Reason for the Chief Special configuration?
- Thread starter TheProf
- Start date
- Status
Guillermo
member
a clairvoyant man, a liar or a fool expresses knowledge of things that he has no way of knowing.
Guillermo
member
Thank you for identifying which one you are.
M2 Carbine
member
Jim H. Good post.
I shoot this once in a whole but not enough to get my time consistantly under 5 seconds. I may be doing it wrong anyhow.
I took the 5 inches to mean the shots must be inside a 5 inch target (actually I use 3 3/4 inches as a maximum because I didn't have a 5 inch jar lid to draw the circles when I made up a bunch of targets, and I like to make things a little more difficult
)I seldom break the 5 seconds with all 5 shots inside the (3 3/4 inch) circle but most of the time would break the 5 seconds if the requirement was 5 shots within 5 inches ANYWHERE on the 8.5x11 inch paper.
Which is correct for this drill?
About the laser.
My timed low light laser shooting is almost exactly the same as my daytime iron sight shooting.............
......except with the laser I can make some shots I couldn't make without it.
David E and Guillermo,
Is this thread really important enough to show you ass to everyone on this site; when you start waxing philosophical it is time to take a deep breath.
I enjoyed reading both your points of view and find reasonableness in both. Relax a little, enjoy the holiday season, and agree to disagree. As my coach use to say "it's time to shake hands and walk away".
Is this thread really important enough to show you ass to everyone on this site; when you start waxing philosophical it is time to take a deep breath.
I enjoyed reading both your points of view and find reasonableness in both. Relax a little, enjoy the holiday season, and agree to disagree. As my coach use to say "it's time to shake hands and walk away".
jfh
Member.
About the "correct version" of Old Fuff's Quad Five drill--
I don't think there is a correct version re the target diameter. Except for breaking the ideas beginning shooters have about how to shoot carry guns well.
IIRC, the parameter of a five-inch group was to replicate the nominal size of the human heart. But, whatever the size, the purpose of no target circle is to 1) reduce issues of grip to (later) discussions of heeling, pulling, etc., and 2) help break the tyranny of our (typical) well-ingrained mindsets of 'shooting accurately'. The last time I taught the NRA 'First shots' / Basic class, we started with BB / pellet handguns with blank paper--it's that kind of exercise.
The "Successive Approximations" notion is what I added to the drill--IIRC. I'm a long-ago teacher; certain educational concepts for how to learn things have stayed with me. Again, its incorporation allows one to mentally reinforce large and fine motor discriminations while working to build confidence in objective criteria. Googling ought to bring up more information without stumbling into stoopid educationese.
Some years ago, I remember reading that it took at least 500 repetitions to beigin getting a complex-motor / muscle action to our subconscious--and that was for basic attempts at fast-and-safe draw. That's the reason I added in the repetitions notion.
Just remember that the "key" concept is to change only one variable at a time--and to think about the concept you want to reinforce, but not too much....
Jim H.
I don't think there is a correct version re the target diameter. Except for breaking the ideas beginning shooters have about how to shoot carry guns well.
IIRC, the parameter of a five-inch group was to replicate the nominal size of the human heart. But, whatever the size, the purpose of no target circle is to 1) reduce issues of grip to (later) discussions of heeling, pulling, etc., and 2) help break the tyranny of our (typical) well-ingrained mindsets of 'shooting accurately'. The last time I taught the NRA 'First shots' / Basic class, we started with BB / pellet handguns with blank paper--it's that kind of exercise.
The "Successive Approximations" notion is what I added to the drill--IIRC. I'm a long-ago teacher; certain educational concepts for how to learn things have stayed with me. Again, its incorporation allows one to mentally reinforce large and fine motor discriminations while working to build confidence in objective criteria. Googling ought to bring up more information without stumbling into stoopid educationese.
Some years ago, I remember reading that it took at least 500 repetitions to beigin getting a complex-motor / muscle action to our subconscious--and that was for basic attempts at fast-and-safe draw. That's the reason I added in the repetitions notion.
Just remember that the "key" concept is to change only one variable at a time--and to think about the concept you want to reinforce, but not too much....
Jim H.
Last edited:
Marshall
Member
My God,
I've never seen someone more bent on putting people down simply for preferring a J-Frame with an exposed hammer.
I'm quite embarressed for him.
I've never seen someone more bent on putting people down simply for preferring a J-Frame with an exposed hammer.
I'm quite embarressed for him.
Guillermo
member
Good advice Hinton. Sadly I have had experience dealing with people that make stuff up in order to support their opinion.
Smiling and retreating is a sound strategy.
Smiling and retreating is a sound strategy.
Guillermo
member
Marshall, the sad thing is that I have, in the real world, had occasion where I benefited from having an exposed hammer on my self defense weapon. I am not a superstar at the gun games but used to be in an industry and a state that was rife with armed robbers.
These days I am better prepared and thankfully live and work in a much better municipality and industry. I pray to God that I never HAVE to clear leather again. And when I have a revolver on my hip it WILL be capable of single action.
These days I am better prepared and thankfully live and work in a much better municipality and industry. I pray to God that I never HAVE to clear leather again. And when I have a revolver on my hip it WILL be capable of single action.
Marshall
Member
Guillermo,
No explaination is needed.
Whatever educated people do best with is best for them.
Happy New Year you and yours.
No explaination is needed.
Whatever educated people do best with is best for them.
Happy New Year you and yours.
David E
Member
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2008
- Messages
- 7,459
Ah, ok. Accuse the other guy of lying or making stuff up so you can ignore the points made! That's easier than dealing with the valid points while overlooking the fact that you have no good answer. I see plenty of guys like this...........mostly online!
These are usually the same folks that have a reading comprehension problem. I didn't say the SA/DA guns are worthless. Nor did I put anyone down for having one.
When I read:
I simply stated that there is another advantage: When using a gun for defensive purposes, with sufficient practice, a 642 with proper grips, is easier to shoot accurately at speed. (I'll redefine 'speed' as less than 1/2 second per shot) This is because there is less muzzle flip due to a higher grip acheived on the frame. To argue to the contrary is to dispute the laws of physics.
Somehow, the Hukt on Foniks crowd took that to mean that there is no place for the SA/DA guns.
My comment has everything to do with defensive use at 7 yds or closer. If you don't use your SA/DA for defense, or don't expect any encounters closer than 7 yds, or are more concerned with tight little groups, or think that one full second (or longer) per shot is fast enough, then this 642 advantage does not apply to you.
So instead of casting insults at me over something that doesn't apply to you, or over something I never said, go shoot your gun some more!
That's easier than dealing with the valid points while overlooking the fact that you have no good answer. I see plenty of guys like this...........mostly online!These are usually the same folks that have a reading comprehension problem. I didn't say the SA/DA guns are worthless. Nor did I put anyone down for having one.
When I read:
I simply stated that there is another advantage: When using a gun for defensive purposes, with sufficient practice, a 642 with proper grips, is easier to shoot accurately at speed. (I'll redefine 'speed' as less than 1/2 second per shot) This is because there is less muzzle flip due to a higher grip acheived on the frame. To argue to the contrary is to dispute the laws of physics.
Somehow, the Hukt on Foniks crowd took that to mean that there is no place for the SA/DA guns.
My comment has everything to do with defensive use at 7 yds or closer. If you don't use your SA/DA for defense, or don't expect any encounters closer than 7 yds, or are more concerned with tight little groups, or think that one full second (or longer) per shot is fast enough, then this 642 advantage does not apply to you.
So instead of casting insults at me over something that doesn't apply to you, or over something I never said, go shoot your gun some more!
Guillermo:
While we may discuss and argue about the advantages or disadvantages, and merits or demerits of double-action-only revolvers; the fact of the matter is that there is a place for both DAO and double-action-with-single-action mode handguns, both pistols and revolvers. While for most users and most uses the choice of both trigger pull options is probably best, there are times and uses where the reverse is true. This is why the marketplace is filled with handguns of all kinds that offer a user a wide choice so that they can buy and use whatever they think is best for them, and the fact that someone else picks something different is a moot point.
Over many years I have used handguns of many different makes and models that offered different features. Occasionally I modified some to meet specific purposes and situations. I found these to be what was best for me, but this didn’t make them “the best” for someone else.
Since you prefer revolvers that have both trigger-pull modes by all means stick with them. I would only point out that some of the attractively priced police trade-in revolvers that have been converted to DAO – for reasons they’re former owners considered necessary – can be backward converted to restore the single-action option for those that want it, or left the way they are for those that prefer a revolver that is as it is.
This is not a situation where a certain way is absolutely best for all people, and all uses. It is something where each of us makes a choice based on our own particular experiences and needs. There is no right or wrong to the issue.
While we may discuss and argue about the advantages or disadvantages, and merits or demerits of double-action-only revolvers; the fact of the matter is that there is a place for both DAO and double-action-with-single-action mode handguns, both pistols and revolvers. While for most users and most uses the choice of both trigger pull options is probably best, there are times and uses where the reverse is true. This is why the marketplace is filled with handguns of all kinds that offer a user a wide choice so that they can buy and use whatever they think is best for them, and the fact that someone else picks something different is a moot point.
Over many years I have used handguns of many different makes and models that offered different features. Occasionally I modified some to meet specific purposes and situations. I found these to be what was best for me, but this didn’t make them “the best” for someone else.
Since you prefer revolvers that have both trigger-pull modes by all means stick with them. I would only point out that some of the attractively priced police trade-in revolvers that have been converted to DAO – for reasons they’re former owners considered necessary – can be backward converted to restore the single-action option for those that want it, or left the way they are for those that prefer a revolver that is as it is.
This is not a situation where a certain way is absolutely best for all people, and all uses. It is something where each of us makes a choice based on our own particular experiences and needs. There is no right or wrong to the issue.
tipoc
Member
- Joined
- Mar 9, 2006
- Messages
- 3,563
David E. going out of your way to attempt to provoke or insult people seems more low road than high, at least to me. You are doing just that and oughta reconsider.
Other than that a useful discussion. When it comes to defensive carry a person should, I think, carry the piece they shoot best and feel most comfortable with.
tipoc
Other than that a useful discussion. When it comes to defensive carry a person should, I think, carry the piece they shoot best and feel most comfortable with.
tipoc
David E
Member
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2008
- Messages
- 7,459
tipoc,
It is not my intent to provoke or insult people. Neither is it my intent to allow others to do that to me unchallenged. I notice that most of those insults are because they misread my post(s) or they are attacking something I never said.
As I've already said, if the 642 advantage does not apply to your set of circumstances, then disregard it.
It is not my intent to provoke or insult people. Neither is it my intent to allow others to do that to me unchallenged. I notice that most of those insults are because they misread my post(s) or they are attacking something I never said.
As I've already said, if the 642 advantage does not apply to your set of circumstances, then disregard it.
Tinman357
Member
David E.
You make some good points. But you're pretty abrasive about it. I have both DOA and DA/SA revolvers. Both have their place in my personal carry line-up. I'm not at your level of zen mastery as you have so humbly advertised yourself to be, but I'm still alive where some aren't.
You obviously have training and experience. I appreciate your knowledge. I get the (heavy) hints that you teach a self defense school of some sort. I'm currently looking to get more civilian training. Could you provide the name of this school? I want to ensure that it is off my list of possibles. Smooth off some of the grit and it would be a little easier to hear what you have to say.
My personal experience on this forum has taught me that how you say something is as important as what you say. The correct intent of my posts rarely get through. If you want your message to get through then make it desirable to be heard. I'd pay big money for lessons from Rob Leatham but wouldn't take those same lessons for free if he treated me like an ignorant child.
IOW you ain't the only horse on the track.
You make some good points. But you're pretty abrasive about it. I have both DOA and DA/SA revolvers. Both have their place in my personal carry line-up. I'm not at your level of zen mastery as you have so humbly advertised yourself to be, but I'm still alive where some aren't.
You obviously have training and experience. I appreciate your knowledge. I get the (heavy) hints that you teach a self defense school of some sort. I'm currently looking to get more civilian training. Could you provide the name of this school? I want to ensure that it is off my list of possibles. Smooth off some of the grit and it would be a little easier to hear what you have to say.
My personal experience on this forum has taught me that how you say something is as important as what you say. The correct intent of my posts rarely get through. If you want your message to get through then make it desirable to be heard. I'd pay big money for lessons from Rob Leatham but wouldn't take those same lessons for free if he treated me like an ignorant child.
IOW you ain't the only horse on the track.
Guillermo
member
Old Fuff,
As you and everyone that reads our exchanges know, I have immense respect for your knowledge and appreciate your willingness to share it so freely. In fact I have suggested that you not share it “freely” but rather write a book so that you might profit from your encyclopedic knowledge.
On the incredibly rare times when we disagree (I can think of one) you present your case within parameters that make your opinion worthy of respect even without your outstanding track record.
It is important to recognize that you do not accuse people of saying things that they didn’t (“overcome the laws of physics”) or suggest that you know how often someone practices (“Some of us practice, some of us don't”) or claim that you know another’s skill level (“I'm sure there is a vast difference in ability!”). You also do not put standards that are unreasonable and suggest that only quickest of the people in gun gaming are fast (1/2 second between shots “and we're not talking "fast" anymore”).
I have never told you not to carry a DAO snub, despite our disagreement on the subject. I am quite sure that you are quite adroit at the operation of your carry guns.
In fact I do not remember ever telling anyone what they should do. This is still, at least kind of, America (Amerika) and they for now have the right to carry what they want.
And of course you are right that there is no perfect answer. Bob Mundon is deadly carrying a single action where I would not be. Apparently David E thinks that his “choking up” by a percentage of an inch on his “hammerless” snub gives him an advantage and claims to have trophies to prove it.
In a perfect world we carry what we want. And I am sure that a lot of those cops were not carrying that they wanted when they were forced by their departments attorneys to carry cobbled up DAO revolvers. Still, makes for some cheap wheel guns now that they are carrying Glocks.
As you and everyone that reads our exchanges know, I have immense respect for your knowledge and appreciate your willingness to share it so freely. In fact I have suggested that you not share it “freely” but rather write a book so that you might profit from your encyclopedic knowledge.
On the incredibly rare times when we disagree (I can think of one) you present your case within parameters that make your opinion worthy of respect even without your outstanding track record.
It is important to recognize that you do not accuse people of saying things that they didn’t (“overcome the laws of physics”) or suggest that you know how often someone practices (“Some of us practice, some of us don't”) or claim that you know another’s skill level (“I'm sure there is a vast difference in ability!”). You also do not put standards that are unreasonable and suggest that only quickest of the people in gun gaming are fast (1/2 second between shots “and we're not talking "fast" anymore”).
I have never told you not to carry a DAO snub, despite our disagreement on the subject. I am quite sure that you are quite adroit at the operation of your carry guns.
In fact I do not remember ever telling anyone what they should do. This is still, at least kind of, America (Amerika) and they for now have the right to carry what they want.
And of course you are right that there is no perfect answer. Bob Mundon is deadly carrying a single action where I would not be. Apparently David E thinks that his “choking up” by a percentage of an inch on his “hammerless” snub gives him an advantage and claims to have trophies to prove it.
In a perfect world we carry what we want. And I am sure that a lot of those cops were not carrying that they wanted when they were forced by their departments attorneys to carry cobbled up DAO revolvers. Still, makes for some cheap wheel guns now that they are carrying Glocks.
easyg
Member
I like having the single-action option.
I suppose a woman who carries her handgun loose in her purse (without a holster) might be better off choosing a concealed hammer revolver.
I suppose a woman who carries her handgun loose in her purse (without a holster) might be better off choosing a concealed hammer revolver.
M2 Carbine
member
So, continuing to use a 5 inch circle as a must hit area is still correct for that drill.
When I print up some more of those silhouette targets I believe I'll change the 4x6 inch elliptical circle to a 5 inch round circle, to continue using the targets for fast shooting up close and distance shooting.
Guillermo
member
or one who contemplates firing from a pocket
jfh
Member.
"...So, ...use(ing) a 5 inch circle as a must hit area is still correct....
Almost, but not quite. That's an accurate statement for most experienced shooters--IMO. It is NOT the way to use this drill for new / novice / inexperienced shooters who are either indoctrinated or practiced in "accuracy" shooting.
The objective criteria of the target and its location is not the lesson's object / goal. The goal of the lesson is to help that novice carry shooter break 'habits' or conscious decisions / choices that will delay their / his / her response inappropriately. IOW, taking time to bring your (j-frame) carry gun up with its fixed sights and getting all sighting elements properly aligned, then taking-a-deep-breath-and-beginning-to-gently-increase-pressure-on-the-trigger-and-thinking-about-trigger-finger-joint-placement-on-the-trigger is going to get you killed. Novices--and women (IMO)--have much less emotional baggage and authority notions when they begin to shoot. So, I am probably overstating the issues here.
But, back to the subject at hand (at least for us, in this discussion).
The initial goal is to acquaint the shooter to the criteria in self-defense shooting. Parameters are limited (e.g., start at five yards, etc.)--but if varied one at a time, the shooter becomes self-correcting. That is, if they are a scared shooter, merely re-doing the drill (while not focussing on being scared, but focussed on, for example, merely getting the shots on that whole piece of paper) builds confidence, and presumably less fear. Similarly, if they have gotten the shots all on the paper, they can now focus on speeding things up....and build more confidence.
In my learning paradigm, the shooter sets the goals to work on, and the parameters for those goals are the constraints the shooter works in on self-improvement. For advanced shooters, yes, the circle is a must hit area--but that is fairly far down the road in acquisition of all firearms self-defense skills, IMO.
Jim H.
Almost, but not quite. That's an accurate statement for most experienced shooters--IMO. It is NOT the way to use this drill for new / novice / inexperienced shooters who are either indoctrinated or practiced in "accuracy" shooting.
The objective criteria of the target and its location is not the lesson's object / goal. The goal of the lesson is to help that novice carry shooter break 'habits' or conscious decisions / choices that will delay their / his / her response inappropriately. IOW, taking time to bring your (j-frame) carry gun up with its fixed sights and getting all sighting elements properly aligned, then taking-a-deep-breath-and-beginning-to-gently-increase-pressure-on-the-trigger-and-thinking-about-trigger-finger-joint-placement-on-the-trigger is going to get you killed. Novices--and women (IMO)--have much less emotional baggage and authority notions when they begin to shoot. So, I am probably overstating the issues here.
But, back to the subject at hand (at least for us, in this discussion).
The initial goal is to acquaint the shooter to the criteria in self-defense shooting. Parameters are limited (e.g., start at five yards, etc.)--but if varied one at a time, the shooter becomes self-correcting. That is, if they are a scared shooter, merely re-doing the drill (while not focussing on being scared, but focussed on, for example, merely getting the shots on that whole piece of paper) builds confidence, and presumably less fear. Similarly, if they have gotten the shots all on the paper, they can now focus on speeding things up....and build more confidence.
In my learning paradigm, the shooter sets the goals to work on, and the parameters for those goals are the constraints the shooter works in on self-improvement. For advanced shooters, yes, the circle is a must hit area--but that is fairly far down the road in acquisition of all firearms self-defense skills, IMO.
Jim H.
David E
Member
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2008
- Messages
- 7,459
Maybe it does come across as abrasive. If this discussion were on the phone or in person, you wouldn't think that at all.
Still, when certain people refuse to read what I actually wrote, attack things I didn't write, then call me a liar, etc, I can't take them seriously. It just proves that they have no real response to the valid points I raised.
Guillermo
member
your reading comprehension is abysmal
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
