Marksmanship Rant

[TX1911fan]

I think just the opposite of the OP. I see guys standing and shooting at paper, or laying on the ground, and think "why don't they sit on something?" I also see guys at the range trying to hit ANYTHING out at 100 yards with iron sights, and I think, "why don't they put a scope on that thing?"

I'm probably slipping into the old fart hunter here. I'm not a fud, but even my AR has become more of a hunting rifle than a combat weapon. I don't have any interest rolling around on the ground or running and gunning. I want to stalk prey and support my rifle as best I can to take a clean shot, whether that's on a tree, shooting sticks, or in a bling. (Although, oddly enough, my first AR kill was offhand because I was sitting in a tree stand. It was only 30 yards on a hog though, so pretty easy.)

 

[Z_Infidel]

I use the bench to zero the sights on my rifles. I do a l ot of shooting, even at the range, from various "practical" positions just to keep myself somewhat good at it. I don't worry about what other shooters are doing as long as they are safe.

As for optics, I see their value and agree they are a very real benefit -- especially for longer range shooting. Currently all of my rifles are equipped with good iron sights -- all ghost ring / aperture types. I don't necessarily agree with the contention that the only way to take game cleanly and ethically is with optical sights. I think that as long as a hunter practices enough to be proficient with the rifle he/she is using and knows the limits of his ability it is just as ethical to use irons as optics.

It's good to have choices.

 

[MCgunner]

Oh, no, it's MY WAY OR THE HIGHWAY! LOL

BTW, I have a 50 year old Weaver 3x5x32KV in the closet that came off my M722. Anyone got something older? Shot my first deer with it at age 11, 44 years ago, sitting on the ground shooting off a tree limb tha was feld to make a ground blind of sorts. Hit that deer on a dead run through the shoulder, severed the aorta, from 75 yards. Couldn't have done it off hand and probably not with irons, though I hunted squirrel with irons all the time on my .22.

A low power scope is MUCH faster on target and has plenty of peripheral view/field of view for shooting at runngin game than irons. I much prefer my 2x10 set on 2 power for spot and stalk or still hunting through the woods. It's deadly fast. With irons, you have to line up things and focus on two objects far and near. You don't waste that time with a scope, faster even than a ghost ring aperture. The key is low power. Check out IPSC shooters sometime. They ain't using irons on those pistols in the open classes. Aimpoints have no magnification and no front/rear sights to align with the target, much, much faster. I can take my Ruger Mk2 and MOW DOWN the 6" plates at 25 yards, very fast, no misses. I can't match the speed with irons. That gun has a 2x optic on it and it's huge fun. Thing will shoot 1/2" groups at 25 yards off the bench. Best I can do with any iron sighted handgun is about 1". What I don't understand is articles I read on defensive handguns where they "test accuracy" by shooting off hand at 7 yards. That really Peeves me! I don't care if you think it's a "belly gun". That don't mean it can't be accurate, just because you can't shoot a snub for squat. I wanna know how that gun does at 25 off the bench! Give me something I can quantify. I won't own a gun for self defense that can't shoot less than 4" from the bench at 25 yards. I have a .380 that shoots more like 6" and I never carry it. My Kel Tech P11 shoots into about 3.5" at 25 and my snub does about 3". They make me happy. Do I practice defensive shooting off a bench? Of course not. I've shot a lot of IDPA and practice combat senarios, el presidente, that sort of thing. But, I wanna know the gun shoots to POA and how well it shoots. Only way to know that and adjust it is to bench it at 25 yards. Defensive shooters that have never benched or optimized their sidearms do themselves a disfavor.

 

[Ash]

The funny thing is, in all my hunting books from the 1950's and 60's, it was considered very important to learn how to shoot while kneeling, sitting, standing, and prone. They all advocated using a rest when possible, after padding them with a coat or something, but none of the training to actually shoot the rifle involved the bench once it was sighted in and the ammo selected.

By the way, I have a nice 3.5x scope that is 65 years old...
...mounted on an M91/30 PU sniper, that is. Believe it or not, I have even taken it hunting before.

Ash

 

[JWarren]

Z Infidel wrote:

I don't necessarily agree with the contention that the only way to take game cleanly and ethically is with optical sights.

I'm not saying that an ethical shot cannot be taken with irons. If I believed that, I would be in conflict with my own ethics-- having taken animals with irons myself.


But I stand my my assertion that in many situations such as low-light conditions and at longer ranges, optics make the shot more certain and therefore have a higher chance of a clean kill.


-- John

 

[MCgunner]

I can shoot off hand about as good as most folks or better. I don't have a problem with it, just prefer to use a gun rest. I've killed deer on the run off hand standing and without the use of a sling. I shoot birds with shotguns off hand, too. I know HOW to do it. If I don't choose to shoot off hand on a given range trip, I'm sorry it bothers you, but get over it. It's my gun, I paid for it, and it's almost a free country, though how much longer that'll remain, I don't know.

 

[Vaarok]

I concur with the preamble Jeff Cooper had in "The Art of the Rifle" where he says a lot of people like to shoot for accuracy, and that's fine, but that's pure marksmanship. Riflemanship is being able to reliably hit with reasonable accuracy under varied conditions. I approve of this philosophy.

 

[turbohardtop]

Was he talking about me

I took my AR to the range this weekend to zero in my optics and I had no iron sights. I know I should have waited for my iron sights to come in but I could not wait. It was fun regardless...

 

[HB]

I agree with the OP.

Whenever I go to the range, most people shoot scoped rifles from the bench ONLY. I rarely see somebody stand up and take a shot. I understand people are sighting in etc. But even after that, take a few shots standing. The bench is a huge handicap to real shooting.

Whats worse is that I am the only person that shoots a pistol one-handed and I'm better with one hand than all of the people with 'combat' handguns are with 2, and I shoot at 15 or 25 yards and they shoot at 7.

I agree that optics are a crutch for a lot of shooters. I hunt deer with irons because they are quick, won't break (I know scopes are tough too), and generally make a rifle easier to carry. The longest distance I saw a deer this year was 60 yards, and I shot mine at 30. I have no need for scopes for the most part. You need to be proficient will irons before you should use a scope, which is way a open sighted .22 is still the best first gun.

Position shooting is a lost art. I have never seen a person shoot sitting or kneeling outside of practice or a match. Thats why I think Appleseed is a good thing. A lot of people with high quality rifles limit themselves by shooting off a bench. Guys with tacticool gear are content with HITTING a human silhouette at 100 yards when they should be hitting a paper plate offhand.... with an AK



HB

I also agree that most guns are way over scoped. A 4X is perfect for most hunting. When I hunt squirrels, my variable scope never leaves 4X.

 

[grimjaw]

+1 Fast Frank, although I will say I usually am just trying to see what the rifle is capable of when shooting from a bench. Otherwise what Vaarok said applies.

jm

 

[MMCSRET]

Mcgunner, I like the old Weavers too. my oldest is a K2.5 sold new with a 336 Marlin in Beuhler mts in 1949.

 

[JWarren]

HB wrote:

I agree that optics are a crutch for a lot of shooters.

Crutch, Smutch. When you've seen knee-capped deer and those shot through the jaw, the question of practical shooting becomes academic.

I've no problems with whatever you use-- AS LONG as you KNOW you can make the shot clean and quick.

If I am in a stand where I know that my maximum shot is 200 yards, I make sure I am capable of making a clean shot as easily as possible at my maximum range.

If one comes out at 75 yards, it makes it that much easier. But I'd MUCH prefer to be able to confidently take the 200 yard shot knowing my shot will be clean, and my target identified than being set up for a 100 yard shot and stretching it for the longer one.

I plan for my extreme situation and KNOW I am prepared for anything less.

I hunt deer with irons because they are quick.

And that's fine. I prefer irons or 1X on my trail stands. Often those shots are on the move at closer ranges. I've had to kill a 9 point in a full run at 30 yards before. I would have had trouble with magnification.

The longest distance I saw a deer this year was 60 yards, and I shot mine at 30.

But every terrain and hunt is different. I KNOW that I will not be able to make a 100 yard shot on my trail stands-- hell, I wouldn't be able to see more than 40 yards. But on one of my stands, the extreme shot is 500 yards. Most deer killed from it are in the 150-300 yard range.

Guys with tacticool gear are content with HITTING a human silhouette at 100 yards when they should be hitting a paper plate offhand.... with an AK

I've got the "tacticool toys." In fact, my hunting rifles are wholely EBR-based at this time. I'm hardly content with shooting silhouette at 100 yards. In fact, if I couldn't keep a benched 1 MOA, I'd be upset. I'll take a bit wider free-hand.

I think we are generalizing a bit too much.

I also agree that most guns are way over scoped. A 4X is perfect for most hunting. When I hunt squirrels, my variable scope never leaves 4X.

Because something works is no reason WHY it becomes a limit. I hunted most of my life with a fixed 4X. After using a varible 3-9, I will never a fixed 4X again. My un-tacticool 59 year old father feels the same way.

I believe some people forget that a scope when hunting has more purpose than a sight. It is also your spotting scope/binoculars in many cases.

From experience, I can tell you that it is near impossible to tell what you are shooting at with a fixed 4X at 300 yards in low light/dusk conditions. I've done it.

Now that I use variable optics, I can raise my magnification and know EXACTY what the target is and any other relevent information. I can always back it down if I so choose.

A Variable 3-9 or such gives something that irons or low-powered fixed optics cannot give you: Options. I can zoom in for target recognition and then zoom back out for better light transmission. With fixed or irons, you get what you get.

I fail to see why this bothers some. If something makes my hunt easier, increases my capability, my confidence, and makes my kill cleaner, why not use it?

For my stands, I like 3x9, but I will be most likely using a 4.5-14 this year. For trails, I want something like 1-4, a reflex sight, or irons.

While I have a 3x9 on my 22, I will likely be replacing it with a 1x4 soon. The advantages of having 1X on the low end outweights the benefits of a higher top end.


In the end, only the hunter knows what works best for him/her. I'll not fault a person for their own preferences. And I am not critical of them, either.




-- John

 

[Onesiphorus]

I'm quite sure nobody needs to explain why they use iron or glass. Get over yourself and welcome to the forum.

 

[mainmech48]

IMO, some folks go to the range to practice their shooting and other folks go to develop their Marksmanship. Very different things, again just MO.

The late Col. Cooper said it best, I think: "The test of Marksmanship isn't what you can do once; it's what you can do on demand." I'd add "from any position supported only by a sling and your body", but that's just my impending Geezerhood talking.

Optics or not doesn't matter much to me; just hits.

 

[bogie]

Any decent sniper will look to shoot from a supported position.

I shoot benchrest. Some of y'all are probably looking down your noses at me right now. I can shoot crawling on the ground like a lizard, bound into all sorts of stiffening gear (to approximate a rest...), but I don't really like doing so...

 

[Tarvis]

Well, Krolden, you kicked the bee hive. Your rant was pretty much answered in the first 4 or 5 posts. If you are doing any sort of load development or sighting in, you shoot from a bench if you have one. Beyond that, some people just like shooting from a bench, just as you like shooting without one.


To each his own.

 

[shootr]

Well, I shoot from a bench when I'm playing around, but I shoot from positions was well. At my range, you have to qualify to shoot positions and most folks don't seem to bother.

As for optics - I can (and do) use peeps, but my days shooting with regular iron sights are over. It's "age and eyes." Once you get a little older, you'll understand.

 

[JohnBT]

"Shot my first deer with it at age 11, 44 years ago, sitting on the ground shooting off a tree limb "

Thank goodness, somebody here older than me. I see you were taught the right way to shoot => supported. Standing is the last option because it is the least accurate. Nobody in my family had enough money in the '50s to buy a scope.

As for me, I shoot off a bench and buy some expensive stuff because I like to. OTOH, my only AR is iron sights only. In a sad development, my Marlin Mountie finally got a little scope stuck on it after 45 years because I couldn't see the sights anymore.

Speaking of stuff I don't need, I don't need the computer I just ordered that should be built by Thursday. I do need a new computer but not the one I ordered. Much like some expensive guns, an Intel Q9450 / Core 2 Quad processor with 4GB of ram and an nVidia 9xxxsomethingorother video card is a little bit of overkill for my needs, but what the heck. I might have to upgrade my FiOS service.

John

 

[JohnBT]

Heh, heh. Oops. You're not older than me. Brain lock here. I've got you by a year or 3.

John

 

[MCgunner]

ROFL!

 

[sarduy]

i don't really care if a person use a bench or not, if that's what he/she likes so be it, but i don't use a bench because in a SHTF, HD or SD scenario i don't have time to set a bench.

now if you feel that a bench will work for you, for the love of god use one, because all i want is a safe shooter next to me.

 

[Joe Demko]

I just got back from the range, and like many other times I go I witnessed the same things again and again.

Since it seems that none of those other shooters were doing anything unsafe, it strikes me that you most likely had business of your own that you could have been minding.

 

[krolden]

Okay, WOW!

I didn't expect so many responses to a rant! The input is interesting and has made me definately think.

Some points brought up, yes they are your toys and you can play with them as you please. I can understand the hand loading argument, testing the rifle, our setting up an optic. But other than that I still question repeatedly shooting from a bench. I do think it becomes a crutch.

My opinion is that pistols are rifles where made as tools, and as such should be used and practiced with as such. So I try to practice what I would do if I was actually hunting, shooting coyotes, or in a real situation.

As for the optic argument. I've heard that optics are faster than iron sights many times. I tend to disagree just a bit but maybe I'm old school (and I'm under 30).

I can understand shooting from support, but I mean REALISTIC support. I doubt I will ever engage game or a threat from my office, so shooting from a chair/bench combo just seems silly. No offense to anyone. Thanks for all the interesting replies. I will spend some more time reading, only got to 75% of them so far.

 

[MCgunner]

I don't take off hand shots at game with handguns. Therefore, I practice from a rest with a handgun. The contender is neat because I have a rubber pachmayr fore stock on it that pads it on a gun rest. My field rest practice with it is either off a board laid on a bench, simulates my tripod stand, or from shooting stix.

Like I say, I have .22s to plink with. I most often sit down at the bench to shoot my high powered rifles, like to shoot sub MOA groups, makes me happy.

I have never carried a rifle for self defense. I use a .38 in the house, a pocket pistol out of the house (rifles aren't very comfortable in a pocket) and have a shotgun in the house. My rifles are strictly hunting weapons or range toys. I don't do ANY long gun defensive drills of any kind. I carry a handgun and I do my defensive shooting with handguns. I'm good enough with a shotgun to kill a limit of doves in an afternoon. I think I can handle the marksmanship part of a confrontation with it. If you don't hunt, you wouldn't understand, I guess. I just have never even entertained the thought of a rifle as a defensive weapon, period, so why worry about defensive scenarios with it? I have done handgun courses, shot a lot of IDPA and other action matches, and even had a NRA instructors certification for a while in handgun and rifle. I taught the 4H kids a few times when my daughter was little.

 

[JWarren]

krolden wrote:

I didn't expect so many responses to a rant!

As a general rule, "Rants" about what other people do that does not affect you or any other person have a tendency to get the responses you get.

As I see it, I wouldn't expect any of you to critique my sex life with my wife behind closed doors either.

Observations, however, will usually get objective responses.

...And to extend the them of my sex life with my wife, I will probably take a bow.


-- John