I dont shoot with anyone who shoots pistols and I dont know what to expect accuracy wise. I'm new to shooting pistols(bigger than .22lr anyways) do I dont know what to expect as being good our decent. My side arm is a 1996 SIG P226 9mm
Sidearms & Scatterguns Whats's accurate. Please show your groups
- Thread starter futurerider103
- Start date
Re: Whats's accurate. Please show your groups
I'd guess that gun should shoot one ragged hole at say 25 yards. So really the only thing that matters is how you are capable of shooting it.
Do this: take the pistol to the range, rest it on a sandbag and shoot it at a reasonable distance. Concentrate on trigger pull, front sight focus, and not disturbing the sight alignment through the trigger pull. See what king of group you get. If it's a nice tight group, then try shooting the same distance but without the pistol rested. If you can shoot the same size group, then move the target back further and try again. Keep pushing the target back until your freehand groups are measurably worse than your rested groups, and then practice the fundamentals until you shoot the same size groups rested an unrested.
I'd guess that gun should shoot one ragged hole at say 25 yards. So really the only thing that matters is how you are capable of shooting it.
Do this: take the pistol to the range, rest it on a sandbag and shoot it at a reasonable distance. Concentrate on trigger pull, front sight focus, and not disturbing the sight alignment through the trigger pull. See what king of group you get. If it's a nice tight group, then try shooting the same distance but without the pistol rested. If you can shoot the same size group, then move the target back further and try again. Keep pushing the target back until your freehand groups are measurably worse than your rested groups, and then practice the fundamentals until you shoot the same size groups rested an unrested.
Re: Whats's accurate. Please show your groups
I was taught to practice making one hole to learn trigger control. Take aim at a clean target and then your second target is the hole you just made. Do this at 7ft,10ft, 12ft, etc until you are out to about 25-30ft. If you are still hitting your hole at 30+ congrats you are officially a precise mf-er with a pistol! I've seen guys that can do this out to 25-30yds. If you get out to 30ft on your first practice session a second congrats is in order because it also means you are freaky good with a pistol. Took me about 8 months of weekly practice to get there.
Then when you start throwing speed in there, it's a whole different game. On the speed follow-up and target acquisition side, the biggest thing I learned was being able to keep both eyes open and see the sights lift and muzzle flash. This also took a while and sometimes I forget how to do this...frustrating.
edit:CNC sorry for the repeat... we were typing at the same time I guess
I was taught to practice making one hole to learn trigger control. Take aim at a clean target and then your second target is the hole you just made. Do this at 7ft,10ft, 12ft, etc until you are out to about 25-30ft. If you are still hitting your hole at 30+ congrats you are officially a precise mf-er with a pistol! I've seen guys that can do this out to 25-30yds. If you get out to 30ft on your first practice session a second congrats is in order because it also means you are freaky good with a pistol. Took me about 8 months of weekly practice to get there.
Then when you start throwing speed in there, it's a whole different game. On the speed follow-up and target acquisition side, the biggest thing I learned was being able to keep both eyes open and see the sights lift and muzzle flash. This also took a while and sometimes I forget how to do this...frustrating.
edit:CNC sorry for the repeat... we were typing at the same time I guess
Re: Whats's accurate. Please show your groups
Im new to handguns as well, been shooting rifles for sometime. And there certainly is a learning curve to shooting them. I have to work on my trigger pull, i find myself wanting to jerk the trigger, because when i'm relaxed and do a slow press to the rear the muzzle flip is more exaggerated. I've been shooting tennis balls at 5 to 10 yards not doing that great, but it's still fun as can be.
I was in the same boat as you having never shot a pistol other than .22. I then shot a S&W 6906 9mm, Glock 21 & 22 both gen 4s. Liked the 21 so much i picked on up. I preferred the recoil of the .45acp over the 40 S&W on the glocks at least. For me the 40 had less muzzle rize but it was much more snappy and induced more felt recoil, frankly it was bother my middle knuckle on my weapon hand.
Imagine the first time you fired a rifle and how it took some time to acquire that skill of shooting consistently decent. I imagine that's how the handgun is going to be for me.
Im new to handguns as well, been shooting rifles for sometime. And there certainly is a learning curve to shooting them. I have to work on my trigger pull, i find myself wanting to jerk the trigger, because when i'm relaxed and do a slow press to the rear the muzzle flip is more exaggerated. I've been shooting tennis balls at 5 to 10 yards not doing that great, but it's still fun as can be.
I was in the same boat as you having never shot a pistol other than .22. I then shot a S&W 6906 9mm, Glock 21 & 22 both gen 4s. Liked the 21 so much i picked on up. I preferred the recoil of the .45acp over the 40 S&W on the glocks at least. For me the 40 had less muzzle rize but it was much more snappy and induced more felt recoil, frankly it was bother my middle knuckle on my weapon hand.
Imagine the first time you fired a rifle and how it took some time to acquire that skill of shooting consistently decent. I imagine that's how the handgun is going to be for me.
Re: Whats's accurate. Please show your groups
Sigs are a production handgun. I've seen really good reviews in the NRA National Rifleman where people were shooting ~1.5" 25 yard groups with the 226 pistols.
That of course led me to purchase a 220. That pistol dropped the first round from every fresh magazine approximately 7" low and left at 25 yards. The rest of the group was nothing special - maybe 4.5".
So I put a Bar sto barrel in it, and that resulted in ~1.5" groups from sandbags with no flier (8 rounds of Federal gold medal match in one hole at 25 yards from sandbags). I couldn't believe that from a drop in match barrel. It was pretty outstanding.
I think the poster above has given you good advice. Rest it on bags, and shoot single action only and try to see what kind of group it can shoot with a focus on the front sight in good light conditions (not indoor). If it won't shoot from bags, then it might benefit from a drop in match barrel.
My brother had one of the Sig X5 suppressor threaded pistols or whatever they are called, and it was very accurate, and he now has a 220 suppressor threaded factory pistol and it is also fairly accurate. I only shot it offhand at 15 yards but it was grouping maybe 2" offhand which is good considering the trigger is average to good and not exceptional.
Improving your trigger pull may help with the real world practical offhand accuracy of the 226 also.
Sigs are a production handgun. I've seen really good reviews in the NRA National Rifleman where people were shooting ~1.5" 25 yard groups with the 226 pistols.
That of course led me to purchase a 220. That pistol dropped the first round from every fresh magazine approximately 7" low and left at 25 yards. The rest of the group was nothing special - maybe 4.5".
So I put a Bar sto barrel in it, and that resulted in ~1.5" groups from sandbags with no flier (8 rounds of Federal gold medal match in one hole at 25 yards from sandbags). I couldn't believe that from a drop in match barrel. It was pretty outstanding.
I think the poster above has given you good advice. Rest it on bags, and shoot single action only and try to see what kind of group it can shoot with a focus on the front sight in good light conditions (not indoor). If it won't shoot from bags, then it might benefit from a drop in match barrel.
My brother had one of the Sig X5 suppressor threaded pistols or whatever they are called, and it was very accurate, and he now has a 220 suppressor threaded factory pistol and it is also fairly accurate. I only shot it offhand at 15 yards but it was grouping maybe 2" offhand which is good considering the trigger is average to good and not exceptional.
Improving your trigger pull may help with the real world practical offhand accuracy of the 226 also.
Re: Whats's accurate. Please show your groups
According to this target I'm not using enough trigger finger so its pulling a bit. I'm a pretty good rifel shooter but I definently have some work to do on my pistol skills.
Thanks for the advise. Im definently going to try the rest idea next time at the range.
According to this target I'm not using enough trigger finger so its pulling a bit. I'm a pretty good rifel shooter but I definently have some work to do on my pistol skills.
Thanks for the advise. Im definently going to try the rest idea next time at the range.
Re: Whats's accurate. Please show your groups
If your problem is Point of impact, the sights are windage adjustable.
A good exercise before making a sight adjustment would be to remove the magazine, and remove any ammo from the chamber, and then in a safe direction dry fire the pistol several times aiming at a very small target. If the pistol doesn't move when you drop the hammer, that represents proper form and a good shot.
If this is happening and the gun is shooting left, adjust the sights is the solution.
If your problem is Point of impact, the sights are windage adjustable.
A good exercise before making a sight adjustment would be to remove the magazine, and remove any ammo from the chamber, and then in a safe direction dry fire the pistol several times aiming at a very small target. If the pistol doesn't move when you drop the hammer, that represents proper form and a good shot.
If this is happening and the gun is shooting left, adjust the sights is the solution.
Re: Whats's accurate. Please show your groups
My issue is not a windage issue. When I got the gun it shot 6in left so I made a handy sight pusher and now if I'm aiming right getting a good consistent pull I can hit the bullseye several times in my 15rnd my from 7yds. Here's my home made sight pusher. I've since cut a 22 shell to cover the pusher screw and covered the insides with leather so it doesn't mess up the finish
My issue is not a windage issue. When I got the gun it shot 6in left so I made a handy sight pusher and now if I'm aiming right getting a good consistent pull I can hit the bullseye several times in my 15rnd my from 7yds. Here's my home made sight pusher. I've since cut a 22 shell to cover the pusher screw and covered the insides with leather so it doesn't mess up the finish
Re: Whats's accurate. Please show your groups
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: futurerider103</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> I'm a pretty good rifel shooter but I definently have some work to do on my pistol skills.
</div></div> I've found that my pistol skills are in direct competition with my rifle skills. Just when I make a breakthrough on speed and accuracy with my .45, I can barely shoot a one inch group with my rifle. My guess is it's just two completely different neural pathways that use the exact same muscles and so my brain gets confused when I switch between the two. So, I tend to focus on my rifle games in spring/summer/fall and save the pistol games for the winter.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: futurerider103</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> I'm a pretty good rifel shooter but I definently have some work to do on my pistol skills.
</div></div> I've found that my pistol skills are in direct competition with my rifle skills. Just when I make a breakthrough on speed and accuracy with my .45, I can barely shoot a one inch group with my rifle. My guess is it's just two completely different neural pathways that use the exact same muscles and so my brain gets confused when I switch between the two. So, I tend to focus on my rifle games in spring/summer/fall and save the pistol games for the winter.
Re: Whats's accurate. Please show your groups
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: WhiskeyWebber</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: futurerider103</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> I'm a pretty good rifel shooter but I definently have some work to do on my pistol skills.
</div></div> I've found that my pistol skills are in direct competition with my rifle skills. Just when I make a breakthrough on speed and accuracy with my .45, I can barely shoot a one inch group with my rifle. My guess is it's just two completely different neural pathways that use the exact same muscles and so my brain gets confused when I switch between the two. So, I tend to focus on my rifle games in spring/summer/fall and save the pistol games for the winter.</div></div>
I shoot longuns right handed, and handguns left handed. I sometimes wonder if that helps or hurts.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: WhiskeyWebber</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: futurerider103</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> I'm a pretty good rifel shooter but I definently have some work to do on my pistol skills.
</div></div> I've found that my pistol skills are in direct competition with my rifle skills. Just when I make a breakthrough on speed and accuracy with my .45, I can barely shoot a one inch group with my rifle. My guess is it's just two completely different neural pathways that use the exact same muscles and so my brain gets confused when I switch between the two. So, I tend to focus on my rifle games in spring/summer/fall and save the pistol games for the winter.</div></div>
I shoot longuns right handed, and handguns left handed. I sometimes wonder if that helps or hurts.
Re: Whats's accurate. Please show your groups
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Griffin Armament</div><div class="ubbcode-body">If your problem is Point of impact, the sights are windage adjustable.
<span style="font-weight: bold">A good exercise before making a sight adjustment would be to remove the magazine, and remove any ammo from the chamber, and then in a safe direction dry fire the pistol several times aiming at a very small target. If the pistol doesn't move when you drop the hammer, that represents proper form and a good shot. </span>
If this is happening and the gun is shooting left, adjust the sights is the solution. </div></div>
Great advice.
That chart is largely useless. All of those things are subconsciously done... so how do you stop doing something you aren't trying to do?
Watch the sights and adjust until they remain steady.
A goal for pistol marksmanship would be that your groups are covered by your front sight at the distance you are shooting them at.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Griffin Armament</div><div class="ubbcode-body">If your problem is Point of impact, the sights are windage adjustable.
<span style="font-weight: bold">A good exercise before making a sight adjustment would be to remove the magazine, and remove any ammo from the chamber, and then in a safe direction dry fire the pistol several times aiming at a very small target. If the pistol doesn't move when you drop the hammer, that represents proper form and a good shot. </span>
If this is happening and the gun is shooting left, adjust the sights is the solution. </div></div>
Great advice.
That chart is largely useless. All of those things are subconsciously done... so how do you stop doing something you aren't trying to do?
Watch the sights and adjust until they remain steady.
A goal for pistol marksmanship would be that your groups are covered by your front sight at the distance you are shooting them at.
Re: Whats's accurate. Please show your groups
don't confuse accuracy and precision, groups in handguns depends alot on how or if the gun is supported. if you are wondering about accuracy start with a simple 8 inch plate at seven yards and from a holstered presentation draw , shoot 2 (double tap) hopefully, and note your time (hopefully your using an electrontic timer so the entire question will have some meaning)continue doing this faster until 2 out of the 10 shots miss the. this is your accuracy for you based on time rather than a very misleading concept of group size. this is also a good way to test what type of or brand of gun is best for you, as some guns will make this easier and faster than others
if you are indeed curious about improving your skills, check in at Brianenos.com they have lots of tips and exercises.
don't confuse accuracy and precision, groups in handguns depends alot on how or if the gun is supported. if you are wondering about accuracy start with a simple 8 inch plate at seven yards and from a holstered presentation draw , shoot 2 (double tap) hopefully, and note your time (hopefully your using an electrontic timer so the entire question will have some meaning)continue doing this faster until 2 out of the 10 shots miss the. this is your accuracy for you based on time rather than a very misleading concept of group size. this is also a good way to test what type of or brand of gun is best for you, as some guns will make this easier and faster than others
if you are indeed curious about improving your skills, check in at Brianenos.com they have lots of tips and exercises.
Re: Whats's accurate. Please show your groups
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: shooter2</div><div class="ubbcode-body">don't confuse accuracy and precision, groups in handguns depends alot on how or if the gun is supported. if you are wondering about accuracy start with a simple 8 inch plate at seven yards and from a holstered presentation draw , shoot 2 (double tap) hopefully, and note your time (hopefully your using an electrontic timer so the entire question will have some meaning)continue doing this faster until 2 out of the 10 shots miss the. this is your accuracy for you based on time rather than a very misleading concept of group size. this is also a good way to test what type of or brand of gun is best for you, as some guns will make this easier and faster than others
if you are indeed curious about improving your skills, check in at Brianenos.com they have lots of tips and exercises.
</div></div>
Great post!
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: shooter2</div><div class="ubbcode-body">don't confuse accuracy and precision, groups in handguns depends alot on how or if the gun is supported. if you are wondering about accuracy start with a simple 8 inch plate at seven yards and from a holstered presentation draw , shoot 2 (double tap) hopefully, and note your time (hopefully your using an electrontic timer so the entire question will have some meaning)continue doing this faster until 2 out of the 10 shots miss the. this is your accuracy for you based on time rather than a very misleading concept of group size. this is also a good way to test what type of or brand of gun is best for you, as some guns will make this easier and faster than others
if you are indeed curious about improving your skills, check in at Brianenos.com they have lots of tips and exercises.
</div></div>
Great post!
Re: Whats's accurate. Please show your groups
The group beside the quarter is a 10 shot group from my Ruger Mark III at 30 ft slow fire off hand. The Ruger has a Ultradot red dot sight on it that is very nice.
The other two groups were shot with a factory Glock 23C at 30 ft. The better group on the paper target was fired from a rest and the other one on the orange peel target was fired off hand.
The group beside the quarter is a 10 shot group from my Ruger Mark III at 30 ft slow fire off hand. The Ruger has a Ultradot red dot sight on it that is very nice.
The other two groups were shot with a factory Glock 23C at 30 ft. The better group on the paper target was fired from a rest and the other one on the orange peel target was fired off hand.
Re: Whats's accurate. Please show your groups
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: shooter2</div><div class="ubbcode-body">don't confuse accuracy and precision, groups in handguns depends alot on how or if the gun is supported. if you are wondering about accuracy start with a simple 8 inch plate at seven yards and from a holstered presentation draw , shoot 2 (double tap) hopefully, and note your time (hopefully your using an electrontic timer so the entire question will have some meaning)continue doing this faster until 2 out of the 10 shots miss the. this is your accuracy for you based on time rather than a very misleading concept of group size. this is also a good way to test what type of or brand of gun is best for you, as some guns will make this easier and faster than others
if you are indeed curious about improving your skills, check in at Brianenos.com they have lots of tips and exercises.
</div></div>
So you're advocating that someone insert time into the mix, when they don't have an established accuracy standard when they're not hurried...
And you're recommending that they fire a "double tap" (one of the worst concepts/ terms to ever enter popular use) where they fire two shots with one sight picture, to determine their own "accuracy."
What exactly is the point of telling someone to take an unsighted shot while they're trying to establish their own accuracy standards for themselves?
I could pound an 8" target at 7 yards with some really shitty trigger control, so long as I had a really stable grip, presentation, and stance. None of that does a thing to help me improve the fundamentals of sight alignment and trigger control.
Conversely I can shoot the gun with a weak wristed, one hand grip where the gun about jumps out of my hand in recoil, and pound out the X ring at 25 yards. None of that would translate to performance at rapid unsighted fire ("double taps"), but would be ingraining solid fundamentals.
If you can't perform without the stress of the timer (or other outside stresses) then you're not going to do well WITH those additional outside stresses.
Someone just trying to develop the fundamentals of marksmanship shouldn't be worried about doing so on a timer until they can shoot to a high degree of accuracy (what was trying to be defined) during slow fire.
IMO, if you can't break 150 on The 200 http://www.firearmstrainingandtactics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1714 then I wouldn't suggest running much stuff on the clock.
Trying to run before you know how to walk will just ingrain bad habits that will be murder to break later.
Also, here is one of my targets from the 200. Scored a 184 on it, cold.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: shooter2</div><div class="ubbcode-body">don't confuse accuracy and precision, groups in handguns depends alot on how or if the gun is supported. if you are wondering about accuracy start with a simple 8 inch plate at seven yards and from a holstered presentation draw , shoot 2 (double tap) hopefully, and note your time (hopefully your using an electrontic timer so the entire question will have some meaning)continue doing this faster until 2 out of the 10 shots miss the. this is your accuracy for you based on time rather than a very misleading concept of group size. this is also a good way to test what type of or brand of gun is best for you, as some guns will make this easier and faster than others
if you are indeed curious about improving your skills, check in at Brianenos.com they have lots of tips and exercises.
</div></div>
So you're advocating that someone insert time into the mix, when they don't have an established accuracy standard when they're not hurried...
And you're recommending that they fire a "double tap" (one of the worst concepts/ terms to ever enter popular use) where they fire two shots with one sight picture, to determine their own "accuracy."
What exactly is the point of telling someone to take an unsighted shot while they're trying to establish their own accuracy standards for themselves?
I could pound an 8" target at 7 yards with some really shitty trigger control, so long as I had a really stable grip, presentation, and stance. None of that does a thing to help me improve the fundamentals of sight alignment and trigger control.
Conversely I can shoot the gun with a weak wristed, one hand grip where the gun about jumps out of my hand in recoil, and pound out the X ring at 25 yards. None of that would translate to performance at rapid unsighted fire ("double taps"), but would be ingraining solid fundamentals.
If you can't perform without the stress of the timer (or other outside stresses) then you're not going to do well WITH those additional outside stresses.
Someone just trying to develop the fundamentals of marksmanship shouldn't be worried about doing so on a timer until they can shoot to a high degree of accuracy (what was trying to be defined) during slow fire.
IMO, if you can't break 150 on The 200 http://www.firearmstrainingandtactics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1714 then I wouldn't suggest running much stuff on the clock.
Trying to run before you know how to walk will just ingrain bad habits that will be murder to break later.
Also, here is one of my targets from the 200. Scored a 184 on it, cold.
Re: Whats's accurate. Please show your groups
I can't find any targets from my pistol shooting, but here's what I can do from a rest at 25 yards with a fixed-sight 5 1/2-inch barrel revolver with loads tailored for it.
[img:center]
[/img]
Please don't be offended, but your question leaves a lot of variables on the table. What ammunition will you be shooting? Are you shooting outside or under cover? (Did you know that you will tend to shoot "away from the light" if the sun is hitting one side of your sight or another?) Have you practiced dry firing? Do you (or do you plan to) wear good hearing protection? Etc. etc...all these factors can impact the answer we give you.
When I first began shooting handguns, I did a ton of reading and followed the recommendations of other shooters. Dry firing was a real game-changer for me. My very first group at 50 feet (with a Ruger P91 40 S&W) was about an inch, and I credit that to practicing the basics of sight alignment and trigger control without the distractions of recoil, muzzle blast, and other shooters. Very shortly after, I joined a group shooting PPC. Friendly competition with good shooters who were willing to share their knowledge accelerated my learning curve like I <span style="font-style: italic">still</span> don't believe. Within a year of picking up a handgun for the very first time, I could keep all my shots in a three inch circle at 25 yards offhand with any handgun capable of that level of accuracy and much better with some (inch and a half with my GP100 was common).
If you're willing to pursue the basics, I wouldn't be surprised to see you poke inch groups at 50 feet your first time out with the Sig. Typically, they're accurate pistols (it's the only 9mm I own), so you're starting with a good foundation. Post up some pics of your first targets...I bet most of us would love to see 'em!
I can't find any targets from my pistol shooting, but here's what I can do from a rest at 25 yards with a fixed-sight 5 1/2-inch barrel revolver with loads tailored for it.
[img:center]
Please don't be offended, but your question leaves a lot of variables on the table. What ammunition will you be shooting? Are you shooting outside or under cover? (Did you know that you will tend to shoot "away from the light" if the sun is hitting one side of your sight or another?) Have you practiced dry firing? Do you (or do you plan to) wear good hearing protection? Etc. etc...all these factors can impact the answer we give you.
When I first began shooting handguns, I did a ton of reading and followed the recommendations of other shooters. Dry firing was a real game-changer for me. My very first group at 50 feet (with a Ruger P91 40 S&W) was about an inch, and I credit that to practicing the basics of sight alignment and trigger control without the distractions of recoil, muzzle blast, and other shooters. Very shortly after, I joined a group shooting PPC. Friendly competition with good shooters who were willing to share their knowledge accelerated my learning curve like I <span style="font-style: italic">still</span> don't believe. Within a year of picking up a handgun for the very first time, I could keep all my shots in a three inch circle at 25 yards offhand with any handgun capable of that level of accuracy and much better with some (inch and a half with my GP100 was common).
If you're willing to pursue the basics, I wouldn't be surprised to see you poke inch groups at 50 feet your first time out with the Sig. Typically, they're accurate pistols (it's the only 9mm I own), so you're starting with a good foundation. Post up some pics of your first targets...I bet most of us would love to see 'em!
Re: Whats's accurate. Please show your groups
get the feeling your more upset about the reference to enos web site as opposed to yours.
a double tap is a good place to start, but the concept of using time (hit factor) as the variable can be used at any distance. Your action shooting web site envolvement somewhat contradicts your posit about developing slow fire first. the concepts of pistol shooting presented in the previous posts are from the older NRA one arm slow fire era. If your particpate in the 3-guns etc. I sure there are many times as you have painly watched a new or so shooter "stand on the shot" for too long.
outside stress such as timers are best started very early, in a shooters learning curve. yelling at them while they are trying to shoot works well too, but the timer puts perform on demand on them from the start.
my double tap was stated at 7 yds. not suggesting it for all distances, something more like a speed rock, by the way what do your times run for this?
more difficult shooting skills , shooting on the move, multiple targets and barricades certainly aren't coming out of anything but the op's dedication and interest, but nothing is going to come out of knowing is gun can shoot x size groups, except his gun goes bang when he pulls the trigger.
get the feeling your more upset about the reference to enos web site as opposed to yours.
a double tap is a good place to start, but the concept of using time (hit factor) as the variable can be used at any distance. Your action shooting web site envolvement somewhat contradicts your posit about developing slow fire first. the concepts of pistol shooting presented in the previous posts are from the older NRA one arm slow fire era. If your particpate in the 3-guns etc. I sure there are many times as you have painly watched a new or so shooter "stand on the shot" for too long.
outside stress such as timers are best started very early, in a shooters learning curve. yelling at them while they are trying to shoot works well too, but the timer puts perform on demand on them from the start.
my double tap was stated at 7 yds. not suggesting it for all distances, something more like a speed rock, by the way what do your times run for this?
more difficult shooting skills , shooting on the move, multiple targets and barricades certainly aren't coming out of anything but the op's dedication and interest, but nothing is going to come out of knowing is gun can shoot x size groups, except his gun goes bang when he pulls the trigger.
Re: Whats's accurate. Please show your groups
Hmmm... looking at Jim D's target, I would say that, yes, I would use a different technique than I typically would. I am more accurate with a Weaver stance with the weight on my heels, but the recovery is so horrible, I don't really practice with it. For me, it works for accuracy because it is basically a bullseye stance with some additional support from the non-firing arm.
Two-handed, I practice with the iso stance because of the vastly accelerated recovery time... so it seems that time is an important dimension to add.
That said, if the real point of the drill is to practice site alignment, trigger, control, and breathing, I like that drill on the B8 target a lot. I would like to give it a try. It looks fun.
I am just now getting into pistol and have a lot to learn... the interesting thing is how much marksmanship skills are transferred from rifle to pistol. My first time to shoot a pistol, I was shooting actual groups while the people around me (with a lot more experience) were shooting shotgun scatter all over their targets. I know what is good for rifle, but like the OP, I have no idea how I stack up with pistol.
Hmmm... looking at Jim D's target, I would say that, yes, I would use a different technique than I typically would. I am more accurate with a Weaver stance with the weight on my heels, but the recovery is so horrible, I don't really practice with it. For me, it works for accuracy because it is basically a bullseye stance with some additional support from the non-firing arm.
Two-handed, I practice with the iso stance because of the vastly accelerated recovery time... so it seems that time is an important dimension to add.
That said, if the real point of the drill is to practice site alignment, trigger, control, and breathing, I like that drill on the B8 target a lot. I would like to give it a try. It looks fun.
I am just now getting into pistol and have a lot to learn... the interesting thing is how much marksmanship skills are transferred from rifle to pistol. My first time to shoot a pistol, I was shooting actual groups while the people around me (with a lot more experience) were shooting shotgun scatter all over their targets. I know what is good for rifle, but like the OP, I have no idea how I stack up with pistol.
Re: Whats's accurate. Please show your groups
ISSC .22LR pistol suppressed at 25 yards, standard silhouette target.
ISSC .22LR pistol suppressed at 25 yards, standard silhouette target.
Re: Whats's accurate. Please show your groups
Just 10-12 yards, RMR equipped G26, Barsto barrel, 5 shots ea.
Just 10-12 yards, RMR equipped G26, Barsto barrel, 5 shots ea.
Re: Whats's accurate. Please show your groups
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: shooter2</div><div class="ubbcode-body">don't confuse accuracy and precision, groups in handguns depends alot on how or if the gun is supported. if you are wondering about accuracy start with a simple 8 inch plate at seven yards and from a holstered presentation draw , shoot 2 (double tap) hopefully, and note your time (hopefully your using an electrontic timer so the entire question will have some meaning)continue doing this faster until 2 out of the 10 shots miss the. this is your accuracy for you based on time rather than a very misleading concept of group size. this is also a good way to test what type of or brand of gun is best for you, as some guns will make this easier and faster than others
if you are indeed curious about improving your skills, check in at Brianenos.com they have lots of tips and exercises.
</div></div>
This. Accuracy to me is being able to hit a pie pan @ 100 yds. Precision is being able to consistently remove little sections of the pan.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: shooter2</div><div class="ubbcode-body">don't confuse accuracy and precision, groups in handguns depends alot on how or if the gun is supported. if you are wondering about accuracy start with a simple 8 inch plate at seven yards and from a holstered presentation draw , shoot 2 (double tap) hopefully, and note your time (hopefully your using an electrontic timer so the entire question will have some meaning)continue doing this faster until 2 out of the 10 shots miss the. this is your accuracy for you based on time rather than a very misleading concept of group size. this is also a good way to test what type of or brand of gun is best for you, as some guns will make this easier and faster than others
if you are indeed curious about improving your skills, check in at Brianenos.com they have lots of tips and exercises.
</div></div>
This. Accuracy to me is being able to hit a pie pan @ 100 yds. Precision is being able to consistently remove little sections of the pan.
Re: Whats's accurate. Please show your groups
in the rifle section on this forum considerable time,effort and posts have gone "redefining" groups and what they mean to shooting. Clearly a bench rest discipline, and handgun bulleyes are special types of the sport. And why groups give disinformation about shooting status. Its no different for handguns. Groups are meaningless. If you have a contest were the groups size are the consideration, the only conclusion is that the guns used will end up being practically the same. Teaching someone to shoot a handgun, and using the traditional definitions, leaves the students with 10-11 variables to deal with at one time. An impossible task. Teach them flash sight picture as they push the gun away from their chest, trigger press thru the target, and some type of martial art stance using bent knees, and wt. forward, taking the recoil in the forarms and you can have them hitting A Zones in a 100 rds.
in the rifle section on this forum considerable time,effort and posts have gone "redefining" groups and what they mean to shooting. Clearly a bench rest discipline, and handgun bulleyes are special types of the sport. And why groups give disinformation about shooting status. Its no different for handguns. Groups are meaningless. If you have a contest were the groups size are the consideration, the only conclusion is that the guns used will end up being practically the same. Teaching someone to shoot a handgun, and using the traditional definitions, leaves the students with 10-11 variables to deal with at one time. An impossible task. Teach them flash sight picture as they push the gun away from their chest, trigger press thru the target, and some type of martial art stance using bent knees, and wt. forward, taking the recoil in the forarms and you can have them hitting A Zones in a 100 rds.
Re: Whats's accurate. Please show your groups
My range only has 7, 12, and 25 yd. for handguns. I haven't been shooting handguns at all in probably the last year. I took a .22 revolver and semi out with me the last time just to see if I could hit anything. I shot 2 - 3 " groups at 12 and I think I was around 5 - 6" total at 25 shooting both on the same target. They do have different POI, but I wasn't really concerned. This is offhand, not leaning on the bench, with a two hand hold.
Obviously there's a lot of room for improvement but I certainly wasn't ashamed after watching what others laid down at 12. There are actually some shooting off the bench at 7 and they still can't one hole a group. Earlier I watched a couple of guys with a Blackhawk trying to shoot it off the bench at 100 yd. Although they did manage to hit the paper occasionally they also destroyed 3 target hangers in the process.
The vast majority of people I see shooting handguns at whatever range seem to be more interested in emptying the cases as soon as possible rather than getting any kind of meaningful practice out of their shooting.
My experiences have led me to believe that if I'm ever downrange of somebody drawing in a self-defense scenario I'm hitting the concrete immediately. Maybe they actually know how bad they are and that's why so many forum threads are concerned with over penetration through walls in their house.
My range only has 7, 12, and 25 yd. for handguns. I haven't been shooting handguns at all in probably the last year. I took a .22 revolver and semi out with me the last time just to see if I could hit anything. I shot 2 - 3 " groups at 12 and I think I was around 5 - 6" total at 25 shooting both on the same target. They do have different POI, but I wasn't really concerned. This is offhand, not leaning on the bench, with a two hand hold.
Obviously there's a lot of room for improvement but I certainly wasn't ashamed after watching what others laid down at 12. There are actually some shooting off the bench at 7 and they still can't one hole a group. Earlier I watched a couple of guys with a Blackhawk trying to shoot it off the bench at 100 yd. Although they did manage to hit the paper occasionally they also destroyed 3 target hangers in the process.
The vast majority of people I see shooting handguns at whatever range seem to be more interested in emptying the cases as soon as possible rather than getting any kind of meaningful practice out of their shooting.
My experiences have led me to believe that if I'm ever downrange of somebody drawing in a self-defense scenario I'm hitting the concrete immediately. Maybe they actually know how bad they are and that's why so many forum threads are concerned with over penetration through walls in their house.
Re: Whats's accurate. Please show your groups
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: shooter2</div><div class="ubbcode-body">get the feeling your more upset about the reference to enos web site as opposed to yours.
a double tap is a good place to start, but the concept of using time (hit factor) as the variable can be used at any distance. Your action shooting web site envolvement somewhat contradicts your posit about developing slow fire first. the concepts of pistol shooting presented in the previous posts are from the older NRA one arm slow fire era. If your particpate in the 3-guns etc. I sure there are many times as you have painly watched a new or so shooter "stand on the shot" for too long.
outside stress such as timers are best started very early, in a shooters learning curve. yelling at them while they are trying to shoot works well too, but the timer puts perform on demand on them from the start.
my double tap was stated at 7 yds. not suggesting it for all distances, something more like a speed rock, by the way what do your times run for this?
more difficult shooting skills , shooting on the move, multiple targets and barricades certainly aren't coming out of anything but the op's dedication and interest, but nothing is going to come out of knowing is gun can shoot x size groups, except his gun goes bang when he pulls the trigger. </div></div>
Not the case, I've learned a lot from enosforums, and the guys that post on there... what I disagree with is your approach to learning.
Virtually all of the leading sources of instruction for tactical pistol shooting will have you go back to 25 yards and develop your accuracy before you try and develop speed.
Speed should comes from efficiency, not sloppy rushed techniques. If you build in a bunch of reps with poor fundamentals (because you never took the time to build them at distance), then you're never going to be that good. You might be a good athlete and crush targets inside of 10 yards, but that's not the topic being discussed.
TigerSwan, Vickers Tactical, Northern Red and bunch of others will all run shooters at 25 yards to work on fundamentals. You do this before you push speed if you want to learn more efficiently. http://vickerstactical.com/tactical-tips/accuracy/
"Double taps" are sloppy techniques an the hallmark of the mediocre. Your sights dictate the cadence of your fire, and you need to be reading your sights (or otherwise confirming the shot) to do that. J. Michael Plaxco wrote about this decades ago, and they apply just as well to combat shooting as competition.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">PLAXCO'S SHOOTING PRINCIPLES
1. ACCURACY TAKES PRECEDENCE OVER SPEED.
2. SPEED IS ECONOMY OF MOTION.
3. SPEED WILL COME WITH PRACTICE (IF YOU PRACTICE TO BE
FAST).
4. LET THE SIGHTS DICTATE THE CADENCE OF FIRE.
5. YOU MUST LEARN WHAT IS AN ACCEPTABLE SIGHT PICTURE
AND TRIGGER CONTROL FOR THE SHOT REQUIRED.
6. SHOOT ONE SHOT AT A TIME.
7. WHEN ALL ELSE FAILS, ALIGN THE SIGHTS... SQUEEZE THE
TRIGGER.</div></div>
http://combatshootingandtactics.com/published/tactical_shooting_thoughts.pdf
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: shooter2</div><div class="ubbcode-body">get the feeling your more upset about the reference to enos web site as opposed to yours.
a double tap is a good place to start, but the concept of using time (hit factor) as the variable can be used at any distance. Your action shooting web site envolvement somewhat contradicts your posit about developing slow fire first. the concepts of pistol shooting presented in the previous posts are from the older NRA one arm slow fire era. If your particpate in the 3-guns etc. I sure there are many times as you have painly watched a new or so shooter "stand on the shot" for too long.
outside stress such as timers are best started very early, in a shooters learning curve. yelling at them while they are trying to shoot works well too, but the timer puts perform on demand on them from the start.
my double tap was stated at 7 yds. not suggesting it for all distances, something more like a speed rock, by the way what do your times run for this?
more difficult shooting skills , shooting on the move, multiple targets and barricades certainly aren't coming out of anything but the op's dedication and interest, but nothing is going to come out of knowing is gun can shoot x size groups, except his gun goes bang when he pulls the trigger. </div></div>
Not the case, I've learned a lot from enosforums, and the guys that post on there... what I disagree with is your approach to learning.
Virtually all of the leading sources of instruction for tactical pistol shooting will have you go back to 25 yards and develop your accuracy before you try and develop speed.
Speed should comes from efficiency, not sloppy rushed techniques. If you build in a bunch of reps with poor fundamentals (because you never took the time to build them at distance), then you're never going to be that good. You might be a good athlete and crush targets inside of 10 yards, but that's not the topic being discussed.
TigerSwan, Vickers Tactical, Northern Red and bunch of others will all run shooters at 25 yards to work on fundamentals. You do this before you push speed if you want to learn more efficiently. http://vickerstactical.com/tactical-tips/accuracy/
"Double taps" are sloppy techniques an the hallmark of the mediocre. Your sights dictate the cadence of your fire, and you need to be reading your sights (or otherwise confirming the shot) to do that. J. Michael Plaxco wrote about this decades ago, and they apply just as well to combat shooting as competition.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">PLAXCO'S SHOOTING PRINCIPLES
1. ACCURACY TAKES PRECEDENCE OVER SPEED.
2. SPEED IS ECONOMY OF MOTION.
3. SPEED WILL COME WITH PRACTICE (IF YOU PRACTICE TO BE
FAST).
4. LET THE SIGHTS DICTATE THE CADENCE OF FIRE.
5. YOU MUST LEARN WHAT IS AN ACCEPTABLE SIGHT PICTURE
AND TRIGGER CONTROL FOR THE SHOT REQUIRED.
6. SHOOT ONE SHOT AT A TIME.
7. WHEN ALL ELSE FAILS, ALIGN THE SIGHTS... SQUEEZE THE
TRIGGER.</div></div>
http://combatshootingandtactics.com/published/tactical_shooting_thoughts.pdf
Re: Whats's accurate. Please show your groups
you assume I said something then make conclusions,
the only thing I said was take double taps as an example, double taps are a function of distance, if its close its a double as the distance increases it becomes a sighted pair. smooth is fast, each shooter has their own internal clock, as some will never be "fast"
my instructors were Ross Seyfried, Paul Miller, Enos, and Gunsight who were yours.
you assume I said something then make conclusions,
the only thing I said was take double taps as an example, double taps are a function of distance, if its close its a double as the distance increases it becomes a sighted pair. smooth is fast, each shooter has their own internal clock, as some will never be "fast"
my instructors were Ross Seyfried, Paul Miller, Enos, and Gunsight who were yours.
Re: Whats's accurate. Please show your groups
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: shooter2</div><div class="ubbcode-body">you assume I said something then make conclusions,
the only thing I said was take double taps as an example, double taps are a function of distance, if its close its a double as the distance increases it becomes a sighted pair. smooth is fast, each shooter has their own internal clock, as some will never be "fast"
my instructors were Ross Seyfried, Paul Miller, Enos, and Gunsight who were yours. </div></div>
Seems that your English instructors weren't as good as your shooting ones.
I am skeptical of anyone who uses the term "double tap." If you show up to any match, the "Alpha-mike" crowd are always the double tappers.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: shooter2</div><div class="ubbcode-body">you assume I said something then make conclusions,
the only thing I said was take double taps as an example, double taps are a function of distance, if its close its a double as the distance increases it becomes a sighted pair. smooth is fast, each shooter has their own internal clock, as some will never be "fast"
my instructors were Ross Seyfried, Paul Miller, Enos, and Gunsight who were yours. </div></div>
Seems that your English instructors weren't as good as your shooting ones.
I am skeptical of anyone who uses the term "double tap." If you show up to any match, the "Alpha-mike" crowd are always the double tappers.
Re: Whats's accurate. Please show your groups
you should be skeptical--- you guy you --- of everything, nothing to me. I don't really know what alpha-mike means. If the course of fire requires a double based on its set up -- then double tap, double tap you hear it, if the course of fire doesn't then no double tap. a lot of the pro shooters I know use a double on the last target in speed steel shooting as an "insurance policy" as the time frame doesn't incur a penalty ---time and a place for everything.
Since a match is a game, and you have put a name (I assume derogatory) on the double tap (your definition seems to be broader than mine) alpha-mike crowd would appear to be "not your kind of people" maybe your not their kind of people
you should be skeptical--- you guy you --- of everything, nothing to me. I don't really know what alpha-mike means. If the course of fire requires a double based on its set up -- then double tap, double tap you hear it, if the course of fire doesn't then no double tap. a lot of the pro shooters I know use a double on the last target in speed steel shooting as an "insurance policy" as the time frame doesn't incur a penalty ---time and a place for everything.
Since a match is a game, and you have put a name (I assume derogatory) on the double tap (your definition seems to be broader than mine) alpha-mike crowd would appear to be "not your kind of people" maybe your not their kind of people
Re: Whats's accurate. Please show your groups
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: shooter2</div><div class="ubbcode-body">you assume I said something then make conclusions,
the only thing I said was take double taps as an example, double taps are a function of distance, if its close its a double as the distance increases it becomes a sighted pair. smooth is fast, each shooter has their own internal clock, as some will never be "fast"
my instructors were Ross Seyfried, Paul Miller, Enos, and Gunsight who were yours. </div></div>
Ken Hackathorn, Larry Vickers, Todd Green, Kyle Defoor, and Northern Red (Paul Tobias and JD Potynsky) amongst others.
Double taps are NOT a function of distance. A double tap is one sighted shot followed up by a non sighted shot. If you need to sight the first, you should be sighting the second.
Lots of competitive shooters are good at firing 2 shots quickly, but their split times between shots 2-3 suck. They aren't capable of letting their sights dictate the speed that they shoot at, and their willingness to sacrifice their fundamentals for speed on the second shot doesn't carry over onto additional shots.
An Alpha-Mike is a hit to the A-zone, followed by a miss (the result of not reading your sights and firing blind because of some artificial time standard you have imposed upon yourself.)
Again, read Plaxco's rules. I'd be very surprised if BE didn't share the same perspective on things.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: shooter2</div><div class="ubbcode-body">you assume I said something then make conclusions,
the only thing I said was take double taps as an example, double taps are a function of distance, if its close its a double as the distance increases it becomes a sighted pair. smooth is fast, each shooter has their own internal clock, as some will never be "fast"
my instructors were Ross Seyfried, Paul Miller, Enos, and Gunsight who were yours. </div></div>
Ken Hackathorn, Larry Vickers, Todd Green, Kyle Defoor, and Northern Red (Paul Tobias and JD Potynsky) amongst others.
Double taps are NOT a function of distance. A double tap is one sighted shot followed up by a non sighted shot. If you need to sight the first, you should be sighting the second.
Lots of competitive shooters are good at firing 2 shots quickly, but their split times between shots 2-3 suck. They aren't capable of letting their sights dictate the speed that they shoot at, and their willingness to sacrifice their fundamentals for speed on the second shot doesn't carry over onto additional shots.
An Alpha-Mike is a hit to the A-zone, followed by a miss (the result of not reading your sights and firing blind because of some artificial time standard you have imposed upon yourself.)
Again, read Plaxco's rules. I'd be very surprised if BE didn't share the same perspective on things.
Re: Whats's accurate. Please show your groups
oh wow I see the problem--
a double tap is when the reflex of the wrist is capable of pulling the shot back into the same hit zone as the first shot sighted or otherwise. your definition does not cover the double tap used in a speed rock, when no sight picture is used on either shot but two alpha alphas are recorded. the dispersion that occurs depends of the skill of the shooter and decreases with increase in distance, my internal clock and ability puts it about 12 yds. I have shot against others with a better distance. some less. a double tap becomes a sighted pair by default. an alpha mike is just that a hit and a miss. causality to a double tap may or may not exist.
all shooters impose artificial times standards, conscious or unconscious, and their flyers are due as much to lack of feel in the sear reset as not watching their sights. This "over the gun" occurs with more frequency in some designs than others. I've shot against Plaxeco and still have one of his orginal cross draw holsters.
split times from shots 3 to what ever can be the same as in a bill drill, but its usually more dependent upon upper body strength and the shooter trying to combine a turret stance and and an isosceles grip
plaxco's, and enos books have been around along time, and while still good some of the terms have been aborted by le, military as these groups have adopted techniques renamed, and claimed for there own use so its difficult to sift thru it.
oh wow I see the problem--
a double tap is when the reflex of the wrist is capable of pulling the shot back into the same hit zone as the first shot sighted or otherwise. your definition does not cover the double tap used in a speed rock, when no sight picture is used on either shot but two alpha alphas are recorded. the dispersion that occurs depends of the skill of the shooter and decreases with increase in distance, my internal clock and ability puts it about 12 yds. I have shot against others with a better distance. some less. a double tap becomes a sighted pair by default. an alpha mike is just that a hit and a miss. causality to a double tap may or may not exist.
all shooters impose artificial times standards, conscious or unconscious, and their flyers are due as much to lack of feel in the sear reset as not watching their sights. This "over the gun" occurs with more frequency in some designs than others. I've shot against Plaxeco and still have one of his orginal cross draw holsters.
split times from shots 3 to what ever can be the same as in a bill drill, but its usually more dependent upon upper body strength and the shooter trying to combine a turret stance and and an isosceles grip
plaxco's, and enos books have been around along time, and while still good some of the terms have been aborted by le, military as these groups have adopted techniques renamed, and claimed for there own use so its difficult to sift thru it.
Re: Whats's accurate. Please show your groups
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Jim D</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Someone just trying to develop the fundamentals of marksmanship shouldn't be worried about doing so on a timer until they can shoot to a high degree of accuracy (what was trying to be defined) during slow fire.
IMO, if you can't break 150 on The 200 http://www.firearmstrainingandtactics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1714 then I wouldn't suggest running much stuff on the clock.
Trying to run before you know how to walk will just ingrain bad habits that will be murder to break later.
Also, here is one of my targets from the 200. Scored a 184 on it, cold.
</div></div>
This is a fun target. I can't get pics over to my computer right now, but I shot a 190-4X on my first try with the target. It all grouped pretty solid with one flyer just catching the edge of the 7 ring. That was one handed, right handed.
I decided the target must be pretty easy, so I tried it four more times and the best I was able to do after that was a 184... definitely beginner's luck.
It is a pretty fun target. Left handed is very awkward but surprisingly accurate. I shoot it with a Bullseye stance but aiming with my right eye. I tried aiming with my left eye, but it didn't seem to work as well. Recoil from the left hand is very awkward.
Anyway, this is a great little drill. I wish I had more opportunities to shoot at 25 yards. The farthest my home range goes is 50 feet.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Jim D</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Someone just trying to develop the fundamentals of marksmanship shouldn't be worried about doing so on a timer until they can shoot to a high degree of accuracy (what was trying to be defined) during slow fire.
IMO, if you can't break 150 on The 200 http://www.firearmstrainingandtactics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1714 then I wouldn't suggest running much stuff on the clock.
Trying to run before you know how to walk will just ingrain bad habits that will be murder to break later.
Also, here is one of my targets from the 200. Scored a 184 on it, cold.
This is a fun target. I can't get pics over to my computer right now, but I shot a 190-4X on my first try with the target. It all grouped pretty solid with one flyer just catching the edge of the 7 ring. That was one handed, right handed.
I decided the target must be pretty easy, so I tried it four more times and the best I was able to do after that was a 184... definitely beginner's luck.
It is a pretty fun target. Left handed is very awkward but surprisingly accurate. I shoot it with a Bullseye stance but aiming with my right eye. I tried aiming with my left eye, but it didn't seem to work as well. Recoil from the left hand is very awkward.
Anyway, this is a great little drill. I wish I had more opportunities to shoot at 25 yards. The farthest my home range goes is 50 feet.
Re: Whats's accurate. Please show your groups
Just stop. Please. As someone holding three "Master" cards in USPSA and IDPA and winning more then a few 3gun and pistol matches, double-taps are for amateurs. Every GM level shooter tracks his sights throughout the recoil cycle for every shot. It doesn't matter if it's one shot or ten.
Just stop. Please. As someone holding three "Master" cards in USPSA and IDPA and winning more then a few 3gun and pistol matches, double-taps are for amateurs. Every GM level shooter tracks his sights throughout the recoil cycle for every shot. It doesn't matter if it's one shot or ten.
Re: Whats's accurate. Please show your groups
great you put your badges with my masters cards and will have a full house, or a house of cards if you think game shooting has anything to do with a gun fight. or put your 3 gun wins with mine and the sum total will be arithmetic.
simply saying that using a bulleyes target grid which was designed for one hand counter levered shooting is not gonna work well,especially when there was no discussion about the wobble zone. Also the group expected by the op is gonna change simply by what grip he (or any shooter) uses.
great you put your badges with my masters cards and will have a full house, or a house of cards if you think game shooting has anything to do with a gun fight. or put your 3 gun wins with mine and the sum total will be arithmetic.
simply saying that using a bulleyes target grid which was designed for one hand counter levered shooting is not gonna work well,especially when there was no discussion about the wobble zone. Also the group expected by the op is gonna change simply by what grip he (or any shooter) uses.
Re: Whats's accurate. Please show your groups
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: shooter2</div><div class="ubbcode-body">great you put your badges with my masters cards and will have a full house, or a house of cards if you think game shooting has anything to do with a gun fight. or put your 3 gun wins with mine and the sum total will be arithmetic.
simply saying that using a bulleyes target grid which was designed for one hand counter levered shooting is not gonna work well,especially when there was no discussion about the wobble zone. Also the group expected by the op is gonna change simply by what grip he (or any shooter) uses.</div></div>
That is false on numerous points.
First off, competition having no value to gunfighting:
Via JD Potynsky of Northern Red:http://www.firearmstrainingandtactics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1710
Multiple deployments with 3rd Group Special Forces conducting direct action missions. Decorated with a Bronze Star and an Army Commendation Medal with Valor for his actions during a 6 hour long gunfight in AFG.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Q: What are some of your thoughts on competition?
A: I think competition is a tremendous way to test your mental performance... at least for me. It's a great way to test your mental performance, especially if you put yourself under some pressure… if you're shooting a match and you care about your score. What it's really measuring, for me, is your ability to make conscious decisions, while you're subconsciously operating your weapon. Seeing your sights, pulling the trigger, clearing malfunctions, all of that stuff. So really, it gives you the pressure - you don't know the stage, you don't know the setup, you're on the clock, some people are watching... so it'll help put some pressure on you.
There is no perfect competition. People game them, they pickup bad habits from doing them, but it's a way to challenge yourself, mentally. To test your mental performance, under some stress… your ability to deal with pressure.
</div></div>
via Pat MacNamara - 20 year Special Forces Operational Detachment Delta assaulter and Instructor
http://m4carbine.net/showthread.php?p=1170914#post1170914
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Competition is a great way to learn how to work under pressure. If you are a police officer, you are in combat the second you strap it on and walk out of the front door of your home. You do not know when that pro-timer is going to “Beep.” It may not be for twenty years.
Add pressure to the training by introducing the elements of time and peer pressure.
There are many who believe that competing in the likes of an IPSC match has no tactical relevancy, and it is all just a game.
OK, it’s a game where you are shooting your gun at targets, under time, and with people watching you. You must handle your weapon properly, and follow all rules or be DQed (disqualified). You must discern and discriminate between “shoot” and “no-shoot” targets. You have got to move and make use of cover. You will have to fire from awkward positions. You must find a solution to an ambiguous situation within your skill level.
You will compete against those in your division (weapon type and caliber), in your class (skill level classification), and in your category (male, female, age, etc.). You will be doing all of this under pressure!
It is cost effective, non-time consuming, and probably right in your back yard somewhere. I like to consider shooting in a match training that is performance based versus outcome based.
In regards to your second point about weapons handling, I completely concur and will take it a step further.
The fundamentals of marksmanship and proper weapons handling should be engraved into our hard drives and we must be able to perform associated skills intuitively. Contrary to popular belief, we human beings are not capable of 'Multi-Tasking'. We can however perform certain tasks at a subconscious level while consciously performing another.
In regards to gun handling, there are facets that must be felt and performed at a subconscious level. i.e., loading, pre-combat check, safety manipulation, building a position, achieving a natural point of aim, sight alignment, trigger control, feeling the metal on metal imperfections in the trigger group, calling your shot, seeing how far the sight rises, seeing where the sight settles, following through, realigning the sights, and resetting the trigger. Now I can focus on the fight at a with cognitive thought.
The more we develop a skill circuit the less we are aware that we are using it. We are built to make skills automatic, to stash them in our unconscious minds. The more processing we do with our unconscious minds, the better our chance for survival. </div></div>
Add to that, Larry Vickers and Ken Hackathorn... two guys who have taught more SOCOM shooters than really anyone else in history... both founding members of IDPA: http://vickerstactical.com/about-larry-vickers-2/civilian-background/
As for your grip changing "groups"... that's just plain wrong.
If the shot breaks with the sights on the targets, that's where the bullet goes. You can hold the gun upside down and shoot with your pinky and shoot the same groups if the sights are in the same spot.
Suggesting that your preferred grip technique influences your group size misleading at best. If the gun is stable, you'll shoot well. Period.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: shooter2</div><div class="ubbcode-body">great you put your badges with my masters cards and will have a full house, or a house of cards if you think game shooting has anything to do with a gun fight. or put your 3 gun wins with mine and the sum total will be arithmetic.
simply saying that using a bulleyes target grid which was designed for one hand counter levered shooting is not gonna work well,especially when there was no discussion about the wobble zone. Also the group expected by the op is gonna change simply by what grip he (or any shooter) uses.</div></div>
That is false on numerous points.
First off, competition having no value to gunfighting:
Via JD Potynsky of Northern Red:http://www.firearmstrainingandtactics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1710
Multiple deployments with 3rd Group Special Forces conducting direct action missions. Decorated with a Bronze Star and an Army Commendation Medal with Valor for his actions during a 6 hour long gunfight in AFG.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Q: What are some of your thoughts on competition?
A: I think competition is a tremendous way to test your mental performance... at least for me. It's a great way to test your mental performance, especially if you put yourself under some pressure… if you're shooting a match and you care about your score. What it's really measuring, for me, is your ability to make conscious decisions, while you're subconsciously operating your weapon. Seeing your sights, pulling the trigger, clearing malfunctions, all of that stuff. So really, it gives you the pressure - you don't know the stage, you don't know the setup, you're on the clock, some people are watching... so it'll help put some pressure on you.
There is no perfect competition. People game them, they pickup bad habits from doing them, but it's a way to challenge yourself, mentally. To test your mental performance, under some stress… your ability to deal with pressure.
</div></div>
via Pat MacNamara - 20 year Special Forces Operational Detachment Delta assaulter and Instructor
http://m4carbine.net/showthread.php?p=1170914#post1170914
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Competition is a great way to learn how to work under pressure. If you are a police officer, you are in combat the second you strap it on and walk out of the front door of your home. You do not know when that pro-timer is going to “Beep.” It may not be for twenty years.
Add pressure to the training by introducing the elements of time and peer pressure.
There are many who believe that competing in the likes of an IPSC match has no tactical relevancy, and it is all just a game.
OK, it’s a game where you are shooting your gun at targets, under time, and with people watching you. You must handle your weapon properly, and follow all rules or be DQed (disqualified). You must discern and discriminate between “shoot” and “no-shoot” targets. You have got to move and make use of cover. You will have to fire from awkward positions. You must find a solution to an ambiguous situation within your skill level.
You will compete against those in your division (weapon type and caliber), in your class (skill level classification), and in your category (male, female, age, etc.). You will be doing all of this under pressure!
It is cost effective, non-time consuming, and probably right in your back yard somewhere. I like to consider shooting in a match training that is performance based versus outcome based.
In regards to your second point about weapons handling, I completely concur and will take it a step further.
The fundamentals of marksmanship and proper weapons handling should be engraved into our hard drives and we must be able to perform associated skills intuitively. Contrary to popular belief, we human beings are not capable of 'Multi-Tasking'. We can however perform certain tasks at a subconscious level while consciously performing another.
In regards to gun handling, there are facets that must be felt and performed at a subconscious level. i.e., loading, pre-combat check, safety manipulation, building a position, achieving a natural point of aim, sight alignment, trigger control, feeling the metal on metal imperfections in the trigger group, calling your shot, seeing how far the sight rises, seeing where the sight settles, following through, realigning the sights, and resetting the trigger. Now I can focus on the fight at a with cognitive thought.
The more we develop a skill circuit the less we are aware that we are using it. We are built to make skills automatic, to stash them in our unconscious minds. The more processing we do with our unconscious minds, the better our chance for survival. </div></div>
Add to that, Larry Vickers and Ken Hackathorn... two guys who have taught more SOCOM shooters than really anyone else in history... both founding members of IDPA: http://vickerstactical.com/about-larry-vickers-2/civilian-background/
As for your grip changing "groups"... that's just plain wrong.
If the shot breaks with the sights on the targets, that's where the bullet goes. You can hold the gun upside down and shoot with your pinky and shoot the same groups if the sights are in the same spot.
Suggesting that your preferred grip technique influences your group size misleading at best. If the gun is stable, you'll shoot well. Period.
Re: Whats's accurate. Please show your groups
Jim
I'm glad to see you agree with my first statement that practicing with timers, someone yelling at the shooter (outside stress) is better than just shooting groups. It also good that someone who was in a two way gun fight thought competition inproved their odds. Not sure how military and le has to do with civilian self defense, please elaborate. Probable conflict distance is different, as well as motivational factors, to say nothing of the differences in weapons used. Todays gamers rarely see stages that are set up such as weapon-retention short distance double taps, (again 2 alphas no sight picture which was the other posters complaint). They want round count and use of non-reciprocating front wt., optical sight offensive use of a handgun stuff. (heh, its fun).
the fact that different grips affect shooters scores in undeniable, to redefine the question "if the sights are aligned" as you did to get hits, trivalizes why experimenting with different grips is done in the first place, to say nothing of getting the cart before the horse.
As far as competition helping in gunfight, that would probably apply to any competitive event helping another competitive event.
But man, keep going all this name dropping is giving me a woody.
Jim
I'm glad to see you agree with my first statement that practicing with timers, someone yelling at the shooter (outside stress) is better than just shooting groups. It also good that someone who was in a two way gun fight thought competition inproved their odds. Not sure how military and le has to do with civilian self defense, please elaborate. Probable conflict distance is different, as well as motivational factors, to say nothing of the differences in weapons used. Todays gamers rarely see stages that are set up such as weapon-retention short distance double taps, (again 2 alphas no sight picture which was the other posters complaint). They want round count and use of non-reciprocating front wt., optical sight offensive use of a handgun stuff. (heh, its fun).
the fact that different grips affect shooters scores in undeniable, to redefine the question "if the sights are aligned" as you did to get hits, trivalizes why experimenting with different grips is done in the first place, to say nothing of getting the cart before the horse.
As far as competition helping in gunfight, that would probably apply to any competitive event helping another competitive event.
But man, keep going all this name dropping is giving me a woody.
Re: Whats's accurate. Please show your groups
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: shooter2</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Jim
I'm glad to see you agree with my first statement that practicing with timers, someone yelling at the shooter (outside stress) is better than just shooting groups.</div></div>
Never said it wasn't valuable. But without proper fundamentals in place it's largely pointless. There is a progression, and trying to make someone try and do something under stress that they can't do period, isn't helping them learn. (crawl, walk, run... etc.)
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> It also good that someone who was in a two way gun fight thought competition inproved their odds. Not sure how military and le has to do with civilian self defense, please elaborate.</div></div>
Well, you see, being in a fight for your life is being in a fight for your life. You can try and make a big deal about what the tool being used is, or what color clothes that person is wearing while they're being shot at, but where is that going to get anyone?
Stress management, mindset and resolve, performance under stress... all that other stuff doesn't much matter. So what if they have a rifle... I have one beside my bed and access to them at work. A probability exists that I might use one in a fight. Optical devices... what does that have to do with anything? I can mount a red dot on my pistol too if I want to... and the % of guys using them in the military if SUPER small. This is really reaching for straws to talk about that kind of stuff.
I'm either going to maintain my composure, deliver fight stopping hits with what is available, or not. You can put me in a plate carrier and multicam, but that doesn't change what I need to do.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Probable conflict distance is different, as well as motivational factors, to say nothing of the differences in weapons used. </div></div>
Military CQB occurs at close distance. Weapons used can largely be the same. Lots of people have been put down with 1911's, M9's and Glock 22's domestically and abroad. How I deal with someone shooting at me with an M4 in my hands is just about the same as I would with my Glock 19... put sights on high center chest of target (if available), work trigger rapidly until target ceases to be a threat, my gun stops going bang, or the conditions of the fight change. Whether I'm assaulting a Taliban stronghold or shooting an armed robber, I'm going to dominate my target with just as much violence and resolve to win in either situation.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Todays gamers rarely see stages that are set up such as weapon-retention short distance double taps, (again 2 alphas no sight picture which was the other posters complaint).</div></div>
It doesn't matter, that's not why competition is of value ... it's not going to be a rehearsal for a gunfight. All of our shooting on the range is pretty much all done on a well lit, flat grassy field (usually in good weather), with 2-dimensional non moving paper targets, facing directly into your line of fire... and none of them pose an imminent threat to your life. So, does that invalidate shooting on the range as a whole, because just about ALL of those conditions are likely to be different on "the day of"?
It would be foolish to suggest that range practice is worthless because of that, rather you take what you can from it and use it how you can (you are improving your gunhandling, decision making, and marksmanship skills while under some stress and trying to achieve a goal).
Just because something isn't a 100% replication of what you are training for doesn't invalidate its value, all together.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">They want round count and use of non-reciprocating front wt., optical sight offensive use of a handgun stuff. (heh, its fun).
<span style="font-weight: bold">the fact that different grips affect shooters scores in undeniable,</span> to redefine the question "if the sights are aligned" as you did to get hits, trivalizes why experimenting with different grips is done in the first place, to say nothing of getting the cart before the horse. </div></div>
But, you don't understand the difference between pure accuracy (the topic of this thread) and rapid fire performance (multiple shots with a time standard).
You don't seem to understand that grip is a technique, not a fundamental. Different people can use different techniques to their advantage... but ANY grip can be shot accurately.
A better grip might help your sights track better, reduce muzzle flip, get you back on target more quickly for follow up shots, etc... but it doesn't impact your ability to put an aimed shot on target... that's trigger control and sight alignment. Why do you think "trick shooting" is possible, where guys shoot over their shoulder with a mirror, or holding the gun upside down... it's just the fundamentals being applied with wacky techniques (like grip or stance).
Someone who misses their target isn't going to hit it if they change their grip. They need to address their trigger control and sight alignment issues to be more <span style="font-style: italic">accurate</span> (the topic of this thread).
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">As far as competition helping in gunfight, that would probably apply to any competitive event helping another competitive event.
But man, keep going all this name dropping is giving me a woody.</div></div>
Name dropping? Who asked the question "who trained you?"? I'm just citing my sources.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: shooter2</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Jim
I'm glad to see you agree with my first statement that practicing with timers, someone yelling at the shooter (outside stress) is better than just shooting groups.</div></div>
Never said it wasn't valuable. But without proper fundamentals in place it's largely pointless. There is a progression, and trying to make someone try and do something under stress that they can't do period, isn't helping them learn. (crawl, walk, run... etc.)
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> It also good that someone who was in a two way gun fight thought competition inproved their odds. Not sure how military and le has to do with civilian self defense, please elaborate.</div></div>
Well, you see, being in a fight for your life is being in a fight for your life. You can try and make a big deal about what the tool being used is, or what color clothes that person is wearing while they're being shot at, but where is that going to get anyone?
Stress management, mindset and resolve, performance under stress... all that other stuff doesn't much matter. So what if they have a rifle... I have one beside my bed and access to them at work. A probability exists that I might use one in a fight. Optical devices... what does that have to do with anything? I can mount a red dot on my pistol too if I want to... and the % of guys using them in the military if SUPER small. This is really reaching for straws to talk about that kind of stuff.
I'm either going to maintain my composure, deliver fight stopping hits with what is available, or not. You can put me in a plate carrier and multicam, but that doesn't change what I need to do.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Probable conflict distance is different, as well as motivational factors, to say nothing of the differences in weapons used. </div></div>
Military CQB occurs at close distance. Weapons used can largely be the same. Lots of people have been put down with 1911's, M9's and Glock 22's domestically and abroad. How I deal with someone shooting at me with an M4 in my hands is just about the same as I would with my Glock 19... put sights on high center chest of target (if available), work trigger rapidly until target ceases to be a threat, my gun stops going bang, or the conditions of the fight change. Whether I'm assaulting a Taliban stronghold or shooting an armed robber, I'm going to dominate my target with just as much violence and resolve to win in either situation.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Todays gamers rarely see stages that are set up such as weapon-retention short distance double taps, (again 2 alphas no sight picture which was the other posters complaint).</div></div>
It doesn't matter, that's not why competition is of value ... it's not going to be a rehearsal for a gunfight. All of our shooting on the range is pretty much all done on a well lit, flat grassy field (usually in good weather), with 2-dimensional non moving paper targets, facing directly into your line of fire... and none of them pose an imminent threat to your life. So, does that invalidate shooting on the range as a whole, because just about ALL of those conditions are likely to be different on "the day of"?
It would be foolish to suggest that range practice is worthless because of that, rather you take what you can from it and use it how you can (you are improving your gunhandling, decision making, and marksmanship skills while under some stress and trying to achieve a goal).
Just because something isn't a 100% replication of what you are training for doesn't invalidate its value, all together.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">They want round count and use of non-reciprocating front wt., optical sight offensive use of a handgun stuff. (heh, its fun).
<span style="font-weight: bold">the fact that different grips affect shooters scores in undeniable,</span> to redefine the question "if the sights are aligned" as you did to get hits, trivalizes why experimenting with different grips is done in the first place, to say nothing of getting the cart before the horse. </div></div>
But, you don't understand the difference between pure accuracy (the topic of this thread) and rapid fire performance (multiple shots with a time standard).
You don't seem to understand that grip is a technique, not a fundamental. Different people can use different techniques to their advantage... but ANY grip can be shot accurately.
A better grip might help your sights track better, reduce muzzle flip, get you back on target more quickly for follow up shots, etc... but it doesn't impact your ability to put an aimed shot on target... that's trigger control and sight alignment. Why do you think "trick shooting" is possible, where guys shoot over their shoulder with a mirror, or holding the gun upside down... it's just the fundamentals being applied with wacky techniques (like grip or stance).
Someone who misses their target isn't going to hit it if they change their grip. They need to address their trigger control and sight alignment issues to be more <span style="font-style: italic">accurate</span> (the topic of this thread).
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">As far as competition helping in gunfight, that would probably apply to any competitive event helping another competitive event.
But man, keep going all this name dropping is giving me a woody.</div></div>
Name dropping? Who asked the question "who trained you?"? I'm just citing my sources.
Re: Whats's accurate. Please show your groups
the name dropping comment was in response to source quotes.
Mrs. Smith was released today, after being involved in a shooting at the local 7-11. Cleared as to self-defence,and when asked how she did it-- " It was the night courses in aggressiveness training and the sun. day afternoon IDPA matches. I regret that I didn't get a good sight picture as I had to shoot with the gun in my purse, but I did get 3 alpha and 1 mike with the triple ought buck 410 loads from my judge. I'm just glad I got a good grip in that thing"
this is the testimonial I want to here, instead of one that involves a group of young males, (alphas probably) in good physical shape, trained by professional shooters in the military no less. Statistical bias comes to mind.
you can't do trigger control and sight alignment if you don't have a good grip. Your reference to trick shooters is grasping at straws.
some days I like to bust out the model 41 and couple of boxes of match, kick that weight back counter lever the 41 into its wobble zone, use that amu slow fire chart (with the help it offers when using the wobble zone) lift off the little finger, pinch the grip -- just to remember the importance of time in the equations.
and yes people do miss by not getting a good (proper or otherwise) grip,
None especially me suggested range practice was good, (mainly fun) except you. Indeed my first suggestion was to do just that, but push the gun away from the chest acquire the sight picture and use time as a guideline.
Your references to what you would do in a military situation are immaterial and beside the point that shooting groups from a stock gun doesn't mean a thing to a beginner. And no where was there a mention of using optics in le or military until you changed the subject
the name dropping comment was in response to source quotes.
Mrs. Smith was released today, after being involved in a shooting at the local 7-11. Cleared as to self-defence,and when asked how she did it-- " It was the night courses in aggressiveness training and the sun. day afternoon IDPA matches. I regret that I didn't get a good sight picture as I had to shoot with the gun in my purse, but I did get 3 alpha and 1 mike with the triple ought buck 410 loads from my judge. I'm just glad I got a good grip in that thing"
this is the testimonial I want to here, instead of one that involves a group of young males, (alphas probably) in good physical shape, trained by professional shooters in the military no less. Statistical bias comes to mind.
you can't do trigger control and sight alignment if you don't have a good grip. Your reference to trick shooters is grasping at straws.
some days I like to bust out the model 41 and couple of boxes of match, kick that weight back counter lever the 41 into its wobble zone, use that amu slow fire chart (with the help it offers when using the wobble zone) lift off the little finger, pinch the grip -- just to remember the importance of time in the equations.
and yes people do miss by not getting a good (proper or otherwise) grip,
None especially me suggested range practice was good, (mainly fun) except you. Indeed my first suggestion was to do just that, but push the gun away from the chest acquire the sight picture and use time as a guideline.
Your references to what you would do in a military situation are immaterial and beside the point that shooting groups from a stock gun doesn't mean a thing to a beginner. And no where was there a mention of using optics in le or military until you changed the subject
Re: Whats's accurate. Please show your groups
Why don't you guys take your childish, misplaced argument to PM's or actually post groups like the author of this thread asked?
Why don't you guys take your childish, misplaced argument to PM's or actually post groups like the author of this thread asked?
Re: Whats's accurate. Please show your groups
If you want to improve your fundamentals, try to get to a bullseye or service pistol match.
If you want to improve your fundamentals, try to get to a bullseye or service pistol match.
Re: Whats's accurate. Please show your groups
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: shooter2</div><div class="ubbcode-body">you can't do trigger control and sight alignment if you don't have a good grip. Your reference to trick shooters is grasping at straws.</div></div>
That's not true.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_X9vS0T0wRY
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_X9vS0T0wRY
Sight alignment and trigger control is all that is necessary when it comes to putting a shot where you want it to go.
If your grip played a role, why is it that bullseye shooters use a far more relaxed grip than action shooters? The answer is because they are tailoring their technique to the task at hand.
There is a reason why Bob Vogel shoots like this for action shooting:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z37UWQ0DyWU
And world class bullseye shooters DON'T shoot like that.
If you want to develop your accuracy, you need to understand what matters and what doesn't. For hammering a target rapidly at 5 yards with 6 shots... you probably need a firmer grip on the target than if you want to make a headshot at 25 yards.
Your change in grip doesn't change where the bullets go, but a more relaxed grip gives you better control over your trigger finger, allowing you to shoot more accurately by having more precise control over your trigger finger (and it affecting sight alignment less).
Whether you hold the gun upside down, with a cup and saucer grip, or with a heavily forward cammed grip with your support hand... different shooters with proper trigger control and sight alignment can all hit the same targets with their different grips. They may all manage recoil differently, but recoil management happens <span style="text-decoration: underline">after</span> the shot, and doesn't impact where the round just went.
You seem to have trouble divorcing recoil management from accuracy. Without the ability to execute one shot perfectly (accurately), trying to develop a string of accurate fire (while under a time crunch, no less) is as you put it "putting the cart in front of the horse".
This topic isn't "how can I get faster at IDPA", it's "I'm new to shooting pistols, what is accurate and how can I get there".
You've seen my groups, so where are some of yours? How can you backup your position that "grip changes your ability to make a shot"?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: shooter2</div><div class="ubbcode-body">you can't do trigger control and sight alignment if you don't have a good grip. Your reference to trick shooters is grasping at straws.</div></div>
That's not true.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_X9vS0T0wRY
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_X9vS0T0wRY
Sight alignment and trigger control is all that is necessary when it comes to putting a shot where you want it to go.
If your grip played a role, why is it that bullseye shooters use a far more relaxed grip than action shooters? The answer is because they are tailoring their technique to the task at hand.
There is a reason why Bob Vogel shoots like this for action shooting:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z37UWQ0DyWU
And world class bullseye shooters DON'T shoot like that.
If you want to develop your accuracy, you need to understand what matters and what doesn't. For hammering a target rapidly at 5 yards with 6 shots... you probably need a firmer grip on the target than if you want to make a headshot at 25 yards.
Your change in grip doesn't change where the bullets go, but a more relaxed grip gives you better control over your trigger finger, allowing you to shoot more accurately by having more precise control over your trigger finger (and it affecting sight alignment less).
Whether you hold the gun upside down, with a cup and saucer grip, or with a heavily forward cammed grip with your support hand... different shooters with proper trigger control and sight alignment can all hit the same targets with their different grips. They may all manage recoil differently, but recoil management happens <span style="text-decoration: underline">after</span> the shot, and doesn't impact where the round just went.
You seem to have trouble divorcing recoil management from accuracy. Without the ability to execute one shot perfectly (accurately), trying to develop a string of accurate fire (while under a time crunch, no less) is as you put it "putting the cart in front of the horse".
This topic isn't "how can I get faster at IDPA", it's "I'm new to shooting pistols, what is accurate and how can I get there".
You've seen my groups, so where are some of yours? How can you backup your position that "grip changes your ability to make a shot"?
Re: Whats's accurate. Please show your groups
Jim
If you want to develop your accuracy, you need to understand what matters and what doesn't. For hammering a target rapidly at 5 yards with 6 shots... you probably need a firmer grip on the target than if you want to make a headshot at 25 yards.
thanks again for agree with me.
from a presentation on the timer go , draw fire two at a say 12 yd target,
now repeat the exercise with a glove and two fingers tapedup (extreme example) do the same exercise,
holding the sight alignment constant what changes, got to be the times, (supports my posit on time being necessary variable) unless you can shoot the same with glove on-- most can't
now set the timer on par repeat so the gloved time is the same as the nongloved.
difference has got to be the grip.
you cannot have good accuracy with without recoil control, the recoil management occurs to control the next shot. trick shots as you describe, still take more time than, say something like a weaver, (another support for my time posit)
when I want to shoot for accuracy as in vereor its usually at old 12 gauge hulls at 25 yds. or sliding down into a Creedmoor with a 454 scoped redhawk to slam some 200 yd rams .
Jim
If you want to develop your accuracy, you need to understand what matters and what doesn't. For hammering a target rapidly at 5 yards with 6 shots... you probably need a firmer grip on the target than if you want to make a headshot at 25 yards.
thanks again for agree with me.
from a presentation on the timer go , draw fire two at a say 12 yd target,
now repeat the exercise with a glove and two fingers tapedup (extreme example) do the same exercise,
holding the sight alignment constant what changes, got to be the times, (supports my posit on time being necessary variable) unless you can shoot the same with glove on-- most can't
now set the timer on par repeat so the gloved time is the same as the nongloved.
difference has got to be the grip.
you cannot have good accuracy with without recoil control, the recoil management occurs to control the next shot. trick shots as you describe, still take more time than, say something like a weaver, (another support for my time posit)
when I want to shoot for accuracy as in vereor its usually at old 12 gauge hulls at 25 yds. or sliding down into a Creedmoor with a 454 scoped redhawk to slam some 200 yd rams .
Re: Whats's accurate. Please show your groups
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: shooter2</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Jim
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">If you want to develop your accuracy, you need to understand what matters and what doesn't. For hammering a target rapidly at 5 yards with 6 shots... you probably need a firmer grip on the target than if you want to make a headshot at 25 yards.</div></div>
thanks again for agree with me.</div></div>
If you agree with that statement, then you have agreed that a looser grip doesn't hamper accuracy.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">from a presentation on the timer go , draw fire two at a say 12 yd target,
now repeat the exercise with a glove and two fingers tapedup (extreme example) do the same exercise,
holding the sight alignment constant what changes, got to be the times, (supports my posit on time being necessary variable) unless you can shoot the same with glove on-- most can't
now set the timer on par repeat so the gloved time is the same as the nongloved.
difference has got to be the grip.
<span style="font-weight: bold">you cannot have good accuracy with without recoil control, the recoil management occurs to control the next shot.</span> trick shots as you describe, still take more time than, say something like a weaver, (another support for my time posit)
when I want to shoot for accuracy as in vereor its usually at old 12 gauge hulls at 25 yds. or sliding down into a Creedmoor with a 454 scoped redhawk to slam some 200 yd rams .
</div></div>
You are still tied up around splits and multiple shots. You can not shoot multiple shots well until you can shoot ONE shot well. Why are you talking about using a timer when someone doesn't have their own understanding of how to shoot accurately WITHOUT time pressure?
Or to quote Brian Searcy, a SFOD-D veteran (and one of the best shooters to emerge from that unit), Presidents 100 winner, and founder of TigerSwan's instructional program "it all starts with the ability to put one shot on one target".
He knows something about "accuracy", FYI.
As for not having accuracy without having good recoil control, you evidently don't understand that recoil happens after the bullet is on the way to where to where you aimed it, and no one here is talking about strings of fire, except for you.
Add to that, you have not defined ANYTHING about accuracy at speed. If I have an 8" scoring ring and I'm on the clock... I WANT to push myself to shoot a 7.5" group. If that target is reduced, then I need to slow down. So trying to incorporate a time standard into an accuracy standard is valid for one shooting stance, at one distance, on one target, with one goal in mind. The second you change the distance, the angle of the target to your sights, your heart rate, the lighting, your stance, your ammo, etc... then the splits you can achieve as well also change.
This is why marksmanship is stripped down to the basics of one shot, on one target, while you are stationary and so is the target, without time pressure, to develop pure marksmanship skills. Trying to build the roof on the house before the foundation is finished is a bad idea.
To quote J. Michael Plaxco "there are no advanced techniques, only advanced applications of the basics." Without the basics, you've got nothing.
You are trying to suggest that a new shooter push their limits before those very limits are defined.
You have also yet to post a single group for anyone to look at, so your not really qualifying your opinion with those of us here you are debating. How come?
Why are you so sure of yourself that you think that it's a good idea for a new shooter to try running before they know how to crawl?
Did you merge onto a highway at 75 miles an hour the first hour you learned how to drive, or did you drive around in a parking lot first?
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: shooter2</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Jim
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">If you want to develop your accuracy, you need to understand what matters and what doesn't. For hammering a target rapidly at 5 yards with 6 shots... you probably need a firmer grip on the target than if you want to make a headshot at 25 yards.</div></div>
thanks again for agree with me.</div></div>
If you agree with that statement, then you have agreed that a looser grip doesn't hamper accuracy.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">from a presentation on the timer go , draw fire two at a say 12 yd target,
now repeat the exercise with a glove and two fingers tapedup (extreme example) do the same exercise,
holding the sight alignment constant what changes, got to be the times, (supports my posit on time being necessary variable) unless you can shoot the same with glove on-- most can't
now set the timer on par repeat so the gloved time is the same as the nongloved.
difference has got to be the grip.
<span style="font-weight: bold">you cannot have good accuracy with without recoil control, the recoil management occurs to control the next shot.</span> trick shots as you describe, still take more time than, say something like a weaver, (another support for my time posit)
when I want to shoot for accuracy as in vereor its usually at old 12 gauge hulls at 25 yds. or sliding down into a Creedmoor with a 454 scoped redhawk to slam some 200 yd rams .
</div></div>
You are still tied up around splits and multiple shots. You can not shoot multiple shots well until you can shoot ONE shot well. Why are you talking about using a timer when someone doesn't have their own understanding of how to shoot accurately WITHOUT time pressure?
Or to quote Brian Searcy, a SFOD-D veteran (and one of the best shooters to emerge from that unit), Presidents 100 winner, and founder of TigerSwan's instructional program "it all starts with the ability to put one shot on one target".
He knows something about "accuracy", FYI.
As for not having accuracy without having good recoil control, you evidently don't understand that recoil happens after the bullet is on the way to where to where you aimed it, and no one here is talking about strings of fire, except for you.
Add to that, you have not defined ANYTHING about accuracy at speed. If I have an 8" scoring ring and I'm on the clock... I WANT to push myself to shoot a 7.5" group. If that target is reduced, then I need to slow down. So trying to incorporate a time standard into an accuracy standard is valid for one shooting stance, at one distance, on one target, with one goal in mind. The second you change the distance, the angle of the target to your sights, your heart rate, the lighting, your stance, your ammo, etc... then the splits you can achieve as well also change.
This is why marksmanship is stripped down to the basics of one shot, on one target, while you are stationary and so is the target, without time pressure, to develop pure marksmanship skills. Trying to build the roof on the house before the foundation is finished is a bad idea.
To quote J. Michael Plaxco "there are no advanced techniques, only advanced applications of the basics." Without the basics, you've got nothing.
You are trying to suggest that a new shooter push their limits before those very limits are defined.
You have also yet to post a single group for anyone to look at, so your not really qualifying your opinion with those of us here you are debating. How come?
Why are you so sure of yourself that you think that it's a good idea for a new shooter to try running before they know how to crawl?
Did you merge onto a highway at 75 miles an hour the first hour you learned how to drive, or did you drive around in a parking lot first?
Re: Whats's accurate. Please show your groups
Take a look at this review. It would shoot 1+1/4" groups at 25 yds. consistently and for only about $500:
http://www.gunblast.com/Firestorm-1911Deluxe.htm
They make these 1911s for accuracy not just mil spec so you have to send them back to accurize to make more money off of you which I think is a racket. IMHO
40gt
Take a look at this review. It would shoot 1+1/4" groups at 25 yds. consistently and for only about $500:
http://www.gunblast.com/Firestorm-1911Deluxe.htm
They make these 1911s for accuracy not just mil spec so you have to send them back to accurize to make more money off of you which I think is a racket. IMHO
40gt
Re: Whats's accurate. Please show your groups
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: 40gt</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Take a look at this review. It would shoot 1+1/4" groups at 25 yds. consistently and for only about $500:
</div></div>
That was only one 5-shot group at 25 yards with a Ransom Rest. On average, it looks like 2.5-ish" at 25 yards for 5-shot groups, which is not unbelievable accuracy.
Semi-customs such as Baer, Brown, and Wilson will typically shoot at least 3" 10-shot groups from a Ransom Rest at 50 yards.
A good 1911 will outshoot the vast majority of shooters out there, with the exception being high level bullseye competitors.
So there is the question of how well the gun shoots versus how well the shooter shoots. A Ransom Rest takes the shooter out of the equation.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: 40gt</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Take a look at this review. It would shoot 1+1/4" groups at 25 yds. consistently and for only about $500:
</div></div>
That was only one 5-shot group at 25 yards with a Ransom Rest. On average, it looks like 2.5-ish" at 25 yards for 5-shot groups, which is not unbelievable accuracy.
Semi-customs such as Baer, Brown, and Wilson will typically shoot at least 3" 10-shot groups from a Ransom Rest at 50 yards.
A good 1911 will outshoot the vast majority of shooters out there, with the exception being high level bullseye competitors.
So there is the question of how well the gun shoots versus how well the shooter shoots. A Ransom Rest takes the shooter out of the equation.
Re: Whats's accurate. Please show your groups
Here are some targets I shot this weekend at 25 yards. I finally topped my 190 point score on Jim's target with a 192.
Here is my 192:
Freestyle: 99/100
Strong Hand: 48/50
Weak Hand: 45/50
That wide right shot caught the 8 ring. The low right shot on the 9 ring did not catch the 10 ring.
I started taking pictures after freestyle. I tend to score 99/100 on that phase. Here is my best group of this weekend. 2-3/4" at 25 yards for 10 shots.
Not as small a group, but I love this target because I tore up the X-Ring. You can very clearly see what the gun is capable of versus the shots that I pulled. That X-Ring is a little over 1.5". I think that is easily achievable with my gun if I had better execution.
Here are some targets I shot this weekend at 25 yards. I finally topped my 190 point score on Jim's target with a 192.
Here is my 192:
Freestyle: 99/100
Strong Hand: 48/50
Weak Hand: 45/50
That wide right shot caught the 8 ring. The low right shot on the 9 ring did not catch the 10 ring.
I started taking pictures after freestyle. I tend to score 99/100 on that phase. Here is my best group of this weekend. 2-3/4" at 25 yards for 10 shots.
Not as small a group, but I love this target because I tore up the X-Ring. You can very clearly see what the gun is capable of versus the shots that I pulled. That X-Ring is a little over 1.5". I think that is easily achievable with my gun if I had better execution.
Re: Whats's accurate. Please show your groups
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Carter Mayfield</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: 40gt</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Take a look at this review. It would shoot 1+1/4" groups at 25 yds. consistently and for only about $500:
</div></div>
That was only one 5-shot group at 25 yards with a Ransom Rest. On average, it looks like 2.5-ish" at 25 yards for 5-shot groups, which is not unbelievable accuracy.
Semi-customs such as Baer, Brown, and Wilson will typically shoot at least 3" 10-shot groups from a Ransom Rest at 50 yards.
A good 1911 will outshoot the vast majority of shooters out there, with the exception being high level bullseye competitors.
So there is the question of how well the gun shoots versus how well the shooter shoots. A Ransom Rest takes the shooter out of the equation.</div></div>
I do agree with what you have said, but read the rest of the review. With the Cor-Bon JHPs it would consistently shoot 1.25" groups not just one target.
I shoot long range competition out to 1,000 yds. and if your gun is not consistently accurate you can not shoot your best. If your gun shoots very well and consistent you have a better chance of improving your shooting. How can you improve your shooting if your gun groups like a shotgun? My neighbor has a tricked out Baer which he paid $2800.00 for and using a rest does not shoot smaller groups than my American Classic II which I paid $529 including FFL+ tax. For the same accuracy and as good a trigger right out of the box as the Baer you could buy 5 American Classic IIs for the price of one $2800 Baer.
http://www.budsgunshop.com/catalog/product_info.php/products_id/61671
40gt
PS: The word has gotten out about these pistols and the prices are going up because retailers can not keep them in stock. Read the reviews at the bottom.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Carter Mayfield</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: 40gt</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Take a look at this review. It would shoot 1+1/4" groups at 25 yds. consistently and for only about $500:
</div></div>
That was only one 5-shot group at 25 yards with a Ransom Rest. On average, it looks like 2.5-ish" at 25 yards for 5-shot groups, which is not unbelievable accuracy.
Semi-customs such as Baer, Brown, and Wilson will typically shoot at least 3" 10-shot groups from a Ransom Rest at 50 yards.
A good 1911 will outshoot the vast majority of shooters out there, with the exception being high level bullseye competitors.
So there is the question of how well the gun shoots versus how well the shooter shoots. A Ransom Rest takes the shooter out of the equation.</div></div>
I do agree with what you have said, but read the rest of the review. With the Cor-Bon JHPs it would consistently shoot 1.25" groups not just one target.
I shoot long range competition out to 1,000 yds. and if your gun is not consistently accurate you can not shoot your best. If your gun shoots very well and consistent you have a better chance of improving your shooting. How can you improve your shooting if your gun groups like a shotgun? My neighbor has a tricked out Baer which he paid $2800.00 for and using a rest does not shoot smaller groups than my American Classic II which I paid $529 including FFL+ tax. For the same accuracy and as good a trigger right out of the box as the Baer you could buy 5 American Classic IIs for the price of one $2800 Baer.
http://www.budsgunshop.com/catalog/product_info.php/products_id/61671
40gt
PS: The word has gotten out about these pistols and the prices are going up because retailers can not keep them in stock. Read the reviews at the bottom.
Re: Whats's accurate. Please show your groups
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: 40gt</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
I shoot long range competition out to 1,000 yds. and if your gun is not consistently accurate you can not shoot your best. If your gun shoots very well and consistent you have a better chance of improving your shooting. How can you improve your shooting if your gun groups like a shotgun?
</div></div>
Now here's the issue... you are comparing two shooting disciplines that are not remotely similar. A better comparison would be high-power rifle at the 100 yard line (slung up, off-hand). Ask a high power shooter if he needs a quarter MOA gun to shoot well at the 100 yard line. If he could choose between slow lock time and a quarter MOA rifle and fast lock time and an MOA rifle, he would choose the faster lock time any day of the week and twice on Sunday.
Why doesn't rifle accuracy matter at the 100 yard line? Because the 10 ring is over 3" in diameter. A missed shot is going to be primarily in the shooter. Same with pistol. I shot that 2 3/4" group above (unsupported)... but I guarantee that my pistol could far outshoot that in a Ransom Rest at 25 yards. I would guess 3/4" or better. Trust me, the pistol didn't throw that 5 o'clock shot (or the 2 and 10 o'clock shots in my other group).
Most pistols far exceed the abilities of the shooter, especially if we are talking IPSC or IDPA. Bullseye is a little different. Accuracy is a heavy consideration for that discipline... I would go for an accurate gun there... and get it scoped and shoot wadcutters.
For the vast majority of shooters, their pistol is not holding them back.
As for the Firestorm, I am sure it is a great value. I did a search on them on 1911forum.com. The guy who was happiest with his modified it. There were a couple of guys who had issues, which you have to expect... at that price point, I guarantee that it is chock full of MIM parts. Some people will have great luck with MIM parts, and some will have failures. That is the nature of the beast. If you get one that runs, you are happy. If you get one that has issues, you are cursing the guns. You don't get something for nothing. I might purchase this over a current production Kimber, but not over a semi-custom.
As for your neighbor, he was robbed. I got a hard chromed, 1.5" guarantee Baer with night sights... pretty much every bell and whistle you can think of, and I got it for less than $2k.
Now let's see some of those Firestorm groups!
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: 40gt</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
I shoot long range competition out to 1,000 yds. and if your gun is not consistently accurate you can not shoot your best. If your gun shoots very well and consistent you have a better chance of improving your shooting. How can you improve your shooting if your gun groups like a shotgun?
</div></div>
Now here's the issue... you are comparing two shooting disciplines that are not remotely similar. A better comparison would be high-power rifle at the 100 yard line (slung up, off-hand). Ask a high power shooter if he needs a quarter MOA gun to shoot well at the 100 yard line. If he could choose between slow lock time and a quarter MOA rifle and fast lock time and an MOA rifle, he would choose the faster lock time any day of the week and twice on Sunday.
Why doesn't rifle accuracy matter at the 100 yard line? Because the 10 ring is over 3" in diameter. A missed shot is going to be primarily in the shooter. Same with pistol. I shot that 2 3/4" group above (unsupported)... but I guarantee that my pistol could far outshoot that in a Ransom Rest at 25 yards. I would guess 3/4" or better. Trust me, the pistol didn't throw that 5 o'clock shot (or the 2 and 10 o'clock shots in my other group).
Most pistols far exceed the abilities of the shooter, especially if we are talking IPSC or IDPA. Bullseye is a little different. Accuracy is a heavy consideration for that discipline... I would go for an accurate gun there... and get it scoped and shoot wadcutters.
For the vast majority of shooters, their pistol is not holding them back.
As for the Firestorm, I am sure it is a great value. I did a search on them on 1911forum.com. The guy who was happiest with his modified it. There were a couple of guys who had issues, which you have to expect... at that price point, I guarantee that it is chock full of MIM parts. Some people will have great luck with MIM parts, and some will have failures. That is the nature of the beast. If you get one that runs, you are happy. If you get one that has issues, you are cursing the guns. You don't get something for nothing. I might purchase this over a current production Kimber, but not over a semi-custom.
As for your neighbor, he was robbed. I got a hard chromed, 1.5" guarantee Baer with night sights... pretty much every bell and whistle you can think of, and I got it for less than $2k.
Now let's see some of those Firestorm groups!
