Single Action vs. Double Action

[mikemyers]

Hmmm...... now that I think about it, while I could somewhat "see" the sight picture after shooting, this was in SA, as that's all I shot back then. But yes, I could clearly see if the shot was good or bad, before looking at the target.

Because I'm so slow, I think the same trick is working for me now in DA, as both SA and DA take me a long time to actually fire. My trigger finger moves as slowly as I can manage, for both.


Side note:
I went to check this out an hour or so ago, and once again noticed how "tired" my trigger finger gets with the stock springs. I took the gun apart, just enough to replace the main spring and the slide return spring, using the Brownell's (Wolff) spring kit:
Wolff Power Rib Mainspring Type 2 - Reduced Power and
Wolff 14 pound Rebound Spring
The kit came with 13, 14, and 15 pound rebound springs, so I picked the middle choice. Unlike the main spring that came from Wilson (which I still think is wrong, even though they tell me it's not), this Wolff mainspring is a full length spring that fits into the gun just as the stock parts did.

The mainspring tension screw is now fully tightened, and the gun is much easier to shoot. The Trigger Pull Scale averages 8 pounds (+/- .5 pounds).



Back to your comment, I'm trying to visualize what would be happening with a rifle...... is this with metal sights of some type, or a scope? Standing and un-supported? Wow. You must have VERY steady hands and arms!!! It would seem to me that you'd still have a very long "shutter", but I don't know enough about rifle shooting to even make a guess.


Oh, and I should thank all of you guys, along with Jerry and the S&W Manual, for making the spring installation quite simple.

 

[9mmepiphany]

But (and I'd be interested in 9mmE's take on this), I'm not sure it's feasible to get such a crisp "polaroid" shooting DA, nor do I think you need to, even to shoot excellent DA groups.

Since you called, I'll have to confess that I can't always call a handgun shot either. Certainly not in DA as I'm only concerned about the position of the front sight when the shot breaks...I don't even try to track it during the trigger stroke

I often "know" when a shot was bad, but it is a subconscious acknowledgement...what throws me off is when a shot looks good and it isn't.

Interestingly I took a competition class from Ben Stoeger last weekend and found that I could almost always tell when a shot went astray when shooting at a speed beyond my comfort level. When shooting at speed, I often shoot with a soft focus, like opening up a camera aperture, and perceive my sights as opposed to looking at them. In that soft focus, I could see the sights drift off at odd angles if I pushed of pulled a shot... not so much seeing where it went, as it is seeing where it shouldn't have been at the point of release.

It is almost like seeing in the dark...where you only see movement, as opposed to shapes

 

[MrBorland]

Back to your comment, I'm trying to visualize what would be happening with a rifle...... is this with metal sights of some type, or a scope? Standing and un-supported? Wow. You must have VERY steady hands and arms!!!

Here are some pics of how this form of rifle shooting is done in the standing position:

http://www.mrra.org/images/hipower/standing.jpg
http://www.odcmp.org/1007/default.asp?page=USAMU_STANDING

High Power rifle competition is "iron sights only". Optics aren't allowed. The rifles shown in the link (also what I'm shooting) use a front post and a rear aperture. You use your skeletal system for as much support as you can, so the muscles in your arms and hands aren't holding the rifle steady.

It would seem to me that you'd still have a very long "shutter", but I don't know enough about rifle shooting to even make a guess.

Be it revolver or rifle, I'm watching the front sight even during the phase before the trigger pull starts, so I'm thinking of it as a the camera on a cell phone: You can see it's continuously running in real-time, but the act of pulling the trigger actuates a shutter, and records a snapshot. The long DA trigger is a long shutter, and the short rifle trigger is a short shutter, ergo fuzzy and sharp polaroid, respectively.

 

[mikemyers]

http://www.mrra.org/images/hipower/standing.jpg
http://www.odcmp.org/1007/default.asp?page=USAMU_STANDING

That second link - wow. Read it all, and a lot more of it made sense to me than I expected.

After all this, you must find shooting a handgun quite relaxing!

The concept of firing as the sights are approaching a good condition (as opposed to when they actually are at their best) sounds fascinating. I don't think I read this elsewhere, especially not regarding handguns.

 

[mikemyers]

Advice needed......

I think I need to ask you guys for help and advice.


For the past month I've been shooting 38 special ammo, using the Model 28 with "stock" springs, with the mainspring tension screw bottomed out. Trigger pull averaged 12~13 pounds, and my grouping was between 3" and 5" at 15 yards shooting DA. I was shooting "lollipop" style at a 6" target, aimed at the bottom of the target, and the bullets hit near the center. (I still need to cut down the blade height of the new rear sight I bought a month ago.)

Last night, I installed the light spring kit:

• Wolff Power Rib Mainspring Type 2 - Reduced Power and
• Wolff 14 pound Rebound Spring

As far as I know, I made no other changes.

After installing the kit, the gun felt much better - 8 pound trigger pull, and while it wasn't butter smooth, the trigger pull was infinitely better than when this discussion first started - light, and reasonably smooth.

I went to the range today, and bought two boxes of "Fiocchi 38 Special 130 GRS FMJ" ammo.

When I started shooting, I noticed two things - first, that the bullets were hitting right where I aimed, and second that two of the first five bullets didn't fire until I tried them a second time.

Very puzzled, I put up a new target, and took out 5 more bullets. The good news is that they were grouped better than I ever dreamed they would be, 1 1/2" at 15 yards. The bad news was that two of them again took two attempts to fire them. I didn't like re-using the bullets, but even more so I didn't like having them around with one attempt already made to fire them. So, I put them in the gun, one at a time, so that they would (hopefully) fire on the next attempt.



I don't like messing with things that I don't understand, especially if it potentially involves gun safety. I didn't want any chance of the bullet going off by itself at the wrong time. I thought the safest thing would be to use up the last two bullets, one at a time.

I left the range and went home. At the time I was thinking it most likely was the lighter mainspring (assuming that the mainspring puts the pressure on the bullet primer, and the slide return spring mostly is what determines how hard it is to push the trigger).


My list of what might be wrong now includes:

• the main spring is too weak
• the bullets are defective
• I did something incorrectly while installing the spring kit
• the gun is frustrated because it can no longer keep me from shooting well

Unless you guys suggest otherwise, my plan is to:

• Go back to the range Sunday or Monday, and try the same bullets in a different gun. If they misfire, I know what's wrong. If they work fine, (as I expect), then I move on to:
  
• I can replace the new mainspring with the stock mainspring, leaving the lighter return spring in place.

If I'm missing something, please advise..... ....and also, when a centerfire bullet fails to fire, what is the correct thing to do? Try it again? Put it in a bucket of water? As the range officer what to do with it?

...........and I can't see any way that any of this would have changed the point of aim, unless the sight magically re-adjusted itself somehow.....

 

[9mmepiphany]

You told us the manufacturer of the cartridges on your second trip, but you didn't give us that information for the first trip.

The weight of the bullet, it's structure and the cartridges loaded velocity can impact where the bullet strikes on the target

 

[mikemyers]

You told us the manufacturer of the cartridges on your second trip, but you didn't give us that information for the first trip.

The weight of the bullet, it's structure and the cartridges loaded velocity can impact where the bullet strikes on the target

I didn't pay much attention to which ammo I used in the past - I always simply asked for 38 Special ammo. I used up the old ammo in Fellsmere two days ago, so I no longer have the boxes. I understand what you're saying, but I didn't think I was good enough to where this would make a big difference.

Maybe it's my imagination, but the bullets didn't seem as loud/powerful as before, but I assumed all the difference in the way the gun shot was because of my changing the springs - that, and the environment, which is usually almost empty, but today the range was packed with people, several of whom were making far more noise than I was...

I do have other 38 special ammo from last year - Remington UMC Target 38 Special 130 GR. MC LN38S11. I could always go back and compare the Fiocchi with the Remington, in case the Fiocchi is a problem.

(Truthfully, I haven't been too concerned about where on the target the bullets hit - my only real concern right now is group size.)

 

[murf]

put the old springs back in and fire the problem ammo to find out if it is, truely, problem ammo.

murf

 

[mikemyers]

My current plan is to go back to the range this afternoon, or more likely Monday morning, taking both my old Remington ammo and the new Fiocchi ammo. I'll take both my Model 28 (with the new, lighter springs still installed) and my Model 19. By trying each ammo in each gun, I should be able to confirm which is the problem.

Second step, if I feel up to it, is to return the ammo (if that is the problem, very unlikely I think), or replace the lighter mainspring with the original mainspring (if the gun seems to be the problem).

 

[mikemyers]

Update.....

A few days ago I wrote about following the advice in the book "The Perfect Pistol shot" by Albert H League III, to allow your left hand/arm to support the weight of the gun, along with the weight of your right arm, using your right hand/arm to only fire the gun. While dry-firing, I'm pretty sure that the gun wobbled less when my left arm was supporting more of the weight. At the range though, it didn't work too well for me using my Model 28, as neither of my hands/arms currently has the strength to hold that gun one-handed, without it "wobbling". I got tighter groups when I used both hands to support the gun. (I never even tried this with my Silhouette gun, as that gun was even heavier.)

I sent an email to the author explaining my problems. He wrote back to me yesterday, and gave me permission to post his comments here:

Regarding your difficulty with using the support hand to support the weapon, you're right. Some people will not be able to support the handgun solely with the support hand. I wrote at the end of that section that the principle should be followed to the degree the shooter was able. Perhaps I should have emphasized that more clearly. Any degree to which you are able to free the shooting hand will be helpful. You've got a great handgun in the Highway Patrolman, but it is a monster and you'll need more effort to lift it. Do what you can; adjust the technique to meet your needs. ​

Of all the books I've read over the years about shooting technique, most books just tell you to do what the author does. I like this book because it explains very clearly WHY the author recommends something, and even gives some simple things to try, if you doubt what you're reading.

Someone on THR recommended this book to me - but now I can't recall who. I found it at Amazon - here's a link to the sellers:
http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?url=search-alias=aps&field-keywords="the perfect pistol shot"

 

[mikemyers]

Update:

Went back to the range this morning with both Fiocchi and Federal 38 Special 130 GR Ammo.

Results: 5 out of 50 Federal bullets failed to fire the first time. Twice that many Fiocchi bullets failed to fire on the first attempt. All bullets eventually fired on the second attempt. I took a close-up photo of the primer on a Fiocchi bullet after a misfire:


Also, evaluating the target, the Federal bullets had a grouping between 1" and 1.5" higher than the Fiocchi bullets.

I called Wolff Springs, and after a discussion, they recommended putting the stock mainspring back in the gun.



I should add that the gun, with the lighter springs, was a pleasure to shoot. In DA it felt reasonably smooth, and most of the grouping ranged from 2.5" to 4". What amazed me, was that the gun is so much smoother and easier to fire, that instead of taking forever on every shot, I could shoot one round after another, without losing accuracy. With the new springs, I could probably go through 200 rounds or more before my hand might get tired - and this in DA. You guys were right - DA is a LOT more enjoyable to shoot than SA.

 

[mikemyers]

Update more....

Part of me wants to delete the past few responses I posted, but another part feels I should leave them, showing the dumb mistake(s) I made.

I went to clean the gun tonight, intending to also replace the mainspring with the original, but while looking it over, and over, and over, and over, I decided to try to tighten the strain screw a bit more. Surprisingly, it did, quite a bit! Bizarre, as when I put the new mainspring in a few days ago, the strain screw went quite a bit, the mainspring started to get bent, and then the screw suddenly got "tighter". Not knowing better, I thought that was done, and put the gun together. (One possible explanation is that I might have used the screwdriver I used to use, not the new one from my S&W screwdriver kit, and maybe the screwdriver bit touched something and felt tight..... unlikely, but it's the only scenario I can think of that explains what happened. I had both screwdrivers on the workbench, and maybe......).

So, it's extremely probable that the gun and the spring are all fine now, and the only thing wrong was my (lack of) ability at doing this sort of thing.....

I'm not going to have another chance to get back to the range for another week. In the meantime, all I can say is ALL of this is a good learning experience for me. Sorry for posting misleading information.....

 

[mikemyers]

I got back to the range today with the Highway Patrolman. With the sight lowered as far as I could get it (it felt like the screw adjustment "bottomed out") the height of the groupings at 15 yards was correct. Also, with the strain screw tightened all the way until it bottomed out, the gun fired perfectly - no misfires. I'm now using the Wolff lightened mainspring, and the lighter recoil spring.

I put up one large target and drew five "crosses" on it with a large magic marker, and shot ten rounds at each target. Groupings ranged from 2 1/2" to 3", which is the best I've yet done. (People say "the smaller the target, the less there is to miss". Well, I found I did best when i drew a one inch "bull" at the center of the cross.)


The fellow running the range today (who also teaches there) took a look at my targets and said the grouping was fine, but I needed better control of the gun if I wanted to get down to 2" groupings. If it works out, I'll likely pay him for a lesson some day late next week, but first I'll re-read what's written about holding the gun.


(I'm 99% sure it still needs a professional trigger job, as the trigger pull is smoother than before, but still nothing as smooth as my other revolvers.)

(I should also add that shooting SA now feels "boring" compared to shooting DA. )

 

[MrBorland]

Glad your reliability issues got worked out.

"the smaller the target, the less there is to miss"

That's true to a point. You still need to see the (fuzzy) target while watching the front site. You can't hit what you can't see. You're about right with the 1" bull. I seem to do best when the black is 1" per 10 yards.

The fellow running the range today (who also teaches there) took a look at my targets and said the grouping was fine, but I needed better control of the gun if I wanted to get down to 2" groupings. If it works out, I'll likely pay him for a lesson some day late next week

One-on-one instruction can be a very good thing. I'd ask him to shoot your gun to demo a 2" (or better) group, though. It'd be good to know your gun, ammo and instructor are up to the task.

 

[murf]

agree with mrborland on the instructor test. don't need bs here.

you're well into the learning curve, here. improvement, from here on out, is going to take progressively longer. patience and practice.

you are still shooting "lights out".

murf

 

[mikemyers]

.......One-on-one instruction can be a very good thing. I'd ask him to shoot your gun to demo a 2" (or better) group, though. It'd be good to know your gun, ammo and instructor are up to the task.

That's something that has been bugging me all day, ever since I left the range. I have never yet seen anyone shoot a 2" or better grouping at any range I've been to - three shots, yeah, but 20 or more? Nope.

That leads to the question, is it worth getting advice from someone who can't do the job themselves. I keep coming up with "yes", as I have lots of experience with this in radio control car racing. There are people I know who are VERY good at explaining "what to do", along with "why", but they all have their own limitations. So do I - if I was 17, not approaching 71, maybe I'd have more room to improve..... but for now, I'd just like to get to 2" grouping, reliably.

Here's today's target. The first three were shot EXACTLY as if I was dry firing. No attempt to do anything differently. Target 4 was shooting more "relaxed", just enjoying the shooting. After being discouraged from those results, I did #5, seriously trying to get EVERY shot into the 1" bullseye. Forgetting the one shot that went off before I was ready, I met my goal of a 2" group at 15 yards, but I want to be able to do it every time, for 20 or more shots. I was amazed to find that four shots actually went into that 1" bull.... if only I could do that every time.



Part of me thinks that this would be easier, if the trigger pull was smoothed out, as I'm constantly fighting the gun wanting to wobble all over because of the trigger pull, but the more I dry-fire, the better I'm getting at keeping the front sight on the target again as soon as the gum starts to move it off. My own "proof" of that is my ability to shoot more accurately DA than SA, which doesn't make sense to me, but I'll accept it.




Can I ask you something silly? When you're shooting, are you just being yourself, holding this device that puts holes where you want them to be, or does the device in some way become "part of you", so it is "you" putting those holes where they end up? I know what I'm trying to describe, but I don't know the words to express it properly. It's as if the gun no longer existed, and all that I see/feel is the "sight picture" and "me".

 

[mikemyers]

.......you are still shooting "lights out". murf

I think I've accepted the first part of what you said. As you get better, it gets more difficult, and takes longer, to get even better. I don't get the "lights out" part though????

I need to spend some time figuring out your 'signature'. I know what it says, but I need to absorb the meaning, so it becomes part of how I think.

 

[mikemyers]

Your signature:

"accuracy is a whole bunch of holes real close together. you get to decide how many holes and how close.

precision is location.

accuracy is a measure of precision (and you thought it was sd).

......festina lente"


A very rough translation is that accuracy = grouping size, and precision is how far that "group" is from where it's supposed to be?

............sd?????

 

[mikemyers]

Aha!!!!

Festina lente or σπεῦδε βραδέως (speûde bradéōs) is a classical adage and oxymoron meaning "make haste slowly" (usually rendered in English as "more haste, less speed"). It has been adopted as a motto numerous times, particularly by the emperors Augustus and Titus, the Medicis and the Onslows.



Thanks!

 

[9mmepiphany]

I have never yet seen anyone shoot a 2" or better grouping at any range I've been to - three shots, yeah, but 20 or more? Nope.

Your sentence structure threw me off a bit. Were you trying to say that you've never seen anyone shoot a 20 shot group of less than 2"?

I'd agree with you. I haven't either...because, the common measure of group size is 3-5 shots. It is just enough to discount luck and not so many as to introduce the reduced precision inherent in losing your aiming point. A 20 shot group tells you very little about your inconsistencies in technique, 20 single shots on 20 different targets tells you everything.

That is why the most precise shooters in the world, bench rest shooters, purposely set their sights to not hit the bullseye

I like to see a shooter place single shots into 1" squares rotated 45 degrees...12 (3x4) to a sheet of printer paper...the first 6 shots tell you everything you need to know about their technique

A very rough translation is that accuracy = grouping size, and precision is how far that "group" is from where it's supposed to be?

This is the commonly accepted differences between accuracy and precision

 

[mikemyers]

Your sentence structure threw me off a bit. Were you trying to say that you've never seen anyone shoot a 20 shot group of less than 2"?

I'd agree with you. I haven't either...because, the common measure of group size is 3-5 shots. It is just enough to discount luck and not so many as to introduce the reduced precision inherent in losing your aiming point. A 20 shot group tells you very little about your inconsistencies in technique, 20 single shots on 20 different targets tells you everything. .......

The image is very clear. I'll need to think about it a bit.....

Yes, I meant what you wrote, in that I've never seen anyone (in person) at the range put 20 shots or more into a two inch grouping. I don't doubt that it can be done, but I've never personally seen it.

I don't think I can agree with you about the part I highlighted in red. Three to five shots is nowhere near enough to eliminate "luck". Luck to me, is irrelevant, as to me, it's all an ability to control various things (perhaps limited by a small number of "worse" shots).

As to losing the aiming point, I don't understand that. I "lose" my aiming point after every shot - each one is fired individually, probably one to two seconds between shots. (If we're talking rapid fire, ignore what I'm writing here). If I can't get back to the same aiming point, that is a HUGE problem I need to solve. Currently, it's really only a "guess", as the target is so blurry I have to try to aim for the middle of the blur, but that seems easier to do the more I do it.

IF it is true that I can stand properly, hold the gun properly, pull the trigger properly, get the right sight picture, and control my breathing, then I should be able to shoot a group of any number of shots, with the grouping limited only by the precision of the gun and ammo, and my ability to do those five things.

Also, when I use CEP to calculate my grouping, I will get the exact same "calculated group size" from 20 holes on one sheet of paper, or one hole on 20 sheets of paper. The math doesn't change.


Why do other people like groups of 3 to 5 shots? I've always thought because it's much easier to do things perfectly when it's only a few tries. Doing it repeatedly, on demand - to me, THAT is what is most important.



Important: I'm not trying to in any way suggest what anyone else could or should do. All I'm saying is what is important to ME, and my own goal is to put 20 or more shots into a two inch diameter grouping, and do that over and over. In no way am I saying what anyone else should do. Maybe I'm far too critical, and maybe I'll never reach my goal, but (thanks very much to you guys) I'm a lot closer to it.

 

[mikemyers]

Gee, I should make sure I'm only saying that "I" never saw people at the range shooting the way I want to shoot. I'm not in any way saying it can't be done - and done MUCH, MUCH better than anything I can ever dream of.....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ed_McGivern


I've got the above book, and the more I read it, the more amazed I am about what CAN be done with a handgun! ........not that I'll ever get even .0001% that good.

One of these days, maybe there will be another exhibition that I'll be able to get to watch.

 

[murf]

festina lente: basically, don't go so fast you trip over your own two feet!

if you look up the definitions of accurate and precise, you may understand why i say what i say.

and mcgivern was using only one hand!

murf

 

[9mmepiphany]

IF it is true that I can stand properly, hold the gun properly, pull the trigger properly, get the right sight picture, and control my breathing, then I should be able to shoot a group of any number of shots, with the grouping limited only by the precision of the gun and ammo, and my ability to do those five things.

Also, when I use CEP to calculate my grouping, I will get the exact same "calculated group size" from 20 holes on one sheet of paper, or one hole on 20 sheets of paper. The math doesn't change.

It isn't about the math, it is about reading which things you are doing incorrectly and which you are doing correctly for each trigger press. A lot of shots in the group tend to hide the flaws

BTW: if you can manage the trigger pull correctly, the other four things lose a lot of their importance. While you'll still need to see the sights adequately, you can stand, grip and breath anyway you'd like.

Why do other people like groups of 3 to 5 shots? I've always thought because it's much easier to do things perfectly when it's only a few tries. Doing it repeatedly, on demand - to me, THAT is what is most important.

Over years of testing and experimentation, professional shooters and scientist who studied shooting determined that that number of shots was very representative of what that gun/ammo/shooter combination was capable of. Additional shots did not collect more useful information and introduced outside factors into the evaluation.

As to losing the aiming point, I don't understand that. I "lose" my aiming point after every shot

You've misunderstood the meaning of "losing the aiming point." You are referring to losing sight of your point of aim, I'm referring to it completely disappearing from the target. I tried to clarify it with the reference to Bench Rest Shooters not shooting for their aiming point at all

 

[Deaf Smith]

Single Action vs. Double Action

Most of the time I shoot my DA revolvers I shoot DA EXCEPT when I want absolute precision.

Slow DA can be just about as accurate as SA, but triggers like those om my S&Ws, in SA mode, are just real good.

I'd say 90 percent of the time I shoot DA, but I sure do want a SA option if possible (and for all but my S&W Centennial, it is possible.)

Deaf