Quoted:


Your post is "hilarious".

This is a forum where people come to discuss the relative merits of the various pistols.  Those merits as discussed help potential buyers understand what is "best" for them.

As for "shooting them all", just how is someone supposed to do that unless they live in some metropolitan area where they can rent "them all"?  Some of us, many of us, do not live in any such place tho once we buy the thing have opportunities and requirements to use them unknown and sometimes unfathomed by the urban hordes.

I always find posts on forums disparaging discussion to be a bit absurd.

After all, it is a forum.

By such reasoning it would be best if Arfcom posted up topics and we all just mumbled to ourselves about them...

Quoted:


The only time I could discern a significant difference was when I had them both at the range at the same time and shot one right after the other. The bore axis difference is noticeable in recoil, but it doesn't necessarily make it better or worse. Granted this is all subjective so YMMV. But to me the 320's impulse has a more pronounced muzzle rise while the 17's feels more like its directed straight back. I was able to get fast and [relatively] accurate follow-up shots with both pistols, and that's really my bottom line. No difference in how they perform with regard to more practical defensive type shooting. They just "feel" different.

Now with regard to slow fire, shooting for accuracy/precision, the 320 performed significantly better in my hands. Maybe its inherently more accurate, as the slide to barrel fit is noticeably more tight in my 320 than my G17, M&P, or XD. Or maybe its just me. I will say the factory sights on the 320 are actually usable, unlike the cheap placeholders that Glocks are shipped with.