PDA

View Full Version : Tried Weaver first time.


SPUSCG
June 4, 2011, 05:02 PM
Always shot out of iso. Then decided "why not try weaver."

Shot better (at least with my revovler, iso seemed poor for revolver shooting but okay for semis:confused: to me.

Seemed recoil was less, i wasnt anticipating and breaking clean and on target. Think ill try it again soon and move out a little farther. Had been taught "its iso for everything" but see that both are good stances.

BikerRN
June 4, 2011, 05:15 PM
Both stances have their place as far as I'm concerned.

Iso is good if you wear a bullet resistant vest. I can't even assume a true Weaver position with a vest on. Iso lets one use the protective capabilities of the vest.

Weaver, when not wearing a vest makes one's vital area a smaller target that is partialy protected by the arms. Personaly I think it's all mental fornication, because when it's for real your stance will be the least of your worries.

Biker

SPUSCG
June 4, 2011, 05:19 PM
Mine was more a mod weaver, i shoot rifles in a semi bladed stance right leg back, and trying iso i tend to blade. Decided "why fight my body just work with it.

Skadoosh
June 4, 2011, 06:12 PM
Interesting point about the weaver presenting a smaller target than the isosceles...but wouldn't the weaver be more problematic because of the possibility of more than one organ being penetrated than would the isosceles? I dont really see much difference in presented target area between the two.

MLeake
June 4, 2011, 06:20 PM
The Weaver, for a right handed shooter, puts the upper left arm in the way of some vitals. OTOH, it puts the armhole of a vest in front of vitals, so it's not optimal if one is wearing a vest. (Another poster has already mentioned this, but it's worth repeating.) This is particularly true if one wears a vest with an impact plate, in which case an isosceles is a much better presentation with regard to armor aspect.

SPUSCG
June 4, 2011, 06:31 PM
Which i dont wear body armor so that points not really big for me. Ive been taught ISOISOISO for so long but noticing iso is not the end all best for everything, both stances have their place. I like the weapon retention and stability weaver gives.

Have not tried weaver on an auto yet, but notice for revolvers i shoot signicantly better, autos ive shot fine in iso. At least SA autos, da autos are tough.

Maximus856
June 4, 2011, 06:40 PM
I've found that when a lot of people try to perfect a certain stance according to the 'proper' way to do it, they don't try to perfect what works for them. Sometimes if one or the other isn't working or is uncomfortable, changing up that stance a bit will benefit the shooter. If shoulder width apart doesnt work, try spreading the feet further or bringing them closer. Any variation that gets you hitting that x ring is what should be 'perfect.'

The one problem I've noticed most regardless of stance, is that people bring their eyes to the sights and not the sights to their eyes. Just my $0.02

-Max

MLeake
June 4, 2011, 08:27 PM
I used to find I had better results with Weaver, but then I started working on my iso stance. Bending the knees a bit more, and leaning a bit more forward, really improved results.

YMMV.

ClayInTx
June 5, 2011, 09:42 AM
Assuming the proper stance and taking aim and a deep breath and slowly pulling the trigger is an excellent method for target competition because targets don’t shoot back and don’t carry guns or knives and are slow on the draw.

robmkivseries70
June 6, 2011, 08:56 AM
In any two handed stance one arm works against the other in such a way that a small boy ought to be able to do a chin-up on your pistol.:cool: This is the technique that provides controllability. My wife found out that she didn't have enough strength in the isosceles position but with the weaver stance she did. Use what works for you, your body type, and arm strength.
Best,
Rob

SPUSCG
June 6, 2011, 11:30 AM
I used more a slight weaver. Right leg back but body mostly squared up. Left elbow slight bend, right arm straight out. Still has the push pull tension and feels more natural, way easier to control DA pull also.

MikeNice81
June 6, 2011, 09:18 PM
Personaly I think it's all mental fornication, because when it's for real your stance will be the least of your worries.


+1

In my personal experience your stance is the last thing you think about. You'll also probably not be in position to take a "proper" stance.

It is great to practice to build muscle memory. In a perfect situation that muscle memory will be an advantage. If it is like my experience you'll be backed up leaning over the trunk of a car. Then any thing besides both hands on the gun and pointing at center mass is out of the question.

Practice, practice, practice but remember muscle memory for proper grip and trigger control is most important. IMO "stances" were developed for police confrontations and military actions. They are great in their intended scenario, but not as aplicable to civilian situations.

MLeake
June 6, 2011, 10:41 PM
Stances are useful if you are ahead of the curve; if you get behind the curve, then practice at shooting one-handed, weak-handed, and from odd positions could prove very useful. (The curve could also be called the OODA loop, etc.)

Jim March
June 7, 2011, 12:12 AM
Weaver can cope with bigger recoil. Once you hit hand-cannon-class recoil the ability to bring the gun back past your head or body is crucial.

If you don't wear armor and you do at least some of your shooting with major recoil handguns, the Weaver (or some variant thereof) is worth considering.

SPUSCG
June 7, 2011, 09:05 AM
I love shooting 38 special but do need help controlling magnums.