Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 30

Thread: Shooting Stance

  1. #1
    Premium Member MarineHawk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    1,946

    Default Shooting Stance

    All my life, until a couple of years ago, I shot pretty well, including qualifying as expert with a HG in the USMC (which actually did not seem to be quite that high of a bar), but I switched from the Weaver to the Isosceles stance a couple of years ago (after reading the book "Surgical Speed Shooting" and after my brother said that the tecniques in it helped him out, and he's a better shot with a handgun than me to begin with). I wonder how most others shoot and how it helps or hurts. Today, when shooting my 10mm, I was wondering why my group size was opening (essentially doubling). Then, I realized I had canted my body into the Weaver without thinking after reloading. I moved back into the Isosceles stance, and I started hitting nearer to the bullseye again. That was the first time I had accidentally switched back to the Weaver, and thought the results were interesting. I wasn't rapid-firing, but wasn't taking more than a second or so between shoots. Am I alone on this one, or do any others out there shoot significantly better in one stance than the other?

  2. #2
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Sandpoint, ID
    Posts
    1,974

    Default

    Solid two handed grip and feet spread about shoulder width with weak foot slightly forward. Align the sights. Squeeze the trigger. Whatever feels good to you and works is what I recommend. Find a comfortable shooting position and don't worry about what it is called.

  3. #3
    Premium Member MarineHawk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Virginia
    Posts
    1,946

    Default

    I only use the terms "Weaver" and "Isoscoles" because that saves me a few extra sentences of describing the geometry from scratch. Even though "garage" sounds annoyingly French, I use it over "residential personal vehicle storage structure" for similar reasons. Bottom line for me though, is that the Weaver is more comfortable and familiar to me, but I surprisingly shoot much better more-easily in the less-comfortable perpendicular Isoscoles stance. Just wondering if anyone else has the same or the opposite experience.

  4. #4
    Member AKDoug's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Talkeetna
    Posts
    5,714

    Default

    I also shoot much better with an isosceles stance.

  5. #5
    Member .338-06's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Anchorage
    Posts
    1,045

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MarineHawk View Post
    I only use the terms "Weaver" and "Isoscoles" because that saves me a few extra sentences of describing the geometry from scratch. Even though "garage" sounds annoyingly French, I use it over "residential personal vehicle storage structure" for similar reasons. Bottom line for me though, is that the Weaver is more comfortable and familiar to me, but I surprisingly shoot much better more-easily in the less-comfortable perpendicular Isoscoles stance. Just wondering if anyone else has the same or the opposite experience.
    First, rep to you for the garage comment! Secondly, I shoot Weaver for two reasons; first, it was how I was taught way back when. Second, I have some medical problems with my neck and shoulders. I've tried to shoot isosceles and have realized I can't shoot more than 7 rounds without pain meds.

    I am trying to shoot both thumbs forward like all the cool kids, though.
    I may be slow, but I get where I'm going!

  6. #6
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Outta Big Lake
    Posts
    1,633

    Default

    uhh, settle the front sight right even with the rear sight, and line em up with the bulls eye and pull the trigger, works every time, don't matter how your standing, I bet it would even work if you were sittin on the pot too
    Eccleasties 8:11 Because the sentence against an evil deed is not executed quickly, There for the hearts of the sons of men among them are given fully to do evil.

  7. #7
    Member GD Yankee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    PANC
    Posts
    1,117

    Default

    Isosceles. Military taught me the weaver stance. That worked ok for target shooting, but after I got out and hung out with some guys who shot IDPA, and received some more training from LEO groups, everyone was using an isosceles variation. Besides better control of the weapon, I find it is a no brainer for in close "point shooting." Square off your arms, push the gun out and press the triggger. The bullets will go where you are facing. I find it much better for recoil control.

    But, what ever works for you is best. To me the weaver is unbalanced and takes more concentration. An isosceles stance is stronger for me. I'm quicker and more accurate.

  8. #8

    Default

    My initial instruction was with the Weaver stance (USMC in 1980) and I used that exclusively until I wore body armor with plates, then it became the Isosceles stance. With body armor I want incoming rounds hitting my rifle plate, not my side. Without body armor the Weaver stance takes over. I shoot equally well in either stance. My grip affects my accuracy more than my stance and if my groups widen out, I refocus on the basics and normally I get back in my zone.

    As for your statement "Today, when shooting my 10mm, I was wondering why my group size was opening (essentially doubling). Then, I realized I had canted my body into the Weaver without thinking after reloading. I moved back into the Isosceles stance, and I started hitting nearer to the bullseye again" is it possible that you simply refocused and paid attention to the basics? I would guess that you can shoot well in either stance if you do the B-R-A-S-S that I know you know about. Just a guess, though.

    MyTime

  9. #9
    Moderator AKmud's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Wasilla, Alaska, United States
    Posts
    3,185

    Default

    At the PD we taught Weaver pretty much exclusively till this past year. We have moved to a "modified isosceles" which isn't quite as squared off as a true isosceles. Overall, hits seem to be improving.
    AKmud
    http://i78.photobucket.com/albums/j96/AKmud/213700RMK1-1.jpg


    The porcupine is a peacful animal yet God still thought it necessary to give him quills....

  10. #10
    Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Sandpoint, ID
    Posts
    1,974

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FurFishGame View Post
    uhh, settle the front sight right even with the rear sight, and line em up with the bulls eye and pull the trigger, works every time, don't matter how your standing, I bet it would even work if you were sittin on the pot too
    Yes Sir, this is the way to do it.

    I don't mean to oversimplify this but remember you fight (or hunt) the way you train and it's all nice on the range but in real life and a lot of the new action shooting games such as IDPA you shoot under, over, between and around stuff and most ranges are flat for safety reasons but in the bush it is seldom flat or just the way you want it....sights on target, squeeze the trigger, be it sitting, standing, kneeling or prone, or somewhere in between, rifle or handgun...sights on target, squeeze the trigger!!

  11. #11

    Default

    I shoot better isosceles than the modified weaver I first learned. Weaver still feels more natural though. I don't have a lot of upper body strength, which might be part of it.

  12. #12
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    In an easy chair in Cyberspace
    Posts
    2,316

    Default

    I just shoot. I hit what I aim at. Im happy

  13. #13
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Kodiak, AK
    Posts
    640

    Default

    As well as the 'cool kids' shooting with both thumbs forward (for semis), most of the SD schools are now teaching a form of iscos. In that the shoulders are squared. Although this (in theory) gives the BG a bigger target, it (most importantaly) pretty much ensures that your shots go straight towards the threat. Also a lot of teaching is going towards 'ignore your feet', they will be in the position that they stopped when you drew the gun and should, by natural body movement be in a comfortable position. The real imprtant bit is the shoulders squared to the threat with arms out and gun centered to the body forming the iscos.
    I was taught (20 years military) a weaver type stance, but now find a iscos type much better for SD. The 'Combat Focus' training gives some very good tips and instruction on how to use the iscos in a natural way to enable extremely fast and accurate SD 'point shooting'.

  14. #14
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Outta Big Lake
    Posts
    1,633

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by nbh40 View Post
    As well as the 'cool kids' shooting with both thumbs forward (for semis), most of the SD schools are now teaching a form of iscos. In that the shoulders are squared. Although this (in theory) gives the BG a bigger target, it (most importantaly) pretty much ensures that your shots go straight towards the threat. Also a lot of teaching is going towards 'ignore your feet', they will be in the position that they stopped when you drew the gun and should, by natural body movement be in a comfortable position. The real imprtant bit is the shoulders squared to the threat with arms out and gun centered to the body forming the iscos.
    I was taught (20 years military) a weaver type stance, but now find a iscos type much better for SD. The 'Combat Focus' training gives some very good tips and instruction on how to use the iscos in a natural way to enable extremely fast and accurate SD 'point shooting'.
    if somebody was shooting at you, wouldn't you want your shoulder facing them so as to have a skinny target instead of a wide one(being you facing them)?
    Eccleasties 8:11 Because the sentence against an evil deed is not executed quickly, There for the hearts of the sons of men among them are given fully to do evil.

  15. #15
    Moderator LuJon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Palmer, AK
    Posts
    11,415

    Default

    Depends, am I wearing my ballistic vest or not?

  16. #16

    Default

    I would grab some binocs and look down their barrel. If they were shooting FMJs, I would face them, so they would only go through one lung rather than both. If they were shooting fast opening HPs, I would stand sideways and hope that my arm and shoulder would take the "massive energy dump" and leave my vitals in tact.





  17. #17
    Member AKDoug's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Talkeetna
    Posts
    5,714

    Default

    if somebody was shooting at you, wouldn't you want your shoulder facing them so as to have a skinny target instead of a wide one(being you facing them)?
    The thought shouldn't even enter your mind. Shooting quickly and accurately is far more important than the size of target you present. Of course, you should also be using cover to every advantage. If I'm caught flat footed in the middle of a parking lot I guarantee I am going to be squared up in an iscos and returning accurate and fast fire.

  18. #18

    Default

    I shoot modified Isosceles, weak foot slightly forward. Weaver has always made me feel like I am going to fall over.

  19. #19
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Midwest
    Posts
    4,431

    Default

    I think there are two different goals we seek here.

    Shooting better...isn't a very descriptive term. The Isosceles stance was developed by speed shooters to help ( a slight edge) to shoot accurate shots more quickly. The Cooper stance is for me the most accurate but slower for recoil recovery and thus slower to score well in the many ABC games we shoot today. I think a person needs to be more versatile. Weaver is really the modified Weaver today and that is still used and was taught for many years to those who wanted to shoot shots on target very quickly, I just find the taut isosceles stance to be a little better for quick recoil management. I do like to point both toes squarely at the target and this requires a slight forward shift of weight and is uncomfortable to some at first, but can be mastered.

    I have been teaching my 12 old grandson the isosceles stance and we both shoot that way together. The other day I wanted to show him how to cut a poker card with my 45 and I went to the Cooper stance (strong arm almost straight, support elbow bent) He commented that was new and wanted to know why. Anyway it worked. I cut 4 of 5 shots at 20 feet. (getting old!!) He hit a couple in about 15 shots with the new technique.
    Is there nothing so sacred on this earth that you aren't willing to kill or die for?



  20. #20
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Kodiak, AK
    Posts
    640

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AKDoug View Post
    The thought shouldn't even enter your mind. Shooting quickly and accurately is far more important than the size of target you present. Of course, you should also be using cover to every advantage. If I'm caught flat footed in the middle of a parking lot I guarantee I am going to be squared up in an iscos and returning accurate and fast fire.
    Yup, that's they way. If anyone really thinks they present a smaller target in a Weaver type stance, just do a quick measure. The Weaver probably makes you about 2 inches thinner from a front-on perspectice, not really a game winner.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •