You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Sacrificing power for accuracy/vice versa in SD load?
- Thread starter mj246
- Start date
buck460XVR
New member
Originally posted by Jack19:
Minute of chest is all your're really wanting. You do not want all your shots to go through the same hole in a defensive situation.
Minute of chest is what, 15" on a normal sized man? Is that all the accuracy that is needed at 7 yards? Not for me. Folks that aim big, miss big.
A BG is not a piece of paper, standing still and laying flat and perpendicular to the shooter. He will be moving and in most scenarios, so will the shooter. If he is completely still after your first shot, follow up shots probably aren't necessary. Even is all the entry wounds are in exactly the same hole, the exit wounds will be completely different along with the wound channel going thru the body because of this movement. There are so many variables when it comes to SD/HD shoots for the average civilian that will significantly impact their accuracy, one wants to be as accurate as possible to begin with. Folks need to be realistic.
There are some pretty strange responses in this thread.
I'm going to just go ahead and rip off Wyatt Earp and change one of his quotes a little bit. He said; "Speed is fine, but accuracy is final." Well, I'll add to that; "Power is fine, but accuracy is final."
As long at the power is there to get deep enough to hit vitals...I'll take the accuracy. I will especially take that accuracy if the reduction in recoil and flash is enough to allow for a faster accurate follow up shot, specifically in a self defense scenario. I'm not a big proponent of one-shot stops, but have noticed when reading statistical studies that two bullets almost always get the job done. I just want to stop the threat as quickly as possible.
I would even take a smaller hole which goes where I want it over a bigger hole that might be off a few inches and miss what would have been a heart or spine hit. CNS disruption or blood loss are all we can count on to end the threat more quickly.
Heck, I'll go one further...two holes per bullet are better than one, as long as there isn't enough energy to put a third hole in a second person. I'll take two holes leaking blood over one hole.
I'm going to just go ahead and rip off Wyatt Earp and change one of his quotes a little bit. He said; "Speed is fine, but accuracy is final." Well, I'll add to that; "Power is fine, but accuracy is final."
As long at the power is there to get deep enough to hit vitals...I'll take the accuracy. I will especially take that accuracy if the reduction in recoil and flash is enough to allow for a faster accurate follow up shot, specifically in a self defense scenario. I'm not a big proponent of one-shot stops, but have noticed when reading statistical studies that two bullets almost always get the job done. I just want to stop the threat as quickly as possible.
I would even take a smaller hole which goes where I want it over a bigger hole that might be off a few inches and miss what would have been a heart or spine hit. CNS disruption or blood loss are all we can count on to end the threat more quickly.
Heck, I'll go one further...two holes per bullet are better than one, as long as there isn't enough energy to put a third hole in a second person. I'll take two holes leaking blood over one hole.
If you ever need to pull that smoke wagon and use it on someone your gonna be stressed enough that accuracy is gonna be right out the window. You're gonna pull it, pop pop pop, and that perp is gonna either fall to the ground or run like hell. THAT being said I say go for horsepower over accuracy if the differences are that slight.
Bob Wright
New member
riverrat38 said:
Say what? Velocity is feet per second.
Bob Wright
Speed has to factor in there also. We are talking about grains per second.
Say what? Velocity is feet per second.
Bob Wright