Home Forums Classifieds Blogs Today's Posts Search Social Groups



  
SIGN-UP
Notices

Glock Talk
Welcome To The Glock Talk Forums.

 
  
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 10-24-2012, 22:37   #21
countrygun
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 17,068
Quote:
Originally Posted by ithaca_deerslayer View Post
Sure. I want confidence at my hunting distances. Deer walking quickly between the trees, I don't want have to worry about distance, bullet power, or accuracy. I have confidence in all of those things.

So I'd say work on your accuracy and shooting skills, but be practical in accepting a certain level for a range of situations.

I think that what is meant by combat accuracy. A stock Glock may only have combat accuracy compared to a target 1911.
i don't quite know how to explain it, i am tired and it's been a long day around here, but, we are talking really two different things. You are talking about what you expect out of THE GUN. I am talking about what I expect out of MYSELF.

I have been able to keep all of my shots out of a 2" S&W "J" frame in the scoring rings since I was taught in my 20's. The 2" is every bit as mechanically accurate as a 4" it is just that the sights being closer together (sight radius) makes it difficult to shoot well. I have seen better shooters than I shoot some great scores at 25 with a 2". The gun is capable of it, Not every shooter NEEDS to work at that level certainly, but it is a matter of what the shooter is satisfied out of himself that sets the bar, not the gun.
countrygun is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-25-2012, 05:59   #22
ithaca_deerslayer
Senior Member
 
ithaca_deerslayer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Upstate NY, USA
Posts: 19,867
Quote:
Originally Posted by countrygun View Post
we are talking really two different things. You are talking about what you expect out of THE GUN. I am talking about what I expect out of MYSELF.
Could be true. But we agree the limit with the snubbie is not mechanical, instead it is me.

Counter to what the OP says, I believe speed and accuracy are interfering with each other. To be more accurate, you need to slow down. To be faster you accept less accuracy.

Now maybe the OP is trying to present some sort of Zen moment where speed and accuracy become one, but I'm not buying it. Accuracy can get better at speed because someone practices, but it still won't be as good as when slowing down.

And pertaining to all of this, what is "good enough"? Where is that defined? I don't think it is. Perhaps if you and your loved ones survive combat then your skills were good enough.

Last edited by ithaca_deerslayer; 10-25-2012 at 05:59..
ithaca_deerslayer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-25-2012, 08:05   #23
Gallium
CLM Number 182
Charter Lifetime Member
 
Gallium's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 47,557


I find that after shooting a 1 day or 2 day handgun "gunfighting" course, my groups from a static 2 handed shooting position increase in size.

I surmise that my brain realizes just how accurate I need to be in a gunfight. Under the right conditions (essentially any day of the week) I am shooting a 1" group at 15 yards with my handguns, and placing 10/10 hits on a 8" plate at 50 yards.

I routinely put as many rounds as I can fire in the time I am given, in a thoracic cavity sized group shooting while moving in any of the eight basic directions, and at oblique angles (ie, target is not squared up to me, and I am not moving to or from the target at a perpendicular angle).

oh yeah, I also try to do that stuff with my non-dominant hand as well.
Gallium is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-25-2012, 11:04   #24
countrygun
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 17,068
Quote:
Originally Posted by ithaca_deerslayer View Post
Could be true. But we agree the limit with the snubbie is not mechanical, instead it is me.

Counter to what the OP says, I believe speed and accuracy are interfering with each other. To be more accurate, you need to slow down. To be faster you accept less accuracy.

Now maybe the OP is trying to present some sort of Zen moment where speed and accuracy become one, but I'm not buying it. Accuracy can get better at speed because someone practices, but it still won't be as good as when slowing down.

And pertaining to all of this, what is "good enough"? Where is that defined? I don't think it is. Perhaps if you and your loved ones survive combat then your skills were good enough.
I am not one to "buy" anyone elses "theories" about shooting totally, I am too long a cynic for that. There are a lot of parts to a lot of "techniques/theories/methods" that do make sense, and a lot that don't. I think it is because of the individual nature we humans posses. I am also equally sure that one could come up with something "off the wall" and with a little success, say at some form of gamesmanship, and the right sales technique, it could become downright popular. Look at how fast hooked trigger guards started showing up on semi autos and they are still with us despite the fact they are used by such a minority.

But I spent a good deal of time in the martial arts myself and have seen the results of what we called "mushin" or "no mind" basically the application of a physical technique via the subconscious mind. A few decades ago a man by the name of (sp?) Tim Galloway applied it to a teaching method for tennis. He called it "The Inner Game of Tennis'. It was quite popular and improved the game of many players. There is much the human brain/body interface is capable of, BUT and it is important, that "individuality" I spoke of is the biggest factor. Different people learn and perform better in different ways and with different mindsets, that is what helps us keep our individuality. The old saying "there is more than one way to skin a cat" is quite true. It is much like what is often talked about with "type "A" and type "B" " personalities.

If you really do some research and read the dozens of articles about Bill Jordan, you wil notice how observers and interviewers remarked that he was utterly calm and showed nothing more that a change of expression when he did his demonstrations. almost no sign of physical strain,save for the muscles in his hand and arm.

Other shooters of note perform well when they are "keyed up" like an overwound spring.

There is more than one way to put holes where you want them on a target you chose. As the Bard said, "There are far more things in Heaven and Earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy.". We should be thankful for that. I helps us retain our individuality.

As to the actual mechanics of speed vs accuracy, I shouldn't think that the concepts are mutually and always exclusive given what people know IS possible in accuracy, and what they accept in the name of speed. I think some individual wiggle room just might exist. I know my wife is a good example. She inevitably does as well DA against the clock @ 25 yds with full house .357 loads, as she does with more "casual" or non existent, timing and .38 spl rounds. It's a "getting into the rythm" thing for her. Me? I'm such a lousy shot it's laughable.

Last edited by countrygun; 10-25-2012 at 15:27..
countrygun is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-25-2012, 12:48   #25
PhoenixTacSolutions
PTS
 
PhoenixTacSolutions's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 131
I see many misunderstood/misread my initial post. I will try to be more clear in the future.
PhoenixTacSolutions is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-25-2012, 13:14   #26
countrygun
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 17,068
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhoenixTacSolutions View Post
I see many misunderstood/misread my initial post. I will try to be more clear in the future.
Sorry, but if you leave a thread untended for a couple of weeks it will go feral.
countrygun is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-25-2012, 13:46   #27
PhoenixTacSolutions
PTS
 
PhoenixTacSolutions's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 131
You are quite right Sir! As I don't have the time to manage my threads, this will be my last post.
PhoenixTacSolutions is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-25-2012, 14:55   #28
TSiWRX
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Shaker Heights/Cleveland, Ohio, USA
Posts: 247
Quote:
Originally Posted by countrygun View Post
I am not one to "buy" anyone elses "theories" about shooting totally, I am too long a cynic for that. There are a lot of parts to a lot of "techniques/theories/methods" that do make sense, and a lot that don't. I think it is because of the individual nature we humans posses. I am also equally sure that one could come up with something "off the wall" and with a little success, say at some form of gamesmanship, and the right sales technique, it could become downright popular. Look at how fast hooked trigger guards started showing up on semi autos and they are still with us despite the fact they are used by such a minority.

But I spent a good deal of time in the martial arts myself and have seen the results of what we called "mushin" or "no mind" basically the application of a physical technique via the subconscious mind. A few decades ago a man by the name of (sp?) Tim Galloway applied it to a teaching method for tennis. He called it "The Inner Game of Tennis'. It was quite popular and improved the game of many players. There is much the human brain/body interface is capable of, BUT and it is important, that "individuality" I spoke of is the biggest factor. Different people learn and perform better in different ways and with different mindsets, that is what helps us keep our individuality. The old saying "there is more than one way to skin a cat" is quite true. It is much like what is often talked about with "type "A" and type "B" " personalities.

If you really do some research and read the dozens of articles about Bill Jordan, you wil noyice how observers and interviewers remarked that he was utterly calm and showed nothing more that a change of expression when he did his demonstrations. almost no sign of physical strain,save for the muscles in his hand and arm.

Other shooters of note perform well when they are "keyed up" like an overwound spring.

There is more than one way to put holes where you want them on a target you chose. As the Bard said, "There are far more things in Heaven and Earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy.". We should be thankful for that. I helps us retain our individuality.

As to the actual mechanics of speed vs accuracy, I shouldn't think that the concepts are mutually and always exclusive given what people know IS possible in accuracy, and what accept in the name of speed. I think some individual wiggle room just might exist. I know my wife is a good example. She inevitably does as well DA against the clock @ 25 yds with full house .357 loads, as she does with more "casual" or non existent, timing and .38 spl rounds. It's a "getting into the rythm" thing for her. Me? I'm such a lousy shot it's laughable.
That is a beautiful post. Good stuff, countrygun.
TSiWRX is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-25-2012, 18:09   #29
ithaca_deerslayer
Senior Member
 
ithaca_deerslayer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Upstate NY, USA
Posts: 19,867
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhoenixTacSolutions View Post
You are quite right Sir! As I don't have the time to manage my threads, this will be my last post.
Interesting that time and the ability to control are at odds with each other.

Where have I seen that conflict before
ithaca_deerslayer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-25-2012, 18:54   #30
PhoenixTacSolutions
PTS
 
PhoenixTacSolutions's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 131
Despite working 6 days a week and having a family (2 kids), I'll bite.

I think my post is very clear.

I see MANY new shooters lined up on the 3 yard line just throwing rounds at the target without having fundamentals in place and the ability to properly run the gun. What does this accomplish other than catering to the person's ego? Just barely making it into thoracic from 3 yards while training is not an art. Speed for the sake of speed without having proper fundamentals is counterproductive.

If shooter A can put 2 rounds into a 2" group from 3 yards in 1.2 seconds and shooter B puts 2 rounds in a 12" group in the same time who has the advantage when in a defensive shooting situation. Shooter A clearly has a better command of his pistol and shooting fundamentals.

There is always the possibility that shots will open up in a defensive shooting scenario...hence tighter groups while training is an asset.

There are those who say you can't have good accuracy and speed. I disagree. I'm not talking pin point accuracy at speed...but relatively tight groups...assuming your fundamentals are in place.

Combat accuracy certainly has a place...combat and defensive shootings.



Quote:
Originally Posted by ithaca_deerslayer View Post
Interesting that time and the ability to control are at odds with each other.

Where have I seen that conflict before
PhoenixTacSolutions is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-25-2012, 19:13   #31
Gallium
CLM Number 182
Charter Lifetime Member
 
Gallium's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 47,557


Quote:
Originally Posted by PhoenixTacSolutions View Post
Despite working 6 days a week and having a family (2 kids), I'll bite.

I think my post is very clear.

I see MANY new shooters lined up on the 3 yard line just throwing rounds at the target without having fundamentals in place and the ability to properly run the gun. What does this accomplish other than catering to the person's ego? Just barely making it into thoracic from 3 yards while training is not an art. Speed for the sake of speed without having proper fundamentals is counterproductive.

If shooter A can put 2 rounds into a 2" group from 3 yards in 1.2 seconds and shooter B puts 2 rounds in a 12" group in the same time who has the advantage when in a defensive shooting situation. Shooter A clearly has a better command of his pistol and shooting fundamentals.

There is always the possibility that shots will open up in a defensive shooting scenario...hence tighter groups while training is an asset.

There are those who say you can't have good accuracy and speed. I disagree. I'm not talking pin point accuracy at speed...but relatively tight groups...assuming your fundamentals are in place.

Combat accuracy certainly has a place...combat and defensive shootings.

PTS,

I much enjoyed your thread starter. I also humbly submit that Ithaca Deerslayer is comparing your comment with regards to being able to "manage" this thread to your very subject matter. While I have never seen him shoot, I am firm in the belief that he has a solid grasp on shooting fundamentals.

- G
Gallium is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-25-2012, 19:45   #32
ithaca_deerslayer
Senior Member
 
ithaca_deerslayer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Upstate NY, USA
Posts: 19,867
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhoenixTacSolutions View Post
If shooter A can put 2 rounds into a 2" group from 3 yards in 1.2 seconds and shooter B puts 2 rounds in a 12" group in the same time who has the advantage when in a defensive shooting situation. Shooter A clearly has a better command of his pistol and shooting fundamentals.
.
I do agree.

Thanks for clarifying.
ithaca_deerslayer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-26-2012, 07:04   #33
Ajfb004
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 16
The way I was trained is to have multiple hits in about a 5 inch area of the upper chest area . The theory is that the body responds to bullet impacts at that distance as if they are separate wounds close shot placement the body will perceive as a single wound. The end goal being hemmorahic shock and resulting organ failure. That is what offers the highest survive ability rate for us as gunfighters. It also is consistent with the fact that gunfights are lost or won in fractions of a second.

Train to survive
Ajfb004 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-26-2012, 07:12   #34
Gallium
CLM Number 182
Charter Lifetime Member
 
Gallium's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 47,557


Quote:
Originally Posted by Ajfb004 View Post
The way I was trained is to have multiple hits in about a 5 inch area of the upper chest area . The theory is that the body responds to bullet impacts at that distance as if they are separate wounds close shot placement the body will perceive as a single wound. The end goal being hemorrhagic shock and resulting organ failure. That is what offers the highest survive ability rate for us as gunfighters. It also is consistent with the fact that gunfights are lost or won in fractions of a second.

Train to survive
The body needs oxygen and glucose as fuel/energy. The ultimate goal is to disrupt the major organs in that process of getting oxygen thru the system,

or,

disrupt the computer that synchronizes this activity

or,

disrupt the motors that allow a threat to be affected against you.

or last, where the simple psychological impact of an attack being repelled renders your assailant mentally incapable of commanding and co-ordinating his systems to act against you.
Gallium is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-26-2012, 07:45   #35
Ajfb004
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gallium View Post
The body needs oxygen and glucose as fuel/energy. The ultimate goal is to disrupt the major organs in that process of getting oxygen thru the system,

or,

disrupt the computer that synchronizes this activity

or,

disrupt the motors that allow a threat to be affected against you.

or last, where the simple psychological impact of an attack being repelled renders your assailant mentally incapable of commanding and co-ordinating his systems to act against you.


I just finished a carbine class where we talked about shutting off the computer. The instructors called it "giving them one in the running lights" The way our discussion went was head shots are great if that's all you have of the target. I was asked if I could reasonably come online adjust for my holdover if closer than 50 meters and get off a head shot faster than I could come chest high and squeeze off 5 rounds within that same 5-8 inch circle. Doing that a couple times really convinced me that their method was more effective for me.

I'm sure that there are some guys out there who can operate differently but with my skillset this seems to work pretty good
Ajfb004 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-26-2012, 10:12   #36
PhoenixTacSolutions
PTS
 
PhoenixTacSolutions's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 131
Bear in mind that your shots may/will open up under adrenaline dump. Do you over/under compensate to achieve a 5" group? In other words, do you intentionally guarantee a 5" group?

Just when I thought I was out...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ajfb004 View Post
The way I was trained is to have multiple hits in about a 5 inch area of the upper chest area . The theory is that the body responds to bullet impacts at that distance as if they are separate wounds close shot placement the body will perceive as a single wound. The end goal being hemmorahic shock and resulting organ failure. That is what offers the highest survive ability rate for us as gunfighters. It also is consistent with the fact that gunfights are lost or won in fractions of a second.

Train to survive

Last edited by PhoenixTacSolutions; 10-26-2012 at 10:15..
PhoenixTacSolutions is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-26-2012, 12:57   #37
Ajfb004
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 16
[QUOTE=PhoenixTacSolutions;19558091]Bear in mind that your shots may/will open up under adrenaline dump. Do you over/under compensate to achieve a 5" group? In other words, do you intentionally guarantee a 5" group?

Just when I thought I was out...[/QUOTE


Lol
It's not a measured pattern or intentionally aimed that way . It's more a cadence of shots from the holster in rapid succession until the threat is eliminated. 5 inches is just the measured acceptable size for whatever reason. From the discussion I gathered it has a lot to. do with the distance where the major organs are in the chest.
Ajfb004 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-26-2012, 13:30   #38
countrygun
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 17,068
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhoenixTacSolutions View Post
Bear in mind that your shots may/will open up under adrenaline dump. Do you over/under compensate to achieve a 5" group? In other words, do you intentionally guarantee a 5" group?

Just when I thought I was out...
Sort of one of my great puzzlements.

Folks settle for a 5" group at 7-10 yds and say "good enough for combat" yet hardly anyone denies that under stress groups may double, so they are saying that they expect 10" groups to save their lives? that is setting the bar pretty low when your life is at stake.
countrygun is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-26-2012, 14:10   #39
Ajfb004
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 16
Quote:
Originally Posted by countrygun View Post
Sort of one of my great puzzlements.

Folks settle for a 5" group at 7-10 yds and say "good enough for combat" yet hardly anyone denies that under stress groups may double, so they are saying that they expect 10" groups to save their lives? that is setting the bar pretty low when your life is at stake.
Maybe I'm not explaining it right. I'm not talking about marksmanship or just target shooting. For carbine we were running 5 shot groups in 2 sec from low ready then the same drill doing 3 shots in 2 sec from the holster as a transition drill. We're not settling for 5 inch groups during these drills. I would say that more than 80 % of the officers shoot expert or distinguished so grouping size is not a concern for punching paper. The goal is to get the shooter up to the point that multiple hits Han be made in areas that will rapidly incapacitate a suspect or threat twice a year while going through qualification it's taught that gunfights are won in fractions of seconds. The question is then posed do you train for fast multiple lethal hits on target or train for precision shots. Efficiency of action or time Nd equity of shots.

They are two different philosophies but in order to do what we are training you firs have to master basic marksmanship and shooting fundamentals
Ajfb004 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-26-2012, 14:36   #40
countrygun
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 17,068
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ajfb004 View Post
Maybe I'm not explaining it right. I'm not talking about marksmanship or just target shooting. For carbine we were running 5 shot groups in 2 sec from low ready then the same drill doing 3 shots in 2 sec from the holster as a transition drill. We're not settling for 5 inch groups during these drills. I would say that more than 80 % of the officers shoot expert or distinguished so grouping size is not a concern for punching paper. The goal is to get the shooter up to the point that multiple hits Han be made in areas that will rapidly incapacitate a suspect or threat twice a year while going through qualification it's taught that gunfights are won in fractions of seconds. The question is then posed do you train for fast multiple lethal hits on target or train for precision shots. Efficiency of action or time Nd equity of shots.

They are two different philosophies but in order to do what we are training you firs have to master basic marksmanship and shooting fundamentals
I was disagreeing, just making an observation about some of the theories I have heard. Obviously my post makes a case for improved marksmanship
countrygun is offline   Reply With Quote

 
  
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump




All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:45.




Homepage
FAQ
Forums
Calendar
Advertise
Gallery
GT Wiki
GT Blogs
Social Groups
Classifieds


Users Currently Online: 903
244 Members
659 Guests

Most users ever online: 2,672
Aug 11, 2014 at 2:31