Pages

Tuesday, November 29, 2011

Trausch Grips-Initial Impressions

Thanks to a very generous member of pistol-forum.com I got a set of Trausch grips in the mail last week for my Beretta 96D. Initially I was a bit skeptical, I was plenty happy with the stock Beretta grips and didn't really see a need for a change. Then I actually put the new grips on my gun and to say they completely change the "feel" of the gun is almost an understatement. The side of the grip is much flatter, and the grip circumference is significantly reduced. The closest and most readily available comparison would probably be to take the stock grips off and have no panels at all. That is about how thin these grips feel. According to the Trausch website it is a 0.25" reduction in width. I don't have a set of calipers to measure, but I would guess that is pretty close.




My only complaint initially are that they are not a perfect fit. I imagine it is due to the thinness of the grip, and Jon8357 over at berettaforum.net noted the same issues. I don't think it will cause any function issues, but is something to be aware of just in case.



I did not have the same issues with the length of the grip screws and magazine interference as Jon8357 did. I am not sure if there is maybe some minor difference in frame thickness or what exactly since his gun was a 92D and mine is a 96D.


My only other issue that is more a personal preference than a legitimate complaint is the large smooth space on the upper portion of the left grip panel.


The way I grip the handgun, this is a prime gripping location for me and I prefer a very aggressive grip texture in this area. So to fix the problem, I did what I did to my Glock and added some grip tape.


I may be putting the cart before the horse a little since I have not run any rounds through the gun with the new grips yet, but somehow I doubt it.

I should be on the range later this week and get some live fire through the gun with the new set of grips. I have a lot of catching up to do on the Drill of the Week. Unless the grips start causing some type of unforeseen problem, I see no reason to switch back to the stock grips. I even think that I might see a measurable performance gain with these grips in terms of split times, it is just a matter of how much. There is definitely an improvement of "feel", although I know that can be misleading and the true test of "better" is measured performance. We will see how they stack up on the range later this week.

3 comments:

  1. 167-I believe that the reason Jacques Trausch kept the upper left grip uncheckered was to allow for quick thumb adjustments during or after the draw; I've found that unlike any other grips for the 92/92, the primary areas of hand-to-frame interface for gripping are the frontstrap and backstrap, due to how the thinness of the Trausch grips literally transform the handling and index of a 92/96. It's the grooving on the frontstrap and backstrap that provide the "grippiness" required, and the smooth upper laft grip surface provides an unimpeded readjustment surface for the thumb. But-if your method with the grip tape works, far be it for me to criticize; the original smooth surface and your treatment nicely illustrate the two schools of thought regarding thumb surfaces on grips. Glock has in effect provided the same treatment that you adopted to their receivers with their RTF2 and Gen4 surfaces.

    Best, Jon

    ReplyDelete
  2. Interestingly, however, with the Glock examples of RTF2 and the Gen4 RTF treatments, it should be noted that where on the RF2 guns the "polymid" spikes extend up to the top of the thumb indentation areas, on the Gen4 guns, the "cubids" (which are inherently less spiky then the RTF2's polymids)stop at the bottom of the thumb indentation areas.

    I believe that part of the reason is that where the RTF2 finish was designed with a non-slip gloved use in mind, the less-aggressive Gen4 cubid treatment represents more of a compromise for use when both bare-handed or gloved.

    Best, Jon

    ReplyDelete
  3. I am not sure if you can tell from the video in the OWB vs. AIWB post but my support hand grip is very high on the gun. My thumbs actually extend along the side of the slide, and not the grip panels or frame. This puts the meaty part of my palm at the base of the thumb against that smooth part of the grip panel and as I squeeze the gun with the my support hand that is the primary pressure point on the left side of the gun. Better traction there helps keep my hand where it needs to be with longer strings of fire like Bill Drills.

    With the stock grips I felt the amount of contact with that part of the grip was a little sub-par, but with these I have found an improvement in surface contact at that location. That is partly why I think split times will drop some, better support hand grip should help tame the recoil and get the sights back on target faster.

    I really wish Glock would have continued the grip texture further up on the frame with their Gen4 series guns. I have a Gen4 Glock 22 and it has grip tape in about the same location. Really helps me cement the gun in place.

    Of course, I am guessing that with a 9mm, either a Beretta or Glock, that I wouldn't have the same need for grip tape. When I still had a Glock 19, I never remember giving a second thought to grip tape and ran the gun slick (the way it was). I didn't run any tape on my 9mm P226 either. Only since shooting .40 S&W have I found a need for the more aggressive texture.

    ReplyDelete