Which did you grow up with, and when? What do you use now?

I started shooting pistols in the mid 80’s with the Weaver and have never tried to change. I’m about to start setting up a basic steel-target pistol range behind the house and it got me to thinking about fundamentals.

Weaver

Back in the day, it was a Starsky and Hutch Isosceles. Now I prefer a modified isosceles. Arms not quite fully extended, elbows slightly bent. I’m in more of an upright position, instead of being all combat forward. It’s a more relaxed shooting position.

🦫

I find Weaver works better when your hand and eye dominance don't align, but that's just me. There is no wrong answer, do what works for you.

I’ve tried both and seem to shoot best Isosceles slightly crouches and pushing toward the target. Seems to make me more stable and accurate.

A modified Weaver! memtb

This.

I started in 1980 with the Weaver, but about twenty years ago I transitioned to the isosceles.

Go with what competitive shooters who win the competitions use. All sports competitions are the crucible that, over time, forms the "best" whatever.

RS

Chapman.

I’ve been using this guys approach for handgun shooting.




🦫

Weaver, more or less...... and my thumbs are down.

Isosceles just doesn't work for me, it ain't natural.

Fair point there.

That Ronin video is interesting as well.

I stand straight upright, chin parallel to the ground. Just like a normal standing person. Then clap your hands together in front of you, like your trying to catch a bug. Both arms are slightly bent and not hyper extended. They're both evenly extended. Then put a gun in them. Then, without moving your head or scrunching anything up in your neck or shoulders, just lift the gun up until you're looking at the sights.

I hold the gun with my hands and wrists. Everything else (biceps, shoulders, back) are relaxed except for the tension needed to suspend the weight of the pistol in front of me.

Stance (foot position and any slight lean) are dictated by how you might need to fight or move. They have nothing to do with the very minor recoil of a handgun.

Nailed it ☝🏽

🦫

Both....

Strong weaver when maximizing the use of cover/corners, isosceles when a long shot is called for and/or a blended transition of isosceweaverles otherwise, depending on the angles, environment and movement through rooms/doorways.

Where I am too.

When I was in the Navy, this topic cane up with some Gunner's Mates and I. Their feeling was the Weaver exposed your sides to much where body armor tended not to be the best. (Under armpits to waist- no plates)

Grew up on both, had plenty of training in both. Most LEO training usually preaches Isosceles because of maximizing your vest protection. I’ve always struggled with that idea, believing more towards Weaver to minimize available target area. Basically, I use a “Modified Weaver” which I’m much more comfortable in. Just my opinion, but to me it utilizes the best attributes of both. Once you leave the comfort of the range, and find yourself in a bad spot, situation and available cover may dictate what works better more than anything else.

Doc_Holidude

Teal, this isn't to criticize you but the rumor of "blading" attached to Weaver. I only say this because I took the API 250 course way back in 19 hundred and 90 at the peak of Coopers' school (before he sold it to Rich Gee) and the years he and his instructors spent teaching the Weaver grip. There was no "blading" or turning of the torso sideways exposing your onside ribs that was taught as far as my experience goes.

We started out pretty much as Blue described,.. up right stance, feet squared up to the target with maybe opposite side foot one toe length ahead of shooting side foot...no awkward turning of the torso. Only difference was the push pull of hands(support arm bent more downward, engaging hand pulling against firing hand pushing with arm straight) on firearm to counter muzzle rise under recoil, the mainstay of the Weaver grip.

The whole blading thing as far as I can tell came about from people looking at the cover of Coopers' book "To Ride, Shoot Straight, And Speak The Truth", depicting him on a Javelina hunt standing sideways during a shot and assuming this was Weaver and ran with it, taking the visual out of context. Then the internet came about and the rest is history.

I kind of use both stances, it just depends. Mostly Weaver I guess.

It really is this simple and much of this methodology can be practiced w/ dryfire. Ronin's technique seems to ignore the most difficult aspect of combat shooting which is positive target and background ID and discrimination. Taking the trigger to the wall as part of your presentation assumes that you will always be able to deconflict your situation in <1.5 seconds which is not realistic. Your finger stays off the trigger until all safety criteria are met w/out fail. This is slightly slower but is the mark of a competent shooter. Most humans will take from 1.0-1.5 seconds from initial stimulus to 1st shot, a lot can change in that amount of time hence the need for mental and physical dexterity often under great stress.

YMMV



mike r

Midsouth turrent accurate. I remind you if something looks stupid but works it ain't stupid.

The Weaver stance feel better when shooting targets, but I think in an emergency situation I'd naturally use isosceles.

I just do whatever not-dead Jeff Cooper says.

This sums it up for me:







GR

Yeah…what he said! 😎



Doc_Holidude