Fit vs Fundamentals
- Thread starter Tongarirohiker
- Start date
Quite often one can’t learn how a gun will handle for him if he doesn't know how to hold one.
If one doesn't know how to handle the gun there is a pretty good chance that he also doesn't know to shoot it (at least to some degree).
It's a simple case of nature against training here.
A pistol with all the nice features that doesn’t agree with your instincts may lead to you adapting to the gun.
Over time, your skills will improve and You may adopt different techniques which may result in shift in preference for different ergonomics as well.
A firearm that matches the shooter poorly can be compensated for. It's not the rocket science.
It will take longer time and more training, but it's possible to accomplish.
However I don’t think it’s the ideal way to go, especially for the new handgun owners.
You want the gun to accommodate you, not the other way around. Especially under the reality we live in.
If one doesn't know how to handle the gun there is a pretty good chance that he also doesn't know to shoot it (at least to some degree).
It's a simple case of nature against training here.
A pistol with all the nice features that doesn’t agree with your instincts may lead to you adapting to the gun.
Over time, your skills will improve and You may adopt different techniques which may result in shift in preference for different ergonomics as well.
A firearm that matches the shooter poorly can be compensated for. It's not the rocket science.
It will take longer time and more training, but it's possible to accomplish.
However I don’t think it’s the ideal way to go, especially for the new handgun owners.
You want the gun to accommodate you, not the other way around. Especially under the reality we live in.
Fundamentals are key, of course. Having said that, each person has to define for themselves what they want to get out of a pistol. If combat accuracy is all you care about and the relative fit of the gun in your hand isn't important to you then you'll probably be content with just about any choice. As a competitive shooter though, I want to take every possible advantage available to me and the "fit", or the ergonomic characteristics of a pistol become more and more important the higher up the performance curve you go. Simple group shooting isn't my only unit of measure. In IPSC shooting time is of equal importance. Being able to stand and shoot a group in a relaxed time frame is one thing. Doing it on the clock, against other shooters, is quite another. When you're looking for gains of 1/10th of a second or even 1/100th, while maintaining accuracy, everything matters. Consider; if you have five seconds to draw and shoot two shots into the center of a (target of choice) at five meters, you can pretty much do that with anything. Now cut the time down to one second. How about .85 second? If your fundamentals are good it shouldn't matter right? Or do you at some point start looking for some sort of interface advantage?
Now does a gun with great ergonomics cover up bad technique? Maybe; it depends on the person. But great ergonomics will only take you so far and the gun doesn't self-align with the target. That's all up to you. At some point, if you want to get better at shooting you are going to have to actually do the work and learn how to shoot. When this happens you'll realize that a good interface, or "fit" is always going to work out better for you in the long run than a bad one.
I'm well schooled in the fundamentals and I can shoot pretty much anything reasonably well. Platform is irrelevant to me in terms of the simple functions of trigger management, sight alignment and follow-through. I chose a custom built race gun for competition but in the classes I teach I often have to demonstrate techniques with students guns. We're talking a wide assortment of platforms and configurations, some of which have been quite good while others have just been horrendous. But I haven't missed anything yet.
The analogy I used in the other thread was the sport of running. Tell me that performance-wise, running a 10 K race in properly fitted running shoes will be no different than running it in work boots that are two sizes too big for you, so long as your stride technique (fundamentals) are correct. Looking at it that way, does the argument that ergonomics don't matter still make sense?
Best advice I can give: choose something you like and shoot the hell out of it. Issues of ergonomics will reveal themselves to you over time as you learn and you will likely try different platforms to see which yields a better result. Also, over time your tastes may/probably will change. Just go with the flow and keep shooting. Work always on the fundamentals and find the small advantages where you can.
Disclaimer: everything I said above could be wrong. It's up to the individual to discover for themselves what works, what doesn't, and why. It's a process, not an event.
Now does a gun with great ergonomics cover up bad technique? Maybe; it depends on the person. But great ergonomics will only take you so far and the gun doesn't self-align with the target. That's all up to you. At some point, if you want to get better at shooting you are going to have to actually do the work and learn how to shoot. When this happens you'll realize that a good interface, or "fit" is always going to work out better for you in the long run than a bad one.
I'm well schooled in the fundamentals and I can shoot pretty much anything reasonably well. Platform is irrelevant to me in terms of the simple functions of trigger management, sight alignment and follow-through. I chose a custom built race gun for competition but in the classes I teach I often have to demonstrate techniques with students guns. We're talking a wide assortment of platforms and configurations, some of which have been quite good while others have just been horrendous. But I haven't missed anything yet.
The analogy I used in the other thread was the sport of running. Tell me that performance-wise, running a 10 K race in properly fitted running shoes will be no different than running it in work boots that are two sizes too big for you, so long as your stride technique (fundamentals) are correct. Looking at it that way, does the argument that ergonomics don't matter still make sense?
Best advice I can give: choose something you like and shoot the hell out of it. Issues of ergonomics will reveal themselves to you over time as you learn and you will likely try different platforms to see which yields a better result. Also, over time your tastes may/probably will change. Just go with the flow and keep shooting. Work always on the fundamentals and find the small advantages where you can.
Disclaimer: everything I said above could be wrong. It's up to the individual to discover for themselves what works, what doesn't, and why. It's a process, not an event.
- Location
- West Quebec
Works for me.. I never get too full of myself..
Interesting.
Just like I should be able to run a marathon while wearing steel toe boots, right? If I can't it's because my fundamentals are not up to par.
True, if I were more fit, it would be a piece of cake. But it's also true that some tools make certain jobs easier. Should I not use the best tool for the job?
Just like I should be able to run a marathon while wearing steel toe boots, right? If I can't it's because my fundamentals are not up to par.
True, if I were more fit, it would be a piece of cake. But it's also true that some tools make certain jobs easier. Should I not use the best tool for the job?
I think this is also very true! I did find however after a bit of gun time and many hours of instructor youtube video ( recommended by people on here ) I have a much better understanding of what I'm doing and can see a notable improvement on recoil management, and am gaining much better trigger control, so I must be getting better. ( gun still fits, or seems to ) My groups are ok as well. However I have a long way to go as when I back it up to 25 I suck haha.
Tongarirohiker
CGN Regular
- Location
- Edmonton, AB
I agree my OP was a bit off the mark. I should be using custom fit golf clubs as my analogy, but buying a new driver seems to be an example most people can grasp. Surprising how many people don't know that you can actually get clubs fit to your swing.
That said, I've heard time and time again from pro's and club fitters the same story. "I make a killing off the fact that the guy doesn't want to fix his swing". If the guy doesn't fix his swing, he'll simply need a new set of clubs once he develops a new flaw.
To address the issue of old golf clubs, most of the time, the only thing wrong with the club is that the grip is dried out more than a well done steak. Change the grips (1/10th the cost of a new club), and the clubs feel like new again. So, let's say that we have an average golfer, and you pull five 6-irons from different sets. To level the playing field, the clubs have been maintained, some new, some old, but in working order with their own unique characteristics. If that golfer has a consistent swing, and takes a swing with each club, you'll likely have five shots with roughly the same trajectory, shape, and distance. The tool has become irrelevant in respect to performance.
Any other factors are irrelevant, as far as performance is concerned until you reach a certain level of proficiency.
I asked my dad how he'd sum up club fitting after 40+ years as a golf professional. He said "fit matters before you know better, and after you've become a pro trying to earn a paycheque. If people would stop wasting money on golf clubs, they've have more money to spend on green fees, balls and lessons."
So, I think the lesson here is to not buy guns based on how they feel, but instead spend the time training so that they all feel awesome.
I think the whole fit vs fundamentals argument is really about conflicting goals. If you're looking to buy a pistol so you can go to the range once a month, put some holes in paper, have a fun time and go home, then buy a pistol based on fit. You might as well enjoy what you're doing and chances are you might just buy one or two pistols in your life.
However, I'd say a lot of us are looking at becoming better pistol shooters. We want 2 inch groups. We want to achieve a level of proficiency. We want to be able to hit Alpha's on IPSC targets a second faster than our last run. At that point, skills and drills is what'll get you through. There may come to be a time where you've actually maximized your potential, or have exceeded what your pistol is capable of. In that case, fit vs fundamentals becomes an irrelevant discussion because you're now operating at a level far beyond what most of us are willing to work towards.
That said, I've heard time and time again from pro's and club fitters the same story. "I make a killing off the fact that the guy doesn't want to fix his swing". If the guy doesn't fix his swing, he'll simply need a new set of clubs once he develops a new flaw.
To address the issue of old golf clubs, most of the time, the only thing wrong with the club is that the grip is dried out more than a well done steak. Change the grips (1/10th the cost of a new club), and the clubs feel like new again. So, let's say that we have an average golfer, and you pull five 6-irons from different sets. To level the playing field, the clubs have been maintained, some new, some old, but in working order with their own unique characteristics. If that golfer has a consistent swing, and takes a swing with each club, you'll likely have five shots with roughly the same trajectory, shape, and distance. The tool has become irrelevant in respect to performance.
Any other factors are irrelevant, as far as performance is concerned until you reach a certain level of proficiency.
I asked my dad how he'd sum up club fitting after 40+ years as a golf professional. He said "fit matters before you know better, and after you've become a pro trying to earn a paycheque. If people would stop wasting money on golf clubs, they've have more money to spend on green fees, balls and lessons."
So, I think the lesson here is to not buy guns based on how they feel, but instead spend the time training so that they all feel awesome.
I think the whole fit vs fundamentals argument is really about conflicting goals. If you're looking to buy a pistol so you can go to the range once a month, put some holes in paper, have a fun time and go home, then buy a pistol based on fit. You might as well enjoy what you're doing and chances are you might just buy one or two pistols in your life.
However, I'd say a lot of us are looking at becoming better pistol shooters. We want 2 inch groups. We want to achieve a level of proficiency. We want to be able to hit Alpha's on IPSC targets a second faster than our last run. At that point, skills and drills is what'll get you through. There may come to be a time where you've actually maximized your potential, or have exceeded what your pistol is capable of. In that case, fit vs fundamentals becomes an irrelevant discussion because you're now operating at a level far beyond what most of us are willing to work towards.
Tongarirohiker
CGN Regular
- Location
- Edmonton, AB
Maybe some food for thought. The one thing that has become abundantly clear with converting from the fit to fundamentals camp is that in exercising good fundamentals and not worrying too much about how the pistol feels in my hands and looks to my eyes, is that my firearms collection can grow to a size I hadn't even thought of before. Someone nailed it in the other thread that while blondes are nice, so are brunettes, redheads, Asian girls....why the hell should I limit myself over something so trivial? I'm all for firearms polygamy.
Tongarirohiker
CGN Regular
- Location
- Edmonton, AB
Just like I should be able to run a marathon while wearing steel toe boots, right? If I can't it's because my fundamentals are not up to par.
True, if I were more fit, it would be a piece of cake. But it's also true that some tools make certain jobs easier. Should I not use the best tool for the job?
LOL. Keep stirring.
I think we're confusing the 'best' tool for an 'appropriate' tool. Running a marathon with a pair of work boots on would be silly. However, I'm probably not going to complain too much about taking a quick run around the neighbourhood in a pair of work boots. So, we need to make sure what we are using fits the situation.
If my goal is to put holes in paper, full stop, then any gun will do. I could use a slingshot and still end up with holes in paper. If my goal is to shoot IPSC Production, then any approved pistol will do. If my goal is to compete in 25m Rapid Fire Pistol at the Olympics, then I'm looking at a specific tool to do a specific job in a specialized environment.
Most of the folks for proper fit are either performing at a level where fit matters, have a valid medical reason for needing a good fit, or are looking to minimize faults without putting in the time and effort. Not saying that this third group is in the wrong, as long as this lines up with their objectives. If their objective is just to have fun and they're not concerned with tight groups every single time, then fire away, buy what feels good in your hands and have some fun. If you're looking at tight groups as a goal, take a close look at yourself before you blame the gun for your misses.
Just like I should be able to run a marathon while wearing steel toe boots, right? If I can't it's because my fundamentals are not up to par.
True, if I were more fit, it would be a piece of cake. But it's also true that some tools make certain jobs easier. Should I not use the best tool for the job?
I bet that any good drill sergeant would be more than helpful here. Heavy, leather boots are perfect for running if You have enough motivation behind your back
Of all your pistols, which one is your fav and why?
Tongarirohiker
CGN Regular
- Location
- Edmonton, AB
Of the ones currently in my possession, no clear favourite shows itself. I like my CZ SP-01 and my Sig 1911-22 each for their own reasons. If I had to pick a pistol? Probably the Springfield XD. Why? It was the first handgun I shot with my dad and how we figured out we like shooting things. Purely sentimental. Don't own one yet...I'll have to rectify that.
Cocked&Locked
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- S. Ontario
Good post, but let me toss this back, not as an attack, but as food for thought to this discussion. (one of the best in a while, way to go OP!!!) Just because a firearm "feels" better in your hand, it may not shoot better for you. I had a prof once who's favorite saying was "people like what they know, but don't necessarily know what they like". I find this true with a lot of new shooters....it has to be a (fill in the blank) or it's not good.
At the far end of this spectrum, I know a shooter who for years changed pistol every 2-3 months, and the new one was always the best pistol ever....for about 4 weeks. He would concentrate on fundamentals and shoot well until he became familiar with it, then loose focus and start to spray all over again....then the pistol "didn't fit him well" and got sold off to get the next one. Nothing wrong with having lots of guns, heck, i've got more then i'll ever shoot, but just buying and selling to try to compensate for poor skills is lost money that cold be spent on ammo eh?
I'd debate "work better" in the context of most pistols with most shooters...some are easier to run (ie 1911s have awesome triggers in general) but it's like wearing water wings in the deep end. If your having fun, there's nothing wrong with it, but if you want to get better, you need to push yourself harder. If you can teach yourself to shoot a glock or M&P well, your 1911 groups will be even better, as you will have a more complete grasp of trigger control and sight alignment. The benefit is it then takes less mental energy to shoot either/or tighter groups or faster and still make the accuracy standard you need.
I will occasionally take a student who's in the doldrums and have them shoot DA revolver. No staging of the trigger, smooth pull thru and release. In every case, once they learn to shoot a group at speed DA, they're groups with their chosen piece shrink....sometimes a lot. It forces them to notice what they're ignoring shooting what "fits" or "feels better"....
I'm a lady with smaller then the "average man" size manufacturers seem to make every gun in. When I first started shooting I found some guns harder to shoot then others but good fundamentals do help lots. I've found even with my CZ Shadow I have to twist the gun in my hand a little to reach the mag release, even with the thin grips. I hardly even notice now that I have to twist the gun in my hand now, it's second nature. I've found it's gotten easier to manipulate guns I was struggling with before. I believe my manual dexterity has increased enough I'm able to shoot pistols I was unable to before but still think a good fitting gun will always feel better. I'm just glad my hands aren't any smaller! I've noticed more ladies having a problem with physical strength being the limiting factor rather then size. I do however wish more manufacturers would think about smaller shooters when designing products. If there's a will, there's a way....
Cocked&Locked
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- S. Ontario
Gawd, that would be like picking a favorite mico brew beer. It all depends on the mood. I have a M-66 4" that i love shooting. If i'm just relaxing and plinking away, probably my Grandfather's Hi Standard. (miss him...reminds me of him ) Competition (not that i get much time to shoot any more
) would probably be XD9.... but there's dozens of others i might grab, depending on the mood. I still love the feel of the luger cycling. 1911's in general don't fit my hand well, to deep front to back, but i shoot well with them and for target work, they're fun.
Cocked&Locked
CGN Ultra frequent flyer
- Location
- S. Ontario
I have wide hands, but short fingers, and can't reach most slide locks or mag releases. I found with any pistol that i could fit a left hand release to, i could operate with the middle finger of my right hand, and don't even notice i do so any more. The ambi release on XD's or the ambi paddle on walther/HK work well this way too. Keeps your trigger finger clear of the guard, but is positive. I think your right, you do develop finer motor dexterity the more you practice the skills. Muscle memory builds up and it becomes second nature. I've never managed to find one in Canada, but i'd love to try one of the 1911's where they shortened the grip frame front to back to 9mm dimensions...seems like a match made in heaven for small hands. The SR9's work pretty well this way too....
