I would assume then (not usually a good idea, I know) that you have no concerns about consistency in your potential performance with the particular platform you happen to be carrying, the ammunition loaded, the particular characteristics of that combination, methods of carry, etc.?
What I'm getting at is, you're obviously confident that you can be effective when it counts with anything you're carrying; is that due to training time spent with each weapon/load combo, or do you attribute it to something else? (mindset, for example)
The 9mm was a Glock carried appendix.
The .45 ACP was a Glock likely to be carried 3:00.
The .40 S&W was an HK (same mechanics as a Glock) carried centerline.
The .44 Mag was a Ruger SBH carried 3:00.
All of my semi-auto pistol function in two ways:
Striker Fired / DAOish (Glock/HK)
Single Action (1911/Hi-Power)
I can run them with equal success due to excessive familiarity. The chambering doesn't make any difference in the functional application of deploying the pistol. Fundamentals is fundamentals.
SA revolvers I am comfortable with for hunting/field carry. Again, familiarity.
DA Revolvers are the only thing I don't have an overly confident familiarity with. I hunt with them often. But, for street defense, I am neither as fast or accurate with them. A decided LACK of familiarity with that platform for anything other than hunting application.
"To Hell with efficiency, it's performance we want!" - Elmer Keith
The 9mm was a Glock carried appendix.
All of my semi-auto pistol function in two ways:
Striker Fired / DAOish (Glock/HK)
Single Action (1911/Hi-Power)
I can run them with equal success due to excessive familiarity. The chambering doesn't make any difference in the functional application of deploying the pistol. Fundamentals is fundamentals.
Very interesting; mainly because of the school of thought that one should carry the same sidearm (or one of the same functional principle) without variation, to reduce the possibility of forgetting which function you're carrying in a high-stress situation like SD. That line of theory also suggests that the difference in recoil across various sidearms and loads used would be a detriment to performance.
I question that idea, which was the reason I asked. Thanks for your insight.
Knowledge is essential to living freely and fully; understanding gives knowledge purpose and strength; wisdom is combining the two and applying them appropriately in words and actions.
Replies
The 9mm was a Glock carried appendix.
The .45 ACP was a Glock likely to be carried 3:00.
The .40 S&W was an HK (same mechanics as a Glock) carried centerline.
The .44 Mag was a Ruger SBH carried 3:00.
All of my semi-auto pistol function in two ways:
Striker Fired / DAOish (Glock/HK)
Single Action (1911/Hi-Power)
I can run them with equal success due to excessive familiarity. The chambering doesn't make any difference in the functional application of deploying the pistol. Fundamentals is fundamentals.
SA revolvers I am comfortable with for hunting/field carry. Again, familiarity.
DA Revolvers are the only thing I don't have an overly confident familiarity with. I hunt with them often. But, for street defense, I am neither as fast or accurate with them. A decided LACK of familiarity with that platform for anything other than hunting application.
I question that idea, which was the reason I asked. Thanks for your insight.
Certain ones carry better, naturally point better, shoot better. I suppose if I could choose one,
I would be a lot more proficient with it.