I was curious if anyone focuses like this at close range. First off im learning how to completely focus on the front sight with both eyes open at close range. Im use to shooting with one eye at 25yds for groups. I never tried completely focusing on the front sight up close before because it seems in a possible self defense situation if im focused on the front sight and the BG is a blur, i cant see if he is pulling a gun or what (assuming it hasnt escalated to actual fear for life yet). The way i have been doing it was (@10yds-less) was to focus on the target with both eyes open and keep the front sight a blur. I can see the front sight but im not completely focused on it. I have no problems hitting centermass like this. Ive recently started trying to focus completely on the FS to see the comparison. Im just having a hard time focusing back and forth and still maintaing the speed i had with target focus.I think its just a matter of training the eyes with dryfire repeatedly til it becomes second nature.
Quest on front sight focus at close range
- Thread starter Reyn
- Start date
- Status
I use the Shooting to Live method at ranges under 5 yards. Raise the gun to eye level, and fire the instant it's horizontal. You basically look "through" the back of the gun, using the entire thing as a sight. Can get about 1-2" groups at that range, on a good day, with each 2-3 shot string being fired from the draw.
Like RyanM said, at 5yds or less, you should be able to stay focused on the target and still hit in about a 4"-6" group (or less) center mass. At 7-10 yds quickly shift to a front sight focus for a split second to verify sight alignment.
With lots of practice you can get reliable COM hits at 10yds with just a target focus, but you have to start in close and work back. That is actually a good exercise; start at 3 yards and fire 2 rounds as fast as you can focusing on the target. Step back to 5yds and repeat. Step back to 7yds...then 10yds etc. Keep going until one or both shots isn't in the vital area. You have just established YOUR max effective point shooting range.
With lots of practice you can get reliable COM hits at 10yds with just a target focus, but you have to start in close and work back. That is actually a good exercise; start at 3 yards and fire 2 rounds as fast as you can focusing on the target. Step back to 5yds and repeat. Step back to 7yds...then 10yds etc. Keep going until one or both shots isn't in the vital area. You have just established YOUR max effective point shooting range.
geekWithA.45
Moderator Emeritus
At less than 5 yards, you should be shooting from the retention position, lest your sidearm suddenly become the bad guys.
Edit: Well, it depends. 5 yards and closing? Consider retention. Less than 10 FEET? Most def, retention.
Remember, most gunfights take place at arms length.
Edit: Well, it depends. 5 yards and closing? Consider retention. Less than 10 FEET? Most def, retention.
Remember, most gunfights take place at arms length.
"While you may initially be focusing on the BG once you have decided to shoot you always then focus on the front sight regardless of the range !!"
That's one of many techniques.
There are generally 2 schools of thought on this subject, those that use the sights in one way shape or form, and those that don't.
I have been a sighted fire proponent for years, however, after experimenting with unsighted fire techniques, I had to admit that they are an option for the shooter at close range.
Do some research on both, try them, and do what works best for you, and what you are comfortable with.
I did some research on Applegates' point shooting technique, and found it to be effective for me out to about 5m-7m, beyond which, I feel more comfortable using quick aimed fire. Alot of that has to do with training though.
As far as focus goes, once a threat has been identified, it is a common technique to shift your focus to the front sight post and aquire some type of sight picture to engage your target. Everything will be slightly blurred as you look over your rear sight aperture and focus on the front sight to fire center mass shots at your target.
Again, do some research and train on the various techniques that are out there. Pick the one that you are comfortable with, and gives you the best compromise between speed and accuracy.
That's one of many techniques.
There are generally 2 schools of thought on this subject, those that use the sights in one way shape or form, and those that don't.
I have been a sighted fire proponent for years, however, after experimenting with unsighted fire techniques, I had to admit that they are an option for the shooter at close range.
Do some research on both, try them, and do what works best for you, and what you are comfortable with.
I did some research on Applegates' point shooting technique, and found it to be effective for me out to about 5m-7m, beyond which, I feel more comfortable using quick aimed fire. Alot of that has to do with training though.
As far as focus goes, once a threat has been identified, it is a common technique to shift your focus to the front sight post and aquire some type of sight picture to engage your target. Everything will be slightly blurred as you look over your rear sight aperture and focus on the front sight to fire center mass shots at your target.
Again, do some research and train on the various techniques that are out there. Pick the one that you are comfortable with, and gives you the best compromise between speed and accuracy.
I agree that at ranges of three yards or less, you should be shooting from retention aka step 3.
At all other ranges, any range where the gun is in front of my face, I am focusing on the front sight (or am suposed to be focusing on the front sight).
A couple months ago I took a class called Handgun Combat Master Prep. The purpose of the class was to prepare you to pass the Handgun Combat Master test that Chuck Taylor came up with in the early 80s. The criteria is listed many places but I think this webpage makes it easy to see: http://www.defenseassociates.com/faq.htm#q6 You will note that most of the test takes place at less than 10 yards. The class I took advocates shooting with one eye closed and focusing on the front sight for every aimed shot. One of the "tricks" they teach in the course is to close your non-dominant eye when you begin your draw stoke and train yourself to focus your eye at an intermediate distance so that when the gun comes up to your eye, your eye is focused at the distance of the front sight. I am finding this very difficult to do, but I honestly believe you can do it with enough dry practice time under your belt.
Keep in mind when viewing the times for that master's test that the time includes the turning of the targets, so, if the time is 1 second that means that the target is facing 90 degrees from you, when the target begins to turn you react drawing your gun. So, even though the time is listed as 1 second, you really have less than that to engage the target. I am a believer in using my sights for every shot (other than retention). If I can react, draw, and fire an aimed shot in less than 1 second then I don't see any reason why I shouldn't use my sights for every shot. In fact, during this class I didn't have much trouble getting my shots off in time. The problem wasn't time. The problem was accuracy. I lost too many points to bad shots. Shots that either were not in the "A" zone or shots that didn't even land in the scoring rings. In the portion of the test called "small targets" and the part called "Hostage situation" and the part called "odd angles", you are NOT shooting at a silhouette target that is standing facing you. The target is smaller than that. These targets are intended to represent situations where you can't see the whole bad guy. He might be partially behind cover, he might be partially behind a hostage, or you might only be able to see his knee cap. Again, accuracy matters and you might even need pinpoint accuracy. This is why I personally feel that you need to practice with a focus toward speed AS WELL AS accuracy and never settle for where you are now in either aspect of shooting. You can always shoot faster and you can always shoot more accurately. Train to always improve both. You never know for sure if your skill in either catagory will be enough to win. If you feel that you can shoot good enough right now to hit an adversary COM at five yards by not using the sights, ask yourself if you can shoot well enough to hit him in the head with your wife or kids standing in front of his face and only a small portion of his head is visible ? You get one shot and one shot only. And it has to be quick. The bad guy isn't going to give you and extra .3 seconds to ensure your sight picture/sight alignment/trigger control: you need to make that one shot count or your loved one dies. If you can't, then you need to train more and very possibly find a more accurate technique. And, if you find a more accurate technique, why wouldn't you use it all the time ?
When training, try to get away from the idea that the target has to be in full view of you. Anyone with any sense is going to be moving and/or behind cover. Even if they are not moving or behind cover they might not be facing you directly. They might also be behind concealment without even thinking about it. What if they are standing on the opposite side of a car or something. Point is, training to hit COM or the "A" zone of a silhouette isn't good enough.
A brief disclaimer: the term Handgun Combat Master is simply a name for that particular test. Obviously there is no combat involved in the test. I am not sure why Mr. Taylor decided to use the word "combat" but I would imagine it was simply a word used to describe combat type shooting as opposed to bullseye type shooting (this was before IDPA, IPSC etc). I don't think he is implying that someone who can pass this test will be able to do anything special in actual combat. The people who taught the class I took made it clear at the beginning of the class that some of the stuff we were going to learn had actual street applications and other stuff was simply a gimmick used to pass this test (which is the goal of the class). During the class they commented with every new technique whether in their opinion the technique had any application outside the classroom.
At all other ranges, any range where the gun is in front of my face, I am focusing on the front sight (or am suposed to be focusing on the front sight).
A couple months ago I took a class called Handgun Combat Master Prep. The purpose of the class was to prepare you to pass the Handgun Combat Master test that Chuck Taylor came up with in the early 80s. The criteria is listed many places but I think this webpage makes it easy to see: http://www.defenseassociates.com/faq.htm#q6 You will note that most of the test takes place at less than 10 yards. The class I took advocates shooting with one eye closed and focusing on the front sight for every aimed shot. One of the "tricks" they teach in the course is to close your non-dominant eye when you begin your draw stoke and train yourself to focus your eye at an intermediate distance so that when the gun comes up to your eye, your eye is focused at the distance of the front sight. I am finding this very difficult to do, but I honestly believe you can do it with enough dry practice time under your belt.
Keep in mind when viewing the times for that master's test that the time includes the turning of the targets, so, if the time is 1 second that means that the target is facing 90 degrees from you, when the target begins to turn you react drawing your gun. So, even though the time is listed as 1 second, you really have less than that to engage the target. I am a believer in using my sights for every shot (other than retention). If I can react, draw, and fire an aimed shot in less than 1 second then I don't see any reason why I shouldn't use my sights for every shot. In fact, during this class I didn't have much trouble getting my shots off in time. The problem wasn't time. The problem was accuracy. I lost too many points to bad shots. Shots that either were not in the "A" zone or shots that didn't even land in the scoring rings. In the portion of the test called "small targets" and the part called "Hostage situation" and the part called "odd angles", you are NOT shooting at a silhouette target that is standing facing you. The target is smaller than that. These targets are intended to represent situations where you can't see the whole bad guy. He might be partially behind cover, he might be partially behind a hostage, or you might only be able to see his knee cap. Again, accuracy matters and you might even need pinpoint accuracy. This is why I personally feel that you need to practice with a focus toward speed AS WELL AS accuracy and never settle for where you are now in either aspect of shooting. You can always shoot faster and you can always shoot more accurately. Train to always improve both. You never know for sure if your skill in either catagory will be enough to win. If you feel that you can shoot good enough right now to hit an adversary COM at five yards by not using the sights, ask yourself if you can shoot well enough to hit him in the head with your wife or kids standing in front of his face and only a small portion of his head is visible ? You get one shot and one shot only. And it has to be quick. The bad guy isn't going to give you and extra .3 seconds to ensure your sight picture/sight alignment/trigger control: you need to make that one shot count or your loved one dies. If you can't, then you need to train more and very possibly find a more accurate technique. And, if you find a more accurate technique, why wouldn't you use it all the time ?
When training, try to get away from the idea that the target has to be in full view of you. Anyone with any sense is going to be moving and/or behind cover. Even if they are not moving or behind cover they might not be facing you directly. They might also be behind concealment without even thinking about it. What if they are standing on the opposite side of a car or something. Point is, training to hit COM or the "A" zone of a silhouette isn't good enough.
A brief disclaimer: the term Handgun Combat Master is simply a name for that particular test. Obviously there is no combat involved in the test. I am not sure why Mr. Taylor decided to use the word "combat" but I would imagine it was simply a word used to describe combat type shooting as opposed to bullseye type shooting (this was before IDPA, IPSC etc). I don't think he is implying that someone who can pass this test will be able to do anything special in actual combat. The people who taught the class I took made it clear at the beginning of the class that some of the stuff we were going to learn had actual street applications and other stuff was simply a gimmick used to pass this test (which is the goal of the class). During the class they commented with every new technique whether in their opinion the technique had any application outside the classroom.
There have been less than 30 people ever pass it since it was thunk up, almost 30 years ago (this isn't to say that there arn't more people who COULD pass it, that is just how many people who have tried, have passed it).
The class I took was at Front Sight. They give the class like 3-4 times a year. There are people in that class that have taken the test 150 times and never passed it. Most of the people in the class take it every time it is offered and don't take any other class.
FWIW I think they said that Front Sight has something like 7-8 of the people who have passed the test.
Also, that page states that all times are by stop watch. That of course now has been replaced with the electronic shot timer and turning targets.
The class I took was at Front Sight. They give the class like 3-4 times a year. There are people in that class that have taken the test 150 times and never passed it. Most of the people in the class take it every time it is offered and don't take any other class.
FWIW I think they said that Front Sight has something like 7-8 of the people who have passed the test.
Also, that page states that all times are by stop watch. That of course now has been replaced with the electronic shot timer and turning targets.
TallPine
Member
I was doing some experimenting yesterday ... holding the revolver slightly below eye level so the entire front sight was visible and focusing mostly on the target (gallon can). Basically I wasn't using the rear sights at all, just looking down the top of the barrel at a very flat angle.
It seemed to me that I was hitting the can just about as well as trying to align front and rear sights, and it sure was a darn sight faster and more reflexive than traditional aiming.
I'm not much good at pure point shooting at all ... guess I didn't throw enough rocks and balls as a kid
I dunno if one gets better with practice, but it seems like a awful waste of ammo...
It seemed to me that I was hitting the can just about as well as trying to align front and rear sights, and it sure was a darn sight faster and more reflexive than traditional aiming.
I'm not much good at pure point shooting at all ... guess I didn't throw enough rocks and balls as a kid
I dunno if one gets better with practice, but it seems like a awful waste of ammo...Like anything you can get better with practice. If you have time to practice a lot, then you can be just as fast and more accurate using the sights. Point shooting can get you to an acceptable level of accuracy (for combat, say 6") at ranges of 7yds or less as fast as you can bring the gun up and squeeze the trigger with a lot less practice.
No point shooting advocate I have ever run accross has ever said that sights aren't important, just knowing when to use them and when not to. Even if you are in the camp that can shoot as fast with sights as without, there will be times when you may have to PS, like from retention or if you do not have night sights and it is low light. Furthermore, both eyes open and focused on the threat is the best way to see the threat in low light. Hard to keep track of a blurry dude in the darkness with one eye shut.
No point shooting advocate I have ever run accross has ever said that sights aren't important, just knowing when to use them and when not to. Even if you are in the camp that can shoot as fast with sights as without, there will be times when you may have to PS, like from retention or if you do not have night sights and it is low light. Furthermore, both eyes open and focused on the threat is the best way to see the threat in low light. Hard to keep track of a blurry dude in the darkness with one eye shut.
If I could shoot a bow at 25 yards with acceptable grouping - without any sights to focus on - one can certainly shoot a pistol at 10 yards without focusing on anything in particular.
Practice until you are confident. Wax bullets may be a cheap and hassle-free way to do that, especially with a revolver. All you need is paraffine and primers since cases last forever, so it comes to 2 cents a shot and can be done in a backyard or even indoors.
miko
Practice until you are confident. Wax bullets may be a cheap and hassle-free way to do that, especially with a revolver. All you need is paraffine and primers since cases last forever, so it comes to 2 cents a shot and can be done in a backyard or even indoors.
miko
Shooting a bow, a slingshot, a blowpipe, throwing a stone or a javelin - all involve putting a projectile on target without employing sights, just by motor memory.
Pistol has a great advantage over all those by being specifically designed for "pointability" and having relatively flat and uniform trajectory.
I believe that with sufficient amount of practice, most people should be able to shoot instinctively - without using sights - at practical distances.
The problem is the amount of practice required - ammo and wear expense, cleaning and having to go to the range. Fortunately there are ways to practice "pointing" without shooting real bullets - laser, wax bullets, replica airsoft and airguns, etc. that can be done inexpensively and without requiring a range.
miko
Some of those seem to me to be a lot easier to shoot than others.
You can hit tiny objects with a blowgun in a very shot period of time.
I was never good at shooting a bow without sights. Nor have I ever been able to consistently hit anything with a handgun without using the sights beyond close contact ranges.
Of course each person has their own standard of accuracy. As I mentioned in a previous post in this thread, I don't consider hitting the "A" Zone of a silhouette every single time without exception to be good enough. I think you need to be able to consistently shoot better than that with every single shot because you very well may not have that big of an area to shoot at.
You can hit tiny objects with a blowgun in a very shot period of time.
I was never good at shooting a bow without sights. Nor have I ever been able to consistently hit anything with a handgun without using the sights beyond close contact ranges.
Of course each person has their own standard of accuracy. As I mentioned in a previous post in this thread, I don't consider hitting the "A" Zone of a silhouette every single time without exception to be good enough. I think you need to be able to consistently shoot better than that with every single shot because you very well may not have that big of an area to shoot at.
Vern Humphrey
Member
I'm far-sighted in my right (master) eye, so the sights appear hopelessly blurred to me. However, I'm near-sighted in my left eye.
When this condition started to bother me, I re-trained myself to shoot with the left eye. With practice, I was able to achieve a both-eyes-open technique, so I see needle-sharp sights with the left eye and the target with the right.
Try working on shooting both eyes open and see how much you can see with the non-aiming eye -- I think you'll be surprised.
"I never tried completely focusing on the front sight up close before because it seems in a possible self defense situation if im focused on the front sight and the BG is a blur, i cant see if he is pulling a gun or what (assuming it hasnt escalated to actual fear for life yet). "
I have tried to stick with shooting technique so far, but I have to comment on this:
Rule #1 of gun safety says that you do not point a gun at anything you are not willing to destroy. If you have not been presented with the threat of deadly force, you have no business pointing a gun at someone else and achieving a sight picture. If you haven't been presented with the threat of deadly force, YOU are now responsible for escalating this situation into a deadly force incident since YOU have presented HIM with the threat deadly force. Your gun should remain in the holster unless you are threatened with deadly force. If you don't have a holster your gun should be at the low ready. In 21st century America, you can't go around pointing guns at people for no good reason.
I have tried to stick with shooting technique so far, but I have to comment on this:
Rule #1 of gun safety says that you do not point a gun at anything you are not willing to destroy. If you have not been presented with the threat of deadly force, you have no business pointing a gun at someone else and achieving a sight picture. If you haven't been presented with the threat of deadly force, YOU are now responsible for escalating this situation into a deadly force incident since YOU have presented HIM with the threat deadly force. Your gun should remain in the holster unless you are threatened with deadly force. If you don't have a holster your gun should be at the low ready. In 21st century America, you can't go around pointing guns at people for no good reason.
444, I agree with what you say with the exception of im an LEO and when im facing a possible deadly situation im not at low ready.Im pointing COM. Thats why i put in about im focusing on the target because at this point ive trained to see the sights as a blur while focusing on the target to see what he is doing with his hands especially if he is ignoring commands. When my heart is about to jump out of my chest im not about to switch my focus back to the front sight. BUT im wondering if i trained my eyesight to where it was subconscious if its possible to switch the focus so fast as to not make a difference.. Our last shooting was about a month ago and the subject was shot at 13yds.
Well, far be it to tell you how to do your job. But those safety rules have boiled down from a couple hundreds years of using firearms. Cops aren't immune from the safety rules anymore than anyone else. Maybe you can legally point guns at people who are not presenting a lethal threat but I am pretty sure they arn't going to sweep it under the rug if an accident happens and you shoot an unarmed man.
FWIW, at several of the firearms schools I have attended, they have actually discussed this very situation and timed a large group of people to see if it was faster to have the gun at low ready, or pointed in, and the difference was zilch. The whole point of the low ready is that you have the gun out of your line of sight so you can watch the other person's hands.
I never thought about the interesting double standard here. It is perfectly OK for cops to point guns at people who are not currently presenting them with lethal force, but a civilian is committing a crime if he does the same thing.
Typical
FWIW, at several of the firearms schools I have attended, they have actually discussed this very situation and timed a large group of people to see if it was faster to have the gun at low ready, or pointed in, and the difference was zilch. The whole point of the low ready is that you have the gun out of your line of sight so you can watch the other person's hands.
I never thought about the interesting double standard here. It is perfectly OK for cops to point guns at people who are not currently presenting them with lethal force, but a civilian is committing a crime if he does the same thing.
Typical
444, I do not agree with your opinion or that of your firearms training schools. If you want to bash LEOs then you should start your own thread in the legal and political forum. I started this thread to get opinions on the usage of the front sight and other peoples experiences. If you want to contribute great, if you want to change the subject i would appreciate it if you just wouldn't post.
- Status
