How can a handgun compete with a man armed with a rifle?

[raimius]

Easy: Land effective hits before they do!

If you get a choice, generally choose the rifle. It's much easier to be accurate with a shouldered weapon with a long sight radius/optics than a hand-held weapon with a short sight radius.

[Blue Duck]

I used to compete in NRA Hunter Silhouette with pistols back in the 80's mostly. The Rams at 100yds were about 8 inches tall and maybe 12 inches long. If I did not hit 50% of those with a 5 inch 1911 with iron sights, standing off hand I was having a bad day, and my misses were not by much.

If you have a decent gun, with a decent trigger and sights, 100yds with a handgun is not that difficult.

[45_auto]

Originally Posted by blue duck

If you have a decent gun, with a decent trigger and sights, 100yds with a handgun is not that difficult.

Have you ever tried it while your target 100 yards away is shooting at you with a rifle? Makes it surprisingly more difficult. I had a rifle when I tried it and it was extremely difficult even with that.

I'm not a real bad shot with a 1911, about 50% on an 8" diameter gong at 100 yards. But you're talking about competing against someone with a rifle. My experience has been that rifle fire even by untrained shooters at 100 yards is IMMENSELY more accurate and intense than pistol fire, so I would rate it as more than EXTREMELY difficult with a pistol.

[JERRYS.]

here's how...https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4vEVhrK_0AE

[Ocraknife]

I feel pretty sure that I could be armed with a full auto AR variant and a hat that shoots laser beams and some if not most of the guys on this forum could still take me out without too much trouble.

To paraphrase what someone said earlier, all things being equal a rifle may be better but not everyone has the same skill level so all things are rarely equal.

As for the folks who take people out at 75+ yards, that is unfathomable to me. I would probably have a hard time seeing that far much less hitting anything with a pistol.

Some people make it look easy though. I think I'm put here to be the guy on the range that provides encouragement - people can look at my targets and think "Bless his heart, at least I'm not as bad as THAT guy". But hey, I'm happy to help.

[Ocraknife]

Have you ever tried it while your target 100 yards away is shooting at you with a rifle? Makes it surprisingly more difficult. I had a rifle when I tried it and it was extremely difficult even with that.

I'm not a real bad shot with a 1911, about 50% on an 8" diameter gong at 100 yards. But you're talking about competing against someone with a rifle. My experience has been that rifle fire even by untrained shooters at 100 yards is IMMENSELY more accurate and intense than pistol fire, so I would rate it as more than EXTREMELY difficult with a pistol.

That is amazing. That is more than practice, that is in-born ability too.

I probably couldn't do that with a 20" gong at 50 yards. Honestly, I don't even think I'd be able to see an 8" target well enough to aim at it at 100 yards.

[Kosh75287]

Gee, uhm... <looking about> ...where's JohnKSa? Does HE know about all this? Not sure he'd approve of all this improbable shooting!

[BDM 9MM]

My BIW and I always finish off our range trips with a 8" metal gong at 50 & 100 yds. We have done this for about the last 3 years. The practice sure helps.

[Nanuk]

Depends on the fight. At typical active shooter distances the rifle loses some of it advantage for distance. In the type of situation we are discussing the tactics you use, your skill and your ability to keep a cool head under fire will help you prevail.
Alot also depends upon the skill level of the rifle shooter. You can use surprise and violence of action to take the initiative back.

[jrothWA]

by Ed. Mcgivern.

In the 20's he did .38Spl revolver shooting @ 200 yds, he indicated that you had a 50/50 chance ogf getting a good hit. When the .357Mag came out, he backed up to 600yds.

I have used my 1991A1 Colt for deer hunting back-up, when using my muzzle-loader durning regular firearm season, I fired couple magazines @ 100 yds on a 50yd slow-fire pistol target and was able to group seven rounds within the 9 ring, using the front sight BASE as aiming point [not the blade top].


It's possible it takes PRACTICE!!

[michael t]

Everyone in combat wants a rifle over a pistol, funny how that works.

Rifle was fine. But the radio brought arty and air both a lot more power than a 5.56rifle .

[45_auto]

Originally Posted by 45_auto

about 50% on an 8" diameter gong at 100 yards.

Originally Posted by Ocraknife

That is amazing. That is more than practice, that is in-born ability too.

Not very amazing. Pretty common with a little practice. Any serious Bullseye shooter would find it laughable. But to qualify that "50%", that's standing in the open, shooting a 1911 that I'm very familiar with (zeroed at 25 yards, using a sight picture with the second "ridge" of the front sight aligned with the top of the rear sight for 100 yard shots), on a known range I'm very familiar with, and taking lots of time between shots to concentrate on breathing, sight alignment, trigger press, etc.

I'm no where near competitive with the serious Bullseye shooters. And I'm using two hands while they're using only one. I do about the same 50% on the bullseye of an NRA 50 yard slow-fire pistol target with a 3.36" 10 ring. Out of 10 shots at 50 yards, five 10's, a couple of 9's (5.54" dia), a couple of 8's (8.00" dia), and probably a 7 (11.00" dia), means that I'd barely break into the "Expert" classification.

High Master ........................................................97.00 and above
Master ....................................................................95.00 to 96.99
Expert .....................................................................90.00 to 94.99
Sharpshooter ..........................................................85.00 to 89.99
Marksman .................................................................Below 85.00

Under incoming rifle fire while quickly ducking out from behind cover to take a shot? I'd consider myself lucky to get a hit on a 4' x 8' sheet of plywood at 100 yards. In the same situation but with a rifle, I'd say that I'd have a decent chance of a hit with a snap shot on a man size target standing still in the open. I'd figure that the opposition could do about the same to me.

[Kosh75287]

Hey, .45 AUTO, may I ask what sort of ammo you use to shoot at long distances? I recall that, if I pushed a 200gr. projectile as fast as possible (1000 f/s), using a max charge of Unique, I could hit MUCH better with that load, than with Ball or 230 LRN reloads. I'm sure that velocity was a factor, but I had to hold over the target with all loads I used.

I understand your point about engaging a target that can fire back. But if they know you're armed only with a pistol, and you start lobbing projectiles near them, that CANNOT enhance their morale and initiative. Secondly, ALL combat depends heavily on mind set, and the defender MUST endeavour to be
calmer, steadier, and more methodical than the aggressor. A tough order to fill, no doubt, but an ability to hit an 8" gong > 50% of the time DOES engender a certain amount of confidence. Remember, that thing about a shooter's accuracy going to hell when being shot at works on BOTH ends of the contest.

In any case, all the anecdotal evidence on the planet will not change the fact that a rifle beats handgun 9 times out of 10.

Perhaps, it but DOES belie the notion that a defender with a pistol is ontologically certain to lose to an aggressor with a rifle. Like Gretzky said, "You are guaranteed to not succeed at 100% of the shots you do not try."
And I question the "9 times out of 10" quantitation, especially if the aggressor must kill or take his opponent out of the fight, and the defender need only stop or discourage the rifleman from firing on him long enough for the defender to evade.

[45_auto]

I use 230 grain cast lead bullets (latest batch was from Missouri Bullet Company) over 5.3 grains of Winchester 231. Muzzle velocity is about 830 FPS, drops about 16 inches at 100 yards when zeroed at 25 yards. Long range accuracy would undoubtedly be easier with lighter, faster bullets, but I typically carry 230 JHP's and prefer to practice with something at least close to what I carry. Carry ammo runs about 100 FPS faster, drops about 12" at 100 yards.

There's usually a few B27 targets on the 100 yard line at the range, aiming at the head with a normal sight picture drops the shots right into the chest area of the target.

As far as this thread goes, I believe that untrained people that have never had rifle fire directed towards them from 100 yards away are SEVERELY underestimating the effects on their accuracy. My last experience with incoming fire from 100 yards was a little over 40 years ago, but it was very memorable.

I watch new shooters with an AR or AK sit there and ring the 8" gongs at 100 yards almost effortlessly. Went shooting at a 75 yard range Sunday with my 11 year old granddaughter. Watched her take out 12 ballons about 6" in diameter stapled to the 75 yard frame in about 4 seconds with an AR.

Obviously the mind-set and training of the shooter are critical, but the advantages of a rifle over a pistol at 100 yards are a huge handicap to overcome.

Edit: There are some very good tactical reasons why the US Army considers the Maximum Effective Range of the M9 (Beretta 92) to be 50 yards, and the Maximum Effective Range of the M16 (AR15) to be 550 yards, even though I'm sure everyone on here is MUCH more highly trained than your typical 11B (infantryman).

http://www.armystudyguide.com/conten...dy-guide.shtml

19 What is the definition of Maximum Effective Range?
The greatest distance at which a soldier may be expected to deliver a target hit.

28 Describe the ranges for the M16/A2 Rifle.
Max Effective Range for a Point Target - 550 meters
Max Effective Range for an Area Target - 800 meters

http://www.armystudyguide.com/conten...dy-guide.shtml

What is the maximum effective range of the M9?
50 meters

[Grizz12]

its not the length of the barrel, its how you use it

[Sharkbite]

There's usually a few B27 targets on the 100 yard line at the range, aiming at the head with a normal sight picture drops the shots right into the chest area of the target.

THIS^^^^

It all about knowing your holdovers at different distances. While teaching at FS the "Advanced Tactical Handgun" class had a portion that had the students engaging steel silhouettes at 200 and 250 yards.

Most students could get hits at 200 about 90% of the time from a good prone position once they found where to hold.

I hold the top of my front sight on the tgt and lower my rear sight so ithe top of it aligns 1/2 way down the frot sight, so 1/2 a frontsight blade high. With a good trigger press the hits are there

Its not magic to hit at longer ranges. Just a solid grasp of the fundamentals. Google "long range pistol shooting" and the info is pretty amazing. 4-600 yard shots used to be way out there. Nkw it seems like 100 is too far.

The longer shot are possible. The increased distance just means the error is magnified. Minimize the error and you can hit out there

[Kosh75287]

The military trains many more people to shoot well each year than I do, so I am QUITE reticent about critiquing their methods. With that disclaimer in place, I think it would be helpful if they would qualify the Maximum Effective Range (MER) of small arms with a percentile of the personnel demonstrating the ability to hit vital areas at that range.

In pharmacology and toxicology, we don't speak of a simple "lethal dose". We speak of a dose sufficient to induce lethality in a certain percentage of the test population, usually 50% (LD50, w/number usually subscript). Sometimes, depending on the substance of interest, an LD90 is used, especially, when determining a therapeutic index (TD90/LD90).

It might be instructive to speak of MERs as MER90s, vs. MER50s, or MER10s.
The M16A2 has a STATED MER of 550m. Is likely higher than 50%, though I doubt as high as 90%. The MER for the M9 pistol probably IS an MER50, not MER90. I would think that these number vary with the M.O.S. of the operators, also. For Seals, Marines, Army Snipers & Delta (if they existed, wink wink), the MER90 for an M16A2 might be closer to 800 yards. For Cooks, Clerks, and Mechanics, it might not exceed 200. I would expect similar results with the M9, and M1911A1. In all my years, I haven't heard anyone who had trouble with the .45 say that the M9 was easier to hit with. It IS a lower-power cartridge, but the M9's ergonomics seem to inhibit good shooting. I've had probably 20 or 30 people not do well with a .45, then pick up a Cz-75 or Browning P-35 and shoot wonderfully with it. Beats me...

[Brit]

As an aside, when the Glock 26 first appeared. A black talon, 147g made just 1000fps from the one I had. Tested in ballistic gel. Ugly mess!

[James K]

I am not sure range results or ballistic specs tell us much on this subject. Assuming that the distance involved was within range of the handgun, what would be required is a person who is extremely competent with his gun and has icewater in his or her veins. Not many pistol shooters could remain cool enough to engage a person armed with an automatic weapon and win, even if the only alternative was death.

Jim

[45_auto]

Originally Posted by James K

what would be required is a person who is extremely competent with his gun and has icewater in his or her veins.

Those attributes would be nice to have, but the most important characteristic a pistoleer would need to overcome a rifleman at 100 yards would be pure luck.

[wizrd]

PRACTICE.

[Brit]

Everyone seems to think this contest, if you would, between a rifleman, and a pistolere? One on one!

Imagine a CCW in a Mall, 50 yards away from an active shooter, on his own, the rifle bad person.

The armed person, from a distance, not seen yet by the Active Shooter.

So from a solid position, fires two or three rounds, then legs it. Hopefully he is on his own.

The thought of a man on man, just the two individuals, looking at each other?

Not such a good idea. The old saying I adhered to, all my life, if you are in a fair fight? Your tactics suck.

[45_auto]

Originally Posted by brit

Everyone seems to think this contest, if you would, between a rifleman, and a pistolere? One on one!

Yes, that's the premise given the title of the thread:

How can a handgun compete with a man armed with a rifle?

You can come up with an infinite amount of situations in which someone with a pistol or a stick or a rock or no weapon at all triumphs over a rifleman.

They all pretty much come down to hide, then hope he doesn't see you until you can pop out at a close enough range for your available weapon to be effective.

What's your point?

[JohnKSa]

Gee, uhm... <looking about> ...where's JohnKSa? Does HE know about all this? Not sure he'd approve of all this improbable shooting!

It's certainly possible to make good hits on human sized targets at 100 yards with a handgun. It's even possible to do it consistently.

However it's not something that a person is likely to be able to do on command unless they've tried it before. Even someone who has tried it before may not be successful if they've not shot the particular pistol in question at long range.

For one thing, although most pistols are zeroed pretty well for work at ranges inside 15 yards, even small sight adjustment errors at that range can result in significant discrepancies between the point of aim and point of impact at 100 yards. Second, small errors in trigger technique become pretty large at extended ranges.

I had significant problems hitting a human-sized steel target at 100 yards with one of my most accurate full-sized pistols until I finally worked out that I had to hold on the "belt" and on the extreme left side of the target. After I figured that out, it was pretty easy to make hits with only the occasional miss.

On the other hand, standing up and shooting offhand (as I was with the pistol) , I was able to make hits with much better consistency and rapidity at triple the distance with an AK style rifle and open sights.

So one of my most accurate pistols vs. one of my least accurate rifles and the rifle won hands down at triple the distance.

I have tried shooting a pistol at a human-sized target at 300 yards, but at that distance I was only able to score hits every 5-10 rounds or so.

At shorter ranges, the rifle becomes very easy to shoot very rapidly from the hip. At one time I could consistently hit targets only a couple inches wide at 10-15 yards shooting a long gun rapidly from the hip. I've never managed to achieve that level of skill with a handgun even with a good bit of practice.

It's not a foregone conclusion that a pistoleer will lose when pitted against a rifleman, but it is certainly true that the rifleman will have a significant advantage all else being equal. Start adding in more advantages on the side of the rifleman and it becomes a very difficult problem to solve with a pistol.

[Branko]

Below 30 yards they're almost as good (well, for a given value of 'almost') with a reasonable level of marksmanship. Now, that isn't that short a distance. Beyond that you're likely to have some cover available in most places, come to think of it.

Sure, 50 yards +, the advantage of the rifle is really big, but... well, a pistol at long range is still better then shouting insults, and a rifle isn't all that easy to conceal.