Tom Sarver has entered the ranks of the Immortals. Shooting at the Thunder Valley (Ohio) Range on July 7th, Tom nailed a truly spectacular 1.403″ 5-shot group at 1000 yards. This represents a new IBS Light Gun group-size record that edges Rich DeSimone’s 1.564″, previously thought “untouchable.” What is even more amazing is that the group was centered, producing a 50-score with 5 Xs. That will be a new IBS Score record as well.




Link to article

I'd never be bale to do it. I shot my dads old single shot revolver (yea it looks like a revolver but then only holds one bullet, the others are fake) and I had trouble hitting the target when I was close enough I could have thrown the gun and hit it.
My problem is my eyes partially, I am nearsighted in one and farsighted in the other so with one I I can see the target but the sight on the gun is too blurry, the other eye I can see the sights but not the target.

I have shot 1000 yard bigbore (with a 1903 Springfield, iron sights), and done pretty well, but not THAT well! What a group!!!

That's pretty much how it's supposed to be! You focus on the target and the sights go blurry. you can't focus on 2 different points at the same time.

Not that good


Breaker

Actually, for the most accurate shooting, you focus on the front sight, and let the target blur a bit...

The problem is with my eyes, my left eye is farsighted enough that I can't even tell that the gun has sights if I focus on the target. Then I'm right handed so its awkward to hold with the right hand in front of the left eye.

I wore galsses in high school and finally gave up on them, the constatt pressure on my face from them gave me headaches.

Dang! That looks like a fairly good day for me at 100 yards....at almost a 1/2 mile I don't think I could even tell if there was a target in place!

I only learned front sight by sheer willpower. My left eye is quite useless (20/200) and as a result, when I front sight, I have to let the sight and the target go a bit blurry.

My Glock 19 has the tritium sights, which helps me a great deal - the three dots in a row make it easier to hold focus on the target without loosing the dots.

In the end, the laser was the tool that let me totally change the way I do tactical shooting, because I was able to focus on the target and beyond a lot better. I went from a rail mounted model that was clumsy to the internal Lasermax model, which is well worth the money.

What is interesting, at least to me, is that I was taught to focus on the front sight, and if I am shooting paper and want a really nice group that is what I do. But I grew up shooting running jack rabbits, always focused on the rabbit, not the sights, and hit a jillion of them. Then when I got into law enforcement, same thing. I focused on the target (after all, when shooting at people you have to KNOW that they have a gun/whatever), and qualified as Master (the highest possible) for thirty years. Ya gotta go with what works for you...

I do that every weekend after I've had a few beers. Then I jump into my lawn chair, climb to 13,000 ft, and head to grandma's house for cookies.

What gun was used?

Reading this got me to thinking (usually a bad idea) and trying to recall how I sight when I shoot a handgun. I think I, also, focus on the target. I am sure there is some visual awareness of the rear sight and that I'm splitting it with the front sight at the same time that I'm placing the front sight on the target. I just think my primary focus is on the target and everything else is in the picture but not in focus.

Now I'm afraid the next time I go to the range I'm going to over-analyze each shot. So, if my groups are more scattered than usual, I'll happily blame this thread!

Frank2135

Yes ... exactly what you are supposed to do... and it really works !!
Now, OTOH, I guess you then don't need to check if the paper target is armed and trying to shoot back... so it can stay unfocused..

I have made many a group like that with my Ruger P90. Not at 1,000yds though... more like 5 feet, maybe.

Hmm, well I suppose that is some pretty good shooting there. I guess the more important criteria that comes to my mind is how well he can shoot when someone is trying to shoot him. That seems much more practical to me.

Marksmanship is a good place for people to begin evaluating their shooting skills, but I've come to the conclusion that practical shooting skills are much more valuable, and never occur under ideal conditions. To me, long range target shooting is more an indication of the quality of the firearm than of the person pulling the trigger.

In practical hunting, I seldom take a shot at big game much beyond 250 yards. Mostly because I just don't encounter animals further out than that, but also because when I do, hunting ethics dictate that I should get within my firearm's maximum point blank range, which for most high powered hunting rifles is about 250 yards anyways. I know that within that range, I can reasonably expect to kill the animal with my first shot, and unadjusted point of aim stays in the kill zone from the muzzle out to that range.

In birdhunting, I am good to about 50 yards. You don't aim a shotgun at flying birds anyways, you point it, so marksmanship is really more by feel than by sight picture most of the time anyways. No one is going to take 5 seconds to pull the trigger on a shotgun at the skeet range or the duck blind once the target is presented, so the whole idea there is more intuitive than discipline.

In self defense shooting, I doubt you are going to even remember what the sight picture looked like after you are done. Going through combat and PPSC courses, my mind is more focused on target identity and the situation than on what the front sight is doing. There is a certain amount of marksmanship required in order to be successful with this sort of shooting situation. In my experience the most important trait of that is becoming accoustomed to the orientation of the firearm relative to the target prior to pulling the trigger more than actual precision shot placement. In any case, 50 yards is what I'd consider the absolute maximum range for engaging in self defense except under true combat situations. For hunting purpose, 100 yards is about the maximum limit I would ever want to shoot any handgun, even the super duper single shots, again as a matter of ethics.

What this article tells me is that the shooter fairly well knows his firearm and what can do, and can be relied on to make the best shot possible under controlled conditions. It is an accomplishment to be sure. Just not quite as sensational to me as for others. If I can hit the target at 1,000 yards I would be happy. My Brownings will shoot 1 minute of angle, so at 1,000 yards that is +/- 11 inches, which is outside the kill zone on pretty much all North American game, not to mention probably 50-100 inches of bullet drop and who knows how much deflection in a 5 mph wind. Even Army snipers know better than to take a shot like that at live targets, though sometimes they have to. I reckon it is good to know that it can be done still.

Of course, it would be far easier to simply point the laser beacon from a mile out and let the F-18 put a 500 pounder on the spot.

Hm. That would explain a lot. Oops.

Practical is all in your perspective.

If you think of firearms as nothing but weapons, and shooting as nothing but something you do to protect yourself, then of course range shooting with no distractions and perfect conditions would be impractical and useless.

But remember, shooting is also a sport. Plenty of people go to the range solely for the purpose of testing their own non-combat marksmanship. Non-combat (and non-hunting) competition shooting comes in a myriad of flavors. Maybe you don't enjoy them, but that doesn't mean they're not completely valid types of shooting. And, they're fun.

'Specially when you can make a group like that at 1,000 yards.

Oh, I wouldn't say I don't enjoy the shooting sports. I encourage those able and willing to get out there and shoot away. Like I said, it is good to practice marksmanship, and I've found it inherently satisfying on it's own accord, to be sure. It would follow that some folks would benefit from putting all that practice to good use. Not all shooters are suited to practical use, but I think if you take a person that's been practicing shooting skills and put them in a situation, they are more likely going to use what they've learned.

Firearms are made for practical use, except for the very small group of custom target guns that are still based in part on practical application. It's like automobiles; the vast majority are used for practical purpose, but that doesn't mean you can't take them to the track and develop some better driving skills and learn more about the limitations of your vehicle.

As someone else mentioned, I'd be happy with that group at 100 yards, doing that at 1000 is amazing to me. I don't get to shoot much anymore, but, no matter how much I used to, I couldn't do that.