Walther Forums banner

1 - 20 of 92 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,287 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
So, I have some experience with the 365, don’t own one yet, but I do have an SAS on order.

I did put 50 rounds through a HC today and another 50 through a 365 XL.

Wanted to share some thoughts on both....

I wanted to hate the HC, but I just couldn’t. The two guns are very similar. So let’s focus on the differences:

- The HC sights are very unique and much more visible than those on the 365. The HC sights seemed a lot better for fast acquisition but made the gun a little harder to shoot more accurately.

- Felt recoil and muzzle flip seemed exactly the same. With eyes closed, I don’t think anyone could tell the difference. Even with the higher bore axis in the HC.

- The HC feels a little fatter. And as such, I think the grip was a bit....wait for it....better.

- The 365 was a lot easier to shoot more precisely...for sure. But with a little practice the HC groups improved.

- The triggers are very similar. But the Sig trigger was better. And by better, I mean that the break seemed more crisp and defined. But in actual shooting, it was hard to discern.

Let me be frank......the two guns seem a horse a piece. The Sig should be a better gun, but I honestly think they are so close that it will come down to personal preference. For that reason, I was surprised.

I think that Springfield really executed their gun pretty darn good. While it hasn’t stood the test of time yet unlike the 365, which is a platform that initially had issues.

Accuracy of the two guns was similar but the 365 was better. I am sharing two targets below. Each has 25 rounds fired at it. 10 rounds at 15 ft, 10 rounds at 25 ft and 5 rounds at 50 ft. The HC could t keep up with the Sig at 50 ft, but most of that I think was due to the sights. For a carry gun 50ft is really pointless.

Had I had more time I would have done my 6 dot transition drill which would have been a better evaluation.

The fliers on the HC were all at 50 ft. And yes....was shooting left. Ugh. All shots were fired two handed unsupported.

I would consider my shooting skills pretty solid. I would need a little more time.
 

Attachments

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,454 Posts
So, I have some experience with the 365, don’t own one yet, but I do have an SAS on order.

I did put 50 rounds through a HC today and another 50 through a 365 XL.

Wanted to share some thoughts on both....

I wanted to hate the HC, but I just couldn’t. The two guns are very similar. So let’s focus on the differences:

- The HC sights are very unique and much more visible than those on the 365. The HC sights seemed a lot better for fast acquisition but made the gun a little harder to shoot more accurately.

- Felt recoil and muzzle flip seemed exactly the same. With eyes closed, I don’t think anyone could tell the difference. Even with the higher bore axis in the HC.

- The HC feels a little fatter. And as such, I think the grip was a bit....wait for it....better.

- The 365 was a lot easier to shoot more precisely...for sure. But with a little practice the HC groups improved.

- The triggers are very similar. But the Sig trigger was better. And by better, I mean that the break seemed more crisp and defined. But in actual shooting, it was hard to discern.

Let me be frank......the two guns seem a horse a piece. The Sig should be a better gun, but I honestly think they are so close that it will come down to personal preference. For that reason, I was surprised.

I think that Springfield really executed their gun pretty darn good. While it hasn’t stood the test of time yet unlike the 365, which is a platform that initially had issues.

Accuracy of the two guns was similar but the 365 was better. I am sharing two targets below. Each has 25 rounds fired at it. 10 rounds at 15 ft, 10 rounds at 25 ft and 5 rounds at 50 ft. The HC could t keep up with the Sig at 50 ft, but most of that I think was due to the sights. For a carry gun 50ft is really pointless.

Had I had more time I would have done my 6 dot transition drill which would have been a better evaluation.

The fliers on the HC were all at 50 ft. And yes....was shooting left. Ugh. All shots were fired two handed unsupported.

I would consider my shooting skills pretty solid. I would need a little more time.
WaterDR, Thanks for taking the time to write a pretty detailed shooting comparison of the two guns.

Now that you've shot it, could you see yourself owning and carrying an HC?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,287 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
In a word.....sure. I would have no issues with that.

I also think SA has a way of giving away a lot of product (such as magazines) with their guns too. Just give it a little time.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,306 Posts
The patterns are very similar other than the HC is more left. Could that have been a difference in the grips or those HC sights?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,287 Posts
Discussion Starter #7
Honestly guys, the guns shoot about the same. My first few rounds with the HC were way worse. But to be fair, I needed to get comfy with the gun. I am a precision shooter so I look at the small things. But ****....it’s a CC gun! And with the HC having better grips and purchase and what I think are better sights, the 365 is really just left with more market experience and a tad bit more accuracy.

Does one round make a difference? No! Only on paper. Who cares? It’s just bragging rights. As if one gun were 1 ounce lighter. Not a deal breaker.

If I were to pick ONE of these, it would be neither. It would be the 365 SAS. But I’ll wait until I shoot that one.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,287 Posts
Discussion Starter #9
So, you’ve got the SAS on order. Let me aske you what you think of the ports and vent holes in the slide? (And, then I’ll ask you again later after you’ve shot it... <img src="http://www.waltherforums.com/forum/images/smilies/wink.gif" border="0" alt="" title="Wink" class="inlineimg" /> )
.

I suspect I will love them. Can’t wait. But I’ll let you know.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,570 Posts
I think Springfield gets their stuff sorted out pretty well before they release it to the masses, unlike others.

That said, I had an early 365 and experienced the peening on the barrel...but the pistol as a whole never malfunctioned. I'm really curious to try an XL, but the 365 and the X-Ray sights are all I need.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,454 Posts
I'm curious about the sights on the SAS. Sure they are great from a snag-ability standpoint, but can you hit what you want with them???

I realize they are not target sights despite the name but you still need to be able to shoot a reasonable level of close-in accuracy.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,306 Posts
Went to the gun club/lgs yesterday to look at the inventory. While there I struck up a conversation with one of the newer sales tech's and discovered he was a former Sig field employee. He was part of their test group and had first hand experience with the 365's. He also had put quite a few rounds through the club's new Hellcat which gives him a great perspective for comparing the two. His comments were as follows:

Recoil virtually the same
Grips very similar in texture and fit....for his hands.
Both equally accurate.
No performance issues.
Not a fan of the 365 flat sights or the rear sight dots for SD use.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
284 Posts
I'm curious about the sights on the SAS. Sure they are great from a snag-ability standpoint, but can you hit what you want with them???

I realize they are not target sights despite the name but you still need to be able to shoot a reasonable level of close-in accuracy.
I read a review of that sight system (can’t remember where, or I would put up the link, sorry) and the reviewer said inside 5-7 yards they are really fast/usable with “combat accuracy” (about a hand-sized group centered in chest) just seeing the forward dot. He said for more precision, or shooting at longer distance, one had to acclimate to seeing the entire ring around the dot. He said seeing only part of the ring was no good, and learning to align for the whole ring wasn’t bad, but took some training time. With the forward dot centered in the ring, accuracy was just as good as any other iron sight system.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,287 Posts
Discussion Starter #14
I honestly don’t think sights matter that much anyway in CC gun. Point and shoot.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,306 Posts
I honestly don’t think sights matter that much anyway in CC gun. Point and shoot.
I use the front sight to create a "flash sight" picture. My concern with the "horseshoe" rear sight plus dot or the flat rear sight is in low light conditions I could be distracted by it even for a micro second and that could prove fatal.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,287 Posts
Discussion Starter #17
I have seen it. That guy is an arrogant prick. But so am I 🙂

My only concern with the gun though after watching it is the accuracy. Both of these guys seem like skilled shooters yet struggled with this gun.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,148 Posts
I'm waiting to actually handle one, perhaps at a gunshow this weekend. Have a P365 and like it very much, but it's almost small enough to pocket. Actually, you can pocket it, but drawing it can be a challenge, and the squared off rear sight is the biggest problem.
If the SAS let's me pocket a 9mm defense gun, I'll trade a little accuracy for that deal.
Moon
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2 Posts
I have seen it. That guy is an arrogant prick. But so am I 🙂

My only concern with the gun though after watching it is the accuracy. Both of these guys seem like skilled shooters yet struggled with this gun.

I been told the same myself. lol


As as arrogant as that guy is the point that the Bullseye sight suck and that the slide release also sucks has been brought up in many other valid reviews.


Soooo.... no P365 in my rotation any time soon.


Good luck with your purchase and keep us updated on how it performs for you.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,454 Posts
I'm waiting to actually handle one, perhaps at a gunshow this weekend. Have a P365 and like it very much, but it's almost small enough to pocket. Actually, you can pocket it, but drawing it can be a challenge, and the squared off rear sight is the biggest problem.
If the SAS let's me pocket a 9mm defense gun, I'll trade a little accuracy for that deal.
Moon
I agree. It's a matter of how much accuracy you give up for that clean slide profile.

For the up close and personal, save your bacon, type shooting the thing is designed for, maybe it's fine???

I believe the reviewer did concede the sights are very quick to acquire.

As a longtime fan of the J frame snub, I think it probable the issues noted with the SAS sights can be overcome. It might just take a little work. But that's a guess.

Hopefully I'll get to shoot one soon and see for myself.
 
1 - 20 of 92 Posts
Top