Author Topic: Is anyone aware of ransom rest testing done comparing compacts ?  (Read 245 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline ms0072

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 1
I do a lot of non competition slow fire target shooting and I am trying to find information on the mechanical accuracy of the different cz compact pistols. Does anyone know of any ransom rest or other testing that has been done on the various different compact models to determine the level of accuracy each is capable of ?  Ive done alot of searching but I have not come up with much.  If anyone knows of any testing that has been done specifically comparing the accuracy of the different compact models please let me know.

Offline Tok36

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5058
Re: Is anyone aware of ransom rest testing done comparing compacts ?
« Reply #1 on: May 23, 2020, 02:10:14 AM »
   The way that i understand it all of the CZ 75 variants compacts should be comparable. There can be allot of difference in one pistol of the same model and the next. The barrel bushing tolerance to the barrel varies. The slide to frame fit varies. Then there is the ammo factor amongst other things.

   I have not seen any tests on the compacts specifically, i am interested to hear the input of other forum members on the subject.
Will work for CZ pics! (including but not limited to all CZ clones)

Offline SI VIS PACEM PARRABELLUM

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3769
Re: Is anyone aware of ransom rest testing done comparing compacts ?
« Reply #2 on: May 23, 2020, 06:10:34 AM »
My PCR can shoot a flea off a rats tail @ 200 yds. It shoots better than I do. O0

Offline M1A4ME

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5534
  • I've shot the rest, I now own the best - CZ
Re: Is anyone aware of ransom rest testing done comparing compacts ?
« Reply #3 on: May 23, 2020, 08:06:08 AM »
   The way that i understand it all of the CZ 75 variants compacts should be comparable. There can be allot of difference in one pistol of the same model and the next. The barrel bushing tolerance to the barrel varies. The slide to frame fit varies. Then there is the ammo factor amongst other things.

   I have not seen any tests on the compacts specifically, i am interested to hear the input of other forum members on the subject.

That's it, right there.  Individual pistols are different.  Ammo is different.  My wife has two Compacts that were "hers."  She was happy with the first one, till she shot the second one (I'd bought that one for me) and it shot better groups.  Then it became "hers" and the first CZ75 Compact I'd bought for her went into the safe.

If you're looking for recommendations on which model of Compact to buy to get an accurate pistol you're looking at the wrong things.

Look at rail/no rail.  Decocker only or safety only or the Omega series (can be either depending on your preference).  Look at steel frame or aluminum frame or plastic frame.  Threaded barre on non-threaded barrel.

Once you decide on the model you want then you shoot it and see how it does.  See if the trigger is acceptable.  If the sights work for you.  If you're happy with the groups. 

After that you can modify the pistol.  Different sights are available from multiple makers/vendors.  Don't like the trigger?  CZ USA or Cajun Gun Works can fix you up with a different trigger, different hammer (and other parts) that will completely change the trigger pull if it was draggy/bumpy/rough to start with.  Not happy with the groups?  CGW makes a bushing that fits the barrel tighter out on the muzzle end.  Don't like the grips (if it's a metal framed Compact) then lots of different grips are available.

I'm a trigger snob and maybe worse on group size.  If it won't shoot good groups it stays in the safe.  I've only modified the trigger/hammer parts on a couple of my CZs because the triggers were truly abominable as compared to the rest of my CZs.  Some of my CZ's are awesome.  Some are good to go (not as good as the best, but still fine).  I've only felt the need to use the CGW barrel bushing on (I think) three CZ pistols.  Like the triggers, some CZs just shoot better groups than others. 

It's a combination of the parts and how they fit/work together.

Good luck with your search, whether for knowledge or for helping decide which CZ Compact you'll be buying.

I like'em all.  I have a P07, come CZ75 Compacts, and a couple Omega P01s.  No PCRs and no P01 decockers.  I'm a safety guy, just don't care for decockers.  I like that first shot SA, just like the next 14 or so.

Again, good luck.
I stopped carrying the SIG 556R.  SIG changed models and couple/three times and stopped supporting it with parts.  So, I stopped supporting SIG.  Back to the tried/true AR15 Carbine.

Offline Joe L

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5881
Re: Is anyone aware of ransom rest testing done comparing compacts ?
« Reply #4 on: May 23, 2020, 10:34:53 AM »
Full disclosure--my experience is with the polymer P-10S subcompact 3.5" and P-07/P-10C 4.0" barrel guns, not the steel 75 style variants, which I would love to try some day. 

I am not convinced Ransom rest testing is necessary to define results from different pistols.  If the pistol isn't re-aimed between shots, a loose slide will show up in the Ransom rest test.  If you re-aim, you might as well test it from a rest yourself.  I don't even rest the gun on anything when I shoot them.  I rest my wrists on a block with a towel on top. 

Here is one consideration.  My expectations for the short barrel gun, say a P-10S with a 3.5" barrel are not as high as for a P-10F with a 4.5" barrel.  The shorter barrel has to drop in the slide the same distance down as the longer barrel, but in a shorter distance so the angle is not as flat.  The larger angle that the barrel drops means the machining on the bushing area has to be a little looser in the shorter barrel gun, or the contact area reduced somewhat.  I don't know the details on the dimensions, but the end result is that the barrel fit will have to allow for more barrel movement vertically on the short barrelled guns than on the longer ones.  Even with the same tolerances, the shorter barrel guns can move more angle-wise because the contact points are closer together.

That said, I have had excellent results with the 3.5" (3.6"? can't remember) P-10S and 4.0" P-10C but there is some variation here as well.  The chamber end of my P-10C is slightly looser than my P-10S so it is not quite as consistent.  Still good.  But the full size P-09 and P-10F 4.5" pistols are good every shot.  The P-10S 3.5" gun, I have had a few spectacular range sessions and one or two less so, but still good.  It is because of the grip shape versus my hand shape.  I definitely need to add some Sugru (this weekend) to get it the grip shape similar to the larger guns. 

What I have concluded is that the lockup design of the polymer CZ's is excellent (and very different from the 75 variants).  My particular guns are extremely good, from a lock up standpoint so mine are all on the good side of the tolerances, which must be very tight anyway.  I can't imagine ever handling a 3.5" barrel pistol that is any tighter than my P-10S and have it still cycle reliably.  The only reason I have to shoot it at 100-200 yards is to show folks that it is possible.  And that, most of the time, I can aim the gun properly, hold it steady, and pull the trigger without moving it.  Better than a Ransom rest in some ways because I re-aim for every shot.  (Full disclosure--I have never used a Ransom rest and am 100% confident that I don't need to, at least in my current physical condition.) 

Based on a sample of 1 pistol,  I don't think you can find a subcompact that is any more reliable or accurate than a P-10S.  If there is one, the differences may not be significant compared to the shooter variation from shot to shot.  It shoots surprisingly well compared to the larger guns.  I was surprised enough to try 200 yards with high confidence.  And I had one good day and one not as good day with it (last week) at 200 yards.  I think it is the grip shape.  Little things make a big difference in pistol accuracy testing.  I've learned that by lobbing over a 1000 rounds or so of 9mm,  .45, and .22 bullets out to 100-200 yards over the last 8 years or so. 

I personally would try several pistol models that have good reviews for reliability and accuracy, or at least no bad reviews, and then see which one has the best fit for your hands from a grip shape and trigger reach standpoint.  I favor the CZ's but there are other good pistols out there.  And I don't hesitate to modify the grip shape and trigger reach on a polymer guns to get that right so that I can pull the trigger without moving the gun.  That is more important than any machining tolerance or lockup design concerns, again, in my opinion.  And I don't take in a lot of caffeine before heading to the range to shoot at 100-200 yards.  And I use good ammo. 

Modern machining techniques have allowed many manufacturers to make mechanically tight guns with match gun lockups.  Find one that you can operate the best and go with that.  But start with a P-10S, of course.   :) :)

I found my P-07 4" compact to be extremely accurate.  Enough so that I used it in a local bullseye match and had high score with it, much to the surprise of my 1911 fanboy shooting buddies.  I haven't shot the P-10S or P-10C in a bullseye match yet, however.  But I've been tempted.   

Joe
« Last Edit: May 23, 2020, 10:51:43 AM by Joe L »
CZ-75B 9mm and Kadet, 97B"E", two P-09's, P-07, P-10C, P-10F

Offline HughB

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 43
Re: Is anyone aware of ransom rest testing done comparing compacts ?
« Reply #5 on: May 23, 2020, 04:59:49 PM »
All of my CZ's, including steel, aluminum and polymer frames have practical accuracy on par, if not better, than my most accurate handguns. I have several H&K .45's that are more accurate in MY hands, but it is generally easier to obtain accuracy in .45's than 9mm's. I don't see any practical difference in accuracy among my 3.5 to 4.5 inch barrelled CZ's. By "practical", I mean available to me within my skills and requirements I place on the pistol at various distances. These differences would likely be evident in a Ransom rest, although some polymer frame pistols suffer repeatability issues when trying to secure them on Ransom inserts.

As to the Ransom rest - by eliminating the human variables, Ransom testing will demonstrate, consistently and repeatedly, the accuracy capabilities of the handgun in it. The handgun is held in the rest with inserts made for that particular firearm and the entire Ransom rest is mounted to an immovable, heavy bench. Nothing on the Ransom rested pistol is touched by human hand during firing. The trigger is remotely activated. It is THE standard for testing the accuracy potential in a particular firearm. It is not re-aimed between shots as it only moves upward in recoil. The pistol is then simply re-set after to the exact same firing position. Freedom Arms is one of, if not the hallmark for precision made production revolvers. The test targets that accompany these big boomers are astounding and indicate the benefits of the production techniques (e.g. line-boring) quality standards as well as the testing procedure. This accuracy level is even more astonishing when one considers that these revolvers are chambered in cartridges that hurl bullets up to 440 grains at velocities exceeding 1200 fps or 250 grain bullets at 2000 fps. You can see the manufacturing process in the video below. The testing procedure begins at the 4 minute mark. Note that the tested firearm is fired from a machine rest, a test firing fixture,  as the recoil is simply too much for extended testing, even a Ransom rest. The purchaser of a Freedom Arms knows what that specific revolver can do, although it is unlikely that many owners could duplicate once, if ever, the test results. Test targets that accompany their .22 revolvers are often one .22 caliber hole. Although I know I can never achieve that result, I also know that the limitations are not in the firearm but are mine.



Shooting with one or both hands, shooting from support, shooting from any number of rests, etc. attempt to minimize the variables associated with grip, strength, vision, trigger manipulation, breathing, steadiness - a whole host of causes that have an effect on observed accuracy. They are techniques that can be honed like any skill. But they are not a substitute for a Ransom rest if one wants to determine the accuracy capability of a specific handgun with a specific load, not what an individual may be able to wring from it. It is an indispensable tool for custom gunsmiths whose skills may be measured by the potential accuracy of the handguns they deliver. A Ransom rest (or a factory test target) doesn't say anything about what the tested firearm will do in human hands, but both are helpful tools when that same individual is attempting to evaluate different firearms or ammunition, loads, or accuracy enhancing modifications in the same gun.




Offline Joe L

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5881
Re: Is anyone aware of ransom rest testing done comparing compacts ?
« Reply #6 on: May 23, 2020, 07:24:44 PM »
HughB--For a revolver, sure, a Ransom rest is a perfect test, since the barrel is fixed to the fixture via the frame. 

For a semiauto, a perfect semiauto when shot hand held, may show some variation from shot to shot not because the barrel is loose in the slide, but because the slide is loose in the frame.  One that is loose to the frame can be a perfect shooter when the gun is re-aimed for each shot.  My Kadet is like that, it would flunk a Ransom rest check but is as good as a revolver hand held, in my opinion.  If the barrel is sloppy in the slide, sure the ransom rest will show that, but I can show that with a hand held test as well. 

My point was that a semiauto gun that doesn't look too good in a Ransom rest may still be perfectly accurate when shot hand held.  Of course, a gun that shoots a one hole group in a Ransom rest SHOULD be good hand held also. 

Joe
« Last Edit: May 23, 2020, 07:39:17 PM by Joe L »
CZ-75B 9mm and Kadet, 97B"E", two P-09's, P-07, P-10C, P-10F

Offline HughB

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 43
Re: Is anyone aware of ransom rest testing done comparing compacts ?
« Reply #7 on: May 24, 2020, 08:27:21 AM »
I didn't find a comparison of steel frame compact CZ's on the web using a Ransom rest  but did locate a video using a steel frame CZ 75 in a Ransom rest:



I don't know the guy in the video but he's having a good time.

Joe L - I don't understand how you "flunk" a Ransom rest check. The Ransom rest merely demonstrates the mechanical accuracy of the tested firearm by exactly duplicating the circumstances at the time each round is fired. You can improve your accuracy with a particular handgun by aiming, but aiming doesn't affect the mechanical ability of the gun to deliver rounds to the same place. In other words, if a pistol shoots 10, 10 rounds groups in 1.5" inches while secured in a mechanical rest, you can't make it deliver 1" groups by aiming it more precisely.

There are a number of things that contribute to the mechanical accuracy of the firearm. Revolvers have their own issues as each round is fired from a separate chamber that must be precisely aligned with the fixed barrel after rotating between shots. This requires the interaction of various small,  fitted parts that lock, release, advance and stop the rotation of the cylinder. The fired bullet must travel in free space before entering the forcing cone of the barrel in, ideally, perfect alignment. Auto's don't have these issues - every round is fired from the barrel. Granted, the barrel must lock and unlock at the same time and in the same orientation for each shot if the pistol is to be accurate. That process is more dependent on fitment at the barrel/bushing/slide and locking lugs/slide than slide to frame. I have a couple of H&K USP Experts - polymer pistols that will rival any 1911 pistol I own or have shot. H&K achieves this in two ways - fitting the slide to the barrel at the hood and locking lugs and employing a silicone O ring at the muzzle to serve as a replaceable bushing. Slide to frame fit is standard USP - a pistol that has been proven to function under harsh conditions.

And a bad barrel, be it poor quality steel, throating, rifling, or crowning will plague accuracy even if all of the other systems are functioning perfectly. Fortunately, CZ barrels are incredibly well-made based upon my experiences and your excellent videos.

I'm not certain what you mean by "perfectly accurate" but the context suggests you mean "acceptably accurate" for the intended use. I'm with you there. I can't duplicate the groups from a Ransom rest with the same gun held in my hands. If the gun is rested and so am I, I sometimes can come close if the distance is 25 yards or less. Beyond that, I cannot maintain the same sight picture to shoot a 2" group without an optic. However, that same pistol can consistently make hits (not groups) on targets at ranges many would not associate with a handgun.  A 12" gong or 24" square piece of steel allow consistent hits at ranges generally associated with a carbine instead of a handgun. I also have a couple of Kadets that shoot better than I can hold them. They can't match a Pardini or Hammerli or even a Smith 41 in the hands of a nationally ranked Bullseye shooter, but they allow me to targets I aim at when I do my part.

I apologize to the OP for wandering far from the original question.  Let me try to land near the OP's topic by stating that my experience with steel and aluminum frame compact CZ's suggest very little difference in mechanical accuracy from the compact and full size pistols. You may find the actual results you seek in one of the reloading forums, or the CZ section of the Brian Enos forum. These guys do a lot of Ransom testing for load development and may have what you are looking for.

Offline Joe L

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5881
Re: Is anyone aware of ransom rest testing done comparing compacts ?
« Reply #8 on: May 24, 2020, 11:06:32 AM »
HughB--Thanks for the additional comments and explanations.   Also, thanks for the video link.  I also watched a PPQ test on Ransom International's channel. 

The Ransom rest videos demonstrated what I have seen from a rest--first round lock up from slide lock can be different from the rest of the rounds, and that, with good ammo, the horizontal spread is usually larger than the vertical when testing a semi auto. 

All I am really saying is that a somewhat loose pistol in the slide to frame fit may not fair well in a Ransom rest but MIGHT shoot just fine from a wrist rest IF the variation in hits from the Ransom rest is due to slide (and sights) locked slightly left on one shot, and slightly right on the next.  Maybe I am overestimating the effect of looseness of the slide/sight relative to the frame constraint.  If one re-aims the gun (perfectly!) the slide slop left and right is taken care of, that's all.  Maybe I'm concerned about an insignificant effect. 

I've seen some custom 1911 pistols that had incredibly tight slide to frame fits that I assumed would help in a Ransom rest but which I also assumed don't make any difference IF the barrel is fully locked up with a sloppy slide fit and the shooter is using a sight on the slide.  Sure, you want the tight slide fit if the optic is mounted to the frame. 

Perhaps I should fall back on my original disclaimer of having never used a Ransom rest and do something about it.  Like maybe get access to a Ransom rest and see how results using it compare to wrist rest starting with one of my sloppy slide fit but otherwise sub 2" at 50 yards from a wrist rest pistols.  I think my 75B with a 10x bushing may qualify--absolutely perfect barrel to slide fit, but loose slide on the frame.  It was good for 1-1/4" at 50 yards from a rest.  Maybe it will do 3/4" from a Ransom rest?  If it does, I'll never bring up the slide to frame fit again.   :) :)

Also, very interesting to read about the subtleties of the revolver details. 

Back to the original question about compact and subcompacts.  I have not seen any results from Ransom rest testing of compacts/subcompacts, but I haven't looked very hard.  I have seen reports on 5" and larger pistols, mainly 1911 style pistols.  The reason?  Most folks consider a compact/subcompact to be a close distance self defense firearm, I suppose.  I am not as consistent with a subcompact as I can be with a full size pistol at 50 yards and further, but I've shot some good groups at 100 yards with the P-10S, and that indicates to me that the accuracy is extremely good and the mechanical tolerances for barrel to slide fit are good, and those results would carry more weight for me in a purchase decision than Ransom rest results, unless they are better! 

Another thought on the 75B variants in the compact size.  If you get one that is a little loose at the bushing, that is easily fixed with a CGW 10X bushing.  Looseness at the chamber end is very rare according to CGW.  So buy the steel pistol when you see a good deal on it, and set aside a few hundred dollars to make it perfect.  I don't recall seeing reports about one that couldn't be fixed up to shoot like a match gun.  Well, against other compact match guns, that is. 

Joe
CZ-75B 9mm and Kadet, 97B"E", two P-09's, P-07, P-10C, P-10F

Offline Boris_LA

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 683
Re: Is anyone aware of ransom rest testing done comparing compacts ?
« Reply #9 on: May 24, 2020, 02:05:09 PM »
I agree with Joe L. Our club have a permanently mounted extremely rigid RR and I have bought CZ inserts for it. Tested a few times and never get better results from RR compared to wrist rest on the counter and aiming at every shot.

 

anything