I'm really tired of hearing...

Originally posted by Dregg:
I never use the sights since studies show most gun fights happen within a distance of 7'.

You've mixed up feet and yards. The average gunfight distance (for LEO, no civilian statistics) is 6 to 7 yards. It varies a bit from year to year, but it's been fairly constant ever since the FBI started keeping stats.
 
Originally posted by Ron H.:
Originally posted by Miss Fire:
that snubbies aren't accurate!

Anyone else feel the same way here?

Sir, there's a difference between mechanical accuracy and ergonomics. Many snubbies possess very good mechanical accuracy, but their ergonomics are such that they're harder to shoot well than full-size guns. This is particularly evident when speed is required and distances get longer than across the room.

For example, a well-trained friend of mine regularly shoots both a 642 and a full-size 1911. Shooting slowly and deliberately at 5 to 7 yards, he does slightly better with the .45 than the little .38. But turn on the speed and/or increase the distance, and he does vastly better with the .45. I doubt there's any significant difference in the mechanical accuracy of the two guns. The difference lies in the better ergonomics of the bigger gun--it's simply easier to shoot well.

Hope this helps, and Semper Fi.

Ron H.

Sir?
 
Don't mind Ron, Miss Fire. He is programed to start everything he says with "Sir." Besides, I'm pretty sure he didn't see your recent photo.
icon_wink.gif
 
Originally posted by f150guy:
I find my m10 2" more pleasant to shoot, and a whole lot more accurate than my sigma 9ve, even d/a to dao for whatever that is worth...
Hey, I was going to say that. My 2" is easier to group well at 21 feet than either of my Sigmas. The 40VE is much more accurate at 40,50...Of course, I always shoot a revolver single action style.
 
A snubbie is meant to be a close-quarters (21-feet) self-defense weapon. Practice rapid-fire double-action as if your life depended on it.

S&W 637 at a low-light indoor range. It's point-shooting, basically, because there's no time to focus on sights and barely light to see by anyway, especially with my bad eyes.
637-copy.jpg
 
I do all my shooting at 25 yards because I like to shoot from this distance. I feel if I can stay on an 8" circle at that distance then I won't have any problems hitting something a few feet away. I will say that my 642 or 638 will make my wrist tired after 50 rounds.
 
I'd throw the NAA at the perp as hard as I can. It's more deadly that way.
 
Printed a respectable group at the range Sunday with my J- frame snub. Strted at 7 yd, then 15 and finally 20. Can't ask much more out of the weapon. No complaints from me
 
My 642 is hardly fun to shoot, particularly with +P loads, but the little thing is as accurate as can be.

Be safe.
 
From www.bob-munden.com :

"Bob Munden is featured on Shooting USA's Impossible Shots Wednesdays on The Outdoor Channel. Bob says he loves thinking up new exhibition shots to try and enjoys hearing from fans who send him their ideas. Of all the special shooting he has done for television, the shot people comment about the most is when he hit a 14"x 24" steel, rectangle target 200 yards away 4 times in a row using a stock, iron-sighted (no scope) Smith & Wesson Model 60, .38-caliber, double-action revolver with a 2" barrel."
 
Originally posted by Miss Fire:
that snubbies aren't accurate!

Anyone else feel the same way here?
I'd never owned a 2" barrel revolver before I bought my 36 "no dash". I was really surprised at how accurate it was at 50' with the Federal "FBI" load.
 
Back
Top