Another pistol thread...

[Steelrat]

There really isn't a beginner gun, per se. A novice can shoot even full-size calibers just fine. The USP can be configured for the most simple configuration, which is DAO, or double-action only. It would have no safeties, no decocker, nothing but a trigger. You just load it and shoot. You can also set it up for safeties, decockers, DA/SA, whatever.

The 1911 is really only going to be able to shoot in one mode. When you pull it out, you have to cock the hammer before firing, or have it "cocked and locked" in your holster. 1911s have several safeties, including the backstrap and the regular safety on the side. It just takes more thought to use.

Kick is more a function of the weight of a gun and the cartiridge. A full frame glock can shoot a .40 just fine, but the subcompacts kick like a mule. A USP full size will have less recoil than a USP-C, but not by too much, as the USP-C isn't a subcompact. The .40, IMHO, has more recoil when it shoots than the .45, which seems to push more gently, though I have no hard data to back that up, only my experience. The same weight rule applies to the 1911s, where a full frame will have less recoil than a smaller one (officer's model, etc.) .

If you were to ask me to pick one, I'd tell you to get a 9mm USP. Or even a .40 or .45 USP, if you must.

[Ninjeff]

the 1911 is just pure sexy time though, What a great looking gun that is.

[slateman]

Seen a few of these threads lately, lots of good information, been reading the pros and cons on the USP in .45, and would like to know what the great minds of AO have to say about it. It would be my first pistol, and eventually I'd like to try my hand at compitition shooting. Would this be a good platform to start with? Thanks in advance for everyone's time.

Kevin

Pros

Great quality. German engineering at its finest. Reliable and durable. If it breaks something drastically wrong happened.

Cons
Money. HK is pricey. Its good, but you're paying for a lot of over engineering and the name. And, .45 is expensive as well.


As for competition shooting, probably not unless you're talking ICCS. And even then, most guys use 1911s for it.

The most important thing about pistol shooting is that you shoot what is comfortable for you. In order to do that, you gotta shoot a lot with the gun.

[CoolHand]

For competition shooting, you will not beat the trigger feel of a well tuned 1911.

For carry, that same wonderful trigger scares some people. YMMV

I don't CCW, but if I did, I would test drive a 1911 first. If it fit and I could conceal it correctly, I'd carry it. The cocked and locked does not scare me, assuming the safeties have been proven functional (which is easy to verify and test). If the 1911 didn't suit me (couldn't conceal it, etc), I'd head for an XD, FNP, USP, or Glock.

Caliber wise, I like .45's better than the .40 recoil wise. They just don't seem to have that same sharp lick that the .40 does (but that could be from the difference in platform too, I've not shot a 1911 in .40 yet).

I also don't like to have to stock 25 different calibers of ammo, so I've decided to just stick with .45 ACP for now. In the future I may add either .38 super or 9mm, but that will be it.

Ease of maintenance will be a toss up really. It's pretty much a no brainer to field strip any autoloading pistol. Conversely, it's pretty much always a bit of a chore to detail strip any autoloading pistol. You generally need tools and time, and patience.

That said, a USGI 1911-A1 can be 100% broken down using nothing but parts of the pistol itself. It was designed like this on purpose. I don't know if any of the other types can make this boast, and honestly, I'm not sure if it matters or not. It's just a cool aside.

My biggest advice would be this: If you're not sure you'll like a pistol or not, go rent some and shoot them to find out. If you're still not sure after that, buy used, so if you have to flip it, you don't take a royal hosing.

[Lohman446]

Pros

Great quality. German engineering at its finest. Reliable and durable. If it breaks something drastically wrong happened.

Cons
Money. HK is pricey. Its good, but you're paying for a lot of over engineering and the name. And, .45 is expensive as well.


As for competition shooting, probably not unless you're talking ICCS. And even then, most guys use 1911s for it.

The most important thing about pistol shooting is that you shoot what is comfortable for you. In order to do that, you gotta shoot a lot with the gun.

I don't buy the reliable and durable. When range shooting there are a handfull of ("high end") guns that you can expect to have failures to feed if you are not careful on ammo selection. Kahrs for the first few hundred rounds (even if you are picky on ammo) and H+Ks. Granted you can carefully pick ammo and avoid this, and all guns have there own "issues" but I find it a touch on the ridiculous side.

Not that it would overly concern me, they are fine enough, and once you know what ammo to stay away from can be wonderful.

I would just be annoyed at putting out top dollar for a gun (yeh, I know there are others) when others in the price range (and lower) do not exhibit the same issues.

[bryceeden]

If you can afford the H&K then get it hands down. In my opinion, and this is only my opinion the 1911 is pretty overrated. Its a great gun but I'd take a USP or FNP45 over a 1911 any day.

[Warwitch]

I love my USP in .40. Ive been shooting it for about 4 years now with no issues whatsoever. By far the best polymer frame handgun IMO. Though I do really like the Springfield XD's they are still a distant second.

My best friend has the .45 and I dont like the feel. H&K redesigned the USP frame to accomodate the .45 round and its friggin huge. I have big hands and it still feels like I dont have a secure grip. I would be afraid to pistol whip someone with it for fear of dropage.

Keep in mind, you get what you pay for. You cannot go wrong with H&K. This isnt paintball. Save your pennies and get the best model you can afford. It could save your life.

Edit: Lohman, Im going to have to disagree with you on this one. H&K is unworldy tough and reliable. My USP has never jammed, misfired, or failed in any way. Ever. Im on my second barrel. The gun has seen 10,000+ rounds and it looks brand new. My buddy threw his in mud puddle, drove his F350 over it, shook it off and dumped two clips with no ill effects. Hes even left it in a bucket of salt water for a couple days and still no issues with the springs or HE finish several years later. You cannot buy a tougher pistol. Period.

[Miltonyz]

I'm not near as knowledgeable as these guys here, but why has no one suggested a .22 pistol? If you want to go from never owning a pistol to shooting competitively you are going to have to shoot a LOT of rounds. If I remember correctly .22 ammo is a couple of bucks for a box. 9mm costs about 10 bucks a box and .45 is around 20. Once you have the basics down you could then trade up, without spending all your money on ammunition. Some beginners also flinch when they shoot throwing the shot off target. This can be exacerbated by a large caliber gun.

[CoolHand]

I'm not near as knowledgeable as these guys here, but why has no one suggested a .22 pistol? If you want to go from never owning a pistol to shooting competitively you are going to have to shoot a LOT of rounds. If I remember correctly .22 ammo is a couple of bucks for a box. 9mm costs about 10 bucks a box and .45 is around 20. Once you have the basics down you could then trade up, without spending all your money on ammunition. Some beginners also flinch when they shoot throwing the shot off target. This can be exacerbated by a large caliber gun.

Very true . . . . .BUT.

Once you've learned the sight picture, the rest really needs to come from familiarity with the weapon at hand.

That means mastering the recoil, creating the muscle memory for the controls, learning the trigger, learning the grips, etc. In other words, the man and the pistol have to "get to know each other" to be really good. You just can't get that from a small caliber weapon with a different feel and controls. Plus, you won't train yourself out of a flinch shooting a .22, 'cause there's basically no recoil to anticipate. If you flinch from anticipating recoil when shooting the big calibers, you won't fix that by shooting a small pistol with no recoil. It can break you of flinching from the sound of the shot, but not recoil.

Plus, the OP asked about competition and defense, neither of which is a .22LR target pistol particularly well suited for.

I have Browning Buckmark. Love it to death. I've ran many many thousands of rounds through it. It shoots like a dream. But, aside from the placement of the major controls being the same, it doesn't help me shoot my 1911 any better. The feel (weight, how it handles, feels in the hand, points, etc) of the 1911 and the recoil from the .45 round are just so entirely different that one doesn't really carry over to the other.

Aside from training up generic shooting discipline and sight picture, not a lot carries over.

That all said, I have several .22's. Hell, ATM I'm working on a 1911 chambered in .22LR. It's nice to be able to shoot several hundred rounds in a day without feeling beat up and broke.

[Bang and Breach]

I'm currently enjoying this CZ75 SP-01

[punkncat]

Since everyone else with an opinion has weighed in on this, I wanna jump on the bandwagon too.

The 1911 has been and continues to be the benchmark by which .45 is compared. They are superb weapons but from design 100 years old. There are newer weapons with better design in certain aspects no doubt. I personally like the 1911, its a good solid pistol. There are tons of upgrades available for them. With a compensator and the weight of the gun in general, I find that "kick" and target aquisition are much easier than with several .40 I have fired.

I have also fired the HK and a Springfield XD in that round and both of those were excellent. I am torn as to which I actually like better. I kind of lean towards the XD. In so far as a carry weapon I would pick either of them over the 1911 simply due to weight.

9mm makes a good round to plink with, as was mentioned above it is very inexpensive. At the ranges you will be shooting in a pistol comp, there should be no issues knocking over plinkers.
My thoughts are that if you are going to multi purpose the gun as far as a defense load as well, I would suggest moving to the .40 as its better stopping and dropping power are priceless.

Good luck in your choice. Try to find some competative shooters if that is your aim and ask them questions. There is a lot more to a match gun than there is to a "carry" weapon. There are many decent gun forums around that can be informative, just so long as you are willing to look past the "kook factor". Some of those sites really are full of the stereotypical gun nuts.

[Steelrat]

My thoughts are that if you are going to multi purpose the gun as far as a defense load as well, I would suggest moving to the .40 as its better stopping and dropping power are priceless.

Actually, the new 9mm JHP rounds are very close to the .40 when it comes to lethality. Ammo design has come a long way.

[punkncat]

Actually, the new 9mm JHP rounds are very close to the .40 when it comes to lethality. Ammo design has come a long way.

I will have to check into that. I have a 9mm tactical rifle as well if I am not forced to sell it. Some good defense loads for that would be nice.
Thanks