I think I read once that a police force did an experiment where they had recruits train on firearms in two conditions:
1. 22 LR SW revolvers equivalent in size to their 38s, then transition
2. Start with the 38s from the beginning.
The results were that #2 was a better procedure as you didn't get negative transfer from the 22s being so light. This is a vague memory and I didn't save it
Anybody recall or heard of this?
I think it makes perfect sense. I don’t think people go to sub caliber understudies if they can shoot a steady diet of full caliber ammunition. It does bring up an interesting question though of how much negative training occurs when firing sub caliber ammunition vs how much positive training occurs.
Good thread idea. I have an M&P 22 Compact I bought in part for cheap practice and have been considering getting a 43C as an understudy for my 642s.
Except for recoil control, everything you need to learn about shooting pistols can be learned with sub-caliber duplicates. If the triggers are the same/close, sights are the same/close, and grips are the same/close, you are doing yourself a huge financial favor using a rimfire for part of your training. It’s also a good idea if you have any physical limitations on how much you can take shooting centerfire rounds.
My case: M18 S&W and G44 get shot these days more than any other pistol, and rimfire rifles more than centerfires. Mostly because of money/availability buying factory ammo, and time/$/component availability buying & loading reloading components.
I'm still working with a new shooter who simply WILL NOT shoot anything other than a .22LR. She's hell on wheels with a G44 - you definitely DO NOT want to be downrange from her if she's got her back up and that pistol in her hand.
Switch her to a G19, she's good for one or MAYBE two rounds, then it's "nope" and she's done shooting for the day.
So, she can't control the recoil of the G19 because she's still scared of it. I'm not worried about that, because she does not carry outside the house, and she's scary fast/accurate with the G44. For HER, the rimfire seems to be "the answer," because anything centerfire would lead her to not having a gun available at all.
For LE training, I don't like the use of 22s, because they're simply not an option for duty use. Instructors get paid to be smart, identify problems early, and correct them. Not sure about other agencies, but I've never seen an agency who's academy had enough range time to teach everyone the fundamentals of marksmanship on a rimfire, then transition to centerfire and start dealing with grip, anticipation, and other issues that show up with "real guns."
Don't get me wrong, I love rimfire guns, have several, and will never part with them. But they're plinkers and skunk killers for me.
I shoot a .22 as practice and warmup, but finish the session with a centerfire. Too much rimfire gives funny ideas about recoil recovery so I don't double tap with the small bore, but shoot transitions, target to target.
Code Name: JET STREAM
I started shooting with centerfires and never bothered with .22s. I've had several over the years and none of them ever stuck around. I taught my two older kids on centerfires, but I did start the youngest out with a .22 rifle. Gauging their performance as adults I'd say it didn't make any difference. With LE, most don't shoot except when they have to, so it's impossible to track performance due to lack of frequency. Likewise, beginning LE training with a .22 is irrelevant because training cycles aren't long enough to track meaningful data. I'm not surprised at those results.
We may lose and we may win, but we will never be here again.......
Then what does this train of thought say about dry fire?
Regular dry fire and rimfire practice certainly improve (and maintain) my DA revolver trigger pull, lack of recoil be damned.
Not just rimfire but lower power (and cheaper, more available) centerfire.
I grew up on SA triggers and came to DA's later in life so it was a true learning curve for me. My kids started at ages way to young for anything but rimfires, they progressed into centerfires with style.
My opinion is that a enthusiast will dedicate considerably more time, effort, learning into their shooting than a police cadet in a required class so that's a large difference.
In my experience as an instructor, the only reason to train with .22LR is because 1) it’s cheap; 2) you have someone unusually sensitive to noise/blast/recoil (which is generally only an issue when shooting indoors, or with someone with physiological limitations); 3) it’s fun.
If you only had a limited amount of time to train folks to shoot for minimum standard duty purposes, I think that time would be far better spent shooting centerfire only. Almost no one ever flunks out of basic combat training or the police training academy because they can’t be taught to shoot centerfire to basic institutional minimum standards.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
To the OP, “it depends”.
I can relate that just a few years back, Bill Rogers at the Rogers School began his “Basic” course with students shooting.22 rimfire revolvers on his moving plate course. Then I recall one transitioned to a semiautomatic.22 pistol.
Then most moved on to a 9mm.
His thinking, which I tend to agree with, was that starting on a .22 allowed learning fundamentals without the distraction of blast and noise. I think there was also the effect of hand strengthening and learning to “steer” the iron sights-then move on after a certain point. He had lighter weight plates set that call with a .22 hit. Seemed pretty neat.
It’s been decades, but Cooper wrote about a overseas military cadet class where ammunition was scarce. The instructors decided to experiment: half the group went through the regular program of instruction-safety, nomenclature, shooting, etc.. The other half dry fired the entire course. On qual day, the dry fire group reportedly did slightly better.
If I had the time, I’d do at least fam fire with a rimfire. With limited time(or a dictated poi), one would have to go centerfire out of the gate.
Apologies for not directly addressing inquiry on about .22/38. I have not heard of that one.
Reply With Quote