125 yard pistol accuracy?
- Thread starter Rifleman1776
- Start date
- Status
NoSecondBest
New member
I love these internet claims of "how good I am". I've seen the best pistol shooters in the world shoot and people on here are making claims that the worlds best can't replicate. Must be true, it's on the internet.
One of the longest defensive shooting I've ever heard of from a handgun was the Fairchild AFB shooting. The gunman killed several people at the hospital. The SF that responded, Senior Airman Andy Brown, fired 4 shots at the gunman from about 70 yards with his M9, and hit him twice, once in the shoulder, and once in the head. That is extraordinary. Hitting 25 for 30, in a defensive situation would be nearly impossible at 125 yards I would think, if your name wasn't Bob Munden.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tied-t1fFsk
And those claiming you could hit 25 for 30 at 125 with a handgun. Do you think you could do it if you were being shot at? I highly doubt it. Hell, I've hit things out to 200 yards with a handgun before. But the conditions are just right to make it happen, and it doesn't happen all the time. 50 yards is about my maximum with some level of consistancy and accuracy, in a controlled situation. I sure wouldn't want to be more than 20 or 25 yards away in a defensive situation and be able to hit what I'm shooting at.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tied-t1fFsk
And those claiming you could hit 25 for 30 at 125 with a handgun. Do you think you could do it if you were being shot at? I highly doubt it. Hell, I've hit things out to 200 yards with a handgun before. But the conditions are just right to make it happen, and it doesn't happen all the time. 50 yards is about my maximum with some level of consistancy and accuracy, in a controlled situation. I sure wouldn't want to be more than 20 or 25 yards away in a defensive situation and be able to hit what I'm shooting at.
L_Killkenny
New member
Well obviously the book is not very well thought out on the gun front for a couple reasons pointed out. Not unusual for I'm actually surprised when books, movies and TV actually get something right. But scoring 25 hits outta 30 on a stationary man sized target is far from impossible. It takes the right shooter, the right gun, a probably a lot more time than the shooters in the book had. But 4" - 5 shot groups are not out of the question with my .357 at 100 yards. Given a decent day and lot's of time. Off hand under stress I'd have a better chance hitting it with a ricochet than my actual shot.
A man sized target at 125 yards 25 out of thirty is doable with a handgun; slow aimed fire.
Now, doing this after being "wounded" with the possibility of return fire is a bit of a game changer. And one would assume that a sniper would not be standing upright there just taunting a pair of 1911 wielding opponents, even at 125 yards.
About every time that I go out shooting, I set up tin cans and clays out to 125 yards specifically for handgun shooting. My 10" gong at 100 yards is not much of a challenge. And for those that "poo-poo" longer distance handgun shooting and say that it is just so much internet bravado, watch Hickok45 on youtube/1911 at 230 yards:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v2cnop15VA8
And realize that there are many other folks who also practice longer range shooting with handguns.
And really does anyone expect reality in an adventure novel?
Now, doing this after being "wounded" with the possibility of return fire is a bit of a game changer. And one would assume that a sniper would not be standing upright there just taunting a pair of 1911 wielding opponents, even at 125 yards.
About every time that I go out shooting, I set up tin cans and clays out to 125 yards specifically for handgun shooting. My 10" gong at 100 yards is not much of a challenge. And for those that "poo-poo" longer distance handgun shooting and say that it is just so much internet bravado, watch Hickok45 on youtube/1911 at 230 yards:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v2cnop15VA8
And realize that there are many other folks who also practice longer range shooting with handguns.
And really does anyone expect reality in an adventure novel?
And that's the key. It's not about slow fire, bullseye shooting from 100 yards. Anyone can do that adequately. You add in adrenaline, and many other potential factors, and your ability to hit anything past 50 yards diminishes GREATLY.
Ahh, so you're that guy who goes to the range, sets his target out to 50 (or 100, or whatever) yards. Takes careful slow aim. If using a revolver, or DA/SA semi, cocks the hammer, then carefully squeezes the trigger. Hits the target, of course, but then gives crap to the people that can get 5 rapid fire shots within 6 inches at 25 yards, because you got 5 shots within 6 inches at 100 yards, and it only took you a minute and a half to get the shots off! Sound unreasonable? I've seen it.
Shooting a static target, with no pressure/stress/adrenaline at any distance on a standard range is one thing. Doing it under pressure with all of those factors included is an entirely different thing. Why do you think miss percentages are so low at short (less than 10 yards) ranges? It has nothing to do with training, and everything to do with adrenaline and stress.
Try an IPSC or IDPA match sometime. When you're under the clock, there's a lot of stress. That 25 yarder they put in there seems incredibly far. I practice and train to be able to hit my target at closer ranges, because chances are very slim I'll have to take a shot greater than 10 yards. I'll practice out to 20 or 30 yards sometimes, and I'll go out to 50 rarely, but 5-10 yards is where I work most of the time. Why? Because statistically, if I am in a shooting situation, I won't have to hit a gong at 100 yards...instead, I'll have to hit an attacker at under 10 yards.
Part of the point is that most can not.
Why not? Because they do not practice at longer distances; and they may not have the skill set, and/or may not be physically able (eyesight, muscle control, etc...).
Different focus/shooting discipline. Sure there are some overlapping skills; however, again different emphasis.
Until one is "in that situation where the chips are down" one really doesn't know how one will perform/react. Punching paper and hitting steel, timed or not, near or far, fast or slow can help simulate situations. But, until it really counts you just don't know. Again, training/practice/skills all can help; I am a strong advocate of all of these.
An excellent example is "buck fever". Perfectly capable marksman at the range, fumbles and can't hit the broad side of a barn at the sight of a legal animal. Or the many accounts of people forgetting the safety on their firearm when being robbed, and continuing to pull the trigger again and again...
And on the other side of the coin, the first time hunter who drops his animal with the first shot, or the person who remembers to flick off the safety.
Both examples may have the same/similar training and perform equally at the range; however, there are many names for it but until you are there... one just doesn't know.
Being a hunter there have been many times that I have utilized the skills involved in being able to easily hit a 100 yard gong, yet I have never had to "hit an attacker at under 10".
YMMV (And that is the beauty of it.)
NO. Not gonna happen.
Slow fire long range accuracy is possible, although the 1911 is far from the best choice.
Shooting back against a sniper with their handguns? Unless your characters have practiced shooting those guns at that distance, ain't gonna be no 25 hits. 2 or 3 perhaps, random hits would be much closer to believable and zero hits (with a few near misses) would be much closer to reality.
I can hit (repeatedly, once I'm on) the 200 yard gong at my local range with any handgun you give me, usually before the gun is empty. Off hand. Assuming there's no wind, and a spotter (really needed for the small calibers), its just a matter of learning how much front sight to hold up, to compensate for the drop.
With a .45 auto, you need to hold up enough so a point between a third to half way to the ejection port is level with the top of your rear sight. Put your target on top of the front sight and spot the fall of shot, correcting as needed.
And, remember that you have no reference point on the slide, so each shot will be a best guess using the force. Once you learn how much to hold up, you can get pretty close, shot after shot. Marking the slide makes it even easier.
BUT, do that rapidly enough to be suppressive fire against a sniper, and accurately enough to get hits (and 25 out of 30 is a pipe dream)? Maybe, if your shooters had spent hundreds of hours of long range practice, including rapid fire.
I couldn't do it, and I've spent the best part of 20 years shooting thousands of rounds out of different handguns across a 200 yd canyon at targets 10" or so, sometimes less.
I don't know if even Mack Bolan could make 25 hits out of 30...
I could get close enough that the sniper would know he was being shot at...and I might even get a hit on him, maybe even two, sometimes even a blind monkey finds a banana!
(and that's assuming the sniper, with a rifle, who has already hit me once-grazed) doesn't get another shot and a solid hit while the wife and I are in spray and pray modeNow, at 125yds, given a head & shoulders size target, my old 7.5" Ruger Blackhawk in .45 Colt, with the load I have been shooting since 1983, some cover, and that sniper will have something to really worry about....
armoredman
New member
With Big Thunder, he can hit anything...or use the rocket launchers in the RV...
Winchester_73
New member
The topic of this thread proves once again, that most often, authors for novels and screenwriters or even directors for movies lack a knowledge of firearms. For me, its more an expectation rather than a disappointment. Also, many times when a movie has a gun or gun scene which more historically accurate or realistic, the movie may not be as good otherwise. Sometimes, depending upon the movie, book, play, etc you have to just get over the fact that the gun, the action with the gun, or the handling of the gun is senseless. The other consideration is that the movie fan who has no knowledge of firearms is most likely not to notice anyways, which goes back to one reason why this happens in the first place - many people don't care about that.
One of my favorite "only in the movies" gun moments is when someone uses a revolver with a silencer. We know (I hope) that this is largely not worth the effort, but it was done in Magnum Force and in the original Manchurian Candidate, which are both great movies, aside from those misconceptions surrounding firearms.
One of my favorite "only in the movies" gun moments is when someone uses a revolver with a silencer. We know (I hope) that this is largely not worth the effort, but it was done in Magnum Force and in the original Manchurian Candidate, which are both great movies, aside from those misconceptions surrounding firearms.
And thus, my point is made.
Hitting 25 for 30 at 125 yards while being shot at in a defensive situation AIN'T GONNA HAPPEN.
Like I said, hitting a target at 100 yards, slow fire, no pressure isn't really a difficult thing to do. Someone who has never done it before, they'll have some difficulty. But once you learn how your gun behaves at that range, and how to aim, most people should be able to reliably hit a man sized target at 100 yards (or 125 as the case may be) at least 50-60% of the time.
Add in the buck fever aspect of it, and you'll be closer to 0% of the time than anything.
This is a topic that comes up a lot. No training is going to be able to prepare you to defend yourself if the time comes. If you're a handgun hunter, that 100 yard gong is a good thing to train with. If you're training for the possibility of having to fire in self defense, there's almost no benefit to shooting past 50 yards (and I'd even argue past 25 yards). There are other skills that I need to work on (and I'm an OK shot...). Being able to hit a target out to 100 yards might be fun to do (and it is) but it's benefit for defensive shooting is almost nothing.
I train at around 10 yards, give or take 10 yards. I practice rapid fire, malfunction drills, reloads, movement, using cover, multiple threats, firing from retention, etc. Although there is no guarantee any of these skills will need to be used in any defensive shooting I might be a part of, there's a far higher probability that those skills will be used than skill hitting something out to 100 yards.
Unfortunately, since we're talking about a fictional story here, the author can put whatever they want. And we can argue it all day long. Let me amend my original position. I said it'd be impossible to hit 25 for 30 at 125 yards. A better way to put it would be it's highly improbable.
L_Killkenny
New member
Statistically the odds I have to hit an attacker at any range is slim. Where as the odds I'm gonna have/want to hit that critter or gong or rabid pop can are at 100%. You may not believe this but most guns are owned for fun not outta fear. Set your drills aside and have some fun for Lord's sake.
Oh, I didn't realize that you're the guy who sets the definition of what fun is.
I do have fun with what I'm doing. I look forward to hitting the range everytime I go, regardless of what I'm doing. The chances I'll have to hit a critter at any range is zero. Not against hunting or varminiting or anything like that, I just don't participate in it. I'm more likely going to have to shoot at someone to defend myself, than shoot a critter for fun.
Running through an IDPA-like scenario is incredibly fun, and a huge adrenaline rush. More so than slow firing at a 100 yard gong. But since you say that's what's fun, and training for the possibility of being viciously attacked isn't fun, I guess I'm wrong.
Anyhow, the original post was about a defensive "fear" induced situation. Not hitting a hog (or gong, or whatever) at 100 yards. 25 out of 30 with a 1911 at 125 yards is highly improbable, and there is likely no amount of practical training that will get you to the point where you could do what was described in that situation.
125 yards with a rifle is easy. For a "sniper", it should be a 100% hit potential.
At that distance, the accuracy of the pistol isn't the issue, but the accuracy of the shooter. Assuming the sniper was in any way concealed from view (prone, behind a tree, etc.), then I'd say one or two hits, in a hail of thirty rounds fired, would be reasonable. 25-for-30 wouldn't be realistic at any distance, beyond execution-style.
I've shot a .45 at a 36'x18' steel plate at 115 yards, and was able to hit it, but not every time, and certainly not the first time, as it took a half-dozen rounds to figure out where to hold to hit it.
At that distance, the accuracy of the pistol isn't the issue, but the accuracy of the shooter. Assuming the sniper was in any way concealed from view (prone, behind a tree, etc.), then I'd say one or two hits, in a hail of thirty rounds fired, would be reasonable. 25-for-30 wouldn't be realistic at any distance, beyond execution-style.
I've shot a .45 at a 36'x18' steel plate at 115 yards, and was able to hit it, but not every time, and certainly not the first time, as it took a half-dozen rounds to figure out where to hold to hit it.
Given the scenario, I'd rather be the sniper at 125 yard against two people with 1911s. Can the shot be done, sure. But under the stress of being fired back at with a pistol, unlikely. I hit a bowling pin the other day at 70 yards with my 22/45 mk3. These people on here practicing pistol accuracy at 100 yards are seriously wasting ammo. Right tool for the job folks. Go grab a rifle.
L_Killkenny
New member
Your posts didn't talk about fun or indicate you were having fun, they were very much based on SD and it had little to nothing to do with the OP's 125 yards shot question. IT very much had a "you need a gun for short range SD and nothing else" tone. They also contained an attitude towards anyone who takes slow aimed fire as if they were somehow beneith your ubber short range, run and gun expertise. Glad you have fun running your drills or your courses but the "it's the only true use for a handgun" attitude that shows us nothing.
When it comes to the OP's question I could see how you may think 125 yards hits are beyond the realm of possibility. Most of your shootin at 5-10 yards? Really? No wonder you have trouble with the 25 yard shots on your IDPA course. That'd be a chip shot for that slow fire bullseye shooter even if he did have to rush.
Last edited:
I would say my posts had very much to do with the 125 yard shot question. Slow fire on a long range target with a handgun will not prepare you to defend yourself with said handgun, against someone with a rifle at 125 yards. My point was in response to someone who was disparaging people who practice at "5 yards" and can't hit anything past 30 yards. Beyond that, a shooter with a rifle, against 2 people with handguns at 125 yards is no contest, unless you're very lucky. The guy with the rifle will almost certainly win, unless you've been training to defensively hit a long range target with a handgun. No one does this. Some will shoot long range for fun, or handgun hunting, or whatever, but being shot at, by someone with a superior weapon system for the situation is a completely different ball game.
Are you saying you'd rather have a handgun at long range than say a rifle? I'll agree that at any range, a handgun is better than nothing, but at such extreme distances, a handgun is practically useless for defensive purposes. If I were in the situation outlined by the OP, certainly, I'd do everything I could do, but I'm a realist. There's practically no way I will win this fight.
Huh? I'd re-read your post. Your post was dripping with that same type of language. As if there's no way you can have fun doing anything but long range slow fire, and other people aren't doing it right. This thread isn't about what training or shooting is most fun. It's about whether someone can hit 25 for 30, at a human sized target, at 125 yards. My thoughts on training were only to highlight the fact that the scenario given by the OP was highly improbable.
I have fun shooting. I do all sorts of kinds of shooting. I enjoy IDPA/IPSC style scenarios the most. They're exciting, and a very serious challenge. I also have fun taking my Mossberg 702 out to range and shooting cans, or whatever else I might have. Again, the context of this thread isn't about what's fun. YOU changed it to that. I will never disparage someone doing something they're having fun with, especially when it comes to shooting.
YOU'RE the one who brought up the fun aspect. That has NO bearing WHATSOEVER on this thread. It shows us nothing. If the thread was, "What kind of shooting is the most fun?" we would be on topic. You made it about what was fun. My comments on training and practice were aimed at others, and to help make my point. Nice derail, there.
Ahh, the ad hominem. This is the one that get's brought out when you realize you have nothing else to offer in the argument.
Let me rephrase, maybe you'll understand:
25 for 30 at 125 yards, with a handgun, being shot at by a rifle. (Just to make sure you fully understand the scenario).
This is almost to the realm of impossibility. Could it be done? I try to never say never, so I will say sure, it's possible. But it is highly unlikely. Hitting a human sized target at 125 with a handgun, slow fire is certainly possible, and I've done it several times (well, never shot at anything past 100 yard with a handgun, anyway). Doing it under stress, and under attack, it's just probably not gonna happen, no matter how much you'd like it to.
L_Killkenny
New member
It goes a dang sight farther in preparing a shooter for that very unusual circumstance than shootin B27's at 5 yards.
Think we can all agree that it's an oxymoron using the terms "extreme distance" and "defensive purposes" in the same sentence. Let alone when we throw handguns into the mix. But then, handguns aren't nearly as limited as you seem to think they are. Shooter maybe, not the gun. I'm not about to defend the premise of the OP's book, it was dumb, but I'll guarantee you wouldn't want to be at 125 yards if I started shooting 15 rounds of .45acp as fast as I could pull the trigger. The odds I score better than 25% is slim to none but how many times would I have to hit? I can pull mighty fast, a man isn't that small and 125 yards isn't that far. Even for a lowly .45.
We could debate all day about who's responsible for the thread drift, You, me, AZAK, etc. You want to say I brought fun up, I'm fine with that. But your post (#28) definitely aired against using handguns for anything but close range, run and gun, SD type shooting. That is what I was responding too, my feelings on the OP's book were covered well before you chimed in.
- Status