Gabe Suarez: The Myth Of Grip

[Tombs]

He was speaking about grip angle, not grip size.

Lots of people seem to be mistaking him. It's very easy to end up with a handgun you can't properly reach the trigger on, that's certainly going to harm your ability to be accurate with it. Having to bend your wrists more or less isn't going to make a difference after you've used it awhile.

Reminds me of guitars, people playing gibsons because they're easier to play, then being unable to play a fender because it takes more effort. Lots of people mix things up so they don't fall in a rut of only being able to effectively use one thing. If you plan on owning or shooting different handguns, it's something you certainly need to be doing.

 

[iChokePeople]

This is more true for those of us that have to carry XYZ handgun on/off duty. I remember back in 1997 when I was in the Academy, I was issued a 1st generation S&W Sigma .40. Man I hated that gun. There trigger was horrible and the grip was all wrong for me. But since I had no choice, I got good with it anyway, qualified expert at the range with an almost perfect score. Later I was able to buy my own handgun to carry on duty but for a long time I had to use that boat anchor of a handgun. Some people cannot get the handgun that fits them best for financial reasons. They buy the best gun they can afford and should not let that gun's shortcomings keep them from being proficient with it.

This is a great point, and from THIS viewpoint, I totally agree with what I believe is the premise of the article. If that's all you have, for whatever reason, you have no excuse -- learn to shoot it.

 

[loudpedal]

A very heavy trigger, aka New York trigger, etc.

Got it thanks.

 

[Maximinus Thrax]

This is more true for those of us that have to carry XYZ handgun on/off duty. I remember back in 1997 when I was in the Academy, I was issued a 1st generation S&W Sigma .40. Man I hated that gun. There trigger was horrible and the grip was all wrong for me. But since I had no choice, I got good with it anyway, qualified expert at the range with an almost perfect score. Later I was able to buy my own handgun to carry on duty but for a long time I had to use that boat anchor of a handgun. Some people cannot get the handgun that fits them best for financial reasons. They buy the best gun they can afford and should not let that gun's shortcomings keep them from being proficient with it.

This is the scenario that hits the nail on the head for the article. However, it can have some carry over to the civilian sector as well. Those of us who do not carry firearms as a part of our employment do not have to deal with being issued XYZ handgun. We have the luxury of purchasing what we feel works best for our budget or situation. As long as we practice with our firearms and learn how to use them properly we shouldn't have an issue. The problem starts when people start blaming perfectly functional equipment when the real problem is lack of training. That is what the author is also speaking about. Shooters should be intimately familiar with their equipment. If you're not, make sure you become so before you start to carry it.

 

[BrewerGeorge]

It's funny. I started shooting handguns back in the early 90's when I was old enough to buy one. Early on, I decided that I could not shoot 1911's "well" because I'd shoot a 12 inch circle at 10 yards, but could do a 4 inch circle with a Glock or Beretta at the same distance. So I jumped on the Glock train hard, and that was basically it for me for 20+ years (except for a few special-purpose revolvers).

Recently, I decided to see if I still "couldn't shoot" a 1911 by renting one. Lo and behold, I shot it just fine. Turns out that my "inability" to shoot the 1911 back then was just inexperience. After 20 years of practice with trigger control, stance, sight picture, etc (mostly on Glocks) I can shoot just about anything after a few rounds of familiarization.

 

[chipsher]

It is spot on. Does an m&p9 or g19 trigger touch that of a highly customized 1911? Of course not. His point is, train with anything that works and it'll work as hard as you trained. 10,000 hours to master anything, it's trigger time using any tools that are available.

While I certainly agree there's nothing that beats training and proper technique. When I hear "there's nothing a 1911 does better than a modern striker fired gun. It sounds like hype. How about accuracy. Why do so many compete with heavy steel guns?

 

[Aaron1776]

Not to dis Suarez, but honestly this post really only applies to cops or military who have been issued guns that are ergonomic nightmares and have no hope of getting a different one. I'm really not surprised to see this coming from Suarez though given his background. (lots of police experience) For the shooter who has the choice of any handgun available (AKA 90% of the people one this site), this makes absolutely zero sense. With today's handgun market, there really is no excuse for failing to find a reliable handgun that fits your hand and possesses ergonomic attributes that allow you to use it easier, (assuming you can afford one). Furthermore, you're only hurting yourself for NOT choosing said handgun.

So if you carry more than one gun, you're drinking tacti koolaid?

Really??

Oy.

Blueboxer is just being nice. Yes. I for one am saying that, if you carry more than one handgun as a CCW type, you are drinking the TactiKool-Aid.

Carrying two guns came from the days of yore when handguns were notoriously unreliable. That is simply not the case anymore unless you're buying sub-par equipment. Unless you're a DevGru operator, SWAT officer, or a cop operating in a notoriously violent area, carrying an extra gun is just silly given the incredibly low chances your gun is going to break. The only reason it makes sense for the aforementioned guys to carry "back ups" is that they are carrying rifles, shotguns, or subguns, and carrying a pistol is a natural supplement to longer guns for reasons far beyond reliability. ( i.e transitioning to close quarters, etc) To be correct, they aren't even "back ups". They are secondary weapons. Carrying a glock to back up your M&P makes about as much sense as towing a Honda behind you just in case your Toyota breaks down.

 

[BrewerGeorge]

...

Carrying two guns came from the days of yore when handguns were notoriously unreliable. That is simply not the case anymore unless you're buying sub-par equipment. Unless you're a DevGru operator, SWAT officer, or a cop operating in a notoriously violent area, carrying an extra gun is just silly given the incredibly low chances your gun is going to break. The only reason it makes sense for the aforementioned guys to carry "back ups" is that they are carrying rifles, shotguns, or subguns, and carrying a pistol is a natural supplement to longer guns for reasons far beyond reliability. ( i.e transitioning to close quarters, etc) To be correct, they aren't even "back ups". They are secondary weapons. Carrying a glock to back up your M&P makes about as much sense as towing a Honda behind you just in case your Toyota breaks down.

I've thought the same for a while. "Two is one and one is none" is all well and good, but when you think about real probabilities it's a real long shot that you'll need a second. Mathematically, probabilities are multiplied, so you'd have to satisfy both the low probability of needing ANY gun, multiplied by the probability that your primary gun fails to get to the chance you'll need that second.

 

[Birds Away]

I like how he bans anyone who doesn't agree with him. What a douche.

 

[Trigger Time]

It's always the guns fault. If you can't pick up a mechanically sound firearm of any type and use the fundamentals of shooting to proper defend yourself then you need more training. Everyone always assumes that gunfight for your life is gonna be this or that and like you have all played out in your mind. It's not. While it's great to have scenarios played out and to mentally and tactically prepare yourself, you might end up having the weirdest **** happen to you that one time in your life where your forced to pull your weapon. You might get into a physical fight first because a gun wasn't the first option and you might have to use the bad guys gun to stop the threat or another bystander who gets deer in headlight syndrom while some guy is shooting up the mall and it's the one time you forgot your gun or you didn't bring it because the mall cops say you can't have it there and you complied and now you either use what's available or you and your family die.
i think too many people focus in the stupidest **** and fail to be a well rounded warrior. Death comes in many forms. Be ready to meet it head on in many different ways and prevail or at least try. You might fight the best fight if your life and still die. Bad **** happens to good people. But at least you increase your odds and luck. And yes I do believe a lot of times it's pure dumb luck that keeps people alive.

 

[rob63]

I like how he bans anyone who doesn't agree with him. What a douche.

He even ends his piece with "let the discussion begin." Then, you read the comments, and, discussion... not allowed.

 

[Fordtough25]

I followed Gabe for a bit a couple years ago but he changes all his gear/weapons on a semi regular basis. It's always buy this and buy that. There are too many great trainers out there like Haley, Defoor, Lamb, etc..., to listen to douche baggery. IMO

 

[Birds Away]

It is easy to see there is at least one person who is madly in love with him....it's him.

 

[lovemachine]

Blueboxer is just being nice. Yes. I for one am saying that, if you carry more than one handgun as a CCW type, you are drinking the TactiKool-Aid.

Carrying two guns came from the days of yore when handguns were notoriously unreliable. That is simply not the case anymore unless you're buying sub-par equipment. Unless you're a DevGru operator, SWAT officer, or a cop operating in a notoriously violent area, carrying an extra gun is just silly given the incredibly low chances your gun is going to break. The only reason it makes sense for the aforementioned guys to carry "back ups" is that they are carrying rifles, shotguns, or subguns, and carrying a pistol is a natural supplement to longer guns for reasons far beyond reliability. ( i.e transitioning to close quarters, etc) To be correct, they aren't even "back ups". They are secondary weapons. Carrying a glock to back up your M&P makes about as much sense as towing a Honda behind you just in case your Toyota breaks down.

I disagree. There's a lot of good reasons to carry a 2nd gun. Be it a small 380 or even another .45.
Today's guns are more reliable than "the days of yore", but they still can, and do, malfunction.
And I'm not even mentioning being able to arm your buddy or family member either.

 

[wesnellans]

I disagree. There's a lot of good reasons to carry a 2nd gun. Be it a small 380 or even another .45.
Today's guns are more reliable than "the days of yore", but they still can, and do, malfunction.
And I'm not even mentioning being able to arm your buddy or family member either.

OR deal with an injured dominant arm that's now non-functional. Most folks I know carry somewheres around their strong side hip area. Now, let's make that strong side arm non-functional due to getting stabbed or shot. I know I can't bring my left arm even close to reaching around to draw my primary arm at the 3-4 o'clock position I carry it in.

 

[Leo]

When a revolver was the common issue sidearm, a second handgun was a quick reload.

One of the only things I agreed with was the concept that a person adapts to the arm they spend time in training. In slow, deliberate practice, this really is not an issue. If you are shooting action pistol games, the difference becomes apparent.

Once all my 1911's were hot rodded to the point they were not allowed in stock class, I picked up a P90 Ruger. If I practiced with it, I could do well in stock class. If I had just trained and shot an action match with one of my 1911's, trying to shoot a side match with the P90 resulted in a lot of missed plates due to a different grip feel/ natural point of aim. Replacing the P90 with another 1911 eliminated the problem.

I had a similar experience when I would switch from my familiar revolvers to a semi auto for bowling pin matches. Switching firearms will always slow you down or cost you points.

If you need accuracy AND speed, stick to one design, whatever one you like.

 

[tetsujin79]

While I certainly agree there's nothing that beats training and proper technique. When I hear "there's nothing a 1911 does better than a modern striker fired gun. It sounds like hype. How about accuracy. Why do so many compete with heavy steel guns?

Weight soaks up recoil. I learned that shooting two different AKs, one heavier then the other. In slow, deliberate fire, both were accurate for their zero. But once I started shooting rapid strings, the heavier one was more accurate.

 

[ModernGunner]

Whether it's handguns, a pool cue, a set of darts, a guitar, or what-have-you, the issue inevitably pops up about skill set vs. gear.

'Gear Guys', who may even be pretty good, virtually always opine that if they just get that next new 'wonder-widget', they'll be 'great'. They'll get a new piece of equipment, shoot better with it, and point to that as 'proof'. Sellers LOVE this kinda guy, 'cause he's a repeat Buyer!

Oh, the improvement is real, for a while. Then that shiny new widget is a 'piece of junk' and they're off buying the next new upgrade or replacement. Once the next new widget shows up, the cycle starts over again. Every new gear swap is just a temporary fix. They're chasing their own tail, they can't figure out why, and they've not figured out the futility in it.

 

[BehindBlueI's]

Or will the cool kids just be the cool old codgers with that old tyme 1986 tech glock still killin like old Gaston intended.

An old Chevelle is a classic. An old Fiesta is just an old car. The Glocks will probably in the bargain bin being sold by the pound like dud comics.

Anyway, the whole article is sure to cause controversy, which will drive traffic, which is the point. It's also something new to say, which has to be done when one makes their rent money off saying things occasionally.

So, let's see. Grip angle does matter. Sure you can fight body mechanics. Sure you can adjust technique. I can ride a bicycle that's 2" too short for me, too. However given the same amount of training and practice, I will be better with equipment that fits me, gun or bicycle. It may be .05 seconds and 1.5" in your groups at 15y, but if you're life was on the line, would you give that up? Would you ever say, I'd like to be just a little slower and less accurate, but with everything else remaining the same?

Anything that starts "take a magazine in the face" to justify a caliber is stupid. I have had exactly one mag dump of .25 into someone's face. It did kill them. It was not self-defense, it was standing over the person and shooting them in the face while the victim was flat on his back. I doubt had the situation been a bit more dynamic shot placement and number of hits would have been the same. So, how about this. You're going to get 3 hits, two in the abdomen and one in the arm. You still think that a .25 is just fine?

The usual apples to oranges presentation of "I, with hours of practice each day and thousands of rounds, beat people who do not have such amounts of practice, and I was using X pistol, so its better" is meaningless. A professional racecar driver would smoke the average driver with a 30% horsepower disadvantage because they are intimately familiar with the lines of the track and the nuances of racing. It does not mean their car is better, nor does it mean that they would not be even better with a car with more power.

I will agree that grip thickness matters. That makes it odd to recommend a handgun that is only offered in double stack except for one pocket pistol, but I agree with the concept.

DA/SA is about perfect for self defense work, and an external hammer prevents Glock leg upon reholstering. Neither are mandatory, but both have their place. I get to see a lot of accidental shootings. Almost none are done with revolvers. Slightly more are done with DA/SA weapons (usually those are while manipulating the slide with the hand in front of the barrel, but not always), and striker fired is by far the most common. Probably a function of how popular striker fired pistols are, but also how easy they are to touch off.

 

[Birds Away]

An old Chevelle is a classic. An old Fiesta is just an old car. The Glocks will probably in the bargain bin being sold by the pound like dud comics.

Anyway, the whole article is sure to cause controversy, which will drive traffic, which is the point. It's also something new to say, which has to be done when one makes their rent money off saying things occasionally.

So, let's see. Grip angle does matter. Sure you can fight body mechanics. Sure you can adjust technique. I can ride a bicycle that's 2" too short for me, too. However given the same amount of training and practice, I will be better with equipment that fits me, gun or bicycle. It may be .05 seconds and 1.5" in your groups at 15y, but if you're life was on the line, would you give that up? Would you ever say, I'd like to be just a little slower and less accurate, but with everything else remaining the same?

Anything that starts "take a magazine in the face" to justify a caliber is stupid. I have had exactly one mag dump of .25 into someone's face. It did kill them. It was not self-defense, it was standing over the person and shooting them in the face while the victim was flat on his back. I doubt had the situation been a bit more dynamic shot placement and number of hits would have been the same. So, how about this. You're going to get 3 hits, two in the abdomen and one in the arm. You still think that a .25 is just fine?

The usual apples to oranges presentation of "I, with hours of practice each day and thousands of rounds, beat people who do not have such amounts of practice, and I was using X pistol, so its better" is meaningless. A professional racecar driver would smoke the average driver with a 30% horsepower disadvantage because they are intimately familiar with the lines of the track and the nuances of racing. It does not mean their car is better, nor does it mean that they would not be even better with a car with more power.

I will agree that grip thickness matters. That makes it odd to recommend a handgun that is only offered in double stack except for one pocket pistol, but I agree with the concept.

DA/SA is about perfect for self defense work, and an external hammer prevents Glock leg upon reholstering. Neither are mandatory, but both have their place. I get to see a lot of accidental shootings. Almost none are done with revolvers. Slightly more are done with DA/SA weapons (usually those are while manipulating the slide with the hand in front of the barrel, but not always), and striker fired is by far the most common. Probably a function of how popular striker fired pistols are, but also how easy they are to touch off.

There you go again with your logic and reason. Sheesh, some people.