Rules for gunfighting

[BoarSpear]

Kind of off topic, but I'm in the market for a gun. I really like the 45 Kimber (sp) but I cant' afford 1300 for a gun. Any suggestions?

Find a Sig

[BoarSpear]

.....Cover?

that and the fact that the prone gentleman with the nice blue tape on his mags has the spring from his mag hanging out


as for hardballs comment on their aim....those two had the best form evident.

[Tant01]

If one round in a thousand hits home then there's still a lot of dead or wounded by the number of spent cartridges lying around...

makes me sick that this kinda terrorism goes unchecked when a handfull of pro's could fix the problem!


I was always fond of rule 23 myself.

[Hardball]

If price is a concern, but you still want a really high quality gun, check into the Springfield XD. I bought mine new for $400, and I think they've only gone up in price by about $50 or $60 by now. They're very well made, and someone recently did a test on them that parallelled the infamous Glock Torture Test where they freeze the gun, dunk it in mud, drop it in sand, run over it with a car, park a truck on it overnight, and then try to fire it after each "evolution." With the Glock, they fired 100 rounds after each. This guy fired 1000 after each, I think. The Springfield didn't stop once. It worked flawlessly, even with all the junk and torture. Plus, they seem to be very accurate guns. I've put maybe 2000 rounds through mine (it's not my main carry gun) and it shoots nearly as tight as my Sig (although not quite). For the pricetag, I don't know of a better value anywhere.

What do you think about S&W 9mm's?

[Hardball]

If you guys aren't worried about buying online check out www.singleactionshootingsociety.com. You have to register, it's free. Then check out their message boards/forumn. Plenty of rare trade pieces and new pieces also.

My name is Hardball and I'm a Gunaholic.

[fayd]

Great post ...the rules are funny and true and the pics speak for themselves.

Medic: see if any ranges/dealers near you rent guns. The best thing you can do is fire several different types to see what you like ...there is no one firearm for everyone or every situation. Personally, I like my 1911 Kimber, but you can't beat the reliability of the Glock. We had one with over 15,000 rounds fried and the only maintenance we did was to wipe down the feed ramp every so often ...not one weapon related malfunction.

Train well...

[Hardball]

Mike B., What do you think about the Baretta hand guns?

[Hardball]

I shoot at an outdoor range with 25,50,100,200 yard targets. Anybody here have any success at 100 & 200 without a scope? Iron sights only.

Boar or Mike, what do you think of the M1 Carbine at 50+ yards?

[Hardball]

As far as the M-1 is concerned, I think the criticisms of it as a battle rifle are well-founded. Like the M16 series, it's designed to be an intermediate caliber weapon. In the case of the M-1 Carbine, it's literally a pistol cartidge. It's great for room clearing and similar endeavors, but you have to be aware that the energy developed by a relatively slow .30 cal round won't be nearly as impressive as what you get from a true .30 cal (7.62 mm) battle rifle. In other words, much like the M4, you'll be able to hit targets at much greater ranges than you could effectively stop a person. .

Are there any other major criticisims of the m-1 carbine that you did not mention?

Above 200 meters you seem to be saying it's important to have a large target (2 foot by 3 foot) if I am using iron sights, can you personally hit basic NRA style round paper targets at 400 meters(designed for 100 yards) or is it a waste of time without a scope? I'm 48 and my eyesight is getting bad, do you think I would have better success using a large human shaped target for 100 to 200 yards. Using a M1, 30.30, or similar 30 caliber carbine or rifle.

Dang, does this question make sense yet. LOL

[Hardball]

Yea that helps a lot. It's the "Mastermind principle"; when I find an expert at a given field I like to pick his brain. Thanks, I think I need bigger targets for my 100+ shooting. Now, if you dont mind,...I hope you dont because you seem to be knowlegeable about marksmanship.

Topic: Rapid fire with a semi auto. What is the principle? The cops seem to live by rapid fire. Are they actually aiming everyshot or are they aiming at an area? How does one become an accurate rapid fire shooter with a semi auto? The ranges in maryland do not alow rapid fire thus not really a way to practice.

[BoarSpear]

Topic: Rapid fire with a semi auto. What is the principle? The cops seem to live by rapid fire. Are they actually aiming everyshot or are they aiming at an area? How does one become an accurate rapid fire shooter with a semi auto? The ranges in maryland do not alow rapid fire thus not really a way to practice.

The police are generally not the best of shots I damn sure wouldnt set ANY of my own standards as low as the police. just look at the AVERAGE police shootout ....pros are known for how little ammo they expend, not how much ammo they can expend. ....ever heard the saying "fast is slow, slow is fast"? Its golden....if you take the extra second to place the first shot where it counts you will be "faster" than if you squeeze off multiple shots that put holes in everything else in sight before finding their mark.

[Hardball]

In my experience, there are three major factors in how well you'll be able to shoot quickly. They are, in no particular order:

1. Fundamental marksmanship Techniques (the stuff we just covered)
2. Confidence / Focus
3. Controlling recoil with good position and timing

The first, we've covered to death. Confidence and focus should also be pretty obvious. Know what you want to accomplish, and devote yourself to smoothly executing what you already know how to do - just do it faster.

The big issue for a lot of people who are good shots when they take their time but fall apart when they speed up is item #3. A lot of shooters try hard to lock everything in place and keep their pistol or rifle from moving at all. It won't happen, so they get tired trying to fight their tools all the time. Then, they get sloppy with their form and the weapon literally runs away from them. They have no control over it, and they end up just trying to bring it back on target from wherever it wandered off to. One method for solving it is this:

Structurally limit the direction your weapon will recoil through body position. With a pistol, I tend to push the gun out until my shoulders lock into place (no bend in my elbows). My wrists are strong, and I lock them in place without undue stress. My grip keeps the pistol from turning excessively, so the gun pretty much recoils back and straight upward, and only a little bit. With my rifle, I have a forward grip, so both of my elbows are in (important when going through doorways and the like). This allows my body to act as a support, so I don't get tired as easily. The grip also allows me to both support the weapon and pull it into my shoulder with my front hand. This seems to make my trigger hand a lot more relaxed, and it keeps the recoil way, way down. I can literally fire and keep my eye on target the whole time the shot is travelling downrange. In other words, the recoil is so minimal that I don't even lose the target in the sights. So the first element is positioning yourself well. Be balanced, be solid, and get into your gun with some of your body weight so it doesn't throw you around.

As for timing, think of dribbling a basketball. There's a moment when you dribble where the ball seems to stop right at the top of the bounce. At that moment, your hand meets it and sends it back down under control, right? If you just let it bounce, it would keep bouncing lower and lower each time, so you give it just enough "oomph" to keep the bounce consistent. Same with your front sight during recoil. If you look down the sights and practice until you can keep your eye open throughout the shot and the follow-through, you'll notice that your sight will "bounce" and then settle back roughly to where you started (assuming you have good positioning). It will not come directly back to the start point, but the start point will be part of the arc. The "art" to rapid follow-up shots is timing your trigger squeeze process with that bounce, just like you time your hand to meet a basketball. You want to shoot, watch the sight bounce off target, and then time your trigger squeeze to coincide with the moment that the sight "bounces" back down from its recoil and back onto the target again. Wait too long, and your follow-up is in the dirt. Go too soon, and you shoot over the top. If your position is bad, you'll heel or squeeze to the left or right. Once everything meshes, you'll start to develop a rhythm based on how well you control the recoil, and you'll be able to squeeze another shot off with each bounce. If you have great control and the weapon doesn't bounce very much, then your follow-ups will be a lot faster. Some points to remember:

1. At first, you'll likely have a decent first shot, and then throw your second shot into the vast unknown. Get closer, hold tighter, and go slower. When your shots basically form a vertical line (no matter how big), then you're ready to progress. if you're chucking them left or right, fix your position.

2. Rifling (the twist in the barrel) adds torque to the recoil of the gun. If left on their own, most (okay, all) rifles without specifically designed muzzle brakes will not only recoil up, but also in the opposite direction of their rifling (equal and opposite reaction, right?). So "felt recoil" is actually more of a diagonal than vertical line. You have to adjust your position to account for this diagonal flip. Make the rifle move up and down, but not side to side. It'll never be perfect, but you can get it close.

3. Once you really start getting the hang of things, you'll be able to open both eyes and literally watch the bounce of the gun more than the other factors. A good rule is that when you can put a controlled pair (double-tap) into a 4" square at 15 meters, you can start speeding things up. The thing rookies do more often than any other mistake is that they assume a quick trigger time equates to fast double-taps. The trigger squeeze has to coincide with the bounce of the gun, or else you're just throwing shots up high more quickly than before. The way to create speed is to create control of the weapon. You can use muscle in a pinch, but good position and technique are far better. Reduce the bounce during recoil, and you speed up your shots. Time the shot with the bounce better, and you increase accuracy. In other words (and to re-use an oft-abused quote), smooth is fast.

A good way to start is by loading just one round in your rifle. Shoot at the target, and then dry fire when you see the correct sight picture during the bounce of the recoil. When you tune your awareness up so that you can take that mental snapshot of exactly where your sights were on the second shot, drop in a second round and do it again. SLow and controlled at first, then add speed as skill improves.

The guys I shoot with most often are pretty much up to a level where I'd say they could compete with any Spec Ops team going. Most of these guys will put multiple double taps at multiple ranges on 3"x5" index cards while moving laterally, diagonally, or in and out at any range out to 25 meters. At CQB distances (out to 25 meters) we often shoot at Altoid mints with regular single shot hits. We've done some drills where we use the 2" square post-it notes and went 200 and something rounds before someone missed the post-it. That comes from lots and lots and lots and lots of rounds, though. Most of these guys are cops, and the ones who aren't are former Special Forces folks, so they've developed their considerable abilities on your tax dollar. (Thanks, by the way) I know I shot 3000 rounds through my M4 (the civilian one) before I really felt smooth with this stuff, and I had a coach right there with me. It also bears mentioning that this initial 3000 rounds was all shot up in two weeks, so I was spending a lot of dedicated time on the range doing the same drill over and over. The point I'm trying to make with that story is that it takes a lot of time and focus to get good, and even when you're doing really well, a 3" by 5" group is considered outstanding in most circles.

You really are giving me a workout trying to put all this stuff into words, but it's good, so any further questions are welcome.

Mike

Man that was a great explanation. I always thought there was a principle in rapid fire shooting. I knew it had to be more than just practice. I am a sharpshooter with a Pistol and rifle but never tried my hand at rapid fire. The basketball analogy was great, I am going to revisit this thread several times before my next trip to the firearms range.

[medic06]

Actually, Springfield's XD DID beat Glock for reliability. But they're both solid guns. I'm not a big fan of either Smith and Wesson or the 9mm round, so I'm maybe the wrong guy to ask about these. I don't feel the 9mm is a very good man-stopping round (and those sentiments are echoed by nearly every study out there, and in the feedback of soldiers who have to carry it), and I think the S&W semi-autos are over-engineered for the caliber they carry. They're bulky, heavy, and in my book, have far too many safety features to be a useful carry gun. I mean, I know the litigation craze in this society, and I respect why they make things the way they do, but if I need my gun in a hurry, I want it to work in a hurry. S&W semi's don't work without a mag in the well (a safety feature designed to keep cops from getting shot with their own guns, but one that also leads to horrible silence if you don't seat your magazines well enough, or if you run dry and need to exercise the option to single feed your rounds - God forbid), they tend to be more complex in take-down and cleaning, and they're a little sloppy on the trigger out of the box. I went with the Sig because it's ultra reliable (I put over 75,000 rounds through my last P229 and had a grand total of three malfunctions the entire time I owned it - all due to underpowered handloads), it's super-accurate (around 1.5" at 25 meters off hand if I'm having a good day), it's easy to take down and clean, and it's as simple as a revolver. The safety is your brain and your finger. No mechanical safety lever - just a decocker. Still, it's as safe as anything with a switch, because the gun locks the hammer away from the firing pin on its own which means it's not only ready to go when I am, but I don't risk accidentally knocking the safety off when I don't intend to. However, the P226 I shoot now (in .40 cal) runs between $700 - $800 new. The Springfield XD is roughly half that, and it's probably more durable and at least equally reliable. I like .40 cal a lot, and have had awesome luck with it, and it carries with it the benefit of being able to swap out barrels and use the same gun and magazines to shoot .357 Sig - a much better option in the 9mm realm than 9mm Luger. They also make the XD in .45 GAP, which is a promising round. If price is your biggest concern and you still want a pistol you can trust with your life (It will work every time ou pull the trigger and there's a round to be fired, shoots where you aim it, and is damn near indestructible) I still have to say the XD is a tough option to beat at around $400. If you have the money, Sig Sauer's P226 in .40/.357 is a great bet, as is the H&K USP (although I personally don't like how high the USP's sight line sits, nor the balance of the gun overall as much as the Sig). Both are in the neighborhood of $750 or so. You can go nuts with the custom-type 1911's, but I've owned those too, and with less desirable results than my Sig Sauer or the XD. Oh they're accurate as all get-out, but with wide-mouthed defense ammo and even a slightly negligent owner (you gotta keep it clean) they choke.

My first time at the range we rented the 9mm XD. I really can't say much since I'm a newbe to firearms but the XD is a really nice gun. I really preferred the 45 kimber though, but I 'm glad the XD comes in 45. I'll have to check it out.

I'm pleased that I did outshoot my friends. What's considered a good grouping with a pistol at 20 and 50 feet?

[Hardball]

After your next trip to the range, come back and let me know if this stuff actually helped!
Mike

O.K. Coach

[Hardball]

My name is Hardball and I'm a Gunaholic. LOL

I'm scheduled to go back to the range this month. I love shooting; like most Americans I started as a boy with a bb gun. I Joined the Army during what Historians now call the Post Vietnam/Rebuilding era of the Army. Boot Camp was fun and very hard at the same time. The Army put something in me that I could not get anywhere else. One of those things was the love and appreciation for Marksmanship practice. You come off as a modest but knowledgeable firearms coach. It was easy to ask you because you seem approchable and willing to help. I'm not going to be able to try out your moving tactics because of limitations with our range. The two main things I will be able to try are the breathing/followthrough/visualization methods you described. (even though I need to reread them several times before I visit the range) the second is to increase the size of my targets for my iron sight sniping practice. I gotta find me a range that allows rapid fire, I believe I can become good at it using your methods and theory and a lot of practice.

You and Boarspear are real assets to this message board and For those willing to listen, they can really learn a lot.