The Sig MPX PCC

The Sig MPX, a gas operated semi-automatic carbine chambered in 9mm, has been on the market for a few years now and has been showing up with increasing regularity at USPSA and Steel Challenge matches. 

With an MSRP at just over $2000 it isn’t surprising that the MPX is purchased primarily by serious shooters, including competitive shooters.  Sig astutely listened to the competition crowd and made some significant changes to the carbine when it released its newest version of the MPX, dubbed the MPX PCC.  Sig claims the new MPX to be “competition ready out of the box” (quoted directly from their website) and is marketing it directly to the competition market.

Before diving into the updated MPX I want to take a moment to talk about the previous MPX Gen2 and what one of our team shooters did to make it competition ready.  Rob was the first on our team to switch to the MPX, picking up an MPX Gen2 last year after having intermittent reliability trouble with his AR.

When Rob began shooting his MPX a few issues showed up immediately.  First was the trigger.  The trigger on his MPX was, as my friend (and fellow trigger snob) Frank likes to say, “like dragging a brick over concrete.”  The trigger was heavy and gritty and made shooting quickly a chore, especially since Rob was accustomed to the Elftmann trigger he had in his 9mm AR. 

Another point of contention with the MPX was the stock.  The rifle came with a stock that used two metal rods that collapsed along the side of the receiver.  This stock provided a terrible cheek weld and was uncomfortable to shoot.  It was definitely compact when collapsed, but that is of little concern on a competition gun.

Rob also found the handguard to be overly large.  It was a KeyMod handguard of exceptionally large diameter.  This large diameter made the gun harder to grip with the support hand effectively.

Lastly, the gun used a pinned and welded flash hider.  This was probably done to make the gun as short as possible without it falling under NFA regulations.  This is not useful to a competitive shooter since it only saved a couple inches in length but it made it difficult to change the muzzle device over to a brake, which is generally preferred by the competition crowd.  You either have to purchase a barrel that is 16” and put a brake on it or have the existing flash hider cut off and a brake pinned and welded into place.

Rob immediately set about changing these shortcomings.  The trigger was swapped out with a Timney trigger designed specifically for the MPX.  The MPX has an AR pattern fire control group but it is known to be particularly hard on trigger groups.  Many AR triggers, especially tuned competition triggers, will fail prematurely in the MPX.  Timney makes a trigger specific for the job so that is what Rob chose. 

To address the terrible factory stock Rob purchased a stock adapter that allowed him to affix an AR buffer tube so he could use the AR stock of his choice.  He decided to use a Mission First Tactical Minimalist stock which provided a familiar feel and a much better cheek weld than the Sig offering. 

The handguard and the muzzle device were initially left alone.  Finding a 16” barrel for the MPX so he could attach a brake was deemed not worth the trouble.  Rob did, however, recently switch to a Samson MPX handguard to get the size down to something he is more comfortable with.

Rob shot the 2018 season with his MPX Gen2 and loved it.  He shot it all year without suffering from the same cycling issues that plagued him with his 9mm AR.  He also managed to bump his PCC classification in USPSA to Master using the MPX.

Meanwhile, I continued shooting my 9mm AR in competition.  Sometimes it would run perfectly for an entire match.  Sometimes it couldn’t get through a single stage without having some sort of feed or ejection issue.  Multiple times malfunctions cost me match wins and my frustration with the 9mm AR platform was building.  I was shooting with Rob and watching him bang away happily with a rifle that worked all the time so when Sig announced that it was coming out with the version of the MPX geared toward competitive shooters I anxiously awaited details.

I was still on the fence about getting an MPX when I shot a Steel Challenge match in March of this year with my 9mm AR.  When it choked several times and literally cost me the match I decided that day that I was going to pick up one of the new MPXs.

When I finally got my hands on the MPX PCC I was pleased to see that Sig addressed all of the shortcomings I listed above with the previous model.  The MPX PCC comes standard with the Timney Trigger, it comes with a telescoping side-folding stock, it has a slim M-Lok handguard, and it has a 16” barrel with a threaded on muzzle brake.  It was almost like Rob wrote Sig an email explaining what was wrong with the old gun and they listened to him, changing exactly what he wanted changed.  Kudos to Sig for listening to the end users and making some much needed changes to the MPX platform.

Shortly after getting the MPX I mounted a Sig Romeo 5 red dot and started shooting.  I noticed a few things right away. 

First, the trigger was leaps and bounds better than the stock trigger on the old MPX.  We still had our original MPX rental at the shop so I was able to compare them side by side.  The original MPX measured 7lbs 2ozs and had a significant amount of creep.  The Timney trigger measured 3lbs 8ozs with substantially reduced creep and reset.  The Timney was a solid improvement and a very workable trigger for competition. 

Second, the stock was better.  It is important to note that when I say better I only mean better, not good.  It was definitely an improvement over the twin metal rod telescoping abomination that was on the original MPX but it was narrow, a pain to adjust, and didn’t offer much of a cheek weld.  It folds to the side but this gun is for competition, I really couldn’t care less if it folds.  I want it to feel rock solid against my shoulder and cheek while I’m shooting at speed.  It didn’t fit the bill.  Better, but still missed the mark. 

The slim handguard was a definite improvement.  It went from a portly 2” width down to 1.6”.  While 0.4” may not sound like a lot it made a significant difference in how the gun felt.   It fits my hands much better and it is also M-Lok rather than KeyMod.  Let’s be honest, M-Lok has won this fight and KeyMod will soon be the new BetaMax (I wonder how many readers will be too young to know that reference).

The brake was also a welcome upgrade.  It is a three chamber brake that seems to be quite efficient with recoil mitigation and keeping the muzzle flat while shooting.  It is definitely better than the pinned and welded flash hider for a competition gun and if you don’t like it, it is easy to change out with anything you can imagine.

Lastly, it didn’t malfunction!  My first 500 rounds went by quickly and without so much as a hint of a problem.  The next 500 rounds were exactly the same, not a single malfunction!  I was ecstatic about this particular detail as my frustration level with 9mm AR rifles had come to a head.

So is the MPX PCC competition ready out of the box? 

In a word:  No. 

While I was pleased with the changes Sig made, this gun still isn’t quite “competition ready”.  Many of the changes I made, which I will outline below, were personal preference.  Sig can’t build every preference into a competition ready gun for all shooters.  Still, there were a few things I would change before calling the gun competition ready and one thing that simply wasn’t acceptable.  The stock.

The new stock was too low for a regular height red dot, the cheek weld was uncomfortable, and the weird locking mechanism of the stock made adjustments impractical on the fly.  Being a side folder led to many of the compromises I consider unacceptable in a competition build.  The stock folding to the side isn’t useful but a good cheek weld during a rapid string of fire is mandatory.  For that reason I purchased an adapter from Taran Tactical Innovations (TTI) that allowed me to affix a mil-spec AR buffer tube.  From there I put a Vltor EMod stock, my personal preference.  Since the stock attachment point on the back of the receiver is actually a small picatinny rail I installed the TTI adapter one slot higher than intended by design.  It was still just low enough for the charging handle to operate properly but it lowered the bore axis relative to the stock and it brought my eye up to the proper level for the red dot.

There are a few other things I would like to see changed before calling the gun competition ready.  One is a flared magwell.  We all know that a nice, wide, open magwell simplifies magazine changes.  PCCs are known for having slow mag changes so when one is necessary having a larger magwell would be nice.  For that reason, I added a TTI metal flared magwell.

Another change would be shipping the gun with magazines large enough, and in sufficient quantities, for the task.  With 32 round courses of fire being common a 30 round magazine clearly isn’t ideal and with some stages having mandatory reloads a spare magazine isn’t just nice, it’s necessary.  I put TTI 10 round extensions on two 30 round magazines and they have run well through a few thousand rounds.  A factory 40 (or 45) round magazine would be nice and having at least a second magazine (preferably three) would also be useful in a competition ready gun.

A few other tweaks would be nice in a competition ready model.  A lighter front end would be great, especially for Steel Challenge.  The MPX PCC isn’t overly heavy, but a light front end is helpful during transitions.  

Many shooters would like a foregrip.  I like having something to index my grip and provide a leverage point to keep the rifle locked into my shoulder while firing.  I chose a YHM vertical grip but just about anything would work.

Sights would be useful.  I understand Sig left them off because competition shooters are particular about sights and will be changing them anyway.  Still, if you’re going to call a gun “competition ready out of the box” A sighting system would need to be included.  I decided on a Romeo 5, Magpul MBUS backup sights, and a Lasermaxx green laser for mine. 

The last change I made was the pistol grip.  While the factory grip will probably work for most shooters I have short thumbs and working the safety and magazine release was a chore with the factory oversized grip.  I went with a Magpul K Grip and it works perfectly.  I like the angle better and can reach the safety and magazine release without issue. 

In the end I’m very happy with the rifle.  It has proven reliable through a few thousand rounds and a few matches, it is fun to shoot, and it is effective at shooting fast.  I plan to be shooting my MPX PCC in USPSA and Steel Challenge for the foreseeable future.  With the track record Sig seems to have listening to the end user maybe the MPX PCC 2 will have an AR stock tube, three 40+ round magazines, and an ultralight barrel/handguard. 

Aaron Lorton
L4004

Draw Speed- How much does equipment matter?

Since Applied Ballistics sells competition gear at the store, has a sponsored shooting team, and hosts USPSA competitions at the indoor range it should come as no surprise that we are often asked just how much of a difference buying high end competition gear makes compared to using “normal” defensive carry equipment when shooting competitively.  Most people start out shooting some form of competition with the equipment they already have, which is actually exactly what I recommend for someone wanting to try out the shooting sports.  After a bit of time, however, they usually start looking at fancier equipment and the inevitable question comes up:  how much faster will this holster (or gun, or magazine carrier, or insert-expensive-shiny-new-gear-here) make me?

While I have always answered this question to the best of my ability, I was always speaking about my opinion rather than hard evidence.  While I certainly shoot faster now than I did a few years ago, and I now use high end competition gear whereas a few years ago I used my day to day carry gear, I couldn’t really quantify how much of that difference was practice and experience vs how much was high end equipment.

With that in mind, I decided I wanted to find out just how much difference in raw speed one could expect by improving their gear.  I needed something measurable to test so I settled on testing draw speed using different holster types and cover garments.

The Gear

First, this wasn’t a test between gear of similar type to see which brand was better, it was a test of different types of gear.  I wanted to test a concealed carry holster vs a well set up IDPA holster vs a full tilt USPSA race holster.  I also wanted to test two different types of cover garments as they would relate to concealed carry and to IDPA competition, one a basic street shirt and one a competition vest.

I needed to minimize variables so one of my first tasks was to decide on a gun.  I had to find a single pistol that would work in all three types of holster while being something I was familiar with and comfortable shooting at full speed.  I didn’t want the type of pistol to affect my speed when testing.  For several reasons I settled on an STI Guardian DS 2011.  For starters, I have more rounds down range over the last three years on the 2011 platform than any other handgun (I just passed 12000 rounds so far this year through various 2011s).  I didn’t want to use one of my actual competition guns, however, since I didn’t have a true concealed carry setup that would work.  The Guardian is a gun I carry on a regular basis (both concealed out in public and open when I’m at work), I shoot the gun regularly, it feels very similar to my competition 2011s, and I am very comfortable with it.  It is a double stack 1911, like my competition 2011s, but it is just a hair bigger than a Glock 19, making it a good carry size pistol.  The final factor, and possibly the most important, was that I had holsters of all three types that would fit this specific pistol.

For gear to test I chose three holsters and two cover garments.  Again I went with gear that I use regularly and am comfortable with.  I didn’t want to use a carry holster I had never drawn from and then use my own competition rig as that would skew the results.  The holsters I chose were a DAA Racemaster, a Comp-Tac International, and a custom pancake kydex holster made for me by Applied Ballistics.  The cover garments were a Blackhawk WarriorWear shirt and a 5.11 Tactical shooting vest.

The DAA Racemaster holster, which I use in USPSA and Multigun with a variety of 2011s, is every inch a bona fide race holster.  It is completely open, only covering the trigger guard, and it rides low with a slight rearward cant.  When it is locked, you couldn’t remove the gun without unlocking it, breaking the holster, or breaking the gun.  When unlocked it requires only a few ounces of pressure and ¼” of movement in the right direction and it is completely unencumbered.  I used this holster on the same belt I use when I compete, a DAA Premium Race Belt.  This belt is very rigid and works well with a low holster like the Racemaster, preventing the low ride of the holster from causing it to twist and bind during the draw.

The Comp-Tac International is the middle ground.  It is the most popular holster in IDPA and happens to be the one I use when shooting IDPA.  It is usable as a concealed carry holster, and I have used it as one, but it isn’t as easily hidden as other models because it doesn’t hug the body as tightly.  The International has all the features that make it just barely legal in IDPA.  It has the front cut out to just below the ejection port, it sits just about as far off the belt as it legally can, and the tension is adjustable from hard-to-remove all the way down to the-gun-is-sitting-loosely-in-a-cup-holder.  For this testing I left the tension set exactly how I have it when shooting IDPA, which means just enough resistance to prevent the gun from bouncing out during movement while requiring minimal force to pull the gun up and free from the holster.  I wouldn’t want to fight someone or jump a fence with the holster set to the tension I use for IDPA, but I have no concerns with the gun coming out as long as I remain upright.  It is also worth mentioning that this holster can be set to vertical or FBI cant.  I compete with it vertical, so I kept it that way for testing, but if the holster were to be used for concealment the forward cant would improve concealability.  For a belt I used my Nexbelt Titan Tactical, the same belt I use when competing with this holster in IDPA.

The custom kydex holster is one that Applied Ballistics made specifically for concealed carry to my specifications.  It has about a 9 degree forward cant (about half what most call the FBI cant), it hugs the body to minimize the profile when worn under a cover shirt, and the tension is set fairly high.  The Guardian, which isn’t exactly a small gun at a hair bigger than a Glock 19, disappears under a cover garment with this setup.  The cant is sufficient to tuck the grip in and the gun is close enough to my body that it creates minimal printing.  The tension is tight enough that it requires a deliberate effort to remove, but isn’t so tight that the act of drawing upsets my belt or waistline.  It is, to me, the perfect balance for a concealed carry rig.  I also used the Nexbelt with this holster, since it is also the belt I wear every day to carry concealed.

As for the cover garments, the Blackhawk shirt is a bit heavier fabric than most shirts of its type.  This makes it nice for drawing from concealment while being a shirt that I can wear daily.  In fact, it is one of the cover shirts I wear most frequently when out and about on my daily routine.

The 5.11 Tactical vest is the vest I use in IDPA.  It is a “shoot me first” vest that tells others that the wearer is carrying a gun, and that gun is probably a full size pistol with a few spare magazines.  Still, the fabric is thicker and stiff enough to make the draw quicker and more consistent than a standard shirt like the Blackhawk.

The Testing Method

I wanted to evaluate draw speed and nothing else.  In order to do this I had to have something measurable while minimizing variables.  I decided on using a shot timer to measure time between a start signal and one shot on a steel B-C zone target at a measured 10 yards.  I only used a single shot because I didn’t want the results to reflect my split times.  Adding a second shot would simply introduce another variable.

I shot all of the various gear combinations on the same day, in the same lighting, with the same wind, from the same shooting position, against the same target, wearing the same clothes, using the same hearing protection, and wearing the same two loaded 17 rounds mags on the support side to offset weight on the belt.  The only thing that I changed was the specific gear I was testing.  I shot at 1pm with the sun almost directly overhead, it was 79 degrees, and there was a slight breeze from directly behind me while on the firing line.  It was a beautiful day and a perfect day to shoot without any environmental factors to worry about.

I shot each combination, as well as the control (low ready), ten times.  I only loaded one round into the gun, so the weight didn’t change during a string of fire.  If I pushed too hard and missed the target, that time was discarded.  I didn’t want to skew the results by counting wild shots that were made too early from me trying to push time.  I shot each combination as quickly as I could draw and obtain a sight picture sufficient to make the shot.  In the end I had only 4 shots that were tossed out because they were misses and 80 shots on target that were scored.  I believe this is a fairly accurate representation of the times I can make consistent first shot hits on a moderate sized target at close range.

Results

The results here are listed from the slowest combination to the fastest.  I used the averages but also provided the fastest and slowest times for reference.

Custom Kydex Holster / Blackhawk Cover Shirt:  1.67 Seconds

The slowest combination of the bunch was the one I expected it to be, the custom Kydex concealment holster paired with the Blackhawk cover shirt.  The concealment holster was made with concealed carry rather than competition in mind.  The Blackhawk shirt was only slightly different than a shirt you would find a normal store and is used for concealment specifically because it does not stand out in a public setting.  After ten shots my slowest recorded time was 1.82 seconds while my fastest was 1.55 seconds.  My average was 1.67 seconds.  I don’t consider drawing and making a good hit at 10 yards in 1.67 seconds with what I wear daily a bad standard.  With decent split times getting two good hits on a threat in under two seconds should be no problem.

Comp-Tac International / Blackhawk Cover Shirt:  1.58 Seconds

The next slowest combination from my testing was the Comp-Tac International holster paired with the Blackhawk cover shirt.  Before the test I wasn’t sure which would slow me down more, the concealment holster or the cover shirt.  As it turns out, the cover garment made a larger difference for me.  It was 0.09 seconds faster on average than the custom Kydex holster using the same cover shirt, with the average being 1.58 seconds.  The slowest time was 1.78 seconds while the fastest was 1.41 seconds.

Custom Kydex Holster / 5.11 Competition Vest:  1.51 Seconds

Next up was the custom Kydex concealment holster paired with the 5.11 Competition Vest.  With an average time of 1.51 seconds, this means that switching from the Blackhawk shirt to the 5.11 Vest shaved 0.16 seconds from the draw.  That seems fairly significant to me and should be significant to anyone serious about shooting IDPA competition where a cover garment is required.  I don’t see myself wearing one of these vests in public for reasons already stated (they are called “shoot me first” vests for a reason) but I can’t deny that they make presentation from the holster quicker.  The fastest shot in this string was 1.45 seconds while the slowest was 1.54 seconds with the average being 1.51 seconds.

Comp-Tac International / 5.11 Competition Vest:  1.40 Seconds

Pairing the Comp-Tac International with the 5.11 Vest resulted in a 1.40 second average, shaving 0.18 seconds off of the same holster using the Blackhawk shirt.  Again, it appears that the vest saves significant time.  When comparing this, which is a good IDPA setup, with my every day carry equipment the combination of the vest and holster shaved 0.27 seconds off of my draw time.  If we look at using the same cover shirt, but switching between holsters this combo was 0.11 seconds faster than the custom Kydex holster and the 5.11 Vest.  Pretty close to the 0.09 seconds the Comp-Tac saved over the custom Kydex when using the Blackhawk shirt.  Here the fastest shot was 1.35 seconds while the slowest was 1.48 seconds.

Custom Kydex Holster / No Cover Garment:  1.27 Seconds

Using the custom Kydex holster without a cover garment averaged 1.27 seconds, which was a full 0.40 seconds faster than using this holster with the Blackhawk shirt and 0.14 seconds faster than with the 5.11 Vest.  It was also faster than the Comp-Tac holster was with either cover garment.  I managed a fastest shot of 1.15 seconds with this combo, while my slowest was 1.40.  This clearly shows that drawing without a cover garment is faster than with one, which is often cited by proponents of open carry.

Comp-Tac International / No Cover Garment:  1.12 Seconds

The next combination in line was the Comp-Tac International with no cover garment.  It was an average of 0.15 seconds faster than the custom Kydex holster when no cover garment was used.  One point of interest is that I noticed the difference between the custom Kydex Holster and the International were greater when no cover garment was used.  It saved 0.09 seconds with the Blackhawk shirt and 0.11 seconds with the 5.11 Vest but jumped to 0.15 seconds with no cover at all.  I suspect that the added speed is offset somewhat by having to clear the cover garment a bit wider due to the International sitting a bit further away from the body.  In this test my fastest time was 1.05 seconds while my slowest was 1.17 seconds.

DAA Racemaster / No Cover Garment:  1.04 Seconds

Not surprisingly the fastest holster was the DAA Racemaster.  It is, after all, a purpose built race holster.  It only shaved 0.08 seconds off of my times with the Comp-Tac international but it was also the only holster I was able to get a sub 1 second time with.  My fastest time with the DAA was 0.92 seconds while my slowest was 1.13 seconds.

I want to note that I didn’t test the DAA Racemaster with a cover garment for several reasons.  First, this holster is not legal in shooting sports that require a cover garment.  Second, this holster is not designed for or reasonable to use for concealed carry.  It lets go of the gun too easily when unlocked yet if you forget to deactivate the lock it makes drawing the gun practically impossible. Last but not least, with the holster in the unlocked position as it should be at the buzzer the possibility of accidentally snagging the gun with the cover garment and dropping a loaded pistol made testing the holster in this manner an unnecessary risk.  There was simply no good reason to do it.

Control, Low Ready:  0.49 Seconds

To have a control for this test I also shot a string from the low ready.  The handgun was in the same condition (cocked, chambered, safety on) as it was during all of the other testing.  I used a marker at 5 yards to have the muzzle pointed down and at the signal I simply raised the gun, acquired my sights, and fired.  My average time from the low ready was 0.49 seconds, over a full half second faster than my average draw from the fastest holster.  My fastest shot from the low ready was 0.43 seconds and my slowest was 0.55 seconds.

Conclusions

If we simply look at holsters without cover garments it would appear that the fastest holster is the DAA Racemaster, which was 0.08 seconds faster than the Comp-Tac.  Likewise, the Comp-Tac was 0.15 seconds faster than the custom Kydex holster.  This means that the DAA Racemaster was 0.23 seconds faster than the custom Kydex, on average.

While this may not seem like a huge difference consider the following scenario.  If a shooter was competing in a level II Steel Challenge match that had all 8 standardized stages that means there are 31 scored draws on the clock in a single match.  That means that at the end of the day the difference between the DAA Racemaster and the Comp-Tac International is 2.48 seconds.  It is not uncommon to view the results of such a match and see that the top ten competitors are normally within a couple seconds of each other so a difference like that can make a significant difference in the final standing.

In this same scenario if you compare the DAA Racemaster with the custom Kydex holster the difference is 0.23 seconds per draw.  That adds up to a whopping 7.13 seconds over the course of the entire match.

Likewise, looking at an IDPA match if you go from the custom Kydex holster with a street garment to the Comp-Tac with the 5.11 Vest you potentially gain 0.27 seconds per draw.  There are certainly fewer draws in the IDPA match compared to the Steel challenge match but a 10 stage high level IDPA match means 2.70 seconds gained.  Again, it isn’t uncommon for competitors to be within a couple seconds of each other at the end of the match.

In the end, whether these incremental gains are worthwhile depends on what your skill level is, how serious you want to be about competition, and how much money you want to spend.  For example the DAA Racemaster is well over double the price of the Comp-Tac International, and it can only be used in a few divisions in some of the shooting sports.  As with most things, the gains get smaller as the price increases but if you want the best gear you can get then you have to pay for it.  I would not suggest a holster like the DAA for someone just starting out in shooting sports, but if you are getting into competition shooting like USPSA or Multigun in a serious way that performance margin may be worth the price.  Only you can decide that.  Hopefully this information will help you make an informed decision.

Those of you that know me know I’m not generally inclined toward polymer framed striker fired guns.  I’m not knocking these guns.  In fact, I recommend them often.  I feel they meet most peoples needs very well in an affordable and convenient package.  They are reliable, they hold ample rounds, they are simple to operate, easy to clean, and they are at a price point nearly anyone can afford.  For these reasons I often steer new shooters to try out a couple and find what fits them before a first gun purchase.

Having said that, I prefer 1911s and 2011s, particularly for competitive shooting.  This is primarily due to my love of a fine trigger and my old fashioned love of the feel (and recoil mitigation) of a heavier gun.  Of course, I love the look of these pistols as well.

My biggest complaint about most striker fired guns is the trigger.  After years of trigger time with 1911s most polymer guns are really disappointing in this area.  So when we received our first Walther PPQ M2 at the store for a rental (pictured above left) I was expecting it to be more of the same.  I was, however, pleasantly surprised with what I found.  The trigger on the Walther still had more take up than I prefer, but once you get past that takeup (it isn’t long by striker fired gun standards) the trigger itself was rather impressive.  It broke cleanly and without much overtravel at 5.5 lbs.  The reset was fantastic for a striker fired gun.  It was short, audible, and tactile.  Exactly what I like in a trigger.

After dry handling it and finding I liked the trigger it piqued my interest so I started looking at it more seriously.  I found that the small grip insert (the Walther has replaceable grip inserts like most polymer framed guns do these days) fit my hand the best.  The slide release on the PPQ is long, meaning this is one of the few guns I can actually manipulate the slide release on using my firing hand thumb.  I don’t have large hands and on a 1911 I can’t even come close.  This actually posed a bit of a problem for me with the Walther, as I’m used to using my support hand thumb to release the slide.  The Walther release was mounted further back, making it hard to use in this way.  This isn’t a criticism of the Walther, it is just a work around I’ve had to develop using another platform that creates an issue for me with this pistol.  The one down side for many shooters, however, is that with an appropriate high grip this long slide release may be prone to causing the slide to go forward on an empty magazine.  Longer thumbs tend to ride on the slide release, holding it down and causing the slide to fail to lock open.  Since my thumbs are short, this is not a problem for me, but it is worth mentioning.

I shot the rental gun early on and was happy with the results.  It shot to point of aim out of the box and shot nice groups.  I shot a few different types of ammo through it, mostly 115gr reman ammo we sell cheap at the store, and it never had any function issues.  I did find that it was harder to shoot quickly than my competition guns, but that is to be expected.  My STI DVC Limited is over a pound heaver, weighing in at 41.8 ozs compared to the PPQ’s 25.2ozs.  The trigger is also 3lbs heavier (5.5lbs for the PPQ vs 2.5lbs for the DVC).

Ultimately I was impressed enough that I decided to pick one up for myself to try in USPSA Production division.  I had never shot production before, as none of the guns I previously competed seriously with fit into the restrictions of that division.  I had considered it in the past but never found a gun I liked enough to give it a try.

I ordered a PPQ M2 with a 5″ barrel (pictured above right).  This wasn’t going to be a carry gun so I had no need to conceal it and the extra sight radius and weight would help with competition.  I wanted the Q5 match but it was impossible to acquire at the time.  Perhaps I will get one later for Carry Optics, but for now I’m using the PPQ.

When the gun arrived I found it to have the same trigger and feel as the 4″ we had as a rental gun.  It also shot well right out of the box and has had zero issues with a variety of ammunition.  I have approximately 2000 rounds through the gun as I write this, but we have well over 10,000 through the rental gun now and so far we haven’t had anything break or any malfunctions that we’ve been made aware of by those renting the gun. While it is still early, I have no negative reports related to durability or function.

On June 3rd at Wildcat Valley Rifle and Pistol Club I shot my first USPSA match with the PPQ.  I used a Double Alpha Academy belt and Racer magazine pouches similar to what I use for other divisions.  I used a Comp-Tac International holster with the drop offset attachment permitted in Production.  Overall I found the gun and rig to handle very well.  I was used to the Comp-Tac holster as I use it for IDPA and had used it in USPSA before upgrading to a DAA holster so it felt familiar and comfortable.

The gun had performed well for me in practice and I had dry handled it enough that the draw and reloads were smooth.  I felt ready when I stepped up for my first stage.  The timer went off, and away I went.  I missed 4 times and my score was terrible…

Through the course of that match I learned quickly that in an actual competition environment I could not run the Walther like I run my STIs.  Double the trigger weight (my STIs are 2.5lb triggers) and more muzzle flip under recoil simply meant I could not run the gun as fast.  By the end of the day I was settling in with the Walther and my scores were competitive.  By the end of the match I finished 4th out of 9 in Production.  Not a bad showing, especially given my difficulty with that first stage.

After that first match I went back to the practice range and worked on my trigger speed with the Walther.  I found a shooting cadence that, while marginally slower than with my STIs, was controllable and accurate.  With more practice and a match under my belt I went out for my second USPSA match on June 25th at Atlanta Conservation Club.  I went into this match with the goal of slowing down and making good hits rather than trying to make a production gun run like a limited or open gun.

It worked.

My first stage the gun performed well.  I posted a solid score and it felt good.  I proceeded to shoot six stages and every one of them felt good, I made good hits, and my time was competitive.  By the end of the day I had gained a great deal of confidence with the PPQ and once the scores were tallied I finished 3rd in Production Division out of 22 shooters.  I was very happy with that.

In conclusion, I’m happy with the PPQ and plan to continue to use it for Production Division.  I will also give it a try in IDPA Stock Service Pistol soon.  The PPQ has been reliable, accurate, and fast for me compared to other striker fired polymer framed guns and I like it.

But it won’t be replacing my 1911s or 2011s any time soon…

– Aaron