Shameful performance, Steyr MA1-40 used in my 1st IPSC

Discussion in 'Competition Shooting' started by ThaiBoxer, Aug 5, 2007.

  1. ThaiBoxer

    ThaiBoxer Active Member

    1,283
    9
    38
    Shot my 1st IPSC today. Came in second to last, 8 of 9. Had a few stages were I was middle of the pack.

    I shot Limited class with 12 rd mags in my MA1-40, but the second place guy shot production with a M&P 9mm. The guys all shot pretty fast. With regard to the IPSC vs IDPA brouha over "reality-based" or "which be mo betta", IMHO...

    Plus: the IPSC is fast and a lot of shooting. If you want to drop a mag that has a round in it, by all means do so. No time wasting with the "reloads with retention". Race guns are cool, but I can admire them without wanting one. IPSC was a bit mory gamelike, and a bit less "rule-hassle".

    Minus: There were a few times where you stood in front of 5 targets and shot before moving to the next part, and I thought that screamed "shooting game". The IPSC course was more farfetched than the most farfetched IDPA course I've seen, one course had 10 targets to engage with 3 shots/target. No attention given to whether to you were exposed to fire from targets that you were apparently justified in shooting, by the same token, you had to keep your feet inside the Bianchi barricade "box", even though you were leaning around to engage the target.

    It's hard to imagine Col Cooper preferring IPSC over IDPA, were he to see both and considering his interest in practicality. I do think that IDPA is closer to "CCW-useful training" than IPSC. Whether that means anything, I dunno.


    Got some good tips from guys afterwards, apparently I dip my gun down between targets "Miami Vice style" and especially when moving, instead of pulling it back in toward my chest, that was useful info. They playfully "made fun" of my Weaver stance, isoceles is preferred. I actually like the isoceles if wearing armor, but for a regular Joe, I'd rather be angled to the target and that's how I learned to box, anyway.

    A .40 Steyr is a good IDPA gun, I think it is weak for IPSC unless you do Limited 10. The mag capacity is low relative to other gamer guns.
     
  2. Netfotoj

    Netfotoj Premium Member

    2,652
    2
    0
    I don't want to name any names, but there's a guy in the forum "cough-wulf" who might know something about some .40 mags for the Steyr that will hold a few more than 12 rounds, like 15 or 16 last I heard.

    With a few of those "full capacity" mags in hand, you might do better at your next match.

    This full-cap Steyr mag doc might come out of the shadows and respond, but if he doesn't you could try sending a PM to whoever he is "cough-wulf". :mrgreen:
     

  3. ThaiBoxer

    ThaiBoxer Active Member

    1,283
    9
    38
    Y'know, Netftoj, that's right. I kinda remember some talk of that. Might have to ask cough-wulf
     
  4. SELFDEFENSE

    SELFDEFENSE Premium Member

    3,816
    31
    48
    I like IDPA better, but all competition is good.
     
  5. ThaiBoxer

    ThaiBoxer Active Member

    1,283
    9
    38
    At present I do too, but I'd still like to turn in a better performance than I did today. The IPSC guys DID shoot fast.
     
  6. RiceCakes

    RiceCakes Guest

    287
    0
    0
    Gotta start somewhere, did ya have fun?
     
  7. ThaiBoxer

    ThaiBoxer Active Member

    1,283
    9
    38
    Not a lot. I always enjoy IDPA. The guys were a different crew from the IDPA crew, and seemed less than friendly through the match, but afterwards were alright. Might have just been competitive spirit.

    I'll go again, but they moved it to the Sunday right after the IDPA, for some reason. Kind of makes for an either-or situation.
     
  8. Polymer Proselyte

    Polymer Proselyte New Member

    167
    0
    0
    We don't have IDPA in this country (NZ) but I find I shoot IPSC better with a relaxed and good humoured squad.
    I think there is a lot to be said for the social side of any sport shooting.

    I shoot with a couple of army guys and its the same style - set weaver stance, double tap, and gun at the low ready when moving (the SAS imprinted it on his brain). What ever works for you, its all rounds down. It sounds like you did ok for your first shoot.

    I'd imagine the rules are pretty different to IDPA.
     
  9. Wulf

    Wulf Premium Member

    1,664
    4
    0
    :shock: What? :shock:

    Wulf <-- didn't do it! :shock:

    Gun racin' mags? :shock:

    I don't do gun racin' or nothin', but if mag capacity becomes the essential part of the sport for the Steyr M-A1 Team, count me in on the R&D Team. Ya gotta answer some questions first. Can ya get by with 14-round mag or will 15-rounds be morebetter for ya? Reason I ask is cause if mag changes are important to this gun race, the Sigma 15-round converted mags don't often "drop free" cause the M-A1 mag release spring in the mag well binds against the Sigma mag body. So that would seem to create a logistical impass, at this time. I'm still lookin' for another spring that'd resolve this dilemma. :shock: The 14-round Sigma mags are best kept atta 14-round capacity, but a spring hack with a Wolff +10% xtra power Sigma 14-15 round mag replacement spring will get most of the "tension loss" back so the mags are still reliable. The Steyr OEM replacement springs won't handle the hack, and neither will the OEM replacement springs for the Sigmas. Also, the 14-round Sigma mags fit flush in the mag well like the OEM Steyrs do, but the 15-round Sigma conversion mags stick out a bit. <FYI> If ya wanna continue with this mag hack stuff, PM me. I think ya donna good thing goin' out there and competin'. I'm proud of ya! :) If Steyr hadda nationally well-known competition shooter reppin' 'em and beatin' the snot outta some o' the other manufacturer reps, IMHO, we'd be miles ahead in the game and other competition shooters would jump on the bandwagon and the extra publicity would lend itself to all the aftermarket items made available to other firearms manufacturers. Then maybe the need for "homemade" hicap mags'd be moot cause ya could just pick up the phone, give 'em a plastic# and have Mec-Gar ship it to your front door...like all the other Big Dawgs. :roll: Just a thought. <shrug> Anyway, good luck with it, Ben. And, be safe and have fun. :p

    Wulf <-- once hadta push start his 1911-A1 before a race :oops:
     
  10. bigtaco

    bigtaco Active Member

    1,791
    10
    38
    i don't think either of the sports are realistic. i think that in a truly realistic defensive competition, you'd be presented with 10 different situations and fire three rounds max, the targets would move erratically, and they'd shoot back at you. short of that, everything is a game.

    but no one wants to do that!!! people want to shoot, at targets they can actually hit, and not get injured in the process. ipsc has more shooting, more ridiculous situations. after all, none of us ever planned a gun fight.

    idpa assumes cover will be available in every circumstance, and that seeking cover trumps engaging targets. the attacker will be seeking you, not cover and diverting your attention from the aggressor will not come naturally in the real circumstance. your eyes will be locked on the threat.

    also, neither of the sports adopts "fire as retreating" stages as a matter of course. if i get my truck stuck in the mud, i want the winch to pull me back out of the hole, not farther into it. same in defensive shooting. you want to shoot your way out of the situation, not into it. stands to reason that one should start the stage at the far end of the bay and work backwards as if retreating from the attack. don't you think idpa in all the "realistic wisdom" would adopt this?

    as far as being angled to the target, i initially had the same thought, but i reconsidered my position after my instructor pointed out some anatomical realities.


    the idea of angling your body seems good because you're giving your attacker a smaller target to hit.
    but...

    1) peripheral shots (those to the right and left of COM) aren't much trouble even if you take one.

    however, if the attacker manages a solid hit and you are angled, the bullet will pass thru you at an angle, damaging more soft tissue.
    the bullet hits two lungs instead of one.

    if you take rounds squarely, good hits will go straight thru, doing less damage.


    2) when engaging an attacker who is firing at you, your fingers and hands are in front of your COM. odds are good that one or both of your hands will be hit.

    if you need to switch from strong hand to weak hand, you'll find weak handed shooting to be easier from a neutral stance.


    also, this practice of shooting with your gun at arms length is silly. it is much too easy for an attacker to knock the gun out of your hand. those truly wanting to adopt a defensively sound shooting stance will hold the gun as close to their body as possible, even as firing. but i don't see many shooters adopting this practical stance. mostly because it's less accurate.

    my two cents... but i'm no cooper.
     
  11. IDPA and IPSC are all good in the sense that they teach you good marksmanship and are superior to at static range. Beyond using a laser engagment system or simunitions IDPA ia about as close to a real engagement as you can safely get.

    I don't feel you need a mag with a capacity beyond 12-rounds in IDPA, but you do need to be good at doing mag changes.

    Things I think that help are: Ditching Weaver (you can be as consistent in weaver), practicing with your support hand postion and having that be the same every time (most people overlook support hand), and try to avoid a tap, tap, pause, tap pace as each shot should be equal space between (you'll get better over all speed that way).
     
  12. SELFDEFENSE

    SELFDEFENSE Premium Member

    3,816
    31
    48
    Just the pressure of time and performance in IDPA & IPSC give some of the pucker factor you would experience in a real confrontation, and you do things in 3 dimensions you would not have realized shooting in the standard 2 dimension target pratice.
     
  13. ThaiBoxer

    ThaiBoxer Active Member

    1,283
    9
    38
    BT, in the spirit of the IPSC vs IDPA thread, I'm going to disagree on a few points.

    I think decreased liklihood of being hit with the somewhat narrower cross section from Weaver is demonstrable, but not real significant. Increased damage from sideways COM hit vs. straight-on COM hit is inherently theoretical. Weaver is not sideways like a bullseye shooter, or even a 45 degree turn. I think it's closer to a 30 degree turn. However, with body armor and the exposed armhole vs straight-on, it is not theoretical.

    I think this is equally true with Weaver.

    I disagree, since I shoot best with my weakhand when turned in a bullseye stance, weakside forward.


    I don't have any training in this close retention carry/shooting, but it seems to echo things I've seen, and I'm starting to buy into it. I will definitely try this if I get a practice in, and for the next match.

    In addition, I've seen enough "expert" types and generally good IPSC shooters advocate isoceles for the repeatability. Limited practice seems to indicate this true for me too.

    But it just feels so...goofy. I'll get over it I'm sure. Early on (like about 12 years of age) I formed the impression that serious, 1911 .45-type guys shoot Weaver style, and .32 PPK shooters shot isoceles. Stupid I know, but that was the impression.
    :D
    Ben
     
  14. Shooter

    Shooter Premium Member

    1,689
    7
    38
    BT, shooting with both arms straight is OK as long as you know when to start pulling the arms in to the chest and keep shooting in the process......but no one is going to knock the gun out of your hand when they are ten yards away.... three yards and the gun should be in very close to your chest, in tight, and the trigger blazing.............you won't have to aim at that distance........... :wink: this is typical CQ training at top notch schools.........but you probably know that.........but dedicated target shooters wouldn't ........... :)
     
  15. ThaiBoxer

    ThaiBoxer Active Member

    1,283
    9
    38
    I've been having a hard time with the isoceles, I keep morphng into Weaver, especially when doing the "Steyr" hold. I do see faster recovery with Isoceles. Have practiced the retenetion style, doing OK with that I think.