TargetTalk

I have spent quite a few $ on 1911's and am not very impressed with myself. Now my hardball Dan Wesson with iron sights isn't a bullseye gun but it's not bad in stock version. My les Baer wadcutter is at Baers being repaired due to a mishap, but in the two months I used it with a red dot, I was not impressed with my shooting. I also have a Nelson conversion 22 with trigger job on a Springfield Armory 1911 with red dot.

About a month ago I had the opportunity and bought a cheap Ruger Blackhawk in 45acp. Though I had to modify the front sight by adding a drop of solder to raise it a bit, I instantly took to this gun and can shoot it more consistently and at POA than the expensive 1911's (with or without red dots).

What is the story with revolvers use in Bullseye? Anyone of you using them?

Thanks, bernie

chiltech500 wrote:What is the story with revolvers use in Bullseye? Anyone of you using them?

Thanks, bernie

I worked on Range 4 this year at Camp Perry; I saw maybe three competitors shooting revolvers on Friday/Center Fire day. I don't recall any on Thursday or Saturday.

Compare the winning CF NMC course score (298-14X) to the winning DR score (271-4X), the difference is substantial:-)

The bad news for all of us is our hand/eye coordination, reflexes and eyesight all decline as we age. As an almost 60 year old novice I don't expect to get very good starting from scratch at my age. I would be ecstatic with the lesser score, so IMO what the best are doing isn't necessarily pertinent to me.

I guess I am looking to see if any on the forum have used/use revolvers now and what they can share with me. Thanks

I used to; I posted the story on your other thread at http://www.bullseyeforum.net/t2956-who- ... vers#18326



...Basically: I did for three years, and got pretty good with them, then switched to semi-autos and got even better. Could I have gotten "good" by sticking to semi-autos? Maybe; we'll never know.

I'm not a competitor, I just like to shoot and I've picked up a couple of really nice wheelguns lately just for fun. My question is, is the difference in score due to better inherent accuracy or better ergonomics for semiautos? Or is there really a difference at all? Could the difference between the bullseye and DR scores be due to higher level of competition among the BE shooters, that is, the best shooters all use semiautos so the best scores are by shooters with semiautos.

Inquiring minds want to know ...

Roger

Thanks for your replies. I cannot access the other forum at work unfortunately.

Those pics are great!

Question, how much does the scope weigh? I have a few small Burris reflex sights which others say no one uses because it's harder to pick up the dot.

chiltech500 wrote:Thanks for your replies. I cannot access the other forum at work unfortunately.

Those pics are great!

Question, how much does the scope weigh? I have a few small Burris reflex sights which others say no one uses because it's harder to pick up the dot.

I'll get weights for you when I get home; Ultradot says their 1"/25mm-4MOA sights are 3.9oz, but I don't know if that includes the rings, sun-shade, rubber 'cone', plastic thread rim protector, and/or polarized lens.

I've seen a few Bullseye guns with reflex sights, but most shooters use tube-type sights. I think this is because the tube-sights are easier to use a polarized lens (for really bright days), and easier to inherently aim (pretty easy to line up a tube with the target, and then to find the dot from that).

RandomShotz wrote:I'm not a competitor, I just like to shoot and I've picked up a couple of really nice wheelguns lately just for fun. My question is, is the difference in score due to better inherent accuracy or better ergonomics for semiautos? Or is there really a difference at all? Could the difference between the bullseye and DR scores be due to higher level of competition among the BE shooters, that is, the best shooters all use semiautos so the best scores are by shooters with semiautos.

Inquiring minds want to know ...

Roger

Looking at the top twenty (20) shooters in the DR, I note there are a number of High Master and Master class shooters. IMHO, the training time needed to really become proficient in Rapid Fire is too much to make it worth the effort for most shooters.

GOVTMODEL wrote:

RandomShotz wrote:I'm not a competitor, I just like to shoot and I've picked up a couple of really nice wheelguns lately just for fun. My question is, is the difference in score due to better inherent accuracy or better ergonomics for semiautos? Or is there really a difference at all? Could the difference between the bullseye and DR scores be due to higher level of competition among the BE shooters, that is, the best shooters all use semiautos so the best scores are by shooters with semiautos.

Inquiring minds want to know ...

Roger

Looking at the top twenty (20) shooters in the DR, I note there are a number of High Master and Master class shooters. IMHO, the training time needed to really become proficient in Rapid Fire is too much to make it worth the effort for most shooters.

My experience is that revolver is just enough different to account for the difference in scores.

I shoot 30-60 rounds of revolver a year (1-2 NMCs), out of a gun that I've never bothered to Random Rest, and that also doubles as a pig and deer gun. I don't even bother to zero it before shooting my one or two DR matches for the year. Therefore I'm happy when I break 270, and really happy when I break 280. Doesn't matter to me - it's fun!

It doesn't surprise me that Kent made Master with wheelguns; he put in the time to be successful, much like anyone else who has made Master or HM.

Here's a dirty little secret: it's a really thin line between Expert and High Master scores. But that thin line takes a lot of work to cross, in one direction.

I think you can attribute the score discrepancy that you see to: A) it's Camp Perry, and if you weren't there, you have no idea what the weather decided to do that day; and B) most HMs shoot their wheelguns about as often as I do.

So I don't think it's necessarily rapid fire or slow fire or inherent accuracy, but rather the culmination of those things that make the difference between shooting a 270 in an NMC vs. averaging 2619+ in two successive matches.

(FWIW I am DR #100 and a HM indoor and outdoor)

Interesting that the original post mentions a Ruger Blackhawk in 45acp. I got one years ago and found it to be match appropriate in terms of accuracy and handling. I never did take it to a match. The idea of trying to make safe for the range officer, being it's lack of a swing out cylinder, bothered me.

One nice thing about revolver skills for timed and rapid: you can accomplish a lot, if not most, of the co-ordination through at home dry fire practice.

Jim

Jim, interesting observation on the Blackhawk.

The stock trigger is quite friendly. I do believe my cylinders need to be reamed per what others have said related to newer Blackawks cylinders being at .250 when they should be .252. This supposedly increases accuracy and more important, reduces leading - which I am getting after 20 shots or so.

Haven't decide if I will fork out to have that done as I purchased 2 more revolvers which I hope may be competition friendly and accurate.

My dad made master shooting and averaged 2575 for years using

High standard victor

S&W 629 6 Inch iron sights

S&W 625 6 inch iron sights

I am not sure, but I think 3.3 bullseye was his short line load.

Technically a wheel gun can be faster than a semi auto.

He gave me a set of English Target grips which really help on my k14 2. nil makes nice ones now but for bullseye you need to get grips that hold your hand higher then combat grips you would use for Dr.

Old timers tell me to use heavy surgical tape and Rossen.

Get a target hammer and trigger and a trigger job to 2.5 to 3 lbs.

match conditions are a challenge because shooting 10 rounds in ten seconds is a challenge in match conditions.