Protected One
Member
Looks like the bodyguard is as good as the person who's hands it is in!
Wow!
[ame]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bS4p8j87EdA[/ame]
Wow!
[ame]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bS4p8j87EdA[/ame]
200 yard shot...with a Bodyguard 380!
- Thread starter Protected One
- Start date
Register to hide this ad
ParadiseRoad
Member
[ame]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HIwVK_FxGZk[/ame]
Walt Sherrill
Member
The old saying is "it's not the arrow, it's the indian..." but I think it's actually both.
The video shows some great shots by an great shooter. No matter how good the ammo and gun, a mediocre shooter isn't going to hit the target, except by accident.
The video shows some great shots by an great shooter. No matter how good the ammo and gun, a mediocre shooter isn't going to hit the target, except by accident.
357-RevolverGuy
Member
I just don't get the whole shooting a gun upside down phenomena (2nd video). Someone at a range I visit was doing this with a Desert Eagle and I just shook my head. I think it's cool to shoot a J frame accurately at 200 yds but why does upside down even matter? Seems unsafe.
Upside down is the new sideways?
So much for all the negative comments on the internet, on how this gun is not accurate. Maybe it's just crappy shooters.
Last edited:
Rastoff
US Veteran
Jump to 12:40 to see the shot.
It's a tiny .380Auto, anyone that expects bullseye accuracy or a match trigger has purchased the wrong gun.
Actually, it validates those comments. According to Jerry, this gun was hitting to the right. Obviously the further out you go the worse this will be.
It's a tiny .380Auto, anyone that expects bullseye accuracy or a match trigger has purchased the wrong gun.
OP
Protected One
Member
Walt Sherrill
Member
The way I've seen it described, there are two different factors involved in how a gun hits what it's aimed at: precision (which controls the gun's innate consistency when used) and accuracy (which addresses how the gun and the shooter work together.)
Please feel free to offer a different explanation -- as I'm not stuck on this one -- but it does make sense to me.
A gun that demonstrates good precision will, when shot from a Ransom Rest, put all of it's shots in a very small group. The human factors (such as grip, use of the trigger, breathing, attention), aren't at play. A semi-auto that doesn't consistently lock up won't do well in a Ransom Rest, and it also won't hit where even the best shooter points it; but a shooter with good technique will likely have better results than a less skilled shooter. (Keep in mind that Ransom Rest tests don't involve using the sights; it just about the gun sending the bullet to the same place with each shot.)
If a gun demonstrates good precision, its trigger can be crappy, for example, but a good shooter can still get good results. I have a friend who is uncanny in this regard: I don't care what the gun is, he'll always shoot it better than anyone else!
A gun that can consistently hit the point of aim at great distances is clearly precise -- but will show that precision only if the person using it uses proper technique.
Some of the guns discussed in this topic are clearly precise, but many of us can't do our part as well as we should.
Please feel free to offer a different explanation -- as I'm not stuck on this one -- but it does make sense to me.
A gun that demonstrates good precision will, when shot from a Ransom Rest, put all of it's shots in a very small group. The human factors (such as grip, use of the trigger, breathing, attention), aren't at play. A semi-auto that doesn't consistently lock up won't do well in a Ransom Rest, and it also won't hit where even the best shooter points it; but a shooter with good technique will likely have better results than a less skilled shooter. (Keep in mind that Ransom Rest tests don't involve using the sights; it just about the gun sending the bullet to the same place with each shot.)
If a gun demonstrates good precision, its trigger can be crappy, for example, but a good shooter can still get good results. I have a friend who is uncanny in this regard: I don't care what the gun is, he'll always shoot it better than anyone else!
A gun that can consistently hit the point of aim at great distances is clearly precise -- but will show that precision only if the person using it uses proper technique.
Some of the guns discussed in this topic are clearly precise, but many of us can't do our part as well as we should.
- Joined
- Apr 29, 2012
- Messages
- 4,644
- Reaction score
- 7,877
In this case, upside down is not a stunt it's a necessity. You'd probably have to do this holding it upside down. With a normal grip the holdover would be so much the gun would block the view of the target. All you'd see is gun and sky. Holding it upside down allows you to judge the holdover.
Of course they didn't show you how much he practiced for this, or how many tries it took to get a "first shot" hit for the video.
Of course they didn't show you how much he practiced for this, or how many tries it took to get a "first shot" hit for the video.
Last edited:
OP
Protected One
Member
Don't think it validates those comments at all. He stated that he was firing the gun "right out of the box". I doubt S&W is sighting them in at 100yds, thus, hitting to the right is not an indictment on the gun.
The way I've seen it described, there are two different factors involved in how a gun hits what it's aimed at: precision (which controls the gun's innate consistency when used) and accuracy (which addresses how the gun and the shooter work together.)
Please feel free to offer a different explanation -- as I'm not stuck on this one -- but it does make sense to me.
A gun that demonstrates good precision will, when shot from a Ransom Rest, put all of it's shots in a very small group. The human factors (such as grip, use of the trigger, breathing, attention), aren't at play. A semi-auto that doesn't consistently lock up won't do well in a Ransom Rest, and it also won't hit where even the best shooter points it; but a shooter with good technique will likely have better results than a less skilled shooter. (Keep in mind that Ransom Rest tests don't involve using the sights; it just about the gun sending the bullet to the same place with each shot.)
If a gun demonstrates good precision, its trigger can be crappy, for example, but a good shooter can still get good results. I have a friend who is uncanny in this regard: I don't care what the gun is, he'll always shoot it better than anyone else!
A gun that can consistently hit the point of aim at great distances is clearly precise -- but will show that precision only if the person using it uses proper technique.
Some of the guns discussed in this topic are clearly precise, but many of us can't do our part as well as we should.
Well then, a gun that consistently pulls to the right can still be considered precise, as long as the shots are in a very tight group? This goes back to my comment about a good shooter and crappy shooters. A good shooter will make the adjustments and hit his target even if the gun tends to pull to the right.
Walt Sherrill
Member
Steve5701 said:
Exactly. That is why guns are made with movable sights. (Of course, one that shoots WAY, WAY to the left or right, up or down, needs adjustment or modification. I'm trying to be realistic and practical.) If it's too far off, moving the sights might not work.
When they use a Ransom Rest to evaluate a weapon's precision, they don't line up the sights with each shot -- maybe just the first one to get it on paper. Then they're just seeing where subsequent shots go. And RR has a lever on it that takes out the human factor (of a poor trigger pull). And if the group is small, and you like the gun, you adjust the sights, etc.
Jerry hitting a 1000 yard shot with a 929 is a bit like magic.
Last edited:
Steved13
Member
- Joined
- Dec 4, 2016
- Messages
- 330
- Reaction score
- 202
Its exhibition shooting, he calls it a "stunt" in the video.
The best reason I saw for shooting holding it upside down, was a trainer from Sig, and he was making the point about not getting hung up on grip and stance, and be natural. He shot it upside down and standing on 1 foot...the proper grip and stance discussion ends. He was obviously clear that a good stance and grip are important, but what feels natural and comfortable is an important part of both.
Bkreutz
US Veteran
This just proves my belief that Jerry is an alien. (the outer space kind, not the cross the border kind) 
Ranger17
Member
all I know is that if i'm trying to focus on the front sight of my MP, no dang way I'm seeing anything at 200 yards ...... but give me a case of ammo and a few hours and by accident I'd sure hope to hit the target at least once lol
as I get more into this hobby of mine, seeing guys/gals who are truly great shots amazes the heck out of me
as I get more into this hobby of mine, seeing guys/gals who are truly great shots amazes the heck out of me
TANKLEGACY
Member
Its absolutely possible...I hit a 100yds with my snub nose .357 with a 1.87" barrel
...so its totally possible with a 2.75" barrel.
...so its totally possible with a 2.75" barrel.
gman51
Member
I don't believe this video. If and I say if he really did hit it I just wonder how many takes it took to luck out and hit the target? Sorry I don't buy it.
I saw on TV that the word gullible isn't even in the dictionary.
I saw on TV that the word gullible isn't even in the dictionary.
Rastoff
US Veteran
Normally I'd be right there with you. However, this is Jerry Miculek. He holds 20 verified world records with various guns and 7 world championships in IPSC shooting. He has absolutely nothing to prove to you or me. So, I believe it and you should too.
You're correct about the two factors, but a little off with the second parenthetical description.
In any measurement system you have precision and accuracy. Precision is how well a stated system can repeat the same measurement and get the same result. In the case of a gun, it's how small a group can it shoot when all human error is removed. Precision is not directly related to the goal or center of the target.
Accuracy is how close to the goal or intended target can you get. This is also a function of the gun itself. If the sights are misaligned, then the gun is not going to be accurate. With any gun it will only be accurate at one distance. This is load dependent.
Now, you have the precision and accuracy of the gun and then you have the precision and accuracy of the shooter. Two related, but different measurements.
Take a look at these pictures:
This is just bad shooting. You can't tell anything from this target. The shots are all over the place.
With this one we start to learn something. If the shooter is standing and unsupported, we know they are doing things correctly, but need to work on their shot process. If this is from a rest, we know the sights are probably aligned properly, but the gun is not very repeatable.
With this one we can see a lot. If the shooter is standing and unsupported, they have something wrong with their technique. Whatever they're doing, they're doing it the same every time. If shooting from a rest, the sights are probably off. But the gun is very repeatable.
Everything is going right here. If the shooter is standing and unsupported, they are better than 90% of the shooters out there. If shooting from a rest, this gun could be better, but it's now down to refining the load, maybe a match barrel or something like that.
When it comes to shooting we must also define the intended use. Considering the last pic, if this was shot at 3 yards and it's a bullseye gun, shot from a rest, this is not very good. However, if it's a defensive gun, shot from standing and unsupported, this is great. If it's done under time pressure, this is amazing.
So, it all depends on what's important. Hitting a target at 200 yards with a snubby revolver, fired double action and only getting one out of 5 is good shooting. It's plenty precise and accurate for that type of gun.
I could go on, but I'll leave it here for the moment.
Ole Joe Clark
Absent Comrade
I think that Jerry really doesn't care what we think. He is such a great shot and he is not working, he is just having fun and getting paid for it. Besides, he is a older guy, like a lot of us.
Walt Sherrill
Member
Rastoff said:
We don't really disagree -- you just said it better than I did.
That said, I consider sight positioning/alignment a SHOOTER controlled factor. If the shooter knows the sights are off, he can still shoot accurately, by compensating for the amount off when aiming the gun. The result can still be accuracy. (That's equivalent to what Jerry M. did with some of his shots... as you can't have sights on a small .380 that can properly sight on a target 200 yards away.)
Great example targets, by the way.
Whatnickname
Member
- Joined
- Aug 10, 2010
- Messages
- 14
- Reaction score
- 1
What ever. 200 yards with something like this is entertaining but not the least bit practicle. As for the .380 round, I know the ammo has improved and offers improved terminal performance. That said they're making 9MM pistols today that are nearly as small. Whatever the .380 can do the 9MM will do better. Where deep concealment is concerned I'm going to stick with my KHAR CW9 or my M&P Shield.
Rastoff
US Veteran
Exactly. Don't look any further.
