We’ve all seen it. Shooters dumping thousands of dollars into their handgun, trying to chase performance. New trigger kits, tungsten rods, magwells, aluminum grips, high-end optics, and certainly more. However, does that money translate into practical performance? Are any of those upgrades truly needed for the average shooter, or is it purely a competition-focused arms race?
I set out to test exactly that, comparing four guns on the same 50-round test course. I did Hammer Pairs, draw-to-first shots, reload drills, the Hateful 8, the Bill Drill, and the El Presidente USPSA Classifier. Aside from trying to measure raw performance, we are taking a look to see how practical some of the popular modifications are to your daily handgun setup. Some modifications for made for the shooting sports may not be as practical for your carry gun.
For the sake of transparency, I am currently ranked B class in both Carry Optics and Limited Optics for USPSA (ranked both with the same Glock 47 rig). I am considered roughly at an average skill level for shooting sports, and above average compared to your common firearm owner. This test will likely emphasize both my strengths and weaknesses in dramatic contrast, as I move from platform to platform.
We have a canyon of difference for our performance options for this testing.
Starting off, we have a barebones Gen 5 Glock 19 (Ameriglo Iron Sights). Following it will be my USPSA Carry Optics Glock 47 build (Holosun 507 Comp). Before we get to the Staccato, we will be shooting an iron-sighted X5 P320 (-_- yes I know about the P320s). This gun is going to Lucas from TheFirearmBlog for a project, but I wanted to include it here. The X5 was the first competition platform I purchased for my very first match, and I’ve got a lot of sentimental value in it. While I wasn’t satisfied with it, I think there are some excellent things to point out that make it a clear bridge between my G47 and the 2011. Finally we will shoot our first 2011 (Staccato P with Holosun 507 Comp). You are going to have to read more below for the full scoop on that!
Trigger: ~5.5 LBs
Sights: Stock Irons
Size: Compact
Modifications: None
Trigger: ~3 LBs
Sights: Holosun 507 Comp Red Dot
Size: Full Size
Modifications: Full Tungsten Guide Rod, Reduced LB Recoil Spring, Timney Alpha Competition Trigger, Surefire X300 Weapon Mounted Light, LOK Reduced Angle Backstrap
Trigger: ~3.5 LBs
Sights: Irons with Fiber Optic Front Sight
Size: Full Size
Modifications: Stock, however notable that it has Tungsten infused grips, a serrated/cut slide, a fully cocked striker, short reset, and flared magwell.
Trigger: ~1.5 LBs
Sights: Holosun 507 Comp Red Dot
Size: Full Size
Modifications: Phoenix Trinity Aluminum Grip Module, Infinity Adjustable Trigger Kit, and Glove Love from Lucas
After running each gun through the same 50-round course of fire, a few patterns became immediately clear. While each firearm brought unique advantages to the table, not every upgrade translated into meaningful gains. In some cases, the differences were more subtle than expected. This section breaks down what stood out, what mattered less than anticipated, and how each platform stacked up once the lead started flying.
For a more detailed breakdown, make sure to watch the included video to hear my firsthand thoughts between each platform! It’s important to consider your use case for the firearm you are modifying or purchasing. With sought after features like increased weight and lighter trigger pulls, keeping your intended use in mind is paramount.
Glock 19
Time: 3.22s
Score: 18
HF: 5.59
Glock 47:
Time: 2.50s
Score: 18
HF: 7.2
P320:
Time: 2.38s
Score: 11
HF: 4.62
2011 P:
Time: 2.67s
Score: 20
HF: 7.49
Glock 19
Total Time: 4.26s
Average Split: 0.33s
HF: 7.74
Glock 47:
Total Time: 4.18s
Average Split: 0.35s
HF: 8.13
P320:
Total Time: 3.76s
Average Split: 0.29s
HF: 9.04
2011 P:
Total Time: 4.14s
Average Split. 0.31s
HF: 9.17
Glock 19
Total Time: 11.03s
Average Reload: 2.29s
HF: 4.53
Glock 47:
Total Time: 9.48s
Average Reload: 1.78s
HF: 5.48
P320:
Total Time: 9.11s
Average Reload: 1.63s
HF: 4.06
2011 P:
Total Time: 9.05s
Average Reload: 1.72s
HF: 5.08
Glock 19
Total Time: 8.21s
Score: 68
HF: 8.28
Glock 47:
Total Time: 7.39s
Score: 63
HF: 8.52
P320:
Total Time: 8.19s
Score: 65
HF: 7.93
2011 P:
Total Time: 6.44s
Score: 72
HF: 11.18
Glock 19
Total Time: 1.79s
Score: 26
HF: 14.52
Glock 47:
Total Time: 1.71s
Score: 24
HF: 14.03
P320:
Total Time: 1.56s
Score: 30
HF: 19.23
2011 P:
Total Time: 1.72s
Score: 30
HF: 17.44
Glock 19
Total Time: 6.90s
Score: 48
HF: 6.95
Glock 47:
Total Time: 7.05s
Score: 52
HF: 7.37
P320:
Total Time: 5.94s
Score: 44
HF: 7.40
2011 P:
Total Time: 5.97
Score: 51
HF: 8.54
So… does gear win? Well, yes and no. Faster splits, smoother reloads, and better ergonomics are absolutely possible with mods or premium builds. That’s why competition shooters gravitate towards the 2011 platforms. However, the differences, while real, aren’t magic. Good fundamentals with a stock Glock can still outshoot a sloppy trigger finger behind a 2011 any day.
Carry vs. Competition:
For everyday carry, some upgrades might make sense. Possible upgrades are an improved trigger if you’re extremely disciplined for gun handling, or an optic if you train consistently with potential electronic failures. But adding weight, big lights, magwells, or race-tuned triggers purely for minor split gains isn’t necessarily worth sacrificing concealability, durability, or safe handling under stress. Additionally, changing your striker system could lead to outright dangerous negligent discharge concerns.
The “buy once, cry once” mentality is real. But before you dive into gear, test yourself first. Put your money into ammo and training, build your skills, and then decide if the juice is worth the squeeze. Because whether it’s a stock Glock or a Gucci 2011, the real magic happens between your ears and at the end of your trigger finger.
I had some additional time to play with the Staccato 2011 P after I wrote & recorded this article. I ended up removing the compensator so that I could fit into “Limited Optics” for USPSA, and so I could run it effectively in a Safariland Thumb Release holster for PCSL. The extra retention allows me to confidently run from position to position with my rifle and not even consider what my loaded handgun is doing on my hip.
Here is some highlight footage roughly within 30 days of the original comparison test. I would confidently say that learning the platform individually matters far more than the upgrades that platform might offer on face value. After a few weeks I am absolutely shooting faster splits more accurately, and with a higher degree of confidence.
