spook

Thanks Jake! Yeah, I must say I was kind of surprized myself. I finally brought the dry fire realm to the range on that run. I was very visual. I think it's good to do this hose stuff sometimes. It made me see clearly that I can be much faster if I am visual and just do what I train for at home

I have practiced at home in dry fire and figured out that I could do the Draw-shot-reload-shot in under 2 seconds with the beat up S&W 625. So, I went to the range today and tried it. Closest I got was 2.03 (twice) and 2.04 (also twice). Dispite the fact that I didn't make it, the 2.04 run made me pretty happy, because I did a 1.29 reload on this one! That's almost .2 s faster than my last personal best. The funny thing is that once I did that, I pulled off a whole bunch of 1.33s 1.35s etc. Now for the disclaimer: 1) This was at a classic target at 5 meters (which is very very close) 2) No, they were not all A-zone hits I did hit the target with every shot though 3) No, I cannot (yet) do it on demand (c'mon...) 4) Yes, I screwed up many many many times Still wanted to share it though Damn that felt goooooood

That's what I noticed when I shot the 625 after shooting my Glock17 for a while. Revolvers are pretty easy to time. Carmoney, I agree with you on the grip thing, but I think isolating the trigger finger from the strong grip in the strong hand makes you shoot fast. Lots of shooters (including me ) try to control recoil with their whole hand including the trigger finger.

LOL, I'm getting there too buddy

Wow, it actually is like an average IPSC shooter: - Too big - Too heavy - Too slow - Doesn't work

N320 and 230 grain bullets is very soft shooting.

AFAIK, the trigger pull weight was put in the rules to prevent PD becoming a division dominated by 2lb. trigger Glocks (or, to put the DA auto on par with the glocks). Now you can pick a gun with a constant 5lb. pull, which some like. Or, a gun with a 5lb. first shot and light follow up shots. AFAIK, the 5" barrel rule that excludes the HK USP Expert, the G34/35 etc. was made before these guns were produced. I'm sure Vince will chime in on this one.

If you can get your hands on one of the steel barrels from the "old" 625 .38 super and put that on the light frame, you'd have a cool gun for steel. How does the scandium/ti stuff wear? Can it stand the endless dryfire of competition shooters? I've heard some nasty stuff about Ti Glock strikers going full auto, because the would break instead of wear like regular steel.

Yes olp73, it is legal for IPSC Standard. The onlt "problem" to me seems magazine capacity. I don't know of any IPSC-box legal magazinde extentions for the G20. You could probably have some custom made though.

LOL, which would probably also have happened with a snap cap...

If you're afraid it will hit your thumb, you could put a kick stand on the left side and the racker on the right side (like Eric Grauffel does), assuming you are right handed.

I just cut them out of a piece of cardboard myself. Cheap and easy. You can make as many as you like. And, just a hint, try to make the distance towards the mini target as large as possible. If you practice on minitargets that are really close by, it will be way too easy to shift your focus between the target and the front sight. You'll be confused when you get to the range and have to engage a target at the "real" distance that you simulated at home. Good luck.

No confusion here L2S. I know what you mean. I think that just knowing you've hit the target, but you cannot say where precisely, will still leave you with an uncertain feeling when you move on to the next one. I'm going to take this to the range Thanks!

OK, I gave this thing some thought. The big advantage of calling the shot to me seems: You can cut away everything from the moment the sights lift. That's when you can move on. I think this should be the fastest thing in every situation where you use your sights the "traditional" way. But still, moving away from an array where the last target is an arm's lenght away, I'd never use my sights and "call" my shot. It would take more time to aquire the sights than to just shoot the target (although the strange thing is that in big matches, I tend to use my sights even on the closest targets)

OK, so can anyone post the real results?

Good to know though. I think the next world shoot will be very exciting. I have never heard of Anthony Sy before (could be my ignorant side), but if you can put Mr. Voigt below 80% in Standard, you can shoot!

Holy sh!t! I'm just browsing through the rest of the results. WTF happened there? Looks like our Asian fellow shooters kicked some ass there. Does anyone here know ChonBoonyadej Cholatit? The guy who won revolver?

Wow, someone finally beat Eric?!?! How long has it been? 6 years?

Looks like an SDM FO sight.

L2S, but when you're hearing the steel for feedback, you're still not seeing what you need to see to make the shot (SWYNTSTMTS). When you're SWYNTSTMTS, it implies that before the bullet left the barrel, you saw something that made you conclude the shot was going to hit the target. You knew the bullet would hit the target. If you make a distinction between SWYNTSTMTS and SWYNTSTCTS it implies that in SWYNTSTMTS, you see enough, but not the sights with great precision. Don't get me wrong, I like the idea of calling your shots all the time. But I'm just trying to figure out the difference between SWYNTSTMTS and SWYNTSTCTS. Flex, I know what you mean. Could it be that you shoot it faster because you're not "consciously" pulling the trigger? You're shifting your attention to your sights/vision, leading it away from your trigger finger. Your subconsciously pull the trigger. Resulting in relaxed (read: faster) triggering. Focussing on pulling the trigger fast, leads to tense slow triggering. When I think of close-by stuff that you could point shoot, I think relaxed shooting is the key. Could it be that because we have nothing else to focus on on those targets, we automatically focus on triggering and speed? If this is true, I'd say calling your shots on those targets is just a distraction with the goal of being relaxed.

Sounds logical Jake, but I still don't understand how you can see what you need to see to make a shot without calling it Can you perhaps give me an example?

Yes, but if the sights are on the target, the gun is on the target. And if you keep it there while the gun fires, the shot is made. Doesn't calling the shot imply a hole in the target right where you called it? Or even shorter: isn't "seeing what you need to see to make the shot" the same as "calling your shot"?

My .45s stick out of the gauge too. Doesn't seem to matter at all. Even makes them easier to push out in case one gets stuck

LOL, that's why I haven't posted a pic of my guns yet. If they see the beautiful guns posted here they might consider shooting them. If they see mine they'll run away even harder

Flex, oh yeah I forgot. I agree. 8 rounds was clearly the better option