Weaver, or isosceles?

Chapman, especially for competitive. Second, Weaver which I was 1st taught.
 
It's really about what is best for you. I used to shoot in, and win, IPSC competitions using the Weaver stance. I also used it in military pistol range qualification sessions. They taught the standard officer/infantry grunt authorized a pistol the isosceles stance, but special ops were taught the Weaver stance.

The Chapman stance is a modified Weaver stance, and it never worked well for me. In handgun defense, keeping the gun close to you and having good combat accuracy is key.

The sole time when I revert to an isosceles stance is when I'm shooting a big bore revolver like .44 magnum. I just don't want that thing in my face and I suck with it. Last choice in defense weapons. It's essentially a single shot zombie blaster.
 
Default to Chapman, have used all three and a whole bunch of whatever works for the situation, especially for shoot while moving or using available cover.
 
Isosceles 100%

it absorbs recoil a lot better and allows for faster/accurate follow up shots
 
I prefer weaver and have always used it when I’m at the range, but I feel like if I was actually in self defense I’d probably favor isosceles, since I’m a right handed shooter.
 
Kind of like, "which plane?" Depends upon the circumstances. For the reasons i would need to adopt a stance, isosceles would not be my first choice.. too many things I need to continue enjoying life exposed. For target or competition ... That's another story.
 
you keep using those words. I do not think they mean what you think they mean.

(all of them can be/are isosceles)
 
EdFred said:
you keep using those words. I do not think they mean what you think they mean.

(all of them can be/are isosceles)
Click to expand...

090914_Signals_promo.png
 
Isosceles.

Weaver might be marginally better for punching holes in a paper target but the symmetry of isosceles allows easier pivoting in either direction plus it handles recoil better which allows quicker recovery for a second shot.

If I were hunting with a handgun, Weaver might be better if there were no rest available, but my hunting is mostly shotgun, some rifle. Handguns for me are for defense, so I prefer isosceles.
 
Are you wearing a vest? Weaver may present a lower profile but expose unprotected areas more.
 
started off with the Gentleman's stance :) shooting bullseye,
switched to Isosceles when starting training for CCW/Personal Defense,
Weaver for some personal training,
Modified Weaver/Chapman for advanced personal defense training

for hunting, I guess I have the same opinion as advanced personal defense ... "whatever it takes to fight your way to your rifle" :D
 
Half Fast said:
isosceles allows easier pivoting in either direction plus it handles recoil better which allows quicker recovery for a second shot.
Click to expand...

Maybe it's all my hth training, but I'm going to disagree on this. Not just completely, but emphatically as well.

Although, I don't think I adopt a textbook Weaver stance. All the images and videos I see it doesn't look as balanced and stable as it could be.
 
Last edited:
Lindberg said:
Are you wearing a vest? Weaver may present a lower profile but expose unprotected areas more.
Click to expand...
That's precisely why I mentioned that I wouldn't use it during actual self defense. Being a right handed shooter would greatly expose the left arm-pit area - a wide open entry point to the heart and chest cavity. It's great at the range, but that's about it.
 
Ryanb said:
That's precisely why I mentioned that I wouldn't use it during actual self defense. Being a right handed shooter would greatly expose the left arm-pit area - a wide open entry point to the heart and chest cavity. It's great at the range, but that's about it.
Click to expand...

Then why are all the targets that you see of people in the iso position? Easier to hit. ;)
 
EdFred said:
Then why are all the targets that you see of people in the iso position? Easier to hit. ;)
Click to expand...

Aren't police trained to do a Weaver/side stance to minimize target area?
 
Bill Jennings said:
Aren't police trained to do a Weaver/side stance to minimize target area?
Click to expand...

I only did hand to hand combat instruction with the police, never firearms. But do they really need to worry when their targets are usually facing away from them?

"Oh no he di'int!!"
 
Ryanb said:
That's precisely why I mentioned that I wouldn't use it during actual self defense. Being a right handed shooter would greatly expose the left arm-pit area - a wide open entry point to the heart and chest cavity. It's great at the range, but that's about it.
Click to expand...

Are you routinely wearing a vest ?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top