Carry gun, competition gun -- same or different

[GJM]

Discussion for those that carry and compete in a shooting sport (USPSA, IDPA, etc.). Is your game gun the same, or at least the same platform as you carry, or is it a totally different platform?

I have friends that insist on gaming and carrying the same platform, and friends that game one platform and carry another. They are all still my friends. :) Kidding aside, I think there are excellent reasons to game and carry the same platform, and equally compelling reasons to carry one platform and game another.

Before I say what my current thinking is, I would be interested in hearing from others.

[breakingtime91]

I think time and money would determine this for most people. For me, I only have time and money to get proficient with one platform so that is what I do. I think most shooters would be better off using one type of pistol but for high end shooters, I'm sure it doesn't matter to much what pistol they use.

[Up1911Fan]

Glock's for everything here.

[BehindBlueI's]

I no longer compete, but when I did I carried the exact same gun for everything. Springfield Target Loaded 1911.

http://www.handgunsmag.com/files/2010/09/hg_springfieldarm1911lbst_201003-a.jpg

I would probably still carry it for everything except for no SAO rule at my department so I moved to Sigs. If I were to shoot competition, it would certainly be with a copy of my duty gun.

[Luke]

The same gun I carry everyday is the exact same gun I use for training and compition. Wish I had a safe full of pistols and had different ones for different things.

[MD7305]

+1, same here.

[ST911]

Same for everything.

[EricM]

Same for me, differing only in barrel length. I value having the same trigger, same grip (index), and same sights. In truth the only reason I even have a 34 is because the shop was out of 17's when I went to pick up a second one and I didn't want to come home empty handed...I'd like to evaluate at some point whether there's actually any measurable difference in my performance between the two.

[YVK]

I think that I can write a small dissertation on the subject. I've started, like most self-defense oriented guys, with my carry gun. I channeled Gabe and shot my first USPSA match with a P30 in the Limited minor from the appendix rig.
Several observations followed. First, I am no Gabe. Second, P30 LEM is no G34. Third, if you shoot competition and don't care to win or place the best, you're wrong (this statement may merit a separate thread if somebody has an issue with it). While I continue to use P30 and P30L for the local IDPA where they are amply sufficient, the USPSA is another story. That's how I ended up with a Beretta Elite and, being true to my train as you fight roots (mild sarcasm), I carried that anchor in AIWB for 8 months or so. Then I got tired. Then I got a CZ P01, hoping to carry it and compete with an SP01. P01 had to go to all major CZ houses to make it both hi-speed and reliable, and I haven't really vetted the last part fully yet. Disillusioned with it, I never got SP01. The compact Beretta kept turning me off on the account of a front sight and Beretta's loose definition of a "compact" term. I did get one eventually and it is somewhere in Pittsburgh now, getting the G-spot worked over.

At the end I said the following: fuck it. I've shot either the LEM guns or B92 nearly exclusively since October '11. I know exactly what price I am paying for switching back and forth. In general, my first shot, from a standpoint of CCW priorities, is faster with LEM; the rest of a mag - with Beretta. I have exactly zero problems with mag buttons differences. So I carry LEM, either 30 or 2000sk. I compete with 30L in IDPA and even occasionally in USPSA, but if I need to go get my best scores, it is an Elite. Also, a Beretta with a standard heavy ass mainspring sees the most of my dry fire. I used to make a point to dry fire both systems during each df session, and that nonsense is over with.
I simply stopped worrying about not having the same carry and game gun, and my timer was instrumental in putting these worries away.

[taadski]

I think one can develop a much higher level skill set by embracing the pure race gun game; learning to shoot (and more importantly visually process) at a higher level will translate directly to one's carry equipment. Akin to learning to drive track/race cars and having that translate back into having a higher level of understanding when driving your Corolla home from work. Is all the capability going to be there? No. But having learned to work at a more advanced level, a good bit of the processing carries over.

[Runs away...]

[warpedcamshaft]

I think you need to define the purpose of competition in your... I guess... "shooting life."

Examples:

1: Some folks don't live near a range where they can actually draw from a holster and shoot a drill because of range rules. A match can provide an exception to this rule for them, and after extensive dry fire practice they can validate with live fire at a match. This guy should probably shoot his carry rig. (It is easy to forget that a good chunk of the gun owning public is in this situation. Especially if you can drive 15 minutes to a private range and do whatever the hell you want.)

2: If you live somewhere with easy access to a range where you can keep up your holster skills with whatever you carry, and are proficient with your carry rig... changing out to a competition oriented gun can yield improved results in matches.

Also... if your goal in competition is to flat out win matches and not to get some practice with carry gear... there is a reason that top notch winning shooters use Glock 34's and not 19's or Tangfoglio Stock II's and not CZ P01's or Rami's.

[warpedcamshaft]

Discussion for those that carry and compete in a shooting sport (USPSA, IDPA, etc.). Is your game gun the same, or at least the same platform as you carry, or is it a totally different platform?


I'd also request that you define the word "platform" in the context of this discussion. (Not being snarky, the word has become very diluted in the context of firearms.)

For example...

Is a Glock 26 the same platform as a Glock 34?

Is a Sig 938 the same platform as a Springfield Range Officer?

[CSW]

Carry a 19 or 26,
But shoot the 34 as a game gun.
My thought process was that Glock triggers are generally the same[obviously the 34's trigger is more refined], and that the manual of arms would be the same.
One of my shootin' buddies carries a 19, and has a separate one for gaming. He shoots it excellent, so in his case, the one-gun-platform works. Both Gen 3 G19's by the way.

[SteveB]

I think there is something to be said for wringing out carry gear in a competition situation. This, to me, is the great thing about the smaller, local club matches where I can shoot a variety of stuff and remain competitive. While it's possible to figure stuff out running range drills, the added stress of a match gives me better data on how guns, sights, etc are really going to work for me.

To answer the original question, if I want to be as competitive as possible, I'm shooting a tuned CZ Shadow, Blade-Tech OWB, not carry gear. While I carry a CZ P-07 AIWB a lot, I don't choose that pistol because they are both CZ's. I do like a hammer on an AIWB pistol, and am currently revisiting the HK P2000 V3.

[Chuck Haggard]

I pretty much dumped everything else when we went to Glock 9mms at work, and since I had been competing with a S&W 5906 before that it was a bit of a step up in competition ability of the gun.

I tend to carry G19s in the summer, often G17s in the winter, compete with both. My nod to competition is to have a G17 with a FO front sight instead of night sights, and sometimes shooting USPSA from my duty holster instead of from concealed. I do pretty good with even the G19 from carry gear, rarely winning, but always well above the middle and often placing.

Happy end of G19 competition day (for me), everyone else in the pic is a cop from my job and they were also shooting a Glock 9mm, which is what they carry on duty;

3673

[okie john]

Haven't shot a match in a while, but I always ran my carry gear. I prefer not to switch platforms, but getting a little time on something new every few months--lately, it's the USP--helps improve my technique.


Okie John

[grok13]

For me, it was about simplification. I was chasing and experimenting with calibers, platforms, competition divisions, and carry positions. My vision also declined a little over this time. So, my do it all pistol resulted in an RMR'd G19. I like going straight from the car to competition and back again.

[CSW]

I think there is something to be said for wringing out carry gear in a competition situation.

The small league I shoot with here in NH is having their next match as a BUG match. Only carry guns of 3" or shorter are allowed. I'll be slinging the G26.

[Peally]

Same, although I could see how a compact with the same manual of arms could be substituted as needed. Two different platforms is a complete waste of practice time for me personally.

[BigT]

I used to be all about a systems approach of competing and carrying the same type of gun.

Now I compete with a Shadow or a Stock 3 and carry a Glock. And the better I get at shooting the Shadow, coincidentally the better I get at shooting the Glocks. I think far too much gets made of the differences between platforms.

In fact I have more issues trying to use a carry version of my competition gun and missing the smaller controls than I do switching between totally different pistols.

[JHC]

I shoot a few local matches a year and my principal objective I am chasing is to shoot alphas. I don't much care about placement and I am especially not crazy about shooting C's and placing higher (most of my local outlaw matches score weighted strongly to speed). So much so that recently a pal ran out of ammo on a steel stage and didn't even complete the course of fire and beat me at that stage. I crushed the alphas on that stage. Outrage!
I care a little more about outshooting a couple good friends I may be shooting with.

So based on that, and the fact I'm somewhat stingy about firearms budgets I compete with either my primary carry guns (G26 or G19) or with my seldom carried G17s. I'm just not interested in spooling up to shoot a purely gamer gun.

[olstyn]

The small league I shoot with here in NH is having their next match as a BUG match. Only carry guns of 3" or shorter are allowed. I'll be slinging the G26.

The G26's barrel is 3.46" IIRC, which would make that gun too big to be legal for that match.

Regarding the thread's original question, for me carry gun = competition gun, but mainly because it's the only pistol I own. Living on a tight budget sucks, but there you have it, so my P99c gets to play games when I'd really rather be using a full-size P99 for that purpose. Heck, ideally, I'd be using a 5" P99, if Walther made such a gun, but of course they don't. (5" PPQ only comes in the M2 version, which is a no-go for me due to the fact that I love the paddle mag release of the P99 and the PPQ M1.)

[GJM]

There is a lot of appeal to gaming and carrying the exact same gun.

To answer what I mean by "same platform," it really varies. Some define it as the exact same model down to same sights, holster, and components, and sometimes literally the same gun. Others mean same family, as in Glock. Some mean same system, like striker. Others mean just that it points the same.

As recently as last year, I carried and gamed the same gun for a while, the Glock 17. Lately, I have accepted that my priorities in trigger, caliber and reliability are enough different for a game vs carry gun, that I carry and game different guns, and put in the practice with both to make sure I am comfortable with each.

For example, in my game gun, my priorities in a trigger are that it be easy to shoot other things, and I don't worry too much about shooting things I don't intend to shoot, excepting me. In a carry gun, my priorities are that the trigger make it hard to shoot me, then hard to shoot things I don't intend to, and only then that the trigger work well at shooting things I do want to shoot. So, completely different.

In caliber, I want a large caliber in my carry gun, the USP .45 now, shooting about 260 power factor .45 Super loads. Closer to town, carrying a P2000 .40. For my game gun, I want 9mm loaded to meet power factor with a small margin.

As to reliability, I game a CZ. We all know that you need three or four -- game, practice, back-up and one in the shop. For my carry gun, absolute reliability is paramount, and reliability is the main reason I picked the USP.

For all those reasons, I am shooting different guns for gaming and carrying. That is not a recommendation for others, and my wife, for example, carries just Glock pistols for carry and gaming.

[Mr_White]

For me, the true reason I stick to a virtually identical copy (different ammo and recoil spring weight) between my carry gun and practice/training/competition gun is that I enjoy it. I enjoy the confidence it helps bring, and shooting this way is how I personally get the most fun and satisfaction from competitive shooting.

It's easy for me to understand that someone can learn certain things using one gun, and learn other things using another gun.

It's very understandable that a person can be very, very good with a number of different guns, if they put in the time to get there. I don't know whether they are truly going to be at their best. It's not a knowable thing, whether a gun-switcher would be more skilled if they went back in time and didn't switch.

I remember being a kid with a BB gun, and later a .22, over the summers, shooting them lots and lots. I could hit about whatever I wanted with those. I was just so used to exactly how they worked and where they shot. That's the quality I am attracted to in shooting one gun. Deep, deep familiarity with handling that gun and putting the bullets wherever they need to go.

[98z28]

I think one can develop a much higher level skill set by embracing the pure race gun game; learning to shoot (and more importantly visually process) at a higher level will translate directly to one's carry equipment. Akin to learning to drive track/race cars and having that translate back into having a higher level of understanding when driving your Corolla home from work. Is all the capability going to be there? No. But having learned to work at a more advanced level, a good bit of the processing carries over.

[Runs away...]

Word.

[EricM]

I think one can develop a much higher level skill set by embracing the pure race gun game; learning to shoot (and more importantly visually process) at a higher level will translate directly to one's carry equipment.

Regarding the bolded section...is that just referring to the higher level of performance achievable with a pure race gun because it's easier to shoot faster (light recoil, light trigger, large magwell, better accuracy, etc.), or do you feel training with a race gun actually helps you acquire more skill (that would translate to any gun) as opposed to the same amount of training with a carry gun? No judgement, just curious whether you felt there was something about training with a race gun that specifically led to better or faster learning. Hopefully that makes sense, maybe I was just reading too much into it.

[Mr_White]

Not to speak for taadski, but I think the idea is that by shooting an actual race gun (as an example) you can redefine your sense of how fast aiming and firing can be done, and improve your visual and mental abilities to contend with shooting at that pace. Then, you go back to your normal gun and can bring some of that increased performance sense with you, and hopefully drive the normal gun harder than you were before.

[Glenn E. Meyer]

I carry some kind of Glock - 26,19 or 17 depending on vagaries of dress and heat. So I alternate between them in IDPA. My goal is a reasonable level of performance for myself as compared to winning. Once in awhile for grins, I will take my 1911 or a revolver (Model 19 or a snubbie). The latter is to maintain some proficiency with them. But they are not major carry guns - however, I don't want to be surprised and be standing there saying how to work this darn thing.

I don't really have top of the line shaving milliseconds with a tricked out gun mindset. Mine are stock except for sight changes.

[EricM]

Mr_White - thanks...that's how I had interpreted it, but it was not a concept I'd previously considered or heard discussed.

If it wouldn't bring down the wrath of my wife it might be tempting to test that theory...it was hard enough to convince her I need the free Glocks from GSSF. ;)

[taadski]

I'll be honest and tell you that the "race gun" comment was a bit of an inside joke. The rest of that post, though, was fully serious.

The inside info bit relates to a personal friend of mine who happens to be a National top 16 limited shooter. He has coached me a bunch and has been bugging me for several years to give up on my "one pistol for everything" mentality. I carry Sigs for work and train/compete with them in Production class pretty much exclusively.

He believes whole heartedly in the race car/race gun analogy and preaches religiously that faster increases in ability can be made with a "race gun" because it'll no longer be the limiting factor; instead, your vision (the ability to see/call shots, etc…at high speed) with be. And that'll consequently allow you to get to the "meat and potatoes" of the matter much faster.

As noted, I've chosen the slower path to GM for the reasons Gabe so eloquently outlined.

Hope that makes sense,



t


EDIT: I was typing while Gabe was….but yes, exactly that….

[EricM]

Very interesting, thanks!

[1slow]

I think that a absolute performance tool can help you to stretch your ability because it takes away the excuse that '' it is the gun making mistakes''. Sometimes it can stretch your ability past where you thought it was. Sometimes you can transfer the improvement back to your carry gear.

[scw2]

If it wouldn't bring down the wrath of my wife it might be tempting to test that theory...it was hard enough to convince her I need the free Glocks from GSSF. ;)


Not to derail and can move to pm if needed but are you talking about the GSSF coupons? Considered getting that even if I intend to focus on my current gun just given the lead one it would take to receive two coupons.

[Mr_White]

I think he means the Glocks won as prizes in GSSF competition, as opposed to the purchase coupons that come at some point after joining GSSF as a member and let one buy Glocks at what amounts to LE pricing or close to it.

Even the prize Glocks aren't really free, after accounting for the required GSSF membership, entry fees, ammo, and any applicable upgrade fees for Glocks beyond the 'base models.' They can be a very good deal, though. ;)

[Clay1]

I have two G34s that go to matches with me and I carry one of two G19s for my daily carry. I would love to say that I shoot the G19s as well as the G34 but for me the difference is drastic. My carry guns have a stock 5.5 pound trigger and competition guns run about 2.5 pounds and the longer sight radius really helps me.

I keep thinking that I really want to do a grip reduction on a G17 - make it G19 length and have the little bit extra barrel and carry that. I think that I will end up with this sooner than later.

One more note: I bought a third G34 lower and put an Advanced Armament 22 rimfire conversion kit on the top of it and shoot that often.

[Clobbersaurus]

Not to speak for taadski, but I think the idea is that by shooting an actual race gun (as an example) you can redefine your sense of how fast aiming and firing can be done, and improve your visual and mental abilities to contend with shooting at that pace. Then, you go back to your normal gun and can bring some of that increased performance sense with you, and hopefully drive the normal gun harder than you were before.

That's an interesting theory and probably works fine for a normal gun shooter. A pure race gun shooter doing the opposite? Well, I recently saw a master level open shooter fail to hit a popper with a calibration gun (Sig 226) at about 12 yards. After five misses he handed it to the RO and said, "it's not my gun, do this for me!"

[Trooper224]

I still use a 1911 for bullseye but no longer carry one. I still haven't found anything that works as well for me at that particular game. I now carry a Beretta 92 off duty and my issued G22 while at work. On the occasions when I compete in one of the run and gun competitons I've used the 1911, though I may start using the 92. Since working so heavily with the Beretta over the last year and a half, I've actually found that my performance has increased with the Glock both in time and accuracy.

[rwa]

I carry different guns depending on the situation. The same was true of my competition guns back when I shot USPSA with the goal of making GM in all five divisions (when there were five). Now I shoot one platform in USPSA (fat open blaster) and I carry either a LWT Commander in .38 Supercomp (cool/cold weather) or a Shield in the summer. FWIW, I never met my goal of GM in 5 divisions. I was the first USPSA shooter to shoot the scores necessary to make Master in 5 divisions, but I only made GM in 3 divisions. I started USPSA late in life at 44 years old. Wish I would have started sooner.

[pangloss]

I don't compete a lot, but so far I've always used Glock 17/19/26 which is what I carry. One day, I'll buy a revolver and see if spending some serious time with it helps me shoot my Glocks better.

[ST911]

One day, I'll buy a revolver and see if spending some serious time with it helps me shoot my Glocks better.

Based on some dedicated efforts with my Js, it absolutely did for me.

[SLG]

I think one can develop a much higher level skill set by embracing the pure race gun game; learning to shoot (and more importantly visually process) at a higher level will translate directly to one's carry equipment. Akin to learning to drive track/race cars and having that translate back into having a higher level of understanding when driving your Corolla home from work. Is all the capability going to be there? No. But having learned to work at a more advanced level, a good bit of the processing carries over.

[Runs away...]

I don't have much time right now to get into detail, but the history of long term winning USPSA shooters does not support your idea. Just the opposite, in fact.

[taadski]

I don't have much time right now to get into detail, but the history of long term winning USPSA shooters does not support your idea. Just the opposite, in fact.


I'd love to have you elaborate further.

t

[Glenn E. Meyer]

Interesting topic. In other domains, practice has been reported to be very instrument specific at times. So I wonder:

1. Does your carry gun and comp gun have the same sight pictures? Not having that would seem detrimental?
2. How does different trigger pull influence your grip, slightly shifting it?
3. Do they have different malfunction and clearance profiles - a Glock and 1911 are different in slide and mag removal routines for the bad jams. If you strive for automaticity - do different patterns slow you?

If you took beginners and had them train up and compete with a carry gun vs. a mixed carry and comp gun - then design a performance test - that would be interesting.

[SLG]

I'd love to have you elaborate further.

t

I'm not going to name names, since some of these people are friends and I have not asked if they want any of this out there. Look at the guys who have been winning for years, not the GM who comes close, or wins once. The vast majority have learned to shoot and win with production type guns. They then transitioned to open type guns and continued to win. Many have gone back to production without any issues, or continue to jump back and forth. The key is that they learned to shoot a real gun first. The vast majority of GM's that I know who "started" in open, and continue in open, haven't done really well when attempting to switch to production type stuff.
Having done a fair bit of high speed (literally) driving, I get the analogy, but it doesn't carry over very well to pistols.

Visual speed is great, but it is visual patience, combined with good trigger control, that allows hits. Most open shooters (certainly not all) cannot seem to do that well when going to real sights and harder triggers.

[GJM]

I'll be honest and tell you that the "race gun" comment was a bit of an inside joke. The rest of that post, though, was fully serious.

The inside info bit relates to a personal friend of mine who happens to be a National top 16 limited shooter. He has coached me a bunch and has been bugging me for several years to give up on my "one pistol for everything" mentality. I carry Sigs for work and train/compete with them in Production class pretty much exclusively.

He believes whole heartedly in the race car/race gun analogy and preaches religiously that faster increases in ability can be made with a "race gun" because it'll no longer be the limiting factor; instead, your vision (the ability to see/call shots, etc…at high speed) with be. And that'll consequently allow you to get to the "meat and potatoes" of the matter much faster.

As noted, I've chosen the slower path to GM for the reasons Gabe so eloquently outlined.

Hope that makes sense,



t


EDIT: I was typing while Gabe was….but yes, exactly that….


I don't have much time right now to get into detail, but the history of long term winning USPSA shooters does not support your idea. Just the opposite, in fact.


I'm not going to name names, since some of these people are friends and I have not asked if they want any of this out there. Look at the guys who have been winning for years, not the GM who comes close, or wins once. The vast majority have learned to shoot and win with production type guns. They then transitioned to open type guns and continued to win. Many have gone back to production without any issues, or continue to jump back and forth. The key is that they learned to shoot a real gun first. The vast majority of GM's that I know who "started" in open, and continue in open, haven't done really well when attempting to switch to production type stuff.
Having done a fair bit of high speed (literally) driving, I get the analogy, but it doesn't carry over very well to pistols.

Visual speed is great, but it is visual patience, combined with good trigger control, that allows hits. Most open shooters (certainly not all) cannot seem to do that well when going to real sights and harder triggers.

Some more information on this subject.

First, I knew that Tadpole was partially joking, partially serious with his statement. For those that know Tadpole, he has a USPSA match gun, a USPSA practice gun, an IDPA gun, a LE gun, and a CCW gun. However, each of those guns is a P226. Tadpole is close friends with Ron Avery, and Ron is one who has told Tadpole that it makes more sense learning to drive fast in a Ferrari, and then apply that to driving a station wagon, than the other way around.

By chance, when I checked in with Tadpole last night, he was in Nebraska for a USPSA area match, and had driven over with Ron Avery. We tried to get Ron to join PF, and comment directly, but he wasn't taking the bait. I did ask him about this subject, and how he would approach training a new shooter that hoped to become a world class shooter. Ron said that he would use a combination of a red dot, iron sights and a laser. The red dot because it is easier to learn sight tracking/shot calling, iron sights to learn visual focus shift between sights and target, and the laser for diagnostic purposes.

[45dotACP]

I shoot a 1911 in competition on any given day. The gun is just fun to shoot and soon I'll be living in Cook County so I'll need to deal with asinine mag restrictions and thus I might as well carry 10 rounds in style. I also decided that it'd be cool to start my USPSA journey as an official member with my much beloved Caspian. It's mediocre in the looks department, but the gun and I have a significant backstory. I don't carry it due to the huge personal value I attach to it. That role is filled by my other 1911.

I do think that getting really good requires dedication to one type of pistol, but I also think it's worthwhile having different pistols that you love to shoot.

I think that people (like Gabe perhaps) take a great deal of enjoyment in the level of performance they achieve with shooting, and that's different than the people who take a great deal of enjoyment with the aesthetics or handling qualities of different firearms. If we're to continue the car analogy, I'd put it this way: Some people like race cars...other people like racing cars.

[1986s4]

I started IDPA years ago with the shoot what you carry philosophy. I still think it is valid. But my competitive nature took over and I decided I wanted to win so I got a full size CZ and modded it for competition. I started to win a few local matches. But the funny thing is the skill carried over into my previously stagnant carry gun skills.

Lately I've competing with a revolver but I carry a DA/SA pistol. The DA work definitely helps with the DA first shot work.

[SLG]

Any shooting is good shooting, and there are lots of ways to train. I'm certainly not an expert on how to train to win USPSA, or any other sport. I'm just pointing out that a moderately detailed study of the actual USPSA winners will show that starting with a race gun has not produced the long term results that have been mentioned here. There is an exception or two, but they prove the rule.

[ssc45]

I generally only lurk here on occasion. However, I went back and forth on whether to register and add my opinion. So, for what it is worth.... The old saying, "Train like you fight and fight like you train," is my thought. Hence, carry and competition pistols, holsters, mag carriers etc should be identical. I did not always believe this. When I was younger, I did the gun a month thing. I thought I was pretty good. I had some training and would practice. I thought I could carry a 1911 on Monday, a smith 19 on Tuesday a 469 on Wed etc. I have been carrying a gun since the late 80's. I got into USPSA in the early 90's. Back in those days, it wasn't uncommon to put 1000 rounds downrange in a week, which included a match or two. Some of the older folks who included my pops who was an old-time deputy from the Midwest back in the 30's-50's use to tell me to get a gun that works and practice. My thought was "yeah right, put any gun in my hand and I'm good to go."

I should have listened, but I didn't understand how the body reacts in bad situations, even though I had experienced things, such as slow motion and tunnel vision in other dangerous pursuits. This all came to head on one summer evening in a dark parking lot. As the scenario played out, I had a glock in a shoulder holster. As the adrenaline pumped I heard a voice say, just as clear as can be, "1911, two dirtbags, low light, no problem. How's that glock shoot?" I made it out safe, but to me it was an epiphany. I shoot and have four glocks that are identical. My IPSC glock has over 120,000 rounds through it. When I shoot a match it is with my carry holster etc. Since then I have had a few incidents. The gun handling/manipulation is automatic and I am able to better handle situations. I have experienced audio exclusion etc. When all hell breaks lose, you will default to muscle memory/training. You will be much more prone to accidents/missing/AD's etc when the gun/platform/ holster you pull is not the one you are used too. Experiencing a deadly situation will make one appreciate how the body reacts. Just as an example, I do know many competition shooters who use cut down holsters. I also know of at least two situations that when Carrying in their CCW holster, which was not cut low, they caught the front sight/end of barrel on the holsters and their guns went flying out of their hands. I saw it happen once and it is scary to see a glock flying through the air end over end. I will get off my box. Just the ramblings of my opinion. YMMV.

Regards SSC

[nycnoob]

Visual speed is great, but it is visual patience, combined with good trigger control, that allows hits. Most open shooters (certainly not all) cannot seem to do that well when going to real sights and harder triggers.

SLG,

Do you have thoughts on doing the opposite, practicing with a slower, harder to shoot gun (say a revolver) as preparation for self defense work?

In many other discipline people practice with the older technology to learn good form (practicing typing with a manual typewriter or learning manual transmissions)

[JodyH]

Compete in USPSA with a P2000 9mm V2 LEM Trijicon HD's from concealed AIWB kydex (classified Limited B).
Compete in outlaw CCW matches with a P2000SK 9mm V2 LEM Trijicon HD's from concealed AIWB leather.
Carry either a P2000 or a P2000SK 9mm V2 LEM Trijicon HD's from concealed AIWB leather.

[JTSpidey]

I started my shooting career in Special Forces 28 years ago and learned on the 1911. I didn't think there was any other gun until my second career in law enforcement when I was issued a Sig 229. So I naturally shot my own 229 in USPSA Production and IDPA SSP, made it up to "A" and " SSP Master" shooting .357 Sig. and I knew I would need to upgrade to a 226 in 9mm if I wanted to keep up with the big boys and I made the switch in 2010. In 2011 I jumped to Master Production. I maintained the theory that my 226 and X-5 all-around was double/single just like my duty gun, so I shouldn't switch guns. I tested that theory three months ago, when I made the switch to the SIG 320 striker fire. It only took me a day to get used to there not being a decock lever, but it was nothing to get used to the trigger. I have competed in four matches with it so far and am pleased with it's performance. Qualified last week with no issues. It really depends upon the amount of time you have to train, and what your goals are. If you don't practice, never dry fire and only shoot at matches, then you can't expect to get better.
So I would recommend same if you don't have time to train, and Different if you take the time to train.

[ragnar_d]

I run the same platform in competition and carry. For competition (USPSA Prod/Lim. Minor & 2-Gun/3-Gun) I usually run a Gen 3 Glock 34 or RTF Glock 17. For carry I've got a G19.

I didn't always though. When I first started shooting, I was running an XD-45 Service (which was also my carry gun). Later, I transitioned to an XD-45 Compact for carry and was shooting a G34 . . . in hindsight, not too smart. I sold the XD-45C and went to a G19 for carry and haven't looked back. All of my Glocks are set up identically with a few exceptions. All my Glocks wear Warren Tactical sights (Tritium on the carry/double duty guns, FO on the G34), Minus connector, NY1 spring, factory extended slide lock, extended mag release (factory on dedicated competition gun, Vickers on the carry guns).

It's worked out very well for me and has helped a good bit. The guns and first spare magazine ride in the same area for competition and carry. The only deviation to my setup is when I carry my J-Frame or Shield (should the situation require something much more discreet, though I can make a G19 disappear in a lot of outfits).

[SLG]

SLG,

Do you have thoughts on doing the opposite, practicing with a slower, harder to shoot gun (say a revolver) as preparation for self defense work?

In many other discipline people practice with the older technology to learn good form (practicing typing with a manual typewriter or learning manual transmissions)

I did a lot of my formative handgun shooting with a .22 revolver, so I may be biased. A revolver is an excellent training tool that carries over well to every other trigger I've ever shot. I'm certainly not alone in this.

As far as not training some of the time with your normal gun, I don't know if it would be better to train with the revolver, or more with the normal gun. Probably depends on your ability/goals/training time etc...

That probably didn't help much, but at least I got to type revolver out:-)

re-read your post. For trigger control, revolvers are tops. For dedicated self defense work, I think I would stick with my carry gun.

[eyemahm]

Compete in IDPA SSP with USPf LEM match hybrid (regular 12 lb hammer spring), 3 dot trijicons with amber rear. Holster and mags are in a typical IDPA OWB setup under whatever concealment happens to be available.
Compete in IDPA BUG occasionally with a P2000SK LEM V1, trijicon 3 dots with amber rear. Same IDPA holster/gear as the USP.
Carry USPf LEM match hybrid (regular 12 lb hammer spring), 3 dot trijicons with amber rear or USP Expert with identical trigger, stock black rear, tritium front. Holster/mag carrier are AIWB kydex.

A quirky variation on nycnoob's question:

While dry firing with the LEM, I've often wondered whether I should pre-cock the hammer spring after each shot in order to practice with the live fire trigger pull or whether I shouldn't and practice some/all of the time with the consistent ~12lb uncocked pull in order to develop trigger finger strength and the muscle memory of rolling through the trigger. I'm aware CCT is a big proponent of mastering that DA pull and then moving onto other triggers, but I'm curious among those who run LEMs (JodyH, nyeti, TC, YVK, among many others), whether anyone recommends doing this occasionally or on a regular basis?












I did a lot of my formative handgun shooting with a .22 revolver, so I may be biased. A revolver is an excellent training tool that carries over well to every other trigger I've ever shot. I'm certainly not alone in this.

As far as not training some of the time with your normal gun, I don't know if it would be better to train with the revolver, or more with the normal gun. Probably depends on your ability/goals/training time etc...

That probably didn't help much, but at least I got to type revolver out:-)

re-read your post. For trigger control, revolvers are tops. For dedicated self defense work, I think I would stick with my carry gun.

[Nephrology]

I compete in IDPA SSP & USPSA Production with a Gen 3 Glock 17 RTF, just bought a Gen 4 Glock 35 for USPSA Limited and IDPA ESP (with 9mm conversion barrel). Carry Glock 19, 26 or S&W Shield, weather depending.

[YVK]

Eyemahm, I did that occasionally, both in dry and live fire. If I were to run LEM exclusively I'd probably still be doing that, just to keep my DA shoot skills. Now that I flip between HK and Beretta, I get plenty of a DA practice when I shoot the latter.
I don't think that working out a DA pull is that beneficial for LEM, but that's just my opinion.

[SLG]

Eyemahm, I did that occasionally, both in dry and live fire. If I were to run LEM exclusively I'd probably still be doing that, just to keep my DA shoot skills. Now that I flip between HK and Beretta, I get plenty of a DA practice when I shoot the latter.

I've been jonesing for some good Beretta trigger time lately. Since I don't actually own one, you're not helping.;-)

[GJM]

I've been jonesing for some good Beretta trigger time lately. Since I don't actually own one, you're not helping.;-)

For years, I knew that a Beretta 92 was a large, heavy gun that was incredibly hard to shoot well. While I hadn't shot one, that is what everyone said, so it must have been true.

The main reason I started shooting one to see how bad they really were. Imagine my surprise to learn that they are arguably the best shooting mainstream* DA/SA there is. Of course, hanging out with Bill Wilson and taking a course with Ernest didn't hurt.



*mainstream meaning not a CZ or Tangfo.

[rob_s]

I've gone both ways on this, and have wound up somewhere in the middle.

Early on, when I was drinking all the training/defense/SHTFantasy/ccw koolaid I firmly believed that one should be competing with their exact carry gun, in their exact carry holster, with their exact carry clothes, every single time. I also thought I should creep around stages like a ninja, never take a walkthrough, cry about the gamers winning, claim because:tactical when I lost, etc.

I slowly moved on to drop all the tactical ninja sneaking around and tried to game the stages with my carry gear. Match placements increased dramatically.

Then I moved on further and bought a dedicated gamer gun in the form of a CZ. I bought dedicated gamer support gear, holsters, etc. there is no doubt whatsoever that y performance at matches improved. A lot. I think this is the A-answer for someone that shoots a lot. The CZ, for me, is a no good for carry so my Glocks remain my carry guns in the form of a 19 and a 26 (and soon to add a 42 and 43). When shooting a lot, I saw no problem going back and forth, and just u derstood that I shoot the Glocks a little slower and a little less accurately.

Then I stopped shooting as much.

So now I'm on to a Glock 34 instead of the CZ for no other reason than cost and having money tied up. I can use one mag ouch type, one bunch of spare mags, the carry guns will fit in the gamer holster if I want it to, the gamer gun will fit in the carry holsters if I buy them with open bottoms, etc. saves me having an extra $2k tied up in sole-use gamer gear when I only shoot a couple of matches a year. Gamer gear is also multi-purpose for IDPA, UPSPSA, or 2/3-gun (if I ever get into it again).

For the guy just starting out, my suggestion is to use carry gun/gear/concealment (on,y use concealment in IDPA where required) and not to ninja-around but to go out and try like hell to win. I don't really believe in competition-generated "training scars" or "competition will get you killed on the street" anymore since (a) you're not very likely to ever use your gun on the street and (b) I've never been able to find any documented examples of a competition shooter getting killed on the street solely because of competition "training scars". But there is this
http://townhall.com/tipsheet/mattvespa/2015/08/02/spoiler-alert-people-with-no-firearms-training-get-killed-in-selfdefense-simulator-n2031884

[LittleLebowski]

I've gone both ways on this, and have wound up somewhere in the middle.

Early on, when I was drinking all the training/defense/SHTFantasy/ccw koolaid I firmly believed that one should be competing with their exact carry gun, in their exact carry holster, with their exact carry clothes, every single time. I also thought I should creep around stages like a ninja, never take a walkthrough, cry about the gamers winning, claim because:tactical when I lost, etc.

I slowly moved on to drop all the tactical ninja sneaking around and tried to game the stages with my carry gear. Match placements increased dramatically.

Then I moved on further and bought a dedicated gamer gun in the form of a CZ. I bought dedicated gamer support gear, holsters, etc. there is no doubt whatsoever that y performance at matches improved. A lot. I think this is the A-answer for someone that shoots a lot. The CZ, for me, is a no good for carry so my Glocks remain my carry guns in the form of a 19 and a 26 (and soon to add a 42 and 43). When shooting a lot, I saw no problem going back and forth, and just u derstood that I shoot the Glocks a little slower and a little less accurately.

Then I stopped shooting as much.

So now I'm on to a Glock 34 instead of the CZ for no other reason than cost and having money tied up. I can use one mag ouch type, one bunch of spare mags, the carry guns will fit in the gamer holster if I want it to, the gamer gun will fit in the carry holsters if I buy them with open bottoms, etc. saves me having an extra $2k tied up in sole-use gamer gear when I only shoot a couple of matches a year. Gamer gear is also multi-purpose for IDPA, UPSPSA, or 2/3-gun (if I ever get into it again).

For the guy just starting out, my suggestion is to use carry gun/gear/concealment (on,y use concealment in IDPA where required) and not to ninja-around but to go out and try like hell to win. I don't really believe in competition-generated "training scars" or "competition will get you killed on the street" anymore since (a) you're not very likely to ever use your gun on the street and (b) I've never been able to find any documented examples of a competition shooter getting killed on the street solely because of competition "training scars".

Solid, solid post.

For me, "cost" is probably the most important bit on changing guns for competition and carry. Mags, mag pouches, sights, etc. Fortunately, I don't ever intend to win a match so I've got that going for me :D

[Gadfly]

I was issued DAO pistols for over a decade (96D, 229DAK, USPc LEM)... I tried to compete in IDPA with them. I could easily shoot a match with the DAO gear, but man follow up shots were slow. I could do OK, but not great. I eventually bought a Glock 22, and started to compete with that. When our office authorized personal purchase Glock 17 a couple years back, I jumped at it.

Now I carry a stock 17 or 26 on duty, and I compete IDPA or NRA TPC with the stock 17. I am liking it.

I could get a 34 and trick it out, but I am happy running the same stock set up I will be called upon to use if I ever have a real fight.

[ST911]

I could get a 34 and trick it out, but I am happy running the same stock set up I will be called upon to use if I ever have a real fight.

I am swapping out a G17 for a gen4 G34 (LE) I just picked up. Across the board switch for CCW, IDPA/USPSA, and duty carry. Just waiting on some holsters. This G34 has very nice trigger for a Glock. It came with a (.) connector, extended slide stop. I added some i-dot pros. This is as close to a race gun as I'm likely to go.

[Mr_White]

This G34 has very nice trigger for a Glock. It came with a (.) connector, extended slide stop. I added some i-dot pros. This is as close to a race gun as I'm likely to go.

That gun is going to race just great.

[Lost River]

For years because it was all I could afford, my duty guns were my USPSA guns.

Now, I have an issued gun that is not really suitable for competition (M&P .40 Compact).

With that in mind, off duty I carry a Glock 19, and compete with a G34 and G35, with an occasional match shot with a G19 or G17.

Given the option I would use Glocks for work,play and competition, but that is not the case.

[1911Nut]

I'm all over the place.

I compete in IDPA with a Wilson Combat 1911 in 9mm and a Glock G34 for ESP division.
I use an Ed Brown 1911 in .45 ACP for CDP division.
Also use a Glock G17 and the aforementioned Glock G34 for SSP division.
Just for more variety, I occasionally shoot a Glock G19 in both CCP and SSP divisions.

I also shoot steel matches, and shoot an STI 2011 in 9mm in Limited division.
I use the same Glock G34 as used in IDPA in Limited division.
Also use a different Glock G34 with an RMR RDS in Open division.
Finally, I use a Glock G17 in Production division.

For EDC, I use:
A Glock G19
A Glock G26
A Springfield EMP in 9mm
A Dan Wesson Guardian in .45 ACP
A Glock G36

For personal carry when in the woods or desert:
A Glock G20SF
The Ed Brown 1911 in .45 ACP
A S&W Mountain Revolver in .44 Magnum

Oh, almost forgot . . . . . A Ruger LCR in .38 Special for BUG

[Glenn E. Meyer]

I've decided to shoot my Smith & Wesson Model 632 Carry Comp Pro .327 Federal Magnum Revolver in the next local IPDA match - http://www.gunblast.com/SW-632CCP.htm, except mine is SS white, not black. I also put on a fiber optic front and U rear sights. I will load it with various 32 rounds ranging from Fiocchi 32 Long FMJ to various 32 HR mag and 327s (if there is steel for the latter in a stage).

Why - I hardly ever carry it (I do pocket a 423 at times) - but because I can. The classification will be 'outlaw' or just a fun gun. BTW, I shoot steel with a Browning Buckmark with a fiber optic just for grins. Bink, Bink, Bink!

[AJZ]

I'm not going to name names, since some of these people are friends and I have not asked if they want any of this out there. Look at the guys who have been winning for years, not the GM who comes close, or wins once. The vast majority have learned to shoot and win with production type guns. They then transitioned to open type guns and continued to win. Many have gone back to production without any issues, or continue to jump back and forth. The key is that they learned to shoot a real gun first. The vast majority of GM's that I know who "started" in open, and continue in open, haven't done really well when attempting to switch to production type stuff.
Having done a fair bit of high speed (literally) driving, I get the analogy, but it doesn't carry over very well to pistols.

Visual speed is great, but it is visual patience, combined with good trigger control, that allows hits. Most open shooters (certainly not all) cannot seem to do that well when going to real sights and harder triggers.

There is a lot of merit here. It can be very easy for an avid competitor to get spoiled by a true "race" gun. In the industry today, many people are carrying guns that would have been called race guns 10 years ago. The biggest obstacle is the weight of the trigger pull. Many competitors set their triggers far lighter than what most would consider acceptable in a carry gun (2lbs or lighter in some cases). The lack of needing to apply significant pressure to the trigger in guns set up like this is often what I have seen as the root issue for "race gun" shooters when trying to transition to a production style gun. Another issue as I have seen it, if you are really "racing" these guns, is going to be the timing of recoil moving from gun to gun. Jumping from a .40 S&W Limited style gun to a G19 size 9mm is a big jump. It can most certainly be overcome with dedicated practice, but it is time consuming for anyone. All that being said, I compete with and carry the same gun, a Miller Custom 1911 in .45 ACP in Single Stack and CDP. The gun was built from the ground up as a carry gun for me, but it also serves my purposes as a competition gun. I absolutely prefer to carry a 9mm, but due to time, using a gun that CAN fill two roles is acceptable to me. Outside of Open division (for now), almost every division can accommodate a "carry" gun and they will be very competitive in those divisions. When all is said and done, it's going to be the shooter that makes it happen, not the gun. Ex: Robert Vogel shot a clone of his duty gun (G35) and won A LOT with it (even in Open division). That was the whole point of these gun games in the beginning anyways.

[taadski]

Any shooting is good shooting, and there are lots of ways to train. I'm certainly not an expert on how to train to win USPSA, or any other sport. I'm just pointing out that a moderately detailed study of the actual USPSA winners will show that starting with a race gun has not produced the long term results that have been mentioned here. There is an exception or two, but they prove the rule.


I think Avery's point is that at some stage along the learning curve to becoming world class in the pistol shooting world, one is going to need to 'see faster' than your average joe has learned to. He believes that the process of getting there is more easily achieved with using modern accoutrements first (lighter weight, shorter throw triggers, optics, lasers, compensators) and then bringing irons, heavier stock triggers, etc… back into the fold later. Easy first, then progressively harder/more difficult, just like the rest of the learning/education world.

I personally learned trigger control on revolvers, but given Ron's experience and success coaching shooters at that level (not to mention those accomplishments of his own) I can't discount his perspective.


While I realize, he is no average joe, even on the elite world stage, Max seems to be having success making his first formal foray into Production division. It was a treat getting to watch he and Ben go back and forth duking it out on Friday.


t

[Dr. No]

I have tried to mirror that as much as I could.

When I got my badge: Carried HK USP 45 and competed with the same in IDPA / USPSA L10
Got more serious about USPSA and wanted to lighten my load - Carried HK USP 40 and competed with the same in USPSA Limited.
P30L series came out, got into shooting production. Carried P30L LEM in 40 and competed with P30L DA/SA in 9mm. Went to SWAT during this time and have to carry a G22 when we do green stuff. Struggled a little bit with the transition between LEM and striker - usually on the first shot.
VP9 came out - switched to that for production. Shortly after the HK team dissolved and I was a free agent. I won a STI frame/slide at a match and decided to build it into a full on race gun in 9mm.
Made GM with the VP9, but couldn't carry it at work because there were no duty holsters for it. At this point I'm shooting 3 different guns with 3 different triggers. Really the only trouble I ran into was the first trigger pull.

Finally got a Safariland ALS in my hands and qualified with the VP9 at work. Now I'm carrying the VP9 as my primary, Glock 22 on green stuff, and the STI 9mm at matches. The striker guns are so similar in feel it's much easier to go back and forth and I don't feel like it's as much of a learning curve.

This seems like a lot, but it's been since 2006.


Honestly, at some point in your shooting career ..... you can pick up anything and shoot it well. I have pretty much the same sights on everything (Dawsons) so my sight pictures all look the same. I think for a newer shooter who doesn't have a lot of experience shooting under stress, it's a good idea to go with the same gun as it maximizes your training time. I see guys bring a new gun to the range every week and they suck with all of them. Get REALLY good with one, dedicate a year (I usually pick a competition season), and ring it out with a few thousand rounds. It will benefit you a lot more than that $300 trigger job.

[Nephrology]

I've gone both ways on this, and have wound up somewhere in the middle.

Early on, when I was drinking all the training/defense/SHTFantasy/ccw koolaid I firmly believed that one should be competing with their exact carry gun, in their exact carry holster, with their exact carry clothes, every single time. I also thought I should creep around stages like a ninja, never take a walkthrough, cry about the gamers winning, claim because:tactical when I lost, etc.

I slowly moved on to drop all the tactical ninja sneaking around and tried to game the stages with my carry gear. Match placements increased dramatically.

Then I moved on further and bought a dedicated gamer gun in the form of a CZ. I bought dedicated gamer support gear, holsters, etc. there is no doubt whatsoever that y performance at matches improved. A lot. I think this is the A-answer for someone that shoots a lot. The CZ, for me, is a no good for carry so my Glocks remain my carry guns in the form of a 19 and a 26 (and soon to add a 42 and 43). When shooting a lot, I saw no problem going back and forth, and just u derstood that I shoot the Glocks a little slower and a little less accurately.

Then I stopped shooting as much.

So now I'm on to a Glock 34 instead of the CZ for no other reason than cost and having money tied up. I can use one mag ouch type, one bunch of spare mags, the carry guns will fit in the gamer holster if I want it to, the gamer gun will fit in the carry holsters if I buy them with open bottoms, etc. saves me having an extra $2k tied up in sole-use gamer gear when I only shoot a couple of matches a year. Gamer gear is also multi-purpose for IDPA, UPSPSA, or 2/3-gun (if I ever get into it again).

For the guy just starting out, my suggestion is to use carry gun/gear/concealment (on,y use concealment in IDPA where required) and not to ninja-around but to go out and try like hell to win. I don't really believe in competition-generated "training scars" or "competition will get you killed on the street" anymore since (a) you're not very likely to ever use your gun on the street and (b) I've never been able to find any documented examples of a competition shooter getting killed on the street solely because of competition "training scars". But there is this
http://townhall.com/tipsheet/mattvespa/2015/08/02/spoiler-alert-people-with-no-firearms-training-get-killed-in-selfdefense-simulator-n2031884

This is more or less my mindset and why I have stuck with Glocks. I am a thoroughly competent pistol shooter, but very far from being an expert. I also generally am pretty ambivalent about how well I do at matches as long as it is not worse than my last. Mostly interested in getting the rounds downrange and using them as an opportunity to improve my pistol skillset.

[SLG]

I think Avery's point is that at some stage along the learning curve to becoming world class in the pistol shooting world, one is going to need to 'see faster' than your average joe has learned to. He believes that the process of getting there is more easily achieved with using modern accoutrements first (lighter weight, shorter throw triggers, optics, lasers, compensators) and then bringing irons, heavier stock triggers, etc… back into the fold later. Easy first, then progressively harder/more difficult, just like the rest of the learning/education world.

I personally learned trigger control on revolvers, but given Ron's experience and success coaching shooters at that level (not to mention those accomplishments of his own) I can't discount his perspective.


While I realize, he is no average joe, even on the elite world stage, Max seems to be having success making his first formal foray into Production division. It was a treat getting to watch he and Ben go back and forth duking it out on Friday.


t

I have no issue with Mr. Avery or Max, and don't want this to sound like anything but a technical discussion. Mr. Avery may very well be correct, but my only point is that it really is just a theory at this point, and a theory that goes against the overwhelming proof of the sport.

I've spent some very pleasant days on the range with Max, both one on one and in competition. He is a great guy to shoot with and a good teacher. As far as Max "going back and forth" with Stoeger, I'm not sure that's really accurate. I may be remembering things incorrectly (if so, please correct me), but I think Max shot 96% of Stoeger. A 4% difference is pretty significant, but there's a lot more to it than that. Max had something like a couple of misses, a few D's and 30 or 40 C's. As I said, I don't remember the exact numbers now. Stoeger had 16 C's. Period. That is incredible, and really puts him in a different class than the rest.

[taadski]

I have no issue with Mr. Avery or Max, and don't want this to sound like anything but a technical discussion. Mr. Avery may very well be correct, but my only point is that it really is just a theory at this point, and a theory that goes against the overwhelming proof of the sport.

I haven't taken it as anything but a technical discussion, Simon. Apologies if it has come off as anything different on my end. I feel a little weird doing the "he said" thing too, but Ron and I have discussed it ad nauseam face to face and I'm alright with paraphrasing a bit. As such, I know he doesn't consider it theory. I'm still interested in knowing what we're considering "overwhelming proof of the sport" though, as I'm not privy to it and it apparently has direct bearing on the subject at hand.


I've spent some very pleasant days on the range with Max, both one on one and in competition. He is a great guy to shoot with and a good teacher. As far as Max "going back and forth" with Stoeger, I'm not sure that's really accurate. I may be remembering things incorrectly (if so, please correct me), but I think Max shot 96% of Stoeger. A 4% difference is pretty significant, but there's a lot more to it than that. Max had something like a couple of misses, a few D's and 30 or 40 C's. As I said, I don't remember the exact numbers now. Stoeger had 16 C's. Period. That is incredible, and really puts him in a different class than the rest.

I don't want to take anything away from Ben. He shot like a superhero. A level of performance for the ages and as you noted, netted an unheard of 98% of the points. He outright won 5 stages. Max won 2 but beat Ben in 4. The final net point difference between the two after 13 stages of shooting was less than 60 points (58.754). I'm gonna stick with the "going back and forth" comment. In particular when you consider that on stage 13 (Window Shots), Max had a horrendous botch that, in one stage alone, cost him 56.93 points. Had that not happened (or had he chosen the "safe bet" stage plan a lot of other top shooters did) they'd have been dueling within a single percent of one another.

And that's all from an Open shooter in one of his first forays into Production. :p



t

[SLG]

I'll certainly not argue the match anymore, and as I said, the numbers were from memory.

Back to the theory. It is theory because Mr. Avery, though an accomplished shooter, has not been winning at a national level year after year, division after division. And the guys who have been, didn't get there the way Mr. Avery is suggesting as the best way. They mostly got there "the hard way". It just takes a small amount of digging on your part.

I'm happy to go into more detail in person, but I'm afraid I'm out of internet:-) Really though, it's no secret or anything. Who are the guys who have won the most over the years? In the most divisions? What did they start out shooting?

[JHC]

I have no issue with Mr. Avery or Max, and don't want this to sound like anything but a technical discussion. Mr. Avery may very well be correct, but my only point is that it really is just a theory at this point, and a theory that goes against the overwhelming proof of the sport.

I've spent some very pleasant days on the range with Max, both one on one and in competition. He is a great guy to shoot with and a good teacher. As far as Max "going back and forth" with Stoeger, I'm not sure that's really accurate. I may be remembering things incorrectly (if so, please correct me), but I think Max shot 96% of Stoeger. A 4% difference is pretty significant, but there's a lot more to it than that. Max had something like a couple of misses, a few D's and 30 or 40 C's. As I said, I don't remember the exact numbers now. Stoeger had 16 C's. Period. That is incredible, and really puts him in a different class than the rest.

A couple days ago Ben posted on his FB page it looked like he was getting a Sig 320 and that set keyboards clicking but have no idea where he was going with that. I never figured him for a gun accumulator for it's own sake.

[SLG]

Apologies if it has come off as anything different on my end.


Not at all, just that since we are discussing actual people who are not us, I thought it bore mentioning.

[kcevans]

Same, its either a PX4 9mm Compact of occasionally a G19

[45dotACP]

Honestly, at some point in your shooting career ..... you can pick up anything and shoot it well. I have pretty much the same sights on everything (Dawsons) so my sight pictures all look the same. I think for a newer shooter who doesn't have a lot of experience shooting under stress, it's a good idea to go with the same gun as it maximizes your training time. I see guys bring a new gun to the range every week and they suck with all of them. Get REALLY good with one, dedicate a year (I usually pick a competition season), and ring it out with a few thousand rounds. It will benefit you a lot more than that $300 trigger job.

Dude. Yes.

[GJM]

This advice was offered in another thread:

If you carry a Glock on duty, then I strongly suggest that you also carry a Glock off duty for the benefit of identical manual of arms, grip angle, and general muscle memory. It may not seem like a big deal at the gun range, but when the stress kicks in the manual of arms that you are most practiced with will kick in and hopefully you are using the right pistol.

I think this makes a lot of sense for an on duty vs off duty gun. I also think this makes a lot of sense for someone newer to shooting, or someone experienced that does't get to shoot much.

In my situation, where I both carry a pistol for defense, shoot USPSA, and shoot a lot, I have come full circle and like my game gun being different from my carry gun. Consider all the things that Darryl points out that are bad about competition -- finger going earlier to the trigger, crossing no shoot targets, shooting very fast compared to your ability to process, and a number of other things conducive to scoring well in a match but not a defensive shooting.

When I draw my carry gun, I want it to be a different mindset than competing. That may mean a larger, harder recoiling caliber, a heavier trigger, more careful shooting, and a platform biased towards reliability over shoot ability. Towards that end, I routinely finish my "game practice" by shooting the same arrays with my carry gun and ammo as I had been shooting with my game rig. No surprise - I am slower with my carry gun and gear. I do make it a point of investing the time to get as close as possible to guaranteed hits. As a result, when I grab my game gun my brain says go fast with hit factor the objective, and with my carry gun my brain says shoot where you can guarantee hits.