Most reliable and shootable 9mm semi auto pistols

[Mattman215]

Glock ….the end.

 

[Long Cut]

1911/2011 aren’t drop safe, I don’t care for Sig after how they handled the 226 issues…

I’ll stick with Glock. Like a Toyota, they don’t have all of the “bells & whistles”… they just reliably work.

 

[gbflyer]

I’ve been trying striker fired for awhile now. SA, Glock, and FN. Ive also had DA Smith’s, and a SIG. I’m back around to a SA-35 which is a sweet Browning High Power copy, and 1911’s. Really is no comparison, at least for me. Recently picked up a Rock Island 1911 10mm. Impressive quality especially for what they cost. I don’t think I’ve had a better out of the box trigger.

 

[Dunky]

For you guys with manual safety p365 do you notice the safety is inconsistent when it will engage on decocked striker? On mine if I dry fire with the barrel pointed up the safety will not engage. If I dry fire with the barrel pointed down it will reengage. I called sig and they said the safety engages and disengages correctly when the striker is cocked so they don’t care how it performs when it’s not. I see their logic but also don’t like inconsistencies in operation. That also would be a simple way of checking striker postion (similar to hammer position in an ar) since the trigger doesn’t stay back like on a Glock. Most other guns I own to not allow engageing the safety after it’s been fired but not cycled.

Out of curiosity I checked mine tonight and it is the same. Never noticed that.

 

[NSI]

Out of curiosity I checked mine tonight and it is the same. Never noticed that.

Pop out your FCU and you'll immediately see why the orientation of the gun determines the movement of the safety pin when there's no tension on it from the striker.

-J

 

[TitsMcGee]

I've seen a lot more talk about ported and comped pistols recently. Does anyone have adversity to them for carry & field use?

Seems to me like reduction in recoil would be a massive benefit, but potential spalling shooting out of the ports and reduced reliability(recoil spring swap might resolve) could potentially outweigh the benefits. Curious if anyone has extended use with them to the point of being able to say "they're not worth the tradeoffs because..."?

 

[RockAndSage]

I've seen a lot more talk about ported and comped pistols recently. Does anyone have adversity to them for carry & field use?

Seems to me like reduction in recoil would be a massive benefit, but potential spalling shooting out of the ports and reduced reliability(recoil spring swap might resolve) could potentially outweigh the benefits. Curious if anyone has extended use with them to the point of being able to say "they're not worth the tradeoffs because..."?

Much depends on the design of the gun, build quality, and if it's a custom gun, the competence of the gunsmith. Some designs, in general, are a hard no, while others are a qualified yes, with a little proofing.

I've run carry-comp guns hard, and the biggest danger you need to watch out for is slide velocity. Your thumb in particular can be a problem - anything touching the slide will slow it down. Some gun designs and ammo types can make this less of an issue, but once you add a comp to a gun it also diverts energy away from slide velocity. Comps divert gasses away from pushing the barrel and slide backwards with sufficient force, and many designs add mass to the barrel as well, which also decreases backward velocity of the barrel/slide. Too little rearward velocity and you get failures to eject, and failures to feed from the slide not having had enough energy going backward for the springs to then push it forward hard enough to strip a fresh round off the mag, and fully chamber. You can get around this a bit with lighter springs, but there's a limit. A light spring might eject fine, but not have enough energy to chamber well. Run ammo that's a little too light, or if it's too cold outside (especially with crap lube), and it can be completely unreliable - when a gun of the exact same design without the comp will be perfectly reliable.

The issue of particulate being problematic when coming out of the ports depends a bit on the design, but has been a non-issue for me personally, and I tested it quite a bit. I wouldn't worry about it for anything except possibly eyes, and even then only if you're firing from a position with the gun locked in right at your hip, below your shoulder and chin. The kind of thing you'd do if retention is concern from someone being in arm's reach, or grappling. That said, test any given gun, and see what the limitations of its comp design are.

In general, I wouldn't carry a comped 1911 for EDC - any exceptions to that have to be proven no less than 1000 rounds of ammo, and preferably as part of a class or training evolution that mimics real-world conditions and exceeds 1500 rounds of ammo, with zero malfunctions. I only own 1 that ever met that. That said, I also have about a 15 year gap in experience with high-end 1911s, and it seems a number of comped guns that are semi-custom factory offerings may be much more capable of it than when I was having them built in the 1990s and early 2000s.

As to other designs, Sig's comps that just use an extended slide with a shorter barrel inside seem to be just fine. And there are plenty of people running Glocks with various types of add-on comps that seem to be doing just fine as well.

 

[TitsMcGee]

Much depends on the design of the gun, build quality, and if it's a custom gun, the competence of the gunsmith. Some designs, in general, are a hard no, while others are a qualified yes, with a little proofing.

I've run carry-comp guns hard, and the biggest danger you need to watch out for is slide velocity. Your thumb in particular can be a problem - anything touching the slide will slow it down. Some gun designs and ammo types can make this less of an issue, but once you add a comp to a gun it also diverts energy away from slide velocity. Comps divert gasses away from pushing the barrel and slide backwards with sufficient force, and many designs add mass to the barrel as well, which also decreases backward velocity of the barrel/slide. Too little rearward velocity and you get failures to eject, and failures to feed from the slide not having had enough energy going backward for the springs to then push it forward hard enough to strip a fresh round off the mag, and fully chamber. You can get around this a bit with lighter springs, but there's a limit. A light spring might eject fine, but not have enough energy to chamber well. Run ammo that's a little too light, or if it's too cold outside (especially with crap lube), and it can be completely unreliable - when a gun of the exact same design without the comp will be perfectly reliable.

The issue of particulate being problematic when coming out of the ports depends a bit on the design, but has been a non-issue for me personally, and I tested it quite a bit. I wouldn't worry about it for anything except possibly eyes, and even then only if you're firing from a position with the gun locked in right at your hip, below your shoulder and chin. The kind of thing you'd do if retention is concern from someone being in arm's reach, or grappling. That said, test any given gun, and see what the limitations of its comp design are.

In general, I wouldn't carry a comped 1911 for EDC - any exceptions to that have to be proven no less than 1000 rounds of ammo, and preferably as part of a class or training evolution that mimics real-world conditions and exceeds 1500 rounds of ammo, with zero malfunctions. I only own 1 that ever met that. That said, I also have about a 15 year gap in experience with high-end 1911s, and it seems a number of comped guns that are semi-custom factory offerings may be much more capable of it than when I was having them built in the 1990s and early 2000s.

As to other designs, Sig's comps that just use an extended slide with a shorter barrel inside seem to be just fine. And there are plenty of people running Glocks with various types of add-on comps that seem to be doing just fine as well.

I've got a s&w m&p 2.0 performance center carry-comp for training and winter carry, Springfield Hellcat Pro-comp for summer carry, and non-comped HCP as a backup. I have just over 2,000 rounds between all of them and haven't experienced my thumb riding the slide inducing malfunctions. I vastly prefer the comped hellcat pro over the non-comped version. It took a lot of the 'snap' out of the recoil impulse for me.

I guess I'm mostly wondering if, for some reason I've yet to discover, I messed up getting comped handguns with the intention of EDC and field use? Also if I would be eternally damning myself if I ported a Staccato C or P.

 

[J. Swartz LLC]

I'm starting to look at pistols to carry while hunting and hiking as I'll be moving to an area with higher bear pop in a year or two. I haven't owned one and have minimal experience shooting a pistol.

I don't know if I'll buy one this year , but thought I should get one and become confident with it before moving.

Goal and use:
- probably won't conceal carry
- no competition plans
- mostly for backpacking, hunting, etc. So, lightweight. Not so small it hinders shootability
- 9mm
- great in reliability in factory (or nearly) form. I want a Tikka pistol. Shoot it dirty for it's life and it still works
- shootability - I've read Glocks are not particularly shootable
- speed - as it's mainly for bear protection, I want to be able to put as many rounds as quickly as I can into poi
- I don't really want to "need" to upgrade. One and done purchase.
- not sure on optic ... If it truly would help with speed and accuracy, then maybe. But it's another failure point to deal with
- prefer to have manual safety

That said, I've been looking into Glocks, Sig, and staccato.

- g19, g45, g48 - maybe g43 or 43x but they seem too small
- p320 m18, p320 x compact, p320 x carry, p365xl
- staccato c or cs

First question... Would I actually see any of the benefit of the staccato unless I became an extremely good shooter?

Because the g45 and g48 seem to be variants of the g19, are they just as reliable?

Does a slimmer grip generally hurt or hinder shootability (g48 vs g45)? I realize it's probably just a personal thing

Is there much difference in reliability between the Glocks and the p320/p365? Much difference in reliability between the different p320 models?

Having not carried a pistol before... For backpack hunters where weight/space is a concern, would a subcompact be better or are the sizes of those above small enough to not be an issue? (Again, probably personal preference)

Also, yes there is a range with rentals nearby and I'll do that before purchasing

I love my CZ P10C!!

 

[RockAndSage]

I've got a s&w m&p 2.0 performance center-comp for training and winter carry, Springfield Hellcat Pro-comp for summer carry, and non-comped HCP as a backup. I have just over 2,000 rounds between all of them and haven't experienced my thumb riding the slide inducing malfunctions. I vastly prefer the comped hellcat pro over the non-comped version. It took a lot of the 'snap' out of the recoil impulse for me.

I guess I'm mostly wondering if, for some reason I've yet to discover, I messed up getting comped handguns with the intention of EDC and field use? Also if I would be eternally damning myself if I ported a Staccato C or P.

Sounds like you're good to go, just keep the carry gun well-lubed and it should be fine, esp if you have 500-1000 rounds through it without malfunction.

I personally don't think you've messed up at all, as long as you've proofed whatever gun you've chosen to carry.

Listen, real talk here - the internet is absolutely full of Tactical Timmys and Fudd lore, especially on gun-specific forums, that may have a kernel of truth but then it gets absolutely blown out of proportion by neck-bearded basement dwellers who don't actually go out and do stuff. People who hear something or theorize about something, they spread that "info", and it becomes gospel. I personally saw this happen with carry comps in gun magazines and early internet forums back in the late 1990s and early 2000s, people claiming they'll blow your eyes out and are the worst thing ever. It's just BS, and it sounds like it's coming back around again, with zero nuance or genuine understanding of the topic from personal experience and testing. Now that 1911s are coming back around again, watch for a big upsurge in people proclaiming the virtues of .45, or saying a light on your CCW gun is a bad idea. These are fads of identity and tribalism.

Take information in, evaluate it in a manner that permits some degree of gray-zone ambiguity along a spectrum of works/doesn't work, actively engage in evaluations of situational appropriateness, focus on remembering advantages and limitations, and determine what works best for you in the realities you walk in. These fads of identity and tribalism don't come from nowhere, and they usually have a grain of truth in them, but when taken with tribal absolutism it just turns into a morass of horse $h*t.

BTW, back before we had lights and carry optics on our handguns? Carry-comps were excellent at giving you an illuminated sight-picture for night shooting. Guys with them were faster and more accurate at getting repeated hits at night on single and multiple targets, and notably so. Nobody talks about that in the discussion, it's just the Tactical Timmy bandwagoning about "comps bad".

 

[Coopsdaddy]

G45 is great.

G48 is a G43x with longer slide.

I carry G43x in my bino harness because its thinner but shoot G45 in competition.

The slide length doesn't seem to matter for hits at pistol range. But coming out of a holster the G45 sight radius is right where I point. With longer G34 when I come up I have to make a slight correction. The G43x is not as enjoyable to shoot as the G45 but better to carry

Both my choices.
Had 19s for years and the second I put a 45 in my hand I was done with the 19s.
43x for me and wife as well.

 

[Joshuajosh]

Cz p01 is solid

 

[zdc1775]

@TitsMcGee

I've had two different guns with ports and a several with different styles of comps and it truly depends on the design whether or not they are actually effective and reliable. With the two ported guns I never experienced any reliability issues but on one of them they also didn't make too much of a difference in recoil from before the porting.

With comps, I had some reliability issues with a barrel mounted comp in one pistol and none with a second. I personally haven't had any reliability issues with frame mounted ones or with chunk ports that are cut into the barrel itself. And all of them have had at least a noticeable effect on recoil with some being better than others.

 

[Steve300xcw]

I've seen a lot more talk about ported and comped pistols recently. Does anyone have adversity to them for carry & field use?

Seems to me like reduction in recoil would be a massive benefit, but potential spalling shooting out of the ports and reduced reliability(recoil spring swap might resolve) could potentially outweigh the benefits. Curious if anyone has extended use with them to the point of being able to say "they're not worth the tradeoffs because..."?

The difference between my ported shield vs a standard shield is night and day. I think all the little pistols should come ported.


Now a 4" m&p vs a ported 5" m&p... I dont notice enough of a difference for it to be worth the extra money. I wouldnt buy another.

 

[Steve300xcw]

Cz p01 is solid

I finally found a flat trigger for mine. I like the gun a lot more now.


Will yours run with steel case ammo?

 

[TitsMcGee]

@TitsMcGee

I've had two different guns with ports and a several with different styles of comps and it truly depends on the design whether or not they are actually effective and reliable. With the two ported guns I never experienced any reliability issues but on one of them they also didn't make too much of a difference in recoil from before the porting.

With comps, I had some reliability issues with a barrel mounted comp in one pistol and none with a second. I personally haven't had any reliability issues with frame mounted ones or with chunk ports that are cut into the barrel itself. And all of them have had at least a noticeable effect on recoil with some being better than others.

Were you able to deduce any relation to their effectiveness in reference to barrel length?

 

[TitsMcGee]

The difference between my ported shield vs a standard shield is night and day. I think all the little pistols should come ported.


Now a 4" m&p vs a ported 5" m&p... I dont notice enough of a difference for it to be worth the extra money. I wouldnt buy another.

Interesting. I was partially considering picking up a 5” model specifically to port and compare to my factory barrel-integrated 4.25” comp version. Likely won’t be going that route now. This thread has me highly considering a Staccato C later down the road however.

 

[Steve300xcw]

Interesting. I was partially considering picking up a 5” model specifically to port and compare to my factory barrel-integrated 4.25” comp version. Likely won’t be going that route now. This thread has me highly considering a Staccato C later down the road however.

Those are the only 2 ported guns I have gotten my hands on. So take that for what it is... I am sure port size and location make a big difference. I sure wouldnt turn one down, but I wouldnt pay extra for it on a full size gun either.

I dunno how easy it is to find non competition style holsters for a 5" m&p these days. When I was looking, pickins were pretty slim...

I dont think you can go wrong getting a staccato or any 2011 IMO. They will make you forget about the plastic guns.

 

[RockAndSage]

I dont think you can go wrong getting a staccato or any 2011 IMO

That last part is something I'd be careful with. Staccatos have an excellent reputation, but they're almost an outlier for 1911/2011 reliability. There are a couple of other 2011 options that seem solid, but 1911s and 2011s in general are company-specific and model-specific in which ones are combat reliable. One of the reasons the top performers cost so much is because of the competence and attention to detail it takes to make them reliable, causing them to fall into semi-custom or full-custom categories. It's harder to do if mass produced.

 

[Steve300xcw]

There are a couple of other 2011 options that seem solid, but 1911s and 2011s in general are company-specific and model-specific in which ones are combat reliable. One of the reasons the top performers cost so much is because of the competence and attention to detail it takes to make them reliable, causing them to fall into semi-custom or full-custom categories. It's harder to do if mass produced.

Thats funny. I have had 3" kimber and springfield 1911's that were more reliable than a 5" performance center M&P. Right outta the box eating jhp's and swc's with only one bobble outta way to many rounds.

The man yall worship on here has a thread about $400 1911's.....................

I picked up a prodigy a while back. Spur of the moment deal. It needed a few parts to get running right. It's a prissy bitch and still doesnt like to be dirty.

But clean it every so often and it'll cycle whatever you stuff into its $35 mags. Comes with what may be the best sights I have ever used. Though the rear needed shaved down a tad. And the trigger is g2g outta the box. Would probly spend more money if I did it again. But it is easily the most shot gun I own.

If a guy was scared of opening up a gun and actually fixing something or even just swapping out a part or two.. maybe you might be right. But guns are just a box of parts. And things are not as complicated as you seem to think.