Please expound.spanky said:
Weaver, Modified Weaver, or Isosceles Shooting?
So I'm reading a book called "Surgical Speed Shooting" by Andy Stanford. I'm sure some of you have read it. In the book he extols the virtues of using the isosceles method of shooting versus the Weaver stance.
I was trained at Rangemaster, owned and operated by Tom Givens. I was taught a Weaver stance, where the barrel of the weapon lines up with the primary shooting arm, and the support arm comes up to kinda form a "D" shape (if viewed from above). Stanford gives his arguments for the isosceles, where a line along the long axis of the barrel would run medial (toward the middle) of the strong arm, and line up (obviously) with the dominant eye. The stance isn't quite a perfect triangle, because the fact that the support hand angles slightly down and sits slightly forward of the shooting hand will necessarily move that side of the shooters body forward. This can look a lot like a modified Weaver if you're not an expert at such things. The author argues that virtually all competitors who routinely win use the isosceles, due to it's inherently superior ability to bring you back on target faster (lock the wrists, with the support wrist being angled slightly down and compensating for recoil).
So, all that to ask again-which do y'all use, and why? Really interested in Cliff's views on this! :thumbup:
I was trained at Rangemaster, owned and operated by Tom Givens. I was taught a Weaver stance, where the barrel of the weapon lines up with the primary shooting arm, and the support arm comes up to kinda form a "D" shape (if viewed from above). Stanford gives his arguments for the isosceles, where a line along the long axis of the barrel would run medial (toward the middle) of the strong arm, and line up (obviously) with the dominant eye. The stance isn't quite a perfect triangle, because the fact that the support hand angles slightly down and sits slightly forward of the shooting hand will necessarily move that side of the shooters body forward. This can look a lot like a modified Weaver if you're not an expert at such things. The author argues that virtually all competitors who routinely win use the isosceles, due to it's inherently superior ability to bring you back on target faster (lock the wrists, with the support wrist being angled slightly down and compensating for recoil).
So, all that to ask again-which do y'all use, and why? Really interested in Cliff's views on this! :thumbup:
1 - 2 of 21 Posts
Your right it was the isosceles. It's more natural for me also.nhstk02 said:Xd357, what kind of stance was I using at the meet & greet? Whatever it is thats what I use. I guess it would be more isosceles. I never could get into a weaver stance and keep it while shooting, I would always feel like I was shooting with one hand or something, hard to explain.
1 - 2 of 21 Posts
- This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Mississippi Gun Owners
A forum community dedicated to Mississippi State Gun Owners and enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about optics, hunting, gunsmithing, styles, ranges, reviews, accessories, classifieds, and more!
Full Forum Listing
Recommended Communities
