Page 14 of 25 FirstFirst ... 4121314151624 ... LastLast
Results 131 to 140 of 250

Thread: 2.0 range day

  1. #131
    Member Luke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Alabama
    SLG, my apologies for freaking out. Not sure why but it struck a nerve with me, please forgive me sir. I enjoy this place because there are a lot of serious and skilled shooters here who enjoy talking technique and discussing ways to better them selves as students of the gun.

    You seem to be a well respected and talented shooter both in a "tactical" sense as well as a established force in the gamer world. I don't know you personally, only things I know is what I've heard around here. Correct me if I'm wrong, I remember reading you had actually won a USPSA nationals a few years ago? If true that's pretty sweet.
    One of the many reason I enjoy the range journals here is it gives a peek into the shooters ability as well as how they define the standard at which they deem "good". I haven't looked specifically for yours, but I have looked back through the journals and don't remember seeing yours. If you have the time, and wouldn't mind, I'd love to know more about your career into competitive shooting. As a newer shooter I'm always wanting to learn how the other guys rose to the top. I'd love to here more about it if you have the time.
    i used to wannabe

  2. #132
    Quote Originally Posted by Luke View Post
    SLG, my apologies for freaking out. Not sure why but it struck a nerve with me, please forgive me sir. I enjoy this place because there are a lot of serious and skilled shooters here who enjoy talking technique and discussing ways to better them selves as students of the gun.

    You seem to be a well respected and talented shooter both in a "tactical" sense as well as a established force in the gamer world. I don't know you personally, only things I know is what I've heard around here. Correct me if I'm wrong, I remember reading you had actually won a USPSA nationals a few years ago? If true that's pretty sweet.
    One of the many reason I enjoy the range journals here is it gives a peek into the shooters ability as well as how they define the standard at which they deem "good". I haven't looked specifically for yours, but I have looked back through the journals and don't remember seeing yours. If you have the time, and wouldn't mind, I'd love to know more about your career into competitive shooting. As a newer shooter I'm always wanting to learn how the other guys rose to the top. I'd love to here more about it if you have the time.
    I'm not a force anywhere. I won a steel nationals a few years ago, in a very soft category. I came in second in another , and third in yet another, iirc. Uspsa doesn't seem to keep records of those years, don't know why. I shot that match with my duty sig 229 in my concealment holster, which made me very happy, but as I said, it was a very soft win, and I have no illusions that I'd be competitive today in uspsa. I've been very fortunate to shoot on the super squad a number of times at nationals and in area matches, and I held my own, but I'm not a super squad level guy. My last ranking in uspsa was A class. I consider my legit, on demand shooting ability as master class. That is a rough metric, since one is a sport designation, and I'm just talking about discrete shooting abilities, like draws and reloads. I think that's an honest assessment, as I hate sandbag gers. If someone wanted to disagree with me, and say otherwise, that's fine too. Or as Rob would say, I'm a legit A class shooter, where most shooters in most classes are somewhat inflated.

    I don't have a journal here, sorry. I'm never afraid to state my score on any test, I just rarely track that stuff anymore. I told my wife about the PR the other day and she didn't even ask what the time was, as she knows how little any of that matters, to me or to her.

    I'm all for higher and higher levels of skill, and in an abstract way, I wish I could out shoot the top guys. Just not enough to put any effort into that. I don't enjoy shooting games very much anymore, and prefer not to spend my remaining time that way.

    My main focus is fighting ability. Always has been. People who spend too much time on the gun, and neglect the other areas are doing it wrong, imo. I know a lot of really good gunfighters. Guys with lots and lots of experience, not just some guy who got lucky once or twice (nothing wrong with that, just putting the experience level into context). I can out shoot all of them. That tells me a couple of things that actually matter, as opposed to my bill drill time. It tells me that fairly high shooting ability is just not needed. It tells me that taking time away from shooting, and spending it on other areas, like individual and team Tactics, or insertion and extraction techniques, is probably more important. Now, some of that doesn't apply to civilians, and never will. That's fine, but it does apply to my world. And in my world, I enjoy shooting very much. I just don't overestimate it's importance, or mistake high technical skill for anything other than high technical skill. My worst day, on demand ability is what matters to me, way more than any pr run. It's just not as exciting to talk about.

    Please reread what I said about magz . I was a bit more sarcastic than I should have been, but I never said he was a bad shooter. I sarcastically asked for his standards, because for me, there are no standards that a crappy trigger can't accomplish, if the shooter is capable. A much overused quote by Steinbeck seems to fit here.

    Eta. As much as I dislike sandbaggers, I also dislike grandbaggers. A friend looked into it, and says my steel win counts as a national championship. I'm not so sure. I went to the podium for some wins and not others. They may not count that division as a national win, idk. Until I can get clarification from uspsa, I won't consider it as a national win. Glock is looking into my gssf wins for me as well, to see if it was a first or not. I have probably been too casual in my thought process on this stuff, and I absolutely do not want to misrepresent myself in any way.

    Further edited to add: Found out more about my win. I did come in first in a division at Steel Nationals. 2nd in another and 3rd in another. I can definitely say I won Steel Nationals in X division. I gather that USPSA does not call that a national title, so I can't really say I'm a national champion (though many other say that of themselves in similar situations, I don't think it is legit.) Hope that clarifies things.

    Luke,

    I find it curious that you have not been back in this thread since. Makes it hard for me to take your queries or apology seriously. Maybe I'm wrong but it seems like trolling to me. Then again, I take a person's word as a bit stronger than some others do.
    Last edited by SLG; 01-14-2017 at 01:15 PM.

  3. #133
    banana republican blues's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Location
    Blue Ridge Mtns
    Quote Originally Posted by SLG View Post
    My main focus is fighting ability. Always has been. People who spend too much time on the gun, and neglect the other areas are doing it wrong, imo. I know a lot of really good gunfighters. Guys with lots and lots of experience, not just some guy who got lucky once or twice (nothing wrong with that, just putting the experience level into context). I can out shoot all of them. That tells me a couple of things that actually matter, as opposed to my bill drill time. It tells me that fairly high shooting ability is just not needed. It tells me that taking time away from shooting, and spending it on other areas, like individual and team Tactics, or insertion and extraction techniques, is probably more important. Now, some of that doesn't apply to civilians, and never will. That's fine, but it does apply to my world. And in my world, I enjoy shooting very much. I just don't overestimate it's importance, or mistake high technical skill for anything other than high technical skill. My worst day, on demand ability is what matters to me, way more than any pr run. It's just not as exciting to talk about.
    Well said, SLG. I think this paragraph gets to the crux on a variety of levels.

    There are many skills involved in resolving a conflict whether with a team or one on one. Not the least of which are communication and command presence.
    Last edited by blues; 01-10-2017 at 12:12 PM.
    There's nothing civil about this war.

    Read: Harrison Bergeron

  4. #134
    Site Supporter DocGKR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Palo Alto, CA
    SLG--very good post!
    Facts matter...Feelings Can Lie

  5. #135
    I was able to get my hands on some of the first M&P's right off the line, a 9mm and a .40S&W for a pretty in depth T&E. I loved the look, loved the feel in the hand and was very excited. But in the end the results were what mattered. We pretty much fished out every issue that later became commonly known issues and complaints in the M&P line, both .40 and 9mm. I think what made me more disappointed is that it didn't take some super knowledgeable gunsmith / shooter to notice or figure out these issues. Some were so glaring that your average shooter could easily see the issues.

    Also what turned me off is that one pistol would not run 2-3 rounds without having a failure. How the heck could a manufacturer and their engineers not notice these issues that were so widespread and how could they send these pistols from the manufacturer to a major organization and not have known this? Anyway that greatly turned me off to the M&P. I did revisit later models, but the trigger and particularly the issues in the M&P9 just kept leaving me underwhelmed.

    I did consider a Pro Core model at one point, but just never pulled the trigger. I will admit to having a big preference for the Glock but this thread has got me at least wanting to get my hands on a 2.0 as I so much wanted to like the M&P when it was first even discussed on paper.

    I will also note that I am also a big "trigger don't matter" (that much) type of person, but when I did review the original M&P the poor trigger did immediately stand out to me. I did say that many people would not like it and if I were comparing triggers, I didn't like it either. But I guess I was groomed on crappy triggers and feel that having learned to shoot on crappy triggers was a big advantage for me in the long run.

    Man I took a lot of heat over those M&P reviews years ago. Good times.

  6. #136
    Quote Originally Posted by Surf View Post
    But I guess I was groomed on crappy triggers and feel that having learned to shoot on crappy triggers was a big advantage for me in the long run.
    I think this is the crux of the "trigger debate" in the practical shooting world. Its all in context of what you are used to. I was introduced to pistols at 17 by an Uncle who shot NRA Traditional Bullseye. My first two pistols were 1911's...one a was a full blown accurised custom gun with a super crisp 3 1/2# trigger. It was an 1 1/2" gun at 50 yards in a rest.

    The first time I shot a Glock my thoughts were "damn this trigger blows" and was appalled by the lack of accuracy (comparatively) That was a long time ago and I have learned to accept modern polymer pistols for what they are I shot them well. But I instinctively compare any pistol to my first experiences. The reality is when you are shooting at 10 yards trying to quickly place shots in a 6" or 8" area, these things don't really matter that much. But they are nice to have

  7. #137
    Vending Machine Operator
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Location
    Rocky Mtn. West
    I started on a DA/SA Beretta trigger and DA/SA is the only trigger that really feels like "home" to me, although I am a demonstrably better shooter with a good striker trigger. Sometimes I can't believe the level of shooting my VP9 lets me get to. As a lifelong mediocre shooter it is the first gun I have ever actually shot WELL, and certainly the first time and only time I've ever been called out for praise on a busy range by the RO. So my gut says a DA/SA trigger is most natural, but the objective results are different. That said, my M&P 40 trigger pre-Apex was rough, and I shot very poorly with that gun.

    Some great input from SLG that makes me think I need to focus on my shooting as a full, life-preserving skill set rather than micro-adjusting my trigger finger position, and maybe get some range and training time that isn't standing with nice even metered fire at the 15 yard line.

    That post may well have inspired me to take the leap to sign up for my first real training.
    Last edited by LockedBreech; 01-10-2017 at 06:13 PM.
    State Government Attorney | Beretta, Glock, CZ & S&W Fan

  8. #138
    Site Supporter JSGlock34's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    USA
    So in return for a fully tensioned striker the M&P gets a mediocre trigger?
    "When the phone rang, Parker was in the garage, killing a man."

  9. #139
    Quote Originally Posted by JSGlock34 View Post
    So in return for a fully tensioned striker the M&P gets a mediocre trigger?
    Not sure that is the case because Apex seems to have figured it out. Recent production M&P Sears break SUPER clean. I think most of the trigger "issues" stem from the striker block and trigger bar loop. The Apex FSS gets rid of the long take up and their USB smooths out the take up. I think a USB may be all that is needed now in current production M&Ps if my sample is indicative of what is being made now.

  10. #140
    I have no insight into M&P triggers, and for the sake of this post, I have purposely not asked.

    For a $430 gun, I'm not sure what is expected these days. They have to save money somewhere, maybe they chose the trigger. My PR's that day were shot with the Performance Center M&P with an RMR. I mention that, again, since it seems to have been overlooked a few times. No surprise to me at all that I shot better with it. I'm sure had I shot my Roland instead, the results that day would have been the same. Certainly it is no mystery that I shot those drills faster with the dot gun compared to irons.

    At any rate, I mention all that as a long way of saying that the Performance Center gun, an older CORE model, has a really nice trigger. Clearly they can have them, but at what cost to the company? I for one have no issue with a $430 gun coming with a less than stellar trigger. My Sigs, which cost twice as much these days, certainly don't come with triggers that i would define as good. Ok, maybe. Definitely not good though. Pretty sure HK is the same way, unless you...wait for it...pay extra...for a different trigger.

    The nice thing is, as I've said before, once you hit the 1,000 or 2,000 round mark, both the trigger and you will work just fine:-) Which is as it should be.

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
  •