100 yd Handgun Shooting
- Thread starter David E
- Start date
- Status
OP
OP
David E
Member
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2008
- Messages
- 7,459
Went back to the range today and shot 4 handguns at 100 yds.
They were:
25 ACP Ortgies. (previously pictured)
Beretta Model 20 in .25 ACP
Sterling pocket auto in .22 LR
Jennings J-22 in .22 LR
My student and I BOTH were able to hit the 100 yd steel target with ALL the pocket guns.
The .22's weren't very reliable, but we made the hits. I wasn't optimistic about them at the beginning, but they proved up to the task.
I took two shots to hit with the Beretta, same as the Ortgies. The .25's worked flawlessly.
They were:
25 ACP Ortgies. (previously pictured)
Beretta Model 20 in .25 ACP
Sterling pocket auto in .22 LR
Jennings J-22 in .22 LR
My student and I BOTH were able to hit the 100 yd steel target with ALL the pocket guns.
The .22's weren't very reliable, but we made the hits. I wasn't optimistic about them at the beginning, but they proved up to the task.
I took two shots to hit with the Beretta, same as the Ortgies. The .25's worked flawlessly.
Last edited:
OP
OP
David E
Member
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2008
- Messages
- 7,459
Check out this video on YouTube:http://youtu.be/tEpgYsPJrvg
It shows, albeit poorly, me making the hit on the 100 yd steel target. The guy that took the video edited out my first shot at it, which landed right next to it.
It shows, albeit poorly, me making the hit on the 100 yd steel target. The guy that took the video edited out my first shot at it, which landed right next to it.
kingcheese
Member
- Joined
- Nov 29, 2008
- Messages
- 677
I witnessed a 275yard pistol shot from a 1911, i was impressed
OP
OP
David E
Member
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2008
- Messages
- 7,459
Sounds like you're not doing it the better way of raising the front sight and perching the target on top.
Vern Humphrey
Member
With scoped weapons you can hold over. With iron sighted handguns, you hold up more front sight.
Look at it like this, the distance between rear and front sight on an M1911 is about 6". There are 300 feet in a hundred yards, and each foot is 12 inches. That means the ratio between sight radius and range is 1:600.
In other words, if you held up an inch more front sight, your bullet would impact 600 inches (50 feet) higher at 100 yards. If you held up a mere 0.01" of front sight, the bullet would impact 6" higher -- which is almost exactly what you want.
To visualize 0.01", think of the sights as a dashed line "---". The two ends of the line are the tops of the rear sight, the center dash is the top of the front sight. Now, simply hold the front sight so the line doesn't look quite straight anymore -- sort of like this, but much more subtle, "_ - _". That's a 0.01" over hold, and it will put you right on at 100 yards.
MikePGS
Member
Just wanted to say this is a great thread, a lot of good advice from people I have a lot of respect for. Keep it coming 
kingcheese
Member
- Joined
- Nov 29, 2008
- Messages
- 677
Can you describe how to raise the front sight? Do you still use the rear sight?
AnthonyRSS
Member
I shot my 4" 1911 at the 200yrd rock we have set up. Its about silhouette size. Was making a few hits every mag. Can hit it a little better with my High Standard .22. My problem is knowing where I miss.
OP
OP
David E
Member
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2008
- Messages
- 7,459
Post #44 shows the technique perfectly.
How much sight is above the rear depends on range, gun and load.
kingcheese
Member
- Joined
- Nov 29, 2008
- Messages
- 677
Ok, so its something that if i used the same load, and the same gun, i could mark the front sight if i wanted to
kingcheese
Member
- Joined
- Nov 29, 2008
- Messages
- 677
Cool
Vern Humphrey
Member
Actually, I expect that works for many elevations. With a red insert, I like "broken line", "More broken line", then "same distance above red insert", "broken line above red insert", "level with red insert" and so on. This breaks the elevations down into approximately 0.01" increments, or about 6" per increment at 100 yards.
Playing with the Wichita today at the range. It’s chambered for the 7R cartridge (30-30 necked to 7mm with a modified shoulder). I was sighting it in. The rings had to be replaced. The old ones were cheap Weaver rings that weren’t holding zero. I swapped them out for a set of Leupold rings.
The load was a surplus 139 gr steel FMJ pulled from who-knows-what-round over 22.5 gr of H322, producing 1673 fps. I could load a lot hotter than that, but there’s no reason for it.
Not the best photo. The top group is 1 3/8” and the bottom one is 1 1/8” I pulled the shot at 8:00. The other four are in 5/8”
Shot at 50 yds from a rest.
The load was a surplus 139 gr steel FMJ pulled from who-knows-what-round over 22.5 gr of H322, producing 1673 fps. I could load a lot hotter than that, but there’s no reason for it.
Not the best photo. The top group is 1 3/8” and the bottom one is 1 1/8” I pulled the shot at 8:00. The other four are in 5/8”
Shot at 50 yds from a rest.
I choose not to use the traditional Elmer Keith method. That conflates with proper sighting for defensive purposes.
I find maintaining proper sighting and utalizing hold over to be more effective ( for me ) as well as creating a confused muscle memory of training.
I find maintaining proper sighting and utalizing hold over to be more effective ( for me ) as well as creating a confused muscle memory of training.
OP
OP
David E
Member
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2008
- Messages
- 7,459
Does "proper sighting for defensive purposes" include totally covering up your target with your gun?
It's almost like saying "I don't shoot revolvers, as it'll conflate with semi-autos."
That said, do what works best for you.
Last edited:
Vern Humphrey
Member
How do you estimate hold over when you can't see the target?
When you hold over with iron sights, the sights block out the target -- as one poster on this thread has already commented.
Shooting at one hundred yards ...and defensive shooting. Two entirely different disciplines. More than muscle confusion!
OP
OP
David E
Member
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2008
- Messages
- 7,459
But it is possible to take a longer shot than the indoor range allows.
In my department, one of the guys had to take an 85 yd shot at a badguy shooting at other officers. He hit him, ending the shooting.
I wonder how he could've made the hit if he completely covered up the target with his gun.
In my department, one of the guys had to take an 85 yd shot at a badguy shooting at other officers. He hit him, ending the shooting.
I wonder how he could've made the hit if he completely covered up the target with his gun.
What do you do with a gun that is designed to have the target behind the front sight David E? There are lots of them around. Too many people think the sights are just off when they see that method employed but those people are wrong. And besides that every gun is different and every cartridge is different. What happens when you switch from a very fast, flat shooting cartridge and bullet to one that shoots slow and drops a good bit? You do understand you have to aim higher with the second gun, right? What happens when you still can't get enough holdover by just changing the sight picture? My S&W 629 shoots perfect at close range using the sight picture someone said was an Elmer Keith drawing. It also shoots slightly to the right of where the sights aim. If I waited around to find a perfectly aimed pistol I'd be waiting a long time. In the meantime I can hit what I want to shoot at much longer distances than the system you describe can compensate for. I can hit a man size target at 175 yards with the S&W I mentioned. And trust me I have to hold over a good bit to do it. How do I keep my eyes on the target? That's why we have two eyes. Well that's one reason anyway. I can tell if my target has moved with my off eye when shooting distances like that.
I described a method of shooting very long distances with revolvers earlier. It involves shooting the handgun upside down so the sights can still be used and the target can still be seen. The longest handgun shots I've ever seen were done using that method. I believe it was Bob Munden that was doing it. I saw it on tv a few years back.
There are many methods for aiming a gun friend. If I limited myself to a single method or two I would find I couldn't hit the target nearly as often. I've picked up other people's handguns and fired them once to find how the sights aimed then hit a very small target from a long distance on the second shot. Those people had tried all day to hit that target. I hit it on the second shot. The difference was they were determined to aim the way the book says to aim. I aimed according to how the gun shot. That's why I hit the target and they didn't. I was actually called to come out and demonstrate how to shoot a handgun that day. The people I was demonstrating for nearly fell off their feet when I hit the bottom of that pop can at 40 yards on the second shot. I didn't think it was a particularly hard shot.
There's more than one way to skin a cat my friend. If you can find a pistol that aims perfectly that's great. But I have several handguns that aim the way I described earlier where the target is actually covered by the front blade. If I didn't shoot them accordingly I'd never hit anything with them. But I do hit things quite often using those handguns. In fact I was just knocking a pop can around yesterday using my XDm .40 by using the method of blocking out the target with the front blade. If I aimed it with the blade at the bottom of the notch I would have missed badly.
I described a method of shooting very long distances with revolvers earlier. It involves shooting the handgun upside down so the sights can still be used and the target can still be seen. The longest handgun shots I've ever seen were done using that method. I believe it was Bob Munden that was doing it. I saw it on tv a few years back.
There are many methods for aiming a gun friend. If I limited myself to a single method or two I would find I couldn't hit the target nearly as often. I've picked up other people's handguns and fired them once to find how the sights aimed then hit a very small target from a long distance on the second shot. Those people had tried all day to hit that target. I hit it on the second shot. The difference was they were determined to aim the way the book says to aim. I aimed according to how the gun shot. That's why I hit the target and they didn't. I was actually called to come out and demonstrate how to shoot a handgun that day. The people I was demonstrating for nearly fell off their feet when I hit the bottom of that pop can at 40 yards on the second shot. I didn't think it was a particularly hard shot.
There's more than one way to skin a cat my friend. If you can find a pistol that aims perfectly that's great. But I have several handguns that aim the way I described earlier where the target is actually covered by the front blade. If I didn't shoot them accordingly I'd never hit anything with them. But I do hit things quite often using those handguns. In fact I was just knocking a pop can around yesterday using my XDm .40 by using the method of blocking out the target with the front blade. If I aimed it with the blade at the bottom of the notch I would have missed badly.
coolluke01
Member
Video or it didn't happen.
You have lots of words and no proof and very little understanding.
That being said, if that's what you like and it works fine. But you can't say there isn't a better or right way simply because you claim to have some success with your way.
There is a better way to do this. It has been explained and the reasons for it have been shown.
This switching from different calibers and point of impact in relation to point of aim do not change how one should aim for long range shooting.
The arbitrary way you hold over in midair will change from gun to gun and caliber to caliber.
You have lots of words and no proof and very little understanding.
That being said, if that's what you like and it works fine. But you can't say there isn't a better or right way simply because you claim to have some success with your way.
There is a better way to do this. It has been explained and the reasons for it have been shown.
This switching from different calibers and point of impact in relation to point of aim do not change how one should aim for long range shooting.
The arbitrary way you hold over in midair will change from gun to gun and caliber to caliber.
OP
OP
David E
Member
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2008
- Messages
- 7,459
Not sure what Cee Zee's point is.
Sure, there are different ways to hold the sights. Some of those ways are stupid. Some work very well.
I prefer to utilize the methods that work best.
I made 100 yd hits using 4 nearly sightless pocket pistols, just to prove to my student it could be done. Even better, HE made hits with just a few shots with all the same guns, too, proving that with proper technique, it's not that difficult to hit a 100 yd target.
Sure, there are different ways to hold the sights. Some of those ways are stupid. Some work very well.
I prefer to utilize the methods that work best.
I made 100 yd hits using 4 nearly sightless pocket pistols, just to prove to my student it could be done. Even better, HE made hits with just a few shots with all the same guns, too, proving that with proper technique, it's not that difficult to hit a 100 yd target.
- Status
