TargetTalk

You may remember this:

viewtopic.php?f=4&t=46189&hilit=steyr+air+pistol

I don't know how it finally shook down, but it gave me something to think about.

I generally like a wide front sight; one that is the apparent width of the bull. Two of my three air pistols have this accommodation, the third is hard to come by so I though I'd go the other way and move the sight to the rear, thereby making it "fatter." Now I'd find out what the effects of the "short" pistols were, since I had never owned a "short" gun.

Bottom line? I may be shooting a little better, but certainly no worse. I certainly would not hesitate to recommend the short guns to any shooter not shooting record scores, and maybe others.

Of course, if you hate the whole concept and won't try it, I'm sure you're absolutely right!

The answer is all about individual hold measured in milliradians and how you view that deviation in tbe sigbts with your specific eyeball focus. The math indicates that a longer sight has the ability to point more accurately. The human interface is the key. If you have a tight enough hold, you can extract the data from the sight picture. The data will be identical in either case. The PERCEPTION will be markedly different. At any specific degree of hold, your shot dispersion will be identical irrespective of the gun. Shortening tbe gun sight plane reduces the fidelity of the feedback. The ability to discern absolute data from tbe sight picture is reduced. That reduction is exactly why some do better with tbem. Some people have difficulty with the data processing of everything going on with a long sight plane and are unable to act/react quickly enough to use it. Reducing tbe acquity of the sight picture helps some by giveing them all they can reasonably process. The lack of stress caused by chasing the sighting system beyond your ability to process it is the internal mental game. That what makes shorter guns perform better in shakier hands with weaker eyeballs............

It used to be that we said you can't hit what you cant see
We should really say you can't hit what you can't see CLEARLY

I don't shoot well enough, especially after years of age & injury related decline to offer much to this conversation, but this stood out to me:

"Some people have difficulty with the data processing of everything going on with a long sight plane and are unable to act/react quickly enough to use it."

My understanding of the shot process is that spektr just described the cardinal sin of trying to snatch a 10. I've been shooting a short AP since a torn rotator cuff made it necessary, and in addition to the lower weight and easier balance it provides a certain degree of smoothing out the sight wiggles. I may not be able to resolve absolute alignment as well as a shooter with a full length pistol with a full length sight radius, but the perceived reduction in movement more than makes up for it.

Even though he's a well-known nutjob, I'm with Rover on this one (and what does that say about me?).

Since velocity = radius x angular velocity
where radius = barrel length and angular velocity = wobble
won't a shorter barrel impart less lateral velocity (& less displacement at the target) than a longer barrel for the same wobble?

So moving the sight back on a long barrel won't have the same external ballistics as a short barrel.

In a static system yes, but we are discussing a feedback loop. If tbe optical sensor cannot sort the signal from the noise, all bets are off. My comment is that the longest sighting plane that you can use is potentially the most accurate. If it wasnt, smallbore shooters wouldnt use tubes. The problem with figuring wobble is wbere the radiius is.... Is it at the shoulder, is it at the wrist, is it at the waist, is it a melding of all theseand is it consistantly the same motion. We are flexible creatures shooting a rigid device using an imperfect optical sensor to drive a feedback loop that has a variable latency in its response...... Its not all cut and dried...... It does seem that restricting the acuity of the sight allows persons with slower response times to shoot without the optics clouding a good decision on trigger release...

If you set up your sight picture like this:



This is a nice symmetric pattern that the eyes & brain can be trained to achieve automatically at a subconscious level. When I can do it (I've got 50 years of training to undo), it works very well. Part of the theory is that you are not thinking about it as three separate pieces, only as a whole. You still need to maintain focus on the front sight.

The difference in the brain is subtle, and if you've spent years thinking about keeping the sights aligned to each other & then keeping that parked under the black, it's going to take a while to grasp. When I can do it, A) it seems to offload my brain a bit, and B) I get a 10.

What I don't know is whether this approach will work well at a long sight radius for people who have trouble tracking the movement of the three separate pieces.

That what makes shorter guns perform better in shakier hands with weaker eyeballs............

It used to be that we said you can't hit what you cant see
We should really say you can't hit what you can't see CLEARLY

This sums up the long/short discussion best for me.

I recently bought a FWB P8x in the compact length. It has the remarkable ability to move the sight radius to almost identically replicate what was standard on my LP10 long.

I experimented with all lengths and the shorter sight radius proved most accurate “for me” because of the above quote from spektr which relates to how I can process what I am able to see in my present state of optical and physical health, combined with the shorter barrel time of the pellet.

This may not have applied 40 years ago when my on level was almost non existent and I could study the front sight in great detail.

The sight picture shown by GWhite is something I have also applied for many years and is one less thing for my mind to keep track of. Also the eye/brain combination seems happier with this symmetrical setup.

Ok here is a very personal take on short v long.
I'm a lightly built small person and shoot a Morini titanium and a K12 as backup, I convinced myself I should try and lighten the load at the end of my arm to give me a bigger window of pure aim without shake. So I converted both to short with short cylinders, what a revelation in stillness, both visually and as traced on the scatt. All is pleasing right up until the release where for me the whole thing goes to hell in a hand cart, both seen on dry fire on the scatt and in live fire on cards. Oh boy did I want it to work but it did not and after two months converted back and my competitive level came back. Think it is the extra mass dampening down the movement from trigger and the puff of air. At the end of the competitive season I'm going to revisit this and try again, firstly going down to short cylinders first and tracking the hold then changing the barrel and working on it. Goodness the short lighter pistols point so well I would love it to work for me but it may just be a blind alley.

George

Theres a difference between the sighting plane benefits and the polar inertial moment of the gun. I would have taped a bit of weigbt to tbe nose of the tank to see what a touch of noseweight did to things.......

Thirdwheel - in addition to experimenting with added end-weights, can you reduce the trigger pull weight a bit, maybe? And/or, move the stop back, so the trigger doesn't bottom out too closely to the time of release. Might help your trigger discipline.

I'm no expert, but generally I've found that the more weights I add, the "firmer" I want the trigger to be. As my index finger pulls, the heavier gun seems to stabilize. Conversely, when shooting it "light", the opposite happens. Something to ponder, anyway!

Thanks chaps.
Yup I know there is a difference the benefit / not for sighting plane and the inertia damping, what I did wrong was go down this road when the competition season is in full swing, so was not going to spend too long playing with things as that would be daft to say the least. I'm pleased with the pointing and stillness so will revisit it over Xmas when things go a bit quiet on the competition front, and this time I will only convert one at a time with my Pardini K12 first as it is my backup pistol. Do not really want to add weight as lightening was the sole reason to try it out but adding weight I will do to observe and analyse, just screwing on the longer cylinder may do it to start with.
Both triggers are set up for competition and as such lightening is not really an option and yes I did back off the stop on the K12 a smidgen as I thought that too, the electronic Morini has no stop.
I found though because the lighter pistol gave such a stable sight picture I luxuriated in admiring it instead of starting my motor release to let it go, so initiated an in-virtuous cycle.

I'm certain that the "barrel time" argument is nonsense, but weight distribution may have some merit.

When I posted, I was only concerned with the sight radius influencing results, but I see others feel very differently.

Rover wrote:I'm certain that the "barrel time" argument is nonsense, but weight distribution may have some merit.

When I posted, I was only concerned with the sight radius influencing results, but I see others feel very differently.

Don't worry, Rog, simple statements made on an online message board will bring out non-responsive gibberish like you can't imagine.

Actually, you've seen enough of these that you CAN imagine.

I added some weight at the muzzle and settled in for a practice session Sat. I shot four straight 94s (one 8) with no warm-up. Not too bad for an old fart with cataracts. Hopefully, there will be progress.

This is EXACTLY why adding a bit of noseweight to short pistols that have superior target visability for mere mortals, MIGHT be an avenue worth persuing. I have been using small neodium magnets stuck to tbe barrel. I buy them at harbor freight. They dont weigh much at all and are simple to add subtract or move. I doubt if I hang more than 10 grams total on the gun. Its about upping the polar moment to make it resist twitchyness.