To you Really Good Shooters -

[StrawHat]

I was a competitor in PPC for a little more than a decade and manage to get into the Governors' 20. So, I understand what you are asking. I have not shot my 38 S&W Special, Davis Competition revolver in three decades but I have poured a long ton of lead down range with my ACP revolvers.

At 50 yards and further, the Model 25-2 with the 6" (or 6 1/2" barrel) is still my top shooter in ACP. BUT, my Model 22-4s are so close as to be a draw.

And the Model 25-2 is a Target Revolver while the Model 22-4s are fixed sighted.

Have not had the 4 1/4" Model 25-2 long enough to truly get a compilation of targets.

All of the "numbered" models outshoot the older "named" model but whether that is the short action, Target sights, or just the nut doing the shooting is unknown.

Kevin

 

[jimbo728]

I used to be a fair competiter until my hand became parylized.
It hurts to lose that ability.
Jim

 

[lrrifleman]

Rich,

In some respects, I think your question is invalid because of it's wide sweep.

I consider myself to be reasonably proficient with all of my firearms (both handguns and rifles) with the caveat that each is mission specific and should be judged by a yard stick calibrated to the mission each arm is acquired for.

For Bullseye matches (currently called Precision Pistol), my K22, K38, and 1911 deliver 85-90% performance over the 25 yard and 50 yard courses of fire. For PPC, my vintage K38, and my assorted semi-auto pistols are delivering 93+% performance. For the GSSF matches, my chosen Glocks are putting me in the 75 -100 second time zones, depending upon which division I'm shooting. For F class mid-range (600 yards) and long-range (1000 yard) matches, my preferred rifle and cartridge combinations are placing me in the 88-92% average zones, despite my physical challenges.

For bullseye matches, I shoot my revolvers SA. For PPC, I shoot my revolvers DA, but I wouldn't think of using my 3T bullseye K38 for PPC, because of the wide trigger. When I first attempted IHMSA matches about 40 years ago, I shot my N frame SA (I'd love to find a club within 150 miles or so still doing these matches).

The bottom line is that each firearm and each discipline requires a certain degree of practice. Some practice is transferable, some isn't. For me, I find that timed and rapid fire bullseye is providing the most transferable skills for PPC. Bullseye and PPC are providing the best transferable skills for GSSF matches. I am seeing the best transferable skill development for the Adaptive Defensive Shooting Summit events being PPC and GSSF matches (I tend to joke that the ADSS matches are IDPA:GSSF matches: stationary [like GSSF], but fired on an IDPA-style course of fire).

Being disabled, I strive for consistency using a mission appropriate yardstick. My key concerns are trigger control and focusing on the front sight.

 

[Lobster Picnic]

K-frames don't like to miss no matter who is holding them, so I've got that working for me. I also own a J-frame with the same proclivity, the 3" 60-4 with full underlug. My other J-frames require some talent from the shooter I seem to be lacking.

 

[Frailer]

Short answer: No.

Removing a firearm's inherent accuracy from the equation, the shooter must do two things to hit the intended target: point the gun at the correct spot, and press the trigger without moving the gun.

Sight radius and the sights themselves influence the former, and the trigger and the grip configuration affect the latter.

 

[Univibe]

No. Depends on what I do a lot of. Decades ago I competed in Bullseye with .22LR target pistol. I can still do pretty well; hands are steady by at my age the eyes aren't in the same league as they used to be.

With my 686 and 629 I can do myself a bit of credit shooting single action. But I fire double action so little that I wouldn't trust a DA revolver to save my life at more than cross-the-room distances. If I worked at it, I know I could become a lot better. By contrast, with a G17 or G19 I have considerable confidence. And that's because I have a lot more trigger time on semis in general and lately, Glocks.

It's all what you're used to doing.

 

[THE PILGRIM]

The trigger makes the most difference for me, I think.
I can probably shoot this one the best.
An inherently accurate gun , 22LR so no recoil.
And it was 'tuned' when the target Hammer Trigger were added.
I think Elmer said a Revolver should have a 3 Pound Trigger Pull like breaking Glass.
This one comes close.

 

[heeter3]

I only own .38 special and .357 magnum revolvers and as would be expected my accuracy goes up substantially when moving from 2 in to 3 in to 4 in and ultimately 6 in bbls.

 

[StrawHat]

…
My key concerns are trigger control and focusing on the front sight…

This is the whole crux of disciplined Target shooting. Without this you are just making noise and wasting components.

Kevin

 

[stansdds]

No, I am not equally accurate across a variety of firearms, which is why I do not have a carry rotation. For carry, it is one of two handguns, a S&W Model 6946 for most uses and a Model 640 when I need something more compact.

 

[BubbaBlades]

It ain't the bow or the arrow, it's ---------

I do not find a difference in precision shooting either revolvers or semiautos in more than 20 calibers from .22LR through 460 Magnum. Almost all of my guns are factory stock (unmodified).

I was the top marksman in each of the military units that served in. I was also the top marksman in each of the police departments where I worked.

I have more than 50 YouTube precision shooting videos demonstrating me shooting dozens of different guns. The videos can be found on Youtube under:

bubbabladesfla

ps: I shot most of these videos after I turned 70 years old

 

[mikerjf]

Beware the man with just one gun, because he's probably going to go buy some more and then play with them until he can't shoot any of them well!

I've shot a lot of J frames and when I got an L, couldn't hit anything with it except by slow careful SA. I just know that the more I work on the L, the worse I'll be on the J. Kinda thinking on cutting back to a select few.

 

[glenwolde]

I own a variety of guns of various configurations. With guns of equal attributes I can pretty much shoot them equally, within my family of firearms. By that I mean I can't shoot a vintage Colt Agent as well as a 6" Model 66.

But within my normal circle of target guns it's pretty close. I'm somewhat of an anomaly amongst shooters. I have no interest in tactical shooting or any sort of competition. Most shooters find my style of shooting exceedingly boring. In fact if I ever find one that doesn't I'll let you know. It's why I shoot alone. I'm good with that. Not a social event for me.

I shoot at the same target, at the same distance, every time. I keep score (in my own way). Strictly two-handed, slow-fire, single-action. I used to shoot at 25 yards but after a couple of decades that became difficult as my range scaled back on the 25 yard range to expand the 7-10-15 yard ranges. I moved to 15 yards and scaled down my target.

I have (2) target .22 autos, (3) six inch adjustable sight S&W revolvers, and (2) Government 1911's all with adjustable sights. Besides the .22's these cover .38, 9mm, .357, .45ACP, and .41 Magnum. These are the only guns I shoot on a regular basis. The others go to the range maybe one a year.

With standard velocity practice ammo there's a little bit of a spread. I guess it depends on how you want to define "equally well". I shoot at a 4" bullseye at 15 yards. Right now, that's indoors. I shoot 25 rounds at each target. This works out well as it's half a box and four targets makes 100 rounds. I count the misses of the 4" bullseye and express it as a percentage. Fast and easy to do the math.

I generally shoot them all in the 90%'s. Now the .22's are in the high 90's and everything else in the mid 90%'s. The 1911's are around 90%, sometimes below, but to be fair to them I have less experience with them. If I didn't think I was going to get there I'd give up on them.

I track my score for each session in a spreadsheet and use a four-week moving average as "current performance".

I can do it with Magnum rounds, I just can't do it for as long. The .357 is O.K. but the .41 will sideline me if I shoot it too much. But I can get through 25 rounds every once in a while.

I've noticed lately I'm starting to slip a little. I think it my be age related. I think I need to step up my workout and get to the ophthalmologist.

Somebody asked me 40 years ago "how good a shot are you?" I didn't have an answer. Now I do. Honestly I feel like after 100,000+ rounds and almost 45 years I'd be a lot better. But it is what it is.

So while I wouldn't say I'm a great shot, I can kind of answer the question anyway. I'm not great but I am consistent. Since this is now getting as boring as my style of shooting I'll stop.

 

[Bumpus13]

I'm more-or-less similar with the majority of my handguns. I can generally hit my targets at reasonable distances, but I'll never be performing circumcisions on flies at 50 paces.

Then again, I merely consider myself "proficient" … I clicked on this thread to read about "Really Good Shooters"

 

[seldon14]

Varies all the way up and down for me. Some guns I naturally shoot really well, some I naturally shoot really poorly. I can put time in with a gun I shoot poorly and improve, and I can take time with a gun I shoot well, and improve more.

I typically don't wast time on guns I naturally shoot really poorly (glock 19, several sig 320s amongst others) and invest that time in stuff I do shoot well (Smith 19, hi power and others). Sometime minor changes make a big difference. I shoot a Glock 17 pretty decent, 19 not at all. I shot the shield a bit below average for me, but invested time in it based off of what it could offer me as a carry weapon at the time. It's probably in my top 5 for proficiency at this point.

 

[Nevada Ed]

Hold all my guns at 6 o'clock. Most have adjustable sights. One or two shots with the others remind me where to put a spotter on the target to hit center mass.

Yes, I also have a few weapons that need "Kentucky windage" when brand "B" ammo is used........
or my cheat sheet is not at hand.

 

[AJ]

Hold all my guns at 6 o'clock. Most have adjustable sights. One or two shots with the others remind me where to put a spotter on the target to hit center mass.

Yes, I also have a few weapons that need "Kentucky windage" when brand "B" ammo is used........
or my cheat sheet is not at hand.

I learned that when in the Corps. We were not allowed to "adjust" the sights on the pistols that we drew from the Armory to qualify with. So you shot for a group and once you established where it was hitting, you put a spotter up so you could hit the bullseye. It the pistol was shooting low left your spotter went up high right.

 

[reddog81]

Grips that fit, a good trigger and sights up to the task make a big difference for me.

Too small or too large of grips makes it hard to get a consistent and comfortable grip. Too small and the gun trys to jump out of your hand with each shot. Too large and you'll be readjusting with each shot. Wood grips on revolvers look nice but often times the rubber grips will offer a better fit and less fatigue for extended shooting sessions.

A smooth trigger is very helpful for consistent shots. My GP100 had a many burs on the hammer strut when I bought it. After replacing that my DA group sizes got cut in half. The first thing I do with a new S&W revolver is change out the overly stiff rebound spring to drop the DA pull weight to something more reasonable.

Different sights are ideal for different types of shooting. A large fiber optic sight might be great for trying to hit steel targets quickly at 15 yards, but is a distinct disadvantage for me when trying to shoot small groups at 25 yards.

Changing any one of these 3 items can make a big difference in how a gun handles and shoots for you. I have many handguns and and can shoot most of then pretty well at 10 to 15 yards. Trying to get good groups at 25+ yards requires a setup built for the task. Some very good shooters might be able adjust and get any accurate gun to shoot well but most mortals will be affected nuisances of each firearm.

 

[Hair Trigger]

I consider myself an adequate shot, meaning I can easily hit center mass out to about 30 yards with my larger revolvers or semiautos, but generally, my groups get bigger as the caliber gets bigger, independent of the distance I'm shooting at. For .22LR at 10 yards, coffee cup or smaller, for a 9mm or .38/.357, a coffee saucer, for 10mm, .41, .44, or .45, a small pie plate, etc. As the range grows, so does the group.

At 30 yards, I could hit Costello, but might miss Abbott 1 out of 3.

 

[S&W Fan]

I like to think I'm a pretty decent shooter though by no means up to the standards of the bullseye folks-they're super human in my opinion. My shooting is typically along the lines of self defense drills and the occasional idpa style competition-not officially sanctioned but that's the closest I can compare our courses of fire.

For revolvers no doubt I shoot the 3" 64 NY-1 better than any other revolver I have now or ever had. For a semi I do my most accurate work with a custom built 1911 with a mostly stock Springfield Armory Ronin 9mm Commander running a tight second.

After those I do pretty much the same with the remainder. Frankly my vision-near sighted with a mild astigmatism, transitional no line bifocals-is the greatest limiting factor. Back when I was a ute (My Cousin Vinny reference haha) 50 yards was routine for shooting. These days I limit myself to 25 and I shoot about a minute of pie plate at that distance.