Differences and similarities of civilian competition and combat shooting

[dwalker460]

What competitive shooting did you get into? I'm looking at it myself to switch up putting holes in paper.

I believe he was at the Noveske 3-gun match this past weekend. I was there too, but I did not perform as well.


Let me say one thing about action shooting versus the usual idea of competitive shooting. Most of us are ingrained to not move while shooting, as MarkCo said. In discussing my lack of performance at the weekends match there are several issues I need to work on, but shooting is not high on the list- groups are good and unless I over run a target I will put rounds where they count. Clearing stoppages (ammo related) on the rifle and shotgun? Nope, did fine there, barely paused and was not really even fazed by it. Running from one point to the next? Not too bad, I mean I am not a sprinter but I can move quickly as needed.
No brother, as MarkCO said, shooting while moving and loading the shotgun under stress are my downfalls. I noticed as I broke down the satges that I tended to move-stop-shoot-move rather than flowing from one target to the next. That adds serious time. I mean a lot. And its a habit most of us have ingrained from the first days our father took us out with .22's and scolded us for running around with bb guns. Even loading the shotgun I would step-stop-load-step-stop-load rather than continously moving. And that was even covered in the Pro runthrough with James that very morning!


All that said, I really love 3-gun and have a great time at every match!

[RMAC757]

Someone a little butt hurt? Where you looking for an opportunity to tell us when you went through selection? I enjoyed the article. Saying "and that is why I only trust HK's" with no emperical data seems....well a little fanboyish.

Unless you can tell me when you went to selection I don't think you're in a position to throw stones...there are some truths to this article such as: competition does NOT come close to combat however it does help with shooting fundamentals, and when your's or someone else's life is on the line make sure your gear is reliable, tested, and meets the needs of the mission. The 1911 vs other guns crap is all personal opinion as well as any 9 vs 45 implications. Take the article for what it's worth. Some of the statements are obvious to people, others may have never considered it before.

[muddywings]

I believe he was at the Noveske 3-gun match this past weekend. I was there too, but I did not perform as well.


All that said, I really love 3-gun and have a great time at every match!

Yup-Noveske match.

The reason why I say there is no substitute for someone shooting at you is because training has a broad spectrum of how good it is and can be. How many young 18-20 y/o hitting OEF for the first time in late '01 early '02 or OIF a few years later had really good training after a decade + of being in garrison? Going to the range with the M-16 and getting yelled at by a DI didn't keep a lot of those kids alive. SEAL training is as good as it gets so it easy to sit back from that standpoint and say competitive shooting isn't going to train you for combat. Well, neither does Basic Training. On a slightly different slant, I remember as I went through LEO training of a story of an LEO that had to pull their weapon and shoot a bad guy. The LEO drew, fired two rounds and holstered. Unfortunately the LEO didn't hit the bad guy and the bad guy won. Sound familiar? "Draw, shoot two rounds, holster."
As for comparing the race guns vs combat guns...sure, I get it. Watch a NASCAR race. How many of them drop out after a couple miles due to some technical issue. My '98 Honda Civic beater/commuter goes farther then those fancy multimillion dollar race cars so I think that analogy is a bit off base.
Back to competitive shooting. It can't hurt can it? I mean, being able to draw, present quickly, shoot accurately acquire a new target and engage, reload and engage again isn't going to hurt you in a combat situation unless you forget about those minor fundamentals such as concealment and cover. I hope somewhere down the road I can take one of those fancy courses from Magpul but for now, I'm happy getting into a new hobby and I think it will help in any situation where I do have to draw my gun for real.

[Dingo]

Jamme...er ...Shot a Gen4 lately?
Glocks are nice pistols. I have one. Is a nice gun. It usually goes bang when I pull the trigger. It has in no way, shape or form demonstrated to me that it is a super pistol incapable of failure. Last local 3-gun match only one handgun on my squad the entire day had issues, and its initials were G-Lock. Doesnt mean they will all have issues, just that they are mechanical devices that will, at some point, fail.

Agreed - not incapable of failure. Just not an entire gunsmithing collective built around making it reliable. :-) I think it's reasonable to expect that in most situations it will work properly despite the environmental conditions, training level of the shooter, or the ammo used. And yeah, I forgot they even made the Gen4's... I've shot everything prior to that extensively, but have heard mixed things about the 4's. Mainly that they shouldn't have fucked with the recoil springs... the Gen 3's were the pinnacle, and should be un-fucked-with.

[275RLTW]

Someone a little butt hurt? Where you looking for an opportunity to tell us when you went through selection? I enjoyed the article. Saying "and that is why I only trust HK's" with no emperical data seems....well a little fanboyish.

Yep. You're absolutely right! and no one is allowed to post their opinions here because they might seem a bit "fanboyish..." Thanks for your contribution to this thread.

[RMAC757]

Yep. You're absolutely right! and no one is allowed to post their opinions here because they might seem a bit "fanboyish..." Thanks for your contribution to this thread.

Your welcome

[jreifsch80]

i'll take my c75 or m57 yugo tokarev over anything

[Aloha_Shooter]

Agreed - not incapable of failure. Just not an entire gunsmithing collective built around making it reliable. :-)

My perception of the 1911 gunsmithing collective was that it was built around accurizing, not making the platform reliable. The 1911 has been a highly reliable platform over the 100 years since it debuted; it's just that a lot of the war surplus were understandably loose. Glocks are great pistols but they're not the end-all-be-all.

[Great-Kazoo]

My perception of the 1911 gunsmithing collective was that it was built around accurizing, not making the platform reliable. The 1911 has been a highly reliable platform over the 100 years since it debuted; it's just that a lot of the war surplus were understandably loose. Glocks are great pistols but they're not the end-all-be-all.

Correct, NOTHING is the end all - be all gun. What fits your hand, has overall comfort, AND what you feel the most confident with. For me it is a variety of hand guns, be it a full size 9mm or even the Sunday Go to Meeting High Standard 22mag. Each has it's place as is your personal preference.

Practice, practice, practice. 3 gun, idpa, ipsc etc. While not for everyone, something all should try, at least once.

[strm_trpr]

Good article, but murphy can bite any gun.