9mm accuracy?Shootist3006

silentmarksman

Shootist3006 had a comment that got me thinking. He stated that the 9mm is a naturally inaccurate round. Personally I find this to be a ridiculous statement based on anything but fact. But, I don't know anywhere near everything, and I would like to know what you based your statement on there Shootist, along with the opinions of anybody else.

He Dog

I have little first hand experience with 9mm, but in doing some research before buying a semiauto,and I did not go with 9mm, I ran into a lot of statements to that effect in books and mags. The theory, at least, is that the 9mm was built originally for a full auto. It was intended to be sprayed rather than aimed and the design reflects that usage. It seems later it was adapted to semi-autos. For whatever "design" reason it is frequently considered inherently inaccurate. I did not buy one because I wanted a little more bullet.

beachmaster73

Shootist .30-06 has forgotten more about weapons than most of us know. I'm sure he's got an explanation that makes some sense to a few people here. My own thoughts come about the 9mm come from the 1911 Colt .45ACP frame of mind and are predictable. The .45 is a great people killer....I know all the 9mm arguments that say the 9mm is the .45's equal or better...if you feel that way buy the 9mm. I guess I just don't have warm fuzzies about the 9mm. Also I have relatively small hands and the double stacks do lessen my accuracy. Beach

Gordian Blade

Before I comment on your question, be aware that I am a newbie, coming back into shooting sports after having not touched a firearm for many years. (And only .22s back then.) That being said, I own two 9mm carbines, one Marlin, one Ruger. The Marlin has a scope. I've recently spent hours at a range brushing up my technique and adjusting the scope. A member on another thread made it a point to differentiate between accuracy, that is, hitting as close to the intended target point as possible; and precision, that is, making a tight group that might be off center. There is no doubt in my mind that both carbines have sufficient precision. From benchrest, if I'm careful, I can get about 2-4" groups with either one at 50 yards. The limiting factor is myself, not the caliber. As for accuracy, accounting for my being a newbie, I didn't have much trouble adjusting the scope on the Marlin to get the center of the groups I was shooting right on target. The Ruger's iron sights seemed pretty good right out of the box.So what I'm saying here is that there does not seem to be any inherent inaccuracy in the 9mm caliber itself, but a lot depends on the firearm you use and your skill level. 9mm probably isn't the caliber to use if you want the best accuracy possible, because in general most 9mm firearms were not designed primarily for target shooting. My 9mm carbines are unusual in the sense that they are rifles that were purposely designed to allow shooting 9mm pistol ammunition (using pistol magazines) more accurately than one normally can with a pistol.I hope some more experienced shooters will comment on 9mm accuracy so we can all learn something. (That's what I like about this web site.)

daddo

I don't think the 9mm is any more inacurate than any other handgun. I tested my .357 , 9mm, and .38 a while back. After finding the type of ammo each gun prefered - I could notice little inherit differences. In fact, I have better groups at 10 yards with my 9mm Glock than I do with the .357 mag. (6" barrel) no mater what loads I use. I think it has a lot to do with- 1- recoil 2- type of bullet/powder 3- the "feel" in ones hand. 4- which gun you practice with the most. 5- the user. 6- barrel lenght (at given distance). 7- condition of the gun. I find no data to support the claim as "inherent". I would use the .357 for longer range shooting, as in hunting, over the 9mm.

Shootist3006

I'm glad you asked the question (I sorta hoped that someone would). The statement that the 9MM is inherently inaccurate is based on a lot of experience and some reading, some history. Experience-wise, I have NEVER seen a 9MM that I would consider accurate. Gordian reinforces that opinion when he talks about 2 - 3" groups out of a scoped carbine at 50 yards. With a scope and a long gun, an accurate ctg. would be putting them all in the same hole at that range. When I put a scope on my M1 carbine (another inherently inaccurate device), even it will group better that that.When the Army decided to buy a new pistol using the NATO 9X19 ctg.; one of the first specification changes they made was to relax the accuracy requirement from the one used to accept M1911A1's (a pistol that is not known for accuracy without a lot of work).My Gold Cup will print cloverleafs (all shots touching or very nearly so) at 25 yards (off sandbags - I sure can't do it offhand). I have never seen a 9MM that would do that, you are lucky if you get 2" groups.Willing to reconsider when the 9's start beating the .45's in matches. Haven't seen that either.BTW, thanks for the kind words Beachmaster

---

Quod principi placuit legis habet vigorem.Semper Fidelis[This message has been edited by Shootist3006 (edited 01-09-2002).]

He Dog

Ok shootist, I don't disagree, but I wonder if you would care to speculate why 9mm are inaccurate? Assuming factory loads with good consistency, why should that particular round be less precise or less accurate than another factory cartridge?

Shootist3006

He Dog, pure speculation - I think it is a combination of several factors: 1st, the taper on the 9MM case is greater than almost any other straight walled ctg., this causes alignment varriances in the chamber. 2nd, the 9MM is 'underbored', a condition that causes most (many) loadings to be compressed. Varriations in neck tension, degree of compression also contribute to the accuracy problem. 3rd, The 9MM recoils 'sharper' than the .45 (also more in most loadings); the 'sharpness' makes it more difficult to shoot accurately as the pistol is recoiling more before the round leaves the barrel - takes a much firmer grip to hold it in a consistent placement - but using a MUCH firmer grip causes trigger control problems and increased wobble, all of which contribute to the inherrent inaccuracy of the 9MM. Just my opinions!

---

Quod principi placuit legis habet vigorem.Semper Fidelis

Lowrider

Since a good deal of the accuracy rests with the shooter first, and the firearm second, I have a hard time understanding how any one caliber can be significantly more (or less) accurate than another.I would not consider myself an expert pistol shot, but shooting good quality 115 gr. JHP with my Glock-17, off-hand, I can get consistant 5 inch groups at 25 yards. How much more accurate is a pistol supposed to be?

---

Lord Lowrider the LoquaciousMember:Secret Select Society of Suave Stylish Smoking Jackets She was only a fisherman's daughter,But when she saw my rod she reeled.

JustC

I HAVE BUT ONE THING TO SAY ON THE MATTER;... THOSE WHO FEEL THE 9MM INACCURATE HAVE NOT SHOT A COMPETITION SIG-SAUER. THAT 9MM WILL GROUP WITH ANY GOLD CUP I HAVE EVER SHOT AS WELL AS H&K EXPERTS AND SOCOMS. THIS PROVES IT IS THE EQUIPMENT DEFICIENCIES AND NOT THE CALIBER. IF THE CHAMBERS WERE TAPERED CORRECTLY AND POLISHED( REFERRING TO THE CORRECT INFO GIVEN BY SHOOTIST3006) THEN WE WOULD ALL SEE BETTER RESULTS FROM OUR 9MM'S.

Shootist3006

JustC - never shot a competition Sig, could be that ALL the other 9MM pistols are inaccurate.Lowrider - 2 to 3 inches should be the minimal accuracy expected. I just wish I could do it consistently.

---

Quod principi placuit legis habet vigorem.Semper Fidelis

He Dog

Interesting speculation Shootist thanks. I suspect you are on to several of the contributing factors in why most regard it inaccurate.I could not help but smile at your phrase "the taper on the 9MM case is greater than almost any other straight walled ctg." Given the threads on clips/magazines and accuracy/precision it suddenly struck me funny to talk about taper in a straight walled cartridge. [This message has been edited by He Dog (edited 01-09-2002).]

Shootist3006

BTT

He Dog, straight walled does not necessarily mean parallel!

Quod principi placuit legis habet vigorem.Semper Fidelis

pabooger

My 9mm is one hell of a lot cheaper to shoot then any 45, the difference in accuracy isn't enought to warrant me spending the extra cash on ammo! I do alot of target shooting just for fun. As far as a 3 inch group or a cloverleaf if your dumb enough to stand out there at fifty yards and let me shoot at you, I dont think the 2 and 1/2 inch difference is gonna mean a damm thing, YOUR STILL GONNA BE DEAD!
Gentleman it's all in what you are into the sport for, the main thing is to have fun,do it as cheap as you can, and be safe.
Besides the money I save on ammo I can use to buy another gun. BUT PLEASE DONT TELL MY WIFE ABOUT IT. Just my 2 cents booger

royc38

I agree with the above post about all the criteria having to be taken into account. I have many calibers in my house. For the record I am a Colt 45 man and my .45s are accurate. However, when I took my concealed weapons test, I tested with a Browning Hi Power 9mm and scored 100% with it. I had a Taurus 99af years ago that on some days I could shoot competitive with it and other days it looked like it was the first time I ever fired a gun at a target. The 9mm is not my favorite caliber but in the right hands it is as deadly as anything else out there. I used to know a farmer that used to shoot bulls for slaughter with a .22 short revolver and they went down one shot every time so that just goes with what I just said before.