August 27th, 2009 04:33 PM
The modified Weaver is the best SD shooting platform...
Well, now that I have your attention, I'm just messin' with you a bit. Seemed like a good way to draw your attention to a discussion where we can see who likes what, why, etc. No more than just a discussion among friends, so let's all realize this is just a fun and hopefully helpful and interesting discussion.
I'll get us started. Because of my extensive training at Gunsite and Thunder Ranch, I've always been a modified Weaver kind of guy. There was a point that I thought that should be the only way, but I realized a lot of people preferred the Iso (isosceles) stance, not that we'll necessarily get into a stance in a SD situation........
So, I decided to go to Blackwater and take their Handgun Level I and Handgun Level II course because they teach the 'I' stance. My level II course was actually better than my level I course as far as specifics of the Iso stance. I heard how that as the pressure goes up the Iso is what you'll revert to anyway.
So all week long, I made an all out effort to use the Iso right down to the smallest detail. Long about Thursday (5 day class) they did our timed five draw and fire drills. And I'm gonna brag a bit, I was the oldest guy in the class, was shooting a Beretta 92SF DA/SA with some trigger work I had done myself. That's not what I'm bragging about - it's this - nobody beat my draw and fire time and all five shots were 'A' hits. There were 17 of us if I recall correctly, comp shooters with their high speed Glocks and all. So why'd I say all that? Oh yeah, to say this.
After the drill, an instructor walked up to me and said, "Do you realize everyone of your draw and fires were in a Weaver stance?" I was taken aback to say the least. I kept my cool and said, "I thought you assured me that as the pressure went up, I'd revert to an Iso.?" He said, "Well, I guess you won't."
Since the Blackwater course, I have shot diligently from the Iso, about two years now. But I still notice that as I speed up, I drift into no man's land somewhere between a modified Weaver and an Iso.
Just in case some of you are not familiar with the modified Weaver, it is essentially the Weaver with a slightly bent elbow. You are bladed a bit to the target, not as much as some would have you believe, and the 'strong' hand is pushing on the gun and the weak hand is pulling to form pretension, purportedly better resisting recoil than the Iso.
I realize that's a pretty strong statement since most comp shooters shoot from a Iso, but I have seen some demos of the modified Weaver and I was re-impressed with it. Plus, I read of a trainer that had a shooter in his class and he was a national champion in another nation. He declined to try the modified Weaver and could not meet the course requirements and yet most of the other students with much, much less shooting experience did.
So like everything, there's pros and cons. Right now, at this point in time, I've gone back to the modified Weaver. Apparently it is deeply ingrained in me and as I've compared the Iso to the modified Weaver, I find I shoot just as well if not better from the modified Weaver than the Iso.
Because of the bladed stance of the Weaver, the gun (holstered), is more awkward for an assailent to reach if he wants to try, and in the case of a rear take away (holstered) there's not enough difference to matter. The gun is exposed to him no matter which way you are standing.
Second, the Weaver has a built in retention position. It locates the gun near your side and your side is away from the assailent, and you can raise your elbow of your weak hand and have a solid 'rejector'.
Some say you can't move efficiently from a Weaver stance. I've done both over and over and over and over in training schools, and honestly, I can't see one bit of difference.
Dealing with corners. Weaver is better on strong side corners, about the same as the Iso on weak side corners.
A subtle thing about the Weaver has to do with what people shoot at. Some studies show that in a gunfight, there is a strong tendency to shoot the immediate threat. The immediate threat is the gun. If that's true and I don't know that it is, then we have this: If you are in an Iso, and the BG does fire at the gun but misses low right, low left, just plain low, you get hit in a bad place. If you are in a Weaver and he misses to the strong side low or high, there's a good chance the bullet will miss you and even if it hits you it's not as bad as it could be.
OK, I know I focused on the Weaver, not because it's best or anything like that, but over the years, after lots and lots of training, I went from the modified Weaver to the Iso and back to the Weaver, and I think I'm just gonna stay there.
But enough of me, what about you guys, what do you like, pros, cons, let's hear it.
I'm too young to be this old!
Getting old isn't good for you!
August 27th, 2009 06:23 PM
I vote for the "not that we will necessarily get into a stance in a SD situation". I'm of the firm belief in M.O.V.E. (Motionless Operators Ventilate Easily), therefore I don't plan to be in any particular position other than the one that allows me to get off the shot, get off the shot, get off the shot..... In a "paper punch" training session, I do prefer the Modified Weaver, just because I am most comfortable that way. JMHO
Originally Posted by Tangle
Sometimes in life you have to stand your ground. It's a hard lesson to learn and even most adults don't get it, but in the end only I can be responsible for my life. If faced with any type of adversity, only I can overcome it. Waiting for someone else to take responsibility is a long fruitless wait.
August 27th, 2009 06:24 PM
I shot instinctive archery in competition for a few years (have trophies to prove it) and can only say this about that. I practiced enough (a couple of hours a day) so that I knew when I released the arrow whether or not it was going where I intended. You may be experiencing the same thing. Stop second guessing yourself and just go shoot. Do not let your intelligence override your instinct. Let yourself assume whatever stance/attitude feels comfortable. Don't think about style. You may find you're assuming a combination of styles based on what you've learned over the years and it may work better than any conventional wisdom. It did for me.
August 27th, 2009 06:59 PM
I also shoot modified weaver. Even if I'm facing the "target" square on I will take half a step back with my strongside leg to blade to the "target" before shooting. It is my natural bent to do this. Under extreme pressure I will even semi-crouch during the draw as well as step back.
Thus, I take exception to the statement that someone will always revert to Iso when the pressure goes up. There are enough exceptions to this rule that the statement serves no purpose except to make the instructor "appear" to be more knowledgeable than the students. Which is bad training/instructing.
Teach the student to shoot the best he can. NEVER teach the student to shoot "your way as the only way."
August 27th, 2009 07:48 PM
Same here, also when advancing I'm running Iso.
Originally Posted by Rob P.
Get the U.N. out of the U.S.
Get the U.S. out of the U.N.
August 27th, 2009 07:51 PM
Guys, don't take what I'm about to say as pushing the modified Weaver, it's just that Rob said something that struck a chord with me:
"...Even if I'm facing the "target" square on I will take half a step back with my strongside leg to blade to the "target" before shooting. It is my natural bent to do this."
I do that too. From my experience, what is natural, what is instinctive comes from what has been sufficiently ingrained into you through training. Once you're there, anything else would feel strange.
Of newbies, I've only had one person that just could not get into a modified Weaver. Most newbies I've had experience with pick up any specific method that is being taught.
OTOH, I find that guys that have a significant amount of shooting experience, don't adapt well, if at all, to a new shooting platform, and I've decided to work with them in whatever they use. It would take an unreasonable amount of time to un-ingrain something and re-ingrain a new method - nobody has that kind of time or inclination.
I'm too young to be this old!
Getting old isn't good for you!
August 27th, 2009 09:11 PM
Without a vest, I'd rather present a smaller target. Modified Weaver for me.
August 27th, 2009 10:07 PM
I step back as well while drawing my gun if not already in a modified Weaver stance already.
"In matters of style, swim with the current; in matters of principle, stand like a rock." Thomas Jefferson
Nemo Me Impune Lacesset
August 27th, 2009 11:48 PM
I also shoot from a modified Weaver stance. It just feels more natural to me. This might stem from so many years shooting skeet. My stance is pretty much the same for shot guns and pistols.
The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government.
August 28th, 2009 01:30 AM
I'm a modified Weaver proponent as well. I suppose that my reasons are a couple:
1. I think Iso works for police, especially because they are wearing bulletproof vests that they want to keep square to any threat. I wear no such vest, so keeping a smaller profile is better.
2. I study American Kenpo, and the modified Weaver is precisely a "neutral" stance in Kenpo. It keeps my training simple so that I can problem solve rather than memorize.
3. It feels right to me.
So I am a Weaver guy. My police buddies harp on me to go Iso, but I know that I will revert to what I know under pressure. Simple works, and simple to me is a Weaver stance.
August 28th, 2009 04:10 AM
I also prefer the modified weaver stance for SD. After reading several books on the various shooting stances I opted to go with the modified weaver.
Granted their are pro's & con's on any given stance. After much consideration I'm a modified weaver SD stance believer.
"Gun control is being able to hit your target."
August 28th, 2009 04:16 AM
I generally go to a modified weaver stance.
People will generally revert back to a staggered foot stance when confronted with a combative situation. If you are going to get into a fistfight, one of the first things you do is stagger your feet, same thing with a gunfight, it offers a lot better balance and versatility than keeping your feet online does.
Fortes Fortuna Juvat
Former, USMC 0311, OIF/OEF vet
NRA Pistol/Rifle/Shotgun/Reloading Instructor, RSO, Ohio CHL Instructor
August 28th, 2009 05:24 AM
I grew up shooting Weaver and Modified/Chapman Stance.
When I went to FLETC they kept kicking my feet and pushing on my arms as I was shooting to remind me to shoot in the Iso Stance. Having done nothing but that for the last three years, I can say that I do go to Iso without thinking about it.
What I like about the Iso Stance is that it allows my vest to provide me better protection. It also gives me almost 360 degree coverage without moving my feet if I start in Iso. Not that I would want to be shooting behind me while standing still.
What I have found is that knowing how to "run" with all three stances is the best way for me. If I was to shoot from my vehicle, while sitting behind the wheel, I most likely would shoot from Weaver. If I was going to fire at something over my left shoulder I would do so in a "Modified Weaver" or Chapman Stance.
I have also found that when my elbows are bothering me, a by-product of riding bulls at a younger age, the Weaver Stance is more forgiving to me than a locked out Iso stance. I heard a rumor once that the late Jack Weaver developed his stance due to elbow problems of his own.
I do find that in "startle" situations that I tend to turn towards the threat. Thus, an Iso stance is applicable for me here. When the danger is known, but I'm not wearing a vest, like off duty, I tend to blade more than when I'm on duty. Don't ask me why, it's just something I do subconciously. It hasn't been an issue for me between being off and on duty so far.
I can tell you that I tend to watch the "threat" over my sights IRL. The Iso Stance is better for bringing the sights up to your eye, IMO, while watching the threat. At the range you know the targets aren't shooting back, so you can take the time to really get that sight picture and manipulate your arms into any position that is anatomically possible. In a real life encounter I've managed to see my sights two out of three times. What stance was I in?
I have no clue, but if I had to guess, Iso.
Know how to shoot from any stance, or lack there-of, that you may find yourself in. That includes lying down and on your back.
August 28th, 2009 07:23 AM
From Drill Sargent Joe B. Fricks:
If your shooting stance is good, you're probably not moving fast enough or using cover correctly.
static shooting stances are great for target shooting, not so much if someone is shooting back
HAPPY NEW YEAR
August 28th, 2009 09:12 AM
It's the way I learned to shoot a long time ago and I'm an old dog,I leke presenting a smaller target and I don't have to think about it
"Outside of the killings, Washington has one of the lowest crime rates in the country,"
--Mayor Marion Barry, Washington , DC .
By los in forum Defensive Carry Guns
Last Post: April 22nd, 2010, 07:09 PM
By TN_Mike in forum Defensive Rifles & Shotgun Discussion
Last Post: October 26th, 2009, 02:06 PM
By Captain Crunch in forum General Firearm Discussion
Last Post: March 16th, 2008, 10:28 PM
By comeandtakeit in forum Defensive Carry Guns
Last Post: October 29th, 2007, 07:45 PM
Search tags for this page
chapman shooting stance
modified isosceles stance
modified isosceles stance shooting
modified weaver handgun stance
modified weaver pistol shooting stance
modified weaver shooting stance
modified weaver stance
modified weaver stance pistol shooting
modified weaver stance shooting
weaver shooting stance
Click on a term to search for related topics.
» DefensiveCarry Sponsors