I was going to resurrect "The SR9c Journal" thread, but...

R

robbovius

Inactive
...I thought I could also introduce myself if I started a new thread.

Hi, I'm Robb.

last january I renewed my LTC after about a 20 year hiatus. I currently own adn shoot a 1985 Ruger Mark II (bought back in the day), and Ruger LCR (its a mean little thing), and the subject of this thread, a brand-new SR9c, which I've put about 450-500 rounds thru so far.

I'm still sort of re-learning my shooting technique - yeah, rusty - but, given the accolades the SR9c gets for its accuracy, I'm a bit disappointed in mine.

some details: the range I frequent is indoors, 30 feet, and I like to use NRA 25-yard slow fire targets. I"m using a two-handed grip (sort-of-weaver-ish), the sight picture I use is three dots in line, POA on POI, exhale, steady, squeeze, bang. I do lots of dry-fire practice.

The ammo I've been using is WWB FMJ and Blazer Brass FMJ (I forget the bullet weights).

in the words of Jeremy Clarckson, "anyway", last night I was getting my best results so far, 16 out of 20 shots in the black circle at 30 feet, and thigns were looking good for about the first 50 or so rounds until I burned thru the first box of Blazer. then I switched to the WWB, and the bullets started kind of going all over the place. Same grip, same stance, same sight picture, but wildly different results.

Most were low and left, occasionally I'd get one in the black. Ran thru the ful box of WWB (100 rounds) then went back to the Blazer, and those were all over the place as well.

Am I seeing accuracy differences in ammunition? Am I seeing loss of accuracy as the gun gets dirty from firing? am I just still crap at shooting?

I really like the gun, carries easily, even just stuffing into my waistband (wearing a technical belt designed for rescue capability) and its super reliable, so far. Take down is cake - compared to the Mark II. I've had one light strike, but that was because I was shooting from a rest and let my steadying hand thumb get in the way of the slide. yeah, duh. Ow, then bleed.

anyway, thanks in advance

R
 
The first thing I'd recommend for you to do is to shoot your Ruger from a rock steady rest so that you will know what the pistol is capable of. Afterwards, you can determine what you are capable of and decide what you might need to change in terms of your shooting mechanics. No getting past sight alignment (focusing on the front sight), trigger squeeze, breath control, grip, stance and follow-through.

Welcome to The Firing Line, robbovius!

Oops-after posting this and re-reading your post I noticed that you were shooting from a rest, at some point at least. :o
 
Thanks DG.

The rest I was using really wasn't all that great, a bit of memory foam cut from an old mattress pad.

what I found though, was that the short front end under the barrel wasn't as secure on the rest as I'd have liked, as I was getting rather large-ish bullet spreads from the rest. the best results and closest groups I've gotten so far were last night, offhand, with the gun freshly cleaned, and the Blazer Brass ammo.

more data is needed, as they say, right? ;-)
 
Right. But make that rest as solid, stable and steady as possible. Those groups should be tight and consistent. What I'm getting from your reports are very inconsistent accounts of accuracy. It's hard to know where to start if one group is great, the next not so much and then become great again.
As you have acknowledged, when trying to differentiate the causes of inaccuracies, things have to be isolated and "trial and error" implemented:

Rule out the intrinsic limitations of the pistol.

Rule out the ammunition.

Rule out the cleaning regimen.

And finally, rule out shooting technique.

At some point in time, the truth (and solution) will eventually emerge.

Best of luck-it's all doable; it just might cost you a little more in ammunition expenditure. :(
 
Okay, sounds like I need to fabricate a proper rest.

Also, I think for the rest shooting, I'll use the blazer ammo, since I got the best results with that, so far.
 
Sounds like you hand might be getting tired or adrenaline pump. As others have stated, get a stable rest and start eliminating variables.
 
One other bit of advice: find someone you know who is an experienced and accomplished handgun shooter and have him/her shoot your gun, using the same ammunition you've been shooting. This might reveal shortcomings of the gun and/or you and will help establish a starting point "norm".
 
Well, I got it figured out. The problem with my accuracy was, well, um, me...and, specifically, my fricken old dude bifocals.

aiming thru the long distance lens, I could see the target fine, but the sights were a definite blur, and even though I thought i was lining them up correctly with the aim point on the target, often I wasn't.

Back when I was shooting a lot (mid 80s to early 90s), I didn't wear my glasses, as the issue is that I have a mild astigmatism (I can pass the drivers license eye test without my glasses), which is worse in the left eye. The fix to my aiming issues is ditch the bifocals for plain safety glasses, aim with my good (right) eye, and get on with it.

can't argue with the results, put 100 rounds downrange out of the SR9c, and was getting them all around the aim point (even nailed a bullseye at 15 feet, right on the crosshairs), though I still have to work on my 30 foot accuracy.

ultimately its a lot more fun to shoot, when you can reliably hit what you're aiming at.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top