'Handguns Aren't Accurate at longer distance' - Glock 23 hitting gong 230 YARDS away

[JQP]

First, mods please move this to the right spot if this is the wrong one, and my apologies in advance.

Second, a big thanks to shockwave here on THR, who introduced me to Hickok45 (his videos). The guy's a phenomenal shot and humble guy with a friendly and practical way about him. He's literally hitting targets far enough away that some only think would be humanly possible with a rifle.

Third - I see so many threads about 'accuracy' and such, that I thought this would be an appropriate reminder that we're all far less accurate than just about any (and probably all) pistols.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zFd3kF6LHz4

That some of us haven't refined their pistol shooting technique to be able to touch the gong 4 times AT 230 FEET, let alone 230 YARDS, makes this video must see TV.

 

[Sky]

Impressive

 

[BCRider]

I guess we need to define "accuracy". But as you can see from the guys that shoot metallic silhouette with hand guns they can achieve some amazing results. And handgun shooters able to obtain sub 3 inch groups at 25 yards are obviously able to do 12 inch groups at 100 and 24 inch groups at 200 on calm days where wind doesn't come into play. And when you figure that those 3 inch groups have the majority of their holes in the 2 inch diameter zone this reduces the 200 yard potential group size to just 16 inches. Tight enough to hit a reasonable size gong most of the time.

Not this guy though. My eyes and arms just aren't up to the visual acuity and steadiness needed. I'd give it a try for sure but I'd be overjoyed to get even 1/3 of my shots to hit a 2 foot diameter gong at 200. Hell, I'd be happy to even SEE a 2 foot gong at that range. Lime green "dayglo" paint anyone?

 

[therewolf]

If the general public could shoot this accurately with a pistol, there would be no point in owning a rifle.

I personally prefer the pistols with at least a 5.5 inch barrel, there's almost no point in taking them to the range, otherwise.

 

[The Lone Haranguer]

Some guns do lend themselves better to long range shooting than others, but it is mostly the shooter's ability.

 

[jon_in_wv]

I personally prefer the pistols with at least a 5.5 inch barrel, there's almost no point in taking them to the range, otherwise.

?????????????????? I dont' see how barrel length effects practicing and gaining proficiency with your weapon. Maybe I missed something.

I think the largest factor of long range shooting is getting over the idea that it isn't possible. If you shoot at ten yards at a 2 inch dot or 200 yards at a 12 inch gong the the principles are the same but the fundamentals become much, much more important. Figuring out your point of aim is the tough part. That and the front sight covers your target completely at that range. Luckly my M&P is right on (well close anyhow) at 200 yards if I align the sights with the bottom of the front sight aligned with the top of the rear notch. This allows me to put the target right at the top of the front sight. I can usually hit the gong about 6 or 7 times out of ten this way. I don't to it offhand like Hickok45 but in the rollover prone position. I'll have to try it offhand next time.

 

[mickeygrimreaperblueeyes]

Kind of makes you wonder why the old battle rifles like the Mosin Nagant and the Springfield '03 have the leaf sights for up to 2000 yards huh. Training, accuracy, practice with the basic fundamentals. It all adds up.

 

[JTH]

Isn't this the result of practice and pratice some more with the same weapon until you know it's every idosyncracy! Couple of thousand rounds through same weapon, you should learn something! I doubt you could do this with an AK but it nevers hurts to practice.
JT

 

[JQP]

Isn't this the result of practice and pratice some more with the same weapon until you know it's every idosyncracy! Couple of thousand rounds through same weapon, you should learn something! I doubt you could do this with an AK but it nevers hurts to practice.
JT

Actually, JT, the very same guy (hickok45) has a video where he compares and shoots both a AK-47 and a AR-15, finds he shoots both pretty much as accurately, states he prefers the heavier round of the AK, and that he prefers the ergonomics and sites of the AR.

In sum, he says that the debate over the AK's lack of accuracy or AR's lack of reliability are both way overstated.

The main advantage of any rifle is that the round will be traveling 2x to 3x as fast as it does out of the barrel of this or any pistol.

.40S&W 180grain out of 4 inch barrel = approx 1,000 fps vs AK's 105 grain 2200 fps or AR's 55 grain 3000 fps.

 

[jon_in_wv]

I doubt you could do this with an AK but it nevers hurts to practice.
JT

Don't buy the internet hype. I hit steel gongs at 200 yards with my AK with boring regularity. To say you can do it with a Glock and NOT an AK is the height of silliness.

 

[Diggers]

WOW that is amazing. I'll have to show my buddy who owns a 23 that. Wonder what kind of ammo he was using.

About the AK VS AR thing...where did the idea of AK not being accurate as the AR come from.

Is it perhaps at 500 yards there is a noticable difference between the two?

I wonder about 500 yards because I read that is the distance that the 5.56 round was made to be effective out to...at least. (a problem with the shorter barrel m-4 used today...or so they say. But that is a power issue not an accuracy issue.) So I assume the AR was made to be accurate well past the 500 yard range

Hows an AK do out that far?

 

[Ben86]

Hickok is awesome. I am a happy subscriber to his entertaining and informative videos.

He has inspired me to accomplish new levels of long range handgun accuracy I didn't think were possible before.

 

[xphunter]

Jon wrote:
"I think the largest factor of long range shooting is getting over the idea that it isn't possible."

This is so true.
The biggest limitation many times is inside your head.
Many have for to long accepted someone's opinion (writer, parent, shooting buddy, etc.) and therefore carry on false beliefs about what can or cannot be done.
LR shooting with a variety of handguns is my hobby.
Great video
One of my friends has a signature (about LR shooting with handguns), "If you think something is not possible move out of the way so the ones that are doing it can."

 

[xphunter]

Digger,
I have a AR handgun with two uppers: A 7" and 16" barrel.
I have used 15-16" 5.56 barrels a number of times out to 600 yards, shooting groups on steel under MOA in good conditions from the prone position.

I plan to go for a prairie dog just beyond 1K with a 16" barrel.
Right now shooting the 69 grain SMK, but will bump up to some heavier bullets for better BC's.

 

[Lonestar49]

Finding the sight picture with the

...

The_right shooter with the correct trigger pulls - Ding!

Being that it was a 40cal, I'd bet he was shooting 165gr for the speed/velocity.

Personally, I think any handgun, 9mm and up, could hit that target given enough sight picture, time/practice, POA-POI, which is similar to much closer, "stationary" type target set-ups.. and results. OMMV

Not a bad thing, if one has the time to set up the shot, via sight picture, have such room/distance/set-up and, for me, not having a backyard as nice and legal as that puts a crimp into my style as well..

But my hat is off to the shooter for both his commentary/style and his, very good, human shooting with some misses..

Enjoyed it,


Ls

 

[jon_in_wv]

About the AK VS AR thing...where did the idea of AK not being accurate as the AR come from.

That is a pretty established fact. The design of the AR with its rigid receiver, tighter tolerances, lighter bolt, and quality barrel just lend itself to better accuraccy. The AK was built for toughness and reliability and it excels at both but it isn't capable of the accuraccy an AR can produce. The lack of accuraccy of the AK is hugely overblown.

 

[Pete D.]

I apologize for the target as pictured but this was unplanned and I was using to bull to sight in a hunting rifle and a 12 gauge slug gun. So there's a lot of holes in this piece of paper. I taped over the slug holes (Winchester rifled slugs were far and away better out of my old Mossberg bolt gun. I taped over the .30-06 holes - more work needed there - still about four inches higher than I want. The remaining untaped holes - all in the top half of the target, eight in the black and one high and white at 11 o'clock are all . 45 cal. 230 grain bullets fired from a Glock 36. I fired 15 shots just trying to hit a 36" X36 " backer upon which this target was stapled. Six of those shots went here and there on the backer, the others are the untaped holes. I was surprised at how well the little Glock could shoot.
Yes, handguns are accurate beyond 25 yards.

 

[Robert]

If the general public could shoot this accurately with a pistol, there would be no point in owning a rifle.

Yeah unless I want to make a first round hit rather than a third round hit.

About the AK VS AR thing...where did the idea of AK not being accurate as the AR come from.

From the fact that an AK is not as accurate as an AR.

That is an impressive feat of pistol shooting, but to say that being able to do that negates the need for a rifle is just silly. Sure Elmer Keith took a deer at 600y with a pistol but even he said it was one heck of a lucky shot.

 

[Justin]

If the general public could shoot this accurately with a pistol, there would be no point in owning a rifle.

Except for the fact that rifles fire more powerful rounds at much higher velocities, and are inherently more accurate platforms due to the longer sight radius, generally better sights, and better stability from holding the gun into the shoulder.

hickok45's shooting there is impressive, but don't make the mistake of believing that an impressive trick shot translates into practical utility.

Don't buy the internet hype. I hit steel gongs at 200 yards with my AK with boring regularity. To say you can do it with a Glock and NOT an AK is the height of silliness.

Agreed. 200 yard shots on a target of that size should be completely doable even with an AK assembled by the drunken monkeys at Century.

About the AK VS AR thing...where did the idea of AK not being accurate as the AR come from.

Because AKs are simply not as accurate as AR due primarily to the mechanics of the design.

 

[MikeNice]

Why does this suprise anybody? I did a paper in college refuting an anti-gun article in our mandated reading. (There was a pro gun article for balance.) One of the big hings I wanted to refure was the idea that handguns are inacurate.

I ran across more than a dozen confirmed reports of people hitting shots at 100 yards with cap and ball guns. I don't mean they were shooting reproductions well. I mean cavalry officers and cowboys making 100 yard shots with old percussion revolvers. Some were even doing it on horse back, while riding.

Shooters have known for over a century that hand guns can do long distances. It is cool to see it done, but suprising, not hardly.

 

[ny32182]

This is why I get a kick out of people who, when comparing handguns, will go on about "my (example) 1911 is more accurate than your (whatever) plastic gun!!".

While this may or may not be true, even assuming it is, this fact is completely irrelevant to the discussion of how well a service type handgun performs the job for which it was intended. I would wager that even the best practical pistol shooters in the world, when shooting at speed, are seeing 90% of their total group spread coming from them, rather than the gun.

Take an even halfway decent rifle shooter from a rested postion, and that 90% is likely south of 50%, making the equipment a much bigger percentage of the equation.

The lesson... handgun accuracy doesn't matter unless you are specifically in a competition slowfiring for tight groups, or maybe hunting... for any carry or "practical" competition, handgun accuracy is all but irrelevant: they are all PLENTY more than accurate enough to get that job done.

 

[rogertc1]

I have good accuracy at 1000yds with my Glock 19.

 

[jonmerritt]

Yeah I hear all the hype too, they tend to go quiet after they see me at the range. It's not bragging, anybody can make the impossable long range shots, with practice it can be done over and over. Try 3 inch groups at 200 meters with a .22lr in an off the the shelf savage. Can anyone say artillary round? Or 100 yrds with a Ruger P85 (9mm). 50 yrds with a .38 spcl snubbie and 157 grain fmj (real artillary there) Yes I said "snubbie".
Oh man! imagine what I could do with a real gun like a Glock!!! By the way, uncle sam provided me with massive amounts of training and the chance to turn it into experiance.

 

[TheProf]

Ok...this may be ignorance on my part... could someone chime in on the "energy level" that a 9mm (or .40) bullet has at 200 yards. What would the penetration power be?

Would a HP 9mm bullet still have enough power to penetrate 12 inches at that distance?

 

[ny32182]

Not knowing the BC (using the default value of .172 in one of the calculator programs) 124gr bullet at 1200fps, it shows:

100yd: 1021fps, 14.2" drop, 287 ft lb

200yd: 919fps, 61.7" drop, 233 ft lb.