Survival and Emergency Preparedness

Shooting our pocket guns in a match last night started up a discussion. Like most, I'm not as fast or accurate with my pocket gun(G43) as my full-size(G17). After 3 really good stages I had a terrible run that completely took me out of contention in the match. I lost a bunch of points due to missed headshots and shots outside the chest circle of an IDPA target. Everyone kept commenting how the shots were good combat accuracy, but bad for the stage. I had 3 headshots about a 1/4 below the chin and 2 body shots about the same below the chest circle. I think my grip was slightly off from a sloppy draw and caused me to shoot most of my shots about 3-4" low. In a real defensive shooting, fast doubletaps to the diaphragm and center throat shots are perfectly acceptable, but the game requires specific placement. It's reassuring to know that when I have a terrible stage at a match it still would have been enough to save me on the street. Makes me glad that I shoot enough competition to get my skill level up even with a gun I don't shoot as much as I should.

Good post and I fully agree.

I've started shooting in local USPSA Outlaw matches. Three stages on targets at varying distances, moving targets, facing targets, targets behind cover and with hostages. Speed seems to be king as far as scoring and winning the match. However, that's not how I shoot or why I'm attending these matches. Yes, speed is important and it's helping me stay proficient at moving while reloading and using cover and all the other tactical considerations. But it's also maintaining and sharpening my combat accuracy. I'd like all my shots to be in the 'A' zone of course, but to me, if I were an inch or two to the left or right or high or low but the shots were grouped tight then I'm personally satisfied. It may not 'score' as high in the match, but I'm using it as an impromptu combat shooting course. IIRC, in my last match, out of 73 rounds fired I had 44(ish) 'A' zone hits. But the other hits were very well placed hits even if they scored less. So I was satisfied with my performance from a street perspective. I was able to get good, solid hits on moving and facing targets (that were moving or facing very fast). I had video taken so I could review it later and see what areas I needed to work on as well.

So I was more than satisfied with the experience and performance even though I didn't win the match.

I defer to my 100 shots, 100 pigs experiment:

Take your chosen caliber, and bullet style, and take a shot. Heck - take three, at a basic farm pig. Something in 100lb range (not a 250lb wild Hogzilla), while it is moving. Take the shots as fast as possible. Tell me how many pigs got hit 3 times, how many stopped, and how many dropped.

Also - suggest this to the next yahoo who says a .22 is a good SD choice.

I call what you guys are saying "Practical Accuracy" - hit the target, hit it often, hit it closer to COM. This is a reason why I prefer AK to AR. Yes - an AR is inherently more accurate. It is more accurate than me. But on a laterally moving target - all of those COM shots miss COM and land behind the target. That +4 MOA on an AK - some of those hit dead center in spite of the target motion. Many many variables at play.

To me acceptable accuracy is a paper plate size.... If I can put several quick rounds into a paper plate while under stress, that's good for me.

Paper plate - the #1 AK zeroing tool!

tom mac wrote: ↑Tue Dec 24, 2019 9:34 am To me acceptable accuracy is a paper plate size.... If I can put several quick rounds into a paper plate while under stress, that's good for me.

The center chest circle of an IDPA target is 8". About the size of a medium paper plate. Keeping all shots in there while moving through a course quickly is the goal. It's a realistic combat accuracy target