Walther Forums banner

1 - 20 of 46 Posts

Registered
Joined
71 Posts
Discussion Starter #1 (Edited)
Whew, ok, here is my "review" and reasons why I sent back the Walther Q5 SF back to Walther. This is of course all my own opinion, yours may vary.

Here's where I am coming from for perspective. I shoot USPSA competition, mostly in production but for the last year in carry optics (CO) division. I shoot the 5" PPQ, not the polymer Q5, because I tried the Q5 and did not it find it to be in any significant way better than the 5" PPQ. I've shot the 5" PPQ for 4.5 years and have around 50,000 rounds through it (same original gun), and I carry that gun that I shoot in competition, so I know that gun pretty well. In fact the only handguns I own are all Walther PPQ's with the exception of one Sig Max Michel 1911 I occasionally shoot in single stack division for a change of pace.

I really wanted to try the Q5 SF because I figured the steel frame might be a major game changer given that production division, and more recently Carry Optics division, are dominated by the steel frame DA/SA guns from Tanfoglio and CZ.

I shot the Walther Q5 SF in 1 USPSA competition and 2 range sessions for around 800 rounds total. I also dry fired the gun for around 5 hours total for the time I had it.

So here's my takeaway.

First the good. In short the SF is more accurate and easier to shoot than the polymer PPQ 5". At least a little bit. Not a lot but a little. I was able to do a sub 2 second bill drill (6 shots from the draw on a USPSA target at 7 yards) with all hits in the A zone with both guns (but not every time to be sure). My groups are tighter with the SF, but so what, an A zone hit is an A zone hit. The extra weight helps with recoil for sure, and so helps keep groups a little tighter. I had no trouble keeping 5 shots in the upper A and B zone of a USPSA target at 30 yrds (a 6"x 6" square) with both guns, but it was easier with the SF. The grip insert and frame cut checkering the SF are more aggressive that the polymer version, which is great. The grip texture on the polymer Q5 is insufficient to keep the gun firmly held in your hand in the Texas summer heat when your hands are sweaty.

Now the bad. The Q5 SF is primarily meant as a competition gun. That's a fact. As a competition oriented gun the major flaw in the PPQ family is the short grip. Its a G19 size grip where a G17 full size grip is needed. I have a permanent scar in the lower part of my palm from the multiple times I have opened up the skin when doing a sporty reload and the skin gets pinched between the magazine basepad and the grip. I hate that, and the SF didn't fix it. The trigger is great with both guns, although with a simple switch of the trigger return spring on the 5" PPQ, you can get the trigger pull weight down to around 3.7 lbs. I couldn't get the lighter trigger return spring to work in the Q5 SF but I don't hold that against the gun. When you are goin fast throwing 0.15 to 0.2 sec splits on A zone hits I honestly dont notice the difference between the 5 lb trigger on the Q5 SF, the 3.7 lb trigger on my 5" PPQ or a 1.9 lb trigger on my single stack Sig Max 1911. Everything else is about the same on the Q5 SF as the polymer 5" and works just as well.

And that's the biggest problem. I can buy a 5" PPQ for less than $500. If I send the slide to L and M for milling to mount a red dot, spend $10 bucks for a reduced weight trigger return spring I can have a ready to go Carry optics Walther for $670. And that gun can do at least 95% or more of what the Q5 SF can do. And even with that both guns are better shooters than I am. I paid $1,499 for the Q5 SF. That's a $830 premium for the Q5 SF over the polymer 5". The short grip thing irritates me to the point I was considering switching to the Sig P320 X5. So I asked a fellow competitor (happens to be a Grand Master, although that's probably not relevant) who had one for sale to meet me at the range. He also brought his current CO guns, a Tanfo Limited Pro and a CZ shadow. He also wanted to try the Q5 SF. I shot all 4 guns back to back, all are great guns. The Sig was not any better than the Walther, in fact I liked the Walther a lot more. Probably not surprising given I have shot a Walther for almost 5 years. But then I tried the Tanfo and the CZ. I hadn't shot either of those guns before. It was amazing to me how criminally easy it was to but 6 shots into a 2" circle at 7 yards from the draw in less than 5 seconds (the DOT drill) with either of those guns. And I have no experience with DA/SA guns. They were way more accurate and easy shooting guns than the Walther's or Sig, for me at least.

OK, so what? We're talking about Walther's here, not Sig's, Tanfo's or CZ's.

Well, again its a cost thing. I am of the attitude that the up front cost of a competition gun is not that significant compared to the overall cost incurred over a year of a semi-serious competitive shooter (match fees, ammo components, gas, hotels etc). Cause I can do math. But I am not a millionaire either. All three of those guns cost less than the Walther Q5 SF, by hundreds of dollars. You can get a Tanfo Limited Pro for $940, mill the slide, polish the hammer and sear, buy a couple of springs for a darn good trigger job (almost as good as a PPQ in double action and better than a PPQ in single action, sorry buts its true), all for around $1,150. The Sig X5, with a Grey guns trigger job, can be had for around $1,000.

The Walther Q5 SF is the best competition gun Walther makes. By a little, not a lot. It's a better gun than either the polymer 5" or the Q5. What it is not is worth $1,500. The guns that directly compete with the Walther Q5 SF in the market it is aimed at are arguably better guns, and certainly just as good, for hundreds less in cost.

I think the Walther Q5 SF would be a keeper at $1,100. But for $1,500, I can't justify it, and I sent it back.
 

Registered
Joined
1,290 Posts
This is a good perspective. You are making a review from a value perspective rather than just the gun itself.

However, I tend to think a better comparison would be between the SF and the Shadow, but I do see your point. I own a Q5 that I am very happy with andjjstcant justify the cost of going to a SF.

It would be interesting though to see how a 5, a Q5 and an SF all differ in the hands of a real pro in regards to speeds. Then again, even a cheap ass Hipoint won鈥檛 be much different either.

Someone can spend $200 or $50 on running shoes and I suspect their 5k times would be the same too. Or $600 or $100 on a rod and reel and still catch the same amount of fish. I could buy a $1500 driver and my golf game would still suck.
 

Registered
Joined
71 Posts
Discussion Starter #4
However, I tend to think a better comparison would be between the SF and the Shadow, but I do see your point.
I used the Tanfo for the more detailed cost comparision for a couple of reasons. I found the Tanfo and CZ to shoot pretty much the same. Probably not a surprise as the Tanfo is basically a CZ clone. I liked the Tanfo better. A Limited Pro has a 3/4 dust cover and weighs 41 oz. The CZ Shadow 2 has a full dust cover and weighs 47 oz. The weight limit in CO division is 45 ozs. So the cost to get a CZ shadow 2 to be legal in CO division is considerably higher than the Tanfo, for what is basically the same gun. If a guy could find a CZ Shadow 1, the cost to convert is in line with the Tanfo, but they don't make the Shadow 1 anymore so good luck finding one.
 

Registered
Joined
1,032 Posts
Now the bad. The Q5 SF is primarily meant as a competition gun. That's a fact. As a competition oriented gun the major flaw in the PPQ family is the short grip. Its a G19 size grip where a G17 full size grip is needed. I have a permanent scar in the lower part of my palm from the multiple times I have opened up the skin when doing a sporty reload and the skin gets pinched between the magazine basepad and the grip. I hate that, and the SF didn't fix it.
That seems to me to be largely dependent on hand size; a friend of mine tried out a Q5 SF and said it felt short to him. I haven't handled one myself, but I had my friend hold my P99, and he said it was exactly the same as the Q5 SF, which to me sounds like the Q5 SF would fit my hands perfectly. (My hands don't hang off the bottom of the P99 at all, and I've never pinched myself doing a mag change at speed in USPSA.) It's easy to understand how it wouldn't appeal to you if you do end up pinching your hands, though.

Thanks for the detailed review.
 

Registered
Joined
71 Posts
Discussion Starter #6
That seems to me to be largely dependent on hand size; a friend of mine tried out a Q5 SF and said it felt short to him. I haven't handled one myself, but I had my friend hold my P99, and he said it was exactly the same as the Q5 SF, which to me sounds like the Q5 SF would fit my hands perfectly. (My hands don't hang off the bottom of the P99 at all, and I've never pinched myself doing a mag change at speed in USPSA.) It's easy to understand how it wouldn't appeal to you if you do end up pinching your hands, though.
.
True Statement.

I guess where I am coming from is that every other gun I know of that is shot in any division in competition has a full length grip (i.e. G17, G34, 1911 and so on size grip). I haven't heard of anyone getting pinched by any other gun with that full length grip. So why would Walther use a grip where a portion of the population's hands can't use it without the risk of bleeding on the gun?

That having been said I am still using the 5" PPQ and don't plan on changing anytime soon. I use a lot of bandaids.
 

Registered
Joined
1,290 Posts
All of this aside....I just enjoy shooting what I like to shoot 馃檪

As I said, I am currently very happy with my Q5. But I do see the SF as a big upgrade for a big price. Not sure I have room for both. I can also buy one at cost. I don鈥檛 know the cost price yet but it鈥檚 likely around 1100 to 1200 for me to get an SF.

I once had thoughts about getting a Shadow 2 and sending to to CGW for an entire make over...until I fired a TSO.

If I pick up a TSO, I鈥檒l keep the Q5. If I get an SF, I don鈥檛 see the point in keeping the Q5 and not sure I would need to TSO...

Hummmmm....
 

Registered
Joined
80 Posts
Great to here every ones opinions on the SF. Just remember in todays climate on guns ,I would suggest we buy guns and not sell them to get another guns because one day in the future guns are going to be hard to get. Like to see more reviews on the gun itself not the price. A true review would be as if the price is $0 and review the gun for quality,accuracy and usability of the product for which it was built.We all spend way to much money on other things that are dumb to others.I don't like the equipment to hold me back,I had rather it be my skill that needs the improvement.All people are made different so some guns won't fit all people. I have 2 SF's and haven't had any problems at all (Over 8000rds fired),Sprinco recoil reducer and the TSK trigger spring kit,which have improved the SF. My CZ S2 had pins come out and sights became loose under 1000rds,but I didn't sell it,just put in the safe. When CZ ships the factory OR(optic ready version)I will try CZ again.We like what we like.That is why they make so many different guns.I enjoy reading every ones opinions ,It does help us make decisions . Thanks everybody.
 

Registered
Joined
136 Posts
As a competition oriented gun the major flaw in the PPQ family is the short grip.

I also would like the SF to have more "bulk" on bottom around the magwel. I just yesterday emailed Mr. Emre of Walther competition division, that optional grip panels with extra stuff at the bottom would be great.


About the capability of modifiyng PPQ 5" etc. to handle like expensive top-end Walthers: it would be done easily as we all now. However, from European/International perspective, we shoot practical under IPSC-rules and the production rules are a little different. As most of you now, the WorldShoots are also shot under IPSC-rules. The IPSC-guidelines for production weapons are strict :cool:


The MSRP for the Q5SF here in Finland is 1890euros ( 2123$ ). In Europe, Walther has no money-back-deal. The price for license of buying a single firearm is 90euros ( 101$ ).


The bottom line in my perspective: I carry Walther P99Q on duty. It would be nice that we would have the moneyback-deal here also. But it doesn麓t matter for me now, because the goverment gives me a chance to choose between Walther or Glock for duty and I choose to compete with samekind/ergonomic firearm that I carry on-duty. Would I do better with CZ Shadow2 OR? I should train with two pistols. I麓ve done that, back in the days I had G17 on-duty and CZ Standard IPSC / Tactical Sports for competition.

Paid a lot for the Q5SF, still happy.
 

Registered
Joined
80 Posts
True Statement.

I guess where I am coming from is that every other gun I know of that is shot in any division in competition has a full length grip (i.e. G17, G34, 1911 and so on size grip). I haven't heard of anyone getting pinched by any other gun with that full length grip. So why would Walther use a grip where a portion of the population's hands can't use it without the risk of bleeding on the gun?

That having been said I am still using the 5" PPQ and don't plan on changing anytime soon. I use a lot of bandaids.
Walther rep said one reason for the shorter grip of PPQ is to force only 1 consistent way to grip the gun everytime,especially the SF PRO with magwell.It was designed to make you have a grip that is as high as you can get to the bore axis of the barrel.When making a sub 1 sec. draw this is critical. Glock or XDM so much grip area,you can be up or down the grip 3/4 of an inch.
 

Registered
Joined
136 Posts
High grip is the thing. Like I said, the Walther has an opportunity to give shooters optional-grips that will force the shooter have the high grip.
 

Registered
Joined
1,290 Posts
Great to here every ones opinions on the SF. Just remember in todays climate on guns ,I would suggest we buy guns and not sell them to get another guns because one day in the future guns are going to be hard to get. Like to see more reviews on the gun itself not the price. A true review would be as if the price is $0 and review the gun for quality,accuracy and usability of the product for which it was built.We all spend way to much money on other things that are dumb to others.I don't like the equipment to hold me back,I had rather it be my skill that needs the improvement.All people are made different so some guns won't fit all people. I have 2 SF's and haven't had any problems at all (Over 8000rds fired),Sprinco recoil reducer and the TSK trigger spring kit,which have improved the SF. My CZ S2 had pins come out and sights became loose under 1000rds,but I didn't sell it,just put in the safe. When CZ ships the factory OR(optic ready version)I will try CZ again.We like what we like.That is why they make so many different guns.I enjoy reading every ones opinions ,It does help us make decisions . Thanks everybody.
I don鈥檛 really buy into that language. It鈥檚 really designed to just push product and it鈥檚 very effective at it. Then again.....
 

Registered
Joined
71 Posts
Discussion Starter #13
Walther rep said one reason for the shorter grip of PPQ is to force only 1 consistent way to grip the gun everytime,especially the SF PRO with magwell.It was designed to make you have a grip that is as high as you can get to the bore axis of the barrel.When making a sub 1 sec. draw this is critical. Glock or XDM so much grip area,you can be up or down the grip 3/4 of an inch.
Oh boy, I don't buy that for a minute. If a short grip enhanced a persons ability to get a high grip then why is Walther literally the only manufacturer that has a gun targeted to competition shooters with a short grip? Does Walther know something no one else has figured out? Does any shooter out there think that all things being equal they would rather shoot a gun with a short grip? Conversely if the Walther rep was correct then one would expect that a full size grip would result in shooters constantly having a low grip, or a grip not as high as possible. But that doesn't happen either. I have no problem getting a high grip on a 1911, and neither does any limited or open gun shooter, who's guns almost all of which are a 2011 style with a full grip.

A high grip is entirely dependent on 2 things, getting the web of your hand jammed as high a possible under the beavertail, and getting your second finger of your strong hand jammed as high as possible under the trigger guard. And how do you do that? Practice, lots and lots of practice, thousands of dry fire draws. There is no shortcut to this.

The only reason for a short grip is to aid in concealment, which has nothing to do with shoot-ability. The Walther rep is throwing some spin to cover for the biggest flaw in their flagship product (and this, again, coming from a guy that owns many PPQ's and chooses to shoot them in competition.) They built the SF with a short grip because they wanted the magazines to be cross compatible and because they already had the machinery set up for it, i.e. it was cheapest to build that way, a thoroughly defensible reason.
 

Registered
Joined
23 Posts
Great in depth and painfully expensive analysis. I own a 4" PPQ M2 9mm and the Q5 Match polymer. I love both guns and thought the SF would be a logical upgrade. But $1500, whew it better be good. I got a chance to try it and as pointed out it is real good. it took about 1 magazine to figure it all out. Is it worth $700 more just to reduce a little muzzle rise from the lighter polymer pistol? No. $1500 is a ridiculous price. The polymer Q5 is 90+% there.

My CZ 75 Tactical Sport cost me $1100 and it out-shoots that SF for accuracy, speed, minimal to non-existent muzzle rise, and just shear fun any day anytime. 3 x 20 round mags included too. I love the Walther PPQs but save your money and get a better pistol with the CZ TS or Shadow 2 if you want a relentlessly reliable and accurate steel gun.

I agree at $1100 the PPQ SF is a good value. I would even buy one at that price, but not $1500.
 

Registered
Joined
71 Posts
Discussion Starter #15
So the Sig X5 legion is out, and addresses most of the competitive shooter's issues (i.e. optic ready for Romeo and Leupold, flat trigger at ~4 lbs, uses 1911 recoil springs that you can easily change out to tune to your load, 3 mags, has good weight at around 43 ozs depending how you set it up, magwell that can be used or not, dawson precision sights). It's a direct competitor to the Q5 SF

And you can buy it for around $850 bucks. Further evidence that the Q5 SF price point is too high.
 

Registered
Joined
171 Posts
So the Sig X5 legion is out, and addresses most of the competitive shooter's issues (i.e. optic ready for Romeo and Leupold, flat trigger at ~4 lbs, uses 1911 recoil springs that you can easily change out to tune to your load, 3 mags, has good weight at around 43 ozs depending how you set it up, magwell that can be used or not, dawson precision sights). It's a direct competitor to the Q5 SF

And you can buy it for around $850 bucks. Further evidence that the Q5 SF price point is too high.

The Sig X5 Legion I think will be good but nowhere near as good as the Shadow2. I don't think any pistol will stack up against the Shadow2. You can't compare a striker fired to hammer but for competition I don't think you will find a better pistol than the shadow2
 

Registered
Joined
80 Posts
I agree, best DA/SA gun competition-Shadow 2. Best striker fired gun for competition -Walther Q5 SF! That is for rite now,their will always be new guns coming out (Alien)
 

Registered
Joined
71 Posts
Discussion Starter #18
I dont disagree the shadow 2 is a better gun than the Sig X5 Legion, in general. But ... it also costs $350 more, its not red dot ready, and it is 2 oz over the weight limit for carry optics division. And both guns are far better better shooting guns than the vast majority of users have the skill to fully utilize them.

I am still of the mind that if I switch platforms away from my PPQ 5" it would most likely be to the Tanfo limited defiant, but the new Sig X5 legion is definitely a platform I would try out first.
 

Registered
Joined
171 Posts
I dont disagree the shadow 2 is a better gun than the Sig X5 Legion, in general. But ... it also costs $350 more, its not red dot ready, and it is 2 oz over the weight limit for carry optics division. And both guns are far better better shooting guns than the vast majority of users have the skill to fully utilize them.

I am still of the mind that if I switch platforms away from my PPQ 5" it would most likely be to the Tanfo limited defiant, but the new Sig X5 legion is definitely a platform I would try out first.

The OP of this thread killed my appetite for the Q5 SF and he has a point that the pistol should have been a 17 rounder. The Shadow 2 I have a feeling will still be more accurate and easier to shoot fast than the X5 Legion coming out, but after owning the CZ P09 and CZ P10, both are fine shooters and tact sharp, it's kind of boring buying the same kind of gun. Feels like your marrying your sister kind of a thing. Although I have the P320 Xcarry, I guess I could make the same arguement that the X5 Legion will be just as boring. I wanted something new like maybe the Beretta 92X performance but that too is only 15 round. I love the X5 legion and the way it looks but the one concern I have about Sigs is their quality control is very spotty. My xcarry and P365 are both fine but i have known other owners that had a lot of issues wiht them.
 

Registered
Joined
697 Posts
I was at a training center earlier this year and one of my fellow students has a CZ 75 Tactical Sport Orange. Another had a Shadow 2. They were talking back and forth about how great their guns were. I was shooting my PPQ with a Vortex optic.

The more they talked, the more I was thinking of getting a CZ. And they were enthusiastic about me shooting their guns as a comparison.

I have shot PPQs now for several years. When I shot both the CZs, I didn't like either one. Draw you own conclusions.

3 weeks ago, I was in a match and one of the guys on my squad had a SF. I kept looking at it and asking how he liked it. He "made" me shoot it at the end of the match. I put a full mag into the A zone easier than I could believe. Recoil seemed non existent in comparison. The gun fit my hand better than my own PPQs.

That night, I was on the internet finding my own. I have shot it now in several matches and have never been happier. The only thing missing for me is a paddle release, but I had to compromise.

If you like Walthers and want to step up, the SF would be my recommendation. YMMV :D
 
1 - 20 of 46 Posts
Top