# Sight radius for home defense



## tvphotog (Feb 24, 2016)

My maximal shooting distance for my home is 12 yards. Does the 5/8 " difference of sight radius between a compact and full sized pistol of the same model make any difference in accuracy or speed of target acquisition?


----------



## denner (Jun 3, 2011)

Not any noticeable accuracy difference in my experience with the firearms I use and used at that distance. At 15 yards and under I'd be quite confident with a 1 7/8 inch barrel snubbie on a human sized target.


----------



## OldManMontgomery (Nov 2, 2013)

To answer your question exactly as asked, probably not. 

But there's more. Since this is home defense weapon, there is NO premium on 'small'. A home defense firearm doesn't have to be concealed, doesn't have to be worn under 'summer clothes' and the weight is immaterial to a large extent, as it isn't carried for long periods of time or distance. I also suggest - opine - a 'larger' gun may be more visible to an intruder and therefore may send the intruder running, removing the need to injure and possibly kill some nitwit. (Saving the homeowner much aggravation and inconvenience at least.) 

On the other hand, if you are (at least currently) restricted to one sidearm, and that sidearm will also be used for concealed carry in public, then one must address that issue as well. However, a slight lack of sight radius will not seriously detract from practical, self-defense accuracy.


----------



## DJ Niner (Oct 3, 2006)

Short answer: as long as you can hit the vital zone on a target at 12 yards with your gun/ammo combo, you're good-to-go. 

It might be easier with a larger firearm, but as long as you can hit with a smaller gun (or are willing to get the training and put in the practice needed to learn to hit with it), you're good. There might even be a few advantages to having a smaller pistol/revolver. Some defensive shooting authorities have made the point that a smaller handgun is often more difficult to "take away" from the defender (should the user be surprised/"jumped" by the bad guy at close range), as it offers the perp less barrel/slide to grab on to, and less leverage to pry it out of your hands if he DOES get a hand on it. On a 5" barrel (or longer) pistol, sometimes another person can grab the barrel/slide in such a way that they might not get shot or muzzle-flamed on firing; on a 2" revolver or a 3.5" pistol, that's MUCH harder to do. Of course, as in most things, a person can go too far in any given direction. If the pistol in question is so small it only offers the owner a two-fingered grip, then it might actually be EASIER to grab it out of the owner's hands than a full-size pistol with a full-size grip.


----------



## paratrooper (Feb 1, 2012)

Is _maximal_ even a word? :watching:

Oh, and by the way, the answer to your question is no.


----------



## Cait43 (Apr 4, 2013)

paratrooper said:


> Is _maximal_ even a word? :watching:


It is now.......... 
Maximal | Definition of Maximal by Merriam-Webster


----------



## paratrooper (Feb 1, 2012)

word choice - "Maximum" vs. "maximal" - English Language & Usage Stack Exchange

I give up.........It seems I can't keep up anymore. :smt119


----------



## Bisley (Aug 24, 2008)

If minimal is a word, then maximal must be, too.

On the question asked, I would simply say that most folks see a major difference in their ability to hit small targets, between full sized pistols and subcompacts. However, lots of practice with subcompacts can close the gap dramatically. At least, that has been my experience. And, I agree that a full sized handgun is usually preferable for everything except deep concealment.


----------



## Cannon (May 1, 2016)

My home doesn't offer a shot of more than 7yds so for me I don't believe 5/8" would make much difference at 7 or 12yds when shooting for center of mass.


----------

