[Binkius]

Interested what you think of mag changes with the Glock mag angle. I fooled around with one and thought that would take a bit of adjustment on my part to get fast with it.

My training/dry-fire pistol is a SIRT Glock 17. I probably get five dry-fire for every live-fire round. I'm doing about 1,000 live-fire rounds/week, so at least 5,000 dry-fire per week. So I'm doing more trigger pulls and mag changes on the Glock platform than the 1911/2011 platform I compete with. So I've unintentionally trained myself to deal with the change in mag and grip angle. I need to practice index a couple of times and my brain switches over to whatever I'm holding.

 

[Binkius]

I can't be the only one who was annoyed when I learned how much Staccato mags cost when I bought my Springfield Prodigy and wanted extra mags. I feel like this Platypus is a good contender vs brands like Springfield and Bul Armory, in this price (base) range. When you factor in the Glock mags, it does make it attractive.

My biggest gripe with 2011's and why I won't carry one is the magazines. Incredibly delicate and easily over-inserted. Feed lips or tube gets bent by a couple hundredths of an inch and they stop working. The Platypus uses the mag base as a hard stop and also the OEM Glock mag ledge at the top as another hard stop to prevent over insertion.

It's a problem with the 2011 platform - the new Kimber bottlenecks the interior of the grip to try and keep the magazines from over inserting. There really needs to be some kind of standardization on 2011 mags. The feed lips are all different heights and angles and some (MBX) over insert even locked into the mag catch depending on your gun.

The two hard stops on the Platypus and the angle of the OEM Glock mags give a lot of clearance and over insertion doesn't seem to be a problem.

 

[Binkius]

I thought the Dawson magwell and base plates corrected the over insertion issue a long time ago. The only thing I've found is that I will get occasional feed issues with dirty mags after 7000 or 8000 rounds. I've had no problems with spread feed lips.

I have a particularly nasty duty cycle - I'm training indoors on concrete and dropping partially loaded mags on the run. When the mag hits baseplate down, it's like a billiard ball smacking another billiard ball. The top two or three rounds (my make up shots) blow out past the feed lips. The follower may or may not join the cartridges. This eventually spreads out the feed lips. If the mag hits feed lips down, it compresses the feed lips. It only takes a couple of hundredths of an inch to get out of spec. I'm shooting about 1,000 rounds per week. Probability is not on my side. My 2011 mags are really beat up. Glock OEM mags can take this kind of use. 2011 mags not so much. Atlas publishes their magazine specs, so I've been able to hammer/bend everything back to spec (I need to get the special feed lip spreader tool).

Staccato is on their third generation of mags. Atlas is on their first generation of mags, but second generation of mag catches. These changes have the frequency of software updates. They are trying to solve a problem that exists. We get to beta test.

 

[Binkius]

"We've tested all the mags they all over insert in pretty much all the guns."
- Owner of Atlas Gunworks
Video below opens at quote.

I think it's a combination of two factors: speed and force.

With enough speed, you can push the mag past the mag catch before it can engage and stop the mag. With enough force, you can push past the mag catch completely.

It's competition, everyone is moving as fast as they can. Mag is going in fast. In the real world, at some point, some LEO, in a life-and-death situation is going to go fast and use too much strength because his life depends on it and he's going to jam the ejector.

 

[Binkius]

As far as feed lips and base plates; I don’t drop them on the ground, and sure as hell would never drop them on concrete, so that point is not a fair comparison.

I use my EDC in a world with ground and concrete. If my mag can't be 100% reliable after a drop on ground or concrete, I won't and don't carry that gun.

 

[Binkius]

How are people moving fast able to align the sights, pull the trigger, and hit the mag release?

You cannot do a static reload. You are wasting time. You have to reload while moving. If you aren't moving you need to be shooting. If you can shoot while moving, don't stop moving.

You don't shoot a red dot. You shoot a moving streak of red line. The higher your skill, the further out you can shoot a line of light instead of a dot. Shooting a dot means you are eating up time. Shoot the streak of light whenever you can.

You shoot twice with one sight picture. It takes too long to re-acquire a second sight picture. Human reaction speed means that second sight picture is going to push your split to at least 0.20 seconds. Too slow.

It's just practice. Lots and lots of practice. My range gives me a discount when I buy 5 cases of ammo at a time. I dry fire 5x more than I live fire. I pay a USPSA grand master to one-on-one coach me live-fire on indoor stages twice a week.

My dry-fire gun. Trigger is adjusted to heavier than my actual guns to force trigger control.

My 1/4-scale airsoft range in the basement. When I go work out, I spend recovery between sets walking back and forth and shooting targets. Shoot everything on the move.

It's just a lot of practice.

The match is the test. You did your homework dry-firing and live-firing before hand. You don't have time to develop skills on the stage. The guys whose only shooting all week is the weekly match really don't improve. The improvement comes from the hours and thousands of rounds spent training/practicing. At the match, you only get a couple of runs - not enough to build skill. Skill is developed through training and practice before the match.

 

[Binkius]

Great post, that's an awesome airsoft practice bay. Are you shooting only USPSA or do you shoot other competitions as well?

I'm running unsanctioned matches generally following USPSA guidelines. The organizer is a local gunshop/range. The owner mixes in IDPA, Bullseye and PCC. That gets more people interested and he sells more guns. The owner discovered if he loosened up on divisioning we all go and buy a comp'd race gun and a PCC from him.

 

[Binkius]

We don't get enough people to separate something like Limited Optics and Open. So if you bring a Staccato XC, you just run that against everyone else. Because turnout is so low, this allows people to just join in with whatever they have on hand. But it also means that we score the guy with a USPSA open gun directly against the guy with a Hellcat and iron sights.

I often see people write something along the lines of "yeah, I tried my friend's Atlas Erebus and it's not much different than my Springfield Prodigy". In single-lane slow-shooting they're about the same. But in hit-factor shooting, the Erebus is basically "pay-to-win" when compared against the Prodigy.

Everyone bought a comped race gun when we figured out they weren't going to score us according to division/gun-type. This scoring model really promotes gun sales. The store owner provided an environment where there's a justification for buying a higher-performance pistol. If you're single-lane slow-shooting, any Glock or M&P is more than enough. But run a gun in hit-factor scoring (especially without divisional separation) and there's suddenly a reason/demand/justification to buy a higher performance pistol because this is where the higher performance is drastically superior to the standard gun.

We're gun guys. It doesn't take much justification to get another pistol. "Honey, I'm 30 years older than the average competitor at the local range, the only way I can keep up with them is if I pay-to-win with an Atlas Erebus" was what I told my wife.

 

[Binkius]

Excellent review. I just had a real problem with the name since the beginning. “Freeze, drop the gun, I have a platypus aimed right at you!“

I think the target demographic is a younger enthusiast who's based on the Glock platform. He wants to get into the 2011 platform - his aspirational buy is an SVI Infinity (check out the similarly silly names with those guns). The Platypus is the gateway. He gets "one-off" customization (through an unlimited color pallete) like a 2011/Infinity, but can still use his Glock mags and the base cost of the gun is at the lower end of the 2011 range. He can completely avoid the added costs of 2011 mags - my collection of 2011 mags could buy three new Glocks. They're just prohibitively expensive.

 

[Binkius]

I think you have to get E-Series Cerakote - it has more metal in it and is stronger. My gun is painted with H-Series Cerakote and that stuff is very delicate.

 

[Binkius]

Platypus vs PX4C-compensated vs Glock-45-compensated

I'm still breaking in the Platypus and decided to bring along some fun guns to compare.

• Langdon PX4 Compact with a new "discount" rail-mounted compensator. Loaded Langdon build.
• Glock-45 with Radian compressor, DPM springs and Apex trigger. Cheapest gun in the run.

Next picture shows what the average internet shill puts up. Big ragged hole. Well, that confirms the guns are sighted in properly and the optics are holding zero. But testing mechanical zero tells you nothing about how the guns shoot. Might as well put everything in a ransom rest. It is in this way that the shill doesn't have to actually rate the guns in any meaningful way and he can keep that sweet, sweet sponsorship support coming.

I did some quick and dirty hit-factor scoring. Run each gun multiple times. Hit in the circle is one-point. Anything else is a zero. Add up all the hits. Divide by average time taken. This gives a very simple hit-factor score. These scores can be compared objectively. It's clear which gun is more accurate and faster.

The PX4 and the Platypus are about 3% apart. Both guns base price at about $1800. The "discount" compensator on the PX4 works very poorly. It doesn't have a front or rear baffle. But the PX4 is pretty flat to begin with, so by adding even a small recoil reduction the "discount" comp showed up a really interesting behavior of the Beretta.

The PX4 has a rotating barrel. Not a tilt barrel. Shooting just a little bit faster than I can control a tight group, the PX4 walks left-to-right as some of the recoil energy is turned into rotational energy and my hands are pushed left-to-right. The Platypus with its standard tilt-barrel shoots up and down around a central point. I think this is why you don't ever see the PX4 in competition. It shoots strangely due to recoil forces from the rotating barrel. The PX4 shoot very flat (up down) -- but it pulls right hard. It just traded up/down for left/right (and mostly right).

The PX4 "discount" comp is incredibly dirty as it blows back so much gas. I put on lab-goggles because it was so bad. There's no real expansion chamber because there is no rear or front baffle. It's more like just cut-outs on the top of a slide. It has to be removed for gun cleaning. The mounting screws are tiny and I don't see them lasting very long. Looks cool, so I'll keep using it until the screws strip out.

The Glock-45 with a Radian compensator, DPM recoil spring and Apex trigger is much easier to shoot fast and accurately. This is what a compensator is designed to do. The gun has lost significant slide velocity due to the comp so I can use a softer recoil spring which means faster return-to-zero. The Apex trigger drops the trigger pull to 4 lbs. 8 oz. The PX4 has a single-action pull of 3 lbs. 8 oz. The Platypus has a trigger pull of 2 lbs. 15 oz.

By my simplified hit-factor scoring, percentage of highest score converted to academic grading (grading on a curve instead of against theoretical max score):

Glock: A+
Platypus: C-
PX4: D+

I could write on and on about "feel", features, pros/cons, etc. But what matters most is the objective score. The internet is full of PX4 fanbois. Well, take a PX4, give Langdon $1100+ to throw every imaginable mod on it and add a compensator and it's still worse than a bone-stock Platypus. Stock PX4's (without $1100 of mods) sell poorly not because they're ugly. It's because they don't shoot well. Slow shooting a big ragged hole doesn't show up the weakness of the platform. Run even a little faster and the gun falls apart. Their biggest selling point is low felt recoil due to the rotational locking action but that translates into some really weird recoil behavior in rapid fire.

This is not what any sponsor wants his internet shill to post online. This is my objective result. Same shooter. Same session. Same stage. Comparing three guns back-to-back. Try to hold the variables down and get an objective comparison. If you shoot better than me, you'll run this faster and the spread of scores will be closer. If you shoot worse than me, you'll run this slower and the spread of scores will be wider. But the relative positioning of the guns will most likely remain. The manufacturers do not want to see this.

I'm not a Glock guy. I probably shoot 20-25+ rounds through a 1911/2011 for every round through the one single Glock that I own. That one Glock shoots better than everything I own except my Atlas Erebus and Atlas Artemis. I've never run it back-to-back against my Atlas Athena, but I think it'd be really close. I just bought a Springfield Ronin in .45 but not another Glock. The Radian Glock is a monster of a shooter, but I'd rather shoot my 1911/2011's.

 

[Binkius]

Bit of luck of the draw. My platypus cerakote has been great with moderate use. My trigger is also far superior to how my P's was out of the box (had to recut the sear immediately, trigger pull was horribly choppy, I have a thread here somewhere).

The only 'issues' I have are that mine is a 'gen 1' - chain link grip textures over prickle, bushing barrel instead of bull, DPP cut over RMR.

My trigger was not good when I first got the gun. Lots of gritty creep with an actual "step" like a 2-stage rifle trigger. I think the problem is they Cerakote the trigger bow. Cerakote trigger bow against Cerakote frame/bow-channel. Springfield Prodigies had a similar problem with Cerakote on the frame rails and it'd choke the slide into failure.

As a put more trigger pulls into the Platypus, the Cerakote must be wearing because the creep and grittiness are getting much much better.

The rest of the machining on the gun shows quite a bit of care. I'd think they'd have gotten the trigger group machined properly. I'm going to go search for your thread.

 

[Binkius]

I shoot around 1,000 rounds a week mostly on 1911/2011. But my dry-fire gun is a SIRT-Glock-17, so ~5,000 trigger presses/week on the Glock platform.

Platypus is completely 1911/2011 grip angle. It's not in between. It's 1911/2011. Girth on the grip is individual to Platypus, but the angle is 1911/2011. The index is so different between the platforms because of the grip angle (mostly due to the Glock hump at the bottom of the backstrap). There is no way to mistake them.

But you get idiots like this who says he shoots the Plat so good because it has a Glock grip angle. He's wrong and he shoots like crap. There is no way you can mix up the index between platforms this different unless you don't shoot either gun much. Typical internet shill.

 

[Binkius]

Thank you for the clarification.

You're welcome!
I wouldn't let grip angle decide one way or the other. If you're target focused, on presentation from the holster, the red dot just comes up sooner on the Glock than the 1911/2011. However, if you're red dot focused, you'll probably lose the dot switching between platforms.

 

[Binkius]

I've got (5) 1911's and (3) 2011's. The major difference is girth. Maybe for a particular hand, the girth of a certain double-stack-1911 or 2011 grip will mimic the Glock backstrap hump and give the impression of pushing high, but the Platypus angle is the same as a 1911/2011.

Plat on the left, Atlas Alpha grip on the right. The Plat grip circumference is much pointier than the Atlas grip. The both have the same angle vertically down the back edge of the backstrap, but the curve across the diameter of the grip is different. That pointier Plat grip circumference may feel like the Glock backstrap hump to some hands.

On draw from holster, the Plat indexes identical to a 1911/2011 for me.

 

[Binkius]

The sub 2k price is intriguing, glock mags are enticing for a beater gun.

When I picked up my Platypus at the gun store, the manager told me my "beater" came in. Buy three Atlas guns and people start making fun of you. 😄

 

[Binkius]

Want an atlas eos in the worst way, but ohlins rebuilds on both track bikes in the off season isn't cheap. Then you consider gasgas 500's selling otd right now for basically same price as a Erebus is a finicky balancing act of priorities! Another fancy pistol, or a sumo to rip kart tracks in the off-season. Decisions, decisions.

The smell of gunpowder or race gas just gets my adrenalin pumping. I'm too old for the race track now, but I can still do race guns and keep up with the younger guys. Enjoy the speed as much as you can - none of us are getting any younger.

If you're still young enough - do the motorsports first. When you get older, you can still do the run-and-gun sports. The hard limit on age at a race track is much more severe than at a shooting match.

 

[Binkius]

I had an Eos on order but cancelled when the organizer of the unsanctioned shooting series I participate in decided he wasn't going to keep track of divisional differences in gun type and just run us all in the same group. I think everyone in the top ~10 immediately went out and bought something with a compensator. I cancelled the Eos and got an Erebus instead. So the Platypus is my Eos substitute.

 

[Binkius]

Wake27,
I'm about 800 rounds in on my Plat. I still can't get a full 17-round magazine to lock into the mag catch without the slide open. Depending on the mag, I can get a mag downloaded to 15 or 16-rounds to go in on closed slide, but the only way I can get a full 17-round magazine in is at slide lockback. Does your Plat do the same?