# Preferred shooting stances?



## Redelf88 (Oct 3, 2009)

Hello all, 

I'm a shooter in Missouri, and I've competed in some IDPA and other non-competitive defensive shooting scenarios. Currently I have a SW 1911PD Gunsight model and a Ruger SR9c. 

I was just wondering what stances people favor, and why? Not so much for my own uses, but I am curious. 

I use a Modified Weaver Stance for most of the shooting that I do, though it occasionally forms into isosceles depending on the situation (not often). The only real difference in the stance I use and isosceles is that I bend my weak hand elbow just slightly. I find it to be a bit more comfortable. 

My stance has changed quite a bit since I first started shooting, as I have received better instruction recently. I used to use a modified weaver stance that had my right foot quite far behind my left foot. This moved my center of aim off by alot, so I'm glad that I've adopted better technique since then. 

Anyway, just wanted to open the discussion on stance to see what people like. Thoughts?


----------



## clockworkjon (Dec 2, 2010)

I'm a new shooter, but before I knew what it was called or that it was an actual stance, I automatically found myself using the Weaver stance. I have tried isoceles and just find it uncomfortable. I like the shooting arm/supporting arm combination of the Weaver as opposed to full extension of both arms. That's my $.02


----------



## Steve M1911A1 (Feb 6, 2008)

The Modified Weaver stance is a good one, especially in competition, but...
In realistic, truly practical shooting, you need to be able to shoot in any position in which you find yourself. Even standing on one foot while shooting weak-hand-only.
I assume that you're right-handed, since most people are. So think about addressing three widely spread-out targets from behind the left side of a full-height barricade. How useful will the Modified Weaver be to you then?
One "stance" that is often forgotten is self-defense at arm's length, which is more realistically practical than you might imagine. Why not see what you can do about that?
Another is firing at a target directly behind you. Talk about difficult, fancy footwork! The point is not losing your balance, so you can deliver aimed and effective shots. See what you can do, turning first to your left, and then to your right.
And so on...


----------



## Redelf88 (Oct 3, 2009)

Steve M1911A1 said:


> The Modified Weaver stance is a good one, especially in competition, but...
> In realistic, truly practical shooting, you need to be able to shoot in any position in which you find yourself. Even standing on one foot while shooting weak-hand-only.
> I assume that you're right-handed, since most people are. So think about addressing three widely spread-out targets from behind the left side of a full-height barricade. How useful will the Modified Weaver be to you then?
> One "stance" that is often forgotten is self-defense at arm's length, which is more realistically practical than you might imagine. Why not see what you can do about that?
> ...


You're very right. For the purposes of the discussion above, I only mentioned the stance I "usually" fall into. I do practice strong hand only, and weak hand only. I'm actually nearly ambidextrous when in comes to shooting: i can shoot handguns in either hand and shoot about the same.


----------



## cougartex (Jan 2, 2010)

I use the Weaver Stance. I have bad shoulders, keeping both arms bent at the elbow releases pressure on my shoulders.


----------



## EliWolfe (Nov 20, 2010)

For SD, which is my primary concern I prefer the prone position firing into the groin of my attacker, or a rapid Tennessee triple step to cover whilst emptying my primary and backup weapons simultaneously. I have never understood the solid, frontal exposed stance for combat, wherein the BG is given a wonderfully wide and stationery target to shoot at. Point shooting and moving, however slowly, is my plan. Now for target shooting, I prefer a nice chair (with pillow and quilt) and a solid bench rest.
Eli :mrgreen:


----------



## HK Dan (Dec 22, 2010)

Steve nailed it. Shoot some more IDPA and you'll see that stance really is irrelevent.

I was a Weaver advocate, and I swithced to isosolese about 15 years ago. I've never looked back. For me it's far superior.


----------



## Hikingman (Feb 10, 2011)

Google - Modern Isosceles vs. Modified Weaver stance!

If you're going to stand still, and shoot without cover, you're already apart from the IDPA method...


----------



## HK Dan (Dec 22, 2010)

I shot Weaver for YEARS. As I got into USPSA and IDPA I started evaluating everything about my shooting and trying new things. I converted to Isos at that time. It allows me faster follow up shots and more flexibility in engaging to different areas, in addition to superior recoil absoprtion.

Secondarily, watch some police dash cam vids. All of those guys who practice with Weaver, when surprised, shoot Isos (or one handed while running and ducking). You're practicing something that you probably won't use if you practice the Weaver.

Lastly--why help the gun? You're pulling back in the direction of recoil with the Weaver, why help the gun??? Push the arms out, stay neutral and relaxed, and let the recoil happen. You'll see that you're back on target faster than if you fight it.

<stepping off soapbox> NEXT!
Dan


----------



## IRSnyder (Mar 15, 2011)

*Techniques and stances*

I'm a new guy, but I'm doing my homework... And what I've found so far is that shooting is much like bodybuilding or any other sport where people constantly seek advice. Most experienced people seem to have techniques that work for them, and tout them as superior to all others. I'm beginning to form the opinion that there are a few basics any new shooter must learn, but for the most part, the techniques used by others are mostly irrelevant. I think, like most things in life, the individual needs to find something that works for _them._ Any thoughts on that?


----------



## ohioman (May 28, 2011)

ok i like to here from the experts on left handed shooting im left handed and it is difficult for us to hold and shoot a semi auto as shown in some videos also can u get a semi auto made for leftys and who makes them?????


----------



## Steve M1911A1 (Feb 6, 2008)

ohioman said:


> ok i like to here from the experts on left handed shooting im left handed and it is difficult for us to hold and shoot a semi auto as shown in some videos also can u get a semi auto made for leftys and who makes them?????


To convert a M1911 to left-hand use, all one need do is install an ambidextrous safety lever. Then you merely reverse the right-had shooting stance you've chosen to try.
(For instance, to use a Weaver stance, the Lefty would extend his right foot and left arm, instead of left foot and right arm.)

Several modern Walther pistols are fully ambidextrous, and other makers' designs permit changing their pistols' magazine releases to the other side for Lefties. Glock pistols are not absolutely ambidextrous, but they can easily be used by either hand interchangeably. Springfield and S&W make pistols similar in ambidexterity to the Glock. There are others.


----------



## HK Dan (Dec 22, 2010)

IRSnyder said:


> I'm beginning to form the opinion that there are a few basics any new shooter must learn, but for the most part, the techniques used by others are mostly irrelevant.


No disrespect intended, but you couldn't be more wrong. You're dealing with physics rather than art here, and some things really DO work better than others. The reason to train with an instructor is to have him impart those lessons rather than learn them on your own (at great expense in ammo, time, etc) Results are the ultimate barometer, of course. If you can use your own technique and shoot as well as I can then I have no reason to argue with their validity (except to say that you'd probably outshoot me if you were using my technique...<g>)

Lastly--any time you switch techniques there is a learning curve. Efficiency goes down for abit, then rapidly climbs back up. In short, you'll shoot worse for a minute, but improvement comes more rapidly than it didwhen you first started. You have to keep your eyes open and your mind on what you're doing.If you listen to what the gun is telling you, watch what it does while it's shooting, the answer will be clear. Mine was screaming "ISOSOLESE" while I was a dedicated Weaver guy. I changed some 15 years ago--it was hard, but I'm glad I did.


----------



## Holly (Oct 15, 2011)

Hmmm... I can't find a name for my "stance". My husband calls it shoots-like-a-girl.

Right foot back a little, right hand in control... left eye...

It works.


----------



## clockworkjon (Dec 2, 2010)

It has been 8 months since my first post and I have transitioned from Weaver to modern-ish isosceles. I like the more aggressive posture and the squared shoulders. I have shot better since making the switch. Still have to play around with it more though. As long as I can shoot I don't care how I'm standing!


----------



## Gunners_Mate (Feb 17, 2010)

unfortunately for me I'm all screwey. Cross dominant (right hand left eye), and most of the damn I'm concerned with needing to fire a weapon I'm wearing kevlar with minimal side protection, so it's isosceles on duty/overseas and weaver/iso in the states. like steve said you've got to be able to shoot as the situation dictates.


----------

