Recently, I started asking around for some input. One of the recurring topics that you guys latched onto was the concept of standards. To be honest, I’m all about objective performance measurements for accuracy, speed, and other elements. As part of a broader goal, I want to make that a recurring element of our community.
I’d like to get your help, though.
You see, there are a lot of places out there with their own standards of performance. I received a few in the Facebook group, but I know there are many out there.
So here is the question: What are your favorite performance standards?
Ideas to get you started
To get the juices flowing, let’s look at some of the examples you guys shard with me.
Ash Hess
Ash Hess, a competitive shooter one of the primary authors of Army TC 3-22.9, put out an article over at Primary and Secondary detailing his baselines at different distances.
• 0-25 4-inch 1 sec or
less splits standing (US Army zeroing ONLY 4 MOA for zeroing prone)
• 25-50 4 inch 2-3 second splits standing
• 50-100 4 MOA standing or Kneeling
• 100-199- 4MOA Standing supported
• 200-250- 4MOA Kneeling supported
• 250-500 4MOA Prone
Now, this is MAX groupsize, or minimum competency. If you can’t do this, cold, on demand, you need to attend a base level class such as Appleseed before doing other classes. Seriously, you are wasting peoples time going to higher level classes if you can’t meet this
So that’s one option. I honestly can’t say how well I stack up to that one right now because I haven’t tested it at speed and at those distances.
AMTAC Shooting
Another interesting standard came from the American Tactical Shooting Instruction LLC site.
This one has the perspective on the “whole person” concept and dips into the author’s experience with the Sniper Adventure Challenge Race. These standards are much less focused on shooting accuracy than they are on physical capabilities. For example, you’ll find rucking, pullups, bushcrafting, and some shooting standards.
Though he doesn’t go as as publishing what the actual standards are.
This approach interests me primarily because it goes beyond shooting skills alone.
Over to You
Let me know your thoughts.
What kind of standards have you come across? How do you measure your own performance?
Personally I don’t think I’m necessarily a ‘bad’ shot but there’s no way I’d live up to the ‘Ash Hess’ minimal standard as described above, especially at distance. I’m a hobbyist at best so I’m never going to be kicking in doors or taking shots at threats over 100 yards away. Actually, a worst case scenario for me (God forbid) would likely involve living room or front lawn distances. I think for the average person it’s more of a ‘need’ standard versus a ‘want’ standard conversation.
William, I thought the same thing when I saw his standards. But I also get where it’s coming from. A lot of folks skip over the fundamentals in a rush to try and do “cool guy” stuff.
At 48 years old, I am about to retire from the Army after 30+ years of service. The ‘standards’ that I have been exposed to have been the Army qualification standards. Until I shot up to 500 yards in a civilian course in 2018, I had never shot at a distance greater than the 300m target in the Army qualification process. Another ‘first’ for me in 2018 was shooting in a two day Project Appleseed event. Knowing that the Army only taught me to qualify over the years, I left any false ideas of the Army having made me a… Read more »
Appleseed is definitely a good program. I really enjoyed the time I spent there, and did learn a lot about the fundamentals. it always helps to have a real coach looking at what you’re doing and offering pointers.
I clover leafed my first three rounds at 100 yards for the first time with a .308 and some ammo I got in a trade from a metro sniper, Hornady ELD M-Tac to be exact, a few months ago. He was also the instructor teaching the precision rifle course I had taken. Having a suppressor took 25% of the recoil out and this was shooting prone. I didn’t know I could do that. I would wager I’ll never be able to do that in field conditions…and I’ll never take that 12 pound rifle in the field. Something that all the… Read more »
One of the entertaining things to me is how much of a demand people put on accurate rifles. The standard for accuracy today is way higher than in the past. I remember reading some internet rumor that the original spec for the M24 sniper rifle called for a 3-4 MOA accuracy level for exactly the reason you stated…there are other more important things in field conditions.
Good point. I’m not Gov or Leo so a lot of my assumptions were from….80’s action films growing up. Just a fact, I guess…anyhoo, when you start listening to guys who have killed the bejesus out of dozens in the span of three decades and several continents it makes you stop and think. “Dont worry about that, focus on this and we’ll transition to that”…and then the light goes on and it clicks. All the whiz bang stuff becomes neat but null and the basics kick in when it’s time to hustle. I DO think people should have standards though.… Read more »
When I was going through the gunsmithing program at Trinidad State Jr. College out here 42 years ago (ouch), the ‘holy grail’ was one minute of angle accuracy from a bolt-action sporter rifle (we were building sporters out of WWII German Mauser 98 bring-backs). Things have changed. Everyone seems to want to spend lots of $$ to get a 1/2 minute rifle yet how many get away from the bench, and do really serious position training? Whoops, that’s WORK.
It sounds like you have a rifle standard, it’s just not unrealistically strict like most tend to be. Something along the lines of “Paper plate @ 200 yards consistently”
Good point. I’m not real good at simplifying things to that degree. I think that’s decent shooting for a hasty shot using a tree for support. I could do better or worse…how much feeling is left in my toes in January?!
Ok ne thing that I have always enjoyed is seeing where I find myself to others standards. Sometimes it real good. Others, not so much.
I enjoy standards for the same reason. It usually ends in “well, at least I know what I need to work on”.
Standards, like competition, are objective standards of “this is where you’re at.”
A lot of people, including me, shy away from that because don’t always want our egos challenged.
Hitting a paper plate at 200 consistently is an already pretty good standard. A standard paper plate is what…nine inches? That’s 4.5 MOA at 200. If you can do that consistently, then you’re doing pretty well, IMO.
OK…but from what position? And under what time pressure? How many times out of ten? Group size in minutes (a true angular measure of ability) per each position is one measurement. This tells you how far away you can consistently hit a given size target. Another is speed to first hit, starting from standing ready (port-arms, or low ready) to assuming position and firing (ideally) a first-round hit, with the target dimension commensurate to the real-life intended target, at multiple distances. For example, using a paper plate: The TIME for each of the following: standing ready to a standing hit… Read more »
Ah, and there’s the rub. Good goals should be specific.
Dinner plates at 200 yards is good, but dinner plate at 200 yards from a sitting position in less than 4 seconds when starting from a low ready standing is better.
If the host doesn’t mind me plugging my book here, try this for pistol shooting:
https://amzn.to/2Zb4Jm9
I don’t mind at all. It’s a great book, and one I plan to review. I’ve shortened the link for you, though. I want to get into a whole pistol shooting series of posts to go along with my rifle marksmanship. I just don’t feel as qualified to write about it.
You are perfectly qualified to write about your own experiences to this point…
I don’t have any official standards or recognized courses of fire/ qualifications per se, but I do have some unofficial drills pistol drills I run during my for fun range sessions that help me see where I am at. Keeping a mag inside a 3”x “5 index card at 7 yards, a mag inside a 6” paper plate at 15 yards, and a mag inside a 12” paper plate at 20 yards plus. I also log each trip in my range journal so I know what I did, how I did, and what I want to work on. Sadly ,… Read more »
A timer is, in my opinion, an *extremely* important tool for training especially pistol skills. I would highly recommend you bump up the priority of a timer on your shopping list. It will open up a whole new world of shooting for you, compared to just doing accuracy oriented shooting. Regrettably, I have been able to do an extremely limited amount of shooting this year. I also have not developed a very robust set of standards for myself. On the pistol side, I use mainly IDPA competitions and my performance on the classifier to gauge my skill level. On the… Read more »
Index cards are a great tool for training, as well as paper plates. I think a lot of folks always want to spring for the fancy tools, but they aren’t really doing anything better.
I’m in the same boat about .a lack of shot timer. I know I should get one, but the money keeps going elsewhere.
For general purpose rifle work (as in hunting big game), Jeff Cooper had three standard exercises that test multiple fundamental skills, from pure marksmanship, to speed, to assuming position/breaking position/moving/assuming position again.
The Snapshot
The Rifle Bounce
Rifle Ten
Along with a bunch of pistol/shotgun courses.
Course descriptions found here:
https://www.frfrogspad.com/courses.htm
Along with a wealth of other info on all types of shooting and related things. Excellent site. The site owner is an old-school Jeff Cooper student and NJ ex-patriate like myself.
The above tests give you a real-world wringing out that you can apply to real-world usage.
Oh man, Pete, I miss having you around this much! That’s a great resource, I appreciate you sharing it.
Huge amount of info on there, lots on Col. Cooper as well. The dry practice drills and standards are great. He’s even got a section of quotes and poetry that capture the essence of “our side’s” thinking.
There are so many different modes of shooting that I think a layered, or multi-faceted set of standards is necessary. Real shooting covers a range of distances, precision requirements, elapsed time of the target being exposed, whether the target is still or moving, gun handling, and some of the little things that come into play, like distance estimation and compensation, states of readiness, what happens after the target is hit, etc… Those things vary probably from person to person, based on application, terrain, and equipment. Most existing standards are variations on marksmanship and time, and omit other important variables due… Read more »
Those are some solid standard, and I wonder how well I would do against them right now. Only having regular access to an indoor 50-yard range has kind put a hurt on some of my skills, especially when it comes to wind (as I found out at a recent match). For movers, I seem to remember some story from back in the day where the test was someone rolling a barrel down a hill and the shooter had to hit it x number of times. I think I came across that for my Townsend Whelen article. I think with everyone’s… Read more »
My wife and I are, what you might call, senior citizens. Neither of us have a military or LEO background. We have formal training for pistol and rifle and both of us shot IDPA and NRA High Power for a time, and both of us are former IDPA range safety officers. We have even hired competitive shooters for private lessons. We don’t compete anymore, except against ourselves. Note to younger readers: as you get older, your eyesight and hearing usually does not improve and your reflexes get slower, you get weaker, so you need to find ways to compensate for… Read more »