Realistic Pistol Capability

Training questions, approaches and reports

Moderator: ZS Global Moderators

praharin
* * * * *
Posts: 2428
Joined: Wed Jun 20, 2007 5:11 pm
Location: pennsylvania

Re: Realistic Pistol Capability

Post by praharin » Thu Feb 12, 2015 3:11 pm

Honestly, I just wanted to share my story. To be fair, he could usually have any shooter adjust their grip or trigger engagement a bit and be on enough to qualify.
Biggin wrote:praharin can be an insufferable dick

Doctorr Fabulous
ZS Lifetime Member
ZS Lifetime Member
Posts: 12210
Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2009 3:06 pm
Favorite Zombie Movies: Evil Dead, Zombieland, 28 Days/Weeks Later

Re: Realistic Pistol Capability

Post by Doctorr Fabulous » Thu Feb 12, 2015 3:43 pm

LJ126 wrote:
praharin wrote:
LJ126 wrote: Well, this is all fine and dandy if your aim is spot-on. But if your aim (sight/bore alignment) leaves something to be desired, that pistol trigger correction mini-guide might just begin a wild goose chase of epic magnitude.

If you're shooting all over the place, it's probably not your trigger squeeze or grip. It's probably your aiming. And maybe your trigger squeeze and grip are jacked up, too.

If you're shooting a super-tight group, and it's all in one direction, then maybe it's trigger-related.

If your "stuff" is good but your groups are off, adjust the sights.

Howdy all. I was a pistol coach in the Corps for a while (02-03). The Range Master (Can't remember his name now, we called him Gunny) would disagree. With literally any M9 I ever saw on the line that man could shoot it dead center first shot every time. Countless times a Marine would ask him to adjust his sights because the pistol was off. He would take the pistol, use one of his magazines and proceed to put 5-10 rounds into the center. One day he must have been feeling particularly froggy, because he literally shot a smiley face on a 2nd LT's target at 7 yards. I don't expect anyone to believe this, I wouldn't myself if I hadn't seen it. But no shit, there I was...

Perhaps the Beretta's sights are aligned properly at the factory.
You see, the Range Master isn't the one who has to carry the weapon. It's fantastic that he can do that, but it accomplishes nothing for the end user.

If someone consistently, without fail shoots solid, tight groups that happens to be out of the center ring, with a comfortable, easily attained grip (for them) on the weapon, why is it plausible that we suggest that the person CHANGE THEMSELVES to fit the weapon?? If the user's fundamentals are reasonable, and that specific handgun shoots off-center for them, adjusting the sights a just a tiny bit is easier and more consistent than attempting to retrain someone to do something that is unnatural for them.

I'm of the mindset that we work with our natural reactions; the ones that have evolved for millions of years to increase survivability. When the adrenaline is pumping, you're not going to think about your trigger finger much at all - and that's a good thing. However, if every time we shoot we have to make a point to consciously engage our trigger finger in a specific, unnatural placement, how does this correlate with our natural reactions under stress? Sure, you can retrain... and maybe make the unnatural natural...
Because M9s don't have adjustable sights, and neither do many of the lower-end handguns. For some people, moving the sight works. Other times, changing the shooter might be the answer. Situation dictates.
Opinions subject to change in light of new information.
Image
http://i.imgur.com/wG6ZMjE.jpg

User avatar
LJ126
* *
Posts: 264
Joined: Wed Mar 07, 2012 7:16 pm
Favorite Zombie Movies: Dawn of the Dead (both), Shaun of the Dead, Wild Zero, 28 Days/Weeks, The Crazies, The Reanimator, etc. I love 'em all!
Location: Saint Louis, MO
Contact:

Re: Realistic Pistol Capability

Post by LJ126 » Thu Feb 12, 2015 5:32 pm

I did not know that about the M9. I was very aware that many less expensive, and sub-compacts, often do not have adjustable sights; it's a lot of the reason why I'm not a big fan of little pistols. You know, other than all of the other stuff that is problematic with little pistols.

A lot of correction can be made by simply drifting the rear sight unit left or right, when that's an option.
...As the great warrior poet O'Shea "Ice Cube" Jackson, Sr. once said, "If the day does not require an AK, it is good."

Doctorr Fabulous
ZS Lifetime Member
ZS Lifetime Member
Posts: 12210
Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2009 3:06 pm
Favorite Zombie Movies: Evil Dead, Zombieland, 28 Days/Weeks Later

Re: Realistic Pistol Capability

Post by Doctorr Fabulous » Thu Feb 12, 2015 5:45 pm

Adjustable sights on combat handguns is a relatively new phenomenon, unless you count bending front blades as adjustment. Hell, even Glocks require a special tool that costs big bucks to move the rear sight, and elevation adjustment is out of the question unless you get target sights. I find it easier to adjust POA most times. HK, I put the dot on the target between the topos of the rear sight, Glocks I generally Aim at the lower-jaw and hit the top of the A-zone/whatever you want to call it with the sights lined up straight.
Opinions subject to change in light of new information.
Image
http://i.imgur.com/wG6ZMjE.jpg

User avatar
LJ126
* *
Posts: 264
Joined: Wed Mar 07, 2012 7:16 pm
Favorite Zombie Movies: Dawn of the Dead (both), Shaun of the Dead, Wild Zero, 28 Days/Weeks, The Crazies, The Reanimator, etc. I love 'em all!
Location: Saint Louis, MO
Contact:

Re: Realistic Pistol Capability

Post by LJ126 » Thu Feb 12, 2015 6:21 pm

Indeed, sight pushers are expensive, but the adjustment by a range gunsmith isn't.

I've found that with all of the full-sized Glocks, I consistently shoot 9:00 left. At 7 yards, it's only about an inch left of POA. At 25, it's about 4-5 inches. It's enough that I opted to have my sights drifted, given it's my duty weapon and primary CCW.

However, with full-sized 1911-type handguns, I don't have this issue. I don't know why. It's generally ~POA-POI. Same with my revolvers. It's very weird.
...As the great warrior poet O'Shea "Ice Cube" Jackson, Sr. once said, "If the day does not require an AK, it is good."

zero11010
* * *
Posts: 586
Joined: Mon Jul 14, 2014 4:24 pm

Re: Realistic Pistol Capability

Post by zero11010 » Thu Feb 12, 2015 7:22 pm

LJ126 wrote:Indeed, sight pushers are expensive, but the adjustment by a range gunsmith isn't.

I've found that with all of the full-sized Glocks, I consistently shoot 9:00 left. At 7 yards, it's only about an inch left of POA. At 25, it's about 4-5 inches. It's enough that I opted to have my sights drifted, given it's my duty weapon and primary CCW.

However, with full-sized 1911-type handguns, I don't have this issue. I don't know why. It's generally ~POA-POI. Same with my revolvers. It's very weird.

Just parroting the info I hear everywhere ...

The issue happening with your trigger finger and the manipulation of the trigger, not your sights. I'm assuming you're right handed. It's very common for right handed shooters to shoot to the left (and often a little low, it's awesome that you don't have the second part).

The trigger on a 1911 is very different than the trigger on a glock. They feel different. They behave differently. When you're pulling the glock's trigger you're likely moving the gun ever so slightly. I spend a bit of time with an XD (similar trigger to your glock) and with a 1911. They're both fine weapons, but you have to treat each as individuals (like driving aggressively with front wheel drive vs rear wheel drive vs all wheel drive).

4-5 inches at 25 yards is still great. You sound like a fine shot, you just need to focus on the fundamentals with the glock and you'll be as effective with it as you are with everything else. I'm a big fan of snap caps to help diagnose shooting issues. Place them in with live ammo when you're at the range. Make a point of not knowing where in the magazine it is (for example set up two mags with a couple snap caps in each and make a point of not knowing which has been placed in your weapon). When you're focused on your front sight you may see it moving slightly when you squeeze the trigger and it goes click on a snap cap instead of going bang on a live round.

User avatar
LJ126
* *
Posts: 264
Joined: Wed Mar 07, 2012 7:16 pm
Favorite Zombie Movies: Dawn of the Dead (both), Shaun of the Dead, Wild Zero, 28 Days/Weeks, The Crazies, The Reanimator, etc. I love 'em all!
Location: Saint Louis, MO
Contact:

Re: Realistic Pistol Capability

Post by LJ126 » Thu Feb 12, 2015 7:51 pm

zero11010 wrote:
LJ126 wrote:Indeed, sight pushers are expensive, but the adjustment by a range gunsmith isn't.

I've found that with all of the full-sized Glocks, I consistently shoot 9:00 left. At 7 yards, it's only about an inch left of POA. At 25, it's about 4-5 inches. It's enough that I opted to have my sights drifted, given it's my duty weapon and primary CCW.

However, with full-sized 1911-type handguns, I don't have this issue. I don't know why. It's generally ~POA-POI. Same with my revolvers. It's very weird.

Just parroting the info I hear everywhere ...

The issue happening with your trigger finger and the manipulation of the trigger, not your sights. I'm assuming you're right handed. It's very common for right handed shooters to shoot to the left (and often a little low, it's awesome that you don't have the second part).

The trigger on a 1911 is very different than the trigger on a glock. They feel different. They behave differently. When you're pulling the glock's trigger you're likely moving the gun ever so slightly. I spend a bit of time with an XD (similar trigger to your glock) and with a 1911. They're both fine weapons, but you have to treat each as individuals (like driving aggressively with front wheel drive vs rear wheel drive vs all wheel drive).

4-5 inches at 25 yards is still great. You sound like a fine shot, you just need to focus on the fundamentals with the glock and you'll be as effective with it as you are with everything else. I'm a big fan of snap caps to help diagnose shooting issues. Place them in with live ammo when you're at the range. Make a point of not knowing where in the magazine it is (for example set up two mags with a couple snap caps in each and make a point of not knowing which has been placed in your weapon). When you're focused on your front sight you may see it moving slightly when you squeeze the trigger and it goes click on a snap cap instead of going bang on a live round.
Oddly enough, having my sights drifted a very slightly resolved the issue. It's a non-issue now. My Glock 17 has since been POA=POI after the adjustment.
...As the great warrior poet O'Shea "Ice Cube" Jackson, Sr. once said, "If the day does not require an AK, it is good."

Snyper708
* *
Posts: 106
Joined: Thu Sep 12, 2013 1:29 am
Location: North Carolina

Re: Realistic Pistol Capability

Post by Snyper708 » Sat Mar 07, 2015 5:30 pm

why is it plausible that we suggest that the person CHANGE THEMSELVES to fit the weapon?
Because it they are not hitting where they intend to hit, it's not the weapon that needs changing.

User avatar
procyon
* * * * *
Posts: 1101
Joined: Sat May 18, 2013 5:56 am
Location: Iowa, USA

Re: Realistic Pistol Capability

Post by procyon » Sat Mar 07, 2015 5:49 pm

Snyper708 wrote:
why is it plausible that we suggest that the person CHANGE THEMSELVES to fit the weapon?
Because it they are not hitting where they intend to hit, it's not the weapon that needs changing.
You're kind of cherry picking the post.
And that isn't always true.
If it were true, there would be no change in the POI when I go from .38 Spl to .357 Mag.
LJ126 wrote:If someone consistently, without fail shoots solid, tight groups that happens to be out of the center ring, with a comfortable, easily attained grip (for them) on the weapon, why is it plausible that we suggest that the person CHANGE THEMSELVES to fit the weapon?? If the user's fundamentals are reasonable, and that specific handgun shoots off-center for them, adjusting the sights a just a tiny bit is easier and more consistent than attempting to retrain someone to do something that is unnatural for them.
If the shooter is doing what they are supposed to do, consistently and getting good groups - you aren't doing them any favors trying to change how they shoot unless they have a real issue that will IMPROVE their shooting.
Messing with a good shooter, just to change their POI isn't improvement and isn't likely to help them become a better shot.
If they are not performing the fundamentals correctly - that is a different issue.
... I will show you fear in a handful of dust...

User avatar
procyon
* * * * *
Posts: 1101
Joined: Sat May 18, 2013 5:56 am
Location: Iowa, USA

Re: Realistic Pistol Capability

Post by procyon » Mon Mar 09, 2015 9:22 am

tonydedo25 wrote:Accuracy is relative. Do you want to be precise, or do you want to be effective?
Not to be snarky, but you say that like they are mutually exclusive. They aren't.
If you're talking about defensive shooting, you want to be effective, not precise. A 3" bullseye target is irrelevant for your purposes. Hitting 2" left of center is an imprecise miss on a bullseye target, but a perfectly effective hit on a defensive target.
Agreed. And if that is your only concern, then it would be acceptable.
Precision is also a waste of time. I have a friend who used to brag about how great with a gun he was. He took me to the range and showed me how he could put 10 shots in the bullseye at 25m. Then I showed him how I could put 10 shots into 10 different 6" targets at various heights and ranges, and it took me 1/4 the time...
This is where I will disagree.
To me, and most folks where I live - precision if FAR more valuable.

If you only plan to use your handgun for self defense at close range - then ok, it isn't a huge deal. But how often have you done that?

Where I live, many folks use their handguns to hunt deer with. Drilling the bullseye every time at 25m translates to a clean kill at 75. Rapidly hitting a 6" target at 25m - not so much.
I dispatch a rather large number of critters on my farm. Sometimes I have no other weapon available than a handgun (I would much rather use a rifle or shotgun, as I am not an amazing handgun shot). Precisely hitting a small moving target is far more valuable to me than rapidly throwing a bunch of lead in it's direction. Rapid follow up shots are important, but not at the expense of accuracy.

So to be clear, I am not disputing that being able to rapidly engage a target at defensive ranges isn't valuable. It most certainly is.

But is it more practical? At least in my area - no, it isn't.
... I will show you fear in a handful of dust...

User avatar
crypto
ZS Donor
ZS Donor
Posts: 16637
Joined: Sun Oct 08, 2006 7:37 pm
Location: City of Saint Louis

Re: Realistic Pistol Capability

Post by crypto » Mon Mar 09, 2015 9:28 am

Doctorr Fabulous wrote: Hell, even Glocks require a special tool that costs big bucks to move the rear sight, and elevation adjustment is out of the question unless you get target sights.

Any sight that fits in a dovetail joint is adjustable, going back to the 1911. You can use a sight pusher (the right way), or you can use a brass or aluminum drift punch and a hammer (the cheap way).

The only semi-auto pistols I know of that have completely non-adjustable sights are the little pocket guns like the Kel-tecs and their clones that have the rear sight machined directly into the slide.
MF'N TEAM LEADER

"Some people think that the best way to stop the leopard is to cut the horns off the gazelle. This, my friends, is insane."

Image
Image

User avatar
ZomCon Sargeant
ZS Member
ZS Member
Posts: 234
Joined: Fri Nov 25, 2011 11:16 pm
Favorite Zombie Movies: Dawn of the Dead (1978), Dead Snow, Fido, Night of the Living Dead (1968 & 1989), Day of the Dead, Zombieland, 28 Days Later, Return of the living Dead, and Shaun of the Dead.
Location: Pig's Eye MN
Contact:

Re: Realistic Pistol Capability

Post by ZomCon Sargeant » Sun May 31, 2015 9:17 pm

Dioxin wrote:
ZomCon Sargeant wrote:When shooting my Smith & Wesson M&P9c at that same distance (7 yards) 40% of rounds fired hit low/low left at about 4-5 inches left and 2-3 inches low. I know that it has to do with the gritty trigger pull and unpredictable trigger break on the M&P9c and my own shooting.
ok lets assume its 4 inches left and 3 inches low, this means a diagonal POI shift of 5 inches at 7 yards.

that works out as 6 feet at 100 yards :ohdear:
Either you or the pistol needs fixed!

It sounds like there is something wrong with your shooting form.
At 25m some of your shots will miss centre mass.

I'd recommend working on;
Natural Point of aim
Smooth Trigger operation
Consistant Sight Picture

its likely one of these 3 is the culprit.
While not claiming to be anything of an expert I have to state the following:
Having shot and owned several different handguns over a period of 18+ years I say it is more of the horrific factory trigger of the S&W M&P than my shooting skills which is why I got the results I did with my old M&P9c. That is the only handgun I ever owned, let alone shot, that I got such results. Granted I am sure some of it was due to my shooting as I stated I am no expert marksmen however I strongly believe it was due to the trigger. Now if I would have installed an APEX Trigger job I am sure my groups would have been much much tighter (Like with every other handgun I have ever shot). Don't take me wrong I believe the M&P line of pistols are great guns (with not so great factory triggers).

I take no offense and realize that you were only trying to help. Some of it may have had to due with Smooth Trigger Operation I'll admit.
Thanks for the advice!
"ZomCon: A better life through containment"

Post Reply

Return to “Training”