Choice of Pistol

[Heddok]

As a fellow Canadian I'd strongly recommend Pardini as the support from John at Western Marksman is just fantastic. I own 2 Pardini's and also 2 Matchguns. Dealing with Stefano in Italy is fairly painless but one needs to have a substantial skill set to run and maintain a MG-2. It would be far easier if they had a Canadian dealer.

There's a reason so many guys at your club have Pardini's--- reliability. That combined with a proven design makes them a winner. You'll need to plan on at least 20k rounds to gain some skill with it. That's $2800 CDN for low end practice ammo so really in the long run the gun will be the lesser expense.

[SlartyBartFast]

Buy the best that you can afford to buy, a good quality pistol will hold its value.

That's the plan.

Buy something that has a local dealer and is in current production, so support and parts are no problem.

Current production I can do. Local dealer is impossible.

Buy a pistol that fits you, try and shoot a number of different pistols, they all fit and feel different.

Problem as I see it is fit. Some beautiful pistols at the show and tell day. But the custom grips didn't feel right. Doesn't mean any of them might not be perfect for me with the right grips.

Then go and find a club with a coach and learn to shoot 10's.

Well, I did this one first. Found the club and started shooting sport rifle. Then took my license courses.

[SlartyBartFast]

As a fellow Canadian I'd strongly recommend Pardini as the support from John at Western Marksman is just fantastic. I own 2 Pardini's and also 2 Matchguns. Dealing with Stefano in Italy is fairly painless but one needs to have a substantial skill set to run and maintain a MG-2. It would be far easier if they had a Canadian dealer.

Nice to hear from a fellow Canadian. I would certainly have support from the locals using a Pardini.

What "substantial skills" are required to keep the MG2 running? Precision mechanical devices don't scare me. ;)

[Heddok]

pm sent

[Gregbenner]

I am new to this forum, and somewhat new to bullseye type shooting, so I post this with some trepidation. Although I haven't shot competitively yet, I recently have started shooting a lot, usually 300 rounds/day, 6 days a week. Started using one hand 3 weeks ago (yikes!). I had several rimfires when I started this fetish last January (Ruger mark 2, Buckmark, Beretta 89) but purchased a new Volquartson Scorpion and S&W Victory almost immediately. This was followed by a Marvel top for a STI Target Master frame, a S&W 41, and very recently a 208, 120, and GSP Expert. Plus another VC lower as well as Tacsol barrels for the Ruger and BM.

The point of this is that I have gotten much better accuracy wise with all the practice, average 95 or so on a B-8 target one hand at 25 yards (with NO pressure). Pretty much all with CCI-SV. However, I don't really notice any consistent difference in accuracy among any of the guns! I like the feel of the 41 and the Scorpion the best, and some days shoot them better, but not all days (I usually shoot 3 guns any particular day, 90 rds each). Haven't received the Olympic guns yet, but don't really expect to be any more accurate with them at this point in time, mostly just curious as to how they feel and shoot. Hopefully I will get to a point in the future where i can actually see a difference.

For me, the best gun for the money was probably my used 41 with a 5" optics only barrel for $850. Haven't wanted or needed to do anything else to it.

I had absolutely no opportunity to "try" other guns, had never even seen a Volquartson or model 41 before purchase.

I now have the VC in both the traditional Mark 3 frame as well as the 22/45, and can't really tell yet which I like best.

Just my personal confusing views, good luck on whatever you decide.

[SlartyBartFast]

I had absolutely no opportunity to "try" other guns, had never even seen a Volquartson or model 41 before purchase.
{...}
Just my personal confusing views, good luck on whatever you decide.

All I can say is WOW! Your budget and disposable income far surpasses my own.

Do you notice significant differences between the Ruger and the Scorpion? The reason I ask is one of the members with quite a large collection of very good handguns was very dismissive of spending a lot of money on something he called "basically just a Ruger".

His suggestion was to look at the Model 41 for less than the Scorpion would cost. But I'm getting a little tired of the stories a the club of 250$ Anschutz rifles and 700$ Model 41 pistols picked up on-line or at auctions. They might exist, but I'll wait an eternity and not have anything of my own to shoot until the mythical sale pops up as an opportunity for me.

Joining the annoyance of "I bought a really cheap great firearm" is the "Good firearms will keep their value". Then WTH does the cheap firearm I'm supposed to be searching the for sale ads for the next few years come from?

And I respect the opinions of many members at the club. But I am skeptical about many claims that seem to be strong on personal opinion and experience but very light on knowledge about what is currently available.

So far, the Volquartsen dealer listed in Canada is incompetent when it comes to answering Internet queries.

In the meantime I'm still waiting for the RCMP to process my RPAL application. Website says "Received 2016-05-30", "In Progress"...

[gwsb]

Are there any Norweigan pistols?

I can't imagine you'd be satisfied with a pistol that has no fjords.

I used to have a Fjord but the damn thing wouldn't start on cold mornings.


SBF, what a very articulate well thought out slam down of a guy who should be called "slothink" not "slofyr". With his thought process he has probably spent his entire shooting career classified as a "Lifetime Sharpshooter".

As a smallbore shooter of many decades I have always liked competing against other shooters who say about their equipment, rifle, ammo, ect. "It shoots better than I do, why up grade?" All other things equal, you already have them beaten before the first shot goes down range.

[SlartyBartFast]

SBF, what a very articulate well thought out slam down of a guy who should be called "slothink" not "slofyr". With his thought process he has probably spent his entire shooting career classified as a "Lifetime Sharpshooter".

As a smallbore shooter of many decades I have always liked competing against other shooters who say about their equipment, rifle, ammo, ect. "It shoots better than I do, why up grade?" All other things equal, you already have them beaten before the first shot goes down range.

Thank you very much for the compliment.

Not so sure how many people I'll be able to outshoot on the range. So far with rifle it's lack of time for practice that's probably holding me back. Managed to shoot a 99 - 5X on a sport rifle 5 bull target with the club's Anschutz last week. So there's hope for me in rifle yet. I know I've got a VERY long way to go before I'm even adequate on the 12 bull competition targets.

As for the pistol acquisition, I want the only times I blame the firearm for a poor performance is when the firearm jams or has an obvious failure. And the only time I buy upgrade parts to be when something wears out or breaks (or maybe when there's something shiny and cool...).

[Gregbenner]

Do you notice significant differences between the Ruger and the Scorpion? The reason I ask is one of the members with quite a large collection of very good handguns was very dismissive of spending a lot of money on something he called "basically just a Ruger".

His suggestion was to look at the Model 41 for less than the Scorpion would cost. But I'm getting a little tired of the stories a the club of 250$ Anschutz rifles and 700$ Model 41 pistols picked up on-line or at auctions. They might exist, but I'll wait an eternity and not have anything of my own to shoot until the mythical sale pops up as an opportunity for me.

So far, the Volquartsen dealer listed in Canada is incompetent when it comes to answering Internet queries.

.

SBF, my Ruger already had a trigger job (Volquartson) as well as an optics tail and a Burris dot sight. It is the SS target model. The Scorpion looks more "cool", and had a better "feel" and better balance. It is approx 6 OZ lighter. As I mentioned, I don't see any real consistent improvement in accuracy, but I always shoot at least three guns each outing so that might make a difference (i.e. if I just focused on one)?? I think with time, it will be better for me. I also have a 41 with a 5" optics only barrel. It is a wonderful gun! It feels more accurate than my other guns, but so far doesn't show consistently on paper. I now have a Volquartson 22/45 lower (1911 style) and can interchange all three barrels (i.e. the Ruger, the VC and a Tacsol). It does make for fun. If you can, I would try to hold and shoot both the 41 and the VC. They are markedly different, at least to me.

I have a good buddy in process of getting his 1st 22 pistol. he has shot all of mine. Initially he loved my Ruger and Buckmark. then Scorpion when i got it, and now after i got the 41, he is as confused as me (lol). One thing he is finding is that it is very easy to find and buy new Scorpions (I would suggest you call Alan at Rimfire Sports, or VC directly). Finding new 41s seems more difficult, and buying off Gun Broker entails buying sight and shot unseen, plus, no real warranty (not suggesting it is bad, just different).

If you have access to good support for particular brands as opposed to others that could be significant. Also, one advantage of the Ruger style is an incredible aftermarket for barrels, trigger parts, magazines, grips,holsters, etc, as well as the original and 1911 style frames which are interchangeable (Volquartson, Clark, TandenKross, etc).

To repeat what others said, a higher priced gun may not shoot all that much better in my hands, but they sure look and feel better doing it.

Good luck on whichever route you take.

[jerber]

There seem to be a lot of people liking the Ruger
That's what I got when I first got back into shooting
Sorry to say but I never liked it
I put a better grip,did a trigger job,and I just gave up on it
I decided to spend the money and got myself a Benelli mp90 and it is perfect for me
The feel,the balance,the sight is just fantastic
I guess everyone is different
To me,the Ruger is nothing more than a nice plinking toy
But that's just my opinion

[deadeyedick]

To me,the Ruger is nothing more than a nice plinking toy
But that's just my opinion

That's more than an opinion...it's a fact. This forum is "Olympic Pistol" not bullseye, squirrel or tin can shooting.
Letting people think that a Ruger mk11 or similar pistol is adequate for Rapid Fire ( Olympic event ) is just plain wrong.

[SlartyBartFast]

To me,the Ruger is nothing more than a nice plinking toy
But that's just my opinion

That's more than an opinion...it's a fact. This forum is "Olympic Pistol" not bullseye, squirrel or tin can shooting.
Letting people think that a Ruger mk11 or similar pistol is adequate for Rapid Fire ( Olympic event ) is just plain wrong.

Meanwhile, it's a fact that many start with Rugers I/II/II or Buckmarks. And those are the pistols that are recommended by many to novices looking for an easy way to get into target shooting.

So, if to start I'm going to be shooting at the following targets @ 20 yds, what factual limit will I experience with one pistol over another?
ISSF Rapid Fire Pistol
ISSF Free Pistol
ISSF Precision Pistol 
Slow Fire Pistol
Timed and Rapid Fire Pistol
(Shooting Federation Canada Targets)

Considering the Pardini is sold in a Bullseye set-up, moving squirrels are quite a challenge to hit, and a tin can of the right size at the right distance is no easier to hit than the center of the ISSF rapidfire target, I don't think there's any need to disparage different shooting activities or "plinking".

My heart is still with the Matchgun MG2. If only I could try it. I'll have to hunt down the Canadian owners when I'm in their area.
I've held, but not fired:
Ruger single six. Loved the feel, weight, and balance. Really liked the trigger too. Dry fired it a lot during my restricted firearms safety course.
Ruger III. Hated the feel, weight, and balance of the polymer frame and short barrel.
Ruger III Hunter(?). Loved the feel, weight, and balance of the longer barrel and all SS frame and barrel.
SW 22A. Too muzzle heavy, didn't like the grips or overall feel.
SW Victory 22. Great fit and feel right out of the box.
Walther GSP. Grips were wrong for me. Gun, meh.
Pardini. Loved the dry-fire trigger. Great balance and weight. Really liked the feel.

Will hopefully be travelling back to Toronto in September. I'll have make the effort to see if the person running a website with Walther SSP, eSSP, and GSP Expert actually has pistols in stock.

Rumours at the club is someone actually has an SSP. Must find out who.

Still awaiting my RPAL....

[SlartyBartFast]

I decided to spend the money and got myself a Benelli mp90 and it is perfect for me

Looks like a nice pistol.

Wish I could try one.

[Gregbenner]

I see. I guess if I am new to this and can't afford an Olympic gun I am a "pllnker". OTOH, if I do have the money and buy an Olympic pistol before I can shoot with the pros, I am a "poser"? (LOL). I realize some of you were born Olympic shooters, perhaps with Olympic guns under your pillows. I am jealous, and not worthy, but I AM trying.

To me,the Ruger is nothing more than a nice plinking toy
But that's just my opinion

That's more than an opinion...it's a fact. This forum is "Olympic Pistol" not bullseye, squirrel or tin can shooting.
Letting people think that a Ruger mk11 or similar pistol is adequate for Rapid Fire ( Olympic event ) is just plain wrong.

[SlartyBartFast]

I see. I guess if I am new to this and can't afford an Olympic gun I am a "pllnker". OTOH, if I do have the money and buy an Olympic pistol before I can shoot with the pros, I am a "poser"? (LOL). I realize some of you were born Olympic shooters, perhaps with Olympic guns under your pillows. I am jealous, and not worthy, but I AM trying.

Well Gregbenner, you certainly seem to be able to afford any pistol you want.

To be fair, it was a different poster calling me a "poser" (and the term used was "noob wanker").

To me, "Olympic Pistol" means competition governed by the ISSF and ISSF style one-handed shooting. IMO, it doesn't mean the equipment. But, if starting out with a less than "Olympic" pistol is wrong maybe the questions should be in another forum.

I understand that in all disciplines there is equipment that meets the cut and equipment that won't. But where do objective differences fall to personal preferences and which provide the best ROI?

deadeyedick, How about providing a little less opinion and a little bit of your own experience? What did you start with, how did you improve, what did you upgrade to and why? I guess you do rapid fire seeing as that was your measure of "Olympic" suitability. What about suitable for other disciplines? Not suitable for rapid fire is irrelevant if I want to train for 50 m free pistol.

How am I to take videos of USA Olympic shooting team members extolling the virtues and accuracy of a VC Scorpion, while others dismiss it as a "plinking toy".

I have the same concerns and issues about which rifle and sights to choose. But thankfully I can just keep shooting the club rifles at no extra cost for now.

[Gregbenner]

I was trying to be facetious. I am extremely new to this type shooting, but so far, really like it.

Sine you mentioned the S&W Victory, I will send you a pm re: my experiences with the one I have.

I see. I guess if I am new to this and can't afford an Olympic gun I am a "pllnker". OTOH, if I do have the money and buy an Olympic pistol before I can shoot with the pros, I am a "poser"? (LOL). I realize some of you were born Olympic shooters, perhaps with Olympic guns under your pillows. I am jealous, and not worthy, but I AM trying.

Well Gregbenner, you certainly seem to be able to afford any pistol you want.

To be fair, it was a different poster calling me a "poser" (and the term used was "noob wanker").

To me, "Olympic Pistol" means competition governed by the ISSF and ISSF style one-handed shooting. IMO, it doesn't mean the equipment. But, if starting out with a less than "Olympic" pistol is wrong maybe the questions should be in another forum.

I understand that in all disciplines there is equipment that meets the cut and equipment that won't. But where do objective differences fall to personal preferences and which provide the best ROI?

deadeyedick, How about providing a little less opinion and a little bit of your own experience? What did you start with, how did you improve, what did you upgrade to and why? I guess you do rapid fire seeing as that was your measure of "Olympic" suitability. What about suitable for other disciplines? Not suitable for rapid fire is irrelevant if I want to train for 50 m free pistol.

How am I to take videos of USA Olympic shooting team members extolling the virtues and accuracy of a VC Scorpion, while others dismiss it as a "plinking toy".

I have the same concerns and issues about which rifle and sights to choose. But thankfully I can just keep shooting the club rifles at no extra cost for now.

[gwsb]

Not so sure how many people I'll be able to outshoot on the range.

SBF there is only one person on the range you need to outshoot - the man behind your sights. Very few people can go to the range at a match and expect to win and actually do it. For almost every one the challenge of shooting is to outshoot what you did yesterday or last week or even on your last shot. If you can continue to out do your prior performance soon you will be at your goal, whether that goal is to win the club championship or make the national team.

Even the best of the best of the best aren't thinking about if the guy next to them shot a 9 or if his gun is better than mine. They only care about their own shot and making it a 10.9.

[SlartyBartFast]

SBF there is only one person on the range you need to outshoot - the man behind your sights.

A beautifully zen sentiment. And certainly the correct way to approach each time you go up to the firing line.

I know what you mean, but you know what I mean too.

[gwsb]

SBF while I don't practice Zen in the sense of a religion anyone who wants to put a pellet in a dot of 0.5mm at 10 meters or a 22 bullet in a ring of 10.4 mm at 50 meters has to get so far into his own head it can only be described as a Zen like experience. In the same vein have you ever read Zen in the Art of Archery by Eugen Herrigel? An amazing book that every serious shooter should read along with about 50 - 100 other books.

In shooting there is no substitute for mental preparation.

[45ACP223]

I'd have to agree, buy the best you can afford. It sounds like you enjoy shooting, so I'd say you will keep it for the long haul. Besides, if you end up shooting competitively (bullseye), you will spend much more money on ammunition than the cost of the firearm. You mentioned, and others have gave you their prospective on the better guns if you are willing to spend the cash.

If you want to start in the mid price range, I'd suggest an old Hamden made High Standard Victor over the S&W Model 41. To me, the trigger is better, and the overall balance. Is the Pardini, Hammerli, and Walthers better, yes, but at double or triple the cost. The adjustability for fit, trigger, and reliability is what you are paying the extra money for. Can you make it to a Master classification shooting a Ruger or Buckmark, maybe but doubtful, Victor or 41, probably, How about High Master classification, no! That's where you will need to upgrade.

This is all just my opinion and you know how much opinions are worth! Hah! So buy the best you can afford based on your current skill level, and where you dream to be down the road. Best of luck to you!