PKS

In the real world, a $30 Timex with a quartz movement tells time a bit more accurately than a $3000 Rolex with a mechanical movement, though each brings their owners utility and enjoyment. I believe the same applies to handguns. In the real world, I do not think the speed at which a person presents a handgun from concealment and fires the first shot is the primary factor in personal safety. This is speaking from experience, when I had an encouter in an urban area after visiting my brother who was in college at the time. A group of people approached me from multiple directions, at a crowded intersection, near a major university campus. I do not think the type of carry gun would make much difference here. Other tactics would have been far more significant. There is a clear difference between IPSC, which is a sport and speed is critical, and the real world, where things are ambiguous, and other skills are more significant. To say that spending $1000 or $2000 or $400 on a reliable firearm makes a difference in personal safety is hard for me to understand. My philosophy for carry guns is that inexpensive and reliable is better than expensive. While I generally find the posts on various subjects to be quite useful, I can honestly say that the replies to my post were not particularly productive. -- pks

If I may interject some practical considerations to carry guns: 1. In the event that you need to produce your firearm in a real world self defense situation, and the police become aware of this, your gun will most likely be confiscated from you. 2. Often the stress of producing a firearm in a self defense situation can reduce your manual dexterity. Not having any controls other than a trigger (and mag release) is a plus. 3. Concealed carry, particulary with IWB or thunderwear, is hard on the finish of a gun, both from holster friction, and from sweat. I think this favors a gun that is reliable, inexpensive, has minimal external controls, and can be easily replaced. My two carry guns, which I find meet the above criteria, are a Glock 30, and a Kahr MK40.

When I started handgun shooting, one of my friends steered me away from glock, and towards a lim-10 setup with a kimber 1911. I then purchased a SVI 40 cal limited gun, and then later, a STI 38 super comp open gun. This was all in a span to two years. The net result is that I am a C-shooter in three divisions. Not exactly my desired goal in learning this sport. If I had to do it all over again, I would have gone with a 40 cal glock. Much less expensive, just as much fun to shoot, and very versatile in learning the sport. I do enjoy tinkering, so the 1911/2011 is entertaining for me, and I have a lot of fun reloading different calibers. And with all that I have invested in the equipment, it is hard to imagine turning back now. But in terms of improving as a shooter in the most efficient manner possible, I've come to believe that the 40 cal glock is the way to go. I think a master/gm shooter is largely independant of the equipment, and the additional money is best spend on practice ammo/travelling to area matches/saving for kids college education, rather than on expensive gear. Just my two cents.

Thanks for all the great feedback. I think I will primarily shoot limited next season, but will shoot open occasionally help focus on the non-shooting aspects of IPSC. I have to admit that my prior practice was a bit disorganized, but in August I purchased Steve Anderson's book, as well as Sam Conway's book. I was amazed at how benificial a one-day class with Matt was. Matt was able to identify some basic problems with my grip and stance. I hope that once these fundamentals sink in, combined with a structured approach to practice, I will be able to improve my game. I've read some good threads about visual feedback during shooting, and I was curious about how much tactile feedback shooters get from the gun during a stage. Can people consistently feel the trigger reset, sense grip pressure, and make adjustment during a stage? For me, I can sometimes get this tactile feedback during practice, but in a stage, things are much more of a blur. -- Prashant

Hi All, I started shooting 2.5 years ago, and I just finished my first year of competition. I am basically a 50 (+/-5)% shooter (both in classifiers and area/national matches) in both limited (SVI) and open (STI 38 super). I have taken a one day class from Matt, and during the shooting season I dryfire almost daily and do live fire practice about 3 times a week. Despite all this, I feel that my progress is still slow. Last season I shot open for half the season, and limited for the other half. My questions are: Does switching guns slow my improvement? What type of training are others doing, and what rate of progress are they achieving? How do I know if my training is effective? Thanks in advance for sharing your collective experiences. -- Prashant