Wesquire

We aren't talking about switching between aiming strategies on the same target. You make the choice (and it will be subconscious with practice) in transition.

I disagree that it takes extra time to switch between sight pictures. You use the same sight picture for every target?

You are begging for an asian joke there.

That is correct, but moto is arguing that you should always see your SIGHTS.

Right, but that doesn't necessarily include seeing the sights.

And I urge you to donate time.

The whole point is that you don't need to see your sights to hit As at close range. You wanted to appeal to authority, and Ben Stoeger himself says that he doesn't see his sights at close range.

You are conflating what you see in fast transitions with what you are able to see once you have a view of the sights, then start pulling the trigger as fast as possible. You don't have to guess at what Ben Stoeger would say, he talking about it in Fundamentals and he says that at close range he doesn't see the sights.

I've got many thousand

Hmm. I've always experienced short rounds feeding better.

If short works, why ream long? Making pf with less powder is a good thing. And I don't think pressure will be an issue on minor loads.

Using the plunk and spin test I'm looking at 1.075 with BBI 147 FPs. Is this something I should be worried about? Significantly shorter than the old lube groove version

You are conflating sights and sight picture. No one is saying that seeing your sight picture slows you down. We are saying that seeing your SIGHTS is unnecessary for many targets, and it will slow you down.

Maybe for a C class shooter.

I really can't fathom how it is controversial to say that a coarser sight picture is faster. If you are seeing your sights for every shot, you are aiming too much.

Which is exactly my point.

You keep asserting that everyone is in agreement other than me, but that is obviously incorrect. Seeing the outline is more coarse than seeing the sights. Your argument makes zero sense. Everything is part of the outline, that doesn't mean you see everything when you see the outline. You aren't seeing a refined outline.

It is a sight picture. That isn't misreading anything.

Nope. You think you need to see the sights at 5 yards. Waste of time.

I didn't misinterpret you, you are just wrong.

No ****. No one is arguing differently. You seem to be very lost.

GunBugBit is specifically saying that you always see your SIGHTS. I agree that sight picture is more broad. It isn't going over my head, you are just ignoring that not everyone is using the same definition or making the same argument as you.

You are aiming too much if you have time to find the sights at 3 yards.

It does. You can see the outline of the gun faster than you can see the sights.

And it is still a waste of time at close range.