Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
As shooting enthusiasts, I think most of us have some ideas about what guns are “good” or “the best” as well as a perception about our own level of skill (or lack thereof). We’ve probably all met the range commandos that claim they are amazing shots, and that the Sig 226 is the best, because everyone knows that’s what Navy SEAL’s use. But when it comes time for them to shoot, they struggle getting their pistol ready to shoot, and are missing their target more than hitting it. Or the self proclaimed “expert” who got all of their “experience” playing Call of Duty.
Have you ever read one of the “What’s the best Bear defense gun” or “What’s the best home defense gun” threads, and been left shaking your head in amazement at some of the recommendations? Does the person recommending the Lorcin .380 as the best bear gun have any experience at all with bears, or guns??
As humans, we tend to overestimate our strengths, and underestimate our weaknesses. As an example, I enjoy bird hunting, and consider myself a pretty good shot. However, if I get on a sporting clays course, I would not do nearly as well as my “self assessed bird shooting skill” would otherwise lead me to believe.
So, let’s have a discussion. Are you and your guns any good?
Well, being mostly a "volume plinker" - we are hell on beer cans. With home-cast bullets.
I tend to do a lot of slow-fire from offhand, both rifle and pistol. About 80 yards with the rifle, iron sights, offhand, I hit most beer cans. But, I will admit I need to shoot faster. 40 yards with my American Eagle Luger, or Model 70 1911 Gold Cup, again slow fire from Weaver stance, yeah, I need to buy a shot timer. Lord knows they are not that expensive anymore. One of my cousins and I spent about 6 months between jobs casting bullets and plinking. We competed against each other informally on how small a target we could hit, at ranges beyond what most people would think practical, particularly for smaller handguns. We didn't have a shot timer at that time, around 1980, they were costly. It did not occur to us to both draw on a single target and see who could hit it first. Dammit. If I had thought of that back then, I would no doubt be faster. DVC - While I am OK with fairly heavy recoil, and handle full house .45ACP from the Weaver stance OK., and am probably more accurate than most when given enough time, I do really need to work on speed. I'm not fumbling around, dropping magazines slow, but, while I am above average on accuracy, I'm below average on speed. I remember the guy who I trained with back in Idaho Falls, who essentially taught us the Gunsite pistol course at a very reasonable price right there in town, saying something like this to me: "Mitch, you need to work on speed. A good fast shot will get off a shot at you maybe a second or two before you fire. But, if he misses that first shot, God help him, because you are accurate and you don't get rattled." And, so, dammit, I have known this for 40 years, and have not done much about it. Time to get moving on that project!
Usually, we have been shooting at ranges where standing up is a good bit more comfortable than assuming even a sitting position. Could use to practice what Uncle Jeff called "rapid assumption of shooting positions". Note to self - you can practice getting into position in a grassy place where you don't mind sitting or laying prone, but can't really shoot there.
Bird shooting with shotguns - I'm OK but I don't think any Olympic scouts are watching me. Need to get on the sporting clays range more often. There are occasional National Match courses here, I have a Garand, I know how to make cast bullet rounds that will "run" in that Garand and shoot up to my decent, but far from championship, level of shooting. That would be a good promotion of cast bullets in general if I can turn in non-embarrassing scores.
My guns are good. A .45 ACP 1911, a M70 30-06, and a M870 12-gauge will, really, take care of any shooting task, outside of shooting a bear with a handgun, that exists in North America. Throw in my M29 .44 Maggie, and handguns for bear are covered as well. But I have more than 50 others, so I guess I am at least as much collector as shooter.
But, yeah, thanks for bringing this up, it points out some self-training I ought to be doing. Lord knows it would be great to 'go to school' but finding the time and money, and arranging the time off, is generally problematic. There are some better shooters around, some I know, some I need to meet, who would likely be willing to give me some coaching, if I would just show up when they are at the range or at a match, and ask.
That last is almost Zen. You want something? Well, ask for it! Rarely will you end up any worse off, just for asking. Show up, and ask. What a concept!
No, I’m not half the shooter my firearms are—except for my skeet gun. I’m practicing more with my handguns these days, but in the mode of finding my way. Rifle shooting from steady positions wouldn’t be too difficult to get good at again, as I still remember the basics of skills learned under US AMU instructors 45 years ago. I’m going to whittle down my accumulation of firearms to a collection in the coming year, so maybe there will be enough time to shoot them all more.
As shooting enthusiasts, I think most of us have some ideas about what guns are “good” or “the best” as well as a perception about our own level of skill (or lack thereof). We’ve probably all met the range commandos that claim they are amazing shots, and that the Sig 226 is the best, because everyone knows that’s what Navy SEAL’s use. But when it comes time for them to shoot, they struggle getting their pistol ready to shoot, and are missing their target more than hitting it. Or the self proclaimed “expert” who got all of their “experience” playing Call of Duty.
Have you ever read one of the “What’s the best Bear defense gun” or “What’s the best home defense gun” threads, and been left shaking your head in amazement at some of the recommendations? Does the person recommending the Lorcin .380 as the best bear gun have any experience at all with bears, or guns??
As humans, we tend to overestimate our strengths, and underestimate our weaknesses. As an example, I enjoy bird hunting, and consider myself a pretty good shot. However, if I get on a sporting clays course, I would not do nearly as well as my “self assessed bird shooting skill” would otherwise lead me to believe.
So, let’s have a discussion. Are you and your guns any good?
Yes, I’m good with my 9 mm at target shooting at the range at specific distances, that’s it.
Compared to what; The average shooter, obviously not a skilled marksman.
I would never claim to be good at anything else with a pistol since I routinely do the same thing every week, with very minor variations. I certainly realize my skill set is limited to what I do, and have practiced and would never claim to be any better at circumstances that I have never experienced before!
As shooting enthusiasts, I think most of us have some ideas about what guns are “good” or “the best” as well as a perception about our own level of skill (or lack thereof). We’ve probably all met the range commandos that claim they are amazing shots, and that the Sig 226 is the best, because everyone knows that’s what Navy SEAL’s use. But when it comes time for them to shoot, they struggle getting their pistol ready to shoot, and are missing their target more than hitting it. Or the self proclaimed “expert” who got all of their “experience” playing Call of Duty.
Have you ever read one of the “What’s the best Bear defense gun” or “What’s the best home defense gun” threads, and been left shaking your head in amazement at some of the recommendations? Does the person recommending the Lorcin .380 as the best bear gun have any experience at all with bears, or guns??
As humans, we tend to overestimate our strengths, and underestimate our weaknesses. As an example, I enjoy bird hunting, and consider myself a pretty good shot. However, if I get on a sporting clays course, I would not do nearly as well as my “self assessed bird shooting skill” would otherwise lead me to believe.
So, let’s have a discussion. Are you and your guns any good?
The above makes me think of a Lincoln quote: "Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak and to remove all doubt." Of course on here if you are silent no one will think you are a fool, because no one knows you are here!
Both USPSA and IDPA competitions have divisions that are primarily designed for using “regular guns” versus tricked out, high dollar “race guns.” A guy can show up with his box stock Glock or M&P and have a gun that will be competitive. You’ll see beginners show up with all manner of guns, but over time, as guys get some experience, you see fewer and fewer different types of guns. For example, you’ll see a lot of beginners with guns like the Beretta 92 or the Sig P226 (because, you know, it’s the Navy Seal pistol ). However, you don’t see a lot of experienced competitors using them. It’s not that they aren’t quality pistols. They are. But they just aren’t effective at what they are actually supposed to do.
Guns that are well represented in Production division of USPSA or Stock Service Pistol division in IDPA, in no particular order, are: Glock, M&P, and CZ (in various flavors, and its Italian cousin, the Tanfoglio). In fact, at the 2018 USPSA Factory Nationals, in Production Division, 68% of competitors used a CZ or Tanfoglio, 11% shot a Glock. Only 8% shot a Sig, and the remainder were “everything else.” There’s a reason for this! The CZ’s/Tanfoglio’s and Glocks are very effective at what they are actually designed to do. Are other guns shot in these divisions? Sure, but they generally aren’t winning.
As to the question I asked about “how do you know?” I would suggest that actively competing is the best way to answer it. USPSA/IPSC and IDPA have an international membership, and established classification systems that allow you to compare yourself to the best in the world.
If you really want to know if you and your gun are any good, shoot the action pistol games. It’s also he best way to quickly and significantly improve your skill level.
If you believe that your Ruger P85 is an awesome pistol, you might want to investigate why almost no one shoots one in the action pistol games. Competitors want to win, and they will generally use the best equipment they can given the rules of the competition they are participating in.
I didn’t answer the “compared to what” and “how do you know” questions above because I’m a little unclear how to respond. I shoot skeet with groups that may include state champions. I am not as consistent as those champions, but there are days when I best them. I have a brand and model shotgun that championships have been won with.
With handguns I struggle. I have some nice 1911s with which better shooters than I have shot tiny groups. One of those shooters shot for Navy at Camp Perry and is still trying to work with me on occasion. I don’t do any better with my Glocks, Sigs, CZs, Springfield P9, or Browning Hi Power either. Or my Ruger and S&W revolvers. It’s a slog for me and I have a long way to go.
Rifle I’m adequate, just needing more trigger time. 1948 Winchester Model 70 .270 and a Ruger Gunsite Scout .308, some well worn lever actions and plinkers.
I didn’t answer the “compared to what” and “how do you know” questions above because I’m a little unclear how to respond. I shoot skeet with groups that may include state champions. I am not as consistent as those champions, but there are days when I best them. I have a brand and model shotgun that championships have been won with.
With handguns I struggle. I have some nice 1911s with which better shooters than I have shot tiny groups. One of those shooters shot for Navy at Camp Perry and is still trying to work with me on occasion. I don’t do any better with my Glocks, Sigs, CZs, Springfield P9, or Browning Hi Power either. Or my Ruger and S&W revolvers. It’s a slog for me and I have a long way to go.
Rifle I’m adequate, just needing more trigger time. 1948 Winchester Model 70 .270 and a Ruger Gunsite Scout .308, some well worn lever actions and plinkers.
I don’t know that there is necessarily a “right way” to answer them, I’m just trying to generate some discussion.
If one were to shoot clay pigeons thrown with a hand thrower, or some sort of portable thrower, out in the back pasture, it would be very easy to conclude that one is a pretty good shotgun shooter, but probably wouldn’t have much basis to actually reach this conclusion.
On the other hand, if one shoots registered skeet or trap, you’ll have a classification based on your shooting scores in actual competitions, with established standards. It then is very easy to compare yourself to the very best in that shooting discipline.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
). However, you don’t see a lot of experienced competitors using them. It’s not that they aren’t quality pistols. They are. But they just aren’t effective at what they are actually supposed to do.
