How Accurate is "Defense-Accurate"?

[C-dub]

In an IDPA match once I had to shoot off hand and put two rounds in before moving. First round was kinda in the middle , but low, -1.

Second shot went right between the eyes. 0 down. When they asked me why I did a head shot, I replied that I didn't. I was still aiming center mass.

[TexasTornado]

When I bought my Sig 226 Navy some years ago, one of those special runs Sig did, I had a hard time shooting accurately. This was one of the most admired pistols ever made, used by SEALS, SAS, law enforcement, etc. How could this be? I had no training since military days, no real experience, but how hard could it be?

I drove the guys at the LGS nuts, worried myself to a frazzle, fiddled with sight pushers, got advice from most of the other IDPA shooters in the group, etc. and somebody told me to talk to Bruce Gray, a Sig shooting team guy and gun smith par excellence then in Sacramento. Gray holds weekend schools among other things. I sent him my pistol to work on, trigger work, change sights, etc. When I showed up for one of his weekend schools, he was ringing the steel at 50 yards very consistently with it. It wasn't the pistol!

Over the next few years, I attended 3 or 4 weekend shooting schools of his. He preaches trigger control, lots of dry firing. "Shooting is dry firing with noise." I'm still not Lone Ranger accurate but my shooting improved enormously. It turns out that's what my SEAL buddies did and suggested. A couple of hundred dry fire a day, concentrating on trigger prep and control, does wonders.

Some have natural ability, talent. Like golfers, the rest of us benefit from training with a competent teacher, and retraining, too.

I may have to try this with my p238. I have the p226 Navy as well and I find that I shoot (very) noticeably better with it than my p238. I think it may have something to do with the weight of it preventing me from jerking as much with anticipation of the noise.

[The Annoyed Man]

Thanks to all for your input--I appreciate it. I will have the bore slugged, try some more types of ammo, and shoot it off a rest (which will have to be at 25 yards at our range) and see what happens. And yes, reliability trumps pinpoint accuracy every time and that's what I really like about the gun.

Cheers,

Crash

Crash,

I have the same firearm and have the same "issue." The more I use it the better I know I will become.

I am curious as to how you like the Hornady 124 gr, I bought some a while ago but have yet to test it at the range.

vjallen75,

Actually, the Hornady was the most accurate of the group. And, as I stated, I've had no reliability problems with any ammo, so now I'm trying to choose a carry ammo based on accuracy.

Crash

I would give some consideration to a bullet's terminal ballistics performance too. Hypothetically speaking, if I were getting 3" groups from FMJ and 4" groups from Federal HST, I'd carry the HST.

[bblhd672]

I would give some consideration to a bullet's terminal ballistics performance too. Hypothetically speaking, if I were getting 3" groups from FMJ and 4" groups from Federal HST, I'd carry the HST.

[Crash]

Thanks to all for your input--I appreciate it. I will have the bore slugged, try some more types of ammo, and shoot it off a rest (which will have to be at 25 yards at our range) and see what happens. And yes, reliability trumps pinpoint accuracy every time and that's what I really like about the gun.

Cheers,

Crash

Crash,

I have the same firearm and have the same "issue." The more I use it the better I know I will become.

I am curious as to how you like the Hornady 124 gr, I bought some a while ago but have yet to test it at the range.

vjallen75,

Actually, the Hornady was the most accurate of the group. And, as I stated, I've had no reliability problems with any ammo, so now I'm trying to choose a carry ammo based on accuracy.

Crash

I would give some consideration to a bullet's terminal ballistics performance too. Hypothetically speaking, if I were getting 3" groups from FMJ and 4" groups from Federal HST, I'd carry the HST.

vjallen75,

From the research I've done on shots fired into 10% ballistic gelatin, I believe the best terminal ballistics are from Gold Dot 124 gr HP +Ps, Federal HSTs in 124 gr, Hornady 124 gr XTPs, Winchester Defend 147 gr HP, and Corbon DPX. I don't have any of the Winchester Defends or Corbon DPXs right now, but as soon as I get some I will try them. Whichever of these gives me the best accuracy will be my carry load. I would really like to have a group no bigger than 4" shooting unsupported (not off a rest) at 15 yards shooting quick fire (just time enough to come down out of recoil and get the sights aligned again).

Thanks for your help,

Crash

[Sport Coach]

Sounds like good advice here. Sounds like you should be able to shoot that as accurately as you like. When I initially bought my CZ PO1 I took it to an outdoor range at 7 yds. Didn't hit the target AT ALL with the first 50 rounds (hard to admit)! Realized I was shooting low right as I hit the guy's target next to me with one round. Practiced better trigger control and now it's my favorite gun. I also shoot a S&W M&P in 9mm and I still have to use better technique with that one to keep accuracy/speed acceptable.

[vjallen75]

Thanks to all for your input--I appreciate it. I will have the bore slugged, try some more types of ammo, and shoot it off a rest (which will have to be at 25 yards at our range) and see what happens. And yes, reliability trumps pinpoint accuracy every time and that's what I really like about the gun.

Cheers,

Crash

Crash,

I have the same firearm and have the same "issue." The more I use it the better I know I will become.

I am curious as to how you like the Hornady 124 gr, I bought some a while ago but have yet to test it at the range.

vjallen75,

Actually, the Hornady was the most accurate of the group. And, as I stated, I've had no reliability problems with any ammo, so now I'm trying to choose a carry ammo based on accuracy.

Crash

I would give some consideration to a bullet's terminal ballistics performance too. Hypothetically speaking, if I were getting 3" groups from FMJ and 4" groups from Federal HST, I'd carry the HST.

vjallen75,

From the research I've done on shots fired into 10% ballistic gelatin, I believe the best terminal ballistics are from Gold Dot 124 gr HP +Ps, Federal HSTs in 124 gr, Hornady 124 gr XTPs, Winchester Defend 147 gr HP, and Corbon DPX. I don't have any of the Winchester Defends or Corbon DPXs right now, but as soon as I get some I will try them. Whichever of these gives me the best accuracy will be my carry load. I would really like to have a group no bigger than 4" shooting unsupported (not off a rest) at 15 yards shooting quick fire (just time enough to come down out of recoil and get the sights aligned again).

Thanks for your help,

Crash

Thanks for the info guys, I have been wanting to try gold dot and hst. I will try both and go from there.

[Legionnaire]

For hunting purposes, I have always considered my effective range to be the distance at which I can keep all six shots from a revolver on a six-inch pie plate. Not the same, of course, but I am certain that all my carry guns are more than accurate enough in and of themselves. Shooting from a rest I can ring steel at 100 yards with a Glock 23. The real question is how fast you can shoot accurately at defense distances, knowing that stress and speed can open a group into a pattern.

So I'd shoot a new gun from a rest at 25 yards. If the group looked "acceptable" (and that's in the eye of the beholder), I'd practice for accuracy and speed (in that order) from more reasonable defensive distances from concealed, holstered, and ready low positions.

[canvasbck]

Thanks to all for your input--I appreciate it. I will have the bore slugged, try some more types of ammo, and shoot it off a rest (which will have to be at 25 yards at our range) and see what happens. And yes, reliability trumps pinpoint accuracy every time and that's what I really like about the gun.

Cheers,

Crash

Crash,

I have the same firearm and have the same "issue." The more I use it the better I know I will become.

I am curious as to how you like the Hornady 124 gr, I bought some a while ago but have yet to test it at the range.

vjallen75,

Actually, the Hornady was the most accurate of the group. And, as I stated, I've had no reliability problems with any ammo, so now I'm trying to choose a carry ammo based on accuracy.

Crash

I would give some consideration to a bullet's terminal ballistics performance too. Hypothetically speaking, if I were getting 3" groups from FMJ and 4" groups from Federal HST, I'd carry the HST.

vjallen75,

From the research I've done on shots fired into 10% ballistic gelatin, I believe the best terminal ballistics are from Gold Dot 124 gr HP +Ps, Federal HSTs in 124 gr, Hornady 124 gr XTPs, Winchester Defend 147 gr HP, and Corbon DPX. I don't have any of the Winchester Defends or Corbon DPXs right now, but as soon as I get some I will try them. Whichever of these gives me the best accuracy will be my carry load. I would really like to have a group no bigger than 4" shooting unsupported (not off a rest) at 15 yards shooting quick fire (just time enough to come down out of recoil and get the sights aligned again).

Thanks for your help,

Crash

What kind of splits are you talking about when you say "just time enough to come down out of recoil and get the sights aligned again"? A 4" group with .30 second splits at 15 yards would be phenomenal, but very very few can accomplish that kind of accuracy and speed together. Getting a 4" group with .75 splits is very attainable, but not really the kind of shooting you would be doing in a defensive situation.

IMO (which is worth exactly what you paid for it), the ability to get 6" groups at <.30 splits would be much more valuable than tack driving with slower splits. A threat with three holes center mass in one second is much less likely to be a threat after that one second than a single hole in it over the same time frame.

To answer the title question in the OP "How accurate is defense-accurate?":
I want my EQUIPMENT to be capable of making a single ragged hole at 15 yards. The only way to test the accuracy of my equipment is to take as much of "me" out of the equation as possible. Shoot from a bench, go very slow, let the shot surprise you, etc.

Once I have the equipment that can perform without "me", now training to be "defense accurate" is all about me, I have eliminated inaccuracy of the equipment from the equation. From your posts it seems that you are possibly trying to evaluate the equipment in a manner that does not take human error out of the equation.

[Legionnaire]

... To answer the title question in the OP "How accurate is defense-accurate?":
I want my EQUIPMENT to be capable of making a single ragged hole at 15 yards. The only way to test the accuracy of my equipment is to take as much of "me" out of the equation as possible. Shoot from a bench, go very slow, let the shot surprise you, etc.

Once I have the equipment that can perform without "me", now training to be "defense accurate" is all about me, I have eliminated inaccuracy of the equipment from the equation. From your posts it seems that you are possibly trying to evaluate the equipment in a manner that does not take human error out of the equation.

canvasbck said it better than I.