Giving up proficiency in favor of power.

[Ankeny]

Now that I see you only went down to a 9mm...

Yes, I did power down to avoid giving up "speed". But since then I have gone back to a .45 and in so doing I gave up some speed and accuracy. Frankly, I am surprised by the number of folks who say they wouldn't give up any proficiency (let's call it speed and accuracy for the sake of a more powerful cartridge.

So, what is proficiency, anyway?

That's an excellent question. In a shooting match like IPSC or IDPA proficiency shows up in the form of match results. For folks who don't have a timer and/or a way to shoot drills, proficiency is probably pretty subjective.

I'm not sure if you've defined what you're giving up accurately. Rather than call it proficiency, we could describe it as top edge speed and performance.

Yes, that is correct, I have given up top edge speed and performance in favor of "power". I know several other shooters who have chosen to do the same. Perhaps we are just to old school to accept the notion that bigger isn't better.

 

[Loosedhorse]

I don't know why in threads like this some always insist that others are suggesting people ought drop to 22 rimfire to achieve proficiency

I mentioned .22LR in my post, but I didn't "insist that others were suggesting" anything.

I said that I have decreased two of my carry loads away from max because I shoot the lighter load better. I am sure that I could shoot a .22LR even faster because there's less recoil, but I have decided not to go that far.

The OP asked how much proficiency one is willing to give up for power, and so I thought it was on point to mention that I was NOT willing to go lower than the loads I mentioned just to gain a bit more proficiency.

In other words, I have given up some "power" (full-throttle .357 and full-weight 10mm loads) to gain proficiency; but also have given up some proficiency (faster shooting with .22s) to gain power. Why would that be a surprising or objectionable statement?

 

[oldfool]

"insist that others were suggesting"
you and that other fellow in that other thread can throw more flames at one another on that one, Loosedhorse

all I said was "it happens every time"
this thread is still young, be patient
at least we haven't yet seen "volunteer to be shot with" here.. yet
donchajustluv caliber wars ???

 

[JohnBiltz]

I felt I gave up power to gain proficiency when I sold a .40 to go back to 9mm. Never regretted it. I felt I gave up a marginal amount of power for a big gain in handling and speed. I still feel that way.

 

[JohnKSa]

I think it's safe to say that a caliber change for a carry gun affects more than just proficiency and power. Maybe considering more of the variables will make the decision easier.

Here's my shot at a list of things affected by your carry gun caliber choice, I'm sure that I've left a few things out...

Proficiency (Accuracy/Speed)
Power/Terminal effect
Capacity
Weight
Size
Practice Issue 1: Ammunition Costs
Practice Issue 2: Wear & Tear on Handgun
Practice Issue 3: Wear & Tear on Shooter

 

[Shadow 7D]

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/proficiency
2 - the state of being proficient hence

: well advanced in an art, occupation, or branch of knowledge

As you should be able to bring your KSA from one gun to the next, wouldn't SWITCHING to the gun you shoot BEST, be increasing your proficiency?

So maybe a better way to phrase this, is
'is choosing another caliber that I can shoot better worth the loss of power'
because if you are proficient, you will hit with BOTH

 

[orionengnr]

I shoot a 1911 better than anything else.
Hence, I am not "giving up" anything except magazine capacity.

I shoot every week, and am pretty confident in my chosen caliber and platform.

 

[Lawdawg45]

It's interesting that the sister thread to this one was locked by the administrator, I guess us old shooters are just too opinionated.

I guess this type of question is like asking which is more important, the magazine or the barrel? Obviously one is dependant on the other, but both must be present and maximized to be effective. While I'm an advocate of a decent, powerful caliber with 2 re-loads, I've also frequently carried a SA (with re-loads) and my wife feels more comfortable with a .22 mag revolver, so I'll go on record as saying carry what you're comfortable and consistently accurate with.

LD45

 

[mavracer]

proficiency is much better at making up for power than power is at making up for proficiency.

 

[oldfool]

Lawdawg45 (again) makes good points
"carry what you're comfortable and consistently accurate with"
that sums up what I do believe the majority consensus would support
comfort, competence, confidence, consistency.. it's an interacrtive progression, not a vs. vs. vs.

JohnKSa also offers good points
"a caliber change for a carry gun affects more than just proficiency and power."
I do believe CCW choices inherently imply more compromises than at-home, and I do choose different handguns for at-home vs CCW.
Acknowledged, there are merits in arguments to the contrary, that you should always carry same (whatever it is you shoot best of all, with speed & accuracy & confidence).

In any event, I do not propose that all should do-as-I-do
in matters of life or death, there is really only one vote that counts.. your own
(and in matters of marriage, don't argue with the wife, like Lawdawg45, let her choose her own !)

PS
yeah, all us old shooters are too doggone opinionated, and it do get too doggone overheated from time to time

 

[Lawdawg45]

"proficiency is much better at making up for power than power is at making up for proficiency. "

I agree Sir!

LD45

 

[tinygnat219]

Depends on what one is giving up to remain "proficient". If it's .40 S&W to 9MM, I don't see an issue. If it's .357 magnum to .38 SPL I don't see an issue. If' it's 9MM to .22LR, I DO see an issue unless one has some serious health issues where 9MM recoil is simply painful (I know some folks with rheumatoid arthritis who simply carry .22LR b/c anything more is severely painful).

In short, carry the most powerful round you can shoot most proficiently with. However, .22LR should be the exception. It's a rimfire cartridge that is known to misfire more often than not.

 

[Loosedhorse]

Uh-oh: you mentioned .22LR!

 

[sugarmaker]

The point at which you start getting into bad technique as a result of recoil / muzzle blast is a good stopping point. For both rifles and pistols, the point where I can't keep 10 out of 10 in a 9 inch circle from the position I intend to shoot from is my stopping point for both range and power. Also (rather arbitrary) I need energy (FP) times bullet weight (grs)/100 greater than 1000 at the point of impact for deer hunting.

 

[Lawdawg45]

"In short, carry the most powerful round you can shoot most proficiently with. However, .22LR should be the exception. It's a rimfire cartridge that is known to misfire more often than not."

Let me lighten the room up a bit and share a personal story. I had a partner in the late 80's that was a power lifter and he looked like a tree trunk and could bench 450+ lbs. He was known for carrying a Ruger Redhawk in .44 mag or a custom 1911, but one day I met him for lunch off duty and he was carrying a Beretta .22 LR After I picked my jaw up off of the ground I asked him what was up with the BB gun, he replied "Oh I'll shoot em in the neck 7 times then beat the living sh** out of them!"

LD45

 

[easyg]

Yes, shot placement is king.
But caliber matters too.


Question: Why do we have so many different calibers and loads?


Answer: Because some calibers are more effective than other calibers for certain tasks.


Self defense: Humans have been shooting humans since the invention of firearms.
And over the centuries we (mankind) have learned a thing or two about which calibers and which loads are more effective at quickly stopping human aggressors, and which calibers and which loads are less effective at quickly stopping human aggressors..
We have also learned which calibers and which loads the average human can control and shoot accurately from a handgun.

Personally, I don't see any reason to use less than .38 Special or 9mm para for self defense.
Both of these calibers are easy enough for the average adult to shoot accurately for self defense purposes, even when shooting with only the weak hand.
And both are plenty powerful enough to quickly stop an aggressive human.

 

[Ankeny]

comfort, competence, confidence, consistency.. it's an interacrtive progression, not a vs. vs. vs.

Yup, true enough. I see several posters have given up power in favor of being more proficient. Which of course, I did a few years back. To get back on track, I am asking about going the other direction, giving up "proficiency" in favor of power. In my case, I went from a 9mm to a .45 ACP with some really stout loads.

I agree if you can't hit the side of a barn with your whomp-em-stomp-em loads, throttle back a bit. On the flip side, if a shooter can really rock with a 9mm, is there anything wrong with moving up to a .45 if you go from "rocking" to shooting a little slower in order to maintain accuracy. It looks like the majority opinion is that would be a bad move.

 

[sixgunner455]

Ankeny, I *can* shoot a .45, quite well. I don't really like it. Whatever advantages it might give the shooter, it doesn't give enough, in my opinion, to justify switching.

 

[mavracer]

I agree if you can't hit the side of a barn with your whomp-em-stomp-em loads, throttle back a bit. On the flip side, if a shooter can really rock with a 9mm, is there anything wrong with moving up to a .45 if you go from "rocking" to shooting a little slower in order to maintain accuracy. It looks like the majority opinion is that would be a bad move.

There are two parts to proficency with a handgun speed and accuracy. I agree that if the added power causes accuracy to fall off that's a bad move. If your split times slow down just a bit to maintain accuracy, well now your dancing with the devil so to speak. Because that's a guessing game. Your first shot is not going to be slower and while more power might slow down the second, it could also make it unnecessary.

 

[Ankeny]

Your first shot is not going to be slower and while more power might slow down the second, it could also make it unnecessary.

My thoughts exactly. My second shot with a .45 runs about 25-30 per cent slower than with a 9mm. I don't mind giving that up, but it seems I am in the minority.

 

[9mmepiphany]

I don't mind giving that up, but it seems I am in the minority.

I think a bit of that hinges on one's belief that they are good enough and calm enough to make that first shot and never need a second.

Having seen shooters, who were not untrained, miss from as close as three feet when shooting under pressure...I'm not quite willing to take those odds

 

[Shadow 7D]

THIS ^^^^

It's all fun and games till someone is shooting AT YOU
then, the majority of shooters, who have NEVER experienced this before, will proceed to mag dump and duck...

It's like a ropes course I was on once, the top leap was to a trapeze bar 6' above and 5' (jump 5 feet and catch a head height bar) out from the top platform, 88' above the ground. Most people missed something they can do easily on the ground, they are CAPABLE, but under the pressure of jumping off a tall platform (tied to a rope) they fail to.

Stress makes you do funny things

 

[Lawdawg45]

"It's all fun and games till someone is shooting AT YOU
then, the majority of shooters, who have NEVER experienced this before, will proceed to mag dump and duck..."

100% truth, and while you're a wise person, you're in the minority with this statement. Too many folk think their range expertise will carry 100% into a gunfight, heck I even see a noticeable drop in accuracy with Deer hunters when they move from the range to the field, and yes I include myself in that category. I missed a nice 8 point last year at about 60 yards, even though I was consistently placing rounds in an 8 inch circle at 75 yards with iron sights.:banghead:

LD45

 

[harmon rabb]

about the only time i'd do that is to move up from a 22. otherwise, it's not worth it. i'll take a hit with a 380 or 9 over a miss with a 45 any day (which isn't that great of a comparison for me I guess, because I shoot 45 well, but you get what i'm saying).

back when i had more limited carry choices, i stopped carrying my g27 in favor of a cz-82. yeah, i stepped down from a 40 to the lowly 9x18... because i was a far better shot with the cz than the glock.

 

[Ankeny]

I think a bit of that hinges on one's belief that they are good enough and calm enough to make that first shot and never need a second.

I suppose that's a valid observation. In my case, I don't mind being 25 per cent slower on the split with a .45 because I think a square range split of .19-.22 with the larger caliber is good enough.