Some Dude On The Internet gives his opinions on and ranks the 5 Most Accurate Poodleshooters, and having fired all but one of them, I can only agree — which must be the first time I’ve ever agreed with pretty much any YouTuber on this kind of topic when it comes to guns.
The rankings:
5. CZ 75 SP-01 (I prefer the original 75 B, but it’s really a moot point)
4. CANIK TP9 SFX (haven’t shot this one yet, but I’m Willing To Learn)
3. SPRINGFIELD TACTICAL RESPONSE 1911 (1911, ’nuff said. Shows what I know; I wasn’t aware that Springfield even made this model in 9mm…)
2. GLOCK 19 (actually, I shoot the silly plastic Glock 17 more accurately than just about any other poodleshooter, but whatever)
1. SIG SAUER P210 TARGET (I’ve only ever shot this once — actually, it was an older P210-6, but I’m sure the new one (P210-9) is just as good. Even I was capable of 2″ groups at 15 yds, for 200 rounds of 115gr FMJ. And yeah, it’s spendy, just as Swiss watches cost more than Thai watches). 
For me, the SIG is the ONLY one of these that could replace the Browning High Power, with the CZ 75 and Springfield a distant 2a and 2b.
Good list.
– I never liked manual thumb safeties on handguns. So the CZ is out. Also, sorry Mr. Kim, but the 1911 is out as well. Great guns. Just not for me.
– Glocks are boringly simple and reliable. They are akin to an affordable brand of tool that costs a good amount of money (not the cheapest) but also not so expensive that you are out your life savings. G19 is the gold standard of Glocks. It’s been the most popular Glock for years. They just work. They are plain looking thigh.
If you like Glocks, try out the Springfield Armory XD , XDS , and other polymer frames products from the Illinois name holder company known as Springfield. In my opinion, while Glocks are nice, the Springfield stuff is just a little nicer. Better triggers, better sights out of the box.
– Canik is another copy of Glock. Though, like Springfield armory , to some they may like them better. Everyone is making a Glock copy these days. (Sig P320 , Sig P365, Canik, Springfield). Find the one you like. “They are all the same upside down in the dark”.
– Sig old school metal stuff. NICE! I enjoy the P229 and Other older P series classic line from Sig. Hammer fired. Double action / Single action. And on the P229, no manual safety. Just a decocker.
These classic Sigs, whether made yesteryear or today, are smooth, reliable and look great. Nice style. Yes they cost a little bit. Buy once cry once.
I am not a huge fan of the Sig plastic stuff (Springfield and Glock plastic for me please).
-Springfield 1911 in calibers other than 45??? OMG !!! Yes. 9MM and 10MM 1911 models are a thing from Springfield. And Ruger. I’m not a big 1911 fan but the 1911 in 10MM looks sweet.
BIG QUESTION THOUGH!!! WHY NO REVOLVERS ON THIS LIST??? DISCRIMINATION!!!’
One minor quibble:
The Canik pictured above looks to be a Walther knockoff variant, not a Glock.
And one minor disagreement:
For ME, I find that Glocks are every bit as comfortable as Springfield’s Croatian imports and their derivatives. They look better, too, with fewer extraneous and useless visual design elements. XDs look and feel to me like putting a body kit and ground effect lighting on a Toyota Corolla. From the 1990s. Whereas the Glock is just a plain Jane pistol, with nothing added that it doesn’t need. Like the Corolla, it will just work.
Springfield has documented 20,000 rounds through the new hellcat. And 10,000 rounds on XD series.
If it’s polymer and striker fired, its a Glock copy.
Everyone and their brother is making polymer striker fired today.
Pick the one you like best.
“They are all the same upside down in the dark”.
Not a copy. Other designs.
Not every economy car is a Corolla copy, either, even if they fill the same nich.
Saying a Walther is a Glock copy is like saying a Colt is a Smith & Wesson copy. I’m being pedantic, but it is factually wrong.
The attraction of a 1911 in the EuroPellet caliber has always escaped me. Yes, it’s a big heavy pistol (if steel-framed) that helps minimize muzzle-flip, but with the 9mm, who cares? It’s limited in magazine capacity to 10 rounds at best when compared even to compact wonder-nines, and about its only advantage is the single-action trigger (but only if it’s NOT a Series 80).
I’ve got a few 1911A1’s, all in .45 ACP (the caliber that God and JMB, PBUH, intended). The only 9mm’s in current use are for when either myself or my wife decide not to carry a pistol and end up with a Ruger LC9 and a spare magazine on our hips. Around here in Wyoming that’s good for maybe a rabid coyote at best.
Lots of folks on the web and in the gun mags love to talk about how much 9mm ammunition has improved and that there’s no point in carrying a bigger caliber. Umm, no. If that’s the case then .45 ammo has improved also and to the same degree. I’m a believer in big, dumb, slow slugs that punch a darned-near half-inch hole to begin with…if it expands, great. If not, it’ll still penetrate.
Now a 1911-style in 10mm with good bullets is something I’d be willing to think about, if only because this is bear country. But a 9mm in the 1911 package? Nope.
So YOU prefer 45 ACP. That does NOT make it a better round
First, 9MM gets the job done anywhere a 45 can
Second, you say you’d consider 10MM in. 1911 but not a 9MM in 1911. Think about this
Your reasoning , cuz 45 is bigger
.45 = 11.5 MM
.355 = 9MM
.40 = 10MM
Why would you consider 10MM? By your thought process, 9MM is less than 45. So is 10MM. Size matters right?
Or could it be that 10MM wipes the floor with 45 power wise and 9MM can do the same job as 45
also with 9MM, more rounds in the same size firearm, less recoil and less cost per round, though not much.
Just say you prefer 45. Because what you state is opinion, not fact
LC9 is a good firearm. Ruger makes reliable guns at fair prices.
Do you have the old school hammer fired LC9 ? Or the newer striker fired LC9S?
LC9S has an amazing trigger.
One minor quibble:
The Canik pictured above looks to be a Walther knockoff variant, not a Glock.
And one minor disagreement:
For ME, I find that Glocks are every bit as comfortable as Springfield’s Croatian imports and their derivatives. They look better, too, with fewer extraneous and useless visual design elements. XDs look and feel to me like putting a body kit and ground effect lighting on a Toyota Corolla. From the 1990s. Whereas the Glock is just a plain Jane pistol, with nothing added that it doesn’t need. Like the Corolla, it will just work.
“Lots of folks on the web and in the gun mags love to talk about how much 9mm ammunition has improved and that there’s no point in carrying a bigger caliber. Umm, no. If that’s the case then .45 ammo has improved also and to the same degree.”
Not entirely true.
Yes, the .45 can handle improvements in bullet design. But to take full advantage of them, one would need more power behind them, with increased recoil, pistol weight, and heavier springs.
As a reasonable cartridge for the average shooter, it’s about at the limit already, a fair balance between control and power. The advancements with the 9×19 simply bring it up within spitting distance of that balance.
To go more so with the .45 puts it out of the realm of ease of use for most people, and if you need that power, shouldn’t you be grabbing a rifle anyway?
All pistol rounds suck in terminal effect, unless they’re too powerful for most people to use in a handgun. I’ll take more bullets in a smaller pistol with similar efficacy in that trade-off, personally.
I would have a H&K P-7 in there someplace if not the top.
It has it’s strange manual of arms, but I have found they are extremely accurate.
After our ECCW classes Wifey wanted a pistol. Because of her size/strength/general novice as a shooter we ended up with Europellet.
She liked the Sig p365, and its a nice one to carry, slim, light, non-excessive recoil. I like the sights but on the one we have its non-adjustable. So for me at least it shoots low, right (I’m using the sights as directed). I realize its probably a “get off me” gun, but damn it, accuracy to me matters. I have the same problem with my 1911 and it keeps that gun from being perfect as well.
Nothing has ever replaced my .357 in my heart of hearts and I can shoot the eye out of a gnat with it. And I look at 1911’s in Europellet and think “Why”, but I’ll probably end up buying a Glock because ubiquity of spare parts, and availability of ammo.
The appeal of the1911 in 9mm is the trigger. There is no better trigger on a handgun than a 1911, period, full stop. The P210 is, indeed a joy. I shot the older model when I was stationed with NATO in Europe.
CoffeeMan:
I’m sorry if I wasn’t clear…I’m not dissing the 9mm in and of itself, but rather the selection of a 1911 in that caliber. It wasn’t designed for it (although newer ones run it well, now) and has very limited magazine capacity for that caliber. If you’re going to carry a 9mm, it is my belief (opinion, but I believe to be factually based) that there are simply better 9mm pistols from which you can select.
With regard to caliber and bullets that’s an argument so old as to be almost meaningless. My particular book on the topic is Forker’s “Ammo and Ballistics” from Safari Press, and even though my copy is a little aged (from 2000) the data is still relevant. Their inclusion in the tables for each round of the “Taylor Knock-Out Values (bullet weight times velocity times bullet diameter) is a handy indicator of whatever we might mean by “stopping power” (yet another endless debate) along with energy. At 25 yards (the shortest distance in tables in this book) we get the following Taylor KO and kinetic energy values:
10mm (200 gr Hornady JHP/XTP): 11.7 (462 ft/lb energy)
.45 ACP (Winchester 230 gr JHP): 13.3 (380 ft/lb energy)
9mm (Remington 124 gr JHP +P): 7.2 (352 ft/lb energy)
The .45 ACP has a clear advantage in the TKO, while the 10mm is far ahead in the kinetic energy. The 9mm lags behind in both, but is close to the .45 in energy (I picked the hottest +P in the book).
The only reason I’d consider a 10mm is that here in bear country (both black and griz) it will offer much better penetration than a .45. Of course, I’d rather be carrying my .30-06 or a 12-gauge if I have a bad-bear day but it’s awfully hard to get any fishing done when you’re carrying something like that. But the magazine capacity of a 1911-based 10mm is the same as a .45, and the heaviness of the full-size pistol will make follow-up shots a little easier.
Since I’m usually more worried about 2-legged varmints I just carry a .45.
CoffeeMan:
I forgot to add that we’ve got an LC9 in each version. The first one was the hammer-fired one with a REALLY long trigger pull, I hated it but my wife (whose usual carry gun is a Ruger SP101, 2″, in .357 magnum stoked with .38 +P’s) just loved it.
I bought the striker-fired version a year or two later, and much prefer that one. They can share magazines between them which is a nice feature.
Both of them eat any kind of ammo without failure, and accuracy from those tiny little pistols is better than I can shoot, so no complaints there. They are so light and small (compared to even my Sig C3 in .45) that you can almost forget that you’re carrying one.
A LGS had a P210 last year and I was really, really thinking about it, but in the end the 8 round mags with no available way to expand to 10 put it at too much disadvantage for my favorite local matched. Nice, nice gun, though. I’ll stick to CZ for now.
A LGS had a P210 last year and I was really, really thinking about it, but in the end the 8 round mags with no available way to expand to 10 put it at too much disadvantage for my favorite local matches. Nice, nice gun, though. I’ll stick to CZ for now.
I thought the attraction of the 9mm 1911 was they had shrunk the size to match the ammo? Something like a 3/4 or maybe 7/8 scale.
IIRC, Colt had modified a Mustang .380 to handle 9mm, but it was only good for ~5k rounds before breaking something. Not considered good enough.
I likes my Beretta 92FS because it fits my hands perfectly, shoots reliably, and I already own it. But I’m always in “shopping” mode for a new gun. You can’t have too many.
I own two of the 5 pistols and have experience shooting two more. (Borrowed a P 210 for several months and owned for a year a Glock) Currently carry a CZ 75D PCR as an EDC.
My only disagreement with your list is that I never found the Glock to be very accurate. Combat accurate, yes, precision accurate no. CZ is stone cold reliable, fits my hand as well as my Hi Power. P210 is just a precision jewel of a pistol but very expensive, worth it if you can afford it. Carried an SA 1911 in 9mm for several years & moved on to the CZ for its mag capacity and fit to my hand. I do shoot my CZ in my clubs PPC competition in rotation with my S&W M 15 & K38 Masterpiece & do about the same with all of them.
Truth be told, precision with a handgun is 80% the nut behind the trigger & 20% the gun.
CZ’s are amazing. Mine is the knock-off from Tanfoglio and in plastic, and in .45: Poly-Witness.
Of course, now I buy CZ by getting a NEW Python (Heh).
But, the 75 is probably the best iteration of the Hi-Power ever made.
XD’s are great also in you’re into plastic, and was originally designed as a competitor to the Glock by HS Produkt in Karlovac, Croatia.
Sig P320: Now adopted by the US Army as the M17, in plastic, but with thumb safeties – sorry “Java”Man.
As EDC, I now carry a Para-Ord “Warthog”, in a Yaqui Slide from El Paso Saddlery; except for dress-up when I swap the “Wart” for a full size Para, in a Ranger/Patton rig also from El Paso.