Can't hit anything with my Pocket Positive

My accuracy improved when I did two things: 1. Ordered in a supply of Magtech 98 grain semi-jacketed hollow-points and 2. Used the pad of my trigger finger nearer the tip than the joint. Here's 40 rounds of the Magtech at 21 feet. That's about as much as I think I can get from this revolver.

Click to expand...

That is a great group for that revolver, if the op is getting that kind of accuracy out of it that is very good.

I go to the range all the time and there are very few who can duplicate that kind of shooting (with anything)

Old Fuff said:

First post says 20 feet....

Click to expand...

Doh! Missed that, wasn't with the rest of the numbers.

Trickshot and Harley,

Thanks for the kind words about the target. Trickshot, it did shoot low when I had too much trigger finger wrapped around it. When I was pulling the trigger with the 1st joint of my finger it was pulling the shot low. When I backed the finger out the shots started landing higher, more to the point of aim. Get a bunch of ammo and start experimenting and practicing. The Tyler-T grip adapter helps also. Tyler does not make one specifically for the Pocket Positive. The one pictured is for a Smith & Wesson J frame, but it worked.

"This gun is for my use and I don't care about ruining it for some stranger who wants it after I'm dead and gone."

But, but, but, I want it now! You don't have to be dead and gone, really!

As others have posted you shooting is fine, group size wise.

But i question your judgment on choice of weapon. Why an almost ancient Colt revolver that is not easily maintainable in a puny caliber like the .32? You commented on the good SA trigger pull and the heavy DA. It's a Colt not a S&W. There's a big difference in the DA and Colts leave a lot to be desired.

I bet that you've been shooting your gun SA, based on your bullseye backround. That's not the way to go for defensive shooting. You need to concentrate on close range, DA shooting and you need a gun that's at least as powerful as a 38 special unless you has some physical problems precluding that. Such guns are hard and uncomfortable to shoot unfortunately, but that's physics.

Sorry for being a hard ass, but just trying to help a fellow shooter. By the way, many decades ago I learned to shoot handguns in a NRA bullseye course. That's fine for basics, but has no relation to the real world of defensive shooting.

Trickshot wrote, "The gun is for my use and I don't care about ruining it..."

If you're shooting a one-inch group at 20 feet, you're shooting a lot better than most of the shooters who post on this or any other board. So you're shooting an inch or two low? Big deal. If you can't correct that by altering your point of aim or your sight alignment, then regardless of your group size, you're not much of a shooter.

And your determination to do what YOU want with YOUR gun is just plain selfish. You've got a very desireable collectors' item, nearly 100 years old, and you seem hell-bent on ruining it. It's time you grew up and realized there are other people in the world who will someday want to own a nice Colt Pocket Positive.... one WITHOUT the front sight filed down.

I've been collecting guns for almost 50 years, and have always been guided by the thought that I am only the temporary custodian of the antique guns I own. It is my responsibility to care for them and eventually pass them on to another generation of collectors.... in the best possible condition.

The single action trigger pull is very light, which I like. But the double action trigger pull is 11 pounds, which seems excessive. Is that normal for this gun?

Click to expand...

Yes... It is heavy by today's standards. But at the time it was made primers were not as sensitive and reliable as they are now. The mainspring can be slimmed, but I'd advise against it. If something went wrong it would be difficult (and probably expensive) to find a replacement.

mine is feed 77 gr rnl ontop of 2.0 gr of bullseye in 32acp cases. slightly faster than a 32 colt long and very accurate. FWIW

Some additional comments:

Cartridge "stopping power": During a period of time, running roughly from the middle 1800's to 1940, many men (and occasionally women) carried small .32 and .38 revolvers. Both were chambered for cartridges that are generally considered to be inadequate today, and all were loaded with plain, round-nose lead bullets with modest velocities. Yet period literature from that era dose not contain the criticism of they’re performance that we see now. Maybe the bad guys were more wimpy back then, but I doubt it. Possibly the low recoil contributed to better marksmanship, although I am convinced that the poor sights employed on most handguns – big or little – encouraged point shooting at close range, where in fact most self-defense incidents occurred.

The concept of ultra-powerful Magnum loads in small, lightweight revolvers is a recent one, but again while theories abound there is little evidence, “from the field,” so to speak, that in and of themselves, these cartridges succeed where Grandpa’s old creampuff rounds failed. Some Grandpa's by the way, could take their pocket pistol and split a playing card edgeways at 10 paces.

All of this is heresy of course, but I have carried revolvers chambered in .32 S&W Long, .38 S&W or pistols in .32 ACP or even .25 ACP, and not felt hopelessly underguned. Bigger is better without doubt, but bigger isn’t always necessary.

Modifying sights: When one carries a handgun, having it shoot point-of-impact to point-of-aim is important, as one cannot always plan on a up-close-and-personal encounter. But when working with a gun that’s new to me I don’t make irreversible changes until I’m sure that practice, in and of itself, won’t result in the issues solving themselves.