Joined
·
97 Posts
In the June/July issue of HANDGUNS magazine there is a comparison review article: ".45 Polymer Shootout" by Paul Scarlata. He compares the S&W M&P45, Glock 21SF, Springfield XD45, and the Taurus 24/7 45 Pro. It is a very biased article which predetermines that since the 24/7 is the least expensive, it will finish last.
The author admits that he did NONE of the test firiing due to injury. The "experts" he brings in have their own favorites and familiarities and are all new to the 24/7.
In accuracy testing, the 24/7 ends up last, yet it has the tightest group in the target photos! Only a single type of ammo was used, no attempt at finding out which gun might shoot best with what brand. The 24/7 (worst) averaged 2.8" at 50 feet and the best averaged 2.5", not much difference but enough to score the 24/7 as worst.
The S&W M&P scored highest in sights and accuracy yet scored lowest at the timed plate rack drill. The 24/7 scored lowest in sights. The shooters are most familiar traditional 3 dot sights and probably had never before seen Heinie "straight 8" sights. Just because something is new to you, does not mean it is inferior.
The 24/7 scored a terrible rating in "ease of reloading" because shooters pinched their pinkies with the shortest gripped 24/7. Like any short gripped auto, one must loosen the pinky grip when inserting a mag, Duh! The 24/7 had two malfunctions when the mag dropped free "of its own accord". This was most likely user error in either not seating the mag firmly (these were the guys with delicate pinkies, remember) or hitting the mag release on recoil. There was no analysis to see if the mag release was defective or fixable. The M&P had finicky mag seating problems of its own.
When describing the unique second strike capability of the 24/7, the author reveals his ignorance of the SA/DA trigger. He calls it a very light double-action trigger stroke with a single-action type let-off. In truth, the 24/7 has a SA trigger for every normal shot and reverts to DA on a dud round.
The 24/7 weighs the least, was the most compact, had the shortest barrel, cost the least, and was the only one with a stainless finish slide many prefer, yet these factors had no effect on any of the ratings.
Most of the rated categories were highly subjective and unscientific, yet there are tables of data to make the article appear to be scientific. In the end the author says there is not much seperating all four pistols and that you really can't go wrong with any of them.
There is of course the economic bias of advertising dollars. High ratings are correlated to paid advertising space in the magazine.
As a Taurus pistol fan, I found this article fraught with error, biased against Taurus, and pseudo-scientific. It explains why people who have never held or fired a Taurus pistol already have negative opinions about them.
The author admits that he did NONE of the test firiing due to injury. The "experts" he brings in have their own favorites and familiarities and are all new to the 24/7.
In accuracy testing, the 24/7 ends up last, yet it has the tightest group in the target photos! Only a single type of ammo was used, no attempt at finding out which gun might shoot best with what brand. The 24/7 (worst) averaged 2.8" at 50 feet and the best averaged 2.5", not much difference but enough to score the 24/7 as worst.
The S&W M&P scored highest in sights and accuracy yet scored lowest at the timed plate rack drill. The 24/7 scored lowest in sights. The shooters are most familiar traditional 3 dot sights and probably had never before seen Heinie "straight 8" sights. Just because something is new to you, does not mean it is inferior.
The 24/7 scored a terrible rating in "ease of reloading" because shooters pinched their pinkies with the shortest gripped 24/7. Like any short gripped auto, one must loosen the pinky grip when inserting a mag, Duh! The 24/7 had two malfunctions when the mag dropped free "of its own accord". This was most likely user error in either not seating the mag firmly (these were the guys with delicate pinkies, remember) or hitting the mag release on recoil. There was no analysis to see if the mag release was defective or fixable. The M&P had finicky mag seating problems of its own.
When describing the unique second strike capability of the 24/7, the author reveals his ignorance of the SA/DA trigger. He calls it a very light double-action trigger stroke with a single-action type let-off. In truth, the 24/7 has a SA trigger for every normal shot and reverts to DA on a dud round.
The 24/7 weighs the least, was the most compact, had the shortest barrel, cost the least, and was the only one with a stainless finish slide many prefer, yet these factors had no effect on any of the ratings.
Most of the rated categories were highly subjective and unscientific, yet there are tables of data to make the article appear to be scientific. In the end the author says there is not much seperating all four pistols and that you really can't go wrong with any of them.
There is of course the economic bias of advertising dollars. High ratings are correlated to paid advertising space in the magazine.
As a Taurus pistol fan, I found this article fraught with error, biased against Taurus, and pseudo-scientific. It explains why people who have never held or fired a Taurus pistol already have negative opinions about them.
