USP 45F vs 45 tactical?

[hkusp999]

Ok so i have been carrying an HK USP 45F with TRU DOT (metpro?) nightsights and a surefire x300 light in a safariland 6280 holster for about 2 years now.

It has over 5,000 rounds of 200gr SWC hard cast lead and ranier copper washed cast lead reloads through it with regular cleaning. I also had some guy at the gun show do a permanent grip modification on it by spraying on that skatebord tape type of textured stuff on it.

I feel like my groups have been starting to open up a little in the past few months and im not sure if its me or the pistol. Im going to sandbag/benchrest it with some factory loads soon and check my 25 yard groups to see if its still a tight shooter.

Im wondering what kind of groups it should shoot new so i can compare. Im also kind of tired of the spongy heavy single action trigger and thinking about just buying a tactical with an upgraded trigger, barrel and sights.

Im wondering if the tactical will fit in my current safariland holster. I know the extended barrel will fit since the bottom of the holster is open. I think the frame size is the same on the tactical as the fullsize, but im not sure if the large adjustable sights will fit.

So is it worth spending a grand to trade up? How much lighter, crisper, and shorter is the tactical trigger than the fullframe? How much more accurate is the barrel and will it fit my standard holster?

Honestly at this point Im almost considering switching to a double stacked 1911 like the polymer kimber or an STI or something that has a perfect trigger.

What do yall think?

[orfeo]

. . . How much lighter, crisper, and shorter is the tactical trigger than the fullframe? How much more accurate is the barrel and will it fit my standard holster?

Honestly at this point Im almost considering switching to a double stacked 1911 like the polymer kimber or an STI or something that has a perfect trigger.

What do yall think?

The USP Tactical 45 has a MUCH better trigger than the standard USP, but you can put the match trigger in your USP if you want. The threaded Tactical barrel is no more accurate than the non-threaded USP barrel. The combination of the Tactical's sights and the match-trigger are what makes it easier to shoot well than the USP.

A tuned 1911 trigger is light-years nicer than even the Tactical's match trigger. . . no comparison. :)

[benderx4]

Isn't the O-ring on the Tactical supposed to enhance the accuracy of the gun? I KNOW the match trigger will tighten your groupings!

[orfeo]

Isn't the O-ring on the Tactical supposed to enhance the accuracy of the gun? I KNOW the match trigger will tighten your groupings!

It doesn't. It has been tested many times comparing the same gun with and without the o-rings installed. . .

The trigger and the sights are what makes the USP Tactical 45 easier to shoot well than the USP 45. :)

[hkusp999]

It doesn't. It has been tested many times comparing the same gun with and without the o-rings installed. . .

The trigger and the sights are what makes the USP Tactical 45 easier to shoot well than the USP 45. :)

you know its honestly not even the sights that im interested in. Those adjustable sights look like something that can get knocked out of alignment when crawling through windows or under fences. They also look like theyre unnecessarily high if you dont plan on using a suppressor, and I havent seen a whole lot of them with built in tritium inserts. It would be nice if the front sight was a little slimmer than the rear sight so you could see some daylight in the sight picture to align the sights faster. The beretta 92F is set up like that .

So if the trigger is substandard compared to a 1911 and the accuracy between the two platforms is similar... Why shouldnt i just pony up the money to get a STI 1911 or Kimber or something?

[Naturil]

you know its honestly not even the sights that im interested in. Those adjustable sights look like something that can get knocked out of alignment when crawling through windows or under fences. They also look like theyre unnecessarily high if you dont plan on using a suppressor, and I havent seen a whole lot of them with built in tritium inserts. It would be nice if the front sight was a little slimmer than the rear sight so you could see some daylight in the sight picture to align the sights faster. The beretta 92F is set up like that .

So if the trigger is substandard compared to a 1911 and the accuracy between the two platforms is similar... Why shouldnt i just pony up the money to get a STI 1911 or Kimber or something?

I personally haven't seen an HK malfunction, I have seen kimbers malfunction sometimes pretty badly...they are more of show gun that sits on your shelf, you can use an HK daily.

[Naturil]

If the 1911 design was the best then HK would make one...they obviously feel that their models are superior.

[orfeo]

. . . So if the trigger is substandard compared to a 1911 and the accuracy between the two platforms is similar... Why shouldnt i just pony up the money to get a STI 1911 or Kimber or something?

You will not see alot of HKs in competition. . . you WILL see ALOT of STI 1911s in competition.

The HK is simple to take down and to clean, it will not need (nor benefit much from) fine-tuning, it will not need any parts or maintenance for a LONG time, it is very reliable with a minimum of fuss. A 1911 is more complicated to take down and to clean, it needs fine-tuning, it will require parts and maintenance MUCH more often, it is more like a hot-rod that you fuss over alot to get the most out of it, a well-tuned high-quality 1911 will cost at least 2x what a USP Tactical will.

The USP Tactical 45: simple, easy, fuss-free, cheaper, ultra-reliable, accurate, okay trigger

A well-tuned high-quality 1911: outperforms the Tactical in shootability, more complicated take-down, fussy about ammo, higher maintenance, more expensive to buy and to shoot. :)