Accuracy with a .38 snub-nose

[AK103K]

Lighter recoil loads can help alot with getting rid of the flinch.

They can, but they really dont do anything to deal with the problem. Go back to shooting heavier loads, and the problem usually comes back.

You need to learn to stop concentrating on and worrying about the trigger and what it brings, and focusing on the sights/target and let the trigger go. If your focus is on your sight alignment and maintaining its place on the target, you will always get a surprise break, without anticipation, and the rounds will go where they are supposed to.

Its knowing that as soon as you touch that trigger, especially with a light single action, that its going to go off, takes your focus from what it should be on, and puts it on the trigger. The flinch comes from the anticipation of that focus.

 

[Pudge]

What makes you confident that two shots will slow anyone down sufficiently?

http://gunssavelives.net/self-defense/analysis-of-five-years-of-armed-encounters-with-data-tables/

5 years of data on defensive shootings: Average - 2.2, Median - 2, Mode - 1, Max - 20

 

[Kleanbore]

5 years of data on defensive shootings: Average - 2.2, Median - 2, Mode - 1, Max - 20

From that, what do you conclude?

And remember, Claude's source only contained the successful defenses.

 

[Pat Riot]

Jbird45,
I have 3 J frame Smith & Wesson revolvers that shoot .38 Special. A model 442, a model 36 and a model 60 Pro .357 magnum. Not one of those three shoots Winchester 130 grain FMJ worth a darn for accuracy.

My first mission would be to try several different makers of ammo at different weights to find out what shoots most accurately and what shoots most comfortably for quicker reliable follow up shots.

Actually, since your Dad has experience shooting this gun now, what I would do if this gun is to be a self defense gun is I would spend some money and I would buy a number of boxes of various self defense ammo in .38 Special and I would shoot them all at 5-7 yards to see what load I was most accurate with. I would shoot them slow in double action and shoot solely to see what ammo is most accurate.

I would pick the top 3 most accurate loads and I would then find a practice ammunition that closely duplicates the weight and velocity of the SD ammo that I shoot best in my gun. Then I would practice with that ammo.

This may be easier said than done but the one real benefit would be learning more and more about the gun and how you shoot it as you test it to see what works.

It is my opinion that confidence in what you shoot and how you shoot is just as important as any other factor in shooting. Removing doubt removes a huge roadblock from being confident and focused.

If after all this your Dad isn’t confident with the gun then abandon that gun and find out what else might work.

Look at it this way. You only have 5 rounds. If you can’t make 5 rounds work for you with confidence then you need to re-evaluate the want or need for that particular gun.

My 2 cents.

 

[AK103K]

http://gunssavelives.net/self-defense/analysis-of-five-years-of-armed-encounters-with-data-tables/

5 years of data on defensive shootings: Average - 2.2, Median - 2, Mode - 1, Max - 20

I think the problem with statistics and things like the above, the "rule of threes", etc, people tend to take them as gospel, and thats how things will always work. But, unfortunately, thats not how life works.

I look at them as interesting reading, and then I plan for the worst, as the worst is in those numbers too, and Murphy seems to have a hard-on for me, and Id prefer to be as "prepared" as possible for the worst, should he show up.


I did find this interesting in the article ......

"It appears that revolver shooters are more likely to empty their guns than autoloader shooters."

And since we are discussing snubbies here, and many of those these days, are 5 shooters, I think its a very pertinent thing.

Just going with the "average", thats basically half the snubbies load. Considering that the discussion here is about people having issues making decent hits with one, and thats really not all that uncommon a thing. Add to that, the targets being talked about, are fixed and not moving, and the shooter isnt moving, and if youre having troubles making good hits on that, then the number of rounds in the gun can and does become a serious issue.

Gabe Suarez seems to be disliked by a lot of people in the training industry, but he does have some very valid points on a number of things. One of those things that I think he's spot on with is, a lot of people seem to strive for mediocrity, and think thats OK. They seem to think "average" is good enough. I think the question you have to seriously ask yourself is, "is it"?

I think whats missed on a lot of people is, there is no destination here, only ongoing challenges and goals. Once you attain one, theres always another. No matter how good you "think" you are, or get to be, theres always something else to learn.

 

[nevadabob]

My most accurate 38 special snubby load is 3.5 grains Alliant e3 topped with either a coated Ringer's or Brazos 125 grain TCFP. This produces 750 fps out of my 2" revolvers with no tumblers/flyers and recoil is minimal.

 

[Pudge]

From that, what do you conclude?

And remember, Claude's source only contained the successful defenses.

You asked why anyone would think that 2 shots would be successful. That's some data which suggests if you are going to successfully defend yourself 2 shots can be sufficient. Do you have data suggesting otherwise?

 

[Pudge]

I think the problem with statistics and things like the above, the "rule of threes", etc, people tend to take them as gospel, and thats how things will always work. But, unfortunately, thats not how life works.

I look at them as interesting reading, and then I plan for the worst, as the worst is in those numbers too, and Murphy seems to have a hard-on for me, and Id prefer to be as "prepared" as possible for the worst, should he show up.


I did find this interesting in the article ......

"It appears that revolver shooters are more likely to empty their guns than autoloader shooters."

And since we are discussing snubbies here, and many of those these days, are 5 shooters, I think its a very pertinent thing.

Just going with the "average", thats basically half the snubbies load. Considering that the discussion here is about people having issues making decent hits with one, and thats really not all that uncommon a thing. Add to that, the targets being talked about, are fixed and not moving, and the shooter isnt moving, and if youre having troubles making good hits on that, then the number of rounds in the gun can and does become a serious issue.

Gabe Suarez seems to be disliked by a lot of people in the training industry, but he does have some very valid points on a number of things. One of those things that I think he's spot on with is, a lot of people seem to strive for mediocrity, and think thats OK. They seem to think "average" is good enough. I think the question you have to seriously ask yourself is, "is it"?

I think whats missed on a lot of people is, there is no destination here, only ongoing challenges and goals. Once you attain one, theres always another. No matter how good you "think" you are, or get to be, theres always something else to learn.

I don't think I disagree with anything you said. I was responding to a specific question. There is nothing wrong with suggesting the study's conclusions can be misused. The worst you can face may not be in the study, but lines get drawn somewhere.

 

[Kleanbore]

You asked why anyone would think that 2 shots would be successful. That's some data which suggests if you are going to successfully defend yourself 2 shots can be sufficient.

Can be and would be are two different things.

How many shots may be required is primarily a function of what each projectile damages inside the body. That's a function of the locations of the entry wounds, the angles, and the posture of the assailant.

Two shots may suffice. or it may take three to five, or even more.

In a close encounter with a fast-moving attacker, should it take more than two, the defender who has fired two will be in a world of hurt.

 

[AK103K]

I don't think I disagree with anything you said. I was responding to a specific question. There is nothing wrong with suggesting the study's conclusions can be misused. The worst you can face may not be in the study, but lines get drawn somewhere.

Theres no way you can prepare for "everything", but you should try and prepare for as much as you can, for things that are beyond your current skill level. They may seem far fetched, hell, even into zombie territory, but you never know!

Seriously though, a lot of times, its some of the weird stuff you do in practice, that you are likely never going to encounter, that will likely make you a better shooter, if "anything" were to happen, and even if it doesnt.

Can be and would be are two different things.

How many shots may be required is primarily a function of what each projectile damages inside the body. That's a function of the locations of the entry wounds, the angles, and the posture of the assailant.

Two shots may suffice. or it may take three to five, or even more.

In a close encounter with a fast-moving attacker, should it take more than two, the defender who has fired two will be in a world of hurt.

Im a believer that the number of rounds its going to take, is "exactly" the number of rounds it takes. Simple as that.

The number of rounds in the gun, has no bearing on that what so ever. Unless of course, you run out before its over.

I think you need to get it into your head, you shoot until the threat is down and out. If the target is still in your sights or in front of the gun when the gun comes back on target, you keep shooting.

The sooner you learn to shoot quickly, and repeatably, basically in bursts, the better off youre going to be.

If you want to know why, try shooting quickly while moving, and your hits on target will show you 1/2 of the reason why. The other half you really have no control over.

 

[ThomasT]

Everyone should be able to shoot their snubby like this guy. And I would love to have a shooting area like he has. IIRC he is in Nevada.

 

[94045]

IMHO the laser is a great training aid BUT and that's a huge one. They should almost never be used at a static target with live ammo.

If you can reference the laser below the sights so the shooter can't see it and video the shooting session it can be very helpful for the student to visually see the gun moving off target before discharge.

 

[Pudge]

Can be and would be are two different things.

How many shots may be required is primarily a function of what each projectile damages inside the body. That's a function of the locations of the entry wounds, the angles, and the posture of the assailant.

Two shots may suffice. or it may take three to five, or even more.

In a close encounter with a fast-moving attacker, should it take more than two, the defender who has fired two will be in a world of hurt.

You asked why someone would think that 2 quick accurate shots would suffice. I provided data in the form of a study which shows the average successful defensive shooting is 2.2 rounds. That is all. We can dream up scenarios, speculate on the probabilities and so forth, and certainly considering statistics and data from successful shootings isn't a predictor for the threat a given individual will face. However the study does show what has taken place in successful defensive shootings. Shooting a snubbie accurately and quickly is a difficult skill to acquire, but it is worth pursuing, and if you can do it, it is an effective skill should you need to defend yourself with a firearm.

 

[SeanSw]

I have not seen it mentioned yet but you may want to try Hornady Critical Defense Lite Ammunition 38 Special 90 Grain FTX. It is an ultra light for caliber self defense load. I have never used it and have no comments regarding the performance but the lighter bullet in a non +p load will probably amount to minimal recoil and less flinching.

It looks like this https://www.midwayusa.com/product/1001573970

 

[Kleanbore]

You asked why someone would think that 2 quick accurate shots would suffice.

Yep.. I have yet to see one good reason.

I provided data in the form of a study which shows the average successful defensive shooting is 2.2 rounds. That is all.

Averages mean nothing in risk management

 

[jmr40]

Depends on the skill of the shooter. How does 200 yards sound.

 

[mavracer]

If you can reference the laser below the sights so the shooter can't see it and video the shooting session it can be very helpful for the student to visually see the gun moving off target before discharge.

With live ammo the holes in the target will do the same thing, until they believe the gun was actually pointed where the bullet went I'm not sure you can help them.

 

[94045]

With live ammo the holes in the target will do the same thing, until they believe the gun was actually pointed where the bullet went I'm not sure you can help them.

It is sometimes helpful anyway. Of course a couple of snap caps will do the same thing if they are doing it consistently. For an occasional flyer the laser is just easier.

 

[mavracer]

Theres no way you can prepare for "everything", but you should try and prepare for as much as you can, for things that are beyond your current skill level. They may seem far fetched, hell, even into zombie territory, but you never know!

I think we spend a lot of time arguing between the "just have a gun" and "ready for zombies" I have about come to the conclusion that this is really the fantasy land. Mr BG is either gonna be reluctant to engage or determined. If he's reluctant then just have a gun is probably enough, if he's determined you better have several rounds in the gun and spare mags for each of his buddies.

 

[94045]

Bob Munden.... Really? That's like telling a guy he can lift a 1,000 lb then posting the video to prove it.

Neither is going to happen in my lifetime.

 

[mavracer]

Bob Munden.... Really? That's like telling a guy he can lift a 1,000 lb then posting the video to prove it.

Neither is going to happen in my lifetime.

Yeah Bob was a special case, but the other video is pretty attainable.

 

[camsdaddy]

I would buy a case of wadcutters from precision delta. I would limit my air weight to 50 maybe 100 rounds max per visit. I would load 2-3 and leave the remainder empty in the cylinder and concentrate on the fundamentals. When you get an empty you will see if you are focusing on the front sight, if you are pulling the trigger through, if you are flinching. When not at the range dry fire.
I think if you do that you will find a snub can be quite accurate

 

[OneFreeTexan]

You asked why anyone would think that 2 shots would be successful. That's some data which suggests if you are going to successfully defend yourself 2 shots can be sufficient. Do you have data suggesting otherwise?

Jack Wilson needed only one shot.!

 

[AK103K]

Jack Wilson needed only one shot.!

But who only shoots once?

 

[mavracer]

But who only shoots once?

Apparently Jack Wilson. But IMHO there was a certain amount of luck involved.