-
ODT Gun Show & Swap Meet - May 4, 2024! - Click here for info
Who Owns & Carries a Slim Single-Stack 9mm?
- Thread starter GAgunLAWbooklet
- Start date
Mine doesn't like 115gr Tula for whatever reason, but eats everything else, and the hotter the better. It's a laser with 124gr NATO. Worth a look for anyone perusing the slim-9 options.
The thunder in .380 is nice. I've never held the one you're talking about (9mm), but Bersa guns I've shot reminded me of a Makarov, and I love the Makarov and carry one if/when I can carry a bigger gun, but still need more than average concealment. The Maks feel good to me, as does the CZ-82, and the PA-63, all in 9x18, and that's why I carry them...Reliability is never an issue with those eastern com block lead dispensers, in my experience. They are like the AK's of the commie handgun ...Seems to me a gun that is compliant with my day to day and inspires me to carry is a good gun for me. I'll definitely check out the Bersa.
I read the original post and some of the comments. I've owned two single stack 9s . One was a Kel Tec PF9 and the other was/is a Taurus 709 Slim. The 709 wins hands down. Y'all May scoff at both but I must say the 709 just works . Second strike capability, Flock style easy take down, manual safety lever for those of us who like that. Oh and a super short trigger reset on the second shot.
I carry my wife’s XDs 9 sometimes by mostly my G19
I went to the indoor range today and rented 3 slim single-stack guns to try.
Ones I'd never fired before (I shot a S&W Shield last year).
I tested a Springfield XDs-9
And a Glock 43.
And a Ruger LC9s.
I shot 5 rounds from a steady 2 hand hold from each gun, at 25 feet.
Then after checking the group size, I did about 10 rounds of rapid shooting single handed, raising the gun from low ready and popping off a single shot within 1 second. Then I'd lower the gun, pause, and repeat.
Next I'd do a 7-shot group (same distance, 25 feet) with 2 hands, shooting all 7 shots very rapidly. So fast that sometimes I lost my sight picture and just pulled the trigger anyway on the next shot, like a "double tap", counting on muscle memory to have the gun back in the right position (it worked pretty well).
Finally, for each gun I'd put up a clean new target to shoot 5 rounds slow fire at 50 feet.
RESULTS:
The Springfield XDs-9 was very easy to shoot and had the least perceived recoil. I think it was the one with the largest grip and heaviest empty weight, too. It was very accurate if I took my time to line up the sights carefully.
My short stubby fingers had to stretch to reach the trigger in its fully forward position, but I managed. It pointed naturally and fell back into alignment with the target after the recoil. The "fiber optic" front sight wasn't very bright at the range. I basically used the dark outline of the front sight's metal frame.
The Glock 43 was my favorite. Slimmer than the Springfield, and with a shorter reach to the trigger. Equally accurate during slow fire. Good pointability. Even when I lost my sight picture in rapid fire, I got a decent group from just pointing or getting a "flash sight picture." It fit in my pants pocket better, too. (I tested each gun by carrying it briefly in my pants pocket, but didn't try to draw from there).
Least favorite was the Ruger LC9s. It had a weird trigger. Light enough poundage, but it was a LONG pull, and the gun fired midway through the trigger stroke. Lots of "overtravel." I suppose you could get used to this, but I wasn't.
I got wild flyers on both the 25 ft. and 50 ft. slow fire targets.
For the rapid fire shooting, I also got one bad flyer, but I think that was me not expecting the trigger to fire when it did.
The one and only malfunction of the day happened to the LC9s. I had a stovepipe. I did the tip-rack-bang drill and that cleared it, but I'd dumped a live round out of the gun along with the fired case.
The LC9 wasn't as accurate at the others, but it was the smallest of them all.
I didn't have time to shoot my own Taurus PT-111 G2 for comparison, but I think that the Glock 43 and the Springfield XDs-9 were its equals when it comes to slow fire accuracy, rapid fire accuracy and controllability, and natural pointability. The Ruger LC9s seemed more like my .38 snubby-- a "get off me" gun that's going to give groups more like a dinner plate than a coffee cup.
Ones I'd never fired before (I shot a S&W Shield last year).
I tested a Springfield XDs-9
And a Glock 43.
And a Ruger LC9s.
I shot 5 rounds from a steady 2 hand hold from each gun, at 25 feet.
Then after checking the group size, I did about 10 rounds of rapid shooting single handed, raising the gun from low ready and popping off a single shot within 1 second. Then I'd lower the gun, pause, and repeat.
Next I'd do a 7-shot group (same distance, 25 feet) with 2 hands, shooting all 7 shots very rapidly. So fast that sometimes I lost my sight picture and just pulled the trigger anyway on the next shot, like a "double tap", counting on muscle memory to have the gun back in the right position (it worked pretty well).
Finally, for each gun I'd put up a clean new target to shoot 5 rounds slow fire at 50 feet.
RESULTS:
The Springfield XDs-9 was very easy to shoot and had the least perceived recoil. I think it was the one with the largest grip and heaviest empty weight, too. It was very accurate if I took my time to line up the sights carefully.
My short stubby fingers had to stretch to reach the trigger in its fully forward position, but I managed. It pointed naturally and fell back into alignment with the target after the recoil. The "fiber optic" front sight wasn't very bright at the range. I basically used the dark outline of the front sight's metal frame.
The Glock 43 was my favorite. Slimmer than the Springfield, and with a shorter reach to the trigger. Equally accurate during slow fire. Good pointability. Even when I lost my sight picture in rapid fire, I got a decent group from just pointing or getting a "flash sight picture." It fit in my pants pocket better, too. (I tested each gun by carrying it briefly in my pants pocket, but didn't try to draw from there).
Least favorite was the Ruger LC9s. It had a weird trigger. Light enough poundage, but it was a LONG pull, and the gun fired midway through the trigger stroke. Lots of "overtravel." I suppose you could get used to this, but I wasn't.
I got wild flyers on both the 25 ft. and 50 ft. slow fire targets.
For the rapid fire shooting, I also got one bad flyer, but I think that was me not expecting the trigger to fire when it did.
The one and only malfunction of the day happened to the LC9s. I had a stovepipe. I did the tip-rack-bang drill and that cleared it, but I'd dumped a live round out of the gun along with the fired case.
The LC9 wasn't as accurate at the others, but it was the smallest of them all.
I didn't have time to shoot my own Taurus PT-111 G2 for comparison, but I think that the Glock 43 and the Springfield XDs-9 were its equals when it comes to slow fire accuracy, rapid fire accuracy and controllability, and natural pointability. The Ruger LC9s seemed more like my .38 snubby-- a "get off me" gun that's going to give groups more like a dinner plate than a coffee cup.
I really like carrying my Shield in the summer time!
Sig 239
Bit heavy, but overall a superior weapon.
PPS is one of the hardest to disassemble.
