TargetTalk

Nestruyev was reported to have shot with almost no gap between his front sight and rear sight.

I wasn't happy with my wide gap, which give me a bigger spread. I wasn't happy with narrow gap, which centralize group much better but is prone to have anxiety induced wild shot.

Recently, I have been using Nestruyev's no gap theory. I am pleasantly surprise how accurate this no gap practice is.

Initially, I thought this might be just a transient novelty that might not produce long lasting results.

But after two weeks, I have come to the conclusion NO GAP, or even better "minus gap", make me a more accurate shooter.

If I see any light, the alignment is really bad. I just concentrate on aligning the top of front sight and rear sight.

I really enjoy this "swim in the black" "sub-gap" in the sub-six feeling.

This has been a technique I have wanted to try in FP. Alas unless I invest $450 for a Morini sight installed on my TOZ it ain't gonna happen. But I will be examining the possibility with my front and rear sight blades that came with the TOZ. "Doc"

Whilst tiny/no gap seems fine for slow fire events like Free and Air, does it still work for faster matches like Standard 10 secs or Rapid 4 secs? Wider rear sight gap would seem to allow quicker acquisition of front sight?

I don't think it is fine for slow fire events, unless you've got a phenominal hold. All you'll get is a bit of white, then you'll correct, and you'll get a bit of white the other way, and you'll correct again - you'll never get the shot off. It's also very hard to centre the shots, certainly much harder than a 'standard sight picture', and I don't believe such a method could be anything other than disasterous for 99%+ of shooters.

Does anyone know if Nestruyev 'really' shot like that or if it's just a bit of heresay ?

Note also that he has switched from precision events now to ORF and I'd be very suprised if that sighting process could work in that event.

Rob.

Seamaster wrote:Nestruyev was reported to have shot with almost no gap between his front sight and rear sight.

There is a very big difference between "almost no gap" and "no gap".

If someone who is used to shooting with white the same width as the front sight picks up a gun with white a quarter of that width then they might describe that as "almost no gap"; it's all relative.

Back in the days when I was shooting well and doing a LOT of training, people would pick up my gun and hardly see any white. Because however I could easily hold the gun without losing the white on either side it was fine for me. I have no doubt the Nestruyev would be able to hold the gun at least as still.

T'is all out there in Googleland:

http://space.baidu.com/nestruev/blog/it ... 44495.html

enjoy!

Nice find.

I think the operative words from the interview are "the gap is too small for most people".

David Levene wrote:There is a very big difference between "almost no gap" and "no gap".

That's true, and, although the OP mentioned Nestruyev, the gist of his question was about using NO gap. No one has commented about that. It's an interesting concept - I have no idea if it's viable.

FredB

FredB wrote:That's true, and, although the OP mentioned Nestruyev, the gist of his question was about using NO gap.

But it did cite "Nestruyev's no gap theory". That gave a certain authority to using using no gap, an authority which has since been proved to be non-existant.

Like you Fred I have no idea if it's viable, but would be surprised if someone could shoot (what I would call) elite level scores using it. At a lower level, who knows?

two quotes I couldn't resist transposing

"In the competition today, I have only made two good tens 10.8 and 10.7. By this I mean, every other ten was 10.2, 10.3 and so only two really good tens, but they were tens. So that means I was really not so good but never the less I can hit the ten, even by shooting this way I can win even on a day when I'm not so good."

regarding the IZH 46M "...that it is very, very hard to shoot with this pistol because the speed is very low and so must always pump it, but this other guy has nearly the same results like me. And this guy I am speaking of was the European champion 1992..."

luftskytter- wrote:T'is all out there in Googleland:

http://space.baidu.com/nestruev/blog/it ... 44495.html

enjoy!

Virus warning: that web.ling tells you to "install language package". Don't do. That may infect your computer severely.

It is truth, I have tried to open my gap and is hard to control my sights, my friends says that is hard to aim with my pistol, the reason i don´t have to much gap is because I only control my left gap, not both or the front sight, but my left gap, it works for me. It depends on how your brain react to your eyes, or how you feel more confortable, I think.

luftskytter- wrote:T'is all out there in Googleland:

http://space.baidu.com/nestruev/blog/it ... 44495.html

enjoy!

I thought I'd read that interview somewhere else before.

http://www.pilkguns.com/intmn.shtml

Cool: use the Pilkguns link!

And of course, never install anything from people you don't know.
My only connection to the other link is..... Google.

Checking only one side gap sounds interesting, though I believe it might be hard to preserve the foresoght/target relationship if concentration is to one side. i
Another thought that struck me, is that if you wobble with close o zero gap, you may see the left and right gaps "flashing" or "blinking" on and off, and this should happen on both sides if you're centered. This is not a piece of advice, just a thought

Personally I'm not going to try either at present. My "method" is striving for symmetry. Humans have a strange natural/instinctive ability to find "centre", balance and symmetry, and I believe in sighting methods that make rely on this. A good sight picture to me is something that you gravitate towards in a natural way rather than something you strive to obtain.

the smaller the gap the longer you will take to aim before firing...i think that would create more shooter fatigue and anxiety and poor shots in the later rounds...

It would take a brave shooter to emulate the Russian with a very small gap between front and rear sights. I suppose if you live on the range you could do it - and for us part time shooters we would choose a width of gap we are comfortable with to offer a consistent hold on target.

I like the LP10 rear sight that allows you to easily adjust the gap evenly on either side to settle on a comfortable gap relative to whatever width is used on the front sight. I wish all my pistols had such a feature.

compscotty wrote:the smaller the gap the longer you will take to aim before firing...

Why? When the pistol arrives at the aiming area the sights are already lined up. If you have the ability to hold the gun steady enough to maintain the gap then why should it take any longer to aim.