Reloading technique question

[GJM]

I searched for this information in the Forum, but failing to see this question answered, decided to start a new thread. If my search was faulty, feel free to nuke this thread.

I am aware of the various ways of speed reloading a pistol from slide lock -- using an overhand method to manipulate the slide, using a sling shot method to manipulate the slide, using either the strong or support hand to manipulate the slide lock, or inserting the magazine so as to cause the slide to go forward without manipulating the slide lock.

This was a busy training year, and as I got ready for a Rogers class with a P30, I noted that most every vigorous insertion of a magazine caused the slide to go forward without touching the slide stop. Bill Rogers discussed this, including the caveat to know how your weapon ran, and if you used the vigorous insertion method, and the slide didn't go forward, to be able to quickly solve the problem. Over time, I realized that by vigorously inserting the magazine with pressure on the rear of the magazine, I could make the slide on my P30 or M&P pistols go forward over 95% of the time. While there have been instances where the slide didn't go forward at insertion, never once this year, on any year, have I induced a stoppage inserting the magazine vigorously. As I shoot mostly HK and M&P pistols, I have trained to insert the magazine vigorously and follow up with my support thumb on the slide stop if necessary.

On another forum, someone made the comment that allowing the slide to go forward at insertion of the magazine was poor technique as it was likely to lead to stoppages -- in their experience 10 per cent of the time. I was amazed as I haven't had one ever, and with between 15 and 20,000 rounds down range so far this year thru HK, M&P and Glock pistols, I have done a lot of reloads.

I am curious whether others are using the technique of vigorously inserting the magazine so as to cause the slide to go forward, and whether they are seeing stoppages with this technique?

[rsa-otc]

On my M&P 45 I don't even need to vigorously insert the magazine for it to autoforward. It does so 100% of the time. I don't rely on this. My strong thumb is poised to hit the release as needed. When I dry fire I use dummy rounds and exclusively use the thumb to drop the slide since the magazine with one dummy round doesn't weigh enough to cause the slide to autoforward. So I get plenty of practice using my thumb if needed.
In 3 years of training & competition I have yet to induse a missfeed. Now that I have said that tomorrow will be my first. Just the way the world works. :-)

[ToddG]

I call it auto-forwarding and would never depend on it. Someone could write a book just about pistol-training.com students who showed up, insisted their guns alway auto-forward, then had it either fail to go forward or induce a stoppage when it came time to run the F.A.S.T.

If it happens, fine. But don't rely on it. What works "every time" when you're thinking about it on the range isn't the same as working every time.

[GJM]

I am OK if the slide doesn't auto forward, but what I am interested in is how it might induce a stoppage. Can you elaborate, since I haven't experienced any stoppage with this?

[seabiscuit]

Just guessing here, but if the slide starts forward before the mag is fully inserted, it could lead to problems.

[jslaker]

I could also see weak mag springs allowing to top round to bounce slightly and cause a misfeed given the amount of force needed to make some guns auto forward.

Personally, if my thumb can reach the slidestop, I don't see any reason not to just preload it. You get the same type of near instant release but without having to worry about that 1 in 10 times the slide doesn't auto forward on its own.

[Dagga Boy]

I like it when it happens. I have never depended on it, even in guns that did it regularly. With that said, I have never had a malfunction because of it either. I look at it as sort of a bonus, not a technique.

[Josh Runkle]

I searched for this information in the Forum, but failing to see this question answered, decided to start a new thread. If my search was faulty, feel free to nuke this thread.

I am aware of the various ways of speed reloading a pistol from slide lock -- using an overhand method to manipulate the slide, using a sling shot method to manipulate the slide, using either the strong or support hand to manipulate the slide lock, or inserting the magazine so as to cause the slide to go forward without manipulating the slide lock.

This was a busy training year, and as I got ready for a Rogers class with a P30, I noted that most every vigorous insertion of a magazine caused the slide to go forward without touching the slide stop. Bill Rogers discussed this, including the caveat to know how your weapon ran, and if you used the vigorous insertion method, and the slide didn't go forward, to be able to quickly solve the problem. Over time, I realized that by vigorously inserting the magazine with pressure on the rear of the magazine, I could make the slide on my P30 or M&P pistols go forward over 95% of the time. While there have been instances where the slide didn't go forward at insertion, never once this year, on any year, have I induced a stoppage inserting the magazine vigorously. As I shoot mostly HK and M&P pistols, I have trained to insert the magazine vigorously and follow up with my support thumb on the slide stop if necessary.

On another forum, someone made the comment that allowing the slide to go forward at insertion of the magazine was poor technique as it was likely to lead to stoppages -- in their experience 10 per cent of the time. I was amazed as I haven't had one ever, and with between 15 and 20,000 rounds down range so far this year thru HK, M&P and Glock pistols, I have done a lot of reloads.

I am curious whether others are using the technique of vigorously inserting the magazine so as to cause the slide to go forward, and whether they are seeing stoppages with this technique?

I feel as if it is appropriate to ask what your usage of the pistol is? Defensive? Offensive (military)? Competition? Shits and Giggles?

Shooting on a range is very different than shooting under stress and fear. In a defensive scenario where you are scared, your body loses a good deal of blood from your hands and feet and skin. This keeps you from bleeding everywhere during a fight. I have seen many videos where someone is cut on their arms or hands and they don't bleed until immediately after the fight. Then, when the fight is over, about five seconds later, they start gushing. This reduction in bloodflow to your hands may be relatively minor, or in some cases it could potentially be like dipping your hands in ice for 20 minutes (to numb them) and then trying to thumb your slide release. Additionally, the amygdala causes adrenaline, cortisol, epinephrine and norepinephrine to flood into your system when you are incredibly afraid. These actually improve your gross motor skills. So, scientifically speaking, when the "fear response" centers of the brain are activated, you lose a bit of your fine motor skills and gain a bit of gross motor skills. (yes, I realize trigger press is a fine motor skill)

If you are training in a competitive sense, or in a scenario where you are "ready" for a fight and unafraid, then the slide stop/slide release might make most sense. If on the other hand, you are training for a defensive scenario, then consider how your body feels when a deer jumps out in from of your vehicle and you grasp down on the steering wheel and your heart is pounding. IMHO, in that scenario, it makes more sense to train for a motion that is congruent with extreme fear. Sure racking over the top of the gun takes slightly longer, and yes it is possible that you might (in that moment) be perfectly fine to use the slide release. To me, when considering defensive shooting, it makes more sense to study the "most likely reactions and outcomes" of a fight and then train for that.

As for the "autoforwarding" my m&p's do it 95% of the time for my friends and 5-10% of the time for me. When it happens I am on autopilot and still tap/rack. I feel like slowing down to assess the situation is much worse than losing a round and going through tap/rack/bang.

[GJM]

There seem to be great differences of opinion on how to perform an emergency reload. Just yesterday, I read where Randy Lee from Apex said that using the slide stop on an M&P damages that part over time, and that using the ambi portion of the slide stop, which is touted as a benefit of the M&P, is particularly bad and sure to lead to failure. In an AAR review from a Pat McNamara class, the author quoted Pat as saying never to use the overhand method as it is likely to induce a stoppage, and you should use the slide stop. I believe Todd Green advocates using your strong side thumb, where Larry Vickers says strong side thumb is likely to induce a stoppage. Bill Rogers says auto forwarding is fine, if it works in your gun. DB, in a post above, says he doesn't count on auto forwarding, but if it works it is a bonus, and it has never led to a stoppage for him. A LE/military trainer I respect, recently said on the Gunsite List, that any technique for an emergency reload is more likely to induce a stoppage, and that his procedure is to draw another full size service pistol. The arguments for and against various methods range from technical, like Randy Lee, to efficiency from Todd Green, to your "under stress" argument.

To answer your question, like I presume for most here at PF, my use of the handgun is serious, and at any particular moment I may be interested in using the handgun offensively to harvest meat, defensively to protect myself or my family, in competition, and just for giggles. I do believe that rather than rise to the occasion, we will default to our level of training, and that the goal of our training is to ingrain proper techniques, so that during an emergency, we perform at the highest level.

It is often said, only half joking, that when people debate topics, they start with logic, drift to emotion, and if that fails appeal to religion. I believe the shooting equivalent of that is the "shoot house versus square range argument" which I commonly see lately, where the shoot house is offered as reason for whatever they want to do. I was perusing a recent thread on some version of the 1911 versus Glock debate, and the supposed SME said, in effect, I love my 1911 because it has a great trigger, shoots accurately and is reliable, but then I took it in a shoot house and now I carry a Glock. No explanation as to why the 1911 didn't work in the shoot house, but just expect us to understand that it was apparent after the shoot house. Another real SME, that trains lots of people, based on his experience, swears a Glock is unreliable in a shoot house.

The very first time I entered auto rotation in a helicopter, lost an engine at takeoff in a jet, and entered a fully developed spin, I experienced fear and some confusion. Training a lot, with high quality instructors and in simulators, has allowed me to push my emotions aside, and perform a series of responses oriented towards achieving the best outcome. I think we are trying to do the same thing here with our firearms training -- determine the "best practices," for any particular skill, and practice realistically, so we can deploy our skills at the highest level.

Back to the topic of the emergency reload, I am think that there are very different opinions as to what exactly the best practice is.

[JAD]

Back to the topic of the emergency reload, I am think that there are very different opinions as to what exactly the best practice is.

[first post on the forum; not an SME, unless the thread drifts to electronics]
I crutch a lot on the sophistry "what is it for?" I don't know much about shootin' and fightin', but I have not overheard a lot of anecdotes that contained an emergency reload where it wasn't tied to a malfunction clearance. In other words, I can't recall hearing about a handgun fight wherein the protagonist was shooting, was interrupted by an empty magazine, and went immediately back to shooting. The mindset I've picked up from my trainers is that slide lock, regardless of the cause, is really just another malfunction.

So I figure if I'm going to train on an ER technique (which I probably shouldn't be wasting much time with, unless I'm more concerned with sporting applications), it should probably be the one that is most like a continuum of my malfunction clearance techniques. If I were smart enough to carry two pistols, my clearance technique and my ER tech would both be to find the working pistol. I'm way not that cool, so my current malf approach is TRB (followed by what Clint Smith calls rackachickaf*cka, in the event of a doublefeed). That continuum is currently all built around an overhand rack. Therefore, my ER technique, in the rare event that I worry about it at all, is an overhand rack.

Am I underestimating the significance of the slide lock reload, folks?

[Josh Runkle]

[first post on the forum; not an SME, unless the thread drifts to electronics]
I crutch a lot on the sophistry "what is it for?" I don't know much about shootin' and fightin', but I have not overheard a lot of anecdotes that contained an emergency reload where it wasn't tied to a malfunction clearance. In other words, I can't recall hearing about a handgun fight wherein the protagonist was shooting, was interrupted by an empty magazine, and went immediately back to shooting. The mindset I've picked up from my trainers is that slide lock, regardless of the cause, is really just another malfunction.

So I figure if I'm going to train on an ER technique (which I probably shouldn't be wasting much time with, unless I'm more concerned with sporting applications), it should probably be the one that is most like a continuum of my malfunction clearance techniques. If I were smart enough to carry two pistols, my clearance technique and my ER tech would both be to find the working pistol. I'm way not that cool, so my current malf approach is TRB (followed by what Clint Smith calls rackachickaf*cka, in the event of a doublefeed). That continuum is currently all built around an overhand rack. Therefore, my ER technique, in the rare event that I worry about it at all, is an overhand rack.

Am I underestimating the significance of the slide lock reload, folks?

Though others may (validly) disagree, I wholeheartedly agree with this. It is exactly what I do as well.

[Josh Runkle]

There seem to be great differences of opinion on how to perform an emergency reload. Just yesterday, I read where Randy Lee from Apex said that using the slide stop on an M&P damages that part over time, and that using the ambi portion of the slide stop, which is touted as a benefit of the M&P, is particularly bad and sure to lead to failure. In an AAR review from a Pat McNamara class, the author quoted Pat as saying never to use the overhand method as it is likely to induce a stoppage, and you should use the slide stop. I believe Todd Green advocates using your strong side thumb, where Larry Vickers says strong side thumb is likely to induce a stoppage. Bill Rogers says auto forwarding is fine, if it works in your gun. DB, in a post above, says he doesn't count on auto forwarding, but if it works it is a bonus, and it has never led to a stoppage for him. A LE/military trainer I respect, recently said on the Gunsite List, that any technique for an emergency reload is more likely to induce a stoppage, and that his procedure is to draw another full size service pistol. The arguments for and against various methods range from technical, like Randy Lee, to efficiency from Todd Green, to your "under stress" argument.

To answer your question, like I presume for most here at PF, my use of the handgun is serious, and at any particular moment I may be interested in using the handgun offensively to harvest meat, defensively to protect myself or my family, in competition, and just for giggles. I do believe that rather than rise to the occasion, we will default to our level of training, and that the goal of our training is to ingrain proper techniques, so that during an emergency, we perform at the highest level.

It is often said, only half joking, that when people debate topics, they start with logic, drift to emotion, and if that fails appeal to religion. I believe the shooting equivalent of that is the "shoot house versus square range argument" which I commonly see lately, where the shoot house is offered as reason for whatever they want to do. I was perusing a recent thread on some version of the 1911 versus Glock debate, and the supposed SME said, in effect, I love my 1911 because it has a great trigger, shoots accurately and is reliable, but then I took it in a shoot house and now I carry a Glock. No explanation as to why the 1911 didn't work in the shoot house, but just expect us to understand that it was apparent after the shoot house. Another real SME, that trains lots of people, based on his experience, swears a Glock is unreliable in a shoot house.

The very first time I entered auto rotation in a helicopter, lost an engine at takeoff in a jet, and entered a fully developed spin, I experienced fear and some confusion. Training a lot, with high quality instructors and in simulators, has allowed me to push my emotions aside, and perform a series of responses oriented towards achieving the best outcome. I think we are trying to do the same thing here with our firearms training -- determine the "best practices," for any particular skill, and practice realistically, so we can deploy our skills at the highest level.

Back to the topic of the emergency reload, I am think that there are very different opinions as to what exactly the best practice is.

It sounds as if you understand that many respectable trainers use many respected/disrespected techniques. I know you are questioning others to learn more and grow as a shooter and instructor, but you seem knowledgeable already. I am curious, what do you currently use and why?

[NickDrak]

I had posted about my "auto-forward" experiences with the M&P (9mm) platform and the issue I experienced with duty/hollowpoint ammo over a year ago....

I have tried auto forwarding on 4 different M&P9 (fullsize) pistols, and at a rate of 5 to 7 out of 10 times it resulted in the nose of several different hollowpoint rounds getting lodged underneath the feedramp of the barrel. This completely locks the pistol up and must be cleared in a similar manner as is used to clear a double feed (remedial action).

I have not seen the above described malfunction with other caliber M&P platform pistols.

[GJM]

Since I am a student, and not an instructor, I fortunately don't have the burden of recommending any particular technique to others. Since I was born male, I knew everything there was to know about firearms by age 16. :) Not sure my practices mean anything, but since you ask:

I was trained at Gunsite, 20 years ago, to use the overhand technique as it was supposedly a "gross motor skill," although I was always curious how one could draw their pistol, prep the trigger, shoot accurately, figure out their pistol was out of cartridges, get a magazine into the pistol but not hit a slide stop with either their strong or support thumb. Later I shot IPSC, and like everyone else that owned a PACT timer, I started using my thumb, and in my case, my support thumb. When I shot 1911 pistols, they didn't auto forward unless the slide stop needed to be replaced. When Glock pistols first came out, I tried to use my support thumb on the little slide stop, and if that didn't work manipulated the slide overhand. In the last five or eight years I have been shooting HK pistols, I started experiencing the slide auto forwarding and initially was puzzled by it. After years of it (auto forwarding) happening sporadically, I developed a technique of inserting the magazine, and if it didn't auto forward, immediately hitting the slide stop with my support thumb as I reacquired my shooting grip. Never, have I had a round jump out of the magazine or otherwise have a stoppage when the pistol was auto-forwarding. When I was at a Rogers Shooting School class back in April, Bill Rogers discussed this, and how some force at the rear of the magazine made many pistols auto forward. Incidentally, Rogers teaches using a sling shot, as opposed to overhand method, for any required slide manipulations. Post Rogers, I found that with my M&P and HK pistols, I can make them auto forward consistently, but not always, by seating the magazine firmly, but not roughly, and then imparting some "body english" with the palm of my hand as I make the final insertion. Incidentally, the amount of force I apply to the magazine bottom is no more than when I make a tactical reload or slide forward reload, and some pistols auto forward even when you are trying not to make them do so. However, anytime I attempt to make the pistol auto forward, I assume it will not and am prepared to follow-up with the slide stop, and if that doesn't work easily like on the Glock 29 I sometimes carry in Alaska, I go to the slide. Finally, after almost getting my face stomped by a cow moose in deep snow, when I was on snowshoes this past winter, and fired a shot that turned the moose at 3 yards while falling over backwards when my attempt to pivot in deep snow failed, I often carry a .44 in a chest rig out in the field, and would draw a second handgun, if available, rather than reload in the middle of something.

So, to answer your question, I hope for it to auto forward, but always plan to use the slide stop with my support thumb (although I am intrigued by Todd's statement that the strong thumb is faster) and fall back to the sling shot if I have a stoppage or the slide stop is unsuccessful. Over 90 per cent of the time, I have a complete off body back-up in the form of a Gunsite/TR/Rogers trained and armed wife, and in most instances in Alaska, I have a long gun in my hands, making my handgun a back-up. My technique is always subject to revision based on being shown something better, and the point of my starting this thread is to try to gather some more information.

[GJM]

I had posted about my "auto-forward" experiences with the M&P (9mm) platform and the issue I experienced with duty/hollowpoint ammo over a year ago....

I have tried auto forwarding on 4 different M&P9 (fullsize) pistols, and at a rate of 5 to 7 out of 10 times it resulted in the nose of several different hollowpoint rounds getting lodged underneath the feedramp of the barrel. This completely locks the pistol up and must be cleared in a similar manner as is used to clear a double feed (remedial action).

I have not seen the above described malfunction with other caliber M&P platform pistols.

Nick, looks like your reply crossed with mine. Since I train mostly with ball ammo, most of my auto forwarding experience with the M&P 9 pistols has been with ball. I have two M&P9 full size pistols, one a thumb safety model with Smith PC mods purchased about three years ago, and another full size without a thumb safety, with Apex mods, bought back in May. I just took a 147 HST cartridge and auto forwarded each pistol ten times in a row, and in each instance the JHP cartridge fed properly. I then repeated the test, 10 repetitions each pistol, with a Ranger 124 +P T load, and same result. I wonder if it is something about your pistols, your ammo, or how you perform the auto forward, since I am not observing this?

[Dagga Boy]

Though others may (validly) disagree, I wholeheartedly agree with this. It is exactly what I do as well.

I actually teach the "Emergency" (we call it a "Combat") reload as a "shooter induced malfunction". Essentially, by failing to reload and shooting the gun empty, the shooter made a non functioning weapon. Easy to fix situation, yes, but unlike during the much prefered "Tactical" or "Speed" reload, where the gun is able to fire during the reload process.

How this reload is both performed, and taught by various instructors is very dependent on who they are teaching, their frame of reference and experience, and the target audience,and where those students will be using the technique. Many will have a little bit of a different take on things. Personally, I also teach different methods with different firearms. Over the years of teaching multiple systems, I have found that I need to fine tune many TTP's to specific guns on everything from grip, to reloads. Of the instructors mentioned, I am sure all can give a very good reason for what they teach and why. Good students can then take input form multiple quality instructors and fit the way they do things to their particular needs. Poor instructors who teach on the "that's the way we always have done it" method, combined with un-caring, or under educated students can lead to disaster.

One of the reasons that I signed up for this forum and breaking my trend towards lack of forum participation is that there are a great many folks on here who I disagree with on various ways they do things, but I very much respect them because they can articulate why they do what they do.

[NickDrak]

I do not want to derail this thread too far off-topic and turn it into a why I don't "Auto-forward" thread, so I will shortly be starting a new thread showing my results with "auto-forwarding" with a brand new M&P9 full-size that I just picked up earlier today. The results are kinda scary and not exactly what I expected based on my previous experiences with my earlier production M&P9's....

Stand-by for link to new thread

[ToddG]

First and most imporantly: being able to do it is more important than exactly how you do it.

Having said that:

the whole "fine motor skill versus gross motor skill" thing just kills me. Don't take my word for it, google those terms and (except in the gun community where they've been misappropriated) you'll see that racking the slide with you hand is also a fine motor skill. Anything that relies on the fingers is a fine motor skill. As others have pointed out, if I have the fine motor skill to hit my magazine release then I have the fine motor skill to hit my slide release. If you examine where the slide rack approach came from, you'll see it had more to do with a particular gun company's product limitations than any actual "tactical" benefit.
if you can comfortably and consistently reach the slide release lever with your strong hand thumb, it is the fastest way to reload with most handguns. Performed properly, a slidelock reload done this way takes exactly the same amount of time as an IPSC-style speed (in battery) reload.

[jetfire]

if you can comfortably and consistently reach the slide release lever with your strong hand thumb, it is the fastest way to reload with most handguns. Performed properly, a slidelock reload done this way takes exactly the same amount of time as an IPSC-style speed (in battery) reload.

Data! I performed 50 IPSC reloads and 50 slide lock reloads using a Glock 34-style pistol with the extended mag release so I can reach it with my strong hand thumb. To get data on pure reload speed, I used and 8 inch target at 5 yards as my target.

IPSC Style Reload: Average reload time - 1.29 seconds. Fastest reload: 1.01.
Slidelock Reload: Average Reload time - 1.31 seconds. Fastest reload 1.09.

I didn't bother to computer standard deviation or do any fancy science-y stuff, I just added up all the number and divided by 50 for each data-set. All the reloads were done from a USPSA belt with the same mag pouch to keep things consistent. I have no doubt that if I plotted all the reloads on a graph, the plots would look basically identical. 2 hundredths of a second is so small a difference that it's not really a difference at all.

For giggles, I tried 10 reloads where I went "over the top" and racked the slide. My fastest was 2.03 seconds, which is pretty slow compared to slide-lock.

[JAD]

For giggles, I tried 10 reloads where I went "over the top" and racked the slide. My fastest was 2.03 seconds, which is pretty slow compared to slide-lock.

That delta matches my expectations. I, personally, am unconvinced that taking an extra seven tenths of a second to perform what still seems to be a fairly unusual action is a big deal. By contrast, having an extra technique to practice, when I don't practice enough as it is, is a big deal. So for me, overhand racking is good enough. If AF consistently works with GJM's guns, I would be totally down with that (GJM is not the kind of guy to stand there looking at his pistol when the slide happens to not go forward). I like to minimize the size of the slide lock on my pistols so I don't bump it, but I'm sure it's already obvious that most of you guys are way cooler than me. Surely the extra practice of a low-priority technique (except in competition) is no big deal if you're putting thousands of rounds downrange a month.

Two post-scripts, though. I've been taught never to use the slide release on an AR to load the weapon, as it is a technique that will induce a failure when your gun gets dirty enough; the extra force of racking to release is significant enough in the AR to matter. I don't think that applies with pistols; they don't usually have that much overtravel.

Second, I'll never question anyone practicing a fast ER, because frankly there are very few things as cool-looking as a sub-second reload. John McGuire used to flash those in Kansas City, and it always blew my mind.

[vecdran]

Two post-scripts, though. I've been taught never to use the slide release on an AR to load the weapon, as it is a technique that will induce a failure when your gun gets dirty enough; the extra force of racking to release is significant enough in the AR to matter.

Hrngh?

[JAD]

Hrngh?

It's when I /inspire/ eloquence that I think I've done my best job as a writer.

Jim Crews was my original source for this, but I recently heard the same in an AAR from a Pat F*cking Rogers course.

As I've heard it: the AR does not love chambering. That's why we don't chamber-check it, we cross-check it. As it gets dirty and dry it loves chambering less. When chambering from bolt lock, we do not use the bolt release, because we would be missing out on the extra pound of force the buffer spring generates as we run it through its overtravel by racking it.

[ToddG]

My thought process re: a 0.7-1.0+ second difference is that if I really am at slide lock and there is still something that needs shooting, that's a very long time. I could fire five shots in that time...

[JAD]

My thought process re: a 0.7-1.0+ second difference is that if I really am at slide lock and there is still something that needs shooting, that's a very long time. I could fire five shots in that time...

That's because you're a bad ass. If I've emptied my pistol and there's still something that needs shooting and I'm not behind some pretty awesome cover, they're going to have to shoot me in the ass or the heel 'cause that's all they're seeing.

[MDS]

That's because you're a bad ass. If I've emptied my pistol and there's still something that needs shooting and I'm not behind some pretty awesome cover, they're going to have to shoot me in the ass or the heel 'cause that's all they're seeing.

FWIW, that's true of me today, as well. But the main reason I read this forum, instead of countless others, is that someday I'd like to be a bad ass, too. :cool: So even though I'm not even high-speed enough to practice reloads at all right now (gotta unf*ck my draw first) I'm taking notes for later.

Sorry for butting in - I'm enjoying the conversation so far. Carry on!

[GJM]

1) I took a Pat Rogers Carbine 2 class back in the spring. While my recollection of the class may be imperfect, I don't recall him discussing your point about reloading the AR. I do remember a number of words I have heard used before, but in combinations that left no doubt what was on Pat's mind, especially if someone inserted a magazine into the AR and did not do a "push-pull," or failed to close their dust cover.

2) This morning, I spent some time practicing reloads with an M&P 9, Gen 4 Glock with a Vickers slide stop, and an HK 45C, and I must admit that perhaps Todd knows something about reloading. If I placed my strong thumb lightly on the slide stop, the reload seemed as fast as auto forwarding. Not sure how I missed this in thirty years of shooting handguns.

[SLG]

As I've heard it: the AR does not love chambering. That's why we don't chamber-check it, we cross-check it. As it gets dirty and dry it loves chambering less. When chambering from bolt lock, we do not use the bolt release, because we would be missing out on the extra pound of force the buffer spring generates as we run it through its overtravel by racking it.

I have not found this to be true at all. At least, not any truer than any other gun that is run TOO dirty and TOO dry. The issue is, what is TOO dirty and dry? The AR needs to be wet, no way around it.

I think the difference is that brother Pat gets to see lots of people using lots of different guns/mags/ammo, some of whom have no idea how to keep their guns up and running. I, on the other hand, have seen lots of people using the same guns/mags ammo, and who knew how to keep their guns running. In having seen and participated in sending almost 10,000,000 rounds of 5.56 down range, this has never been an issue for a good shooter, using a good gun/mag and crappy M882. To the best of my knowledge, every single reload during those 10 million rounds was done using the bolt release.

The gun needs to be wet, whether you're in the U.S., Afghanistan, Iraq, or any other climate in the world. Keep it wet, and it will take care of you. So, what is TOO dry? I've found that with a 14.5" M-4, I could easily get 500 rounds between lubings without a problem, as long as I "field lubed" it every 500 rounds or so. Starting with a wet gun, I can count on getting the better part of 1000 rounds trouble free, if I was unable to lube it again. After that, it needed to be lubed if I wanted it to keep running.

With an 11" gun? Different story. Lube more often for best results.

[JAD]

(on the AR thing)
Shame on me then -- it was gjm's AAR that I misremembered it from. I'll work on a better attribution, and will also unpack my copy of 'some of the answer.'

[DocGKR]

For the past 25 years or so, I've always used the bolt release to chamber a round with AR15's--as SLG mentioned, no problems. I've taken classes with Pat--he uses the bolt release.

As noted, gross and fine motor skills are a red herring--despite what is commonly believed, pretty much ALL pistol manipulations, including hitting the magazine release and pulling the trigger, are fine motor skills.

For my first decade in LE we were trained to use the overhand method on the slide--works OK, but is slow. Then in the wake of 9/11 we began to get more training from folks in the SOF community who strongly advocated using the slide stop. Thus for the past 10 years we have been using using the weak hand thumb to release the slide stop. Turns out it is definitely faster and just as consistent to release the slide using the slide stop...

[GJM]

(on the AR thing)
Shame on me then -- it was gjm's AAR that I misremembered it from. I'll work on a better attribution, and will also unpack my copy of 'some of the answer.'

Where was that AAR? I recall doing one after the Pat Rogers class, but I couldn't locate the AAR when I read your initial reference to AR loading technique.

Doc, in my experimenting today, despite my long time use of the support thumb, the strong thumb seemed faster than the support thumb, so assuming no issue with the ergos of a specific pistol, why the support thumb?

[DocGKR]

If you can use your strong hand thumb, then rock on. However, a lot of folks cannot reach the slide release with the strong thumb without shifting the pistol; on the other hand, after inserting the magazine the support side thumb ends up right on top of the slide release--might as well use it.

[ToddG]

The primary arguments against using the SH thumb are that some people find it hard to reach depending on their hand shape/size and their gun (as DocGKR pointed out above); and, you run the risk of hitting the slide release before the magazine is seated, thus inducing a stoppage. The latter problem becomes more prevalent as folks speed up if they're trying to time the release rather than simply pre-loading the slide release lever (again, assuming they can reach it properly from their normal firing grip) and allowing the motion of the gun to trip the lever without worrying about timing.

[JAD]

Where was that AAR? I recall doing one after the Pat Rogers class, but I couldn't locate the AAR when I read your initial reference to AR loading technique.
Q12011. I found it in the archives, and there is absolutely no mention of the bolt stop / release. I am *completely* on crack. I have the sneaking feeling it was from a Rangemaster AAR; so, there you go, maybe.

[Adam]

I don't train for it or rely on it. I load, unload, clear malfunctions, chamber check and perform every other action by coming over the top and running the slide with all of my fingers. Just one of those to each their own things.

[Ed L]

As noted, gross and fine motor skills are a red herring--despite what is commonly believed, pretty much ALL pistol manipulations, including hitting the magazine release and pulling the trigger, are fine motor skills.

What's funny is that some instructors who eschew using the slide release because it is a "fine motor skill' will then go and advocate even finer motor skills like easing to the trigger to the reset point after each shot or taking the slack out of the trigger or starting on the trigger pull as you extend the gun out.

To those people I say, c'mon, guys, you can't have it both ways--you can't say that one technique is too fine motor and then teach things that are even more fine motor.

[Dagga Boy]

Ed, one of the things I have noticed during debriefs and my own experience is the ability to do certain things has more to do with Hicks law issues and when in the gunfight they are occurring. I stress to my students to try to not panic (confidence in your skills and training really helps here), and focus on the basics. The use of very simple responses to problem solving also helps. I train that the only thing going through your head after you have decided to use lethal force is "front sight, press, follow-through (reset is part of the follow-through)". All of this can be done, and is well established as a winning strategy.

The issue comes in when things start to go wrong. You go to slide lock or have a malfunction while in the middle of a fight....panic and stress will go through the roof. This is why I teach very similar techniques to solve both problems to the people I trained. Those who live, breath and crap shooting can handle working though more efficient means to solve some of these problems. Those who carry a gun because they "have to" and those who rarely train will not do well trying to diagnose "why their gun is not going bang" in the middle of a fight. Some guns are also more efficient at different things. Slide Lock reloads....HK's win the day here all day long (positive mag release combined with HUGE slide release). They tend not to have as good of a trigger as other pistols. Some pistols have better safety systems, some better triggers, some better size to fit a shooters hand, some are easier to carry,.....etc. So you have to work with what you have. Things like "timing" a mag change in a fight is a much bigger issue than timing that mag change during a match or range drill. It is why I teach speed reloads and tactical reloads as "reloads", and slide lock as a malfunction (whether it is the result of running out of bullets, or a mechanical issue is a irrelavent). Many people also have major issues post fight. Again, simple training to make it easier for them to deal with the situations. Also, the longer a gunfight takes, stress gets multiplied rapidly (this is also true of regular fights, police pursuits, and other similar events). It is why I so heavily emphasize ending fights as quick as possible. Most of my people were ending gunfights in under 5 rounds. That was not the case before I was training them, and where I was able to see all sorts of issues become factors the longer the fight lasted, or the longer misses were being fired.

[ToddG]

The issue comes in when things start to go wrong. You go to slide lock or have a malfunction while in the middle of a fight....panic and stress will go through the roof. This is why I teach very similar techniques to solve both problems to the people I trained.

The problem is that neuroscience doesn't back that up. Training for a common response to varied stimuli doesn't have a substantial crossover effect. Your brain is going to give one set of instructions when faced with "gun is empty" and another set for "gun malfunctioned." If anything, to me this advocates towards using the slide release because when my brain says "gun is empty" and it's time to drop the slide, using the release is far faster and more certain for most people than racking the slide on the belt, etc. -- which also requires more decision branching. So my response to "empty gun" is very consistent.

Now if you teach the exact same response to every instance in which the gun cannot/does not fire another round, you avoid the decision tree problem but create a slow and inefficient response to the most common issues. There are certainly some who advocate that, but personally I think it is -- like "fine motor skill vs gross motor skill" -- mostly people who know just enough about psychology to get themselves in trouble. To steal ed l's train of thought, we cannot tell people to be situationally aware and making multiple split-second decisions about threat identification, positioning, tactics, etc. but at the same time tell me my lizard brain is incapable of conscious thought under stress. It's got to be one or the other.


Those who carry a gun because they "have to" and those who rarely train will not do well trying to diagnose "why their gun is not going bang" in the middle of a fight.

Couldn't disagree. But you can reduce anything down to "people who don't know how to do it right won't do it right." I don't think the question here is, "what should you teach someone who won't actually learn what you're teaching?"

[Dagga Boy]

Todd, I don't know how much neuroscience comes into play when people are shooting at you (unless there is a secret testing facility in Strasbourg where it is done and we just have to trust them). I have been lucky to be in a position to really diagnose what happens in gunfights and how training impacts the results. I have never felt "time come to a near stop" other than during a shooting and one particular vehicle collision. Some of this stuff is simply hard to duplicate in a lab or in traditional analysis of human performance.

The biggest issue is in fact training and experience. You and I can tell the difference almost by feel between a malfunction and slide lock. We can sort through the options to fix it far faster than most, even with different guns. In the case of most of my students......just getting them to do something other than stare at the gun or raise there hand for somebody to come fix it was significant. If I had a nickel for every officer standing on the line with their pistol at slide lock and I would have to tell them..."you may want to think about a reload". It was frustrating that their initial training was so limited that they lack the skills needed for their job. However; it was very satisfying when you could get them to start to be able to run the gun after some directed training, and even more satisfying when they actually did it during a shooting.

It is simply a very difficult thing to teach those who don't want to learn, those who are happy being bare minimum performers, those who really want to learn but are limited by resources, and the other myriad of issues associated with L/E training. In my case, it was simply a case where I was passionate about the process, because I am passionate about the study of gunfighting. I invested a TON of my own time, money, and focus that was way outside of the norm for most people assigned to the same job. I get frustrated now when I return to my old agency and see instructors who are under trained, lack passion, and have just enough info to get into trouble. Combine this with disinterested students and you see why many fail in lethal force encounters.

[ToddG]

Todd, I don't know how much neuroscience comes into play...

That's just it, though. The brain works the way it works. Human beings have been placed in life-threatening stressful situations since the dawn of mankind.


It is simply a very difficult thing to teach those who don't want to learn, those who are happy being bare minimum performers, those who really want to learn but are limited by resources, and the other myriad of issues associated with L/E training.

Agree 100% but as I said above, "those who don't want to learn" fall outside the purpose of this thread which was, by definition, about people who do want to learn. :cool:

[Dagga Boy]

"That's just it, though. The brain works the way it works. Human beings have been placed in life-threatening stressful situations since the dawn of mankind."

And some excel, and some crap the bed. I have found over and over that it will come back to training and mindset. In the case here, the issue may be too many choices of what to do when the flag goes up, rather than knowing what to do. I am a big believer in giving the brain "easy" decisions to make when working in life threatening situations in compressed time frames. I would rather see a good technique executed smoothly and without hesitation right now, than stumbling a little or slowing down while trying to find the perfect solution.

I'll be out of town without internet for a few days, so I don't want anyone to think I left pouting. I am really enjoying the tone of discussion here.

[Dagga Boy]

I am not an instructor or any kind of an expert, but isn't this really a matter of knowing your audience? For the OP, slidelock will work because he will train it hard. For someone who carries because he has to but won't dedicate time to training, overhand is better because it's aligned with a series of other skills that are all being taught simultaneously. That's an oversimplification, but it gets at what I have taken from this thread and others on the subject.

Pretty much.:cool:

[JAD]

I am not an instructor or any kind of an expert, but isn't this really a matter of knowing your audience? For the OP, slidelock will work because he will train it hard. For someone who carries because he has to but won't dedicate time to training, overhand is better because it's aligned with a series of other skills that are all being taught simultaneously. That's an oversimplification, but it gets at what I have taken from this thread and others on the subject.

Close for me; and keeping in mind that the origin of the thread was "do I need to feel bad about autoforward working for me?" the basic response that I was trying to convey was "the ER is grossly overtaught and overpracticed; I wouldn't worry if it seems to work most of the time."

I do one or two ERs in a 200 round workout, if I think about it. I hit the slidelock sometimes, but if I bother to try to get it 'right' I run over the top since it works with all my guns (except the revolvers) and it's kind of part of a continuum or whatever.

But mostly, I don't worry about it, GJM probably shouldn't worry about it, and drills (like, say, El Presidente) are kind of crap because 10% of par is taken up with even the fastest ER. Todd made the point that one technique being 0.7 seconds faster than another would allow him to get an extra five rounds downrange. For me, if nine rounds have been ineffective in resolving the situation I plan to devote foremost attention to changing the situation, and clearly I was on the wrong side of the .45 vs .50 AE debate.

[gringop]

But mostly, I don't worry about it, GJM probably shouldn't worry about it, and drills (like, say, El Presidente) are kind of crap because 10% of par is taken up with even the fastest ER.

Are you saying that your plan to an empty gun situation is to not practice empty gun reload drills because they don't let you have a nice fast time? Do you recommend this practice to others?

Gringop

[jetfire]

I don't know about ya'll, but if I was in a situation where I shot my gun dry and I still needed to shoot more (very unlikely) I would want more bullets in that gun as fast as possible.

[ToddG]

I don't know about ya'll, but if I was in a situation where I shot my gun dry and I still needed to shoot more (very unlikely) I would want more bullets in that gun as fast as possible.

This.

[JAD]

Are you saying that your plan to an empty gun situation is to not practice empty gun reload drills because they don't let you have a nice fast time? Do you recommend this practice to others?

I don't recommend anything to anybody. I also didn't say I don't practice it, though I'm sure I hyperbolized my nonchalance; I work a couple of reps in per session. I don't emphasize it. I am baffled by how much others worry about it, primarily as evidenced by its significance in many common drills and tests -- like I said, it's at least 10% of an el pres, even for you badasses. I think that's silly. But, I do admit, speed reloads do /look/ really cool.

[JAD]

This.

Cool. So -- and we may need a sample from someone who isn't a complete training beast -- how much of your practice time is spent working ERs? Of the drills that you use to measure your skill, what weight does the time of an ER have? And do you think those two numbers are appropriately proportional to the likelihood of having to employ that skill, and having that skill not only performed smoothly and surely (which we both agree is important, which is why I give it some of my time), but very very quickly?

I don't know how to factor looking cool. It ranks pretty high for me.

[ToddG]

I think you're trying to approach the issue from the wrong angle.

It's not about what percentage of time people should practice slidelock reloads. Set goals and work toward reaching them. The goals you set are going to be based on your current ability, your resources, and your priorities. If, in your mind, the slidelock reload has little practicality then it won't be a goal.

[jslaker]

Cool. So -- and we may need a sample from someone who isn't a complete training beast -- how much of your practice time is spent working ERs? Of the drills that you use to measure your skill, what weight does the time of an ER have? And do you think those two numbers are appropriately proportional to the likelihood of having to employ that skill, and having that skill not only performed smoothly and surely (which we both agree is important, which is why I give it some of my time), but very very quickly?

I don't know how to factor looking cool. It ranks pretty high for me.

By training in the defensive use of a firearm in general, you are devoting a disproportionate amount of time to an exceedingly unlikely event; the vast majority of defensive firearm owners will never fire a shot in anger in their lifetime. But we train anyway because in the event we need that skill, something has gone seriously wrong and we want to be able to correct that as proficiently as we're able.

Ending up at slidelock during a defensive shooting is highly unlikely, but if it happens, you are in an even worse unlikely situation that you want out of as quickly as possible. Given how incredibly simple it is to work slidelock reloads into your other training, I think it's hard to justify not working them, personally.

Train for the worst so that the odds are at least slightly less bad when the universe is busy stacking the deck against you.

[GJM]

I like to train fast draws, initial shots to the upper A zone, slide lock reloads and 50-100 yard steel because they represent the edges of my envelope, and hopefully make what is in the center of envelope feel less difficult. At the same time, I would be fibbing if I didn't admit that I enjoy shooting. I suspect that if all most of us cared about was basic defense, we would just buy an 870 for home and call her done after some basic pistol training. It is a passion for shooting that causes us to invest this time and money into obsessing about what surely are inconsequential increments for most.

For a long time, my wife was a comfortable, safe, accurate shooter with good self defense skills, but no real passion for handguns. It was the Rogers School that turned the light switch for my wife, and changed her into a passionate shooter looking to train and improve. Since then her skill level has blossomed.

Back to the original thread, I do lots of slide lock reloads during my training session because it makes that response very familiar, and I haven't figured out a down side to that practice. Generally I load only five or ten cartridges into a magazine, so I don't think I am developing a bad habit of failing to reload.

[Ed L]

I value Nyeti's input & experience. Correct or incorrect, I grew up in a time where I had higher expectations for Police. I remember a family friend who was with the NYPD telling me about his job when I was a kid in the 1970s. I am not meaning this as a dig on Police either past or present.

I can see the simplicity of teaching racking the slide during reloads as it is similar to the motions initially loading an empty gun, but I never viewed hitting the slide release during a reload as a high-speed skill. Maybe this is a lack of exposure on my part.

My first formal handgun training was in the mid 1980s by Ronin Coleman, who before that was an instructor at Gunsite. The training involved the Weaver Stance and using the slide release during reloads, the latter of which, if I understand correctly, Gunsite no longer advocates.

[ToddG]

Commonality of training for LCD students is used because it makes teaching easier for the instructor as much (or moreso) as it makes learning easier for the student. When loading the gun, reloading the gun, and clearing malfunctions all use the same technique you only have to teach one thing. While "easier to teach" may sound the same as "easier to learn," it's really not.

While you'd be hard pressed to find anyone who remembers -- and will admit -- it now, one of the main reasons the FBI moved away from DA/SA guns to a consistent trigger was because it was easier to teach.

[JAD]

I like to train fast draws, initial shots to the upper A zone, slide lock reloads and 50-100 yard steel because they represent the edges of my envelope, and hopefully make what is in the center of envelope feel less difficult.

Granted, gjm, but I have the feeling your envelope is larger and it's center more cream-filled than mine.

Several good points made by Todd, gjm, and others, and I'm sorry to have hijacked this thread but it's been an interesting rathole.

I rarely go to slidelock in practice, just because it doesn't work out that way. A good example of when it does is when I do my unass bill drill, sending somewhere between three and nine rounds at a close target while moving to distant cover. That sometimes works out to an ER, if my splits are nice or the cover is distant; but by the time I execute that ER I'm moving behind cover, in the process of crouching, etc. I /shudder/ to think of what those times are like (one of the best reasons not to use a timer in practice is if you suck), but on good days that reload is smooth and the gun is not empty too long. If it wasn't smooth I'd practice it -- and I suppose that agrees nicely with todd's point.

GJM (can I call you by your first name in this forum?), the only downside I guess my trainers might see to the way you practice is that it could (not does) mean you're practicing those reloads standing still, and one thing I'm pretty sure they wouldn't like is me standing still with an empty gun -- if that slide's back I'm supposed to be hoofing it, I think. But then, they never seemed to let me do anything standing still.

[GJM]

I think Todd's point is that, properly executed, there is no time difference between a slide lock and slide forward reload. Now, if someone uses the overhand method, there is a big time difference.

I haven't reviewed lots of videos of shootings, but in the few I have, my sense is that people don't have a problem moving and taking cover when real bullets are inbound. I have done FASTest drills with a big step off the line when drawing, and another big step when reloading. It wouldn't bother me at all if that was part of the FASTest, but I think it is a diagnostic tool more than a tactical drill, and I am not sure if the variation in movement would makes the comparisons less valid. In any event, you can just practice moving when drawing and reloading.

I read something written by Hilton Yam recently, that made a lot of sense on movement. He described these baby steps people sometimes take while shooting "on the move" and suggested they offer little value over standing still.

George

[Dagga Boy]

Commonality of training for LCD students is used because it makes teaching easier for the instructor as much (or moreso) as it makes learning easier for the student. When loading the gun, reloading the gun, and clearing malfunctions all use the same technique you only have to teach one thing. While "easier to teach" may sound the same as "easier to learn," it's really not.

While you'd be hard pressed to find anyone who remembers -- and will admit -- it now, one of the main reasons the FBI moved away from DA/SA guns to a consistent trigger was because it was easier to teach.

For me, much of this was about training efficiency. I got "X" amount of time, and "X" amount of training resources (bullets, range time, access to ranges, access to personnel, etc.), and I needed to get the most bang for my buck. Keeping in mind that it was difficult to keep these people competent with both hands on their guns shooting one dimensional paper targets. It is sad because mine were using their guns a lot. I had to make decisions based on how to get them the most relevant training possible. I only taught one handed support hand only. If I was taking time away from teaching what they really needed to work on (two handed strong side), then the reality was that they were going to the weak hand because the primary hand was injured or not functioning. The whole hand switching thing was just taking away from more essential skill sets. I tried to keep weapons manipulations choices as easy as possible. The hand over the slide handled Administrative loading, Emergency loading, and malfunction clearance with one "choice" for the brain to make. That was more efficient to teach, and easier for the students to retain, and use under stress.

For what its worth, by focusing more training on accurate hits out of the gate, and winning fights quickly and with control, Combat Reloads became a rarity, and Tactical reloads as a post shooting procedure became more of the norm. It was not that way when I took over training.

[Al T.]

One thing to be cautious about - slide mounted safeties can be switched to "on" with an overhand slide release. BTDT - not fun if your in a bad spot.

[Dagga Boy]

One thing to be cautious about - slide mounted safeties can be switched to "on" with an overhand slide release. BTDT - not fun if your in a bad spot.

My agency never issued or allowed any pistols with a slide mounted control lever, which is why we had good luck with overhand, especially on the Glocks.. You have to adapt to each system. LAPD has to teach a slide pinch slingshot for this very reason. Same with others who have had issue with using the overhand on 1911's. I have spent a lot of time developing very specific techniques to specific pistols. The grip I teach on a Sig P220 is very different than what I teach on a Glock. The reload I teach on a 1911 is different than other pistols. Generally, I like the overhand on the Glock and like the slide release on anything HK. I am much happier using the slide lock on the Glock with a VIckers release.

[JM Campbell]

Great discussion gents, there is a lot to take away from these pages and add to the memory banks.

Please continue!

[FotoTomas]

I have lesson plans that require certain procedures be taught for manipulation of the pistol. Our qualification requires several slide lock reloads and we teach to use the left side release lever on the SIG and Beretta weapons we issue. I prefer that method as well and practice it often with my personal Berettas, GLOCKS and other pistols. A side note however is I once had a GLOCK 36 that was one smooth shooting machine BUT I was unable to reliably and quickly drop the slide using the side lever. That one pistol, when used in local matches, required me to overhand or slingshot the slide after a slide lock reload. I traded it off. Even so it makes the point that some familiarity with all of the slide lock reload options should be practiced. You never know when that "It will never happen to ME!" moment comes along. :)

[superscribe]

I'll go ahead and tack this on to the end of this thread and see if anybody wants to keep going with this. My topic is a little different, but related.

Recently at the range, i was practicing reloading. i was bobbling a few. I try to keep the gun in the box when i reload, and i turn my gun to make it a little easier to insert that mag. Basically, i end up with the palm of my hand facing the top of my head, the gun pointed up/left. A RO walked by and tried to get me to reload by having the palm of my gun hand facing more up with the gun pointing more left. That allowed the mag chamber to become more square with my face, and i was told it facilitated a faster reload.

Does anybody have any suggestions or criticisms?

The aspect of my post that is related to the original thread comes in this form: Before, i auto-forwarded a lot. After, i couldn't get the gun to auto-forward if i wanted to. Have any of you found the orientation of your barrel to affect the frequency of your autoforward?

Thanks.

[ToddG]

I want the mag well pointed at my mag pouch. The mag moves in a straight line into the gun.

[jslaker]

I'll go ahead and tack this on to the end of this thread and see if anybody wants to keep going with this. My topic is a little different, but related.

Recently at the range, i was practicing reloading. i was bobbling a few. I try to keep the gun in the box when i reload, and i turn my gun to make it a little easier to insert that mag. Basically, i end up with the palm of my hand facing the top of my head, the gun pointed up/left. A RO walked by and tried to get me to reload by having the palm of my gun hand facing more up with the gun pointing more left. That allowed the mag chamber to become more square with my face, and i was told it facilitated a faster reload.

Does anybody have any suggestions or criticisms?

The aspect of my post that is related to the original thread comes in this form: Before, i auto-forwarded a lot. After, i couldn't get the gun to auto-forward if i wanted to. Have any of you found the orientation of your barrel to affect the frequency of your autoforward?

Thanks.

I'm in the camp that likes to keep the gun where I'm basically looking down range through the trigger guard while reloading, so from your description it sounds like my preference is closer to what your RO suggested.

[superscribe]

I want the mag well pointed at my mag pouch. The mag moves in a straight line into the gun.

thanks for the feedback. do you do that and still keep the barrel pointed at the target, or are you comfortable with letting the barrel drift to the side?

[superscribe]

I'm in the camp that likes to keep the gun where I'm basically looking down range through the trigger guard while reloading, so from your description it sounds like my preference is closer to what your RO suggested.

I think this is how i used to do it. My RO wanted me to almost be looking INTO the mag well, and not through the trigger guard, because the gun was more horizontal (almost like it was laying on an invisible shelf).

[jslaker]

I think this is how i used to do it. My RO wanted me to almost be looking INTO the mag well, and not through the trigger guard, because the gun was more horizontal (almost like it was laying on an invisible shelf).

I look through the trigger guard, but the mag well is oriented toward the incoming magazine. The gun itself is roughly square to my face, but the muzzle is probably around 45 degrees off vertical. I apparently misunderstood what you were describing at first; the RO's method is definitely not what I find works well for me.

[ToddG]

thanks for the feedback. do you do that and still keep the barrel pointed at the target, or are you comfortable with letting the barrel drift to the side?

Keeping my empty gun pointed at the target isn't helping me shoot it.

I want my slidelock reload to be as fast as possible because the thought process has to be: "I just emptied more than a dozen rounds into this guy/these guys and they're still a threat... and my gun is broken until I get it loaded."

Looking through the trigger guard is a popular way to teach a proper reload. I prefer to have my gun just a little bit lower, so that my front sight is in line from my eye to the target. This means it's at the proper height to do a straight press-out once the mag is seated.

[Jay Cunningham]

I agree with Todd; I'm not really sure where the mindset came from that you are "serious" if you keep your empty gun pointed at a potential threat... I'm sure they'll be real impressed as you fumble your reload.

I agree with Todd again that looking through the trigger guard at the target is a great way to teach the reload, but I don't necessarily say that it's exactly how I do my reload.

From the VSM approach, I say you point your magwell of your empty gun at your reload pouch while holding the gun 6 to 8 inches from your face.

Your eyes generally stay downrange until the mag is about to go in then your eyes shift quickly to the magwell, and then the slide release as you actuate it with your support hand thumb.

Eyes go back to target as you push the gun back out and reacquire.

[TCinVA]

Keeping my empty gun pointed at the target isn't helping me shoot it.

I've never understood the logic behind that. The idea is that generally you were actively shooting at some dude who was trying to kill you and at some point in that process your gun stopped going bang. It seems highly unlikely to me that the guy who hasn't been deterred by the number of rounds you've sent into him or in his general vicinity is going to really be given any pause by a gun pointed in his direction that isn't making any more loud noises. If it's gotten to the point where you've expended all the ammo on board it's probably well beyond the point where mere display of a firearm is any sort of deterrent to whomever is on the other side of the event and what you really need most at that moment is more bullets in the bad guy.

To me that's always sounded like advice somebody came up with based on cardboard bad guys rather than actual human beings.

[superscribe]

I've never understood the logic behind that. The idea is that generally you were actively shooting at some dude who was trying to kill you and at some point in that process your gun stopped going bang. It seems highly unlikely to me that the guy who hasn't been deterred by the number of rounds you've sent into him or in his general vicinity is going to really be given any pause by a gun pointed in his direction that isn't making any more loud noises. If it's gotten to the point where you've expended all the ammo on board it's probably well beyond the point where mere display of a firearm is any sort of deterrent to whomever is on the other side of the event and what you really need most at that moment is more bullets in the bad guy.

To me that's always sounded like advice somebody came up with based on cardboard bad guys rather than actual human beings.

the issue here is that people seem to be ignoring whether or not they are okay with teaching two different types of reloads for different situations. do i reload one way from slide lock and another way when I just want to change mags with a round still in the chamber?

i can think of several reasons for keeping the gun pointed at the target if there's a round in the chamber. i'm sure many of you could as well.

so, people being who they are, i can easily imagine why someone would want to teach his students one way of reloading, regardless of the situation.

[ToddG]

i can think of several reasons for keeping the gun pointed at the target if there's a round in the chamber. i'm sure many of you could as well.

I cannot think of a single instance in which I'd have an operable gun pointed at a potential threat and would choose to compromise my grip by performing a reload.

[Jay Cunningham]

I cannot think of a single instance in which I'd have an operable gun pointed at a potential threat and would choose to compromise my grip by performing a reload.

Right! WTF are you doing monkeying with a tac reload if you are actively pointing your loaded gun at a threat?

[superscribe]

I cannot think of a single instance in which I'd have an operable gun pointed at a potential threat and would choose to compromise my grip by performing a reload.

i don't have a dog in this fight either way, but i will give a few scenarios that have been given to me as justification.

picking an easy one, maybe when teaching a person to reload under stress, the instructor decides he doesn't want the student to accidently send a round high and to the left. the idea is shoot shoot then keep the gun pointed downrange while you reload in incase it is your first time with a walther/hk trigger guard mag release. that is how i first learned to reload.

lets say you have moved one from beginner class and are now 'tactically' minded. imagine a situation where someone might shoot most of their clip, not neutralize the target, and have the target go around a corner/doorway, etc. now lets say the shooter is worried the threat may pop out of the corner at any time, is still worried, and might need more bullets. would he take the gun away from doorway or corner and fumble with the magazine, or would he keep the gun pointed and fumble with the magazine, knowing that he could still fire a round?

[ToddG]

i don't have a dog in this fight either way, but i will give a few scenarios that have been given to me as justification.

No worries. That's what the forum is here for: so people can discuss this stuff.


picking an easy one, maybe when teaching a person to reload under stress, the instructor decides he doesn't want the student to accidently send a round high and to the left. the idea is shoot shoot then keep the gun pointed downrange while you reload in incase it is your first time with a walther/hk trigger guard mag release. that is how i first learned to reload.

Teaching someone to do it a sub-optimal way "in the beginning" is just cheating the student. Why build reps doing it the wrong way? A better approach is to teach the student the right way to do it safely and then monitor to be sure it's being executed in a proper & safe manner.


lets say you have moved one from beginner class and are now 'tactically' minded. imagine a situation where someone might shoot most of their clip, not neutralize the target, and have the target go around a corner/doorway, etc. now lets say the shooter is worried the threat may pop out of the corner at any time, is still worried, and might need more bullets. would he take the gun away from doorway or corner and fumble with the magazine, or would he keep the gun pointed and fumble with the magazine, knowing that he could still fire a round?

If you're in an exposed position with a potential threat that could pop around a corner at any time, are you seriously going to screw around with a reload to begin with?

If you are, then I'd suggest you're far better off doing the best, fastest, most fumble-proof reload you can. The idea that you might fire the one shot in the gun before the reload is complete -- the reason behind keeping the muzzle downrange -- is not only unrealistic but less than ideal anyway. You just fired the only round in the gun. Either the slide is closed on an empty chamber (which will make getting the gun back up and running take even longer) or, commonly on many pistols, firing the gun without a magazine can very easily lead to a stovepipe-like stoppage that needs to be cleared.

I said above it's unrealistic because based on testing we did years back at an IDPA match, I'm extremely skeptical that most folks will actually halt their reload mid-technique to fire a shot, anyway. Unless you have a very slow and meticulous conscious reload technique (in which case the answer is to practice your reloads more), by the time you've mentally caught up to the guy moving around the corner you've likely finished your speed reload. I've done speed reloads in FOF/shoothouse scenarios plenty of times. It's a matter of making good decisions about positioning and awareness.

Any technique that reduces my pistol to a one-shot weapon is marginal at best.

[jetfire]

To be even more practical about it, look at it from a purely civilian POV. I tend to look at reloads in the following order.


If there is a threat that I can see and I have bullets in my gun, I'm going to shoot it.
If there is a threat that I can see and I have no bullets in my gun, I want to reload as fast as possible.
If the threat goes around a corner and disappears, I am going to run away like a little girl while calling 911.


I can't think of a single reason why I'd point a loaded gun at a threat and try to reload it at the same time. If I want more bullets in my gun, I want to get the bullets in the gun as fast as possible.

[superscribe]

for the record, as an instructor in things that are not guns, but are also difficult and dangerous to learn, my experience is that using the words "i can't think of a single reason... " is an invitation to be proven wrong. It suggests your choice is based situationally and not on principle. it also hits a nerve with people who are even remotely creative.

@caleb

lets say trouble starts at the doorway of your apartment building. its trouble so bad you have to draw and shoot out the doorway, and the people you are trying to stop around the side of the doorway. Let's say your apartment is on the third story with no fire escape... like mine. now, maybe you suck at reloading with the gun pointed at the target, so that shouldn't be an option for you. But maybe you are proficient at reloading with the gun poited downrange. Also, and this is more toward toddG...

@toddG
...i think that current training for reloading with the gun pointed at the target teaches one to focus on the reload, and you having the option to shoot at the back of your mind, so when you are suprised you just want to reload faster, you don't default to shooting. I think you'd have better results with your experiments if the focus was on being ready to shoot at a target of opportunity, and reloading with the back of your mind.

if you have ever raced, the pro-con on the different mindsets seems to be very similar to whether or not you shift gears while cornering. people are probably getting bored of this discussion. personally, i'm just going to practice with both and see what the time difference really is. i'm lucky enough to have a gun that has no problem shooting a single round out of chamber with no magazine.

[ToddG]

for the record, as an instructor in things that are not guns, but are also difficult and dangerous to learn, my experience is that using the words "i can't think of a single reason... " is an invitation to be proven wrong. It suggests your choice is based situationally and not on principle. it also hits a nerve with people who are even remotely creative.

I guess I see it the exact opposite way. I'm not practicing -- or teaching -- for the most "creative" what-if scenario someone can come up with to justify an otherwise faulty technique. The idea is to use robust, widely-relevant techniques that work under stress, while moving, in the dark, etc.

[David Armstrong]

As always, what is your audience. I understand Nyeti working with his audience, Todd working with his audience, and the different audiences needing different tactics and techniques for reloading. I teach beginners and non-dedicated folks now. I get a very limited amount of time with them and often what I teach is the only thing they have to fall back on. So I want techniques that cross a wide number of scenarios and tactics that provide the greatest security. For me that means one style of load/reload, the overhand rack. It means one tactic for reloading, bring the elbows in and the hands down and reload with the gun at your tummy. If you need to shoot, be ready to shoot. If you need to reload, reload. Trying to reload while staying ready to shoot just doesn't get it done. Now, if I was teaching SWAT-doggies again, or HS/LD folks again, we might address things a little differently.

[jetfire]

@caleb

lets say trouble starts at the doorway of your apartment building. its trouble so bad you have to draw and shoot out the doorway, and the people you are trying to stop around the side of the doorway. Let's say your apartment is on the third story with no fire escape... like mine. now, maybe you suck at reloading with the gun pointed at the target, so that shouldn't be an option for you. But maybe you are proficient at reloading with the gun poited downrange.

Creating hypothetical scenarios to justify a bad or low use technique never made sense to me, but I'll play along. If I shoot out my doorway and the target retreats to cover, then there's no longer a threat for me to point the gun at. Which means if I decide to reload, I want the gun to be full of bullets again as fast as possible. What's even more likely is that I'm going to run like a little girl to my safe room, call 911 and hunker down behind cover with the phone on speaker and wait for the cops. I certainly don't wan to be pointing my gun at the door when they show up.

Reloading the way Todd and everyone else describes is a good technique. When you're trying to put a small box (a magazine) inside another small box (the mag well), why not make it as easy as possible? Like Todd says, I can reload in the dark while moving with the correct technique, which to me is a lot more valuable than waving my gun around at a "threat" that may or may not be a threat.

[superscribe]

I guess I see it the exact opposite way. I'm not practicing -- or teaching -- for the most "creative" what-if scenario someone can come up with to justify an otherwise faulty technique. The idea is to use robust, widely-relevant techniques that work under stress, while moving, in the dark, etc.

I agree with that principle in teaching. I don't think creating endless situations to test a good and sound theory is worthwhile. that is why i feel there's no reason to say "i can't think of a reason why..." because you are passively saying "i know better," but you are also inviting criticism or smart assery. You may not be able to think of off the wall reasons, but i just did.

I appreciate your reasoning, and i'll be practicing. I will say that if if the reload times are similar for me, I'd probably opt for the gun pointed downrange reload.

[superscribe]

Creating hypothetical scenarios to justify a bad or low use technique never made sense to me, but I'll play along. If I shoot out my doorway and the target retreats to cover, then there's no longer a threat for me to point the gun at. Which means if I decide to reload, I want the gun to be full of bullets again as fast as possible. What's even more likely is that I'm going to run like a little girl to my safe room, call 911 and hunker down behind cover with the phone on speaker and wait for the cops. I certainly don't wan to be pointing my gun at the door when they show up.

I live in a studio and i'm afraid that they ducked out and they are just waiting to come back in as soon as they hear my pop a magazine out.

[John Ralston]

I live in a studio and i'm afraid that they ducked out and they are just waiting to come back in as soon as they hear my pop a magazine out.

If you are concerned about noise, and not speed, you can remove a mag and insert a new one with almost no noise. You just have to ride the mag release button and push in on the mag during the release. Very quiet, and very slow.

If you could do a USPSA paced speed reload, you would be drilling him the second his head poked back in the apartment, which is the point they were trying to make previously.

[jetfire]

I live in a studio and i'm afraid that they ducked out and they are just waiting to come back in as soon as they hear my pop a magazine out.

Then you'd probably want to do the fastest reload possible, which isn't going to involve keeping the gun pointed at the target. Especially in this case, since there is no target to point it at, just an empty doorway.

The problem with hypothetical scenarios is that I can come up with at least three imaginary counters off the top of my head to justify my point of view, but that's silly. The only real answer to answer the question is to identify the technique that works under the widest possible number of circumstances and produces the best results. That technique has already been identified, so why would you want to use a slower, less reliable method?

[fuse]

I said above it's unrealistic because based on testing we did years back at an IDPA match.

This sounds awesome. I am assuming a stage where some kind of mover is activated as the shooter is in the middle of performing a tac reload?

Neat idea, very unconventional for a match.

[jetfire]

The worst is when you're shooting IDPA and step on an activator after firing 10 rounds in ESP because you forgot to fire a "make-up shot" before you got there.

[ToddG]

This sounds awesome. I am assuming a stage where some kind of mover is activated as the shooter is in the middle of performing a tac reload?

Yes. We set up a stage in which the shooter would reach a point of cover and was supposed to perform a tac or retention reload. As soon as the magazine came out of the gun, an RO would pull a rope that caused a non-threat target to fall off the target stand, revealing a threat target. People were simply unwilling or unable to change mental gears mid-reload and instead finished what they were doing before engaging the target.

[Tamara]

I live in a studio and i'm afraid that they ducked out and they are just waiting to come back in as soon as they hear my pop a magazine out.

You just lit off three quarters of a mag from a service-caliber pistol in a studio apartment and you're afraid that they'll hear you change mags? They must be descended from those evil Krauts who could hear Garand clips go *ping!* over the mortar fire.

[ToddG]

They must be descended from those evil Krauts who could hear Garand clips go *ping!* over the mortar fire.

http://timothypower.me/blog/wp-content/uploads/2010/05/29zonzt2.jpg

[LOKNLOD]

Yes. We set up a stage in which the shooter would reach a point of cover and was supposed to perform a tac or retention reload. As soon as the magazine came out of the gun, an RO would pull a rope that caused a non-threat target to fall off the target stand, revealing a threat target. People were simply unwilling or unable to change mental gears mid-reload and instead finished what they were doing before engaging the target.

Were many oblivious to the threat altogether until they finished the reload?


--Josh H.

[ToddG]

Were many oblivious to the threat altogether until they finished the reload?

No. The design of the stage made it almost impossible not to realize the target just turned "threaty."

[Jay Cunningham]

I've read this before and this and other data have gotten me to begin questioning the value of the tactical reload versus simply doing a retention reload - or just simply shooting to slidelock.

[ToddG]

The main benefit of a tactical reload (exchange is made at the gun) as opposed to a retention reload (exchange is made at the belt line), for me, is that it allows me to put the partial magazine in my mag pouch pretty easily. The whole "my gun will only have one round in it for less time" thing is just silly internet what-iffing and not really reflective of what people are likely to do under stress.

The main benefit of the retention reload is that it's easy and takes little (or no) practice to perform. And if you have the time/space/cover to do a tac load, you probably have the time/space/cover to do a retention reload and then reposition your spare mag back into your pouch.

Of course, for years I've said the best solution, if you really worry about retaining that half a mag's worth of ammo, is to carry another spare mag. Because having another full mag doesn't take any additional training whatsoever.

Admittedly, I tend to use tactical reloads instead of retention reloads. But that is more a function of my early training (very Gunsite-esque) and countless hours practicing it both live and dry. If I were tasked with teaching it to someone else, I'd almost certainly favor retention reloads.

[David Armstrong]

The main benefit of a tactical reload (exchange is made at the gun) as opposed to a retention reload (exchange is made at the belt line), for me, is that it allows me to put the partial magazine in my mag pouch pretty easily. The whole "my gun will only have one round in it for less time" thing is just silly internet what-iffing and not really reflective of what people are likely to do under stress.
Time out. Did I miss something, or has there been a change in terminology that I missed? When did the difference between tactical and retention reload become where the exchange is made as opposed to how the exchange is made?:confused:

[ToddG]

Time out. Did I miss something, or has there been a change in terminology that I missed? When did the difference between tactical and retention reload become where the exchange is made as opposed to how the exchange is made?:confused:

Sorry, I was totally unclear and threw my personal terminology into a public discussion. :cool:

To me, a tac reload involves exchanging the mags at the gun... fresh mag comes up, swap mags, old mag goes away.

A retention reload involves exchanging the mags at the belt line... old mag goes down to the belt (pocket, etc.), new mag gets picked up from the belt and brought up to the gun.

[David Armstrong]

Sorry, I was totally unclear and threw my personal terminology into a public discussion. :cool:

To me, a tac reload involves exchanging the mags at the gun... fresh mag comes up, swap mags, old mag goes away.

A retention reload involves exchanging the mags at the belt line... old mag goes down to the belt (pocket, etc.), new mag gets picked up from the belt and brought up to the gun.
AAAGH! Don't do that! There is already enough confusion in terminology out there without adding to the confusion!:D
BTW, what would it be if the exchange is done at the gun, but the gun is held at the belt?:)

[ToddG]

BTW, what would it be if the exchange is done at the gun, but the gun is held at the belt?:)

"Wrong."

:cool:

[Tamara]

BTW, what would it be if the exchange is done at the gun, but the gun is held at the belt?:)
I'm pretty sure he'd call that "Wrong". ;)


{EDIT: Dude, am I psychic, or what?}

[David Armstrong]

"Wrong."

:cool:
Putting aside the opinon of right or wrong on a technnique, would it be a wrong tactical reload or a wrong retention reload?:p

[ToddG]

2 mags in the hand at once = tactical reload
1 mag in the hand at a time = retention reload

[GooberTim]

BTW, what would it be if the exchange is done at the gun, but the gun is held at the belt?:)

I thought that was an administrative reload? Not that I condone such a thing.

Edit: At the belt as in "in the holster".

[superscribe]

2 mags in the hand at once = tactical reload
1 mag in the hand at a time = retention reload

The only reason i know "tactical reload" is from people being critical of IDPA and claiming it's ridiculous for self defense and all tactical situations.

What would you call letting your partially/completely empty mag just drop to the ground and slamming home a fresh on? "realistic?"

[Dagga Boy]

The only reason i know "tactical reload" is from people being critical of IDPA and claiming it's ridiculous for self defense and all tactical situations.

What would you call letting your partially/completely empty mag just drop to the ground and slamming home a fresh on? "realistic?"

Competition has made the tactical reload into something its not. If it is done on a clock, then if is being improperly used. I teach tac loads, we have had tac loads work very well in the field for a variety of situations, and they have a definate place in the real world. If speed is of the essence, it is not the reload I would use, and I am one of the biggest tactical reload proponents around. They are used when there is a "lull" in the action, and should be pure habit prior to holstering, or moving from one location to another after shots have been fired. If under fire, a speed reload is the way to go. If you (the shooter) cause your pistol to become inoperable due to running it dry, then it needs to be fixed at speed (combat reload). Neither is a place for the tac-reload.

As far as not being a good weapons handling skill for the real world............I was taught the importance of it from what is often regarded as the best SWAT team in the world, and have had it taught by most of the elite units, teams and trainers that I have worked with over the years..............I'll take their insight over tow truck drivers running "tactical matches", internet experts, and trainers with very questionable backgrounds any day of the week.

[rsa-otc]

Competition has made the tactical reload into something its not. If it is done on a clock, then if is being improperly used. I teach tac loads, we have had tac loads work very well in the field for a variety of situations, and they have a definate place in the real world. If speed is of the essence, it is not the reload I would use, and I am one of the biggest tactical reload proponents around. They are used when there is a "lull" in the action, and should be pure habit prior to holstering, or moving from one location to another after shots have been fired. If under fire, a speed reload is the way to go. If you (the shooter) cause your pistol to become inoperable due to running it dry, then it needs to be fixed at speed (combat reload). Neither is a place for the tac-reload.

I agree with your main point that Tac Reloads or Reloads with retention have their place in the real world, when there is a lull in the action and you are behind cover, or at the apparent end of the confrontation prior to holstering.

Now I do not believe in all the rules of IDPA. Like the one that says even if you are standing there with an empty weapon you can not start your reload until you have assumed cover. Horse DOO DOO. In real life if I'm empty I'm loading NOW as I go to cover, I'm getting that gun running ASAP. But as I have seen the Tac or Retention reload used (only when you are behind cover) I see it's place. This is simulated combat (yes I know it's only a game) even if I'm behind cover and I sense or feel there is a lull in the action and decide to top off, I'm doing it as quickly as possible. I can see where the USPSA run and gun competition would not be a good fit.

Personally even though I have large hands I find the reload with retention to be more positive, both in the exchange of the magazines and making sure the new mag is properly seated. When I have two mags in my hand at the same time and I'm trying to seat a fully loaded mag in the gun with the action closed sometimes under stress I don't get enough force applied to the new mag to positively seat it.

[David Armstrong]

I thought that was an administrative reload? Not that I condone such a thing.

Edit: At the belt as in "in the holster".
IME the admin load is done with the gun in the holster. There is a school of thought that suggests doing the reload by pulling the gun into the stomach area for mag changes. Makes it easier to swap mags under stress for lots of folks.

[David Armstrong]

The only reason i know "tactical reload" is from people being critical of IDPA and claiming it's ridiculous for self defense and all tactical situations.

What would you call letting your partially/completely empty mag just drop to the ground and slamming home a fresh on? "realistic?"
I tend to agree with the idea that the tactical reload is rather ridiculous. There is little it can do that cannot be done as well or better with another type of reload. If it truly is a lull the retention reload provides more certainty, if there is not a lull the speed reload is faster. Todd may remember it better than I do, but IIRC we spent about a year asking on various forums and at conferences if anyone could provide a single instance of a tactical reload having any impact on the outcome of a fight without anyone being able to provide one.

[Dagga Boy]

I've had two cases at my old agency that I know of first hand where the Tac load was an integral in resolving the incident to full, safe, conclusion.

[David Armstrong]

I've had two cases at my old agency that I know of first hand where the Tac load was an integral in resolving the incident to full, safe, conclusion.
I would love to hear about them, if you don't mind sharing. Please PM details. We've found cases where tac reloads were done but never where the rounds saved could not have been saved with a retention reload or where the rounds saved were later needed to win the fight, so I'd really like to get them into my files.

[ToddG]

I've had two cases at my old agency that I know of first hand where the Tac load was an integral in resolving the incident to full, safe, conclusion.

Just to follow on with what Dr. DA said: These were instances in which the rounds saved during the tac load were used to resolve a fight? We're not just talking about the need to have a fully topped-off gun but the need to retain ammunition.

[Dagga Boy]

In both cases, a reload with retention would have worked fine. I do not get to wrapped around the axle on this one. I prefer the tac loads for a couple of reasons, but I don't get overly excited about reloads with retention. Keep in mind that I have used a P7 PSP for over twenty years fairly regularly, so I was doing "reloads with retention" pretty regularly (pretty much the go to reload for the PSP).

Briefly-case one, a SWAT officer working a normal patrol assignment pulls a traffic stop in a gang area. The vehicle occupied by two suspects pulls to the rear of an apartment parking lot and sets the officer up for an ambush. During a very hectic gunfight the officer kills the driver, and then is engaged with a shotgun armed passenger. The officer carrying a Sig P-220 with two reloads abandons his patrol vehicle under fire and moves to another parked vehicle. He performed a combat reload under fire, and then a tactical from the cover of his last position as he knew he was short on ammo. The shotgun armed crook stole the police unit. All the responding units went after the police car and eventually the shotgun armed suspect was killed (another discussion on use of sights played a major role here). The original officer finally got a single back up and went to clear the original vehicle (he did not know the status of the driver until they cleared the car). During my interview the officer indicated that the Tac Load was critical because he felt much more confident clearing the vehicle with a full weapon, and knowing that he had another partial magazine in his back pocket with a few rounds in it. He was very aware of his ammunition situation, and used the correct reloads at the correct time. When he performaed the Tac load, the shotgun armed suspect was still very active, so keeping the gun ready to fire and controlling his magazines was important.

Case two-My partner and I were being set up for an ambush that we countered. This was in response to ruining the drug trade in a particular area. We were on bicycles. During the course of this my partner was engaged in a gunfight in which he killed the suspect with a failure drill executed on the move. After the shooting, he performed a Tac load while I covered him. Within seconds, the scene went very chaotic with a huge, very violent and hostile crowd. This included anther suspect making a go at my partner for killing his uncle (I ended up choking this idiot out........and the crowd went wild:eek:). There were only a few of us standing back to back protecting my partner and the body. I had a USP45, everyone else had Sig P-220's. Not exactly a lot of rounds for the very real possibility of another shooting. Especially, when we found out later that the car I was approaching and contacting the occupants when my partner got in the shooting had a trunkful of AK47's that were intended for us and we interecepted prior to the off-load. This had potential for going very bad very quick. It emphasizes that these fights are not over after the initial engagement, and the conclusion is not when the last shot is fired in the initial fight.

[David Armstrong]

As Todd points out, were the rounds that were saved make any difference in the outcome of the fight? In both of those instances, no, they did not. Any reload would have worked out just the same. So we are still without an actual example of where the tactical reload had an impact on the outcome of the fight. That is the problem with the tac reload, IMO. A mystique has grown up around it that is not warranted or even accurate.

[ToddG]

I've got to agree, while I appreciate that it's always better to have more ammo neither of those cases actually relied on a tac reload (or other retention reload) to succeed. In LE, most guys -- either through policy or habit -- carry far more ammo than they're likely to use effectively to begin with.

Having said that, during the short time I carried a low capacity pistol (P220), I was far more aware of my limited firepower... and practiced tac loads far more often.

[JAD]

I've got to agree, while I appreciate that it's always better to have more ammo neither of those cases actually relied on a tac reload (or other retention reload) to succeed. In LE, most guys -- either through policy or habit -- carry far more ammo than they're likely to use effectively to begin with.
Clint Smith -- and this was a long time ago, like 2000 or so -- was unshockingly succinct. "Don't throw your shit on the ground." Cooper, who never seemed to think much about capacity, favored the speed reload. I think Higgenbotham is teaching a speed reload followed by an eventual pick-up of the magazine. I train both ways. I have little trouble with tac loads, but I use single column guns. I don't see the purpose, outside of games, for the RWR, and don't practice it.

[rsa-otc]

It's well and good that a Tac Reload or RWR has not been used to this point (that we know of). But can we say that it will always be the case? Especially for those who are still carrying single stacks such as the 1911 or Sig P220 (Sig being popular here in NJ). In other discussions we say we want to be proactive, why not in this one? Is it better to train and never need it or not train and then need that skill?

IMHO the skill may not need to be emphasized but it still needs to be addressed.
An once of prevention is worth a pound of cure.

[David Armstrong]

It's well and good that a Tac Reload or RWR has not been used to this point (that we know of). But can we say that it will always be the case? Especially for those who are still carrying single stacks such as the 1911 or Sig P220 (Sig being popular here in NJ). In other discussions we say we want to be proactive, why not in this one? Is it better to train and never need it or not train and then need that skill?
It isn't a question of train or not train, it is a question of what to train. I suppose there might be someone, somewhere, who practices holding the pistol upside down with one foot while pulling the trigger with their tongue, just in case they ever need that skill. But given most of us have limited training time why spend it developing a skill that has never been shown to be needed AND offers a result that is better achieved in another way? If your concern is changing mags and retaining the rounds the retention reload does that far more reliably than does the tac reload, for example.

[David Armstrong]

Clint Smith -- and this was a long time ago, like 2000 or so -- was unshockingly succinct. "Don't throw your shit on the ground."
Perhaps true, but given that can be accomplished in other ways, I'm not sure that it provides a reasoning for the tac reload.

Cooper, who never seemed to think much about capacity, favored the speed reload. I think Higgenbotham is teaching a speed reload followed by an eventual pick-up of the magazine. I train both ways. I have little trouble with tac loads, but I use single column guns. I don't see the purpose, outside of games, for the RWR, and don't practice it.
I see it the opposite, that the tac reload is better for the games and the RWR makes more sense in a hostile environment.

[Dagga Boy]

As Todd points out, were the rounds that were saved make any difference in the outcome of the fight? In both of those instances, no, they did not. Any reload would have worked out just the same. So we are still without an actual example of where the tactical reload had an impact on the outcome of the fight. That is the problem with the tac reload, IMO. A mystique has grown up around it that is not warranted or even accurate.

Cool, don't do them. Had the officer in the first incident dumped his reload, he would have been doing a vehicle take down with 8 rounds on a vehicle that had initiated fire on him minutes earlier. The officer in the second incident would have had 3 rounds on board had he not reloaded, or been down to 15 rounds and facing a large crowd with access to several AK47's had he done a speed load. We had another long shoot-out where an officer fully depleted his entire load out of magazines for his M16. Ammo was dumped to him in case form over a fence into his position, in which he was then loading that ammunition by hand into the magazines that he luckily retained. Semi automatic and many automatic firearms do not work without magazines. I agree with Clint Smith, why dump the critical component of functioning on the ground where it may not be recovered if you don't have to. I worked for a medium sized agency. I would venture that there are cases at bigger places with better examples that meet the standard that you guys are looking for. For me, the idea that you should holster a pistol that you have already used in a fight with a full compliment of ammunition makes sense as a good habit. Not moving from a position of cover to an unknown without a reload makes sense to me as a good habit. Not discarding a critical component of my weapon, along with ammunition that I made need later for no apparent reason doesn't make sense to me......if it makes sense to others, rock on with your bad self. I do know that it always pissed off the R/O's at matches when I would tac load at the end of a stage prior to holstering, and then draw and perform and administrative unload. I guess not pissing off R/O's is a great reason to not do tactical reloads.

I began to emphasize the tac load after running a drill in which my officers dealt with a problem in one room, and then had to move to a second room to deal with another problem. Room one was a 3-5 round problem. Room two was a ten round problem. Every single officer left room one with a gun with a few rounds in it and ran out of ammunition and
had to perform a combat reload from slide lock or a load from a speed loader in very close proximity to multiple targets. This is unacceptable, and we trained extensively around it. Prior to me taking over our program, most shootings went on till empty. Once sighted fire was made mandatory and the program was changed to a Modern Technique based system, round counts went way down, hits went way up, and the tac load was far more common than the speed or combat load.

[David Armstrong]

I don't think anyone is saying don't do reloads, what is being said is that the tac reload as a skill doesn't seem to serve any real need off the range.

Had the officer in the first incident dumped his reload, he would have been doing a vehicle take down with 8 rounds on a vehicle that had initiated fire on him minutes earlier.
In other words, the officer would have still had a full magazine to do a vehicle takedown where he didn't need any rounds at all.

The officer in the second incident would have had 3 rounds on board had he not reloaded, or been down to 15 rounds and facing a large crowd with access to several AK47's had he done a speed load.
So, again, the officer would have had a full magazine and some spare rounds in a situation where he needed zero.

Ammo was dumped to him in case form over a fence into his position, in which he was then loading that ammunition by hand into the magazines that he luckily retained. Semi automatic and many automatic firearms do not work without magazines.
I don't understand why this is so hard to understand. Nobody says don't hold on to magazines and any other gear if appropriate. The question is if the tac reload offers any advantage when compared to other reloading techniques.

I agree with Clint Smith, why dump the critical component of functioning on the ground where it may not be recovered if you don't have to.
I agree, why do that? You reduce the likelihood of that happening if you handle one magazine at a time, rather than try to juggle two at a time with the tactical reload.

I would venture that there are cases at bigger places with better examples that meet the standard that you guys are looking for.
Like I said, we've asked lots of places for lots of years, and so far nobody has been able to provide a non-military instance where the saved rounds were even needed, much less where the rounds couldn't have been saved with another reload method.

For me, the idea that you should holster a pistol that you have already used in a fight with a full compliment of ammunition makes sense as a good habit. Not moving from a position of cover to an unknown without a reload makes sense to me as a good habit. Not discarding a critical component of my weapon, along with ammunition that I made need later for no apparent reason doesn't make sense to me.
And nobody disagrees with that, AFAIK. But none of that requires a tactical reload.

The issue, to me, is very simple. Can anyone provide a single example of where the rounds saved by a tac reload made any difference to the outcome of a situation? And can anyone provide a reasoned explanation of why the tac reload is a better way to save that ammunition/magazines than another method that provides greater reliability? If those questions can't be answered with a "yes" then perhaps the practice needs to be looked at very closely in regards to the amount of training devoted to it.

[Tamara]

Not to be flippant, but I'm suddenly having flashbacks to {$RANDOM_INTERNET_GUN_FORUM}.com.

David, are you just pining for an argument, or did you honestly miss the part where nyeti said:

In both cases, a reload with retention would have worked fine. I do not get to wrapped around the axle on this one. I prefer the tac loads for a couple of reasons, but I don't get overly excited about reloads with retention.

As for

In other words, the officer would have still had a full magazine to do a vehicle takedown where he didn't need any rounds at all.
<snip>
So, again, the officer would have had a full magazine and some spare rounds in a situation where he needed zero.
well, maybe their crystal balls were in the shop?

I mean, yeah, it's fantastic that everything turned out okay and they didn't need any more rounds, but is that honestly the way you advise people to bet?

[jetfire]

I guess I don't understand what all the fuss over whether or not you should retain a mag is all about. Outside of an IDPA context where they sometimes force me to, the whole "when to reload" seems like a pretty straightforward decision tree.

So I'm shooting at threat targets, one of two things will happen. Either 1) the gun runs out of bullets before the threats are gone, or 2) all the present threats are neutralized before I run out of bullets. If #1 occurs, then I just reload my gun as fast possible since I'm out of bullets anyway. If #2 occurs and I've got a spare mag, I top off my gun and stick the mag in a pocket/pouch/whatever because I'd like to keep that magazine.

I am aware that it's a gross oversimplification, but it's also not my job to run towards gunfire. As a non-LEO, if I've reached the point in a gunfight where I'm doing tac-loads to have a full mag so I can sweep a vehicle or some damn thing then my day has taken a really, really statistically unlikely turn.

[rsa-otc]

I was thinking of a tactful way of addressing this, but Tam beat me to it and as usual did a better job of it.

[ToddG]

It's well and good that a Tac Reload or RWR has not been used to this point (that we know of). But can we say that it will always be the case?

I can't say with scientific certainty that the sun will rise tomorrow morning, but given significant historical precedent and no contrary data I feel safe making the assumption.

Tac load to your heart's content. You're not hurting my feelings. But given the limited training time most people have, "the thing that's never been needed but maybe I'll be the first" seems lower on the Great Totem Pole of Priorities than, say, improving marksmanship and speed.

My position remains the same: if you're that concerned with running out of ammo, carry one more spare magazine.

[Dagga Boy]

I've sort of given up on trying to change peoples minds on things like this. Rob Pincus is a guy who doesn't teach tac loads and teaches magazine positioning that differs from most peoples that also happens to not work with a traditional tac load. If you think Rob (and others with the same opinion) is a genius on gunfighting, don't do tac loads. On the other hand, the circle of folks I train with all advocate them, and most have been in multiple gunfights and don't seem to find the technique to be a waste.

Like I said, I have to do reload with retention style loads in order to run my PSP. It is the way to go with that system for everything. I also carry my PSP's like most carry a J frame, and often do not have a spare magazine, so its sort of a non issue. With other guns, I like keeping things consistent for the sake of being on auto pilot with all aspects of fighting with firearms. Gun handling is one area that goes to crap in actual gunfights (or the very minimal stress of a competition or training class), so many aspects should be hard wired as "habits". I am a big believer in hard wiring responses to limit decision making on techniques when you are dealing with the chaos of a lethal force engagement when you are fighting with guns and not playing with guns.

When I asses any situation to require a re-load on a pistol that can be re-loaded with single hand manipulation, my support hand is going to the pouch and returning with a magazine on the desired speed and tac reload, which are both done when I want to (usually ahead of hitting the mag release). Think of it as the same order of event-1. support hand retrieves mag and starts to the gun. 2. primary thumb hits the mag release (mag on ground or support hand depending on situation), 3. insert magazine into weapon and continue the fight. In the case of a combat/emergency (ran the gun out of bullets shooter induced malfunction) reload, I am also going to the pouch with that support hand, and the rest is the same, except for getting the round chambered to fix the malfunction prior to continuing the fight. So if I can keep all of that consistent and fluid, I'll do it. The tac load also combines well with a technique we taught for dealing with downed officer rescues and active shooters when using single stack mags. If you cannot handle two mags at once, don't do it. I have taught the re-load with retention to shooters that I have had who due to hand size, lack of dexterity, injury, or ineptitude, who wouldn't be able to execute a tac load reliably in a fight. It is viable, just not my first choice. This is also very true when handling rifle mags with small handed shooters. If I was beginning in the training world today, without my current background, training, and curriculum, I would take a hard look at the reload with retention as a primary means of performing a re-load during a lull.

For what its worth, I am aware of several cases where not performing a reload prior to holstering, or standing around with a partially (or worse-unloaded) firearm has been a major issue in a fight. This is why many of us teach the importance of the tac-load (as well as loaded chamber verifications, and other often maligned weapons handling procedures). It is a good habit to prevent an issue. For those who think they are done the second they win the initial fight, find no need for retaining mags in their world, and discount all of this stuff because they aren't the people who run towards gunfights, then don't worry about it.

[Dagga Boy]

My position remains the same: if you're that concerned with running out of ammo, carry one more spare magazine.

Sorry Todd, we were typing at the same time. In regards to another magazine.........have you seen most cops gunbelts these days.........especially the little ones they like hiring these days. They can't even get normal pouches in the right place and oriented the right way. Equally, for the CCW folks, gauging what is appropriate is tough. I normally have 30 plus rounds on my body and another 30 off body on most days........and I still do tac loads.

Additionally, for those folks who are statistically more likely than most to end up in a fight with a gun, then teaching them proper post fight handling is a critical task. In my case, use of a pistol with a flashlight was probably the most important skill set I needed (I worked 19 years of nights). That would not be the norm for most folks who tend to be in bed at night and not hunting bad guys in the dark. Again, we all have different priorities that need to be addressed on an individual basis.

[ToddG]

Sorry Todd, we were typing at the same time. In regards to another magazine.........have you seen most cops gunbelts these days.........especially the little ones they like hiring these days.

Yes, I have. They normally have 45-50 or more rounds on them at a time. Some carry even more. The ones who have the shooting skill to make those 45-50 rounds count aren't likely to need more; those who lack that skill aren't going to be magically saved by a tac load.


Additionally, for those folks who are statistically more likely than most to end up in a fight with a gun, then teaching them proper post fight handling is a critical task.

Post-fight ritual is a completely different issue than tac loading. I'm all for having a ritual. I've got one myself. Making sure the gun is loaded and ready doesn't depend on whether I save the mag that was in the gun or not. What I do when I'm so confident trouble is over that I'm ready to holster my gun is different than what I do when I think I might need my gun again soon.

That's the issue I have with the whole "lull" thing. I do a pretty simple demo in classes. I'll tap you on the chest and tell you that when I stop, when there is a long enough lull, count to three out loud. Guess what? No matter how long you wait, I can always tap you when you start to count. Why? Because you can never know if the lull is going to extend another few seconds or not. Even if you have been standing around for ten minutes, if we're really concerned that another fight might await us, then we have no way of knowing whether that lull will last a few more seconds... enough for me to juggle my mags. So either I keep the gun as-is or I do a speed reload. If and when I feel safe and secure enough, I can always bend down and grab that mag.

[joshs]

I use and like the tactical reload for one reason, convenience. I carry only one spare mag on my belt, so it is easier to set myself up for a successful emergency or speed reload by performing the change at the gun and putting the partial back in the single pouch. I also used to practice the technique a lot for stage 3 of the IDPA classifier, so I'm not worried about fumbling and possibly dropping or failing to seat the fresh mag. But, I think most slide-forward reload problems are better solved by a speed reload or a reload with retention (speed if shooting again may be a possibility and there are very few rounds left in the gun or rwr if shooting again is unlikely, e.g., before holstering, where failing to seat the fresh mag doing a tac load would suck if you need the gun again).

[Tamara]

Post-fight ritual is a completely different issue than tac loading.

In all seriousness: How does one tell a "post -fight" from a (you know the accent I'm using here*) "lull"?

I'm assuming that in the former I can stuff the magazine that was in my gun, that has (x<FULL) rounds in it in a pocket or mag pouch, while in the latter I should just let it drop on the deck?

*("What is a 'lull'? I've never seen a 'lull'. I imagine it looks like a large bird...")

[ToddG]

Tam -- post-fight means I'm ready to put the gun away back in the holster.

[Dagga Boy]

Again, back to simplicity. The tac load as I teach it (which is different than what I learned because I had to change things to handle hi-cap mags) is used for both the reload during a lull, the reload prior to movement from cover after a shooting, the reload prior to holstering, etc.

There are lulls in gunfights. Happens all the time. You just don't know how long they will last, which is why my tac loads are done at a level of speed, my gun is positioned for immediate action, and I have trained to shoot with the spare mag in my support hand if need be.

The level of importance is probably lessened by the use of high capacity 9mm's and .40's. I know of an agency that issues G-22's to everybody, and they just do a speed load to solve just about every problem. Where I worked, .45 was and is the prefered gun with a lot of both 1911's and P-220's in use. For me, I am usually carrying either a Glock 17/19 variant or a HK45C most of the time. I use the same procedure for both. This is especially true when I strap on one of my "man guns" (1911). Again, everybody is going to have a little bit different take and solution. My point is that just because you haven't had gunfights that fully depleted you of rounds is not the same for everyone. I have also seen enough issues with people trying to recover magazines from the ground on a controlled range environment, that I would not depend on that in the field where the ground, terrain, lighting, and other issues come into play. Also, many mags can suffer damage when dropped hard on concrete or asphalt. I like the idea of controlling my magazines IF I CAN. Others don't give a crap. Like many things, we roll the dice on what works. I have rolled enough times with a very successful, very well tested program that worked exceptionally well in a large number of field shootings to be confident with what I teach. If others have different experience that they know or believe (that is always the scary one) to work, then go with it.

[ToddG]

You just don't know how long they will last, which is why my tac loads are done at a level of speed, my gun is positioned for immediate action, and I have trained to shoot with the spare mag in my support hand if need be.

As soon as you acknowledge the fact that you may need to fire the gun in the middle of performing the tac load, you've identified a time not to be doing a tac load. :cool:

[irishshooter]

There are lulls in gunfights.

perhaps for LE, but not for a lot of us here not LEO. a lull in a gunfight for non-LEO is probably better served beatin feet than performing a tac reload, unless you are doing this while exiting the threat area.

[NickA]

Might have missed this, but just to turn the argument around a bit: have there been any cases of someone losing a gunfight because they attempted a tac reload /RWR?

Sent from my PC36100 using Tapatalk

[Dagga Boy]

As soon as you acknowledge the fact that you may need to fire the gun in the middle of performing the tac load, you've identified a time not to be doing a tac load. :cool:

Sometimes shit happens.........:eek:.

Which leads me to another point in the equation-post shooting procedures. How many really train hard for this? I have had the unique experience of not only being in several shootings myself, but I was present at so many without firing a shot that my nickname was "the bridesmaid" for a few years. I am sure I have set some kind of record for handcuffing shot bad guys. In my experience, what goes on immediately after a shooting is FAR more chaotic than during the shooting itself (this is in a domestic encounter, overseas combat is a different story). When you are trying to stop someone from hurting you or an innocent victim, you tend to be very focused on the task at hand. With proper training, sight focus and trigger press will be automatic as will your weapons handling related to actually shooting. After that, things go chaotic and with no real rhyme or reason. I have seen many "good" shootings go bad due to failures after the shots were fired because of poor weapons handling. I have seen some insane stuff from both people who I could predict failure as well as from highly trained people who couldn't deal with the situation. I spent a good amount of time training my people to be very controlled and employ very specific habits after they finish a course of fire everytime. Its why I watch Todd's videos with awe and admiration for his speed and clean movements, and then kill a kitten every time I see the speed re-holster:). I cannot say enough.....different needs for different people. I will also add that I have been in a statistically impossible number of VERY violent encounters while off duty (my shit magnet runs at a higher level than most). This wholly relates to what CCW holders will be encountering. While the stuff I did as a cop was very intense on many occasions, it did not compare to the level of intensity when I was without assistance, at times with my family, with very limited equipment and resources, and dealing with bad guys who were "all in" as their only chance of escape or survival was to beat me prior to the uniformed cops arriving. It is why I am so convicted to many that they need to pay attention to what is happening in L/E encounters, because when it happens to civilians, it will be a worse situation and often with people who will be dealing with that level of violence and chaos for the first time in their lives.

[ToddG]

Its why I watch Todd's videos with awe and admiration for his speed and clean movements, and then kill a kitten every time I see the speed re-holster:).

All part of my plan. I hate cats.

[David Armstrong]

Not to be flippant, but I'm suddenly having flashbacks to {$RANDOM_INTERNET_GUN_FORUM}.com.

David, are you just pining for an argument, or did you honestly miss the part where nyeti said:
I could be mistaken, but I thought one of the reasons for this forum was to discuss effective training techniques and how to improve how we used firearms. A discussion of the differences and relative advantages/disadvantages of various reloading technniques would seem to fall into that area.


As for

well, maybe their crystal balls were in the shop?

I mean, yeah, it's fantastic that everything turned out okay and they didn't need any more rounds, but is that honestly the way you advise people to bet?
Again, I don't advise people to drop ammo without a good need, but that is a different issue than "should we train to use the tac reload as a technique." Todd said it well: "Tac load to your heart's content. You're not hurting my feelings. But given the limited training time most people have, "the thing that's never been needed but maybe I'll be the first" seems lower on the Great Totem Pole of Priorities than, say, improving marksmanship and speed."
We already teach a retention reload as a skill, and that retention reload seems to do everything the tac reload does, only better. So why would devote teaching/training time to the tac reload?

[David Armstrong]

As soon as you acknowledge the fact that you may need to fire the gun in the middle of performing the tac load, you've identified a time not to be doing a tac load. :cool:
Bingo! That is my point in large part. If you are absolutely certain there is a lull then RWR provides the advantage of reliability in completion of the task. If you are not absolutely certain there is a lull then a speed reload provides greater certainty and improved speed. The tac reload offers no advantage to the shooter that I can see. I can do them, and used to show off a bit by shooting the Air Marshal course using only tac reloads, but they seem to take a fair amount of training for very limited return. During an shooting incident, or after the incident when everyone is under stress and things are particulalry chaotic, suggesting one use a technique with the highest chance of failure just seems counterproductive to me. My $.02.

[Tamara]

Bingo! That is my point in large part. If you are absolutely certain there is a lull then RWR provides the advantage of...
Who are you agreeing with, here?

Todd seems to be saying that, in his opinion, there's no such thing as lulls and also seems to be saying that he doesn't favor any kind of reload other than a speed reload, unless you're sure the fight is over and are putting the pistol away.

nyeti says there is such a thing as a lull and that he doesn't have any quibble with reloads-with-retention, although he says that he prefers tac-loads.

So, you say "I agree with you, Todd!" and then go and contradict everything Todd just said and, in fact, wind up agreeing with nyeti.

I am really, really confused.

[Dagga Boy]

I will concede that the reload with retention is easier to do. Shooting without sights is easier under stress. Shooting from a stationary position is easier. Never drawing from concealment is easier. Slapping the crap out of the trigger is easier. Shooting without wearing your gear is easier. Lots of stuff is easier. If I had very limited training time, and different priorities in my training program, then I would teach them without too much heartache.

With that said, my people did a tac load prior to moving from one shooting position to another during quals. They did a tac load prior to holstering. They had to shoot a lot of head shots, because they were required to shoot a failure drill for every stage inside of 10 yards. They had to shoot on the move, and we set up a slide lock reload under stress.......this was all done as part of their qualification course at every single range and training session. All of this repetition and "hard wiring" responses resulted in the following: My people shot very few rounds in actual shooting with very high hit rates (90+ %), shot a bunch of folks in the head on demand, often were shooting on the move, and during the post shooting investigation usually had a magazine in their back pocket and a fully loaded pistol (obviously, through training, they didn't have an issue with these). This was the opposite of what I found in the investigations of people not trained in my program (which was essentially stolen with permission from LAPD Metro "D" Platoon). Those folks often missed, often shot till empty or almost empty, and had unloaded or partially loaded guns in their holsters post shooting.

In regards to picking up magazines after a shooting. First, I've never seen it happen outside of the case with the guy with the M16 who was in a prone fixed position and his mags were laying under the gun, and a Senior admin guy who dumped his magazine when he was trying to hit the de-cocking lever. In most shootings, if it ends up on the ground, it will stay on the ground. Another issue is that you are working in a crime scene. From the L/E side of the fence the previous argument against tactical reloads was not in regards to the shooting side like this forum, but that "messing with the gun after a shooting is altering the weapon and will screw up the investigation". The benefit of what my agency did with me is to put a firearms guy on the investigation team, and I often got to talk to the shooters before anyone else did. I had to go to many briefings and training to tell our people to finish the fight, use what they were trained with, and I would figure out how many rounds were fired and by who. This is not a fantasy issue. Most post shooting investigations with both L/E and citizens are a witch hunt, and any "picking up" of any item is looked at by investigators as tampering with a crime scene. It is stupid and lacks a full understanding of many dynamics of the "whole picture" in this regard, but is an unfortunate reality.

[Dagga Boy]

I could be mistaken, but I thought one of the reasons for this forum was to discuss effective training techniques and how to improve how we used firearms. A discussion of the differences and relative advantages/disadvantages of various reloading technniques would seem to fall into that area.


Again, I don't advise people to drop ammo without a good need, but that is a different issue than "should we train to use the tac reload as a technique." Todd said it well: "Tac load to your heart's content. You're not hurting my feelings. But given the limited training time most people have, "the thing that's never been needed but maybe I'll be the first" seems lower on the Great Totem Pole of Priorities than, say, improving marksmanship and speed."
We already teach a retention reload as a skill, and that retention reload seems to do everything the tac reload does, only better. So why would devote teaching/training time to the tac reload?


I'm fine with a solid debate on this. I am well know for being the guy with a less than popular opinion and being "an arrogant prick" on the internet. My favorite evaluation at work was that I was "condescending and abrasive towards my co-workers" which was true when they were screwed up, so I am okay with a professional debate. If this stuff gets overly stupid and a waste of my time, I just stop typing at this stage in the game.

I am just the opposite of Todd (as usual :cool:), if you don't want to tac load, you're not hurting my feelings. I just put gun handling/tactics as being of equal importance to marksmanship and mindset when it comes to winning fights (not just surviving them, but crushing your opponent kind of winning). If marksmanship and speed is your priority, and the gun handling and mindset stuff is secondary, that is fine in somebody elses world.

[ToddG]

Todd seems to be saying that, in his opinion, there's no such thing as lulls and also seems to be saying that he doesn't favor any kind of reload other than a speed reload, unless you're sure the fight is over and are putting the pistol away.

At the risk of angering David with more twisted terminology... :cool:

I think of reloads as falling into two categories: voluntary and involuntary. The whole "TR vs RWR vs pick-up" debate is about voluntary reloads. Speed reloads (meaning IPSC style in-battery reloads) are voluntary reloads, too. I don't lose much sleep over any of them because, by definition, they're reloads I perform when I want to. They are initiated by conscious decision making on my part.

Now, from a teaching & learning standpoint, the speed and RWR options are much easier. As mentioned already, the time and effort necessary to reach true unconscious competence with the tac load is probably much better spent practicing, for example, hitting what you're aiming at... or the (involuntary) slidelock reload. Given the apparent scarcity of actual need when it comes to retaining the partially spent magazine in the first place, it seems like a lot of wasted effort to me. And I say that as someone who has spent probably 100 hours practicing tac loads.

Let's take the "never leave cover without tac loading rule." That's awesome in theory. But let's examine it more closely.

First, unless the fight is still ongoing, reloading is purely administrative... being ready for the next fight. How and when you reload is therefore completely unimportant so long as the gun is at full capacity before going back in the holster.

Second, if we are assuming that incoming rounds are a concern, unless you've trained that tac load to the point you can perform it without taking your attention off the action downrange and all around you, you're going to fumble, give up situational awareness, or both in the process. That's why I said the skill is only useful if trained to the unconscious competence level.

Third, a rule like that assumes a lot. When you step away from the square range and start dealing with thinking, mobile opponents you fall once again into e "lull" trap. While you're behind cover performing your tac load, the other guy(s) may be flanking or simply rushing your position. I've performed many in-battery speed reloads during FOF training; the only TR/RWR have been when I was ready to holster up.

As for the evidence thing, I have absolutely no problem explaining -- and demonstrating -- that topping my gun off after a shooting is a widely accepted and sometimes mandated action. Putting a magazine in my pocket, whether it came from the floor or straight from the gun, is no more tampering with evidence than reholstering. It's not like I'm going to hand over my gun to the cops but conceal the spent magazine...

edited to add: let's not bring mindset into this. "My technique shows better mindset" is even more debatable than which technique actually works best and just begins to smack of the whole "I don't have a weak hand, I have a Secondary Super Awesome Hand that just doesn't happen to be as dextrous."

[Dagga Boy]

I refer to "Mindset" as part of the Combat Triad as an equal leg to "Marksmanship" and "Gun Handling/Tactics", not regarding any technique. I use the triad to dissect shootings and where the successes were and where the failures were.

I try to make the tac load an unconscious process. I find it viable in that regard as I again am looking at those "voluntary" reloads as being very similar, and the "involuntary" reload as a malfunction that needs to be fixed. Like I have said the Tac Load starts the same as all the others, and the RWR doesn't, which is my only real issue, and it is not a major one. Its one of those things where I may ask somebody "why do you do them that way" to see where their thinking is coming from, vs. things like spare magazines with the rounds facing the rear where I do have a real issue with that and look at it as "wrong", and can demonstrate "why" its jacked up.

[David Armstrong]

Who are you agreeing with, here?

Todd seems to be saying that, in his opinion, there's no such thing as lulls and also seems to be saying that he doesn't favor any kind of reload other than a speed reload, unless you're sure the fight is over and are putting the pistol away.

nyeti says there is such a thing as a lull and that he doesn't have any quibble with reloads-with-retention, although he says that he prefers tac-loads.

So, you say "I agree with you, Todd!" and then go and contradict everything Todd just said and, in fact, wind up agreeing with nyeti.

I am really, really confused.
Tamara, are you just pining for an argument, or did you honestly miss the part where I said "That is my point in large part."? :)
I agree with both of them in some parts of what they have said, I disagree with some. I agree with Todd, it is pretty difficult to know how long a lull will last until it is over.


Sorry to confuse you. I thought it was fairly clear, but I know sometimes you don't follow my way of thinking.

[David Armstrong]

I'm fine with a solid debate on this. I am well know for being the guy with a less than popular opinion and being "an arrogant prick" on the internet.
Greetings, kindred soul<VBG>!

My favorite evaluation at work was that I was "condescending and abrasive towards my co-workers" which was true when they were screwed up, so I am okay with a professional debate. If this stuff gets overly stupid and a waste of my time, I just stop typing at this stage in the game.

I am just the opposite of Todd (as usual :cool:), if you don't want to tac load, you're not hurting my feelings. I just put gun handling/tactics as being of equal importance to marksmanship and mindset when it comes to winning fights (not just surviving them, but crushing your opponent kind of winning). If marksmanship and speed is your priority, and the gun handling and mindset stuff is secondary, that is fine in somebody elses world.
We aren't that far apart. My point is that we already teach RWR as a basic skill and it does everything the tac reload does, only better. So why not use it instead of spending the time and resources to learn yet another reload method that is actually less effective? The only way a tac relaod seems to make sense is if you need to do it in a hurry and don't care if you drop everything and need to pick it up, both of which seem to negate the whole reason for the tac reload.

[David Armstrong]

At the risk of angering David with more twisted terminology... :cool:
Words have meaning, darn it!:p Actually I don't mind modifications to terminology that make things clear, such as your voluntary/involuntary thing. I get a little bent when folks take a term that is regularly used in one context and then try to use a different word for it or apply it to a different context. Makes it really difficult to know what anyone is talking about.

I think of reloads as falling into two categories: voluntary and involuntary. The whole "TR vs RWR vs pick-up" debate is about voluntary reloads. Speed reloads (meaning IPSC style in-battery reloads) are voluntary reloads, too. I don't lose much sleep over any of them because, by definition, they're reloads I perform when I want to. They are initiated by conscious decision making on my part.
Don't see much there to disagree with.

Now, from a teaching & learning standpoint, the speed and RWR options are much easier. As mentioned already, the time and effort necessary to reach true unconscious competence with the tac load is probably much better spent practicing, for example, hitting what you're aiming at... or the (involuntary) slidelock reload. Given the apparent scarcity of actual need when it comes to retaining the partially spent magazine in the first place, it seems like a lot of wasted effort to me. And I say that as someone who has spent probably 100 hours practicing tac loads.
I would add a couple of points. We teach the speed reload and the RWR already for general gunhandling. And even when one has spent a lot of time developing the tac reload it is still the technique that is most likely to be done incorrectly.

See, no anger, no problem with the terminology. Life is good!

[Jay Cunningham]

Todd has a helluva lot more shooting experience than me and nyeti has a helluva lot (infinitely more) professional "real world" experience than me - weighing each of their opions in this thread and the explanations behind them makes for enlightening reading.

[Dagga Boy]

I'm not ready to concede that the RWR is "better". Is it easier to teach as an individual manipulation-yes. I already pointed out lots of "easier" things that are not "better". To me the pluses of the tac reload when taught in conjunction with the speed load and the combat reload in that they all use similar manipulations and order are huge plusses in a fight. If you want to call the Tac load a more advanced technique than the RWR that requires more practice to master, I will concede that as well. I use and teach a lot of techniques that are far more advanced than what I was taught. I found that many of the "simple" techniques that I was taught in the police academy were not as good in gunfights as other techniques (the biggest being not being allowed to use sights inside of 7 yards). In my world, when I am practicing tac reloads (which I did A LOT of at 0400 in my black and white parked outside the local stop and rob), other than the actual mag exchange, I am practicing most of the speed and combat reload in correct order. I used to actually about split my in car/t.v./toilet (best place to dry practice:cool:) practice time by dropping the mag from the gun into my lap to practice speed loads, or in my hand to practice tac loads. I had many of my people perform in field tac loads post shooting without ever having a case of them screwing it up, so it wasn't an issue that played out as being too difficult.

[Al T.]

Epic thread.

From my corner of my cake eating civilian world, I found Tom Given's method to have merit. Essentially, the off hand secures a full magazine and brings it next to the firearm. The shooter then releases the partially empty magazine from the handgun and quickly seats the fresh magazine.

Obviously, this is more oriented towards civilian use.

[rsa-otc]

Epic thread.

From my corner of my cake eating civilian world, I found Tom Given's method to have merit. Essentially, the off hand secures a full magazine and brings it next to the firearm. The shooter then releases the partially empty magazine from the handgun and quickly seats the fresh magazine.

Obviously, this is more oriented towards civilian use.

Are you retaining in anyway the partial mag?

[seabiscuit]

Question on the RWR:

When you bring the partially empty mag to your belt line, where do you put it? All of my pants have different pockets, some of which can be difficult to stick a double stack mag into. I'd want to be consistent about it, but that'd be hard unless I wore the same pants every day.

[JeffJ]

Question on the RWR:

When you bring the partially empty mag to your belt line, where do you put it? All of my pants have different pockets, some of which can be difficult to stick a double stack mag into. I'd want to be consistent about it, but that'd be hard unless I wore the same pants every day.

I noticed the same thing although my experience with this is all IDPA based. I just shove it into my waistband in the same place everytime, about 10:30. It's faster for me.

[Al T.]

rsa-otc, no. If the situation permits you can secure it later.

[Dagga Boy]

Epic thread.

From my corner of my cake eating civilian world, I found Tom Given's method to have merit. Essentially, the off hand secures a full magazine and brings it next to the firearm. The shooter then releases the partially empty magazine from the handgun and quickly seats the fresh magazine.

Obviously, this is more oriented towards civilian use.

Actually, this is exactly what I teach, and how I was taught to do tac loads, and it has no bearing on being a civilian or not.

What to do with the spare mag? I use the back pocket. I always kept that pocket clear when I worked in uniform and when I am off duty, and now retired. In my war gear I am a huge advocate of the dump pouch, and even wore a rolled up mini dump pouch from CSM gear in plain clothes, daily, for a year on a very high risk protective detail. The realities of clothing or gear placement will dictate where your spare mag goes. I do not like "back to the pouch" for a variety of reasons. I also use the inside of the waistband as my alternate. You should always have a plan "B" if your plan "a" is blocked from access or un-available due to position. I find the waistband faster, the pocket or dump pouch more secure. Also work from those locations on doing partial mag reloads. If you aren't willing to fully practice "ammo management" by working from your stowage location, then don't bother practicing tac loads at all. Often repetitive practice at multiple techniques used in conjunction with one another will dictate how well they flow together. This is very important to me, others like maximum efficiency from single techniques vs. the whole package. Whatever floats your boat. What wins gunfights at the end of the day, and can survive the post fight legal scrutiny is what works for me.

[David Armstrong]

I'm not ready to concede that the RWR is "better".
That's fine, put "better" aside as that is a very subjective concept. Let's try "more reliable." If we are executing a reload during what we think is a lull, there isn't a speed component to be worried about, and the only issue is getting a new mag in the gun and securing the old mag. The RWR provides quite a bit more reliability when performing that task.

To me the pluses of the tac reload when taught in conjunction with the speed load and the combat reload in that they all use similar manipulations and order are huge plusses in a fight.
I would take issue with that as a plus. No other reload requires catching a magazine in one hand while you are already holding a magazine in that hand, no other technique requires loading a magazine in the gun while holding a second magazine in the hand. I think the case is actually made that the RWR is more similar. Combat/speed, remove a magazine from the gun without fumbling around with something else in your hand, insert a magazine in the gun without fumbling around with something else in your hand. You are already taught RWR as part of basic gunhandling.

If you want to call the Tac load a more advanced technique than the RWR that requires more practice to master, I will concede that as well.
I don't know that advanced is the right word. Complicated may be more appropriate.

I found that many of the "simple" techniques that I was taught in the police academy were not as good in gunfights as other techniques (the biggest being not being allowed to use sights inside of 7 yards).
Me too. Of course, when I was being taught in academy we were still using K-frame revolvers and ammo dump pouches.:eek:

In my world, when I am practicing tac reloads (which I did A LOT of at 0400 in my black and white parked outside the local stop and rob), other than the actual mag exchange, I am practicing most of the speed and combat reload in correct order.
But that leaves out the most critical difference, the actual mag exchange. And it emphasizes Todd's point, I believe....to be done well the tac load does take A LOT of practice.

I had many of my people perform in field tac loads post shooting without ever having a case of them screwing it up, so it wasn't an issue that played out as being too difficult.
Perhaps, but I think that just about anyone who spends much time watching this sort of stuff concedes that if a reload is screwed up it is more often the tac reload than any of the others. There are lots of skills that aren't too difficult, but they still take time and resources to train and we can't see them ever making a difference.

[David Armstrong]

Question on the RWR:

When you bring the partially empty mag to your belt line, where do you put it? All of my pants have different pockets, some of which can be difficult to stick a double stack mag into. I'd want to be consistent about it, but that'd be hard unless I wore the same pants every day.
I always went to the left rear pocket. If for some reason that was unavailable, then the left front pocket.

[Dagga Boy]

I always went to the left rear pocket. If for some reason that was unavailable, then the left front pocket.

Finally.......agreement-:cool:.

[seabiscuit]

I always went to the left rear pocket. If for some reason that was unavailable, then the left front pocket.

Thanks. I'll practice that.

[David Armstrong]

Finally.......agreement-:cool:.

Like I said, AFAIK we're not really that far apart. Maybe it just seems that way when both parties are "well know for being the guy with a less than popular opinion and being "an arrogant prick" on the internet" kind of guys!:p

[Slavex]

I'm far more concerned about this cat hatred thing Todd has going on.

[Dagga Boy]

I'm far more concerned about this cat hatred thing Todd has going on.

Its one of Todd's better qualities............perfectly normal in my book.

[David Armstrong]

I love my cat.....Cuddles EvilDemon Hellspawn Deathcat, ressponsible for putting more scars on me than any other living creature.:mad:

[ToddG]

I love my cat.....Cuddles EvilDemon Hellspawn Deathcat, ressponsible for putting more scars on me than any other living creature.:mad:

Freyja, our 15 month old Belgian Malinois, could change that for you at your request. :cool:

[NickA]

I love my cat.....Cuddles EvilDemon Hellspawn Deathcat, ressponsible for putting more scars on me than any other living creature.:mad:

What's the saying? "Dogs have owners, cats have staff. "

Sent from my PC36100 using Tapatalk

[John Hearne]

"Cats look down on us.
Dogs look up to us.
Pigs regard us as equals."

Attributed to Winston Churchill.

[David Armstrong]

Freyja, our 15 month old Belgian Malinois, could change that for you at your request. :cool:
Well, Cuddles is sort of like me these days.....old, crippled, beat-up and mellowed out quite a bit. But in his day, I'm not sure. He did manage to send a couple of pit bulls running in the past, and fought a rather large boar racoon to a dead heat in his younger days. :eek:

Freyja, hmmm...I'm noticing a pattern.

[DonovanM]

Just put the damn thing in the gun and plan on releasing the slide, why the shit does it take 17 pages to- oh, you guys are talking about pets. Carry on. :)

[Dagga Boy]

Just put the damn thing in the gun and plan on releasing the slide, why the shit does it take 17 pages to- oh, you guys are talking about pets. Carry on. :)

You'll make a great instructor someday with your depth of knowledge:cool:.