weaver vs isosceles

[chris]

This is the best explanation I have seen online, with pictures:

http://corneredcat.com/basics/stance.aspx

That website, while designed to introduce women to the world of shooting and self-defense, it a great resource for ANYONE looking for information.

I'm glad she showed a photo with the "Faux Isosceles".

I see lots of ladies do that at the range, especially at CCW qualifying. Good to know there's a name for it.

 

[Glocktogo]

Interesting. The model at this link has her elbows locked when shooting in the isosceles stance. Yet, I was told in a TDSA shooting course not to lock my elbows while in this stance, but to keep them slightly bent. Or maybe I misunderstood? Wouldn't be the first time

Do not lock your elbows. I also roll my elbows to the outside so they flex fore and aft rather than up and down. This also helps keep the pistol flatter in recoil.

 

[Rabbitcreekok]

Here are a couple of basic layout photos I yoinked from Google Images:

Weaver:
http://www.azccw.com/weaverstance.gif

Weaver is the stance that was primarily taught for years to LEOs (I'm going with off the cuff knowledge, input/correction welcome). Weaver is typically identified by the fact that you blade your body to the target.


Iso:
http://www.azccw.com/isostance6.gif

Isosceles is named for the fact that you form an isosceles triangle between your shoulders and your weapon. That whole triangle (your upper body) rotates at the hips to move from target to target. Iso is generally considered a faster and stronger platform, since you're using your whole body to control recoil, not just your arms.

Modern Iso is a twist off of the basic Iso in that you stagger your strong side foot back a bit, and some folks put a slight cant on their shoulders. This gives a more natural, aggressive, and reactive stance to fire from.


Again, any trainers or pros that want to weigh in, please do! This is just my understanding as an average dude who tends to pay too much attention.


And personally, I usually use a Mod Iso stance.

When I went through the DPD Academy in the 70's, we were taught the Weaver stance. According to the Kathy Jackson site, it was actually the Modified Stance. I like it because of the balance it provides with the weak side foot dropped back and the tension between the strong side hand and the weak side hand pulling back to the body. It really steadies the gun.

Also we did not use the pad of the finger to pull the trigger. Almost everyone shot double action S & W pistols with pretty stout trigger pulls and you actually pulled the gun more off target using the pad. We used the first joint. I have looked at changing, but I have long fingers and I move more off target using the pad.

I think the important thing is that if you shoot well using your preferred method, you are OK. Don't change to suit somebody's idea of perfection because it might be great for them, but terrible for you.

 

[NikatKimber]

OK, so I've seen weaver and iso, what's the modified iso look like?

 

[Perplexed]

OK, so I've seen weaver and iso, what's the modified iso look like?

I believe this may be the modified iso?

 

[inactive]

I think the important thing is that if you shoot well using your preferred method, you are OK. Don't change to suit somebody's idea of perfection because it might be great for them, but terrible for you.

I agree with this above all else. Much of the technique is what it is, as there are proven reasons that it works well for most people. But we are all mechanically different, and should train on what works best for us.

Though this does not mean we should be content with learning bad habits if we can train to avoid them.

 

[JD8]

I feel dumb, explain the difference.

I always just put the gun out with my elbows slightly bent and shot just like everyone else. Seemed to work well, but I've never had a trainer tell me "now we're going to learn stance X."

Don't feel bad, I didn't know for a long time what it was called either.


Modified Iso as taught by TDSA.

 

[deja]

I agree with this above all else. Much of the technique is what it is, as there are proven reasons that it works well for most people. But we are all mechanically different, and should train on what works best for us.

Though this does not mean we should be content with learning bad habits if we can train to avoid them.

This is true, to a sense, but for a while I was shooting in a way that felt comfortable to me, worked for me, etc..

Then my dad basically tore my stance apart (he was a firearms instructor for the FBI, and a veteran sniper), and had me adopt what I now understand to be the modified isosceles stance (stance a 45 degree angle to your target, strong arm to the natural left point where it stops, weak hand up for support as extended as it needs to be), but I didn't know the name for it at the time. My shooting accuracy and stability took off, and though it wasn't as comfortable at first, because it was new, it became a lot more comfortable with a little practice, and I outshot everyone I stood next to.

Things that aren't familiar aren't going to be as comfortable, even if they're a familiar weakness.

 

[ExSniper]

Modified Isoceles.
Like glocktogo said, elbows rolled out and slightly flexed so recoil comes straight back. For a right handed shooter, both thumbs on left side and trigger finger on right side pointed along the frame at the target until finger moves to the trigger for firing. Look at the pictures in Todd Jarrett video.

 

[technetium-99m]

what training have you had?

-You shoot mod iso.

David E and TDSA.

Neither said "okay this is the mod iso shooting stance."

Just didn't know it was called that.