I wanted to shoot my new wadcutter loads and I really like them, except you can forget about reloading quickly. It's slow even by revolver standards. Then I got a squib on a .45 round, which sucks because I haven't screwed up a reloaded round like that in 11 years, but at least I had the Makarov's cleaning rod to get it out. I practiced some sub-3-yard shooting and I really should do it more. It always seemed like a waste of ammo to shoot that close, but I was surprised how easy it is to miss center mass when firing from retention.

>>13653 >trying to work on This. 20 rounds of 9mm out of my carry gun glock 19 at 10 yards, with 6 shots of 44 mag out of a revolver on the same target after. I know it's an okay tight group but it's not right on the x, next time I go out I want to change something with my grip or trigger finger to see if I can do better. X ring is an inch wide so I'm still effective sure but come on now.

I'll post the challenge thread tomorrow after work. Gonna be carry/pocket gun themed this time and then next time we'll do big irons.

>>13665 sadly i wont be able to pew pew for a few weeks i have a parade committee and shit to do, but on a good note this board moves slow enough i'll be able to update in a few weeks when i can. strictly pocket carry guns or carry guns overall? I carry stupid big guns in the winter but right now it's all pocket carry.

>>13667 You'll have plenty of time. I reckon we can make it a monthly thing. I was thinking more in the realm of subcompacts, snubnoses, mouse guns, and that sort of thing, but if you want to use something bigger then that's fine. Was thinking 10 shots on this target at 10 yards, but if you or anyone else has a better idea then tell me. Never hosted one of these before.

>>13677 >subcompacts, snubnoses, mouse guns, and that sort of thing, that sounds really fun. i happen to have at least one example of each of those and would be cute to go for it. for giggles you could post a particular target everyone prints out so we can compare on equal footing.

>>13682 nvm the file you uploaded finally loaded for me it's gtg

>>13677 As a comparative example shooting stupid baby guns vs. full size etc. is actually pretty fun. Really shows where you suck and WHERE YOU FUKCING SUCK. Lazorbeam anon will show up and ace everyone if its all slow fire, but a lot of anons probably don't have timers so I don't know how to parse that distinction. I know the ipsc (sp?) app and others are out there, but they are very hard to tune correctly and wont save you if you are shooting around other people much. The target could just be something like a 3x5 card. Those are readily available. You could also throw in strong side/weak side to up the challenge.

>>13653 Shooting trash you say?

>>13687 Personally I like using clay pigeons. Small, high visibility, and satisfyingly breaks apart when you hit it

Most common for me to be at an indoor range since innacity. I've found some of the drills from the lucky gunner start shooting better series very helpful, especially dot torture and the 5x5: https://www.luckygunner.com/lounge/category/start-shooting-better/page/2/ The FBI qualification isn't bad: https://www.luckygunner.com/lounge/can-you-outshoot-an-fbi-agent-part-3-2019/

>>13744 The Air Marshal qualification is especially challenging. You'll probably need a decent outdoor range to do all of it though.

>>13806 I don't have any idea what that target size is, but it doesn't sound too bad. Those time are very generous unless I'm reading it wrong. 3.3 second to draw and fire 1 rnd at a 7 yard a zone (?) is slow even for me and I blow. Now if its running the drill twice in 3.3 its harder. I doubt they are actually telling you to hot reholster though.

>>13830 Its 3.3 seconds total to do the drill twice. You have to average less than 1.65 seconds Stage 2 would be 1.35 seconds on average.

>>13830 Also the target is the FBI-QIT-97 target. Should also be noted that you are allowed 0 misses, and only 5 shots outside the inner zone across the entire qualification.

>>13806 I like that one. Tight times.

>>14061 Tight times and also tight accuracy requirements. From what I understand this is actually the OLD qualification. When they massively expanded the air marshal program after 9-11 they actually had to make it easier. DEI for bad shooters lmao

>>13806 I like this one. That’s challenging but doable with some practice. I think my draw times would screw me.

I've been practicing bill drills for a while, and today I finally got a sub 2-second run, even if my accuracy wasn't perfect. I got all the rounds on the printer paper in 1.96 seconds with my P228, but they weren't all in the 8" circle. I'll probably leave it at that, because I don't have any ideas about seriously pursuing USPSA or anything, and practicing bill drills a lot feels like wasting ammo. The webm is from Friday which was worse in time and accuracy, but I didn't record today's drills. The P228 has an enhanced hammer spring strut and guide to make the DA pull better, but it doesn't have the short reset kit.

>>15147 Nice. I think there's some utility in bill drills for CCW / two legged varmint events, but could probably get similar training with doubles.

>>15164 I've noticed that I basically get the same amount of "practice" out of shooting 3 as I do shooting 6. Triple taps give me a draw, first shot, and two split times to measure, which is everything that fundamentally matters. I'm still going to keep practicing until I get a 100% accurate run under 2 seconds, but I want to start spending more time on variable distance drills. I regularly practice out to 25 yards, but I hardly ever put it all together, so I want to practice adjusting my shot cadence in real time.

>>15147 >went to narnia hate when that happens. >be me >brushing teeth before bed >hear glass breaking >nightfolk.avi >grab bathroom gun and rush down the stairs, toothbrush in my mouth >two future astronauts are trying to steal my TV >one of them is armed >he sees me, drops the TV and pulls out his own ghetto blaster >I shoot first but he shoots less than a second after >suddenly the rooms is enveloped in a blinding light >feel like my head is going to explode >a giant wardrobe has appeared in between me and the intruders >both of our shots seemingly went into this wardrobe, causing us both to miss >the robbers and I look at each other, then the wardrobe, then each other again >dumbfounded.png >door to wardrobe busts open, and it's a fucking lion >two bullet holes in either side of it >tactically shit bricks and run back upstairs >hide in my bathroom before getting the courage to go back downstairs >blood all over my living room >one of the unstanding young gentlemen is in the corner, covered in blood, but seemingly unharmed >TV and other future doctor is gone >try to get the guy out of the corner, at first he won't move >eventually coax him out with some leftover easter candy I have on hand We agreed to not tell anyone else what happens, and work together. I get my TV back, he gets his buddy back. That was four days ago, and we're trying to get the wardrobe to reappear. Wish us luck.

No pictures, but after many years of only practicing sighted fire, I watched some old FBI and police training videos and decided to practice the things I saw. There seem to be three basic stances and techniques of point shooting, as far as I can determine. There's the Bill Jordan method. You stand at attention, maybe with right foot slightly forward, with your elbows at your sides pointed straight down, pointing your sternum at the target. The gun is in your strong hand at elbow level pointed at your target. Your weak hand may be extended downward and forward a bit for balance. You focus on the target and try to make the bullets hit it by sheer willpower, I guess. I did this for several hundred rounds and past about nine feet this doesn't work very well for me at all. I guess I'm not as coordinated as Bill Jordan. There's the W. E. Fairbarn method, which looks weird to the uninitiated. You start out with your hands at your sides, standing at attention. You draw the gun with your right hand and move into a partial crouch, left foot forward, most weight on your right foot. The strong hand with the gun comes up to just below eye level. You focus on the target and shoot with the gun in your peripheral vision. It is optional to begin from the high ready, then bring the gun straight up and extend your right arm, then rotate the whole arm forward and down from the shoulder to the just-below-line-of-sight shooting position, "swinging your arm like the handle of a water pump" if you begin from high ready. Actually I'm oversimplifying. Fairbarn taught a system that included many different stances and positions, but I'm talking about the version that ended up in US Army training manuals printed after the war. There's the Jelly Bryce method. The weapon is in your right hand and your weak hand is at front or side for balance, but not in front of the gun, of course, lol. You drop into a very aggressive, very low crouch, with your left foot forward and most of your weight on your right foot, and extend the gun well forward with your right hand. You shoot with your right shoulder low and your left shoulder raised. As with the Fairbarn method you bring it up to just below line of sight and focus on the target, shooting with the gun in your peripheral vision. Of the three this worked best for me. After a few thousand rounds I can mostly--mostly, that is--hold the A-zone of an IPSC target at fifteen feet. Beyond that my accuracy drops off very rapidly. It seems to work the best for me, for all that it looks like something the director of a 1950s TV western would have told an actor to do. All three of these guys were the real deal. All three of them saw some shit and stacked some bodies, in an era before police body cams or "activists" with camcorders hiding behind the dumpsters in every alley. I was initially skeptical about the utility of point shooting. But after some thought and reflection, and after trying it for more than just a mag or two, I have concluded that it may have some utility, perhaps in circumstances of poor lighting. I am still not certain that it's any faster for me than using the irons, but if it is slower it's not much slower. Pew pew!

>>13653 infographics