View Full Version : Pistol as a primary means of training and self defense?
I am interested to hear others thoughts here on training primarily/exclusively with pistols for self defense?
Any recommendations you guys have on training focus, classes, or pistol as a primary weapon would be great!
I am a long time gun owner, my previous firearms experience besides my time in the service, is primarily plinking with friends and a couple trips to the range every year. Recently after obtaining my ccw/chp my thoughts have shifted from just being an enthusiast to wanting to become much more proficient with a firearm specifically a pistol for self defense purposes.
I am a non LEO and I live/work in an urban area, I have come to the conclusion that a handgun would be the best platform for my use and training.
I feel the odds of needing to use a firearm for self defense greatly favor pistol skills under most circumstances, whether it be in the community with an edc, home defense, or even the unlikely shtf scenario. Sure, rifles and shotguns have certain advantages depending on the situation but a handgun is what we are most likely to have at arms reach and should be adequate for dispatching bad guys within 25 yards or so. Also, the added benefit of being concealable gives somewhat of a tactical advantage of being able to neutralize the threat without looking like one. Not sure how true it is but I have also read that most of what is learned pistol training carries over to long guns. So I am focusing on using a pistol as my primary self-defense weapon of choice.
My current training goal is to get to 2-3 tactical pistol courses this year and train at the local range at least once a month.
I will likely sell off most of what is in the safe to fund training, ammo, spare parts, and lots of magazines...and will be focused on 4 or 5 9mm m&p's and glocks for manual of arms and ammo price/compatibility. Might keep a rifle or two around but mostly for fun/range toy.
My thoughts for basic loadouts based on my reading, research and limited experience are:
Every Day Carry: alternating G19 or Shield AIWB
Home Defense: G17 with light
Classes/Training: G17, G19, or M&P 9 in a OWB holster riding on a inner/outer style belt with 2 or three mag pouches
Thoughts?? thanks in advance
My personal thought is that you are generally going in the right direction.
I would add pistol competitions to the mix as it really brings out where you are lacking in skills/manipulations. It's easy to do stuff on a range, start running and thinking about stuff and everything goes to crap if your not where you need to be.
I would also recommend side a rifle for hd. Many huge advantages, but some still prefer the pistol.
All that said, I'm a nobody. There are some real professionals here who may weigh in. Make sure your training is from a reputable person.
Your pistols sound like good choices.
whatthepuck
02-11-16, 13:12
Probably 90-95% of my training is devoted to pistol-shooting, g19s specifically. I agree with you that as a normal joe-shcmoe upstanding citizen, you're much more likely to be involved in a defensive scenario involving a pistol than anything else. I really enjoy shooting rifles, but I'm far more likely to have to one day use my EDC g19 than one of my ARs. Also, like you mention, the pistol being the weapon always on you should be the one you're most proficient and familiar with.
At night my AR is locked up, but one of my g19s is on the nightstand ready to rock if need be.
Pick one platform and stick with it. If you use a G17 for a HD gun then carry a G19 and use either a G17/G19/G26 for an EDC. No reason to have different platforms (unless you want to) With that being said, if you stick with one platform you can save money as you will only have to buy one brand of mag instead of 2-4 as listed above.
Shoot a match (IDPA or USPSA) with your carry gun and carry rig. This will show you if it works or not. Some will argue that shooting matches will get you killed on the street, but if you look at the core idea behind it-shoot accurately under the stress of speed (and others watching) you will find that you will improve with time. Don't cheat yourself and game it out but rather go into each stage with an open mind and shoot as it appears.
IF-you want to get a different platform to train on and familiarize yourself with, then you should look at a 1911 and a DA/SA gun. Having a good 1911, DA/SA, and using striker fired guns you should be able to shoot anything you pick up.
Agree with Mega - your moving in the right direction. I spent too much money and time taking carbine classes in the past.
Gun choices look solid, personally I would be Glock only but thats me. Be very picky on who you take your 3 classes from and devote significant time to dry fire. Tons of great resources online for improving your pistol - pistol-forum.com has printable targets and drills. Pistol shooting is easy to loose focus and burn 200 rounds at the range without a goal, stick to a goal and be conscious of your efforts and improvements. Buy a shot timer. You-Tube has some good videos on control and hand tweaks as well from very credible sources, i.e. Specialized Services Group (Surf) has begun publishing videos again and his Glock videos were great.
Once you have taken a couple pistol classes, I would recommend you look at the Shivworks coursework (ECQC/AMIS in particular) as the verbal MUC, open hand, and blade are all going to be an interest to you as you move in this direction. Retaining the gun is as important as learning to use it properly.
Mr. Goodtimes
02-11-16, 14:57
Why keep four or five handguns? Sell it all. Buy an excellent rifle/optic combo and keep two G19's, one for carry and one for competition/range.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
You’re on the right track conceptually, but any time you use the word “alternating” when you talk about carry guns, you’re overthinking things and making life more complex than it needs to be. Keep things simple for the first few years and savor the complexity and nuance of concealed carry that you can only learn from experience before you move too far from the norm. The most advanced teachers and practitioners usually use the most basic gear possible.
A few other points:
1. Everything you do with a pistol carries over to long guns. The reverse is not true.
2. Buy as many fun guns as you want, but don’t vary your street guns much if at all. Settle on something and stick to it. I’d get a pair of G19s and a G43 OR a Shield and a pair of M&Ps, but don’t mix brands for carry. If nothing else, you’ll save money on holsters, spare parts, magazines, and mag carriers.
3. You can’t have too many spare mags. 10-20 per system is a good idea, so if you carry a G26/19/17, have 10-20 G17 mags since they work in all three guns.
4. Study post-shooting dynamics before you choose a carry method. Reholstering can have potentially fatal consequences on a good day, and post-shooting adrenalin dumps make it even more dangerous.
5. AIWB is an advanced skill. Many top trainers ban it from their classes for a reason. Don’t use it until you have a lot more training and experience than you do now.
6. Train with the same make and model of pistol that you carry to the greatest extent possible. Use the same holster, too.
7. $150-200 worth of spare parts can keep several Glocks running for a LONG time.
8. No matter which pistol you choose, add $100-150 per gun for better sights.
9. Raise your training cadence to at least once every two weeks.
10. Test practice ammo, find what your pistols like best, and buy 10k rounds of it.
11. Know your zero.
12. Get a timer and scorable targets. Per Kyle DeFoor, scoring rings and timers don’t lie.
13. Balance your training time on distance shooting (25 + yards) and up-close speed work. You’ll need to be good at both if the pistol is your primary.
14. Learn the basic drills and tests (El Presidente, The Test, The Hackathorn Standards, IDPA Qualifier, FAST, Mozambique, etc.), shoot them regularly, and track your progress. They are the universally understood (though often demoralizing) standard for pistol-shooting skill.
15. Keep a log of your goals and your progress toward reaching them.
16. Start with a good introductory course. No need for a celebrity trainer—chances are you’ll be just fine with a local “no-name” trainer who had a good reputation. Don’t start off with celebrities like Kyle DeFoor, Larry Vickers, or Pat McNamara. Their basic courses will blow most people’s minds.
17. Once you get a couple of courses under your belt, train with Ken Hackathorn if you can. It’s like taking Physics 101 from Sir Isaac Newton.
18. Stay active on this forum and others like it. Ask questions and let people help you.
Okie John
OhioFinance
02-11-16, 15:52
Pretty much the best possible post and could wrap the thread up. Wise words Okie.
Okie nailed it.
Simplify your gun choices and train (not just shoot) as much as you can.
There was a thread not too long ago (a year or two) that asked what would you do different or what have you learned in all the years shooting and the majority agreed that:
1. Most would have standardized on the 9mm Glock 19 and skipped experimenting with other platforms/calibers.
2. Most would have focused 99.9% on handgun training vs. AR/longgun training/classes, for EXACTLY the reasons the OP stated.
Do a search....I'd link but my search-fu is weak.
jackblack73
02-11-16, 18:27
IIRC, in the NSW goes Glock thread, one of the SMEs mentioned that special forces train something like twice as much with the pistol than carbine simply because it is harder to become proficient with a pistol. So focusing your training on pistols makes sense to me.
But personally I wouldn't be looking to sell off the contents of your safe, since for most of us this is primarily a hobby to be enjoyed.
Also, there is a real, BTDT SHTF poster on other sites (Google: FerFAL) that also recommend handguns, due to their concealment, go anywhere properties.
In his AO (post-financial SHTF 1990's Argentina), there aren't carbine/rifle toting people in urban areas. Though, he also possessed longarms (IIRC, a FAL)
Thread: How often do you get out and "shoot the gun"?
https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?173826-How-often-do-you-get-out-and-quot-shoot-the-gun-quot
Much better cost:benefit for me in working handguns over rifles. I've found that I need less rifle work to maintain a given practical standard. Not to mention more of it is sustainable dry. Dedicated handgun shooting also seems to help my rifle shooting by default, where I haven't found the opposite to be as true as I once believed. I've attended several classes in 2015 that incorporated carbines for a day or less, which met my needs. Some dry work, and 1-2 limited sessions a month to keep it up.
Of late, I am developing much more interest in precision AR work than defensive/CQB type applications.
As Sadam in said, buy a shot timer, besides ammo, it's the best investment I've made. What works best? Time it. Are you progressing? Time it.
Eurodriver
02-11-16, 20:33
Thread: How often do you get out and "shoot the gun"?
https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?173826-How-often-do-you-get-out-and-quot-shoot-the-gun-quot
Much better cost:benefit for me in working handguns over rifles. I've found that I need less rifle work to maintain a given practical standard. Not to mention more of it is sustainable dry. Dedicated handgun shooting also seems to help my rifle shooting by default, where I haven't found the opposite to be as true as I once believed. I've attended several classes in 2015 that incorporated carbines for a day or less, which met my needs. Some dry work, and 1-2 limited sessions a month to keep it up.
Of late, I am developing much more interest in precision AR work than defensive/CQB type applications.
I remember that post (yours) and have recently found that I agree on all counts. Precision AR work and handguns consume the vast majority of range time as of late.
The truth is that running a carbine correctly is a very hard skill to "forget". Long range work and especially handguns require constant honing.
Okie's post was awesome. Do that.
I've been thinking along the same lines lately. Pretty much every practical application I have for a firearm can be solved with a Glock 19 and a strong side IWB kydex holster.
methical20
02-12-16, 11:49
7. $150-200 worth of spare parts can keep several Glocks running for a LONG time.
Okie John
Just curious, but what basic parts would you recommend keeping on hand?
Thanks for the post. It helped more than just the OP. That helped me to rearrange some of my flawed priorities.
Just curious, but what basic parts would you recommend keeping on hand?
For upgrades, I like smooth triggers, minus (-) connectors, extended magazine catches, and maritime spring cups. Keep the OEM parts, so if you sell the gun you can reinstall them and keep the upgraded ones for your next Glock.
For maintenance, every spring in the gun. Look at Glock's recommended service intervals to determine the proportions. Everyone focuses on the RSA, but if the slide lock spring fails, then the slide will fall off of the gun, so you want to keep an eye on them as well.
The trick is to figure out what you need, then buy it all at the same time. Most Glock parts cost less than the shipping it takes to get them to you, so buying parts one at a time can triple or quadruple your overall cost. Also, some parts get scarce now and then--I've had to hunt for maritime spring cups and minus connectors, for example--so if you want something it's best to buy in advance so you don't have to wait. This also helps keep the per-unit cost low. Once you figure out what you need, check Midway, Glockmeister, Brownells, and whoever else you use for the best price and buy in bulk.
Thanks for the post. It helped more than just the OP. That helped me to rearrange some of my flawed priorities.
Glad to help.
Okie John
Hard to beat what's already been said in here. I take carbine and shotgun classes for fun, the handgun classes are more defensive because I can't carry a rifle or a shotgun around with me. Yes I have both and available but realistically you're going to most often have access to a pistol. Even in your home it's more likely than not easier to navigate with a pistol, especially one handed if you have to control other people (children) etc.. Long guns are great and have specific purposes but putting your money and training dollars towards primarily handgun is the way to go. Stick mainstream like a G19 or two and try to wear it out.
Here is that thread....it surfaced to the top recently.....GOOD READ of ALL PAGES!
https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?144800-If-you-had-it-to-do-all-over-again/page29
If you choose Glock, it's worth shooting a GSSF match every couple of years to have those parts replaced at the match for free. Plus, the matches are fun.
William B.
02-15-16, 19:49
I'm going to echo a lot of what's already been said, but it is more practical to primarily train/practice with a handgun. You are more likely to use it as a civilian with a CHL; the ammo is generally more affordable, allowing you to practice more often or practice more affordably; and, as others already said, pistol skills are more transferable to rifle/carbine than vice-versa.
As far as the training classes go, if money is an issue I would cut back to one SOLID class this year and spend the rest of the time at the range (more than once a month using the $$ you saved by not attending 2 more classes) practicing and perfecting what you learned.
As others already said, buy a shot timer. I've owned one since early 2014 and, aside from a Robert Vogel class I attended, it has been the most valuable purchase I've made as a handgun shooter. Once you've achieved a reasonable level of marksmanship it's the best way to quantify your performance. Also, try to be consistent with your practice targets. This will give you consistent data and feedback as to how you are improving and what your weak areas are.
It sounds like you've already got a level-headed plan, solid goals, and some quality handguns. I'm glad to see you seeking training!
jjackson@tierthreetac
02-17-16, 17:14
There's some good info on this sight. As was noted above we do tend to cary our pistols more than our rifles but many of us shoot and seek out training with the carbine over the pistol. I also agree that the basics are the basics on any platform. I just wrote this article about some new research covering tactical pistol shooting. Hope it helps. http://www.tierthreetactical.com/3-scientifically-proven-methods-to-improve-pistol-shooting/
Well...beat officers pretty much live and die by their sidearm. Literally. I'm big on the Rogers course. That was something else.
That said, as cliche as it is, a pistol exists to fight my way to a rifle and create distance. Preferably toward a rifle.
William B.
02-18-16, 09:13
There's some good info on this sight. As was noted above we do tend to cary our pistols more than our rifles but many of us shoot and seek out training with the carbine over the pistol. I also agree that the basics are the basics on any platform. I just wrote this article about some new research covering tactical pistol shooting. Hope it helps. http://www.tierthreetactical.com/3-scientifically-proven-methods-to-improve-pistol-shooting/
Interesting read. Thanks!
I've been leaning more and more to the "handgun as primary" for a while now.
I had a pretty nasty scleral buckling eye surgery last year for a detached retina and multiple follow-up laser treatments. It has changed my vision and the way I shoot (right handed and right eye was the problem eye) quite a bit. I found that it was easier to adapt my pistol shooting (just tilt my head or rotate the gun a bit) than long guns.
There is only so much a guy is allowed to do at an indoor range, but now that the weather is breaking a bit and I can get out to my club's outdoor range more often, I plan to get more "dynamic" in my training. In trying to decide a core set of drills to use I kind of started leaning toward just shooting the IDPA classifier. It covers multiple distances, both strong and weak hand, reloads from slide lock and loaded chamber, cover, standing, kneeling, moving, single and multiple targets... It really does have a good mix of everything. Plus it has the benefit of quantifiable standards (score) to measure yourself against. It only requires 3 targets and 90 rounds of ammo so setup, shooting and takedown could all be accomplished pretty quickly.
Obviously I wouldn't want to ONLY shoot the classifier, but as a "standard" training routine, it seems like a pretty good idea. Am I on the right track?
jjackson@tierthreetac
02-18-16, 11:01
Interesting read. Thanks!
Thanks for the kind words. I was worried that it was a bit to nerdy.
Well...beat officers pretty much live and die by their sidearm. Literally. I'm big on the Rogers course. That was something else.
That said, as cliche as it is, a pistol exists to fight my way to a rifle and create distance. Preferably toward a rifle.
I've said that and even believed it. The problem, it assumes a rifle is even a possible variable in the equation. It marginalizes the pistol, which has capability far beyond many realize. Many will also use it as an excuse for sucking and failing to do anything about it.
I've said that and even believed it. The problem, it assumes a rifle is even a possible variable in the equation. It marginalizes the pistol, which has capability far beyond many realize. Many will also use it as an excuse for sucking and failing to do anything about it.
I don't even know that I've ever seen a case of someone getting into a self-defense shooting, even a home invasion, and actually using a pistol to "fight" to a rifle. I have however read of a police officer who ended up pinned down by his vehicle, couldn't get to his shotgun in the car or rifle in the trunk, and ended the shootout with well-placed headshots and just a few rounds left in the last mag for his Glock.
Considering most defensive shootings are done with a pistol - over in a matter of seconds with just a few rounds fired, it's important to focus training on making sure each of those rounds counts.
Well...beat officers pretty much live and die by their sidearm. Literally. I'm big on the Rogers course. That was something else.
That said, as cliche as it is, a pistol exists to fight my way to a rifle and create distance. Preferably toward a rifle.
I was an advocate of using the pistol as a means to fight my way to the rifle for a long time. If the rifle is no more than several yards away, it might be possible. In most cases though, you won't be able to reach the rifle or by the time you do the problem has been addressed and is no longer a threat.
A person should make every effort to master the weapon they carry on their person or keep within arms reach.
Obviously I wouldn't want to ONLY shoot the classifier, but as a "standard" training routine, it seems like a pretty good idea. Am I on the right track?
Definitely.
Jeff Cooper designed IPSC as a laboratory to help discover the best techniques and equipment for gunfighting, but it turned into an equipment sport pretty quickly. Some savvy shooters got together and created IDPA to replace that function. IDPA needs to sort shooters by relative skill level, so the Classifier was always meant to be a good all-around measure of pistol skill.
After you shoot it five or six times, you’ll have a baseline and a pretty good idea of where you need to improve. As your Classifier scores go up, you can start to work on other problems and drills. I like The Test, The Humbler, The Hackathorn Standards, the FAST, the Bill Drill, and the 1-5 Drill, the Mozmabique, and a couple of others. As you start working on those, you’ll see a LOT of overlap with the Classifier, but each of them heads down a slightly different path.
Then after a few weeks or months away from the Classifier, you can shoot it again and see where the changes are.
Also, keep a log as you train. Record the date, time, range, drills, scores, and any thoughts you have about your progress. Don’t omit the bad stuff—you learn more from that than you do from the good stuff. I use a Word document, which is searchable, and I generally get 35-50 pages a year. It keeps me from re-inventing the wheel.
Okie John
jjackson@tierthreetac
02-19-16, 16:23
Definitely.
Jeff Cooper designed IPSC as a laboratory to help discover the best techniques and equipment for gunfighting, but it turned into an equipment sport pretty quickly. Some savvy shooters got together and created IDPA to replace that function. IDPA needs to sort shooters by relative skill level, so the Classifier was always meant to be a good all-around measure of pistol skill.
After you shoot it five or six times, you’ll have a baseline and a pretty good idea of where you need to improve. As your Classifier scores go up, you can start to work on other problems and drills. I like The Test, The Humbler, The Hackathorn Standards, the FAST, the Bill Drill, and the 1-5 Drill, the Mozmabique, and a couple of others. As you start working on those, you’ll see a LOT of overlap with the Classifier, but each of them heads down a slightly different path.
Then after a few weeks or months away from the Classifier, you can shoot it again and see where the changes are.
Also, keep a log as you train. Record the date, time, range, drills, scores, and any thoughts you have about your progress. Don’t omit the bad stuff—you learn more from that than you do from the good stuff. I use a Word document, which is searchable, and I generally get 35-50 pages a year. It keeps me from re-inventing the wheel.
Okie John
Im a big fan of timing drills. Do you have any solutions for timing dry fire drills?
Im a big fan of timing drills. Do you have any solutions for timing dry fire drills?
Sorry, but I do not.
Okie John
Being that I live in CA and bullet buttons on AR15s make training prohibitive, I've primarily trained on handguns for self/home defense. I've only taken 1 rifle class compared to the ~7-8 handgun courses I've taken in the last 8 or so years.
I have tried to reduce the "random" guns and streamline down to glock, but I keep getting off that simple path.
One thing I have enjoyed is the Angstadt arms 9mm AR using glock mags....
My minimalist approach idea is to have glock mags work in my pistol and SBR pistol platform....
Ken Hackathorn or Larry Vickers for training
WickedWillis
05-05-16, 14:02
I train with my handgun probably four times as much as I do my rifles. I rarely have a rifle near me when I am out and about in public so it made more sense to me to really focus on training with my EDC a majority of the time.
I have tried to reduce the "random" guns and streamline down to glock, but I keep getting off that simple path.
One thing I have enjoyed is the Angstadt arms 9mm AR using glock mags....
My minimalist approach idea is to have glock mags work in my pistol and SBR pistol platform....
I want a 9mm ar badly. I am having a hard time if I want a flat top and red dot or a 1-4
WickedWillis
05-05-16, 17:47
I want a 9mm ar badly. I am having a hard time if I want a flat top and red dot or a 1-4
What manufacturer (outside of Wilson combat now) Makes a true quality AR 9mm pistol upper and lower? I am talking something of minimum Colt quality. That is the biggest reason I have yet to jump in on the 9mm AR deal. I would love a 9mm AR pistol with a folding brace.
I tried to read through all the posts, and also realize this thread has a little bit of age to it. But, could not find anyone else mentioning the OWB for training. Overall, people far more experienced than I have provided some excellent advice. So, I won't rehash all of that. My question to all of you is, where do you stand on the OWB for training that the OP describes. If all other times one is carrying IWB, shouldn't you train like that? At least a healthy mix of both? Why get really proficient, only to change a major variable when applying the skills in the real world? If you're training for a competition, fine, then use the OWB option. But when training for self defense, shouldn't you train for how you'll actually be carrying?
What manufacturer (outside of Wilson combat now) Makes a true quality AR 9mm pistol upper and lower? I am talking something of minimum Colt quality. That is the biggest reason I have yet to jump in on the 9mm AR deal. I would love a 9mm AR pistol with a folding brace.
Ehhhh... I've seen a ton of barrels and bolts (not top name), but for me it's the cost effectiveness aspect of 9mm and the conv. Of glock mags that I want. I d9nt think this platform is finely tuned on 9mm yet. Imy not partial towards billet receivers so I'd like to either see mag well adapters and or forged 9mm glock mag lowers.
I tried to read through all the posts, and also realize this thread has a little bit of age to it. But, could not find anyone else mentioning the OWB for training. Overall, people far more experienced than I have provided some excellent advice. So, I won't rehash all of that. My question to all of you is, where do you stand on the OWB for training that the OP describes. If all other times one is carrying IWB, shouldn't you train like that? At least a healthy mix of both? Why get really proficient, only to change a major variable when applying the skills in the real world? If you're training for a competition, fine, then use the OWB option. But when training for self defense, shouldn't you train for how you'll actually be carrying?
Chiming in with my small world experience. I had the fortunate opportunity to train with Pat McNamara and Mike Pannone a short time ago. While in mac's class I ran OWB because a majority of his training evolutions were not solely based on getting the gun from concealment. Not to say that there wasn't emphasis on accuracy within mike pannones course, there absolutely was. That being said, during the covert carry portion of the course I ran an AIWB rig, as that's how I carry my weapon daily everywhere I go. So I often try to mimic my range time and training to the way I carry. I'm fortunate enough to belong to a range that allows you to draw from a holster and fire, that doesn't sit lightly with me as I know that is difficulty to come across now a days. To sum it up, i'm a firm believer that you should train the way you carry, I don't go grocery shopping with a plate carrier and TQ strapped to my chest, I do however carry a glock 19 everywhere I'm legally permitted to, therefore thats how I like to train if its allowed.
Joe
grizzlyblake
05-05-16, 20:12
Absolutely train how you actually carry. I carry AIWB so I never bother to do anything contrary to that.
I agree with an emphasis on pistol over carbine. As plenty of others have already said, you are 95% more likely to be in a position where you need to shoot someone when you are out and about with your EDC than sitting at home with your carbine.
Thanks guys. I'm fortunate, too, in being able to go to a local outdoor range that grants shooters a lot of latitude; as long as you're doing it in a safe manner. Full auto, drawing from a holster, shooting while moving, etc. Like the OP, I'm just starting to really commit to serious training. And, I'll be the first to admit I have a lot of opportunity to improve. For those that are further down the road of experience. When working on drawing from a holster, IWB or OWB, do you compartmentalize the stages from start to finish? Meaning, do you first focus on an efficient and smooth draw, and worry less about sight picture, trigger control, and follow through. Then, once you've developed consistency in the draw, move on to focus on the next step (sight picture)? Or, do you try to perfect everything all in conjunction? In the past, I admit I did the latter, and feel like it's a bit of mental overload to try to compress thoughts for each stage all at once. I've recently converted more to the "compartmentalization" method, and feel like that is the way to go. I realize sometimes one should "do what works for you", but is there any long term benefit/disadvantage to one of my methods vs the other?
I almost exclusively shoot my G19 when I go to the range. As a college student without unlimited funds I decided to sign up for a Haley Strategic 3 day pistol course this summer. If money were no object Id do the concurrent carbine course but I feel like I decently covered what I need to know for now on the rifle front as an 03 in the Marine Corps. Those are predominantly red dawn skills for me at this point.
Despite having shot quite a bit in the Marine Corps, and having had loaded M9s for security purposes, I never once shot a pistol in the military. I've been teaching basic pistol courses in my state for about 5 years and I have shot a few basic idpa matches and informal 3 gun matches, but I still lack "formal" handgun training. I carry my glock when I can (hard with school), and short of a zombie apocalypse the AR isn't my go to gun. If this class is as great as I expect it to be when they come around next year and do the disruptive environments one I'd love to do that as well. Money wise I am certainly prioritizing handgun training as that is what would benefit me in the unlikely event I need to use a firearm in self-defense.
On a side note I wish I went from my P229 in .40 to my G19 years ago. I loved the sig but the G19 just shoots more quickly and is easier to carry.
I am guilty of not getting to the range enough. Life is busy.
Mike
Sent from my cell phone with a tiny keyboard and large thumbs...
Probably 90-95% of my training is devoted to pistol-shooting, g19s specifically. I agree with you that as a normal joe-shcmoe upstanding citizen, you're much more likely to be involved in a defensive scenario involving a pistol than anything else. I really enjoy shooting rifles, but I'm far more likely to have to one day use my EDC g19 than one of my ARs. Also, like you mention, the pistol being the weapon always on you should be the one you're most proficient and familiar with.
At night my AR is locked up, but one of my g19s is on the nightstand ready to rock if need be.
I'll go one further, I keep an AR in a pretty much immediately accessible state and I'm still far more likely to use a handgun in a defensive situation. Most problems are going to happen away from home so your CCW is what you are going to come down to if you have a problem.
The lone exception is ongoing civil unrest, such as a post disaster environment, where you are protecting your home against a current and continuous potential threat.
I've said that and even believed it. The problem, it assumes a rifle is even a possible variable in the equation. It marginalizes the pistol, which has capability far beyond many realize. Many will also use it as an excuse for sucking and failing to do anything about it.
I agree. But I did say create distance. I was taught in an advanced handgun course that in something protracted, distance is your friend.
Your longarm is in a rack or a trunk. In a perfect world, you'll have a chance to get it but distance and cover is your friend.
I probably should've expanded more than merely saying "fight to a rifle". In my heyday as a younger person I remember chasing on foot someone quite a ways from my car. So life happens.
One thing we touched on was the same principles as being a rifleman. As part of a confidence course we proned out to hit a steel silhouette at 100yards. It was easier for those with 9mm and especially those with .357 sig. I had a .45 (I know, I know), and once I found my hold and had greater stability; it wasn't anything at all to ring steel.
By proning out you also reduce yourself as a target.
Anybody can be lucky at 3 yards, but if it goes from a close quarters fight to a working firefight then it's time to get where skill and training will carry the day. If outnumbered, you may still get injured or killed. The chances increase. But if you can get where skill is the deciding factor, and have trained; it buys time. Time is life.
I will admit that I realize. 45 ACP isn't an optimum pistol cartridge at least 60% of the time or for 60% of what one does. I dare say it is a placebo round. But I have a lot of muscle memory behind it. It was the first caliber I was indoctrinated on. I stick with it mainly because I know my holds and I feel very used to the recoil and maybe a little bit of superstition. In my personal life, I've been trying to matriculate to 9mm and move away from .45.
I am no expert but, I find capacity, extra mags, and a compatible back up is probably more sensible. At one time I remember being told all one needed was a main duty weapon, a Model 36 Chief Special, or a SW 447.
Now...with 13 odd years of experience and trying to take advantage of this excellent site and seeking, at times ony own time, extra training; I have learned that a lot of people are being done a disservice in how they are trained.
I would sooner have a Glock 17 and extra mags and a compact BUG Glock or really just a quality 9mm.
I understand that being political, agency heads don't want to go over the research and get the training in and just keep it status quo but...
A) Officers are still dying
B)There has been so much learned and developed not to take advantage
C)If you are sending a young naive guy out on the street without giving him something solid to fall back on if circumstances go south; he will end up like A)
I mean, if you carry a gun, especially professionally,.....you may actually have to use it. That's a reality.
But most "instructors" just want to get people qualified on a joke of a qual course for once a year and then not deal with it again.
And it's bad because subjects are getting more aggressive and willing to fight. And they know most officers will hesitate because of the political fallout.
I both am leery of, but moreso, pity the new breed starting out.
These are just my thoughts.
And FWIW, I wish you all boring days and for military people...cold LZs.
Ehhhh... I've seen a ton of barrels and bolts (not top name), but for me it's the cost effectiveness aspect of 9mm and the conv. Of glock mags that I want. I d9nt think this platform is finely tuned on 9mm yet. Imy not partial towards billet receivers so I'd like to either see mag well adapters and or forged 9mm glock mag lowers.
I run a DDLES 9mm lower that I SBR'd several years ago (Colt pattern, billet, serial #16). It's got a 5.5" barrel and a dedicated can (YHM Wraith XL QD). I built it all myself and, after getting the buffer dialed in, it has run like a top for me. I lost count how many rounds I've put through it at this point, but it has all been 147gr suppressed.
If I was doing it again, the only thing I'd change would be to maybe (maybe) go with a Glock mag lower instead.
DDLES is no longer in business, but Quarter Circle 10 is making lowers off the same prints now. They also offer Glock pattern lowers, uppers, bolts, barrels, etc, etc. They've built a solid reputation and a dedicated following.
When working on drawing from a holster, IWB or OWB, do you compartmentalize the stages from start to finish? Meaning, do you first focus on an efficient and smooth draw, and worry less about sight picture, trigger control, and follow through. Then, once you've developed consistency in the draw, move on to focus on the next step (sight picture)? Or, do you try to perfect everything all in conjunction? In the past, I admit I did the latter, and feel like it's a bit of mental overload to try to compress thoughts for each stage all at once. I've recently converted more to the "compartmentalization" method, and feel like that is the way to go. I realize sometimes one should "do what works for you", but is there any long term benefit/disadvantage to one of my methods vs the other?
Let me stop you right there. If you have to compartmentalize like you’ve described to learn comfortably, then you’re probably going way too fast—or trying to go too fast.
Don’t compartmentalize anything. The goal is a smooth draw stroke that ends in a solid A-zone hit, so train for that. To do that, assume a solid stance, move your hand to your pistol, get a solid firing grip while the pistol is still in the holster, pull the pistol clear of the holster, push the pistol toward the target, align the sights, press the trigger, and follow through. Do that slowly at first, on a target at 3-5 yards. If each rep takes 5 seconds or even 10, no problem. Once you smooth that out, you’ll naturally start to move a little more quickly.
As you get better—judged by increasing smoothness while maintaining accuracy—you can go faster and/or move the target back. Then you can move to making multiple hits, then multiple targets, and so on. You’ll make progress more quickly than you’d think with this method. Even better, you won’t have to go back and break a lot of bad habits.
The problem with perfecting a blazing fast draw that doesn’t end in a solid hit is that it doesn’t end in a solid hit. In the real world, you wouldn't draw your pistol to deliberately fire a wild shot, so don't train yourself to do that. Instead, train to make hits. One of the most important parts of that, and the one that you're most likely screwing up, is getting a good firing grip on the pistol while it’s still in the holster. If you have a good grip, then making that first hit is a lot easier, as are follow-up shots. If you rush that, then you’ll teach yourself that it’s OK to accept a bad grip on the draw, and by then you’re already up and firing and it’s too late to correct your draw. If you use that method, sooner or later you have to go back, break your bad habits, and learn everything the right way. Might as well start off the right way and save all of that time and ammo.
Focus on the entire stroke. Slow it down and make hits, then speed up.
Do you have a timer?
Okie John
Let me stop you right there. If you have to compartmentalize like you’ve described to learn comfortably, then you’re probably going way too fast—or trying to go too fast.
Don’t compartmentalize anything. Focus on the entire stroke. Slow it down and make hits, then speed up.
Do you have a timer?
Okie John
Thanks, John. I completely agree that, in the past, trying to go to fast was an issue and led to less than desirable habits. Recently I've slowed down a lot, so maybe that's why it feels a little more compartmentalized. Perhaps a better description would be more deliberate. I do appreciate the input. The next range trip I'm going to start really slow and focus on proper technique from start to finish; as you suggest.
FWIW, part of the reason I likely trend towards compartmentalizing is due to my first passion; golf. I've played since I was three and when I started to really perfect things, I learned very quickly that one can only have one swing thought at a time. So, I've kind of been "wired" to work in stages. I realize that shooting and golf are two very different things, but both also rely heavily upon proper technique and muscle memory.
I don't yet have a timer. Reading your post I realize that I should. It'll allow me to quantify improvement over time. Do you have a couple you'd recommend?
Thanks, John. I completely agree that, in the past, trying to go to fast was an issue and led to less than desirable habits. Recently I've slowed down a lot, so maybe that's why it feels a little more compartmentalized. Perhaps a better description would be more deliberate. I do appreciate the input. The next range trip I'm going to start really slow and focus on proper technique from start to finish; as you suggest.
Keep us posted.
I don't yet have a timer. Reading your post I realize that I should. It'll allow me to quantify improvement over time. Do you have a couple you'd recommend?
I use a PACT. Lots of people like the ProTimer. Both are probably pretty good.
Okie John
Keep us posted.
I use a PACT. Lots of people like the ProTimer. Both are probably pretty good.
Okie John
I will definitely keep everyone posted.
I'll look into the PACT and ProTimer as well. Outside of the specific model recommendations, are there any features that you feel to be a "must have" when choosing a timer?
William B.
05-09-16, 07:32
I use a PACT. Lots of people like the ProTimer. Both are probably pretty good.
Good advice. A shot timer was one of the best, if not the best, purchase that I made as far as becoming a better shooter.
I will definitely keep everyone posted.
I'll look into the PACT and ProTimer as well. Outside of the specific model recommendations, are there any features that you feel to be a "must have" when choosing a timer?
Not really. They all offer the ability to set par times, instantaneous start, delayed start, and review functions. That's all you need. You might even be able to get by with a phone app.
Okie John
I am having problems now with my Glock 17 and Glock 43 coexisting with my HK P30V1. I have mainly practiced with my P30, trying to become faster and more accurate, and have made good progress. I am finding that it takes me a transition (at best a few shots, at worst a few range trips) to shoot decently with my Glocks though. I need to work really hard to stop all my shots from going high due to that infamous grip angle. The 17 sits in my quick access safe and the 43 sees the majority of my CCW.
Am I pissing up a rope trying to be proficient with both platforms? Should I be consolidating to just Glocks or HKs? What are your thoughts? Thanks.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Not really. They all offer the ability to set par times, instantaneous start, delayed start, and review functions. That's all you need. You might even be able to get by with a phone app.
Okie John
Thanks! I'm gonna search the forum for reviews of the shot timer apps.
I am having problems now with my Glock 17 and Glock 43 coexisting with my HK P30V1. I have mainly practiced with my P30, trying to become faster and more accurate, and have made good progress. I am finding that it takes me a transition (at best a few shots, at worst a few range trips) to shoot decently with my Glocks though. I need to work really hard to stop all my shots from going high due to that infamous grip angle. The 17 sits in my quick access safe and the 43 sees the majority of my CCW.
Am I pissing up a rope trying to be proficient with both platforms? Should I be consolidating to just Glocks or HKs? What are your thoughts? Thanks.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Personally I cannot shot a glock for nothing. I can pick up my HK45, M&P9, or my CZ's and do just fine. There is something about the glock that does not allow me to shoot them.
Personally I consolidated my pistols to CZ's for USPSA and carry. Same platform and have about 20k through them.
I also used a MP9 for awhile and carried a MP shield.
William B.
05-10-16, 07:41
I am having problems now with my Glock 17 and Glock 43 coexisting with my HK P30V1. I have mainly practiced with my P30, trying to become faster and more accurate, and have made good progress. I am finding that it takes me a transition (at best a few shots, at worst a few range trips) to shoot decently with my Glocks though. I need to work really hard to stop all my shots from going high due to that infamous grip angle. The 17 sits in my quick access safe and the 43 sees the majority of my CCW.
Am I pissing up a rope trying to be proficient with both platforms? Should I be consolidating to just Glocks or HKs? What are your thoughts? Thanks.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I'd say consolidate your time to mastering one of them. Then move on to the next. Simultaneously splitting your time, money, and energy between three firearms may slow your progress as opposed to mastering one at a time.
Personally I cannot shot a glock for nothing. I can pick up my HK45, M&P9, or my CZ's and do just fine. There is something about the glock that does not allow me to shoot them.
Personally I consolidated my pistols to CZ's for USPSA and carry. Same platform and have about 20k through them.
I also used a MP9 for awhile and carried a MP shield.
What does that mean? What standards/metrics are you applying?
You mention USPSA...what is your classification?
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.