Training Theories: Work up to eqipment capabilities?

[PsychGuy274]

This is something I've been thinking about for some time now and I'd like to hear your guy's thoughts on the matter. Concerning training theories, do you believe it is better to buy the best equipment and work up to it's potential or buy low quality, master it and then slowly move up to high quality equipment?

When I was in drumline our instructor drilled it into our heads to practice on those crappy Remo drumpads. His thinking was that if you can make that piece of crap sound good then you can make anything sound good. In theory it's a good idea and it worked for the most part, but I found myself having to make slight mechanical corrections when switching to real drums due to rebound differences.

So I don't really know where I stand.

Work up to equipment potential

PROS - Intimately learn a weapon system, a lot of trigger time, 'buy once cry once'

CONS - Difficulty transferring skills to another weapon system, you might spend a lot of money to find out that specific type of shooting is not for you

Master lower quality first, then move up incrementally

PROS - Not too big of an investment if you don't like it, trigger time on different weapon systems of varying quality, practiced in transferring skills to other weapon systems

CONS - Not as much familiarization per weapon, can be expensive over time

Thoughts?

[Desert_Rat]

What kind of training?

What type of "equipment"?

Just buy a nice firearm that you like and shoot the hell out of it.

If you're going the mall ninja route...just have fun with it.

[gant]

yeah i dont think its the same training your thinking of its a gun, with sites on it like every other gun in the world, as long as you get range time in.

[G-forceJunkie]

The fact is, with todays modern firearms and ammo...99% of it is the shooter skills for 99% of the shooters. Those on the extreme ends of the spectrum are the exception, not the rule. Rob Letham will outshoot 99% of shooters with a highpoint pistol. Michael Voigt will outshoot 99% of shooters with a stock iron sited M4 or Remington SPS .308 with a Bushnell scope. But if thejist of your post is what is better for the average shooter, I say the equiptment takes a backdoor to good instruction and training. Training with a $3000 custom 1911 will not make you a better shooter than training with a $500 Glock.

[ironpete]

I think you are thinking too much...
...and not shooting enough.

Make some friends (Calgunners, local range people, etc). Borrow, rent and shoot a variety of guns until you find what you like.

I did the buy once cry once thing and I cried for a long time because my ideal gun just didn't work for me. In my imagination it was perfect but without actual experience and knowledge I just had gun lust.

After you get some experience you'll understand and know more. From your knowledge you'll develop preferences. From those preferences and experiences you'll know what you want.

You have a well thought but incorrect question. Most people will never shoot to the potential of their equipment unless it is really crappy equipment. With crappy equipment you'll never learn anything but bad habits. Test drive other people's stuff until you figure it out.

-Pete

[9mmepiphany]

Just as there is a point of diminishing returns at the upper end , there is the same point at the lower end of equipment. While the skills learned are transferable, going with lower quality equipment could well mean that you'll be fighting it to perfect your technique.

The most important mechanical quality to shooting a handgun well is trigger control...all you need is a clean breaking and consistent trigger.

The best thing you can do to master your gun is get quality instruction in the correct technique. Without knowing the correct techniques, you'll spend a lot of time and money (ammo) later on breaking bad habits

[voiceofreason]

Training with a $3000 custom 1911 will not make you a better shooter than training with a $500 Glock.

I believe it will make you worse. FAR easier to make hits with a nice 1911 with a 3.5# trigger than a factory Glock.

That said, I would say get the best and MOST RELIABLE gear that you want. I have nothing against 1911s if you can keep it running reliably.

Do you need a Wilson or Nighthawk to have the best? Glock or M&P would be the best for ME. They function reliably for ME, and just plain work.

I believe getting cheap gun, then mags for it, then a holster for it are false economy. When you move up to a better gun, you start over for a new holster, new sights, new mages...

Start with a GOOD gun that is reliable and easy to hit with (the trigger on my friend's HK P2000 is atrocious- reliable, but he would have been far better off with a gun that wasn't a DA/SA with a crap trigger IMO), change out for better sights, get a high quality holster, extra mags, then stick with it.

[dieselpower]

with firearms its trigger time. You can master skills related to firearms with other firearms, but you need trigger time with your "go-to" firearm to master it.

You can use Airsoft to develop proper foot work. body position, gear placement and body mechanics, but you must also do this with the real thing at some point.

This is why the whole "train as you fight" mantra is wrong for everyone other than a door-kicker (or a revolutionist.) You first have to believe you are truly going to be in a squad of men, assaulting another armed force to think a Carbine Course is helping you develop skills you will need.

So this whole post needs a direction to go in.....

please explain to me your intent on this training. Are you seeking employment with an Law Enforcement Agency / Para-military Force, or are you expecting to have to assault one?

Or are you talking about Home-defense training, Hunting, Self-defense training or Precision shooting?