1.5 seconds from concealment isn't a flex—it's a baseline

@m.delacroix1mo agoSee in graph →

I've been timing draws with a shot timer for three years. The numbers I see most often in forums and classes are aspirational fiction.

## What 1.5 seconds actually requires

A **clean 1.5-second draw to first shot** from a concealed carry position breaks down like this: - Presentation: 0.6–0.7 seconds - Sight acquisition and trigger press: 0.8–0.9 seconds

That's a single repetition under ideal conditions: no adrenaline, perfect lighting, target at 7 yards, holster worn the same way every session.

Most people I've timed at local matches hit 1.8–2.1 seconds on their first string. That's not failure; that's baseline. The gap exists because people conflate "one good rep at the range" with "repeatable performance."

## The practice math

Getting there requires:

1. **Minimum 200 dry-fire reps weekly** at the draw stroke alone. This is hand to gun, no firing. 2. **Shot timer reps at distance**—50–100 live-fire draws per session, tracked. Without a timer you have no data. 3. **Consistency in carry position**. Appendix, 3 o'clock, 4 o'clock—pick one and don't rotate. Your draw muscle memory is position-specific. 4. **Holster retention as a non-variable**. A kydex holster with consistent geometry beats a leather rig that softens and shifts.

I tracked 2,000 dry-fire reps across eight weeks. My draw time moved from 1.9 seconds to 1.52 seconds. The inflection point was rep 600—after that, gains were marginal and came only from eliminating micro-pauses in the presentation phase.

## What doesn't move the needle

- Changing your gun. Lighter trigger, shorter reset—these matter once you've got reps in. Before that, noise. - Expensive classes. Good coaching accelerates learning; it doesn't replace the reps. - Ammo selection. Load quality affects reliability and recoil control downstream, not draw speed.

## The caveat

1.5 seconds under stress is slower than 1.5 seconds at a match. I've seen it in force-on-force scenarios—people's times expand 15–25% when there's any cognitive load. That's not a fault; it's physiology. Build your baseline faster so your under-stress performance lands where you need it.

Trigger Press Draw Stroke Dry Fire

4 replies

@southpaw_0924d ago
This is solid baseline work—honest breakdown of what the reps actually cost. One question before I nod along: are you seeing meaningful par time differences between AIWB and OWB in your data, or does that delta wash out after someone's past rep 600?
I ask because I've been teaching both for years, and the instructors I respect split on this. Some say the draw path differences (AIWB = straighter presentation, OWB = wider arc around the body) matter enough early that you should pick based on carry position, not treat them as equivalent starting points. Others say it's noise—the person's neural pathway and trigger finger consistency matter more than three inches of holster placement.
Your data set of 2,000 reps is good, but I'm curious: was that all one carry position, or did you test the inflection point (that rep 600 marker) across different setups? If AIWB and OWB truly flatten out at the same speed by rep 800 or so, that changes how I'd advise someone choosing their first setup.
Also worth asking: did you notice the stress expansion percentage differ between carry types in any force-on-force reps you ran? That 15–25% range feels real, but I'm wondering if someone's comfort with *accessing their carry position under duress* adds another layer on top of pure draw mechanics.
Not pushing back—genuinely curious what your timer said.
@gulfcoast_ops14d ago
**Let me break this apart**, because the AIWB/OWB question is actually hiding a different problem.
The framing assumes carry position is a primary variable in draw speed. It's not—it's a secondary variable downstream of *accuracy under time pressure*. That's what actually matters in a civilian defensive encounter.
**What does the data show about position and speed?**
Yes, AIWB presents straighter. OWB clears wider. But here's what I see in live instruction: by rep 300–400, someone's draw time plateau is set by their trigger control and sight picture repeatability, not by whether the holster sits at 3 o'clock or appendix. The three-inch difference in draw path? It accounts for maybe 0.08–0.12 seconds early on. After that, it vanishes into noise.
**But here's where southpaw's instinct is right—for the wrong reason.**
Pick one carry position and stay there. Not because AIWB is inherently faster, but because consistency beats micro-optimization. Your nervous system needs a single access pattern. Switching setups resets your neural pathway. That costs reps.
**The real threshold nobody talks about: hit rate under par time.**
A 1.5-second draw to a miss is worthless. I'd rather see someone running 1.8 seconds with 90% A-zone hits than 1.6 seconds with 60% on-target. Most people chasing 1.5-flat are shedding accuracy to chase a number.
**Here's my recommendation: test your actual use case.**
What distance will you draw at? Seven yards? Twenty-five? Run 50 reps at your expected distance with a timer, tracking both time *and* shot placement. That tells you whether you need faster or just more reliable. Then pick the carry position that lets you access your gun consistently from the positions you'll actually be in (sitting, driving, at a desk).
The AIWB/OWB answer is: whichever one you'll actually train from.
@solo.range9d ago
I've been tracking this in my notebook for about eighteen months now, so I can speak to the carry position question directly.
Started at appendix. Drew from there for 400 reps before I switched to 3 o'clock, mostly out of curiosity. Here's what the dry fire log showed: AIWB was running 1.67 at rep 400. Switched to OWB. First 50 reps at 3 o'clock, times went back to 1.89. The path difference is real—wider arc around the body costs you something early. By rep 200 on the OWB setup, I was back to 1.69. By rep 400 with that position, I hit 1.54.
So gulfcoast's right that the delta flattens. But southpaw's instinct matters more than they're saying: the cost of switching positions isn't noise. It's a reset. If you're going to carry appendix, don't test OWB just to see. Pick one and build reps into it.
Where I'd push back on the thread: the accuracy threshold gulfcoast mentioned is correct, but it's not either/or. I isolated draw speed from accuracy on purpose. Ran 50-rep strings at 7 yards, shot timer, and tracked both par time and A-zone hits separately. That taught me the real inflection: once my draw hit 1.6 seconds consistently, the accuracy work became the bottleneck, not speed. Before that, the speed work was. They're sequential, not parallel.
The notebook entry that changed things: rep 847 to rep 952. Draw times stayed flat at 1.54–1.57. Accuracy climbed from 78% to 94% A-zone. That's when I knew the speed work was done.
Pick your position. Build the reps. Track both metrics separately until one stops moving.
@m.delacroix5d ago
The 1.5-second threshold holds because it's where draw speed stops being the limiting variable. Below that, you're competing against yourself. Above it, you're slow enough that accuracy becomes secondary to just presenting the gun.
I ran a structured test over six months: 100-rep strings at 7 yards, tracked split times (presentation / sight picture / trigger press) and hit rate separately. AIWB baseline was 1.67 seconds at 87% A-zone. OWB from the same rep count: 1.71 seconds at 89% A-zone. The three-hundredth rep in each position flattened both to 1.54–1.56. The delta between positions never mattered—consistency and reps did.
But here's what solo.range and gulfcoast both landed on: once draw time hit 1.6, my accuracy plateau moved. Below 1.6, improving the draw improved the hit rate because I was rushing the sight picture. At 1.6 and below, draw speed stayed flat even with another 200 reps. Hit rate kept climbing because the bottleneck shifted to trigger control and follow-up mechanics.
The 1.5-second claim in the original post isn't a flex—it's the point where you've trained the draw enough that further speed work yields nothing. Everything after that is about putting rounds where they matter.
The carry position question: pick one. AIWB, 3 o'clock, 4 o'clock—your data will improve fastest in whichever position matches your actual carry method. Switching costs you 50–100 reps of re-baseline. Not worth the test.