TargetTalk

Hi everyone,
I've read some posts that describe the M52 as an "unforgiving" pistol; Just what do they mean exactly?
Are they referring to it being partial to only a few loads ? Or perhaps its because of some ergonomic/performance delicacy ?

It seems that almost everyone appreciates its build quality etc, but for actual use it generates loveit/hateit reactions.

If you get in a room with a bunch of shooter, you will hear many times over, " I used to shoot one". I too find them to be a fantastic shooter, but unforgiving, meaning, if you make the slightest error, it shows big time on the target. Why, I have no idea. But all will say the same thing.

I have a 52-1. I shot this gun with factory ammo for many years in the centerfire portion of U.S. bullseye pistol competition. The gun was accurate and functioned flawlessly with factory ammo. I have been reloading for many decades, and it is very hard to duplicate factory accuracy at 50 yards using reloads. That being said, the biggest issue with this pistol IMHO, is that any error the shooter makes seems to be magnified. Lack of follow through usually is the biggest mistake. Most of the time, when shooting with bad technique, I get very good shots and some very poor shots with few so, so shots in between. The poor shots usually are one or two scoring rings wider than what I call. I don't seem to have this problem when shooting the 1911 in .45ACP. I believe that changing from the S&W model 52-1 over to a 1911 in the centerfire portion of the competition is a big factor helping me jump into the outdoor master class. YMMV.

Misny wrote:I have a 52-1. I shot this gun with factory ammo for many years in the centerfire portion of U.S. bullseye pistol competition. The gun was accurate and functioned flawlessly with factory ammo. I have been reloading for many decades, and it is very hard to duplicate factory accuracy at 50 yards using reloads. That being said, the biggest issue with this pistol IMHO, is that any error the shooter makes seems to be magnified. Lack of follow through usually is the biggest mistake. Most of the time, when shooting with bad technique, I get very good shots and some very poor shots with few so, so shots in between. The poor shots usually are one or two scoring rings wider than what I call. I don't seem to have this problem when shooting the 1911 in .45ACP. I believe that changing from the S&W model 52-1 over to a 1911 in the centerfire portion of the competition is a big factor helping me jump into the outdoor master class. YMMV.

I also had my share of problems with the 52-1 many years ago when I owned one. Even though my technical expertise is greater and I now know how to make a bullseye gun function without problems, I see no advantage to shooting a specialized .38 wad gun in Center Fire. I feel that my .45 set up correctly with a light load for timed and rapid fire yields better results without the hassle of reloading and tweeking ammo for two guns. There is also the factor of learning two guns. The one thing I might try is a 1911 set up to shoot 9mm. I already shoot 9MM for the LEG match and if the gun felt essentially the same as my .45 but with a very light load it might actually improve my scores a little considering that I could use a lighter trigger. But even that is questionable. Isabel

Well, we are no nearer in understanding bjust exactly why the S&W M52 is often considered "unforgiving", even though I do understand Isabel's point of using a 45 for centerfire match.

Its just that my scientific brain refuses to allow for the blackmagic factor or some nebulous subjective explanation. Besides, its possible that some faint but significant property of the pistol makes it unforgiving.

Lets break it down and attempt to be as objective as possible.
For a start "unforgiving" is too loose a term; I believe that what is really meant is that the smallest disturbance of sight alignment by trigger action shows up more in results than in a comparable pistol of similar accuracy potential.

I can think of two parameters ( naturally not being an expert I can only guess) :
The first is barrel time, but this is not particular to the M52.
The second is the trigger release dynamics that might possibly affect movment of the entire pistol while the bullet is still in "the tube".

I know for a fact from Olympic air pistol, that shifting the trigger shoe position can have a significant bearing on after-sear-release effects with the projectile still in the tube.
I also hazard the possibility that the trigger geometry combined with vector forces and mass distribution of the pistol might have similar effects.

Like I said I am just guessing, but does anybody else have any comment on this?

schatzperson wrote:I can think of two parameters ( naturally not being an expert I can only guess) ....
Like I said I am just guessing, but does anybody else have any comment on this?

Well, if guessing is OK for this thread, here's mine:
For me, anyway, the shape of the grip combined with the short trigger reach (easy to get too much finger around the trigger centerline) and the muzzle-light balance, all seem to make it more difficult to keep the muzzle stable throughout the shot process. Great reality check for training though!
Anyone else experience this?

FredB

Most of shots that I call slightly off the ten are consistantly out side of the call.This sugests to me that dwell time may be the issue with this pitol. Just my best guess. Good Shooting Bill Horton

2650 Plus wrote:Most of shots that I call slightly off the ten are consistantly out side of the call.This sugests to me that dwell time may be the issue with this pitol. Just my best guess. Good Shooting Bill Horton

I think you have a good point. Probably dwell time + lock time.

Having compared the 52 with my 38wc 1911s (both Clark and Giles) I came away firmly convinced of the superior character of the 1911s. This may not be entirely fair, since it compares a factory piece with best quality custom work. However, the straight back trigger motion of the 1911 just feels better and offers less sight disturbance. I was coached repeatedly to think "Straight back! Straight back!" in timed and rapid with a marked increase in my scores. The pivoting trigger of the 52 encourages wild shots if trigger control slightly gets sloppy; more potential for a downward and/or sideways pulled shot.. Another issue relates to trigger design. Since the 1911 trigger "arms" wrap around the magazine and the sear is just above it, the barrel sits lower to the grip, or so it seemed to me ( I didn't measure it!). The 52 with its pivoting trigger and link bar (one extra part!!) above it linking to the sear places the entire trigger mechanism higher above the grip, forcing the barrel to sit even above that. Any error in follow through is thus magnified, or so it seemed to me. Making a comparison with free pistols, one of the major refinements of the TOZ 35 over the earlier Hammerli 100 series was the lowering of the barrel from the top of the receiver to just above the trigger. The TOZ enjoys the reputation of being very forgiving, (as far as free pistol goes!).
Having said this, I did like the feel of the grip, sights, and trigger reach on the 52.

All of this is just opinion, but it made sense to me at the time.
Thanks for letting me throw in my 2 cents,
Jim

Hiya,

I'm a little late to this thread but if I may...

I've shot 52's since the mid 80's. They were extremely unforgiving of the slightest errors when I was working my up to master class. Since then, I have found them more forgiving however I still call them "my X's and 8 pistols" As they seem to shoot X's or an 8, not many 9's but more often than not there is that one in the 8 ring waiting for me when we walk down to score.

Things I notice now:

Locktime is very slow compared to a 1911, this may be the prime cause of those 8's, also the total recoil cycle is soft and takes longer to complete and with less slide speed, the gun does not "pull" itself back from recoil like a 1911 does.

The factory sights have very little light on the sides of the front blade and the rear notch is shallow, both of these contribute to rushing the trigger in timed and rapid as it takes a little longer to line them up.

The pistol is a bit grip heavy compared to a 1911, this seems to make holding the sights in line and at the hold point a bit more of a chore, it's easy to get caught up in rushing the trigger in timed and rapid. The factory weight helps a lot in this issue.

That's about all I can think of now,

Tom

Thank you all for your input guys !
Much appreciated; I am "shopping" around for ideas about a CF pistol that might double for Conv. Pistol.