Walther Forums banner

1 - 20 of 23 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
131 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Perhaps it wasn’t the best day to go and compare two guns, as I’m still recovering from an issue with my ears which for the past week has been affecting my balance. But while I thought I was perfectly fine, shooting really brings out any defects in the shooter. Somplease bear with me.

This is in no way a scientific experiment and I am sure both pistols can shoot far better than I am able to shoot them.

The P5 is a recent acquisition, is in near new condition and still very stiff. The Compact, on the other hand, I have owned for a number of years and shot quite a bit so definitely more familiar. Furthermore, either due to usage or to some modification to the trigger, the P5 Compact has a far lighter and smoother trigger. There again, I’m sure I’d have gotten much better groupings were I in better health. I took some pictures to show the results plus also comparing the two different pistols and dimensions.

As expected, I shot the Compact more accurately, but I think I ought to do this again when I am 100% fit.
 

Attachments

·
Registered
Joined
·
131 Posts
Discussion Starter #2
I shot tighter groups with the P5 Compact, but tday was not my best day at the range. I asked a hellow shooter to try them out, and he was amazed with the SA trigger of the Compact. Trigger pull measurements tell us why. The standard size has a trigger pull that’s 2lg heavier. It also has more creep.
 

Attachments

·
Registered
Joined
·
131 Posts
Discussion Starter #4
P5 vs P5 Compact...changes more than skin deep

More pictures comparinf the two pistols, not sure what they were all for as I have never completely stripped them. Input is welcome.
 

Attachments

·
Registered
Joined
·
131 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
Double action

The P5 Compact average trigger pull was slightly lower than the standard pistol. When shooting them id DA, this did not appear to make much difference.

Perhaps the comparison is not fair, and not both pistols were new out of the box. The smaller slide and barrel of the P5 Compact appeared to cause more felt recoil than the standard size. This was even more evident when shooting factory ammo. Conclusion? Both excellent guns that are an engineering jewel and a joy to shoot (...and also a joy to have, collect, handle and behold!).
 

Attachments

·
Registered
Joined
·
63 Posts
Thanks for the photos and the shooting impressions. Owning a P5 has always been on my "gun bucket list." Just seems like something else always takes precedence and the P5 gets put on the back burner.

Truth be told, there's something about the lines and the proportions of the compact that just speak to me. I think it would be my perfect carry gun (especially with some Nills). But I don't think I'll ever be in the market to pay the kind of the prices the P5Cs bring. So, it will likely be a standard... at some point.

Given you experience, how would say the P5s stack up as practical weapons for everyday use? Compared to, say, Sig P239s, P225s, maybe some Beretta 92 compacts... I think some would say it's outdated as a workhorse pistol... I would be inclined to say "is the 92 outdated?" The Walther is really the original... (Caveat: not dissing the 92, by any means--it's pretty much my favorite handgun).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
131 Posts
Discussion Starter #7
Hi Matty380. Thanks for getting back. I do not have any experience in everyday carry (not legal where I live) so cannot really say. What I can say, though, is that I'd trust the P5C with my life any day and every day. It does occupy a "special" go to place at my house for a SHTF scenario, to be honest. Along with a snubby model 66. My impression compared with other pistols is that the P5C is a bit too wide for a single stack so in that repsect it may lose out in the capacity practicality categories. Beretta 92? I love it. So many hate it, but I shot them and have finally got myself one in stainless steel. Not sure why so many bash them (mainly becasue of the initial bad reviews by the US army). Outdated? I do not really know how a pistol can become outdated (unless it's black powder, hahaha!!!) but it all boils down to personal preference. I know people who prefer a revolver for everyday use. Six rounds. Or even 5. Personally, I'd have a gun that I can trust 101% for every day use. And the P5C fits that perfectly.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,792 Posts
"(Caveat: not dissing the 92, by any means--it's pretty much my favorite handgun)"


I can't speak of the old Italian 92s, but I know the P5 is on a higher level in almost EVER aspect when compared to my new Wilson Combat/Beretta 92G Brigadier Tactical w/action tune. The "almost" had to be added because the trigger on the P5 has the slightest amount of creep (from wall to break).


The P5 has a support strut (to frame) below the front of the barrel, the 92, it's just hanging out there unsupported.


The P5 has a tight slip fit between the front of barrel and slide. The 92, a big ol' sloppy hole (not even centered to barrel FCS) is in the slide for the barrel to stick thru, zero support. EDIT; A +1k Langdon Tactical 92 purchaser that is waiting for his gun, commented on Beretta forum a short time ago that he HOPES the barrel is centered in the slide hole!!! Pathetic. What year it this? 1818?


I guess this garbage fit and finish is a nod to Beretta's "classic" firearms.


The P5 has a MASSIVE dropping lock block assembly (why the gun is so WIDE for a single stack) The 92, Beretta copied the Walther P38/P1/P4/P5 design evolution, but made it smaller to reduce width, making it failure prone while shooting hot ammo, same with the slide width, narrower.


Purchasing the WC/B 92G BT, returning 2 for horrible production quality, then comparing the 92 to the P5 side by side? I'm picking up my 2nd NIB Var4 P5 on Thursday (two bought in under 2 weeks, may buy a 3rd I'm going to look at in Austin).


The P5 is next level when compared to the 92!


I have to thank Beretta, they opened my eyes to what the P5 truly is, the finest production handgun Walther ever produced.


The pudding? 8rds @ 25 meters, bench-rested, sub 1" group c to c.......
 

Attachments

·
Registered
Joined
·
63 Posts
Hi Matty380. Thanks for getting back. I do not have any experience in everyday carry (not legal where I live) so cannot really say. What I can say, though, is that I'd trust the P5C with my life any day and every day. It does occupy a "special" go to place at my house for a SHTF scenario, to be honest. Along with a snubby model 66. My impression compared with other pistols is that the P5C is a bit too wide for a single stack so in that repsect it may lose out in the capacity practicality categories. Beretta 92? I love it. So many hate it, but I shot them and have finally got myself one in stainless steel. Not sure why so many bash them (mainly becasue of the initial bad reviews by the US army). Outdated? I do not really know how a pistol can become outdated (unless it's black powder, hahaha!!!) but it all boils down to personal preference. I know people who prefer a revolver for everyday use. Six rounds. Or even 5. Personally, I'd have a gun that I can trust 101% for every day use. And the P5C fits that perfectly.
This is great perspective. Thanks. You're right--I suppose "outdated" is really an irrelevant term, when it comes to a gun's purpose and function. Glad the P5c can be "the one" that fits your needs best.

For me, capacity is kind of an afterthought. Having a gun that dependably puts rounds where I'm pointing, fits fairly easily in my pants, and is 110% reliable comprises the three-tiered "holy grail" of handgun ownership.

The P239 comes close. It's concealable. Shootable. Reliable. But no gun does better for me on a target than a 92 compact. It's just... big. The PX4 compact falls somewhere between those. Lately, I find myself carry a Sig P245--really a great shooter and no problem to carry. I tend to shoot it a bit better than my P239.

In any case... it's becoming clear I need to add a P5 to stable at some point. Thanks again.

P.S.- Malta looks spectacular
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
63 Posts
"(Caveat: not dissing the 92, by any means--it's pretty much my favorite handgun)"


I can't speak of the old Italian 92s, but I know the P5 is on a higher level in almost EVER aspect when compared to my new Wilson Combat/Beretta 92G Brigadier Tactical w/action tune. The "almost" had to be added because the trigger on the P5 has the slightest amount of creep (from wall to break).


The P5 has a support strut (to frame) below the front of the barrel, the 92, it's just hanging out there unsupported.


The P5 has a tight slip fit between the front of barrel and slide. The 92, a big ol' sloppy hole (not even centered to barrel FCS) is in the slide for the barrel to stick thru, zero support. EDIT; A +1k Langdon Tactical 92 purchaser that is waiting for his gun, commented on Beretta forum a short time ago that he HOPES the barrel is centered in the slide hole!!! Pathetic. What year it this? 1818?


I guess this garbage fit and finish is a nod to Beretta's "classic" firearms.


The P5 has a MASSIVE dropping lock block assembly (why the gun is so WIDE for a single stack) The 92, Beretta copied the Walther P38/P1/P4/P5 design evolution, but made it smaller to reduce width, making it failure prone while shooting hot ammo, same with the slide width, narrower.


Purchasing the WC/B 92G BT, returning 2 for horrible production quality, then comparing the 92 to the P5 side by side? I'm picking up my 2nd NIB Var4 P5 on Thursday (two bought in under 2 weeks, may buy a 3rd I'm going to look at in Austin).


The P5 is next level when compared to the 92!


I have to thank Beretta, they opened my eyes to what the P5 truly is, the finest production handgun Walther ever produced.


The pudding? 8rds @ 25 meters, bench-rested, sub 1" group c to c.......
Love to hear you extoll the virtues of the P5. I have no doubt it's "on another level" in terms engineering, compared to most production guns today--including the 92.

That said... my 92 was a little over $500. Brand new. All metal. Nicely made. Metal trigger. Metal guide rod. Chrome-lined barrel. And I trust its reliability 110%. Certainly, I've gotten my money's worth.

I've actually posted in other forums about cockeyed 92 barrels: https://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?26090-Cockeyed-Beretta-92-barrels

Consensus: it isn't an issue. But still, no one can explain to me how the guns hit POA when the front sight doesn't match the centerline of the bore. Obviously, this isn't an "issue" for a P5, given the muzzle-end support. But regardless... my remaining 92 compact is laser accurate at 10 yards. I can hit the numbers on silhouette targets with some regularity.

Certainly, the 92's locking block is scaled down from the original P38 design--to the point where it's a disposable part. I think that's known and understood, and it's not really an issue: replace it after 10,000... you good...

All that said...

I've never been more interested in trying a P5: "Everything you love about the 92... only better!!!"

I've always been a fan of "only better."
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
131 Posts
Discussion Starter #11
....

I've actually posted in other forums about cockeyed 92 barrels: https://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?26090-Cockeyed-Beretta-92-barrels

Consensus: it isn't an issue. But still, no one can explain to me how the guns hit POA when the front sight doesn't match the centerline of the bore. Obviously, this isn't an "issue" for a P5, given the muzzle-end support. But regardless... my remaining 92 compact is laser accurate at 10 yards. I can hit the numbers on silhouette targets with some regularity.

....

I've never been more interested in trying a P5: "Everything you love about the 92... only better!!!"

I've always been a fan of "only better."
I have a number of pistols where the barrel does not appear to be aligned to the frame at the front. But they are consistent in the shooting, so sometimes I wonder whether this really affects "accuracy". My P89 and P90 are such examples. The P89 shoots spot on, the P90 a bit low to the right but the groupings are respectable. They are not competition or target shooters after all.

My 2c, FWIW
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
131 Posts
Discussion Starter #12 (Edited)
Barrel "alignment"

This is how the barrel of my 5.25" XDM, 9mm looks.
Accurate? A fellow shooter friend of mine who has earned himself quite some respect in the bullseye shooting community called it "the most accurate polymer pistol I have ever shot".
Not trying to disprove anyhting, but I guess there are so many issues that could affect the shooting of a gun... For example, I had to switch to the largest grips of the XDM to improve my accurace. Whereas on my CZ75B. I had to reduce the thickness of the grips and replaced the factory rubber ones with aluminium.
 

Attachments

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,792 Posts
Don't get my wrong, I enjoyed putting the first 480 rds thru my WC/B 92G BT 2 weeks ago, great trigger job by WC, shot good, ate ammo without issues, felt nice (with the 16lb recoil spring & Shok Buff, have an 18lb installed for next session). Beretta needs to realize it's time to address quality issues, their biggest customer (US government) is no longer buying the 92 with other peoples money (taxpayers).


I went on beretta forums and got pounded when I posted about my issues with the 92. Was told I needed to buy a "custom gun" for better quality (TOTAL BS, I don't have a SINGLE custom in my collection, yet the 92 is the ONLY one I see poor workmanship/inconsistent clearances (barrel to slide) on. Heck one of the 2 refused was shaving metal when hand cycled). Forum members were told BY MODERATORS I was to be ignored because I didn't introduce myself to the forum properly (whatever that means). Moderators locked threads that were picking up momentum as others began to agree beretta has quality issue. AND the best? Was accused of not actually owning a 92 and being a (insert brand here) fanboy.


Seems to me it's not just the beretta guns that need fixing, their forum does too.
 
  • Like
Reactions: malteser2710

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,792 Posts
Wow...not a pleasant experience with both BEretta and their forum.

Yeah, both Beretta USA and the forum made me a "one and done" owner.


My search efforts for quality, NIB/NOS classic firearms got kicked into high gear too.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
63 Posts
This is how the barrel of my 5.25" XDM, 9mm looks.
Accurate? A fellow shooter friend of mine who has earned himself quite some respect in the bullseye shooting community called it "the most accurate polymer pistol I have ever shot".
Not trying to disprove anyhting, but I guess there are so many issues that could affect the shooting of a gun... For example, I had to switch to the largest grips of the XDM to improve my accurace. Whereas on my CZ75B. I had to reduce the thickness of the grips and replaced the factory rubber ones with aluminium.
Do you mean the space above the barrel? I feel like a lot of tilting barrel guns have that... I guess because the barrel needs to angle up when the slide's fully retracted. Or maybe there's something I'm missing in the photo...

But yeah, grip width is a weird equation for me. On some pistols I like the girth... makes it easier to apply more lateral pressure with my support hand. For me, the grip of the 92c fits my hands best. But I have better trigger reach with single stack guns (ie, p239).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
63 Posts
Don't get my wrong, I enjoyed putting the first 480 rds thru my WC/B 92G BT 2 weeks ago, great trigger job by WC, shot good, ate ammo without issues, felt nice (with the 16lb recoil spring & Shok Buff, have an 18lb installed for next session). Beretta needs to realize it's time to address quality issues, their biggest customer (US government) is no longer buying the 92 with other peoples money (taxpayers).


I went on beretta forums and got pounded when I posted about my issues with the 92. Was told I needed to buy a "custom gun" for better quality (TOTAL BS, I don't have a SINGLE custom in my collection, yet the 92 is the ONLY one I see poor workmanship/inconsistent clearances (barrel to slide) on. Heck one of the 2 refused was shaving metal when hand cycled). Forum members were told BY MODERATORS I was to be ignored because I didn't introduce myself to the forum properly (whatever that means). Moderators locked threads that were picking up momentum as others began to agree beretta has quality issue. AND the best? Was accused of not actually owning a 92 and being a (insert brand here) fanboy.


Seems to me it's not just the beretta guns that need fixing, their forum does too.
That sucks you had a bad experience over at Beretta Forum. I'm a member there... though I haven't posted in a while. Generally speaking, I had a good experience there. Some of the members are very knowledgeable. Yet, at the same time, there always seems to be thread about when the 84/85 will come out in 9mm.

And for Brig/Cen Tac money... I agree, there should be an extra layer of QC. I feel like that's kinda what you're paying for, with the premium offering.

If it's just features you want... buy a minivan...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,792 Posts
Yeah, I didn't expect to see a Wilson Combat action tuned 92G BT that shaved metal when had cycled.


I would expect that issue to be seen by the WC gunsmith benchworking the action, or during test fire.
 
1 - 20 of 23 Posts
Top