For combat shooting, I use a Weaver stance. However, when shooting long distance, I may use an isosceles stance. What stance do you recommend for longer distances for stability a d precision shooting?
For combat shooting, I use a Weaver stance. However, when shooting long distance, I may use an isosceles stance. What stance do you recommend for longer distances for stability a d precision shooting?
Stays the same for me.
As a general rule, get as low as possible and as steady as possible, so if I really want to make hits at bunch of yards*, I'd be in roll-over prone or braced in some form or fashion.
If due to vegetation or terrain, I have to remain standing or am unable to get into a more supported position, iso. I also like putting my right cheek on my shoulder as if it was a rifle stock.
* What's your definition of long range? You can do quite well at 100y (depending on target size, obviously) with out as much effort at some folks think.
Why change at all? What benefit does iso give you at longer distance vs. the weaver stance you're already using?Originally Posted by CDR_Glock
I could see perhaps an iso shooter adopting a more weaver(-ish) type stance for shooting long distance where they tuck a support elbow in against the torso for some support, similar to what you see long distance or Olympic rifle shooters doing. It might help steady the hold at the expense of recoil control, but at long range that may well be a worthy trade-off.
--Josh
“Formerly we suffered from crimes; now we suffer from laws.” - Tacitus.
Define long-distance. I never use or teach weaver anymore. I shoot a modified iso at short-distance and long-distance. Long-distance to me (where I can get A-zone hits with certainty) is 25 yards. Long distance for me, where I am uncertain of hits, is 25-100 yards. I've never hit regularly past 75 yards realistically. Last I recall from 75 yards was challenging a buddy on a 3x5, and I got about 75% hits, and he got about 90%. We both use the exact same modified iso stance that we do when shooting short distances.
Consider this:
You use weaver for "combat". Consider that combat is messy. With a blue gun or unloaded gun, face a training partner. Have them move 1 step to your strong side, as if they are going toward your gun or holster (realistic in a fight). Come up to weaver. Have them push on your strong-side forearm, as if they went for your gun in the holster, but are now going for your arm/gun as you have pulled it out. They will be able to push your entire body over with one hand. Now, if you are an expert grappler, and your secret motive for weaver is to take the fight to the ground, that's awesome, but if not, then try the exact same thing with iso. Note that the farthest they can push you with two hands is about where the gun is still covering their left shoulder.
If you are shooting competition, stances like weaver might take place in some rare scenario, but I honestly can't find any usefulness for it in combat after 1950.
Short, long, I shoot a modified Weaver. Right arm straight and the left one bent. I've seen it called the Chapman Stance.
Works for me.
Me too. The one thing I'll change is eye use. At full size IDPA targets or poppers I shoot both eyes open up to 50 yards but when doing bullseye type shooting at 25 yards or any kind of precision shooting further than 25 yards (headshot for instance) I'll go to one eye.
If you are changing something as drastic as stance/grip based on precision/distance, something is going wrong.
Director Of Sales
Knight's Armament Company
Dang son
If you want a vision of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face - forever. -George Orwell
It was with CCT125US about 9 months to 1 year ago. I was firing a glock 21sf, and I believe he was either firing an HK p30 DA/SA in 9mm or an XD in .45. Even more impressive for him is that he shoots DA about the same as SA. Two different trigger pulls doesn't even seem to phase him.
I shot 25 yards on 4 inch squares and 8 inch pie plates during a class saturday. We were doing timed (for stress) transition drills from carbine. Had some carbine misses during the day. No pistol misses during carbine. Even at speed and distance. Shot my pistol better than my AR at 25 yards
There are definitely a LOT of people here that are still better than me at pistol, I'd be willing to bet that it might even be a majority. All that being said, my point is:
Changing stance "may" "hypothetically" give you an advantage, but well beyond what your front sight can pick up.
So: (If it's for defense and not competition)
#1 Use the same stance, grip, etc, every time
#2 Use the stance, grip, etc, that is nearly identical to what you would use if you were contact shooting, etc...
I am merely saying that modified iso is a thousand times better than weaver for self-defense, and trying to point out that using that same iso defensive stance, it's still quite possible to shoot long-range. And, if you're my friend who practices that much more often than I do, you'll get solid hits, assuming you have solid form.
Reply With Quote
