A bunch of us were sitting around bored one day during break. We put blindfolds on just for giggles and shot the CLEET qual course and did surprisingly well out to the 15 yard line.
Is anyone else tired of the "My pistol isn't accurate" threads?
- Thread starter aarondhgraham
- Start Date
Truer words have never been spoken.
No different than a piano player or a welder.
Step away for awhile and it takes lots of practice to get back to the previous level.
It ain’t always the pistol. Soooo many variables involved in accurate pistol shooting. Grip is probably #1.
I shoot better with doubling up hearing protection. I start flinching from noise, not recoil. Still hate loud noises and always have, but still have great hearing for a middle aged male because of it.
My p220 shot great at the last ens when suppressed and the suppressor blocking the sight picture.
I have had a few pistols with misaligned sights or the gunsmith put on the wrong height front sight on a 1911. They were still precise but not accurate until fixed. You couldn’t hit paper at 7 yards with the 1911 without aiming above it. Front sight was way to tall for the rear sight.
Vast majority of the time, it’s me, not the pistol.
My p220 shot great at the last ens when suppressed and the suppressor blocking the sight picture.
I have had a few pistols with misaligned sights or the gunsmith put on the wrong height front sight on a 1911. They were still precise but not accurate until fixed. You couldn’t hit paper at 7 yards with the 1911 without aiming above it. Front sight was way to tall for the rear sight.
Vast majority of the time, it’s me, not the pistol.
You are 100% correct and I’ll add this to what I posted earlier:I can shoot a pistol fairly well. Enough that I don't need to boast on the internet, but to qualify my experience; I've shot multiple service pistol matches at the Division Matches and below level. I also held the secondary MOS of Primary Marksmanship Instructor/Combat Marksmanship Trainer for 17 of my 21 years in the Corps. I also have reloaded for decades.
I will absolutely go on record as stating that I have some revolvers and pistols that very much prefer specific bullet weights and velocity nodes. It is just like a rifle...only most people aren't good enough to tell much of a difference. If they walked up to the line and shot a 6" group at 25 yards they'd be happy...and probably never notice the difference between a load that could shoot 1.5" and another that was only good for 4" at that distance.
My most extreme example: I have an original 1994 Colt King Cobra Enhanced that will shotgun pattern 125gr bullets at moderate to heavy magnum load velocities...yet that same revolver will shoot to the best of my capabilities with 158gr bullets at 38SPL velocities. It isn't a crimp or jacket separation issue, that revolver just has a very specific preference (and not all do...just like rifle barrels).
Ever notice how most of the handgun rags always seem to have better accuracy with SD ammo than bulk stuff?
Now, I realize that this goes against the gist of the OP. I totally understand the difference of a bad group due to ammo, and a shooter who lacks skill and training...and then complains when perfection isn't achieved. I'm not arguing against that...I'm just stating that SOMETIMES, it isn't always the Indian. Sometimes we need to give people the benefit of the doubt before assuming they're an idiot who can't shoot.
^ Now I'll basically contradict myself that 95% of the time, it's usually the Indian.
To a scratch golfer equipment makes a difference.
To an experienced, avid fisherman, equipment makes a difference.
To an archery marksman, avid clays shooter, etc. equipment makes a difference.
In the case of an average ordinary amateur, extraordinary equipment isn’t going to make them significantly better.
Maybe a little poorer but not significantly better!
- Joined
- Apr 7, 2021
- Messages
- 698
- Reaction score
- 1,345
Like most things the more you use it the more conformable you are with it and the easier it is to use.
I will challenge the golf equipment. I bought a set of cloned Ping Eye 2 clubs and because of my height had them put 1 inch longer shafts on every club. I improved my game exponentially. Equipment that fits is step one.
So, what was your handicap before you bought the clubs, and then after you bought the clubs?
^ This relates to handgun accuracy much more than many people think. It can be overcome some with proper techniques and grip adjustment, but to force everyone to be as proficient with one design is unrealistic.
Maybe that's why we see so many exotic grip shapes on target pistols/revolvers (rhetorical)?
This is where some of time time it is the arrow and not the Indian. Yes, you can train proficiency back into it, but to assume that everyone has the time, money, and passion to undertake this is also unrealistic.
* I am not directing my comments toward you in any way, but I wanted to use your example to qualify my position a bit.
I probably should have included this with my long ramble about preferred loads, but the post was getting extremely long-winded already by that point.
Next we can go over sights, as some people aren't blessed with the vision to pick up a good sight picture like everyone else...
I will accept such a story from the owner of only one particular weapon. That is a Gen 1 Ruger P85 9mm. When I was attending the MoSHP's Firearms Instructor's Training there were two students who failed to qualify. Both had P85s. Now before you tsk, tsk know this; one of them was my roommate, a deputy from the county my muni agency was located in. I decided to shoot a qual course with it to see just how bad it was and brother, it sucked. I finished as the 5th best shooter in the class and I was only bested by 4 troopers who had their newly issued G22s with night sights. I couldn't see sh*take in the dark with my M66-1 so I can shoot. So anyway, that P85 sucked. Trigger, grip, sights the whole thing was a train wreck. I could have thrown it at the target and been more accurate. So there is one valid claim. The rest are as we all know weak excuses for lack of practice.
Last edited:
