What, you don't get your new vehicle recommendations from the cast of "Canada's worst driver"? Lol
No, as a matter of fact I don't.
I dont compete, i am not interrested in training the LE training, i just like to shoot shoot anything i can accurately, for me shooting is a great activity and firearms are fun to use and permit to focus out of the daily routine...
Some individuals are just happy they do shoot and have the opportunity of doing it often, i am in this category...
My business carrer ( i dont need to be the first) is over and my life doesnt depend on the size of my groups, this is a pleasant activity and even more when i do good but if i do bad one day, there is always tomorrow...
I can understand the serious training and i like the discipline you guys put in it, i respect that... JP.
Nothing wrong with shooting for the sake of shooting. However, you want to see what you can do with a given firearm, a desire to improve. That being the case, you can't even begin to gauge your abilities until you first know what you're doing, and second, set a goal. You're never lost unless you had somewhere to be in the first place.
I don't subscribe to the "this is a pleasant activity" line of thinking. There is a certain amount of joy/pleasure/achievement in placing rounds where you want on demand, but make no mistake, these are tools designed for killing and should be respected as such. The operation of a firearm and the act of firing are violent actions, often associated with violent situations. I fail to see the "pleasant" side of marksmanship but that could just be me.
you don't have to.....honestly, some say there's no points in shooting tight groups slowly. not true.
point is, it can be fun to see the intrinseque accuracy of a given gun ; you first get some hints by shooting couple strings on the rest ,then off rest you go to works your fundamentals yet trying to keep the groupings as tight as possible. control.
the bragging about getting into LE training is funny.
i don't say ALL, but most guys can't hit a cow at 30 feets with a handgun in true stress condition with the heart at 160 BPM when life is at stakes ; defensive handgun handling has nothing to see with competitions or bullseye shootin. cherries and potatoes ; most of us are into the second and 3rd class of shooters,that's what we're talking about here. defensive shooting is an important string added to the bow, but it's not necessarly what a majority uses their handguns for.
Tiny groups are but one drill you can do/use when practicing. They're useless when it comes to defensive or competitive shooting as no one shoots for groups. The "one hole" drill is a great drill that forces you to focus on the fundamentals, its essentially shooting tiny groups. Its helpful, but its not the END goal. That is what I meant by tiny groups are useless. As the OP proclaims to be shooting for the sake of shooting, this entire discussion is moot as he appears to have no goal/reason/purpose or desire in mind when it comes to his marksmanship activities.
Interesting thread. Chiming in.
I get what TDC is saying about fundamentals and agree to a point. Fundamentals come into play in many sports and activities in a big way but when it comes to pistol shooting in my experience, the ergonomics, sight picture, and inherent overall accuracy of the pistol itself does come into play. If someone with near perfect and sound fundamentals stated they could shoot any pistol with the same results, I would call flies on them.
I am an average shooter at best and am always working on improving my abilities but I have pistol or two that I constantly blow my own mind with and others that group 2 to 3 times the size. What's up with that? Same fundamentals, same sights, different ergonomics, but drastically different results. Love Sigs but can't shoot them near as well as a Glock or an M&P. Can group a 1911 OK but can clover leaf with my S&W PPC 6" long slide at 7m consistently. When I do some rapid fire drills (bowling pins are my favourite) its the same result.
Again fundamentals and practice are key but don't believe for a minute there is anyone out there who is equally accurate with all handgun models.
There are plenty of accomplished shooters that can shoot many different guns just as well as the next, Jerry Miculek being one and Bob Munden being another example. I agree that ones performance won't be identical from gun to gun, but for the intended purpose the performance the performance is the same. We're talking about small groups and good hits, not Olympic bullseye type shooting measured to the thousandths of an inch.
Ergonomics are a gimmick, its not voodoo. If the sights are aligned with the target and remain their during the trigger press, the bullet will strike the same point(obviously extreme ranges don't count). Your SIG doesn't have the same sights as your Glock or your M&P. Did you measure the width of the front sight and compare it to the width of the near sight notch? Are the sights on all three the same dimensionally? Are they all the same brand and style of sights? Don't forget that the SA trigger on a SIG is not the least bit similar to the DAO trigger of a Glock or M&P. If you shoot one gun more than the others you'll naturally have a much more intimate feel for how it shoots, but your fundamentals will carry over. Some guns are inherently more accurate than others, that is true. When it comes to service guns, they all shoot the same.
TDC
