In another thread, i mentioned that I keep a shooting log of canned drills I use to evaluate myself and particular pistols. It’s not an end all be all of this or that gun is better. But, it provides me with a pretty good peek into my performance with this or that, and it eliminates the whole “it feels” better or worse. I’ve been collecting data long enough that i can draw some pretty sound conclusions over a long period of time.

One of the big things I can say with a fair degree of certainty is that there just isn’t much performance difference in the big three striker fired guns. I shoot a full sized 320 RMR a fraction better than a G17 or M&P that is similarly equipped. I can come pretty close with the other two but the AXG gun beats them out.

Here’s the other thing. The data tells me that there isn’t much difference between a RMR equipped G19 and G17. It doesn’t matter if it’s from concealment or a security holster. The times, points down, points per second and hit factor are damn close.

What are you experienced between a compact and full sized guns comparisons?

My experience is the same as yours:
P320 X Compact is similar to 320 FS.
Colt Commander is nearly the same as a 5 inch 1911.
G19 same as G17. And G26 is close to the G19. G48 is snappy but shoots as well as the G19.
For me, I shoot best with compact or mid size guns. And they excel at EDC, too.

I only carried the g19 because it was easier to conceal than the g17.
Same reason why I now carry a commander sized 1911 vs full size

The only testing metric was years of using the 5/5/5 test when I went to the range…

Funny you should post this. Now I don’t have anywhere near the skill or experiences as you or other folks but when you made the comment about comparing the 320SC vs a G19 all I could think was wow I would really have to put some time into both because they are so close in practical terms at least for me (Glock/M&P,SIG,Walther etc.) that I might vary well just shoot one or the other better on any given day for any given reason (like maybe the Glock handles caffeine better ).

Like you, in my layman’s experience they all perform about the same within a given platform size. There might be individual likes or pros and cons here or there but holistically they work pretty damn well the same for me.

Funny. I shoot my 3.6" M&P compact as well as my full size. Stock triggers on both.
Same deal between my G17 and G19.
The only advantage I feel the full size has is they are more forgiving of a sub optimal gip especially coming out of a holster at speed. I tend to readjust more with a compact.

I've not tried to compare a compact vs a full-size specifically, but your results don't really suprise me, especially with an RDS where sight radius is not a factor. We switched from "carry" model 320s earlier this year to the full-size, and I know I don't feel much difference in recoil impulse or muzzle flip between the two.

I have a P320 Full-Size and a Carry both equipped with RDS (not exactly the same as one has an RMR and the other a Romeo 1 Pro...but similar concept)...I ought to go to the range next week and put them on the clock and see how they compare. I've got compact and subcompact grip modules, too...could be a fun project.

I'm not that fast, even on a good day...I predict that for me, how clean the gun comes out of the holster will have more impact on my times than the size of the grip.

I prefer the compact slide length to full size. I chalk it up to starting with a P229 in .40. The SP2022 was pretty similar in recoil characteristics to me. The P228 I’d dip a bit, the P226 even more.

My sweet spot seems to be the P320 Carry. I like the compact slide length and the full sized capacity.

Anyway, I’ve always just attributed it up to familiarity. If I put a couple thousand through my P226 without shooting anything else, my guess is I’d adjust to it.

quote:

Originally posted by jljones:
One of the big things I can say with a fair degree of certainty is that there just isn’t much performance difference in the big three striker fired guns.

Lucas Botkin put out a Glock vs M&P vs P320 shootout video a couple months ago, and his results concur w/ yours. I suppose to hardcore competition shooters, some of his time differences would be a big deal, but for real world self-defense purposes, not so much.

quote:

Originally posted by YooperSigs:
Colt Commander is nearly the same as a 5 inch 1911.

I have never understood the love for the Commander size 1911. The part that factors most into concealment (the grip length) is the same for both. A bit less weight in the Commander, but more barrel length in the full sized. I have owned one Colt Commander, and two full sized Colts. When started I moving away from the 1911 platform, the Commander was the first to go.
 
I have settled on a pair of 10mms for my pared down retirement guns, a SIG P220 Stainless Elite Nitron SAO, and a Ruger GP-100 3" (the Wiley Clapp model). Naturally, I shoot the 220 more accurately, but the smaller revolver is not far off.

You will shoot best with what you practice with the most fit more reasons than a meager 1” or less of barrel length. As a small example, I shot my Glock 30 better than my now gone 21, especially at close encounter ranges because that’s the scenario I trained the hardest for. To my surprise, I shot the barely sub-compact (it’s closer to compact imo) better at more extended range as well. I’m sure if I had spent the time reversed, the 21 would have probably fared better, but the extra capacity was outweighed by the practicality of a more concealable package.

I've always shot better with full size than compact/sub compact.
Better to me includes accuracy and feel.
It's not that I hate smaller pistols but if I have a better grip and longer sight radius, I know I'll be more accurate.
I took 3 pistols out a while back and shot the full size the best even though I haven't shot that particular pistol in about 6 months.

I shoot my g34 better than my g19 and generally shoot full size guns better. The exception is my p938. I shoot this tiny subcompact better than my 5in 1911.

quote:

Originally posted by amc:
The exception is my p938. I shoot this tiny subcompact better than my 5in 1911.

In an IDPA qualification some years ago, I qualified a higher score with the P938 than I did with the P320.

quote:

Originally posted by amc:
I shoot my g34 better than my g19 and generally shoot full size guns better. The exception is my p938. I shoot this tiny subcompact better than my 5in 1911.

I'm not picking on you, but shoot one better than the other by what metric? Jones is talking about specific drills that he shoots to come up with his results.

This is useful. Now someone, Jerry or other, needs to push this data collection experiment into the subcompact / microcompact arena. There is a belief that this guns are harder to shoot well than duty / standard compact guns. I'd like to see the relative numbers.

quote:

Originally posted by DaBigBR:

quote:

Originally posted by amc:
I shoot my g34 better than my g19 and generally shoot full size guns better. The exception is my p938. I shoot this tiny subcompact better than my 5in 1911.

I'm not picking on you, but shoot one better than the other by what metric? Jones is talking about specific drills that he shoots to come up with his results.

I was going to type this response as well. To what metric?
Just standing still and trying to shoot a small group or drawing from a holster with a dynamic range, movement, reloads, and under stress of a timer?
I think th latter equates better to how you will perform with that pistol in an actual gun fight as opposed to just punching holes in paper and will showcase a lot more of the shortcomings or attributes.

Talking about metrics, today I made 2 runs each with a G19 RMR and G17 RMR. Both were Gen5. The course of fire was the Trex 50 round pistol course of fire. It is graded on hit factor. Hit factor with the 19 averaged a 5.2. Hit factor with the 17....5.7.

Curiously, I made two runs with my Gen4 17 RMR and averaged 6.7. Yes, it was the last two runs. I was somewhat practiced up. But damn, I smoked it.

quote:

Originally posted by jljones:
Talking about metrics, today I made 2 runs each with a G19 RMR and G17 RMR. Both were Gen5. The course of fire was the Trex 50 round pistol course of fire. It is graded on hit factor. Hit factor with the 19 averaged a 5.2. Hit factor with the 17....5.7.

That's a 9% delta. In a world of hit factors this is a crushing difference.

I shoot my 228s marginally better than I do my West German 226s. But the 228 fits my hand like Wolfgang, or Reinhard or Hans or whoever designed it with me in mind.

I recently did a qual between a G19 and a G34...

The G19 fits tightly in the hand and points quickly for me. When I tried the G34 it just felt like I was chasing the front sight. If my shot was off it was by a larger margin on the G34. Not what I expected.