I don't shoot paper a lot... is this typical or am I a crappy shot?

Status
Not open for further replies.

1KPerDay

Member
Joined
Jan 19, 2006
Messages
20,900
Location
Happy Valley, UT
This one is fine, IMO: Ruger LCP, 3 mags mixed fmj, 102 gr. Remington Golden Sabre, Speer Gold Dot, 15 feet, standing 2 handed.
8cb5a14f.jpg

This is the one that raised my eyebrows. New Ruger MKIII 22/45, 30 feet, 10 shots standing 2 hands, federal "champion" bulk. mag safety has been removed, otherwise stock.
6c3dafe9.jpg

top target LCP, middle Taurus PT101AF .40, 2 mags worth 30 feet, Remington/UMC ball, bottom 22/45

04283836.jpg

3 shots Fiocchi V-max 40 gr. Ruger 196 series ranch rifle 50 yds
031447a3.jpg

top target, top group ruger 10/22 carbine, fed bulk, 50 yds; top target lower group 10 shots ranch rifle mixed brands XM193 50 yds, middle target 5 shots fed bulk, JC higgins mod 31 open sights, bottom target 3 shots fiocchi 40 gr vmax ranch rifle. all shot prone from a semi-wobbly range bag rest.

51e809d5.jpg

The Ruger I have no problems with, and I guess I can handle the Taurus... it's pretty loose everywhere but it works. for 22 shots offhand I can see that... at least there's sort of a central pattern.

The 22/45 is what surprised me. it's a 5" bull barrel. I expected a lot more accuracy. So here are my possible excuses:
1. crappy trigger?
2. crappy bulk ammo?
3. I suck at shooting paper?
4. pistol is inherently inaccurate?
5. My expectations are too high?
ix. all of the above

Any thoughts?

I suppose I really should take the time to go to an actual bench/range with a shooting rest/bags and try to eliminate as many variables as possible... but I really felt like I was doing a passable job with the fundamentals.
 
LOL... providing I was packing the 22/45 you'd probably be relatively safe if you were more than about 30 feet away. :D
 
Well just keep in mind handguns are by definition close-in weapons, and aren't really designed to be used to maximum effectiveness at long distances. You're probably shooting as well as most of us here, better than many from what I've seen.
 
I to have a 22/45 MKIII and there is a pretty noticeable difference in accuracy with better ammo. Mine prefers subsonic and Match ammo and at 30 yards will shoot 2" groups while rested on my gun case and using a red dot sight.
It doesn't do well with bulk anything if i want accuracy.
Try CCI Standard Velocity ammo or anything subsonic you can find, Match ammo would be even better but expensive.

By the looks of your targets you can shoot decently but the gun isnt working with you.
They make tons of trigger options for the gun to smooth and lighten it. I did all mine myself tho. The Bushnell TRS-25 i use helps me more than anything.

Check out rimfirecentral forums for more specific help with the gun.
 
You are right about the 22/45 triggers , they are cr*p. Some aftermarket parts will help tremendously. Add just free standing and bangin away ain't the best way to control groups. At close ranges all ammo is ok but at 25 yards the right ammo choice does help. And thats just buy'n an try'n. Wolf M/T does seem to work real well in most 22's.
 
I would guess that a lot depends on what order you shot the pistols.

After shooting a snappy pistol like a .40, it's not surprising if you shoot a .22 badly. One tends to flinch and try to compensate for the recoil if you don't have a great deal of experience.

It used to be standard that the minimum distance to shoot a handgun was 15 yards. And at that range shooting slow fire and offhand, you should be able to keep groups under 4". I think that's still a good goal for any handgun shooter - and any handgun will easily meet that standard.

My advice? Back off to 15 yards. Shoot the Ruger .22 first. Keep shooting .22's until you can consistently keep shots in 4". Then, and only then, pick up the centerfire handguns. If you can keep them under 4" you're good to go. If not, put them down and pick up the .22 again.
 
Thanks\ guys. I have read up at rimfirecentral about the mag disconnect etc. Good info. I'll try some different ammo next time out.

Kodiakbeer, interesting theory, and I imagine it's probably true. However in this case I shot the ruger before the .40.

I did fire the LCP first, though, so maybe that had something to do with it.
 
One problem with the Ruger automatic is trigger backlash -- the trigger keeps moving after it releases. That generally produces vertical stringing -- which is apparent in your targets.

One quick and cheap fix is Mole Foam <tm>. This is adhesive-backed felt. You find it in the foot care section at Wal Mart or any drug store. Cut a piece and stick it to the backstrap, behind the trigger. Build up or shave down until your trigger comes to a stop just as the sear releases.

For a more permanent fix, strip the gun and drill and tap a hole in the face of the trigger. Reassemble and put an allen screw in the hole, screwing it in until the trigger stops just as it releases. File it a bit to get the screw flush with the face of the trigger at the proper adjustment point. Shoot it a while until you're satisfied you've got it right, then add Loc-Tite.
 
Centerfire or not, the shooting looks good enough on the other handguns. I'd try a few more brands of ammo in that .22 first. Maybe have another shooting buddie try a few groups with that .22. If another shooter can shoot it more accuratly than you do, well it just may be your shooting. But judging by your targets shot with the centerfire pistols I think it's probably an ammo/gun issue.
 
I'd say an ammo to gun issue as well with perhaps some of the issue being the trigger if it's as bad and the guys are saying.

I've shot a couple of Ruger MK II's and III's and the trigger on those was nice. But they were VERY old and well used rental range guns so likely the sears had been polished by the many untold thousands of rounds shot through them over their lifetimes. The same range just got a 22/45 so I'll have to try it out to see if it's as bad as you guys are saying and different from the MK guns.

I'd also say that the ammo you shoot out of your LCP is a little fast for the sights. A slower ammo should move that grouping up to dead on the bullseye. The .40 is the other way around, the ammo being a little slow for the setting of the sights.

But hey, at 15 yards and with that sort of grouping it's more than "good enough". Nice shooting.
 
On paper with a handgun you’ll learn consistency, trigger control, hold, and sight picture at 25yds and 50yds. What you learn applies which allows hits as an example at 100yds or 7yds:)
SW4506Feb09.jpg
S&W 4506 two hand hold at 25yds pairs transition-DA/SA
IMG_2658.jpg
S&W 4506 at 25yds standing conventional offhand (one hand hold)
Colt_100Yds_56Rds.jpg
Colt XSE at 100yds total (56) rds standing two hand hold.
Hits_MP9_G17.jpg
Combined hits two hand hold at 25yds with G17 & MP9 total rounds fired (170)
 
My .22 pistol did pretty horrible with bulk packs. Accuracy was a joke and lots of cycling problems. I stick with CCI's when shooting .22 now.
 
Hangingrock, you taking any students on? LOL.

That's some damn fine shooting.

I'm not too shabby with a rifle that's remotely accurate, but freely admit I have a lot of room for improvement with the handgun genre.
 
Follow up:

ff8bb157.jpg

top row is a Browning Challenger pistol (Federal is Champion bulk stuff), Fiocchi is SM320 match), bottom row is the Ruger MKIII 22/45 that I was still trying to get sighted in (added Hi-Viz front sight), and which has a lousy trigger (particularly emphasized by shooting it back to back with the browning's trigger, which is, in a word, awesome). 25 feet, standing braced against my car.

These were standing, 21 feet, 2 hands. MKIII with CCI Mini-Mags.

995c3b9d.jpg

These are the Browning, standing, 21 feet, 2 hands, Fiocchi SM320 match ammo.

4b9c9c24.jpg

I think I'm ready to spend some money on the Ruger's trigger/sear now. It's really difficult to get a good letoff the way it is.
 
is this typical or am I a crappy shot?
Yes.

Your Browning may have the better trigger, but your supported groups indicate that the Browning and the MkIII are capable of similar accuracy, both being somewhat ammo-specific.

It also tells me you're capable of executing the fundamentals (sight picture & trigger control) much better than you actually execute them when shooting unsupported.

It's true your arm & gun will wobble more when shooting unsupported, but that's normal, so that alone doesn't explain why your unsupported groups open up so much. My suspicion is that you're seeing your front sight wander around the bullseye, then panic and quickly and impulsively snatch the trigger when you see the sight centered on the bull. The trouble is, of course, that snatching the trigger disrupts your nice sight picture. And trigger snatching aside, trying to time your shot is futile anyway, since, by the time you get the shot off, your moving gun is guaranteed to not be centered on the bull.

The solution? Forget the target. Simply accept the wobble. Relax and focus only on the front sight as you smoothly increase pressure on the trigger. Pay particular attention to the sight the instant the trigger breaks. And do not peek at the target at any point. Even for an instant. Your subconscious will align the gun with the target, and peeking only keeps you from doing your job (front sight/trigger press). Do your job well. The target is merely a recording device - it records how well you did your job, and you don't need a recorder to do it well.

If you have a hard time focusing on the sight and not the target, get rid of the target altogether. Shoot into the berm. It'll free your mind enough to concentrate on front sight/trigger control.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top