Are we approaching group shooting the right way?

[LSP552]

I think until you can shoot an acceptable group slow-fire, pushing for speed is counter-productive. Everything builds from being able to execute the fundamentals, with trigger control at the top of the list. Once you are able to shoot groups, picking up the pace is a good thing. I really like decreasing PAR time drills to build speed while keeping your hits on a given target.

I like end a practice session with a slow fire group to dial me back a bit at the end of the day.

Ken

[45dotACP]

I think both slow and fast have validity, but its best to get a mix to be a good all around shot. Perhaps some may benefit from more slow shooting. I've been a little surprised at some groups posted with comments that they were the best over shot by the poster.

I resemble that remark!

[jetfire]

As someone who shoots a lot of slow fire groups for work purposes, they accomplish a couple of useful things. First, I like to know exactly how accurate I can be with any given gun under ideal conditions. When I know that, it gives me a starting point for acceptable levels of accuracy under various other conditions.

When I'm training for Bianchi, the most accurate intense event I shoot every year, my training mostly consists of shooting six shot groups at various cadences. I'll start without a par, then work my way down through various par times at various distances. At 25 yards the standard is six shots in an 8 inch circle under 7 seconds from the holster, and at least 50% of those rounds should be in a four inch or better circle.

[Clobbersaurus]

Great thread GJM.

I've taken to just timing my groups at 25 yards. I start from the ready position, but it could be run easily from concealment. Really, if you want to measure your progress timing and scoring it is the only way. Here's my last B8: 93 - 3x in 39.61seconds. I don't know if that is a good score in that time frame or not. But it benchmarks me and helps me make a goal; 95 in 30 seconds or under.

[CCT125US]

I don't know if that is a good score in that time frame or not. But it benchmarks me and helps me make a goal

And that is so important. What others can do and achieve is valuable info, but at the end of the session, your progress is what matters. I have started to convert drills to hit factor, that way nothing is ever perfect and can always be improved. I find it interesting to see the effects of speed on accuracy and accuracy on speed.

[JWinTN]

The excerpt below is from Champion Shooting: A Proven Process for Success at Any Level by Ben Stoeger and Jay Hirshberg. It is the first drill of the ten they suggest a practical shooter should master.

1. Group Shooting

We start with this drill as a fundamental building block of successful pistol marksmanship. Practical shooters as a group are not good group shooters (shooting a few shots in the same place on the target) and some do not think this type of shooting is relevant. I think successful group shooting is invaluable to one’s development as a practical shooter. In the classes I have taught, it is rare that I encounter a shooter who can shoot all alphas on demand from 25 yards (this does not consider placing the shooter under a time constraint). -Ben

Through this drill one learns to read your sights. You will also learn where your gun hits at various distances and gain confidence. You will also gain an unparalleled appreciation for the function and properties of your specific sight, trigger, and load combination.

Your goal in this drill is to slow-fire your gun as well as it is mechanically capable at a small target. Shoot six shots and review your group. From 10 yards your shots in Production and Open should fit in the size of a quarter-dollar. From 20 yards the group should fit within a fist of a hand. . . .

[GJM]

At the risk of repeating what I said on page one, I believe slow fire group shooting ability is a fundamental skill that shooters need. The point of this thread, is my thinking about how to build on slow fire group shooting to be able to shoot a high percentage of your slow fire group ability, while pressing the trigger at a speed appropriate to gaming, hunting or defending yourself. If you aren't comfortable with your slow fire group shooting ability, stop reading as this doesn't apply to you.

If you are comfortable with your slow fire ability, consider experimenting with how quickly you can press the trigger while maintaining whatever standard of accuracy you want, at whatever distance you want. Do this by isolating the trigger press, by starting aimed in with the slack out. If you have any defect in how you press the trigger at speed, this effort will make this painfully obvious, and separate it from other aspects of, for example, drawing with a par time. I consider this practical bullseye -- where you maintain a given accuracy standard, but vary speed as you refine your trigger press. Today, my accuracy standard was a 3x5, and I worked it to 40 yards. In the process I refined my press, in a way that I haven't seen from classic slow fire.

[okie john]

Recognizing they are shooting mass produced service pistols vs precision wheelies.

That's part of it. But I think a lot of it is generational, like when Malamute talks about the dark ages. Most shooters on PT.com understand the fundamentals of accuracy: how to shoot a group, what a zero is and why it matters, the need for good ammo, etc. Most new shooters have no idea about that stuff. They have no idea it's possible to shoot small groups until they see it in places like this. When they see us actually doing it, they want to learn how to do it themselves.

When I started shooting four decades ago, the Modern Technique was pretty esoteric stuff. People understood that using two hands was good, but that was it. We focused on rifle-like accuracy at 25 and 50 yards. The premier handguns were Colt or Smith revolvers and tuned Colt or Browning autos. Ruger was just getting a foothold, Browning was the only import that could seriously challenge domestic arms makers, and action shooting didn’t exist outside of southern California.

We also didn't have the internet. Print writers like Elmer Keith, Bob Milek, Skeeter Skelton, George Nonte, Lee Jurras, and others larded their articles and books with pictures of small groups and zero emphasis on the kind of speed we take for granted today. Ed McGivern was dead; Bob Munden and Bill Jordan were fast up close, but neither of them used their sights. McGivern’s “Fast & Fancy Revolver Shooting” had a whole chapter on timers, but nobody else had one. Chronographs were rare. Relative to wages today, factory ammo was far more expensive than it is now, so if you wanted to shoot a lot you had to be wealthy, join the military, be a cop, or reload. Mike Dillon hadn’t started making presses yet, so we all used single-stage presses, which are so slow that anything like FAST or a Bill Drill would have been considered a frivolous waste of ammo.

When Jeff Cooper’s work hit the tipping point in the mid-70’s, we realized that being able to hit a dinner plate at 7m was enough to keep you alive most of the time, but you had to do it quickly—DVC and all that.

Then, as Bill Riehl puts it, the world lost its way.

Sights got bigger, targets got bigger and closer, and par times got shorter. When the Tueller Drill came along, we all started trying to get two hits at 21 feet in 1.5 seconds. That was all a Brave New World for a LOT of people, and all of it was good. But more and more unqualified people started calling themselves instructors. The worst of them focused on “combat accuracy” because it was The Latest Thing and you could help people to get measurable improvements quickly, which is impossible with accuracy. Add the ability to spread nonsense online, and it makes sense that some new shooters are astonished to see someone get hits at 25 yards and beyond.

I spend a lot of time helping new shooters at my club, and I worked on rental ranges before that. From what I see, new guys want to shoot fast, but few of them can keep a full magazine on the paper beyond 10 yards. Few of them understand the concept of zero, and some of them actually get upset when I tell them that centering their sights on the slide may not make POA and POI match up. Putting five shots in the black at 25 yards or cleaning The Test amazes them.

I first started asking about accuracy with polymer handguns three or four years ago. Most responses to my threads were of the you-can’t-outshoot-your-pistol-so-why-bother school. So I’ve gone out to learn what I can about making a modern service pistol shoot well and I share it when I can.

I agree that the well-rounded shooter must be able to balance speed and accuracy on demand. A lot of posters on the slow-fire threads have speed but not accuracy, hence the threads. The rest of us need to go out and teach these folks, and to spend more time on stuff like that LAV drill.

Anyway, that’s one old guy’s take on it.


Okie John

[SAWBONES]

From what I see, new guys want to shoot fast, but few of them can keep a full magazine on the paper beyond 10 yards. Few of them understand the concept of zero...Putting five shots in the black at 25 yards or cleaning The Test amazes them.

My experience too.

[ASH556]

That's part of it. But I think a lot of it is generational, like when Malamute talks about the dark ages. Most shooters on PT.com understand the fundamentals of accuracy: how to shoot a group, what a zero is and why it matters, the need for good ammo, etc. Most new shooters have no idea about that stuff. They have no idea it's possible to shoot small groups until they see it in places like this. When they see us actually doing it, they want to learn how to do it themselves.

When I started shooting four decades ago, the Modern Technique was pretty esoteric stuff. People understood that using two hands was good, but that was it. We focused on rifle-like accuracy at 25 and 50 yards. The premier handguns were Colt or Smith revolvers and tuned Colt or Browning autos. Ruger was just getting a foothold, Browning was the only import that could seriously challenge domestic arms makers, and action shooting didn’t exist outside of southern California.

We also didn't have the internet. Print writers like Elmer Keith, Bob Milek, Skeeter Skelton, George Nonte, Lee Jurras, and others larded their articles and books with pictures of small groups and zero emphasis on the kind of speed we take for granted today. Ed McGivern was dead; Bob Munden and Bill Jordan were fast up close, but neither of them used their sights. McGivern’s “Fast & Fancy Revolver Shooting” had a whole chapter on timers, but nobody else had one. Chronographs were rare. Relative to wages today, factory ammo was far more expensive than it is now, so if you wanted to shoot a lot you had to be wealthy, join the military, be a cop, or reload. Mike Dillon hadn’t started making presses yet, so we all used single-stage presses, which are so slow that anything like FAST or a Bill Drill would have been considered a frivolous waste of ammo.

When Jeff Cooper’s work hit the tipping point in the mid-70’s, we realized that being able to hit a dinner plate at 7m was enough to keep you alive most of the time, but you had to do it quickly—DVC and all that.

Then, as Bill Riehl puts it, the world lost its way.

Sights got bigger, targets got bigger and closer, and par times got shorter. When the Tueller Drill came along, we all started trying to get two hits at 21 feet in 1.5 seconds. That was all a Brave New World for a LOT of people, and all of it was good. But more and more unqualified people started calling themselves instructors. The worst of them focused on “combat accuracy” because it was The Latest Thing and you could help people to get measurable improvements quickly, which is impossible with accuracy. Add the ability to spread nonsense online, and it makes sense that some new shooters are astonished to see someone get hits at 25 yards and beyond.

I spend a lot of time helping new shooters at my club, and I worked on rental ranges before that. From what I see, new guys want to shoot fast, but few of them can keep a full magazine on the paper beyond 10 yards. Few of them understand the concept of zero, and some of them actually get upset when I tell them that centering their sights on the slide may not make POA and POI match up. Putting five shots in the black at 25 yards or cleaning The Test amazes them.

I first started asking about accuracy with polymer handguns three or four years ago. Most responses to my threads were of the you-can’t-outshoot-your-pistol-so-why-bother school. So I’ve gone out to learn what I can about making a modern service pistol shoot well and I share it when I can.

I agree that the well-rounded shooter must be able to balance speed and accuracy on demand. A lot of posters on the slow-fire threads have speed but not accuracy, hence the threads. The rest of us need to go out and teach these folks, and to spend more time on stuff like that LAV drill.

Anyway, that’s one old guy’s take on it.


Okie John

I love you man! (no homo).