Don't like airweight snubs.

[Guillermo]

Shoot 50,000+ rounds per year with a strict training schedule and you could shoot at their level

Maybe

Maybe not

Those guys are the best of the best.

It takes a lot of god-given talent AND a ton of training to do what they do.

Like with Ed Mcgivern. The stars have to align

 

[PRM]

deleted

 

[David E]

That was what I thought you would say.

I should've said, "full power loads are essential for recoil management during rapid fire."

Any other time, lighter loads are fine.

 

[Guillermo]

"full power loads are essential for recoil management during rapid fire."

that would have been more precise but I got it.

The K-22 is a nice tool for trigger control and sight picture but does not help with recoil control.

I almost always finish with my carry gun and full power loads.

My Achilles heal is that I shoot too many guns.

 

[mavracer]

I have never seen or heard anyone say that Fred or Jamie cheat. What I have experienced personally is some people, when they get beaten by a better shooter, accuse the winner of somehow cheating. Apparently, it's easier to be beaten if you think the winner had to cheat to do it.

Of course a lot of times it's easier to just call someone a wistle blower than to actually look at the facts. Like the fact Jamie shot the '94 or '95 KS (can't remember which year now but several other local shooters might) state match for fun because his ammo didn't make minor. Or the fact that our club president had to petetion USPSA with match results to move him to master class because he tanked classifiers.

The K-22 is a nice tool for trigger control and sight picture but does not help with recoil control.

A model 34 or 63 works good too.

 

[Warp]

I understand the concept of "aim small miss small", but there is more to it. Pie plates don't present a shoot, no shoot, decision. They don't move. A bad guy is not going to have a circle on his chest. I think defensive training should be somewhat realistic. Practice moving. Practice shooting from cover. Practice with more than one assailant. Practice shooting under stress.

Where and how?

 

[mavracer]

Where and how?

here's a place to start
http://www.idpa.com/clublist.asp?pick=GA

 

[David E]

Like the fact Jamie shot the '94 or '95 KS (can't remember which year now but several other local shooters might) state match for fun because his ammo didn't make minor.

Looks like the rules worked as intended. Surely he knew there'd be a chrono and he was the only one to suffer for it. Did he think, "hey, I know I can win this thing without cheating, but I'm going to use sub-minor loads anyway and not worry about that stupid chrono!" Was he caught cheating or did he not pay attention while reloading?

Or the fact that our club president had to petetion(sp) USPSA with match results to move him to master class because he tanked classifiers.

Back then, each and every classifier shot was sent in. The shooter sometimes could "X" it out so it wouldn't be counted if it weren't up to the shooters skill level. Was he sandbagging, or did he tense up simply because it was the classifier? It happens to many shooters, regardless of skill level. Either way, the rules kicked in and he was moved to the appropriate rank.

 

[Guillermo]

Was he caught cheating or did he not pay attention while reloading?

Allow me to clarify.

He wasn't cheating. He was not allowed to participate because his ammo was not up to minimum power.

To have actually cheated he would have had to competed intentionally with sub loads..

Both of those italicized words would have to be true for him to be cheating. Since one was not true and the other is supposition...he did not cheat.

Was he attempting to cheat? Who knows.

From what David says, he didn't need to.

Don't have a dog in this hunt...but hate for people to be convicted on here say.

 

[mavracer]

From what David says, he didn't need to.

Sure didn't need to to beat me or you but other pros were there

Was he attempting to cheat? Who knows.

Would you make up your mind. In my first post I never used the word cheat. I used sportsmanship and then discribed some of their actions. You called it cheating.

 

[Guillermo]

Certainly you suggested that those guys were cheating with statements like "their guns were louder at the chrono".

Are you saying that your post was not properly stated, that you were NOT suggesting that they cheated?

I thought that intentionally using sub power rounds was against the rules...thus cheating.

 

[bonza]

In the mid 1990s I bought a new S&W 442 .38 Special in the satin nickel finish. Great gun, easy to carry, & quite comfortable to shoot.

 

[Andrew Wyatt]

How many of the j-frame carriers on here have shot an ipsc or idpa match with their gun?

If so, we're you dissappointed with your performance?

 

[mavracer]

I thought that intentionally using sub power rounds was against the rules...thus cheating.

Well as you said we really don't know if it was intentional or not. Maybe a master class shooter was ignorant of what PF of his ammo but I doubt it.
Now I'm done with this bickering that has lead to this serious thread drift. If you need any more help defining sportsmanship or integrity PM me.

 

[David E]

How many of the j-frame carriers on here have shot an ipsc or idpa match with their gun?

If so, we're you dissappointed with your performance?

Either if those venues suck for a J-frame. You could ignore the penalties and shoot the stage as you see fit, of course, which isn't really a bad idea. IDPA allows for BUG stages that are 5 rds or less, but there is more to shooting than firing 5 shots and gun-in-hand starts.

The previously mentioned TACSS match has a specific division for 5-shot snubs and utilizes a unique scoring system called DRT (Dead Right There) that allows the 5 shooter to keep up with everyone else and be competitive.

Mav, obviously a Master class shooter knows what the PF is, just as he knows there will be a chrono at a major match. You started the sidetrack, now let it end.

 

[rdrancher]

Holy thread drift! What was the original question?...

I like my 642 just fine. Steel j-frames weigh my pocket down a bit too much. I did try a scandium j-frame with full-house magnums once. No thanks!

 

[David E]

I like my 642 just fine. Steel j-frames weigh my pocket down a bit too much.

That's what I discovered. I originally had a Model 36, but it wasn't very pocket friendly.

 

[rdrancher]

That's what I discovered. I originally had a Model 36, but it wasn't very pocket friendly.

Yep, I really wanted to pocket carry a bobbed-hammer Model 36, but didn't like it banging against my leg. It's amazing the difference a few ounces makes.

 

[Guillermo]

You started the sidetrack, now let it end.

I concur.

Everyone knows you accused them of cheating. Too much tact or too little backbone will not put that genie back in the bottle.

It is all bullsqueeze beyond that.

And to the OP

I do not see people that shoot lightweight j-frames well. Obviously it happens. (David and Mav are examples)

To those of you that will put the time and effort into doing it...great.

But please...please...if you carry a gun...ANY GUN...put the time in to be competent.

And the lighter, smaller and more powerful it is, the greater the effort is required.

 

[David E]

Proper grips matter. The skinny factory wood ones leave much to be desired. This could be the major cause of some of the problems cited in this thread.

Maybe all you need is a grip swap.

 

[AK_Maine_iac]

I had bought the S&W 13 oz Scandium air light 357mag for CC. It was great for that purpose. But at the range after a dozen or so full house loads it would really bite my hand. I sold it after a few years Now i carry a Ruger redhawk 2.5" bbl 45colt. More bark less bite.
I should have said it is a cc weapon for fishing around bear country, but i am sure it will do just fine with two legged critters too.

 

[llwsgn]

i like my 360sc smiths. they have crimson trace lasers as well. full power loads= 1 3/4" 5shot cluster to 10 yds, 2 1/2" cluster 15-18 yds, pray and spray beyond that. kick like a georgia mule when you trigger them, but carry like a full keyring in the pocket. what's not to like with the intended purpose in mind?

 

[Big_John1961]

And again we're talkin' about target accuracy and recoil with a gun that is designed for use at breath-sniffin' distance...likely in the dark...probably fired frantically with one hand at hip level. A gun designed and intended to be carried a lot and seldom shot. An emergency tool that will...due to its weight and bulk...most likely be there when one finds oneself up to one's crotch on crocodiles with shooting as the only option to extract oneself from the fray.

I mean...really...how much practice does one need in order to press the muzzle against a belly and pull the trigger? How accurate does it need to be...or how accurate does one need to be with such a gun? It would serve just as well without sights at all. It would serve just as well if it wouldn't keep five shots on a pie-plate at 15 yards from a machine rest.

Exactly. I don't why this concept is so hard to grasp.

 

[gk2410]

I've always liked and recommended a J-frame airweight - if you carry it for the right reasons. I got my flat-latch Model 42 a looong time ago as a backup when we were still carrying 6-shot wheel guns. It served me well then, and as an occasional carry gun now.

I've handled the new 642's but never shot one, but have recommended it to a lot of folks. Most everyone in my age group don't want/need to carry a large cap, large caliber gun, as we're not going on the offensive anymore. These small, lightweight revolvers are easy to carry, don't have a hammer to snag in a purse or pocket, and work with a pull of the trigger.

Remember, too, that these aren't meant to be range guns. They're a "belly gun" and serve a purpose for close defensive work.

So, the probabilities that you're going to need it are low, it's simple to use, and small and light to carry - which means you probably WILL carry it, and not leave it at home or in your vehicle. I'd rather have a snubby than nothing...

 

[David E]

Exactly. I don't why this concept is so hard to grasp.

Oh, it's easy to grasp, it's just too silly and short-sighted of a "concept" to take seriously.

Who among us can predict with 100% certainty that our confrontation will take place so close that the best tactic is to press the muzzle into the single hostile target? Anyone?

Using such a scenario to justify NOT practicing is......curious.

The encounter might be that close, but it might not. And over 40% of the time, there are multiple opponents.

I'm sure those that embrace the "no need to practice" doctrine would think when confronted by 3 badguys, "I'm sure glad I didn't practice any of this crap!"

Do you think someone well practiced couldn't press the muzzle into the target if necessary ? Or do you think they'd say, "Sir, you're much too close and I can't use my sights and preferred technique. Would you back up, please?"

Me, I'll continue to practice.