Different grip for Weaver vs Isosceles?
- Thread starter gilfo
- Start date
I had to get a pistol and check to see, I didn't know what I did.
Anyway for me, I didn't see any difference in grip or finger placement between the two.
But then again. I do most of my pistol/revolver shooting with one had. When I do shoot with two hands its normally in competition where I use mostly a combination of the two, depending on targets and if I'm moving.
Main thing is go to the range and see. See what is comfortable and how you shoot. You're targets will tell you more then us guys on the internet.
Anyway for me, I didn't see any difference in grip or finger placement between the two.
But then again. I do most of my pistol/revolver shooting with one had. When I do shoot with two hands its normally in competition where I use mostly a combination of the two, depending on targets and if I'm moving.
Main thing is go to the range and see. See what is comfortable and how you shoot. You're targets will tell you more then us guys on the internet.
Marty Hayes
New member
The "school" teachings of Weaver has one resting and locking down the shooting hand thumb on top of the manual safety, with the weak hand gun thumb below the safety. Part of the recoil control of the Weaver stance has to do with the firm shooting hand grip.
John Farnum, whose classes I've taken, is a thumbs up shooter all the way.
His simple advice to put both thumbs up, one in front of and one in back of the safety works just fine. It also allows the palm of the hand to more fully depress the grip safety, if that's a concern.
Now days, everyone who shoots "Weaver" seems to use a modified version of it, rather than the original "pure" form.
His simple advice to put both thumbs up, one in front of and one in back of the safety works just fine. It also allows the palm of the hand to more fully depress the grip safety, if that's a concern.
Now days, everyone who shoots "Weaver" seems to use a modified version of it, rather than the original "pure" form.
I can understand demonstrating a specific handhold for a new pistol shooter or attempting to correct something for a not-so-new pistol shooter. Beyond that the hand position should be as much or more a function of the physical characteristics of the shooter. We're all built differently with different weaknesses and strengths.....just take a look at Arnold Palmer's golf swing and you'll better understand my point.
I do because they tell me that when in an actual lethal encounter one may not have the luxury of getting cozy in his/her favorite stance. You might have to deal with the problem with your feet where they are.
Take any stance and swing as far left as you can go with gun extended without moving feet. That's Weaver (for right handed shooter).
Now swing to the right as far as you can---you'll have to turn your torso as you keep your feet in place and you'll be in Isosceles, or close to it. Only when your target is in front of you will you get to choose your favorite position.
That may work out for you most of the time, but not always.
I also practice one handed shooting. That's the only way you're going to get on a target back at 4 o'clock without moving your feet. Also the only way you'll get on a target to your right as you move left.
Most of my shooting is with a somewhat modified Weaver at targets to the relative front, but that's my comfort zone.
Last edited:
Having been throroughly schooled in the Weaver both in the USMC military police and early 90's law enforcement training and then the agressive isoceles in the mid to late 90's, there was a distinct difference in the way the thumbs were aligned. With the agressive isoceles, the thumbs pointed towards the target. I remember when taught this thinking it was strange and awkward. It took some serious getting used to but soon became second nature.
Thanks for the great tip displaying intellect of such high caliber, even if it comes across as a bit snippy.
However, I already know how to move my feet, but the point is that moving the feet, rather than just the gun, takes MUCH longer. One may not have time if Bubba and his friends have positioned themselves advantagiously. One can pivot to extreme right or left FAR more quickly than having to reposition the feet (and whole body along with them).
AND, if you have time, then position yourself the way you want.
Not sure I understand your point. I thought those who always have to reposition their feet so they're facing the target are the ones who are more dependent, and those able to shoot in a direction the feet aren't positioned for (if NECESSARY) are less dependent on a fixed position.
Shooting on the move is a different issue. Going left frometarget neccesitates one handed shooting, going right from target allows two hands. Only thing the feet are doing is hot footin you the H#%$ outta there.
OK, my fault for not being more precise. I'm talking about RUNNING from right to left while shooting on the move while attempting to get the hell out of there. If you want to shoot two handed, then be sure and practice while you're backing up at a snails pace.
Not talking about lateral movement, or any other footwork while engaging the target to the front. Gabe Suarez as a good tape that shows the technique very well.
You're essentially shooting the target as you run by. Right to left requires one handed as the gun stays on the target. The more acute the angle to the target as you go from right to left, the farther rearward the gun will be pointed in relation to your moving body's position.
I was surprised at how well, with a little practice, you can run by a target and pump it full of bullets.
The shooting takes place before you pass the target, while you're passing the target, and after you've passed the target.
Goin the other way, from left to right, allows for two handed shooting.
Well, Rehab, with all the shorty witty replies, that hint of (but don't go far enough to demonstrate) superior intellect and knowledge of the subject, I'm taken aback at your failure to grasp the simple fact that I'm not describing a tactical philosophy. Just another tactic that could be used IF the situation requires it---- same as just running flat out if the situation requires it.
You sound like an ol' retired geezer (like me) who likes to amuse himself, from time to time, while playing with the keyboard and trifling with fellow board members. And your dry sense of humour reminds me of me.
Oh crap, I thought I heard a moderator just sign in.
Last edited:
2damnold4this
New member
There may be times when it is difficult to move our feet. Sitting in a car or wheelchair, for example, might make it difficult to acquire a favorite stance.