Mississippi Gun Owners banner

Weaver, Modified Weaver, or Isosceles Shooting?

2389 Views 20 Replies 13 Participants Last post by  msshooter
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:
1 - 3 of 21 Posts
While this may show my lack of knowledge, or whatever, here goes.

For me it’s the Weaver with the pistol tucked in tight to the web of my right hand, and in line with the long arm bones. The weak hand comes across for the support.

I have tried the isosceles but what happens to me is this.

I bring the pistol up and over to join with the support hand forming the “isosceles” triangle. What I find is that the pistol is either still in line with the right arm bones thus canted off to my left, needing a little extra time to get it realigned, or the pistol is on target but has fallen out of line with the right long arm bones and some stability is lost.

Of course, I may be doing it all wrong, but there you have my humble opinion.
Just for the fun of it, let’s take a walk back in time. Say, to the early 60’s. At that time I was shooting on the Visalia CA police pistol range, shooting 22, 38, & 45.

As I recall (that by the way is the operative qualifier – “as I recall”) the stance was a bladed-to-the-target, one-handed hold, thinking maybe “I’m no wimp; I don’t use two hands” (or something like that).

The main concern was what to do with that left hand – stick it in a pocket, put it on the hip akimbo-style, stick it behind the back, slip it under the belt, make a fist across your chest.
My "The main concern was what to do with that left hand..." in yesterday’s post sure got things stirred up. Might as well stir the pot some more.

Again, as I recall (assuming my memory’s any good) back in the early 60’s we didn’t know what ear protection was (what’d ya say?). In retrospect, that sure was macho-stupid.
1 - 3 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.