PDA

View Full Version : Shooting in "cadence".


Lurper
December 6, 2007, 11:02 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VN0rTnL1fJs

Rob Pincus
December 6, 2007, 01:01 PM
Lurper,

I think the principle expressed in your vid is spot on. Time between shots should be dictated by recoil management and the amount of time it takes to get the necessary deviation control for the given shot, not an objective pace or "cadence".

Good Job.

-RJP

Tanzer
December 6, 2007, 04:52 PM
Makes sense to me (keeping in mind that he's got a lot of experience).

ISC
December 6, 2007, 08:06 PM
I would agree except for the very specialized instance where you are in a competition that you specifically train for where you have a timer dictating when your shots must end and you need to pace yourself to get off every shot. In that instance you are better off getting off all 6 shots even if a couple are only 4s than getting 5 5's and not getting one off.

just playing devil's advocate.

Erik
December 13, 2007, 10:45 PM
Nice video: not too busy. Well done.

Cadence shooting is a common bad habit of intermediate shooters. It is picked up near the transition from novice to intermediate shooter in the mistaken belief that it will make them faster. That may be the case in the short term, but as your skill set and abilitites increases the use of a cadence serves, more often than not, as an impedement to progress as the intermediate shooter looks to transition to an advanced shooter.

(Shooter categories used are loose, generic ones.)

YMMV, but that has been my experience.

On competition: The better competitors allow the front sight to dicatate how fast htey shoot; they do so amazingly fast with great accuracy.

---

Fatigue is a factor, too; when it sets in many advanced shooters, who worked through it, lapse back into it.

vox rationis
December 16, 2007, 05:46 PM
Very nice video..I have a question though, what do you think of "hammers" (two shots with one sight picture) for close range defensive shooting?

Lurper
December 17, 2007, 08:06 PM
I don't see any reason to use what some commonly call "controlled pairs" or "hammers" there is not advantage to two shots with one sight picture. I can't say it any better than this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wbg2s2bfjhw

Erik
December 17, 2007, 09:17 PM
Son,
I don't think "giving up the front sight" is worth it when you consider how fast you can shoot with it.

vox rationis
December 17, 2007, 10:05 PM
I've tried hammers and frankly I feel like the weapon is too out of control on the second shot for my liking, and I personally like to have a front sight picture for every shot, but I was wondering what some of you thought about the hammers. Recently they had one of those personal defense shows where they were at Gunsite I believe, and they were doing hammers, but at targets at very close range, it looked like around 3-5 yards or less even maybe. Anyway I wanted to get y'all's thoughts on the subject.

Lurper thanks for the other video link, actually I'd seen it already and that's how I try to shoot as well.

kgpcr
December 18, 2007, 08:13 PM
If it works dont fix it. It does not make much sense to me but if you think it will help you then by all means do it

Axion
December 19, 2007, 03:25 AM
This is kind of off target but. Where do you get those sort of metal targets you are shooting at in the video, and is it safe to shoot at them with FMJ bullets.

I want to start working on my transitions and taking a few targets like those out to the desert seems to be the ideal way since you get immediate feedback on weather or not you hit the target.

Lurper
December 19, 2007, 05:05 PM
Son,
I don't think "giving up the front sight" is worth it when you consider how fast you can shoot with it.:D

Axion,
Those are just standard steel targets that we had made. Any metal shop should be able to make them for you. Yes, they are safe to shoot w/fmj, but you really don't want them any closer than about 10 yards (especially with jacketed ammo).

One thing to keep in mind, shooting steel can teach you bad habits. With steel, you can be less precise (read sloppy) because you only need to hit the target anywhere. When you shoot at other targets that require more precision, you may get less than ideal hits.

STLRN
December 19, 2007, 05:36 PM
Never say there is never a need for a technique, it all depends on proximity to the threat and the situation at hand.

If you are beyond muzzle to chest range, but still close enough that you can have effects, than there it is a valid technique. If you are beyond that distance and will just miss with your second round than no its not.

Rifleman 173
January 12, 2008, 07:26 AM
Talk about a different kind of cadence shooting.

Shooting in cadence? Ever see the movie "Zulu?" The movie is about a real battle between the British Army and the warriors of the Zulu tribe of South Africa. The battle took place at Rorke's Drift. In the movie they show cadence fire being used to curb the Zulu attack. As I understand it, there was some sort of cadence fire actually used or tried at Rorke's Drift but it may NOT have been done like it was shown in the movie.

Get a load of this one: Cadence fire can be used with automatic fire weapons. I know you're going, "HUH????" In WW2, from about 1943 and on, USMC squads would try to have 3 BARs (Browning Automatic Rifles) in each squad to be used to fight the Japanese. The Marines developed a technique that they used in some situations, like against machinegun nests and bunkers, where one BAR would target the bunker. When the first BAR ran out of ammo then the second BAR would start shooting. While the second BAR was shooting BAR # 1 is reloading and BAR # 3 got ready to engage the target. By using this cadence shooting technique the BARs were able to keep constant fire on their intended target until a guy could use grenades or satchel charges to blow it up. Is cadence fire viable? It seems so in SOME applications. It probably would not work in all cases.

Tanzer
January 13, 2008, 08:22 AM
Not bragging here, but I'm one of those people who can pick up just about any tool and use it well. Show me once, I've got it & just need practice. There's one thing I cannot do no matter how hard I try; Read/play music. The difference between a three beat and a four beat makes absolutely no sense to me. Therefore, cadence never gets in my way. I can't remember ever worrying about rhythm in anyth........ Uh, well, there's one thing, but this isn't the site to talk about bumpin' uglies.

AAANYHEW.... I've been working on double taps & up to four shot series recently & have a question for Lurper or anyone skilled at this: I didn't want to start a new post because I didn't want "yahoo' answers.

I don't want to "fight the recoil", so I'm relaxing the elbows after the shot breaks (tough because I like just a touch of follow-through). The question is, should I be more concerned with the strong or the support hand when regaining the sight picture, or should I adjust in unicine? Secondly, should I worry so much about getting back to the push/pull I'd use in a single shot, or just grasp firmly? I know from previous training that a relaxed hand is faster than a tense one, so do I really need to get back to that balanced squeeze? It take more time.
I'm not looking for trophy shooting, just decent grouping & not letting one get away. I know it'll take practice, but I want to practice the right method. I think I'm a little too worried about getting the "push/pull" back to single-shot feel.
My main deal is SD shooting, so I'm not looking to empty my mag.

Lurper
January 14, 2008, 04:37 PM
You shouldn't fight the recoil, you should let it do the work for you.
Your elbows shouldn't relax "after" the shot, the should be relaxed all the time.
Likewise with the grip; your grip should be neutral. It should be loose but firm, not deathgripped. Adjusting your grip every shot is counterproductive as is "push-pull" or "isometric tension". Relax, achieve a natural and neutral grip/stance. This will allow you to shoot much faster.

This may help:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wbg2s2bfjhw

Tanzer
January 14, 2008, 05:00 PM
Thanks Lurper,
I may have over-emphasized the whole elbow tension deal. It's not like I lock them, but I don't let them "limp" either. Same with the grip. I look at it like "holding a chicken by the neck". Not choking it, but firm enough to keep it in place.
When it comes to push/pull, I do it slightly, not like a contest between the two hands. I've dropped it in the past with negative results, but what the heck, I'll try it again. That's what range practice is for. I instinctively want to tighten the strong hand to regain the sight picture. I'll work on that too. I just can't seem to get the recoil straight back. The barrel wants to raise. BTW - I'm shooting a .45 cal 1911 with a 3" barrel - my carry weapon.
I'll take what you mentioned into account at the range tomorrow & see if I can get that natural balance. I've viewed the video repeatedly and notice how you the gun just finds its way back to position. As with so many things, a lot is in the mind. If I could just find that balance that lets it right itself, I suppose it'd do it for me. Sometimes it's hard not to over-think.
Thanks again.