Page 1 of 11 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 104

Thread: JCN critiques cardboard targets

  1. #1
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Location
    out of here

    JCN critiques cardboard targets

    Quote Originally Posted by Tom Givens View Post
    My favorite cardboard training target is back in production and available again. This target has anatomically correct scoring areas, a neck, and a more humanoid head. It is far superior to IDPA/USPSA cardboard targets. They are about a buck apiece in quantities of 100. See

    https://shootsteel.com/shootsteel-co...pack-of-100-1/

    I have no connection, BTW, I just like the target.
    IMO that isn’t very good anatomical correlation.

    The “heart” zone is way high. The aorta in full frontal is only about 3cm in width, so not a great target.

    Name:  5C34519A-964C-4DBA-9640-A76A44D057EF.jpeg
Views: 723
Size:  65.2 KB
    Last edited by JCN; 02-10-2021 at 08:43 PM.

  2. #2
    Site Supporter
    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Location
    South Louisiana
    "Not to nitpick..."

  3. #3
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Location
    out of here
    Quote Originally Posted by revchuck38 View Post
    "Not to nitpick..."
    It's not just a "little" off anatomically. It's pretty far off.
    To the point where the actual aim point would be bordering the C/D zone.

    I don't think that's a small deal when it's being advertised as an "anatomical" target.

    I would imagine someone as evidence based as Tom Givens would appreciate that it's more than a nit.

  4. #4
    Quote Originally Posted by JCN View Post
    It's not just a "little" off anatomically. It's pretty far off.
    To the point where the actual aim point would be bordering the C/D zone.

    I don't think that's a small deal when it's being advertised as an "anatomical" target.

    I would imagine someone as evidence based as Tom Givens would appreciate that it's more than a nit.
    The human heart isn’t located in the C/D zone border of that target in any drawing, scan, or photograph of the human torso I’ve ever seen. Maybe the bottom of the B zone but I’d say that target’s scoring zones are definitely good enough.
    My posts only represent my personal opinion and do not necessarily reflect the opinions or official policies of any employer, past or present. Obvious spelling errors are likely the result of an iPhone keyboard.

  5. #5
    Modding this sack of shit BehindBlueI's's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Location
    Midwest
    Older conversation on similar topic: https://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?4597-Targets
    Sorta around sometimes for some of your shitty mod needs.

  6. #6
    Hammertime
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Location
    Desert Southwest
    Quote Originally Posted by JCN View Post
    IMO that isn’t very good anatomical correlation.

    The “heart” zone is way high. The aorta in full frontal is only about 3cm in width, so not a great target.

    Name:  5C34519A-964C-4DBA-9640-A76A44D057EF.jpeg
Views: 723
Size:  65.2 KB
    High thoracic hits are the best hits IMO.

    Name:  4415_21_25-nerve-pericardium.jpg
Views: 648
Size:  25.8 KB

  7. #7
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Location
    out of here
    Quote Originally Posted by DanM View Post
    The human heart isn’t located in the C/D zone border of that target in any drawing, scan, or photograph of the human torso I’ve ever seen. Maybe the bottom of the B zone but I’d say that target’s scoring zones are definitely good enough.
    Wat?

    Name:  Screen Shot 2021-02-10 at 8.11.41 PM.jpg
Views: 663
Size:  41.0 KB

    There is clearly heart in the D zone.
    And while there is aorta in the B... that's not where I'd be aiming optimally.

  8. #8
    Quote Originally Posted by JCN View Post
    Wat?

    Name:  Screen Shot 2021-02-10 at 8.11.41 PM.jpg
Views: 663
Size:  41.0 KB

    There is clearly heart in the D zone.
    And while there is aorta in the B... that's not where I'd be aiming optimally.
    The shoulders of the target are lined up higher than where the shoulders of the X-ray image are. You lined up the top of the head.
    My posts only represent my personal opinion and do not necessarily reflect the opinions or official policies of any employer, past or present. Obvious spelling errors are likely the result of an iPhone keyboard.

  9. #9
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Location
    out of here
    Quote Originally Posted by Doc_Glock View Post
    High thoracic hits are the best hits IMO.
    Name:  4415_21_25-nerve-pericardium.jpg
Views: 648
Size:  25.8 KB
    I think high thoracic hits are just fine as are low thoracic hits.
    I personally like the QIT-97.

    Name:  Screen Shot 2021-02-10 at 8.26.01 PM.jpg
Views: 655
Size:  16.5 KB

    But I can't imagine an "anatomic" target prioritizing the smaller target of upper great vessels over the larger target of the heart with a circle.
    Plus the subclavians are protected by clavicles so I'm not sure that's a great place to be aiming.

    I would rather try and hit a heart than an aorta just on a size basis.
    From an incapacitation standpoint, hitting an aorta would probably cause quicker bleed out than heart but so many variables there I'm not sure it's worth debating.

    So I personally wouldn't use that "anatomic" target over something with just a narrower vertical chest scoring zone.

  10. #10
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Location
    out of here
    Quote Originally Posted by DanM View Post
    The shoulders of the target are lined up higher than where the shoulders of the X-ray image are. You lined up the top of the head.
    I was assuming that the cardboard target is a human with all the fleshy parts (it has ears!) so that the shoulders on the outline of that target includes all the traps and deltoids above the skeleton.
    The point is that it's hard to guess what they were thinking of in terms of anatomy, but at the very least, the B zone should be flipped to the lower part of their C zone.

    @DanM

    Here is a male model superimposed.

    I did a couple different scales whether you match the head or the torso size.
    I did anchor based on the face T-zone.

    Name:  Screen Shot 2021-02-10 at 9.26.39 PM.jpg
Views: 628
Size:  26.8 KBName:  Screen Shot 2021-02-10 at 9.23.27 PM.jpg
Views: 623
Size:  24.7 KB

    Again matching by T-zone, that's where I get the heart on the X-ray.
    Name:  Screen Shot 2021-02-10 at 9.32.13 PM.jpg
Views: 614
Size:  22.9 KB

    Even if I squash the skeleton image down to try and match shoulders, the circle is still too high.

    Name:  Screen Shot 2021-02-10 at 9.35.38 PM.jpg
Views: 625
Size:  21.9 KB
    Last edited by JCN; 02-10-2021 at 10:36 PM.

User Tag List

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •