BSeevers Posted October 10, 2002 Share Posted October 10, 2002 Kyle knows. He shoots a Glock for goodness sake Talk about sub par equipment. sort of like a Samick entry level guitar (ok Steve laugh) The MOST important thing about any gun is it works and can hit the target. Sounds simple but many $4400 raceguns and $300 stockguns, cannot meet this standard. BUT a great majority do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron Ankeny Posted October 10, 2002 Share Posted October 10, 2002 I too think equipment can make a huge difference to the average competitor, if there is a wide gap between gear. Let's take a D class shooter who is trying to get into C class. Suppose said shooter has been shooting a beat up 1911 with surplus military ball ammo, drawing out out of a GI canvas holster and loading from canvas pouches. Said gun has an 8 pound trigger pull with a ton of creep and over travel. It has a conventional hammer and grip safety and the shooter is developing an extreme hatred of hammer bite. His 7 round magazines are covered with rust. The gun shoots a 6 inch group at 25 yards. This rig showed up at one of our matches about a year ago. The guy likes to shoot so he talks around and decides to enter the equipment race. The next time I see him he is in C class shooting a Rock River Arms Basic Match, 10 round Shooting Star magazines, and he has a Kydex holster and Safariland magazine holders. For this guy, the change in equipment made a huge difference in his enjoyment of the sport and it accelerated his learning curve. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flexmoney Posted October 10, 2002 Share Posted October 10, 2002 OK...lets get our apples and oranges in line here... Ron, what you just described is sadistic. A decent entry level gun...that runs, and fits the shooter...that shoots something that resembles a group... I'm talking Beretta, Glock, CZ, Springfield Loaded (they are even offering a double stack 45 now). Add some Kydex mag holders and a holster. Add in some fuctional mags...all under $750 (new). I just don't see the need for $2000 gun and mag setup and another bill and a half for a race holster...not in D-class...not in C-class...not in B-class...likely not in A-class...maybe not even in Master. A shooter does need a decent trigger and a clean sight picture. (Well, that sure makes life easier.) But, those can be had on the $600 gun just as easiely as the $1500 gun. OK...and the other thing....the, "I'm too _______" (old, fat, ugly, tired, weak, blind...insert whatever) ...that just doesn't wash with me either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
38supPat Posted October 10, 2002 Share Posted October 10, 2002 Gotta agree with Flex, moving up from that piece of crap...as described... to ANYTHING would bring the shooter up a class. But if you compare any decent current production pistol, the difference is a lot less drastic. A few years ago, Dillon had a El Prez shootoff challenge with TGO and Argnt M-M. The difference between a box stock military grade Springfiel Armory .45 to their full house Springfield P-9's was around 2 sec. Thats going from what today is probably a $600 gun to a $3000 gun. At the time I think they had it figured that each second was worth $1000. Really not a big gain considering the money. This thread also points to another pet peeve of mine. Shooters who claim they are just out for fun and don't care about the score 'cuz they don't think they can be competitive...then whine about the equipment race, hard shots, run and gun stages, high ports/low ports etc. Either you are out for s and giggles and you don't care...or you do, in which case get the hell out and practice and stop making excuses. Analogy time: This year as I was learning to race my car, instead of buying huge sums of parts (adjustable shocks, race springs, front and rear sway bars, CAI, exhaust etc.) I let one of the top drivers run my car. He beat my best time by over 2 sec (on a 60+ second run) He also almost bested his own best time with his own car. Obviously instead of buying a bunch of crap that will maybe bring me up a little, I should get more seat time, learn the skills...then buy only the neccessary parts, which will bring me up ALOT. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tightloop Posted October 10, 2002 Share Posted October 10, 2002 Equipment does make a difference. Pick the division you want to compete within, then; buy the best, most trick gear you can get and practice like hell. When you are kicking butt locally, try regional or national and if you can consistently place in the top 5 or so, pick another, harder division and start again. Or, if you don't want to move divisions, do like Alex Zimmerman in SSR IDPA and try to win the National title every year for 6 or 7 straight years. Or if you are masochistic, start with Open and get ready to get your brains kicked in continually with only some little spurts of achievement. Depends on your personality, thickness of your skin, tenacity, spendable income and talent. Kind of like when I shot bench rest. I had a rifle built by the same guy who built guns for a guy who was in th BR Hall of Fame. Went to my first match, 39 competitors and finished 38th. I was cussing my gun, ammo and everything else. Don Geracy, the Hall of Fame guy overheard me and walked down to talk. After listening to me whine for a time, he took my rifle, my ammo, and shot a group which measured .110. His comment to me was, "...son, I don't think it is your gun. But don't give up." I didn't and three years later, I won the same match against most of the same shooters, with the same rifle. Couldn't have done it with gear of lesser quality. (Edited by tightloop at 1:55 pm on Oct. 10, 2002) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jkmccoy Posted October 10, 2002 Share Posted October 10, 2002 Flexmoney, Thanks for your response. I spent much of the past couple of hours wrestling with what I was going to do following your previous post. I was leaning heavily towards just deleting my post, taking my marbles, and going home. In retrospect, I see that what I said was probably not clear. I did not mean that every U, D, C, B (or even A) shooter needs "the best" equipment. Spending large amounts of money on the latest and greatest gadgets will not be effective (certainly not as effective as buying bullets and practicing). But, I do think that they need "functional" or "good" equipment. It is my experience that people who are very talented can do amazing things with very unimpressive equipment. The shooters that have been mentioned. The guitar player example. I've known machinists that produced incredible work on the worst worn out junker lathes you've ever seen. For people who are less talented/less practiced/less skilled having better equipment will make things easier. I started this sport with a .45 Witness (10 round mags) in Limited because there was no L10. I used an Uncle Mike's holster and had all my spare mags in my back pocket. I had a great time and I shot several matches like that. I switched to a Para .45, a CR Speed holster, real mag pouches and a belt. My scores instantly got better. (Still shooting that rig.) I wouldn't claim that that's the ultimate USPSA gear, and it cost me much less than $2000, but it was a LOT better and made me much more competitive. I also wasn't suggesting some physical limitation excuse for poor performance. Although I AM too old, fat, tired, ugly, weak, blind, and whatever for some activities (just joking about ugly). I realize that most of our limitations are self-imposed and that many statements of this sort tend to be self-fulfilling. However, I believe that there are innate differences that may result in differences in ability. Those innate differences are only going to be differences in potential and for most people are not going to have any effect (since most people don't ever reach their potential). Despite being blind, old, fat, tired, weak, and whatever - those things are not limiting me. I believe that I am capable of shooting much better than I am right now and I'm working on it. Will I ever reach a point where I say "that's the best I can possibly shoot"? No. Dang, sorry for contributing to the runaway thread drift. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BSeevers Posted October 10, 2002 Share Posted October 10, 2002 Pat Thanks I had forgotten about that Dillon contest. I used to use that example to make my point to many a shooter. NEWS FLASH Its the shooter not the gun!! Now I will say that a very green brand new shooter might have an easier time with a Dot but that will cease to be a consideration, very quickly, in the shooters career. And could stagnent and doom that particular shooter to mediocre levels. I have seen it happen a lot. You still must master the fundimentals to shoot at a high level. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron Ankeny Posted October 10, 2002 Share Posted October 10, 2002 Flexmoney: Sadistic, maybe, but it is absolutely true. I used the worst example I could think of. I started in this game with a single stack Kimber Gold Match. From there I went to a Les Baer. Then came the hi-cap STI. The open blaster soon followed. I got those guns so I could shoot multiple divisions and because I am a gunaholic. I am the first to admit that if I would have stuck with the Kimber, gotten off of my ass and lost 30 pounds, spent the gun money on entry fees, ammo, and professional instruction, I would be shooting Master in both L10 and Limited with the gun it all started with. As for too old, too fat, too bald, etc. Those don't lessen my enjoyment of the sport a bit. I shoot with a guy who is permanently disabled from a chronic back injury, and another of my friends is in need of a knee replacement. They both hobble around the course flinging lead. Still, age will impose it's limitations and I doubt that an arthritic old fart with tri-focals will win the Nats. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flexmoney Posted October 10, 2002 Share Posted October 10, 2002 Kelly, Please don't delete anything...this is a forum...we all learn from different viewpoints and open discussion. I didn't mean to come down on you...I just happen to be hitting high gear about the time you posted (Some of my threads smolder in my mind for a few weeks before I can put them down in print. I sure wish I had Brian's knack for sharing a thought.) I have one shooting buddy that is just a super guy. He runs his own match even ($20 gets you 6-8 stages and lunch). This guys loves shooting so much that he would buy primers when he ought to be buying tires for his truck. He is a real good B level shooter...but thinks he is too old to get any better. (He is if he tells himself that...but, I know better) I have another shooting buddy that is currently worried about getting his splits faster than .16...a noble goal, but it ain't gonna make any difference in his placing. He should be asking his buddies what they think will improve his score (getting out of the shooting position as the last shot is fired and being ready to shoot the very moment you get to the next shooting position). Another shooting buddy...says to me that my gun sure doesn't move much on recoil...must be those beefy arms (his words, not mine). Bull-butter! My front sight jumps all around, if I am using poor technique with my grip and stance. Same guy...he also thinks he is as good as he is going to get...and yet, I see him wasting time on "getting to the shooting"....on his reloads...many places. I am reading over in a "tactical" forum on another board. The guru there...he kicks butt on stand and delivery shooting. He states, though, that he is too old to run with the Todd Jarrett-types in IPSC. He states that he likes IDPA because everybody has to shoot the course of fire the same way...making it a fair test of shooting. Whatever! This guy is good at one thing. And, he wants to stay the big fish in that pond. IPSC requires movement, but not track-star speed. This guy can't see that, or refuses to believe it, or just isn't willing to do what it takes to learn to get into and out of positions faster...or shoot on the move. OK...enough of that for now. Thanks for listening. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flexmoney Posted October 10, 2002 Share Posted October 10, 2002 Ron, Sorry. I was typing my rant when you posted. "Still, age will impose it's limitations and I doubt that an arthritic old fart with tri-focals will win the Nats." We may find out...Robbie isn't 21, nor is he the poster for "Ripped Abs"...and he has had those three knee-surgeries...and yet he won everything this year. Mind over matter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tightloop Posted October 10, 2002 Share Posted October 10, 2002 flex Slight thread drift... If you have to run more than 10 yds age does indeed make a difference. No, you don't have to be Carl Lewis, but I could still run faster 20 yrs ago than I can now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BSeevers Posted October 10, 2002 Share Posted October 10, 2002 I think I might not run as fast as I did 20 years ago but I do shoot A LOT better than I did then 20 year olds be darned Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flexmoney Posted October 10, 2002 Share Posted October 10, 2002 If you have to run more than 10 yds age does indeed make a difference Nope. I ain't hearin' that today. Not gonna give that to you. I just don't feel like it. If you can't run 10 yards...it isn't because of age. But, if you always tell yourself that is the reason, then it will be good enough in your mind. We have many a Super Senior or Senior shooter. When they beat me, or I beat them...it isn't because one of us ran faster. Oh, in fact, one of our most senior shooters...well, get this guy on your squad, he wears guys out...literally racing them down range each and every time to set steel and paste targets. Besides Tightloop, I have a feeling your shooting skill makes up for any lack of foot speed that you may have. (...and my point is that it isn't about foot-speed...it is about saving motion.) (Edited by Flexmoney at 5:17 pm on Oct. 10, 2002) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jkmccoy Posted October 10, 2002 Share Posted October 10, 2002 Flexmoney, I think I'm actually with you on this one. Aren't you suggesting that most people are not really shooting up to their potential? That the capability to shoot better lies within in them, but that many are allowing some perceived physical limitation to hold them back? I agree with that. What I was trying to point out was that if everyone shot up to their potential, I think we would still have different classes of shooters. Now I don't remember why I thought that was important to the original discussion. Must be getting old (Edited by jkmccoy at 10:07 pm on Oct. 10, 2002) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
38supPat Posted October 11, 2002 Share Posted October 11, 2002 Quote: from Flexmoney on 3:14 pm on Oct. 10, 2002 If you have to run more than 10 yds age does indeed make a difference Nope. I ain't hearin' that today. Not gonna give that to you. I just don't feel like it. If you can't run 10 yards...it isn't because of age. But, if you always tell yourself that is the reason, then it will be good enough in your mind. We have many a Super Senior or Senior shooter. When they beat me, or I beat them...it isn't because one of us ran faster. Oh, in fact, one of our most senior shooters...well, get this guy on your squad, he wears guys out...literally racing them down range each and every time to set steel and paste targets. Besides Tightloop, I have a feeling your shooting skill makes up for any lack of foot speed that you may have. (...and my point is that it isn't about foot-speed...it is about saving motion.) (Edited by Flexmoney at 5:17 pm on Oct. 10, 2002) Well the Canadian champion this year was in his 50's and he placed in the top 20 at the US Nationals....maybe it does make a difference..the older guys know its not about running, just shooting smart Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jake Di Vita Posted October 11, 2002 Share Posted October 11, 2002 I agree with Flex. While being fast on your feet is definetely an advantage, pure shooting skill geratly outweighs it. I can run the 100 in just over 11 seconds. I'll bet that's faster than most people in this sport, however, I still get crushed by the likes of TGO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tightloop Posted October 11, 2002 Share Posted October 11, 2002 Flex Foot speed isn't the only thing that makes a good/great shooter. All else being equal, a faster runner will beat a slower runner every time. And if you aren't buying that today, call me in 20 years and lets talk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tightloop Posted October 11, 2002 Share Posted October 11, 2002 Flex Foot speed isn't the only thing that makes a good/great shooter. However, all else being equal, a faster runner will beat a slower runner every time. If you aren't buying that today, call me in 20 years and lets talk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flexmoney Posted October 11, 2002 Share Posted October 11, 2002 Tightloop, Growing older doesn't slow people down anywhere near as much as the thought of growing older. Kelly, Not just a "perceived physical limitation"...it is any perceived limitation...(like the start of this thread...equipment). I am pretty sure that the further you are from the top, the less any of this matters. The other thing I see a lot of (i may start a thread of "IPSC Myths") is the time issue. Or..."his daddy must be rich and he gets to practice more". Again, maybe at the upper levels. But, ten minutes of dry-fire practice a day would do most of us wonders. Pat said: "....maybe it does make a difference..the older guys know its not about running, just shooting smart" That says a bunch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nik Habicht Posted October 11, 2002 Share Posted October 11, 2002 Quote: from jkmccoy on 2:48 pm on Oct. 10, 2002 Flexmoney, Thanks for your response. I spent much of the past couple of hours wrestling with what I was going to do following your previous post. I was leaning heavily towards just deleting my post, taking my marbles, and going home. Kelly, I too am glad that you didn't leave. What I think separates this forum from the rest, is that we have the ability to disagree like adults, often adults who care enough about one another to attempt to more clearly understand each other. We all have a tendency to occasionally rant, or perhaps to state our position somewhat more forcefully than absolutely necessary. What I value about this forum is that you guys all make me think. Sometimes I'll think about someone's post and have an epiphany ---- someone will have put into words what I was experiencing recently, but hadn't digested enough yet to be able to fully recognize what it was that I had noticed. Other times, a very persuasive post will get me to think about the situation and realize that my feeling is the exact opposite. Without your various contributions though, it would take me a lot longer to figure any of this stuff out ---- I think that you've saved me years of learning already. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nik Habicht Posted October 11, 2002 Share Posted October 11, 2002 And since we're still in thread drift mode, here's my take on improving equipment: I think it's universal that newbies try to accelerate the improvement curve by focusing on changing/improving equipment rather than technique. And if you've got a basic, useful set of tools, then technique and knowledge improvements are where it's at.... It's not that the equipment won't help, rather it's that it won't help as much as investing that amount of money and the energy required to setup, learn and maintain the equipment would be better spent pursuing the technical skills and knowledge required to win. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duane Thomas Posted October 12, 2002 Share Posted October 12, 2002 I remember a few years ago at Marty Hayes' Firearms Academy of Seattle I was attending a John Farnam course. We were doing some man-on-man steel shooting. It was really simple, like five pepper poppers apiece and criss-crossing poppers in the middle. And they kept putting me against this Canadian cop whose duty gun was a Beretta 96D .40. I was shooting a Glock 19 9mm. And every time I'd beat him, i.e. every time we shot against each other, he'd go on and on about how my gun was easier to shoot than his. And I'd tell him, "Well, on an empirical level that's true, to a certain extent. But take my word for it, not to sound arrogant but....it's not the gun." And this goes on and on, every time we shoot, "Oh your gun is SO much easier to shoot than mine...." Finally, John says to him, with a tiny smile, "Okay....switch guns." So we go through the whole rigamarole of switching guns, holsters, mag pouches. And you know what? I STILL beat him - by about the same amount as when I was firing the Glock 9mm. It's not the gun. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bbyrd Posted October 14, 2002 Share Posted October 14, 2002 Im with Mr. Enos on this one. I remember in the early 90's when I sold every damn thing I had to scrape together a race gun. And I mean everything. For 2 months I had the top equipment in IPSC, until the scopes and wide bodies came out. So like 90% of most of the shooters in IPSC I sold my worthless paper weight and stopped shooting. Anyone want to know why our sport struggles? You want to see an increase in attendence? Add a 22 LR division. JMHO Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now