http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogList.aspx?id=12Wiley Clapp shares more than a quarter century of experience and knowledge in the technical and historical aspects of handgunning.(c) 2010 All rights reserved.5http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/a-great-gun-storeTue, 11 Jun 2013 00:00:00 GMT<p><span style="font-size: small;">For some reason, I have lately been reflecting on a lifetime of shooting, which includes the fine gun people I&rsquo;ve met and the great gun places I have visited. I found both in the old San Francisco Gun Exchange. The store has been out of business since September of &rsquo;99, but it was an iconic institution for the 52 years preceding that unhappy date. Those who study marketing would be well advised to examine the way that grand old store was run. They had what you needed (as well as most competing products), their sales people knew a great deal about the product and the sale was completely honest and above board. It was a dignified, yet cordial atmosphere, and for most of the five-plus decades the SFGE was in business, owner Nate Posner worked hard to keep it that way.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">I was introduced to Nate Posner sometime in the mid 70s, just as he was getting into the custom knife business. Over the years that followed, I bought several guns and a great many books, accessories and the like from the friendly guy behind that wide counter at the right rear of a big store. As stores go, this one was magnificent. The ceiling was two stories high with mezzanine facings decorated with DeWats&mdash;ever seen an Ingram Model 6 in .38 Super? Arranged in a big &ldquo;U&rdquo; shape with gun cases against the walls and accessories in the middle, the main floor was a gun buff&rsquo;s dream. Virtually everything made and worth having was arrayed in glass showcases or open racks behind the counters. As you came through the front door, you were faced with a five-foot high Lucite case stuffed with single round samples of collector&rsquo;s ammo. I once bought a single round of 9 mm Mauser, a pre-WWI cartridge for the C/96 pistol, from that case.&nbsp; Knives, custom and otherwise, were stored over on the left. </span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">When it came to gun stuff, Nate Posner had it all. However, it was not so much that he was exceptionally well-stocked, but rather the way he conducted business that made the old store so great. In those days the big &lsquo;Smiths were in short supply and you had to pony up some big bucks for them.&nbsp; osner never asked a dime over suggested retail and sold more guns because of it. He was as straight as a ruler and conveyed that characteristic to a son and daughter who continued to run the business when Nate could no longer handle it. Eventually, an unfriendly regime in the city government created a special tax schedule for gun stores. By this decree, gun stores paid something on the order of twenty times the tax rate of bicycle shops, drug stores, bakeries or what have you down the street. In plain words, they were eventually nagged out of business. More than anything else, I miss the atmosphere of that old shop. The clientele was generally urban professionals, cops, genuine sportsmen and even a politician or two. It was a place for people who just liked guns.<br /></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/a-great-gun-store#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/terminology-handWed, 05 Jun 2013 00:00:00 GMT<p><span style="font-size: small;">In a revolver, the hand is the long bar that reaches up through a slot in the standing breech. The upper tip of the hand engages a lug on the rear of the cylinder (usually part of the extractor) and turns the cylinder.&nbsp; </span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">It must be adjusted carefully in order to get the cylinder to align with the barrel just as the cylinder bolt locks into its notch. An often misunderstood part of the revolver, the hand was one of the trickiest parts of Sam Colt&rsquo;s first wheelguns. </span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">Hands have been pretty much the same since. That is until some of the newest polymer frame guns were developed. In effect, they sometimes do away with the hand as we have so long known it.&nbsp; <br /></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/terminology-hand#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/cylinder-latchesTue, 28 May 2013 00:00:00 GMT<p><span style="font-size: small;">The swing-out cylinder DA/SA revolver has been around since the 1870s and has been refined in many ways. While there are variations in the common brands and models, they pretty much remain alike with their handling. However, they usually differ in the way you get the cylinder open for extraction and loading. <a href="http://www.coltsmfg.com/" target="_blank">Colt</a> always used a pull-back latch, originally &ldquo;L&rdquo; shaped and evolved into a gracefully rounded knob. <a href="http://www.smith-wesson.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/CustomContentDisplay?langId=-1&amp;storeId=750001&amp;catalogId=750051&amp;content=11001" target="_blank">Smith &amp; Wesson</a> favored a dished-out button that you pressed forward to allow the cylinder to swing out. When <a href="http://www.cz-usa.com/products/by-brand/dan-wesson/" target="_blank">Dan Wesson</a> came along with the flat lever that tilts down to release the cylinder, it was mounted forward of the cylinder on the left side of the frame. That unusual arrangement drew criticism until PPC shooters discovered the utility of the system&rsquo;s ease of reloading.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;"><a href="http://www.taurususa.com/index.cfm" target="_blank">Taurus</a> became a force in the market in the 80s and stuck with a system similar to the S&amp;W in that the dished out latch went forward. Interestingly, when Taurus started making big magnum revolvers, they went to a system that required a Dan Wesson-type latch along with a S&amp;W type latch&mdash;two latches. <a href="http://www.ruger.com/index.html" target="_blank">Ruger&rsquo;s</a> first DA/SA revolvers were introduced in the 1970s and proved to be fine sixguns. The cylinder latch was, in my opinion, the best of them all. Mounted high on the left recoil shield, a lever is in direct line with the cylinder axis, completely out of the way of speed loaders. The latch tilts inward.<br /></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/cylinder-latches#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/machine-pistolsTue, 21 May 2013 00:00:00 GMT<p><span style="font-size: small;">There is a variation of the basic pistol that is worthy of a quick look, but is a variation that most of us will never fire, much less own. It&rsquo;s called a machine pistol, which means a full-auto pistol&mdash;illegal without federal registration and tax stamp. Less there be confusion in terminology, understand that the abbreviation MP is sometimes used to describe them, but the Germans use that same abbreviation to describe the submachine gun&mdash;MP38, MP5, etc. In common use, the submachine gun is a compact full-auto firearm that fires pistol cartridges. It has a buttstock for support and is very effective in trained hands. In most cases, submachine guns are not easily concealed. Machine pistols, on the other hand, are full-auto guns firing pistol cartridges and having fairly concealable characteristics. More often than not, they do not have stocks or other support devices. I do not believe the machine pistol has characteristics that make it an effective firearm for anything but highly specialized roles.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">The basic problem with this type of firearm is simple. Pistols light enough to be carried (2 to 3 pounds) produce recoil that raises the gun&rsquo;s muzzle upon firing. Second and subsequent shots only increase the recoil and muzzle rise. Even a short burst usually drives the gun well off target. Much of the time, all but the first shot is a miss. You get much noise with repeated shots, lots of muzzle flash and golden streams of brass in the air, but only an occasional hit. You could slow down the rate of fire with more mass to the recoiling parts or more strength to the recoil spring, but there are limits to this approach. One of more familiar versions of the machine pistol is the C96 Mauser in the later Schnelfeuren version. I fired one of these once and found it tough to manage. My late pal, Chuck Karwan, chuckled when I repeated this story, and commented on the utility of the Spanish Astra copy. The gun&rsquo;s designers worked a rate-of-fire reduction system into the searage, making it much easier to shoot. In handgun history, there have been several machine pistols that have enjoyed modest popularity, such as the Mac-10, Beretta 93R, HK VP70Z and the Russian Steckchin. In prowling around references for these things, I found information on several makers who tried to improve full-auto firing by using less powerful ammo&mdash;.380 Auto, .32 ACP and even .25 ACP.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">As much as the concept seems attractive to modern firepower enthusiasts, it just never went much of anywhere. While they are certainly powerful enough in most versions and the designs are usually acceptable, the guns are so hard to control as to make them impractical. They&rsquo;re ingenious solutions to imaginary problems. However, I did encounter a bit more grudging approval for one model in my casual telephone surveying. Originally conceived as a dignitary protection firearm, the <a href="http://us.glock.com/" target="_blank">Glock</a> G18 can be managed fairly well with practice. They are still made.</span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/machine-pistols#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/perfect-practiceThu, 16 May 2013 00:00:00 GMT<p><span style="font-size: small;">There is an old saying, repeated often enough to be a clich&eacute;, which says &ldquo;Practice makes Perfect.&rdquo; On the face of it, this might seem to apply to learning the skills of gunhandling and marksmanship. But when you think about the consequences of errors in handling a gun and using it skillfully under stress, then maybe it&rsquo;s time to refine the clich&eacute;&rsquo;d just a little. How about adding a word, making it &ldquo;Perfect Practice makes Perfect?&rdquo; In essence, this simply means that you must execute every aspect of a training regimen to perfection before additional repetitions will produce a beneficial effect. It has been pretty well established that you must do something on the order of 5,000 reps of a physical act before muscle memory takes over and it becomes habit. That&rsquo;s a tall order.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">Let&rsquo;s take something as simple as presenting the pistol from a holster. As taught at <a href="http://www.gunsite.com/main/" target="_blank">Gunsite</a>, this is a five step sequence that begins with the pistol in a holster and ends with the gun locked into a hard Weaver stance, sights aligned on target and finger on the trigger. Students at the school practice the steps of the exercise enough to understand what the steps are. Performed properly, the presentation of the handgun minimizes the movement of the gun. It just comes out of the holster and goes straight to the final on-target position with no wasted motion. With conscientious effort, the presentation is very smooth and can be very quick. Although your initial practice sessions may seem tediously slow, they will become more productive in the long run.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; </span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">There are two reasons why it is so vitally important that each step of the sequence be perfectly executed. First, if you vary from the proper technique, you are actually wasting time and effort and won&rsquo;t produce the result that you want. Second, improperly performed steps are simply programing you to perform improperly. You will have to spend even more effort to unlearn the bad stuff. Either way, the practice session achieves nothing of value. Slow it down and go at it just one step at a time. In the case of the presentation drill, you will find that the five (properly performed) steps begin to blend into one another in such a way that it becomes a smooth, swift exercise that brings the gun out and on target quickly. And&mdash;to quote another Gunsite mantra&mdash;Smooth IS Fast.<br /></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/perfect-practice#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/weightTue, 14 May 2013 00:00:00 GMT<p><span style="font-size: small;">On several occasions in the past, I have stated an opinion that I will re-iterate here. When you are choosing a concealed-carry firearm, the most important physical characteristic to consider is weight. As you make your comparisons to narrow the choices, we&rsquo;ll assume that you chose a gun of a caliber that is well-suited for the job. In autos, nothing smaller than a 9 mm, while .38 Spl. is as light as you should go in a revolver. </span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">Quite often, the perspective concealed-carry handgunner becomes enamored of light guns with polymer or light alloy receivers housing double column magazines. Certainly he or she needs to consider light guns, because the heavier guns are onerous to carry. In short order, the CCW gunner rationalizes away the need to carry a heavy gun for &ldquo;just a quick trip to the market.&rdquo; But the high-capacity handgun has an under-appreciated fault, and that is weight.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">The delightful Glock G17 that you see and handle at the gun store counter can be very appealing, as it weighs just a bit over 22 ounces. If you choose to put Glock&rsquo;s two-shot magazine extension on the gun and carry with a round in the chamber, your on-tap total of 147-grain cartridges is 20 rounds. But that adds almost 10 ounces to the weight of the gun. It now weighs two pounds and is a pain to carry all the time.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">Let&rsquo;s take an even worse example of unacceptable weight. How about the FNS in .45 ACP? It is an excellent service auto, originally designed for Spec Ops. It has a polymer receiver and an unloaded weight of 33.2 ounces. Capacity of the big pistol is 15+1 rounds. When those rounds are 230-grain JHPs, little more than 12 ounces is added to the weight of the gun. That is well on the way to a 2-&frac12; pound pistol. There are few handgunners who are willing to lug around a monster like this all day. There is also a disadvantage that I have yet to seriously evaluate. The gun gets lighter by &frac34; ounce every time you fire a shot. In theory, it becomes harder to shoot when you get close to running the magazine dry.&nbsp; <br /><br />Simply stated, you must consider the weight of the concealed-carry handgun and a full load of ammo for the gun. And I haven&rsquo;t even considered at least one reload on your belt.</span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/weight#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/grip-or-stocksMon, 06 May 2013 00:00:00 GMT<p><span style="font-size: small;">Before automatic pistols had one piece receivers of best-quality, industrial grade polymer, they came with two pieces of (usually) wood fastened to the sides of the butt. Revolvers go even farther back in the chronology and did the same thing. Wood shapes easily and can even be user-customized. However, what is the correct name for these wood, bone, horn, ivory or whatever plates. For most of my shooting life, I have called them &ldquo;grips&rdquo; and I believe the majority of the firearms world does the same.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">But years ago, <a title="Check out Herrett Stocks. " href="http://www.herrett-stocks.com/" target="_blank">Steve Herrett</a> started a business in building these items and in doing so, steadfastly referred to them as &ldquo;stocks.&rdquo; Which term is correct? I frankly do not know, but I believe they are most commonly called grips, and I can point to many other places in industry literature that use that term. However, I freely concede that Herrett has a point. I recently looked at some of the original drawings for the 1911 and they are in fact stocks. I suspect, but cannot prove, that the term stocks was used earlier, but grips eased its way in during recent decades. What is correct? You can call them grips or stocks, or both. Take your pick.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;"><img title="Herrett Stocks" src="../../Webcontent/gallery/245/2024Herrettstock_web.jpg" alt="Herrett Stocks" width="400" height="261" /><br /></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/grip-or-stocks#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/cowboy-collectingFri, 03 May 2013 00:00:00 GMT<p><span style="font-size: small;">From just before the American Civil War to just after the turn of the century, America underwent a westward expansion unparalleled in history.&nbsp; Millions migrated with the sun to the new opportunities beyond the wide Missouri. In order to have this happen, the frontier population went armed with the fast-developing firearms of that day. In our time, this movement has been romanticized heavily, including the use of a wide variety of guns. The process has involved a great many so-called &ldquo;western&rdquo; motion pictures and TV shows. This, in turn, has created a demand for shooting samples of all of these types of guns. I&rsquo;m delighted to point out that you can now buy brand-new examples of almost all of the guns that served to conquer the frontier. Made of modern steels and fitted very nicely, these guns come from a variety of factories, most of which are in Italy.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">While long arms of many brands are available (including such gems as Sharps and Spencers), we&rsquo;ll stick with the handguns. Some of the very earliest revolvers were imported from Italy by Val Forgett in the late &lsquo;50s. They were the black powder, caplock revolvers of <a href="http://www.coltsmfg.com/" target="_blank">Colt</a> and <a href="http://www.remington.com/" target="_blank">Remington</a>. The Colts were in greater variety and are still available for those fond of shooting cap-and ball guns. Eventually, other black powder guns came along, including the &rsquo;58 Remington and even the exotic LeMat.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">The vast majority of Frontier cartridge revolvers were made by Remington, Smith &amp; Wesson and of course, Colt. The ever-popular Colt Peacemaker has been replicated in virtually every one of its major variations&mdash;Bisley, Flat Top, Storekeeper&rsquo;s, Buntline and others, and several varieties of Remington are available. Only fairly recently have the difficult-to-make breaktop series of S&amp;Ws come on the market. Called the No. 3 model, there are four major revolvers in the series&mdash;American, Russian, Schofield and New Model. Only the earliest&mdash;the Americans&mdash;have yet to be replicated. I was really pleased to see the No. 3 New Model in the <a href="http://www.taylorsfirearms.com/" target="_blank">Taylor's &amp; Company</a> catalog at SHOT this year.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">It remains for a domestic replicator to come up with a working model of the Merwin, Hulbert revolver. This Frontier period gem is intricate and finely fitted, but a delightful revolver with many desirable features. An American entrepreneur is said to be hard at reproducing this gun and I wish him the best of luck.<br /></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/cowboy-collecting#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/ppc-revolversMon, 29 Apr 2013 00:00:00 GMT<p><span style="font-size: small;">The course of fire known as the PPC was developed to give peace officers a more realistic training experience than the bullseye courses that used to be in police basements all across the country. For administrative reasons, the Practical Pistol Course needed several important characteristics. It had to be easy to run and require a minimum of space. Also, there was a need for an easy-to-score system and a minimum of range staff. There was a bit of fiddling around with the course, but it eventually settled into a routine with stages as 7, 15, 25 and 50 yards. All you needed was a flat piece of ground with a berm to contain the bullet strikes and lines at the four ranges. After my Marine service, I started shooting this course for qualification and in competition. I fired it early and often, shooting the course probably 1,000 times in the years I was a deputy sheriff. It was fun meeting other officers on the competition circuit and my revolver skills improved along the way. Eventually, however, the use of the PPC course as a competition device produced some problems.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">Intended as a qualification and training tool, the PPC simulated combat conditions. It offered generous time limits and huge scoring rings on the old Colt target. In no time at all, the good shooters began to take their time and run the course &ldquo;clean&rdquo; with no misses at all. Therefore, for competition use, they began to use a Prehle target with the same oversized silhouette and Olympic rapid fire scoring rings thereon. This spread the scores out nicely and running clean was more difficult&mdash;much better for scoring. But it was not realistic in times distances and scoring, as was the original intent. At this point, a new piece of equipment came along&mdash;the PPC revolver.&nbsp; </span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">Made on stock Colt, Ruger or (most commonly) Smith &amp; Wesson .38 revolvers, the PPC revolver was built by gunsmiths specifically for competition. It was never used for on-duty purposes, as it was prohibitively heavy. That&rsquo;s because the first thing the revolversmith did was unscrew the original barrel and toss it in his parts bin. He then took a premium barrel blank from Douglas or another top barrelmaker and threaded it to fit the frame. Usually, the barrel had a fast 1:14-inch twist, which worked perfectly with the almost recoilless 148-grain LWC ammo in use. With a heavy outer contour, this barrel made the gun so heavy that it was easy to shoot. Topped by a heavy rib and precisely-adjustable sights, the only remaining things were upgraded grips and a flawless action job. It may have been unrealistic, but the better PPC smiths made guns that took the plain service revolver to a performance level never seen before.<br /></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/ppc-revolvers#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/used-gunsMon, 22 Apr 2013 00:00:00 GMT<p><span style="font-size: small;">Everybody loves a bargain, but there are a lot of shooters in these hard economic times who absolutely need a bargain if they are going to keep shooting. Where handguns are concerned, you might want to consider what&rsquo;s available in the pre-owned category. In doing so, know that there is a difference between worn out junk and a well-maintained service handgun. </span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">In the computer and television world, they re-certify products all the time. At least one of our major handgun makers is doing something similar. <a href="https://www.sigsauer.com/" target="_blank">SIG Sauer</a> has been selling large blocks of various pistols to police agencies for many years. When these agencies decide to upgrade to another SIG model, the older guns are sometimes turned in for credit. Factory personnel examine the guns carefully, make repairs as needed and completely re-finish each gun. These guns are then sold to distributors in packaging that clearly identifies them as &ldquo;Certified Pre-Owned.&rdquo; There is what amounts to a new gun guarantee included. This is about as straightforward and honest a program as I can possibly imagine and is an excellent source of some of the best of modern pistols as you can possibly find. Naturally, the guns are sold at prices lower than brand-new models.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">There are some other variations on this practice that are somewhat less formal, but which can put some decent guns in the hands of cash-strapped Americans. Consider the used service revolver. In the last half of the 20th century, American police agencies went through two massive upheavals as regards to armament. Right after World War II, there was a shift from older fixed-sight DA/SA revolvers in .38 Spl. to newer, often adjustable sight revolvers in .38 Spl. or .357 Mag. Many of these were of the <a href="http://www.smith-wesson.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/CustomContentDisplay?langId=-1&amp;storeId=750001&amp;catalogId=750051&amp;content=11001" target="_blank">Smith &amp; Wesson</a> make, with liberal doses of <a href="http://www.coltsmfg.com/" target="_blank">Colt</a> guns. In the &lsquo;70s, the very strong designs of Bill <a href="http://www.ruger.com/index.html" target="_blank">Ruger</a> began to make a name for the company. By the late 1980s, autos were obviously the wave of the future. This shift to autoloaders was the second great wave of police re-arming that has occurred. It left tens of thousands of high-quality revolvers on the used-gun inventories. Although the majority of available guns have moved on to new owners, occasional small batches of old guns still come to the market.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">In selecting one of these revolvers, first examine the gun carefully. Nothing should be cracked or broken. Grips are easily replaceable if there is a problem with them. It is also possible to re-blue a scratched blue steel revolver or even bead blast a stainless one. Also check for bulges in the barrel or cracks at the forcing come. The cylinder needs to spin freely with no visible wobble to the ejector rod, and the yoke or crane needs to close into the frame perfectly, with no gaps where the two parts meet. The cylinder should not move back and forth on the crane at all. Finally, make sure the gun in in perfect time or very close to it. Timing refers to parts fit that allow the cylinder to lock in place via a cylinder bolt at exactly the correct point in time.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">Things have evolved in handgun development to the point where we are actually seeing some of the other pistols of the Wondernine Wars era growing obsolete to the point where they are going on the used gun shelves of the retail gun shop. <br /></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/used-guns#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/pinto-smithsWed, 17 Apr 2013 00:00:00 GMT<p><span style="font-size: small;">In the 1970s, I lived and worked in an area with a number of excellent gun stores. One of them was in a coastal city, and about half the salesmen were off-duty deputy sheriffs. This store was big enough to have an enormous array of guns, both new and used, and it was well connected to the major makers, so rare guns were not uncommon. It was in this cop-friendly emporium that I saw my first <a href="http://www.smith-wesson.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/CustomContentDisplay?langId=-1&amp;storeId=750001&amp;catalogId=750051&amp;content=11001" target="_blank">Smith &amp; Wesson</a> pinto revolver. Now, what is a Smith &amp; Wesson &ldquo;pinto&rdquo; handgun?</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">The term is collector slang for a S&amp;W handgun with different parts finished in standard blue and nickel plate. This two-tone finish is somewhat reminiscent of the sharply contrasting colors of a pinto pony, providing the name. Most commonly, the pintos involved a J, K or N frame revolver with nickel barrel and cylinder with the rest of the gun blued, though exceptions have been noted by the avid collectors. Only a few autos have been seen, usually Model 39s and 59s.&nbsp; </span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">There are numerous theories as to how this style of handgun came to be. Some say that it came as a result of excess parts on hand. Others maintain that the Pintos were ordered by large distributors because the guns were novelties that might sell very well. S&amp;W&rsquo;s historian once told me that this began as a tradition that was started in the earliest days of the company. There is certain logic to a revolver with nickel barrel and cylinder, with the remainder blued. It&rsquo;s particularly understandable in the black powder era, when corrosion of the parts immediately associated with firing is unavoidable. Today, we view nickel plating as primarily cosmetic, but it is much more resistant to corrosion than blued steel.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">Regardless of the reason for them, S&amp;W&rsquo;s pintos are growing in their collector value. And they shoot every bit as well as the all blue or all nickel guns from the company&rsquo;s golden age.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;"><img title="Smith &amp; Wesson Pinto " src="../../Webcontent/gallery/243/2034SWPintoGuns_web.jpg" alt="Smith &amp; Wesson Pinto " width="644" height="483" /><br /></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/pinto-smiths#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/centennial-revolver-cartridgesFri, 12 Apr 2013 00:00:00 GMT<p><span style="font-size: small;">Centennial denotes a period of 100 years. When those 100 years are identified as a specific period, such as 1901 to 2000, it&rsquo;s called a century. The 20th century was a milestone time in history, both in general and in the history of arms and their use. We witnessed enormous changes in guns and ammunition in the 20th century, from the U.S. Army riding to battle on horseback to Marines using Osprey VTOL airplanes in the Gulf wars. Similar changes occurred in police and civilian arms. It struck me the other day that there are a few significant items that literally span a century, being popular and meaningful throughout. Take the revolver cartridge, for example. At the beginning of the century we had two that merit our attention.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">First, there was the .38 Spl. It was introduced with the new K frame Hand Ejector revolver in 1899. This was an attempt to build a gun/cartridge combo that would meet the long term needs of police, military and civilian handgunners. You can still buy an M&amp;P revolver from Smith &amp; Wesson and the ammo is universally available. Over the years, .38 Spl. rounds have been loaded in a great many ways, including .38-44s, high speed-metal piercing loads and even flush seated wadcutters for competition use. Amazingly versatile, the .38 Spl. adds an additional dimension to every .357 Mag. revolver ever made. At 100 years, the .38 Spl. JHP (sometimes +P) has evolved into one of our top choices for defensive use in short-barreled revolvers.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">Consider also the .45 Colt, a veteran of almost three decades of service when the 20th century began. It was originally a U.S. Cavalry service cartridge that went to work in 1873 with the Peacemaker Colt. From the beginning, the .45 Colt worked on the basis of a heavy bullet at very modest velocity. Recoil was there in plenty, so it was not for everyone. The cartridge was eventually replaced by a .38, but people who conducted serious revolver work hung onto their guns and ammo. It&rsquo;s well known that Ordnance pulled old guns out of storage when close range fighting in the Philippine Islands made it clear that .38s were not enough. As a matter of fact, it seems fair to conclude that the performance of the .45 Colt drove the development of the .45 ACP. Many police agencies used the .45 Colt well into the 1950s. But it faded a bit until avid handloaders brought it back. That&rsquo;s particularly true when Bill Ruger brought out his Blackhawk revolver and a whole new generation of shooters found out how powerful it can be.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">While the .45 Colt was never as widely used as the .38 Spl., it was&mdash;and still is&mdash;a veteran of long service that is viable today. Ammo companies do not introduce new loads for a cartridge that is declining, so new types of .45 Colt ammo on dealer&rsquo;s shelves is significant. As for the .38 Spl., it is absolutely everywhere and there are no signs of change.&nbsp; <br /></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/centennial-revolver-cartridges#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/terminology-lands-and-groovesWed, 03 Apr 2013 00:00:00 GMT<p><span style="font-size: small;">Take a close look at your handgun barrel the next time you are cleaning it. Since we never clean loaded gun, it will have been carefully unloaded and the ammunition put away. As you check the bore to be sure you have done a proper job of removing the debris, take note of its spiral grooves. They weren&rsquo;t always there. </span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">These grooves were pressed, cut or hammered into place when the barrel was a smooth tube. This process is known as rifling the barrel and the end result is also called rifling, so the word is both a verb and a noun. Rifling induces a spinning motion to the bullet as it makes its speedy way down the barrel.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">In the manufacturing process, the tool that creates the rifling puts (usually) five or six grooves into the smooth tube. The parts of the barrel that aren&rsquo;t touched by the rifling tool are called lands. Therefore lands and grooves equal rifling, which spins projectiles and increases accuracy.</span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/terminology-lands-and-grooves#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/my-new-gripsThu, 28 Mar 2013 00:00:00 GMT<p><span style="font-size: small;">To my admittedly prejudiced hand and eye, the classic handguns are great examples of the saying that &ldquo;form follows function.&rdquo; Shaped for completely practical reasons, they are as efficient as they are beautiful. Like many tools, they exist for immediate but specific needs and are more often carried than actually used. As such, it is not surprising that some shooters decorate their tools. Some employ the services of artists who engrave the handgun&rsquo;s surface, others like to use various forms of etching. I personally like to take advantage of a classic handgun characteristic that is fast disappearing. For me, fancy handles, scales, stocks or grips are the thing. In a world of very nicely shaped butt sections of moulded polymer, my eye&mdash;and hand&mdash;turns to the pistol or revolver with custom grips.&nbsp; </span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">I&rsquo;m always looking for new and exotic woods in pieces suitable for a known or as-of-yet unknown craftsman to turn into gems. Plain black walnut is excellent, as is Claro, French and English walnut. I have also used African Blackwood, Holly, Bocote, Myrtle, Cocobolo, Purpleheart and others. Recently, it has been some of the flashy North African wood&mdash;Amboyna and Thuya. It has all been a great deal of fun and not terribly expensive. On a few occasions, I have been able to put together the bucks for (legal) ivory and pearl, as well as stag, sheep and elk grips.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">But recently, I have received back a pair of grips that are so beautiful that I have to share them with you. They are on a USFA SAA revolver in .45 Colt with the short 3 &frac34;-inch barrel. The gun is full blue and grips are in the one-piece style. The material is musk ox horn, which is exceptionally rare, especially in pieces big enough to make SAA revolver grips. In color, the material is a light cream with slightly darker streaks of butterscotch and off-white. To some degree, you can see the remains of the growth rings in the animal&rsquo;s horn, which leads to the real beauty of the grips. Apparently, the horn grows in such a way as to produce wild swirls and streaks that are completely random. To the everlasting credit of the craftsman, he matched the curve of the Peacemaker grip to the grain curve of the material. He then cut and fitted them to absolute perfection. The artisan who did the work was Aaron Pursley of the <a href="http://www.bigsandymt.org/LittleSharps.htm" target="_blank">Little Sharps Rifle Company</a> of Big Sandy, Mont. Craftsmanship is alive in America, and one old musk ox did a pretty good job of growing these things.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;"><img title="Musk ox grips" src="../../Webcontent/gallery/240/2044DSC_0031_web.jpg" alt="Musk ox grips" width="644" height="766" /><br /></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/my-new-grips#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/da-sa-transitionTue, 26 Mar 2013 00:00:00 GMT<p><span style="font-size: small;">Back in the 70s, there was a great deal of experience behind police trainers and the procedures used to make competent handgunners out of rookie cops. For the most part instructors were teaching the use of wheelguns, one of the more forgiving handguns ever made. But the move to automatic pistols came along in that period and things changed. Police adopted autos, quickly deposing the DA/SA revolver. SigSauer/Beretta/S&amp;W and a few other autos were the first guns of choice. Most of the guns of that day were cocked for the first shot by trigger pressure, with subsequent shots cocking when the slide recoiled and returned to battery. A first-class trainer, whose experience spans those early years to date, recently commented to me that it was actually easier to teach DA/SA autos when everyone was coming off revolver skills.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">There is a problem inherent in that first-shot in double action to the second shot in single action, and it&rsquo;s more than just the different feel of the two trigger actions. The thick butt sections of most autos makes for an unwieldy grip at best. People with all but the biggest hands may have control of the gun, but they find themselves shifting the gun in their grasp just a little when the go from DA to SA. That leads to all kinds of typical trigger control problems&mdash;jerking, heeling, flinching, etc. On-target groups spread out to poncho size. If there is any way to resolve this dilemma for the struggling handgunner, it has to be through a complete understanding of trigger reset.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">Reset is that point in the forward motion of the trigger where the trigger/sear/hammer linkage allows the shooter to stop and reverse the motion to fire again. You can actually feel&mdash;and sometimes hear&mdash;a tiny click when this happens. It happens in DA, SA or even DAO trigger systems. Basically, learning to reset the trigger means that you are reducing the distance the trigger travels in firing multiple shots. It has significant advantages in any form of shooting, but we&rsquo;ll leave that for another time.<br /></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/da-sa-transition#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/ruined-38Wed, 20 Mar 2013 00:00:00 GMT<p><span style="font-size: small;">Guns are rarely worn out through normal use. Given reasonable care and shooting only with the proper ammunition, most quality handguns will last for decades. Abuse, on the other hand, can destroy a nice gun in very little time. And sometimes the abuse can be ill-conceived modifications to a gun that could not possibly be improved. Take the case of the <a href="http://www.smith-wesson.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/CustomContentDisplay?langId=-1&amp;storeId=750001&amp;catalogId=750051&amp;content=11001" target="_blank">Smith &amp; Wesson</a> M&amp;P revolvers made for the United Kingdom forces during World War II. The British service revolver cartridge was the .38/200, which is interchangeable with the .38 S&amp;W (not the same as the .38 Spl). Tens of thousands of these fine revolvers were made and shipped to Great Britain, used by various British Army forces and put in storage after the war. Some may have never been issued. Most of them eventually came home via the war surplus route. More than a few were absolutely ruined before they were sold to American handgunners.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">That&rsquo;s a positive statement but lamentably a true one. S&amp;W was able to meet the demand for these guns because they were making them when the war started. The M&amp;P revolver was a staple of the line in 1940, and was available in several calibers, including both .38 S&amp;W and .38 S&amp;W Spl.&nbsp; The .38 S&amp;W is a short, thick rimmed revolver cartridge designed for the company&rsquo;s top break revolvers, such as the Baby Russian model in 1877. The .38 S&amp;W Spl. is a long, lean rimmed revolver cartridge intended for the M&amp;P revolver in 1899. Neither is a true .38 caliber. The .38 S&amp;W uses a .3604-inch barrel and the .38 S&amp;W Special has a .3565-inch tube, as determined by recent measurement. Therefore, the two models not only had different bore dimensions, they also had different chamber specifications.&nbsp; </span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">Of the two cartridges, the longer and thinner S&amp;W .38 Spl. was the more powerful and therefore the more popular. When those .38 S&amp;W revolvers came back into the country, the importers realized they would sell much better as .38 Spl. They employed technicians (undeserving of the title of gunsmith) to use .38 Spl. chambering reamers to lengthen the chambers, so that a .38 Spl. would fit. It as a loose slip fit, wide enough near the rim to cause a .38 Spl. to expand and stick in place. Worse, these bastardized chambers sometimes caused even good quality ammo to split, blowing gas and brass particles all over the place. It was a stupid thing to do and can only be corrected by installing a new .38 S&amp;W cylinder or a new S&amp;W .38 Spl. cylinder and barrel. These ruined guns are still in circulation&mdash;I have seen them at recent gun shows.<br /></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/ruined-38#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/its-discontinuedTue, 12 Mar 2013 00:00:00 GMT<p><span style="font-size: small;">Manufacturers discontinue handgun models for a variety of reasons, all of which are based in the market. It&rsquo;s as plain as the laws of supply and demand, to which I was once exposed in Economics 101, many years ago. I hope that long ago professor will excuse my clumsy summary of how it works, but here goes. A handgun is a product just like a box of matches or an exotic silk scarf. The handgun, match or scarf maker produces these things at some expense, in the hopes that he or she will sell them for more than it cost to make them. He&rsquo;s free to ask any price, but is well advised to set the price with care. Too high and the product won&rsquo;t sell; too low and he&rsquo;s literally giving his profit away. If enough people want the handgun, matches or scarf, and he prices accurately, he will prosper. He has to consider many other factors, such as the cost of selling the product, a mercurial market and politicians messing around with the conditions under which he is allowed to sell his wares. Let&rsquo;s take a look at a couple of guns that were discontinued, and then later revived.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">As America faced the reality of an imminent war with the Axis powers in the late 30s and early 40s, our arms makers looked at their product lines and their manufacturing capability. One such firm was <a href="http://www.coltsmfg.com/" target="_blank">Colt</a>, maker of mostly handguns, including the U.S. service pistol&mdash;the M1911A1. They also had production lines up-and-running to makes a variety of revolvers. One of these was the beloved Peacemaker, which had been (in 1940) made under the Blue Dome on the Connecticut River for 67 years. Not surprisingly, World War II caused Colt management to shut down the Model P line and store the equipment. When the war was over, they made it official by announcing the discontinuation of this gun. But in the mid-50s, when Americans began to watch lots of movie westerns, thereby creating a demand for the old guns. Colt gauged the depth and width of this demand carefully and decided to bring it back. It was a sound decision, because they have made more of them since the 1956 re-introduction than they did before, even though&nbsp; they cost more. There was a demand; Colt created a supply. And the gun is still in the catalog, as of 2013.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">Meanwhile, upriver from Hartford and Colt, there was another maker trying to continue in the gun business. <a href="http://www.smith-wesson.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/CustomContentDisplay?langId=-1&amp;storeId=750001&amp;catalogId=750051&amp;content=11001" target="_blank">Smith &amp; Wesson</a> came off some hard times during WWII, but an aggressive new president was making big waves in an effort to grow the company. He actively looked for new models and therefore listened as handgun experts Rex Applegate and W.H.B. Smith came to his office. Applegate wanted a new solid-frame version of the Safety Hammerless in .38 Spl&nbsp; The reason for his demand is an oft-repeated chunk of handgun lore. Rex felt there was a need for the gun and S&amp;W&rsquo;s Carl Hellstrom agreed. The revolver (based on the new J frame) was successful. After some fifteen years of popularity, S&amp;W chose to shorten up the revolver line and discontinued a bunch of classics, including both aluminum and steel-frame versions of the Centennial. No sooner has this happened than second market specimens of the gun began to increase in price&mdash;clearly a demand with small supply. Therefore, S&amp;W re-introduced an improved version with no grip safety in 1989. That revolver, in several calibers and variations, is now one of the sellers in S&amp;W&rsquo;s line.&nbsp; </span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">Obviously, if enough handgunners want it, manufacturers will make it. The operative word here is enough. To get a discontinued model back in production, a maker has to be certain that there will be a strong immediate and continuing demand. That&rsquo;s why, as much as you and I might want one, there is little chance that you will ever see new Pythons again.<br /></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/its-discontinued#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/nickelTue, 05 Mar 2013 00:00:00 GMT<p><span style="font-size: small;">Even before I was a peace officer, I was a little suspicious of people who used nickel-plated guns. The high shine never appealed to a guy who grew up with Parkerizing and tung-oil finished walnut. As it happens, I may have been unfairly prejudiced against this old-time gun finish. But the arguably unfounded calumny against the nickel-plated handgun is still part of my thought processes. So much so that I count only a single nickel-plated gun in my assortment of arms&mdash;a very nice <a href="http://www.smith-wesson.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/CustomContentDisplay?langId=-1&amp;storeId=750001&amp;catalogId=750051&amp;content=11001" target="_blank">Smith &amp; Wesson</a> DA Frontier .44 that was re-done at the factory in the 1970s.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">When that gun was new (1880s), it was given a nickel finish as a matter of practicality rather than cosmetic appeal. When guns fired blackpowder, or cartridges loaded with it, nickel-plated surfaces resisted corrosion far better than bluing. The guy who ponied up the bucks for this revolver wasn&rsquo;t showing off&mdash;he just wanted to keep his gun working, possibly because he needed it.&nbsp;&nbsp; <br /></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/nickel#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/my-new-gunThu, 28 Feb 2013 00:00:00 GMT<p><span style="font-size: small;">On a recent trip back to my where I was once a police officer, I dropped by the gun store where I used to spend a lot of time&mdash;The Stockade, in Westminster, Calif. Tucked back in one of the display cases was a type of <a href="http://www.smith-wesson.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/CustomContentDisplay?langId=-1&amp;storeId=750001&amp;catalogId=750051&amp;content=11001" target="_blank">Smith &amp; Wesson</a> revolver that I had never handled. A conversation ensued, money changed hands, and I now own yet another S&amp;W revolver. The little gun&mdash;a S&amp;W Model One-and-a-Half, 2nd issue&mdash;is far too old to ever fire. I got it as a piece of history, and it is easily the oldest handgun I own. In its day, the 1 1/2 was a big seller for the Springfield plant, with over a 100,000 units made. Its day was right after the Civil War (1868-1875).</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">A hinged-frame revolver, this one is of the tip-up type, where the frame-barrel hinge is on the top, front corner of the frame. The revolver has a 4-inch, round and ribbed barrel. There are five chambers in the fluted cylinder. S&amp;W used fancy rosewood for the round butt grips, which remain in excellent condition. A single action, the little revolver fires via a sheathed trigger. It is chambered for a .32 rimfire cartridge. Interestingly, there is no extractor system. To punch out the fired round, you open the action, pull the cylinder forward off its axis, invert it and run each chamber in sequence down on the rod.&nbsp; </span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">It is a small and compact revolver with an almost toylike nature. Nevertheless, it was serious gear back when the grand old company was young and full of vigor. The little Smith is a tangible link to days gone by.<br /></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/my-new-gun#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/9mm-and-40-swFri, 22 Feb 2013 00:00:00 GMT<p><span style="font-size: small;">Several months ago, I <a title="Read Wiley's first blog on 9 mm versus .40 S&amp;W. " href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/nine-versus-forty/" target="_blank">invited the readership</a> of this column to participate in what amounts to a debate. The subject was the status of the two most popular service pistol calibers&mdash;9 mm and .40 S&amp;W&mdash;and how they compare, why they are chosen. The response was overwhelming and not only in numbers of participants, but also in the quality of their contributions. We heard from many shooters with a variety of carefully reasoned and clearly written comments on their feelings about these two rounds. I truly appreciate the effort that went into this and I hope that all readers who responded would be willing to do so again and on other topics. So, what did we learn?</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">First, it seems pretty clear that American shooters understand why the .40 S&amp;W was conceived. Pure and simple, the primary intent was to provide law enforcement with a powerful medium-bore service cartridge that would fit into 9 mm-sized pistols. It was always more powerful than the 9 mm. Civilian shooters took to the new round with considerable enthusiasm. However, the range of comments from readers suggested to me that civilian pistol shooters still have some reservations about the .40. Recoil and muzzle blast are never pleasant to deal with and the .40 has plenty of both. Some guys actually dismiss the .40 as being too problematic (in the shooting sense) for everyone in the household to deal with. This was a far stronger belief than I would ever have predicted. While .40s don&rsquo;t particularly bother me, if the buying public is actually acting on this belief, then that&rsquo;s the way it is.&nbsp; </span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">By default, the 9 mm is the next best thing. Everybody likes to do their fun shooting and even serious practicing as economically as possible. A quick price survey of available ammunition was very illuminating.&nbsp; Boxes of 9 mm ammo can often be found at close to half the price of .40 S&amp;W. This means that people are really shooting their personal protection guns often enough that the cost of ammo is very important. This is sometimes true of shooters who carry guns on the job or teach shooting skills professionally. In effect, the popularity of 9 mm is at least partially because you can shoot a lot more for the same money. This reasoning cannot be faulted, because in crisis shooting, a hit with a 9 mm is superior to a miss with a .40. You need to shoot as much as possible in practice. But in the final analysis, there is no substitute for horsepower.&nbsp; <br /></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/9mm-and-40-sw#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/m1911-and-m1911a1Wed, 20 Feb 2013 00:00:00 GMT<p><span style="font-size: small;">To a handgun specialist, the <a title="Look back at the history of the 1911. " href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/articles/colt-1911-history/" target="_blank">1911</a> is a familiar pattern. For Americans, the handgun of the 20th century is <a href="http://www.coltsmfg.com/" target="_blank">Colt&rsquo;s</a> Model of 1911, caliber .45. The majority of competitive handgun manufacturers offer some variation of this classic design, so gun reviewers deal with the terminology frequently. Not surprisingly, they have become a little sloppy about differentiating between the 1911 pistol and the 1911A1 variant thereof. So let&rsquo;s review this classic handgun information once again for those who came in late.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">Officially adopted on March 29, 1911, the Colt-designed and produced .45 Government Model .45 pistol saw active service with the U.S. Cavalry almost immediately. When the Great War began in 1914, some of the guns were in the hands of British officers, and when we entered the war in 1917, it was the established and proven choice of the U.S. military. Made by several makers during the war years, the pistol was proven in the trench warfare of the 1917 and 1918 period. Relatively minor deficiencies in the design were noted by Army Ordnance and those who used the gun for its intended purpose. In the early 1920s, the Army and Colt Firearms set about developing a series of modifications that eventually were used. In effect, these changes to an already proven handgun design differentiated the original 1911 pistol from the 1911A1.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">There were five major visible changes to the .45, as well as many other and less obvious ones.&nbsp; They are as follows:</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">1.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp;Sights, both front and rear, were increased in size to allow for a wider and more immediately visible sighting notch with a square bottom. Early sights were hard to find and align under stress.<br />2.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; The tang, or rearmost extension, of the grip safety was extended rearward over the web of the shooter&rsquo;s hand. The original design was prone to bite the shooter&rsquo;s hand when skin rolled up over the short tang and was pinched by the pivoting hammer.<br />3.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Semi-circular relief cuts were installed at the rear edge of the trigger guard on both sides of the frame. This effectively shortened the trigger reach and made the pistol easier to handle for soldiers with smaller hands.<br />4.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; The trigger was shortened in its front-to-back dimension and the trigger face was checkered. This was another effort to make the pistol usable in a variety of hands. It created the terminology &ldquo;long&rdquo; trigger and &ldquo;short&rdquo; trigger.<br />5.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; The mainspring housing in the lower rear corner was arched and checkered. This tended to correct the tendency to shoot low when pointed and fired. In fact, it did just the opposite when the gun was raised to eye level and aimed.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">Pistols, both commercial and military were designated Models of 1911A1. The modifications did not happen overnight and in fact took several years to accomplish. Also, there a number of other specifications that changed. Interestingly enough, the modern Colt pistol that evolved from the early days of both 1911 and 1911A1 designs has many of the early features, but also some completely new ones. Most shooters want the 1911 (flat) mainspring housing and (long) trigger, but also prefer the 1911A1 trigger relief cuts. Their sights are huge and sometimes include tritium inserts for low-light work. The extended tang grip safety was morphed into today&rsquo;s widened &ldquo;beavertail&rdquo; types.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;"><img title="M1911 and M1911A1" src="../../Webcontent/gallery/230/2035M1911_and_M1911A1_pistols.jpg" alt="M1911 and M1911A1" /><br /></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/m1911-and-m1911a1#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/terminology-muzzle-crownWed, 13 Feb 2013 00:00:00 GMT<p><span style="font-size: small;">It seems obvious that the muzzle end of a handgun barrel should be cut square with the bore. But some shooters seem to be unaware of how critical a proper crown is to the overall performance of a gun. As a bullet leaves the cartridge and heads down the barrel of the gun, it picks up speed very quickly, because the powder charge is burning at a high-flame temperature and producing violently expanding gas. The gas exerts pressure on the base of the bullet, which drives it forward. It is a really hostile world in a handgun barrel as all of this happens. The bullet is a snug fit in the barrel and spiral grooves (rifling) cut in the bore cause the bullet to rotate. Then the moving bullet, which has been stabilized in the barrel, comes to the end and launches free into space.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">Happily enough, the spinning causes the bullet to be stabilized in flight. This means the bullet continues on a straight forward flight to the target. But only if the muzzle of the barrel is perpendicular with its geometric axis. If the rifling is a little irregular at one or more points around its circumference, this can have a negative effect on the stability of the spinning projectile and cause it to vary its path from true. That why gunmakers take pains to insure the muzzle is properly crowned when a gun leaves the factory.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">Over the years that I have been fooling with handguns, I have seen a number of otherwise accurate pistols and revolvers suddenly lose their competitive edge. Sometimes, it&rsquo;s because the muzzle crown has somehow been altered. This seems to be more common with revolvers than pistols. We often use our cleaning rods improperly with revolvers, dragging the rod across the muzzle crown and thereby ever-so-slightly deforming it. Beyond doubt, this can impact the bullet&rsquo;s flight and degrade accuracy. It is usually easy for a well-equipped and competent pistolsmith to re-cut the crown, but a better fix is to protect it from damage in the first place.<br /></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/terminology-muzzle-crown#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/the-factory-letterMon, 04 Feb 2013 00:00:00 GMT<p><span style="font-size: small;">Any good (or better) quality handgun from <a href="http://www.coltsmfg.com/" target="_blank">Colt</a> or <a href="http://www.smith-wesson.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/CustomContentDisplay?langId=-1&amp;storeId=750001&amp;catalogId=750051&amp;content=11001" target="_blank">Smith &amp; Wesson</a> probably deserves a so-called &ldquo;factory letter&rdquo; to go with it. Both companies offer this service and while it is getting expensive, it may, in the long run, add to the value of the gun. Basically, a factory letter is derived from the shipping records of the company and reports the basic description of the gun, any special features, the day that it left the factory and to whom it was shipped. Today that means a gun store with an FFL, but in older times, guns sometimes went straight to the end user. </span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">My buddy, the late Chuck Karwan, once advised a local handgun enthusiast to get a factory letter on his pre World War II Registered Magnum. He did and it came back as having been shipped to Ed McGivern, a famous handgunner of the 1930s. This tripled, at least, the value of the gun. If the gun in question was made before WWII, it never hurts to spend the money and get a letter.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">As a matter of fact, so many people have &ldquo;lettered&rdquo; their early Colts and Smith &amp; Wessons that the letter is actually displayed with the gun on a high-end gun show table. I bought a Single Action Army recently and its letter came with it. It had been with the gun for a long time, since it is dated in the 1950s. Smith &amp; Wesson letters have a capsule history of the model, as well as the shipping data on the individual specimen. Preserving arms history is always a good thing and the factory letter is a big part of the process.<br /></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/the-factory-letter#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/gun-book-collectingThu, 31 Jan 2013 00:00:00 GMT<p><span style="font-size: small;">I can&rsquo;t collect handguns because I can&rsquo;t afford it. You have to accept the difference between an organized collection of specimens of a particular make or model, and an accumulation of different handguns that fill specific needs in your shooting life or were priced right when you thought they were really neat. My limited little armory is in the latter category. I am fooling around with a particular category of gun collection, but for now I am more of a gun accumulator than a gun collector. I suspect that many readers are in similar situations, so may I suggest another form of gun-related collecting?</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">How about collecting gun books? I try to stay current with everything having to do with selecting and/or using fighting handguns. At this point in history, a lot of new stuff is coming out and you have to hustle to keep up. It was a lot more fun when I was scrambling to find the early classics like FitzGerald&rsquo;s Shooting or Nichol&rsquo;s Secrets of Double Action Shooting. There are still a few books from the early 1920s that I don&rsquo;t have, but the search continues. A complete collection is always valuable and there is a tremendous amount of useful information in those faded and dusty pages.&nbsp; </span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">Also, you can sort of define your own parameters for your collection. You could have a collection of Colt books, Colt automatic pistol books, Colt .45 auto pistol books, etc. There is an interesting array of books on combat shooting, competition shooting or even field shooting with handguns. Without even realizing I was doing it, I amassed a pretty decent collection of books on handloading ammunition. Much of this came from a lot of years of working in the business and constantly upgrading the mini-library over the loading bench. Have at it!</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;"><img title="Gun Book Collecting" src="../../Webcontent/gallery/226/2045NewBooK_web.jpg" alt="Gun Book Collecting" width="644" height="883" /><br /></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/gun-book-collecting#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/where-have-all-the-hammers-goneWed, 23 Jan 2013 00:00:00 GMT<p><span style="font-size: small;">No, I was not suggesting a title for a new folk song when I wrote that line. In a recent phone conversation with <em>American Rifleman</em> editor <a title="Read the Keefe Report. " href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogList.aspx?cid=25&amp;id=36" target="_blank">Mark Keefe</a>, we were both perplexed about the absence of hammers on new automatic pistols. Almost everything in the way of new designs is a striker-fired pistol. Sure, hammers persist on still-produced classics like the 1911 and Browning Hi Power, as well as several veterans of the Wondernine Wars like the Beretta and SIG Sauer. But look at the basic 9 mm service pistols of Glock, S&amp;W, Springfield, Ruger, Taurus, Caracel and possibly others. They all use some form of spring-loaded, in-line striker that moves straight forward to smack the primer, rather than a floating firing pin that is struck by a pivoting hammer. Why?</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">I believe it is a matter of efficient use of space. Since most of these pistols are double wides, it is tough to fit them and their polymer receivers to the human hand. A pivoting hammer requires space for the pivot and more space to mount a hammer spring on a strut. By using a striker, there is no need for these parts and the designer is free to shape the butt of his pistol in an ergonomically sound fashion. It does make sense to do it this way, although something is lost in the process. The hammer can be cocked and the status of the gun is instantly discernible with a touch or a glance. How many times have you seen a movie actor with his 1911 entering a room hammer down? They don&rsquo;t work that way, my boy. And you have to learn a different drill when the prop master gives you a Glock. </span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">Indeed, where have all those hammers gone? They&rsquo;ve gone to progress, every, single one. <br /></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/where-have-all-the-hammers-gone#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/2013-gun-digestThu, 10 Jan 2013 00:00:00 GMT<p><span style="font-size: small;">As some readers may be aware, I am a big fan of the <a href="http://www.gundigest.com/" target="_blank">Gun Digest</a>, a great gun book that has been produced annually since 1944. In the early years, the book evolved a unique format that gave it a distinct character. It has pretty much stayed with the same format through 60-plus years, which includes a selection of detailed articles on a variety of gun topics, a catalog type section with all major models listed and even a bibliography. One of the more interesting features is a well-done roundup on pistols, another on revolvers, shotguns, etc. </span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">I regard the 2013 edition with particular favor because the Digest Books management has wisely chosen Jerry Lee as the new editor. I have known Lee for many years, and even worked with him for a time at another publishing company. He is a consummate professional and his first effort in the Gun Digest series shows it. There are at least two or three articles here for every field of interest and the scope of every article is enough to provide the writer plenty of room to go into great detail. By way of example, Massad Ayoob&rsquo;s great article on the history of service use of the C96 pistol gets 12 full pages. That is absolutely impossible in a newsstand magazine. There are similar lengthy treatments on a variety of other handgun subjects, as well as a great assortment of rifle and shotgun stuff.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">For the most part, the Gun Digest improves steadily. An example? How about Holt Bodinson&rsquo;s indispensable web (site) directory? It has been there for several years now, but gets an annual going-over. Best of all, the listings are now printed in a larger and bold-faced type that is much easier on this author&rsquo;s elderly eyes. That is most assuredly practical progress. I hope that Jerry Lee stays at the helm for many years to come&mdash;it&rsquo;s getting better all the time. And that&rsquo;s from a guy that owns just under six linear feet of Gun Digests.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;"><img title="2013 Gun Digest" src="../../Webcontent/gallery/225/2024GunDigest2013_web.jpg" alt="2013 Gun Digest" width="644" height="861" /><br /></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/2013-gun-digest#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/a-triple-lock-from-another-placeMon, 07 Jan 2013 00:00:00 GMT<p><span style="font-size: small;">One of the sought-after &ldquo;Holy Grails&rdquo; of <a href="http://www.smith-wesson.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/CustomContentDisplay?langId=-1&amp;storeId=750001&amp;catalogId=750051&amp;content=11001" target="_blank">Smith &amp; Wesson</a> collecting is a nice clean specimen of the 1st Model .44 Hand Ejector&mdash;the Triple Lock. This classic revolver was introduced as the &ldquo;New Century&rdquo; model and was produced from 1908 to 1915. Approximately 20,000 revolvers were made in this short period of time. It was an expensive gun that required a great deal of hand-fitting. Since it was popular with military officers who liked the big .44 and .45 cartridges for which it was chambered, many of the guns were pressed into service in the early months of World War I. Wartime experience with the gun&rsquo;s finest feature&mdash;a precisely fitted third cylinder lock&mdash;may have caused the gun to be discontinued. That lock system was not fully reliable under the muddy, dirty conditions of trench warfare.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">Nevertheless, it was a marvel of precision manufacturing matched to hand finishing. Modern shooters might easily miss the third lock that differentiates a Triple Lock from a current production Classic Series Model 21 .44 Spl. That classic N-frame revolver is in essence a &ldquo;double lock&rdquo; because it has a latch or lock at the rear end of the center pin at the rear end of the cylinder. Another is at the extreme front end of the ejector rod where in engages a spring-loaded plunger in the barrel underlug. On the Triple Lock, there&rsquo;s a third lock on the swing out yolk. Here, a hardened insert engages a spring loaded plunger in the underside of the barrel underlug. All three locks work in marvelous synchronization because those wonderful craftsmen at Springfield fitted it all together. They are magnificent guns and were appreciated in their own time. Mint or lightly used guns are hard to find, as these guns were used hard.&nbsp; </span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">It would be a hard gun to copy, but it was done. I know that to be true, because I have seen, handled and fired a beautiful copy of the Smith &amp; Wesson Triple Lock revolver. The gun was in a small arms museum in the Amadeo Rossi industrial complex in Sao Leopoldo, Brazil.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">Although it is generally unknown to Americans, <a href="http://www.rossiusa.com/" target="_blank">Rossi</a> has many products and services in Brazil and firearms production is a small part of its business. The company maintains a beautiful little museum with an assortment of prototypes and other guns. Browsing the aisles, I was drawn to the array of handguns and noticed what appeared to be a 4-inch Model 29. When taken from its case, I saw that it wasn&rsquo;t.&nbsp; </span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">Hand-made by a former director of engineering, the one-of-a-kind revolver was a very close copy of the S&amp;W .44. It had the heavier frame, straight-tapered barrel and adjustable sights of a modern Model 29, but it also had the triple locking system of the turn-of-the century model. The engineer was apparently enthralled with complex mechanism, and made the gun from scratch just to see if he could do it. Obviously he could as the gun was beautifully rendered. I was even allowed to fire the unique revolver on the company&rsquo;s range. Rossi can make some beautiful stuff when they want to do so.<br /></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/a-triple-lock-from-another-place#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/seecamp-converionsMon, 31 Dec 2012 00:00:00 GMT<p><span style="font-size: small;">A few months back, I walked into a gun store in California that I frequented in the early 1970s. It hasn&rsquo;t changed very much&mdash;same large log building with no change in floor space or show cases. This is a full-service gun shop that is deep into everything available. In the old days, there was room for several samples of everything current in handguns. Today, there are so many kinds of competing handguns that usually there is one example of each on display with more under the counter. In essence, that&rsquo;s the difference between then and now&mdash;there is a lot more from which to choose. That is particularly true in the field of automatic pistols. For reasons that don&rsquo;t seem to make much sense now, in those days everybody was mad for pistols with DA/SA triggers, particularly .45s. They were perceived to be somehow &ldquo;safer.&rdquo; Many current 21st century models fill the bill, but there weren&rsquo;t that many in the 70s.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">So an ingenious gunsmith named Louis Seecamp took up the complex problem of making DA/SA .45s, using Colt Government Models as a starting point. Looking at one of these pistols years after the fact and you realize how complex the procedure that made it happen actually was. It involved a great deal of machining on the right side of the 1911 receiver in order to make a channel for a draw bar. </span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">This part internally contacts the bottom end of the hammer and draws it rearward to a cocked position. This happens just as a new pivoting trigger contacts the stub of the old SA trigger and fires the gun. A few brief sentences cannot possibly describe how precisely these various part must be shaped and positioned in order to make the system work.&nbsp; </span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">Initially, Seecamp converted individual pistols sent to him by their owners. Word of the system&rsquo;s efficiency spread by magazine article and word of mouth, so&nbsp; Mr. Seecamp entered into some kind of arrangement with Colt and modified an unknown number of 1911s for sale via Colt&rsquo;s distribution network. I saw several in that old time gun store. Although the DA conversion is probably his best known innovation, it is not his only one. He came up with several other pistol products, as well as a unique rifle. Master of the combat sight and 1911 guru Wayne Novak recent commented to me that Louie Seecamp was easily the most underrated and overlooked of the great 1911 pioneering pistolsmiths.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; <br /></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/seecamp-converions#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/the-peacemaker-abbreviatedTue, 18 Dec 2012 00:00:00 GMT<p><span style="font-size: small;">When <a title="Read an early review of the SAA by Elmer Keith. " href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/articles/colt-single-action-army-elmer-keith/" target="_blank">Single Action Army</a> revolver No.1 left the old plant on the river in Hartford, it had a barrel that ran some 7 1/2 inches from forcing cone to muzzle. In time, other guns came along with shorter barrels, most commonly 5 1/2 or 4 3/4 inches. These three lengths served the interests of handgunners about 99 percent of the time. One of the three lengths worked well for most shooter&rsquo;s since 1873, when all of this Peacemaker business began. In the so-called &ldquo;first generation SAA&rdquo; period, which was basically before World War II, <a href="http://www.coltsmfg.com/" target="_blank">Colt</a> was willing to fill special orders for other lengths. We know of a handful of guns made with extra-long barrels, some of them the Buntline Specials. And we also recall a larger quantity of Sheriff&rsquo;s or Storekeeper&rsquo;s Models with no ejector rod assembly on the lower right side of the barrel. I always wondered what the Frontier handgunner used to poke out his empties when equipped with one of these guns. Most likely, it was a pencil or plain old stick. Most of these guns, however, were one of the three standard barrel lengths and that remains true to the present.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; </span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">Longer-barreled guns enjoy an advantage in sight radius and ammo performance, as well as balance. The gun with a muzzle-heavy feel cocks quickly when the shooter hooks that big hammer with the thumb and sweeps the muzzle down. But the same guns are at a disadvantage when it comes to deployment quickly from the holster. An old timer once noted: &ldquo;&hellip;takes a heap of liftin&rsquo; to get a cavalry Colt outa the leather.&rdquo; Most shooting&mdash;rather than collecting&mdash;uses of the SAA revolver are in various types of cowboy shooting games. There are also a number of hardy Westerners who still enjoy going heeled with the traditional sixgun.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">Why not use a traditional Peacemaker (or quality clone) with a slightly shorter barrel that takes a shortened version of the ejector rod housing? This gives you ease of carry and draw, positive extraction and enough muzzle heft to handle well. A recent survey of pictures of actor Gene Barry in the old TV Western &ldquo;Bat Masterson&rdquo; show him using just such a gun. And at least one common reference on the SAA pictures a Bisley set up in this way. The guns are becoming more popular all the time. I have three in my assortment of SAAs. I got interested in this type of gun over 30 years ago and the late George DiLeo made my first one back then. Working with an almost wrecked Great Western, George came up with a nifty little .38 Spl. sporting one-piece black mesquite grips.&nbsp; </span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">More recently, I obtained one of those <a href="http://www.lewhorton.com/" target="_blank">Lew Horton</a> Specials made by USFA, a really handsome gun with a full-blue finish and a short 3 3/4-inch barrel with ejector rod. I have some special plans for grips on this one. However the gem of my snubby SAA collection came from the original maker. At my request, Colt&rsquo;s Custom Shop took a production 5 1/2-inch gun and re-fitted it with a new 4-inch barrel and ejector rod. The result is a shooter&rsquo;s delight&mdash;accurate, quick to handle and just plain cool. This is not some special deal they did just for me. It is one of the first items on the list of Custom Shop options. <br /></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/the-peacemaker-abbreviated#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/the-45-gapMon, 10 Dec 2012 00:00:00 GMT<p><span style="font-size: small;">The idea is so deceptively simple that I&rsquo;m surprised someone had not tried it before 2003, which is the year that Gaston Glock did try and success. In a world gone mad over high-capacity magazines on the one hand and big bore pistols on the other, <a href="http://us.glock.com/" target="_blank">Glock</a> made a monumental effort to give shooters both. Most shooters are uncomfortable with a high-capacity, big-bore pistol and the double-wide magazine that is required. They are much happier with two columns of the shorter 9 mm or 40 S&amp;W rounds. These are the people that I call Capacitonians, those who fill the air with metal and hope for the best. Their opposite number is the Caliberite, the worshiper of cavernous barrels and the massive projectiles that issue forth therefrom. Both would profit mightily from the application of the principles of marksmanship, but that&rsquo;s another story.&nbsp; </span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">Glock and his designers simply shortened the .45 ACP case to 9 mm/.40 S&amp;W length and inserted a typical .45 ACP bullet over a charge of powder. It used the same type of 9 mm magazine as typical guns of that caliber, of course it held a few less cartridges. Mechanically, the new pistol had to have a stronger, heavier slide and other mechanical modifications. But these were possible and Glock got them done. They offered small, medium and large versions of what was essentially the world&rsquo;s first 9 mm-sized .45. The new cartridge was called the .45 GAP (Glock Auto Pistol) and ammunition makers started loading it quickly. </span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">They say the measure of a cartridge is how many ammo makers produce the ammo and how many gunmakers build a gun for the caliber. Most ammo makers offer a .45 GAP round, but no other gunmakers currently offer a pistol in that caliber. There were a few XDs from Springfield and some really neat experimentals from Para, but if you want a pistol for your .45 GAP ammo, you have go to the source&mdash;Glock.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">In short, the idea has not caught on particularly well. I believe Glock still sells respectable quantities of the guns, but there is no other option for the caliber. Most of that seems to be because &ldquo;simply shortened the .45 ACP case&rdquo; does not completely describe what happened. The designers had to fiddle with nearly every dimension of that case to make it work right and they obviously reduced case capacity. That simply means that a .45 GAP pistol will essentially reproduce .45 ACP ballistics&mdash;a 230-grain slug at 850 fps&mdash;but it does so at a sharply increased pressure level. And too much pressure is very hard on pistols&mdash;very hard.<br /></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/the-45-gap#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/hammerlessMon, 03 Dec 2012 00:00:00 GMT<p><span style="font-size: small;">Smokeless powder is powder that burns with little or no smoke. And of course, stainless steel is steel that won&rsquo;t stain. So a hammerless revolver must be one that has no hammer, right? Uh-uh, I afraid not. The term is often misused. The user of the term is trying to describe an internal hammer revolver or a spur-less hammer revolver. This type of gun has a long history in America, with some models dating to before the cartridge era. The advantages of such a firearm are considerable, but let&rsquo;s look at the standard features. Usually, there is a humped or rounded upper rear corner on the receiver. Within the receiver, there is a pivoting hammer that includes or contacts a firing pin to fire a round. Since there is no way to get to the hammer from the outside, it cannot be cocked and is fired via long-arc DA trigger pull, or in more modern terminology, a DAO. There&rsquo;s an advantage to a gun with a closed action that keeps debris out and even more of an advantage to a pocket gun with little in the way of latches, levers and what-not to snag on clothes and equipment. That&rsquo;s why these internal hammer wheelguns have been on the scene almost from the earliest days. They are not new.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">Since the introduction of Smith &amp; Wesson&rsquo;s Centennial revolver in 1952 and re-introduction in 1989, this was the single remaining &ldquo;hammerless&rdquo; made in America. Before World War II there were many makers of these things&mdash;American Revolver, Iver Johnson, Harrington &amp; Richardson, Sedgely and a number of others. This was just in America&mdash;they were also made in Russia, France, Germany, Belgium, Spain and possibly other places. Admittedly, many of these were of lower quality. Usually, these guns were chambered for low-pressure cartridges not well suited for personal defense. For a long time, modern American handgunners have looked on dealer&rsquo;s shelves and seen nothing but those reliable little S&amp;Ws. Incorrectly, they identified the type as a S&amp;W exclusive. That is not true, as many makers in many places have made similar guns and some were fine revolvers.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">Don&rsquo;t believe it? Let&rsquo;s look at a couple of facts. At the present time, you can buy several kinds of S&amp;W internal hammer guns, including one with a polymer receiver. Others come from Charter and Taurus, as well as a new little gem from Ruger. If you don&rsquo;t believe the concept has been examined in detail, consider patent #306596, dated October 14, 1884. The included drawing shows a revolver with a familiar bird&rsquo;s head butt shape. It also shows a very definite closed receiver and a spurless internal hammer. The patent was granted to Colt Firearms. Even the handgun giant was looking at the type, way back when.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;"><img title="Hammerless Revolver" src="../../Webcontent/gallery/218/2027HammerlessBlog.jpg" alt="Hammerless Revolver" width="644" height="621" /><br /></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/hammerless#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/speedloaders-in-serviceWed, 28 Nov 2012 00:00:00 GMT<p><span style="font-size: small;">As a rookie cop, I was issued the typical Saw Browne rig, complete with handcuff case, baton ring, key holder and Border Patrol holster (a crummy one that I quickly replaced with a Don Hume). In those days, ammo rode in dump pouches or a belt slide with cartridge loops. We got dump pouches and thus equipped, I went forth to protect the good people of Orange County. A year or two into my new career, someone came up with a marvelous new device called the speed loader. The first that I saw were made of rubber and were somewhat bell shaped with a flat bottom that had six cartridge slots. The shooter dumped his fired rounds on the ground, indexed a loaded speedloader into the six chambers of a cylinder and peeled the loader away. Thus did the reloading process speed up. In the years that followed, many such devices came on the market and I tried every one I could find. There was something to commend each of them and you had to wonder why no one had ever thought of this before.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">Someone had. The revolver loading devices of the 1970s effectively answered a question first asked almost a century earlier. As soon as revolvers with swing-out cylinders were developed, people began to build cylindrical devices that held six cartridges in a circle that exactly matched the chamber placement. Different types of cartridge retention and release mechanisms made these thing work. I have the patent drawing for three different types, dated 1888, 1889 and 1904. It should be obvious that Yankee ingenuity was at work well before I took up revolver shooting in the late 20th century. I also learned of the ingenious folding speedloader used by NYPD before World War II and the equally ingenious Prideaux quickloader, used by the Brits for their breaktop Webleys before that.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">The old saying of &ldquo;there is nothing new under the sun&rdquo; is once again validated. Speedloaders are a perfect example of the wisdom therein.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; <br /></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/speedloaders-in-service#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/star-gunsTue, 20 Nov 2012 00:00:00 GMT<p><span style="font-size: small;">Not too many years ago, the Spanish arms industry was alive and producing guns in quantity, particularly with handguns. Like any product-driven industry, the Spanish companies made pistols and revolvers designed to sell at many price points. The best of these guns, particularly the automatic pistols, were fully competitive with other European designs. Then, almost overnight, and for reasons unknown to me, everything stopped. There were different companies producing firearms in the post-war era, but most of the well-made pistols came from one of three companies&mdash;Llama, Astra and Star. Look through any decent handgun encyclopedia and you will find many of the Spanish guns that bear a strong resemblance to the Colt 1911 pistol. This is particularly true of the 9 mm Luger Star Model B.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">Model B pistols are an advanced form of the Modelo Militar that dates to the World War I era that were made until the 1970s. The pure Model B is a full-size service auto that is so like the 1911A1 as to confuse all but the most astute observer, as it is an all-steel pistol, beautifully machined from forgings. Hollywood prop men had an obvious need for 1911 pistols modified to shoot blanks and real 1911 45s were expensive and hard to functionally modify. However, the Model B looked enough like the 1911, to get by and it was easy to modify to shoot 9 mm blanks. A key to telling the difference between the two is the Star&rsquo;s visible external extractor as opposed to the unseen internal one on the genuine Colt product. Try to spot them in the next war flick you watch.&nbsp; </span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">Of course, Model B Stars were also used by armies and police agencies all over the world. In the 1970s, several new variations of the gun came along, including an abbreviated 9 mm for concealed carry. This gun came in both all-steel and alloy-frame versions and enjoyed a steady popularity in the United States. The most popular Star ever was the PD, which was a mid-size .45 ACP with an allow receiver. I carried one as a off-duty gun for a time and found it to be a handy and powerful gun. In the years just before all production ceased, Star made a series of modern DA/SA pistols that worked well. This included a massive double-wide service auto called the MegaStar, one of the few portable autos that managed the 10 mm cartridge well. At its best, the Spanish pistol makers in general and Star in particular made some fine firearms.<br /></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/star-guns#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/mikes-new-bookTue, 13 Nov 2012 00:00:00 GMT<p><span style="font-size: small;">My buddy Mike Bussard has been rattling around this industry far longer than I have and I&rsquo;ve been at it quite a while. In the process of working at various jobs, Mike has amassed virtually encyclopedic knowledge of ammunition, which makes him very well-suited to write books on the subject. </span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;"><a href="http://bluebookofgunvalues.com/" target="_blank">Blue Book Publications</a> has published three prior editions of the book at hand, but this new <em>4th Edition Ammo Encyclopedia</em> is a quantum step forward with 972 pages, selling for $34.95. Everything good about the earlier editions remains, but much more has been added. </span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">For one thing, the earlier, sometimes confusing, layout has been improved. Beyond that, there is simply much more information that arrives in more charts, graphs and tables. Bussard is a student of the cartridge and the history of this gunpowder stuff. Mike is a steady, solid scholar, but his impish sense of humor creeps into the text now and then. For a host of reasons, this is a commendable book and a necessity on the shelf above my computer.&nbsp; </span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;"><img title="4th Ammo Encyclopedia" src="../../Webcontent/gallery/211/20364thAmmoEncyclopedia_web.jpg" alt="4th Ammo Encyclopedia" width="644" height="848" /><br /></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/mikes-new-book#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/pre-war-woodsmanTue, 06 Nov 2012 00:00:00 GMT<p><span style="font-size: small;">Once in a while, a gun comes along that offers such a unique combination of features that it is quickly popular, occasionally beyond logic. Sometimes, it takes a few years for a gun to achieve that almost iconic status. I am not sure how it went with the gun in question, but it is certain that the pre-war <a title="Learn more about the Colt Woodsman in I Have This Old Gun. " href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/articles/colt-woodsman-target-model/" target="_blank">Colt Woodsman</a> is a classic handgun that enjoys cult favorite status. As most handgunners are aware, the Woodsman is a handy-size .22 auto that was the gold standard in this type of gun during the period before and immediately after World War II.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">The Woodsman enjoyed a long service life and came in several variations. First offered by <a title="Colt still makes some great firearms. " href="http://www.coltsmfg.com/" target="_blank">Colt</a> in 1915, the gun was originally a John Browning design, later improved by Colt engineers. It was not marketed or marked with the Woodsman name until 1927. In the pre-war era, the Woodsman came with either a 4 &frac12;-inch or 6 &frac12;-inch barrel. There was also a longer gun with a heavy flat-sided 6 &frac12;-inch barrel and adjustable sights. All variations of the Woodsman used the same rather steeply angled grip, which was very good for point shooting techniques. However, it was not so well suited for the deliberate aimed shooting of the competition ranges. Colt noted this and installed wooden grips that partially corrected the angle problem. That may have been necessary for precise target work, but informal shooters and small game hunters seem to like the angled grip just fine. Even during the depression, Colt sold plenty of the little .22s.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">There were plenty of reasons for that. For one thing, the gun was made&mdash;&ldquo;the old way&rdquo;&mdash;with precisely machined forgings. It was fitted up with great care and polished before bluing. Beyond the quality of its construction, the Woodsman caught the shooting public&rsquo;s fancy because it was about as sleek a gun as you will ever find. Every edge and corner seemed amenable to a firm human grasp. There was enough steel to be a gun with a serious heft, but modest dimensions made it slim and trim. More than a few of the little Colt 22s found a home in a farmer&rsquo;s, trapper&rsquo;s or outdoorsman&rsquo;s jacket pocket. There they lived until needed. It was not only a blue collar man&rsquo;s handgun either. Novelist Ernest Hemingway and actor Gary Cooper included a Woodsman in their kits when they went afield.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;"><img title="Colt Woodsman" src="../../Webcontent/gallery/211/2029Blairs_Woodsman_web.jpg" alt="Colt Woodsman" width="644" height="359" /><br /></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/pre-war-woodsman#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/terminology-wadcutterWed, 31 Oct 2012 00:00:00 GMT<p><span style="font-size: small;">A wadcutter is a style of bullet that is almost completely cylindrical in shape. While there have been a few jacketed wadcutters, the majority are lead. Most commercially loaded wadcutters are swaged from lead alloys and some even have a hollow base. Cast lead wadcutters are often double-ended, particularly those used by handloaders. </span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">As part of the wadcutter design, the entire length of the bullet bears on the rifled barrel, allowing for an easy transition from cylinder to barrel. Wadcutters are usually associated with low velocity and match accuracy.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">More often than not, wadcutters get fired at paper targets with precisely printed scoring rings. They get their name from their ability to cut a sharply defined plug, circle or wad of paper at the point of impact. Round-nosed bullets give a less visually apparent hole and possibly loss of a point when the bullet hits near a scoring ring. Wadcutters provide a true score.<br /></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/terminology-wadcutter#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/10-mm-fedliteThu, 18 Oct 2012 00:00:00 GMT<p><span style="font-size: small;">After the legendary Miami shootout, the FBI&rsquo;s firearms people were faced with a fistful of problems. Not only were they charged with the responsibility for developing or selecting a new gun for their agents, they also had to come up with a protocol for selecting cartridges and loads. Some dedicated people went at it hard for a considerable period of time, and came up a standard procedure of shooting a series of shots of a given load into properly calibrated ordnance gelatin and through various kinds of intervening barriers. After a while, the so-called &ldquo;FBI protocol&rdquo; came to be accepted as the best means of evaluating defensive cartridge performance. Routinely used by the major ammunition makers, it is a reliable standard. That portion of the effort was a resounding success.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">The new gun and cartridge did not fare as well. The gun was a short version of the S&amp;W Model 1006, called the 1076. It had a host of persistent problems that eventually defeated the idea of a 10 mm service auto. </span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">The 10 mm came along in the early 1980s, intended for the Bren Ten pistol. Loaded by Norma, the first loads drove a .40-caliber, 200-grain bullet to a muzzle velocity of 1,200 fps. Early on, it became obvious that such a loading was a bit ambitious and velocity dropped to 1,150 fps and bullet weight to 180 grains. Everybody who made ammunition quickly got their version on dealer&rsquo;s shelves. About the same time, the FBI and <a title="Visit the homepage of Federal. " href="http://www.federalpremium.com/" target="_blank">Federal</a> jointly developed the Bureau load&mdash;a 180-grain JHP at 950 fps. It was quickly nicknamed &ldquo;FedLite&rdquo; in recognition of the 200 fps drop in velocity. Since most observers of the handgun scene were enthusiastic about the power of the 10 mm cartridge, the loading down for FBI use drew some amount of scorn. As it turned out, the FBI gun people may have had a more viable cartridge than the speed-freaks. In a short period of time it became obvious that building a 10 mm pistol involved a good deal more than re-barreling a .45 and fitting a different magazine. Everybody tried it, but the forces at work in the hot-loaded 10 mm ammo made almost all models badly worn in less than a thousand rounds.&nbsp; </span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">However, the guns that fired &ldquo;FedLite&rdquo; seemed to roll on forever. There are still a couple of original-style 10 mm loads made with velocities are in mid-1,100 fps range. Many more loads are made with slower velocities and often times lighter bullets. The trend in 10 mm ammo is pretty much toward the 180 grains and 950 fps of the &ldquo;FedLite.&rdquo; At the same time the FBI was working on all of this, <a href="http://www.smith-wesson.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/CustomContentDisplay?langId=-1&amp;storeId=750001&amp;catalogId=750051&amp;content=11001" target="_blank">Smith &amp; Wesson</a> was also developing another 10 mm cartridge, which was introduced in &rsquo;91, called the .40 S&amp;W. In terms of terminal ballistics, the .40 S&amp;W is pretty much the same thing as the 10 mm FedLite.</span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/10-mm-fedlite#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/thoughts-on-ccwsWed, 10 Oct 2012 00:00:00 GMT<p><span style="font-size: small;">Apparently, enough American gun owners are making their feelings known to the politicians, because the majority of states have enacted laws that permit some form of CCW permits. Better yet, there is a bill under consideration that would require all states to honor permits issued by other states. This is a positive step forward and is much closer to the day when every American can be licensed to carry if he or she so chooses. I have no trouble understanding the intent of the 2nd Amendment, but politicians sometimes have difficulty fully grasping some very simple language. So we have to spend all kinds of time and money. OK, so be it&mdash;but we are making progress.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">Depending on where you live, there is a certain amount of expense and effort involved in getting your license. Do you want to do this? Is it important enough for you to put up with the hassle? You'll have to answer this one for yourself, but I would like to offer a different perspective on the now common CCW permit. I believe that all Americans who treasure their rights should go through the process. And that applies to every gun owner, whether they need or desire to carry a handgun. In other words, go get the permit, renew it as often as is needed and you are always legal. This is not necessarily done to benefit you personally, but it will have a positive effect on the system. Simply stated, the more handgunners who have a CCW, the harder it will be to take it away from them. If you support the idea of a CCW permit, go get yours.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">Understand that having a permit does not require you to carry a concealed handgun at all times, but does permit you to do so when you feel the need. You may live in a community that is essentially peaceful, so guns are not routinely required. But when some perceived threat comes along, it may be comforting to drop a quality handgun into pocket or purse&mdash;legally. I would be a lot happier knowing that there are many more armed citizens with a working understanding of the limits of power.</span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/thoughts-on-ccws#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/the-fire-is-dryFri, 05 Oct 2012 00:00:00 GMT<p><span style="font-size: small;">In the Marine Corps, we grew accustomed to the term &ldquo;snapping in,&rdquo; meaning practice firing without the use of ammunition, or dry firing. In view of the cost of ammunition in these troubled economic times, many of us are forced to dry fire in order to develop handgun marksmanship. I have personally spent hundreds of hours in dry fire, and have developed basic competence with the pistol, maybe a little more. It makes me wonder what might have happened if I had spent thousands, but I digress....</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">I am absolutely certain that this is a necessary part of the game. I would go so far as to say that if I were given unlimited ammo to teach a group of neophytes, I would still use dry firing as part of the instructional program. There are skills to be learned with an empty gun that cannot be learned with a loaded one. Buz Mills' Gunsite Academy still assigns students night homework of snapping in and gives them emphatic instructions on how to do this safely. Basically, they are taught ways to self-emphasize shooting in safe directions and always, always, ALWAYS with an empty gun with no ammunition anywhere near the gun.&nbsp; </span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">Dry fire practice needs to be done in short, intense periods of no more than 20 minutes long. No distractions permitted&mdash;TV, radio, conversations, etc. Never snap in at a mirror or at the TV set. An improvised target is OK. Much can also be learned by dry-firing at a blank piece of paper. When the allotted time is over, put the gun away and cease all practice. This is usually the time when the Negligent Discharges occur. A budding shooter gets to thinking about it and wants to do a few more cycles, but forgets (a) he reloaded the gun and (b) he always needs to perform a press-check. There is something important to be learned and formed into habit by perfect dry fire practice.&nbsp; </span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">Do it like this. Check to be sure there is no ammo in the room where you will spend a focused quarter hour of practice. Pick up your service handgun and ensure it is not loaded. Assume a firing grip, cock the action, take a deep breath and aim in on your point. When sight alignment and sight picture are perfect, apply straight-back pressure to the trigger until the hammer or striker drops. Hold the trigger all the way back and slowly release to the point where the action resets for another shot. On many guns, this can't happen until you re-cock the action. Think perfect sight alignment and repeat. </span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">I also recommend an additional extension of the basic dry fire cycle. Do about five reps of this one at the end of your session and do it with a blank target. Everything is the same until the hammer falls. At this point, continue to hold the trigger back with the sights in perfect alignment. Hold the gun steady, sights aligned and trigger back, until it becomes uncomfortable, almost painful&mdash;no less than a minute. This drill develops the muscle groups necessary to hold a heavy pistol still. It also develops patience and the ability to work the trigger. The last step before you lower the gun and rest the aching muscles of your arm is to reset the trigger and resume proper sight alignment. When shooting live, any given shot ends with proper trigger reset and a new sight picture, not when the hammer falls. Shooting multiple shots is a linked chain of events always ending in reset and re-align.<br /></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/the-fire-is-dry#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/whats-its-worthWed, 26 Sep 2012 00:00:00 GMT<p><span style="font-size: small;">What's it worth? Usually, the answer has to be &ldquo;I have no idea&rdquo; but the question is one of the most common from curious readers. Some magazines offer answers to reader's questions as a regular feature, but hedge the answers just a little bit. They might say &ldquo;A gun of the type you mention should bring between $500 and $900&rdquo; and not &ldquo;Your gun is worth $783.19.&rdquo; There are two reasons why this is true&mdash;condition and location. A used guns' condition is critically important but sometimes a gun's value varies with where it is being sold. Big magnum revolvers are probably more likely to sell in rural areas where they can be effectively used. Smaller, concealed-carry guns enjoy a better market in urban venues with more densely concentrated populations. Regardless of the circumstances of the sale, the greatest single factor in selling a used handgun is the gun's condition. You are way ahead in the deal if the gun is in excellent or better condition. If it is a desirable gun in new condition, you rule the deal, but if the gun is much less than 100 percent, then it is a &ldquo;shooter&rdquo; and the only buyers are likely to be someone who views the gun as a tool.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">Setting the exact value of a gun is almost impossible unless the person to whom the question is posed has the gun in hand. Even then the matter is pretty subjective. Those that buy and sell guns for a living see what they are willing to pay and what they believe they will sell it for. People in business are entitled to make a profit on every transaction. This means that they buy at a little less than what it is worth and sell at a little more. There is no giant regulatory agency in the sky, so it is the old caveat emptor&mdash;let the buyer beware. It might as well also be let the seller beware. It is the same sort of reasoning as used in the selling of real estate, automobiles or diamonds. Experience is the key to getting along in this business, but experience is not something you buy in quart cans. You develop it through in-depth research and looking at lots and lots of gun sales. As a matter of fact, there are people around the country who do this for a living. They work for insurance companies and are called appraisers.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">As bleak a picture as I am painting, there is some help available. Stephen Fjestad runs a publishing company, and its major product is an annual called <a href="http://bluebookofgunvalues.com/" target="_blank"><em>Blue Book of Gun Values</em></a>. Although this hefty 2,000-plus page volume has detractors, I have found it to be a pretty level and even effort to fix the price of most guns. When asked, it is the first place I look to answer those important &ldquo;What's it worth&rdquo; questions. The current edition lives about 18 inches from my left hand.</span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/whats-its-worth#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/fossiesThu, 20 Sep 2012 00:00:00 GMT<p><em><span style="font-size: small;"><a href="http://www.adamsguns.com/" target="_blank"></a></span></em><span style="font-size: small;">Webley-Fosbery (or Fossies) revolvers are beautifully made gun from the Golden Age of British armsmaking, and they are quite unique. I am sorry to say that I have never fired one&mdash;you have to go to my old friend and fellow Field Editor Garry James for that kind of experience. While the recent Italian Mateba revolver has some distinct similarities, the Fossie stands different in the history of small arms.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">Developed by George Fosbery in the late Victorian era and marketed by Webley at the turn of the century, the Webley-Fosbery was a big heavy service revolver. Chambered initially for the .455 service cartridge (later for the .38 ACP), the gun was loaded by breaking the action muzzle down to expose the rear of the cylinder. This was a popular system of loading and worked well if the gun has a strong hinge. The unique feature of the Fossie was a recoiling upper&mdash;barrel, cylinder, hammer, etc.&mdash;that rode back a short distance when fired. The recoiling movement both turned the cylinder and cocked the hammer, while a strong spring returned the upper to battery. This presented the shooter with another crisp, short, single-action trigger pull. </span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">Despite the obvious complexity of the system, the gun worked well in rough service and was popular with British officers.You will not see their like again.</span></p> <p><br /><em><span style="font-size: small;">Photo courtesy of <a href="http://www.adamsguns.com/" target="_blank">Adams Guns</a></span></em></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/fossies#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/terminology-target-triggerTue, 18 Sep 2012 00:00:00 GMT<p><span style="font-size: small;">Primarily applying to <a title="Visit the homepage of Smith &amp; Wesson. " href="http://www.smith-wesson.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/CustomContentDisplay?langId=-1&amp;storeId=750001&amp;catalogId=750051&amp;content=11001" target="_blank">Smith &amp; Wesson</a> revolvers, target trigger means an extra-wide trigger that curves gently under your finger. As the term suggests, it is intended for formal target competition. </span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">In theory, if the trigger is wider, more of the surface of your finger will be in contact. This allegedly makes it much easier to pull. S&amp;W used them on its top-end revolvers for decades, along with its lower, wider spur. Many shooters, who work their guns with both DA and SA trigger systems find the target trigger something of a nuisance. </span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">I can remember one of our range masters working over an original narrow trigger to produce one with a straight ridge down the center of the finger pad. Lock the crease of the first joint of your trigger finger on the ridge and go for it! So much for theories.</span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/terminology-target-trigger#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/the-super-magsMon, 10 Sep 2012 00:00:00 GMT<p><span style="font-size: small;">In the very earliest days of International Handgun Metallic Silhouette Association, one of its founding gurus, the late Elgin gates, designed some new cartridges for the sport. This was long-range handgun work&mdash;50, 100, 150 and 200 meters. The distant targets were hard to hit because of their size and hard to knock down because of their weight. You needed an accurate, flat-shooting, high-velocity, heavy-bullet load in your handgun, particularly when shooting revolver class. That&rsquo;s why we have the Gates&rsquo; Super Mags&mdash;.357, .375. .414 and .445. It is an interesting array of cartridges that achieved varying degrees of popularity. All of them required special long-frame, long-cylinder revolvers made mostly by <a title="Dan Wesson firearms are produced by CZ-USA. " href="http://www.cz-usa.com/products/by-brand/dan-wesson/" target="_blank">Dan Wesson</a>. All four have a rimmed case that is 1.61 inches in length. Since I worked a great deal in the 70s with three out of the four, I have some impressions to contribute.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">The .357 Super Mag. was easily the most popular of the series, largely because <a title="Visit the homepage of Ruger. " href="http://www.ruger.com/index.html" target="_blank">Ruger</a> made a special Super Blackhawk revolver to fire it. Intended for a hefty bullet at good velocity, the concept fell into the hands of the firewallers who tried to move a short little bullet of between 110 and 125 grains at Klingon speed. They burned out barrels at the forcing cone and destroyed top straps in an afternoon of heavy shooting. Bill Ruger heard about it and pulled the guns&mdash;no more of those beautiful long Dragoons. Dan Wesson made some and they came with an extra barrel for a while. The concept was effectively ruined by shooter mishandling.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">In theory, the .375 Super Mag. should have succeeded brilliantly. It took a special jacketed revolver bullet of 220 grains made by Hornady. Ergo, there was nothing wrong with the bullet and certainly nothing defective about the handsome DW revolver. But somehow or another, the darned things just didn&rsquo;t shoot very well. It was rather unceremoniously dropped. Not many of these were made and the Star-Line brass is likewise rare.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">It&rsquo;s another story with the .414 Super Mag, which is my favorite of the bunch, mostly because of a custom Hamilton Bowen Ruger with a ribbed S&amp;W .41 Mag. barrel in place. The Ruger is re-bored from one of the .357 Super Mags., and is an elegant gun. Most shooters used the Dan Wesson (and even the current CZ DWs) and got excellent service from them. The last time I looked, the maker even had ammo in stock.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">With the .445 Super Mag., you have a slugger. This is a sort of .44 Mag. Long, maybe even Extra Long. It takes commercial bullets up to 300 grains. I spent a long week of handloading and shooting for a story once. I got very fine accuracy&mdash;close to 2 inches at 100 yards&mdash;but the recoil was pretty severe. This was the big end until S&amp;W came along with the .460 and .500 S&amp;W Mags. I have another of the re-bored Rugers in this caliber. All you can say about all four Super Mags is power, power and more power. If you need it, it&rsquo;s there.</span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/the-super-mags#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/nine-versus-fortyThu, 06 Sep 2012 00:00:00 GMT<p><span style="font-size: small;">I clearly remember the press conference where <a title="Visit the homepage of Smith &amp; Wesson. " href="http://www.smith-wesson.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/CustomContentDisplay?langId=-1&amp;storeId=750001&amp;catalogId=750051&amp;content=11001" target="_blank">Smith &amp; Wesson&rsquo;s</a> Tommy Campbell announced the .40 S&amp;W cartridge along with the Model 4006 pistol to fire it. The announcement created such a stir that almost anything &ldquo;Forty&rdquo; was a viable product. Like so many things, the .40 was a compromise, an effort to increase stopping power without increasing gun size or inadvisably reducing capacity. Most of those design criteria were pretty well met. But I want to make a couple of points here, and that means putting the situation in context.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">The need for the .40 came as a result of perceived inadequate performance of the 9 mm cartridge, which dates to 1904 and the Luger pistol. It had scant history in America until after World War II, when it came back in the duffle bags of soldiers. In the 1960s and 70s, police agencies grew restless about the suitability of.38 Spl. revolvers for police work in the auto age. At the time, the order of the day was 9 mm semi-autos with DA/SA triggers, and the various makers competed vigorously. When 9 mm pistols&mdash;with the ammo of that day&mdash;began to fail, the search for something better began. The .40 was the result. The 9 mm pistols of that era usually had 15-shot magazines, while the .40 contained 11 or 12 rounds. Engineering changes and improvements have given today&rsquo;s 9 mm magazines as many as 19 rounds, while the newest 40s are around 15 or so. In my book, this renders the capacity difference a very moot point.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">It is also a good idea, however, to look at the ammunition. When those old &ldquo;Wondernine Wars&rdquo; got rolling in the early 1970s, we were using almost primitive ammo. Sure, it was accurate, clean-burning stuff, but the bullets were 115-grain JHPs of early design. Much effort went into getting the 9 mm to shoot bigger than it had before, even as more makes and models came along.&nbsp; The trend was toward heavier bullets, usually 147 grains or sometimes 124 grains. Today, most 9 mm ammo in service is one of these two weights, and the hollow-point cavities are engineered for reliable expansion. The point is simply that 9 mm ammunition today performs much better than it ever did. And most 9 mm pistols carry many more rounds than ever before.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">However, the .40 S&amp;W situation was not stagnate. Almost as soon as the first S&amp;W and Glock pistols and ammunition came along, they started changing. The same improvements that were made to the 9 mm were made to the .40. While the majority of .40 loads featured 180-grain bullets at the start, lighter weights began to appear. The mean is probably around the 165-grain point today. It should also be obvious that neither caliber is frozen in time, and that great effort is underway to make all handgun ammunition perform better.&nbsp; </span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">Handguns in 9 mm Luger and .40 S&amp;W account for the greatest number of police service pistol sales and a big portion of civilian personal defense choices. In the latter category, there is an understandably large slice of the market going to snubby revolvers. Staying with the &ldquo;Nine and Forty&rdquo; comparison, it is interesting to note that in several ways, the two are growing closer, rather than farther away. In bullet weight, magazine capacity and bullet velocity, the two cartridges are closer than when they started. Bullet diameter cannot change, but it is established that the more popular round, as far as sales is concerned, is the 9 mm, even though the .40 seems to have a better stopping record.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">I&rsquo;d like to ask my readers to give me their input as to why this is happening. Let me know <em>why</em> you rate one over the other. Please stick to the 9 mm versus .40 S&amp;W issue and not slide off into why you think the .41 Long Colt or .38 Super or whatever is better. I&rsquo;ll compile them and let you know about the consensus.</span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/nine-versus-forty#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/throwin-downTue, 28 Aug 2012 00:00:00 GMT<p><span style="font-size: small;">&ldquo;Throwin&rsquo; Down&rdquo; is an old-time expression for drawing a handgun&mdash;typically a revolver&mdash;and demonstrably aiming the piece at a live target. I think it may have originated in the south and migrated west as the frontiers were conquered. It conveys an impression of a kind of flamboyance, but also one of deadly intent, as when&hellip; &ldquo;Earp threw down on Curly Bill.&rdquo; Sure, the term is slang, but slang is what makes our English language so expressively colorful. There are numerous examples of gun terms becoming slang terms with much broader meanings. How about &ldquo;Don&rsquo;t go off half cocked&rdquo; to indicate a lack of preparation or &ldquo;Lock, stock and barrel&rdquo; to suggest completeness.<br /><br />There may be more than to &ldquo;Throwin&rsquo; Down&rdquo; than we realize. In the early days of caplock revolvers, percussion caps on the chamber nipples were a necessity. They were manufactured in huge quantities and sometimes quality control was lacking. The caps would often shatter and drop particles into the various spaces at the closed rear end of the cylinder and then into the action. In an effort to get this debris out of the gun, some shooters would pull the revolver clear back by their head and then cock it with a down and forward throwing motion. When the revolver was upside down, above the shoulder, the debris from previous shots could drop free of the gun. The term persisted, even if the caplock revolver did not.</span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/throwin-down#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/sanderson-gripsTue, 21 Aug 2012 00:00:00 GMT<p><span style="font-size: small;">In the era of bullseye shooting that started before World War II, the revolver was king. In those days, most folks shot either Colt or Smith &amp; Wesson. Eventually, gunsmiths came up with ways to accurize the 1911, and then other autos surfaced and the revolver began to fade. Before it completely vanished from the competition arenas, some pretty accomplished craftsmen went to work on properly stocking the wheelgun.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">Steve Herrett was well known to shooters of the &lsquo;60s and &lsquo;70s. He placed his first ad in 1955 and, while he built both pistol and revolver stocks, he was best known for fitting target revolvers. Herrett was a very prolific maker and came up with a number of original designs. Before him, there was Walter Roper, who employed a couple of different craftsmen to build grips to his design. Today, Roper grips are much-sought-after collector&rsquo;s items. And then there was Sanderson.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">Lew Sanderson was a gripmaker of that same golden age of the revolver. A Midwesterner, Sanderson is not as well known as the others or properly appreciated, but he made many fine sets of grips for target revolvers. For a time, a son carried on that tradition. Sanderson also delved into the world of combat grips. In those days, virtually every cop in America went to work with a Colt or S&amp;W revolver on the belt or under the arm. Some of them were real shooters and knew that good grips made the gun handle better. But they were also aware that grips could not be bulky. Sanderson and the other makers all worked in the defensive revolver field.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">The pictured revolver is a S&amp;W .38-44 Heavy Duty&mdash;the heaviest .38 Spl. that Smith ever made. It was a workhorse from the time of its introduction in the &lsquo;30s until the mid-60s. Although the samples pictured are scuffed and battered, they still provide a good example of what a craftsman can do with a chunk of good walnut. Almost all combat grips use a bit of wood behind the trigger guard. For really big hands, they may completely enclose the revolver&rsquo;s backstrap. Most shooters are better off with an open backstrap and so it is with this set of Sandersons. However, note that there is not one bit of excessive or unnecessary material left on the grips. Also note the gentle palm swell that has been worked into the cross section of the grip, as well as the full coverage checkering pattern. These Sandersons are fine specimens of the gripmaker&rsquo;s craft.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;"><img title="Sanderson Grips" src="../../Webcontent/gallery/188/2041SandersonGrips_web.jpg" alt="Sanderson Grips" width="644" height="838" /><br /></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/sanderson-grips#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/revolver-bookFri, 17 Aug 2012 00:00:00 GMT<p><span style="font-size: small;">In the course of my weekly trip to Barnes and Noble in Reno, I ran across a book that I had not seen before. In the Reno store, gun books are just across the aisle from military history, so I usually spend a half hour of relaxed browsing in one spot. Last week&rsquo;s visit produced a new gun book that all revolver enthusiasts need to know about. Titled <em>Gun Digest Book of the Revolver</em> and written by Grant Cunningham, the book is primarily concerned with revolver characteristics and how to manage the various models and makes. While the title might suggest another dreary survey of everything in production, it is far from that.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">This little volume begins with concise descriptions of the major functions of today&rsquo;s DA/SA wheelguns. Cunningham gets right to the point early on and starts talking about the subtle and not-so-subtle differences in the trigger action. Most of all, he presents individual techniques for each, including such gems as the return trigger stroke is just important as the backwards one. That is almost worth the cost of the book, particularly in view of the fact that he offers a sharp, well-reasoned opinion on why it is true. </span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">There is material here on tuning the various guns, reloading them quickly under duress and even proper cleaning. It seems certain that Cunningham developed his material by personal experience as well as studying the works of other trainers. Although I am sorry to say that I was unaware of this author&rsquo;s earlier efforts, I do believe this book is worth the $23 price tag. I commend it to you and almost regret that I have to temporarily put it down because duty calls. It is on the shelf next to Nichols, Winans, Pollard, Mason and Fitzgerald&mdash;all true revolver shooters.<br /></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/revolver-book#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/the-everlasting-22sTue, 14 Aug 2012 00:00:00 GMT<p><span style="font-size: small;">America&rsquo;s first metallic cartridge was a <a title="Learn more about the .22. " href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/articles/Impossible-22-rimfire/" target="_blank">.22 rimfire</a>, and it was introduced more than 150 years ago. While that little .22 Short was first fired in Smith &amp; Wesson&rsquo;s tip-up revolver, it went on to broader use in many rifles. Because of its modest price, low noise and minimal recoil, those early.22 rimfire revolvers were very popular handguns. Some Civil War officers even carried them in pockets as defensive firearms. They must have been hugely optimistic, because a .22 doesn&rsquo;t have a large enough bullet or velocity to be an ideal fighting load. This does not change the fact that the .22 rimfire handgun has long been a big part of a handgunner&rsquo;s battery. </span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">Along the way, there have been many other .22 cartridges, and most of them have been chambered for pistols or revolvers. One that hasn&rsquo;t made its way into handguns is the .22 Winchester Auto, which is the initial and only round used in Winchester&rsquo;s Model 1903 rifle. As a kid, I made a slick trade for one and painfully recall the anguish of having a neat little rifle for which there was no ammo. A very similar&mdash;but not interchangeable&mdash;cartridge is the .22 Remington Auto. Aside from a few oddities like the .22 Extra Long, most.22 rimfires are still in production. Both the .22 BB Cap and .22 CB Cap are efforts to reduce the range and power of the .22 for indoor practice and pest control. On the other side of things, there was an effort to get more power from the .22 with the .22 Winchester Rim Fire (.22 WRF). Initially made for the Winchester 1890 rifle, it was also used in some Colt revolvers. This was a step up the power scale from the .22 Long Rifle, and the WRF lasted until 1959 when the .22 Winchester Magnum Rimfire burst on the scene. Earlier .22 WRF ammunition will work in a .22 WMR arm, but not vice versa. The .22 WMR is the king of rimfire cartridges in the power sense. The latest news in the .22 WMR story is the development of short barrel loads for snubby revolvers.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">We got the .22 Short in 1857, the .22 Long in (about) 1871 and the .22 Long Rifle in 1887. These three cartridges, along with the .22 WMR, constitute the greatest majority of American rimfire shooting. To be even more specific, most is done with the .22 LR and the .22 WMR. There is a bewildering array of ammo on the market for these two rounds, and while the WMR is more powerful, America&rsquo;s most popular cartridge remains that nifty little .22 Long Rifle.</span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/the-everlasting-22s#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/when-its-real-dirtyThu, 09 Aug 2012 00:00:00 GMT<p><span style="font-size: small;">As much as we all enjoy guns and shooting, the clean up after a range session is never exactly pleasant. Even with modern solvents and tools, the residue left by shooting is difficult to remove. It&rsquo;s even worse with lead bullets and a real pain when blackpowder is involved. A good bit of the gunk that is produced by the combustion of gunpowder can be at least softened and sometimes removed through the use of solvents. The old, traditional and still effective solvent is <a title="Learn more about cleaning products from Hoppe's" href="http://www.hoppes.com/" target="_blank">Hoppe&rsquo;s</a> No. 9, complete with that odd, banana oil smell. But when all the stuff that can be chemically removed is gone, you are stuck with the stuff that is mechanically imbedded in the barrel. This stuff has to be scraped from the bore. So what is the most efficient scraper? Long ago, old time gunsmith George Matthews introduced me to a product that is nearly miraculous. It is called <a title="Learn where you can purchase this interesting product. " href="http://www.big45metalcleaner.com/" target="_blank">Big 45 Frontier Metal Cleaner</a> (or B45FMC for short).</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">The nastiest cleaning job I have ever faced came from one of those &ldquo;10,000 rounds in one day&rdquo; shoots of not so long ago. The gun was a brand new Sig P200 in .45 ACP and the ammo was Black Hills 230-grain ball. With a crew of a half dozen equally enthusiastic shooting buddies, we started early and ended with a barrel of brass, a great deal of interesting data and one very dirty gun. After an hour or so of conventional cleaning with bore brush, patches, tooth brushes and solvent, we had a generally clean gun, except for the ugly streaks of plated-on fouling down the bottom of every groove in the bore. It had been deposited on that good Sig bore by 10,000 fast shots, along with heat and pressure, and it wasn&rsquo;t coming out. </span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">Then I remember that I had some B45FMC on hand. Using this product, it took about 10 minutes to restore that bore to better than new condition. I can say that because I had a Ransom Rest 10-shot group fired at the beginning of the shoot and another after the cleanup. The latter had a visibly different size. This product looks like a hardware store pot scrubber with tight coils of thin metal. You use it by snipping off two or three strands about two inches long, then winding them into the bristles of a bore brush. Put this on a rod and go to town&mdash;everything comes out.&nbsp; <br /></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/when-its-real-dirty#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/aimingMon, 06 Aug 2012 00:00:00 GMT<p><span style="font-size: small;">This question came up in a combat range discussion not long ago. Indeed, when does the aiming process begin? Most present said something about aiming beginning when the gun is at the full extension of the arm and the front sight is visible. Possibly, but I think it happens earlier in the sequence. As a matter of fact, I can make a pretty good argument for aiming beginning at the moment you realize you need to shoot.&nbsp; </span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">In this sense, aiming begins wherever your gun might be on your person and a threat presents itself. It can include the draw if the gun is holstered, but either way, you must establish a positive firing grip. Without a proper grip, which aligns the handgun correctly in the hand, you cannot get a proper view of the sight system. </span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">Hopefully, you will get level ground without obstacles around wherever the fight starts on which to get your stance, but hopefully I will also start getting younger any day now (not going to happen). The point is that good training will create good tactical and gunhandling skills that become habit. And they are part of the procedure that happens in a flash under stress and leads to the quick sight picture&mdash;the aim&mdash;that saves your bacon. This only comes with training.</span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/aiming#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/fairbairn-of-shanghaiFri, 27 Jul 2012 00:00:00 GMT<p><span style="font-size: small;">One of the lesser known figures in the world of combat handgunning was William Ewart Fairbairn. Born in 1885, this slender Englishman was in the British service by 1901 and the Shanghai Municipal Police by 1907. He served in this famous agency of Sikh, Chinese and English officers for more than 30 years, forever studying the martial arts to include close quarters pistol shooting. In that period, the so-called &ldquo;International&rdquo; Settlement was one of the most violent cities on earth. Administered by a joint commission of several nations, Shanghai&rsquo;s police department faced daily episodes of violent crime and was an ideal laboratory for study. </span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">Fairbairn rose to command the elite anti-riot section and engaged in scores of personal confrontations. He was as rough as a cob, but objectively studied mayhem as some study differential equations. When World War II broke out, he was tapped for duty as a trainer for the fledgling Commando battalions. This brought him to the attention of the OSS, who secured his training services for the United States.&nbsp; </span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">As far as shooting handguns at close quarters is concerned, Fairbairn was the first to use a realistic indoor range (complete with sound effects and odors) that provided extreme stress to the student. His book, <em>Shooting to Live with the One-handed Gun</em>, is the seminal work on this vital skill as taught in the pre-WWII era. Some of the material is still taught in some of today&rsquo;s training centers.&nbsp; </span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">The training methods that came from this man are old, but still very good.</span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/fairbairn-of-shanghai#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/mab-p-15Tue, 24 Jul 2012 00:00:00 GMT<p><span style="font-size: small;">In the 1960s, American shooters started getting interested in semi-auto pistols. Unfortunately, they had relatively few models from which to choose. Colt made only 1911 style guns, Ruger made none and Smith &amp; Wesson offered a single choice in the Model 39. Exotic double-wide, double-column guns were still a few years off. In fact, the only really viable staggered column pistol was the legendary Browning Hi Power of 1935. A few other guns were available, mostly European imports and often World War II surplus. Into this uneven market came a new 9 mm pistol that makes for a very interesting footnote in handgun history.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">The gun is the MAB P-15. MAB stands for <em>Manufacture de Arms de Bayonne</em>, a plant in southwestern France close to the Spanish border. This firm was well-established by the mid-60s, but most of their product was pocket autos, usually in smaller calibers. A few of these guns have come across my desk over the years, and I remember the excellent quality of the machine work that went into these guns. The P-15 was their first effort at building a service pistol for serious police and military use. It turned out to be a very nice gun&mdash;accurate, durable and easy to use. P-15s were all steel with molded plastic grips, fixed sights and a high-polish, blue-steel finish. A big gun&mdash;a little bigger than a typical 1911&mdash;the better part of the gun&rsquo;s mass came from a sturdy receiver big enough to take a 15-round magazine. Even though the maker made an obvious effort to keep the butt section as comfortable as possible with thin plastic scales, it&rsquo;s thick enough to be a bit of a problem. Part of that also comes from the space needed in the gun for the barrel locking mechanism. This is the distinguishing feature of the pistol and it was the first modern gun to use it&mdash;a barrel that rotates into a locked breech position. </span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">This concept was used on certain Savage pistols and recently on Berettas and the ill-fated Colt 2000. It seems to work quite well on the several guns I have fired that use it and that includes the MAB. The only problem seems to be one of aesthetics and ergonomics&mdash;the pistol is rather thick. The MAB did not turn out to be a great commercial success, but that is more likely to be because of the single-action trigger at a time when the world wanted DA/SA and then DAO ones. This was a big, rugged gun that filled the bill very well for police and military service. It handled much like the Colt, with a down-to-fire safety and thumb-operated magazine catch on the left side. </span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">Despite many claims that the P-15 was the French service auto, it was not. Although the French military recognized the gun&rsquo;s value in competition and bought a relative few for that purpose and (possibly) some for Special Operations, the gun was never made an official service auto. Interestingly, the gun was made in single wide and adjustable-sight variants, but not in quantity. This is one of those fascinating footnotes in the ongoing history of small arms.</span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/mab-p-15#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/the-45-hp-loadTue, 17 Jul 2012 00:00:00 GMT<p><span style="font-size: small;">Many nations have enacted regulations that limit the possession of firearms and ammunition by their citizens&mdash;Thank God for the 2nd amendment. Some governments choose to prohibit just the possession of military caliber guns and ammo for civilian use. Regardless of intent or means of achieving same, this practice of no military guns in civilian hands sets clever minds a&rsquo;working to evade the statute. American handgun aficionados are aware of the popularity of the 1911 pistol and .45 ACP cartridge in Central and South America, where it is often prohibited for civilians. In Mexico particularly, the answer is a 1911, but chambered in the .38 Super cartridge. An unknown, but significantly large portion of all Colt .38 Super pistol ended up south of the border and probably will continue to do so.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">But the .38 Super is a long ways from the .45 ACP in the ballistic sense. When a similar situation arose in Europe in the early 1980s, clever minds devised a way to come up with a cartridge that would reproduce the exterior and terminal ballistics of the .45 ACP by developing a .45 round that would not fit into the chamber of a .45 ACP. Called the .45 HP, the round had a case almost identical to the.45 ACP, except in length. The round was shorter by about a millimeter and worked fine in a chamber cut deep enough to take it, but no deeper.&nbsp; If the chamber were deeper, a man could use .45 ACP ammo.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">To deal with possible feeding issues, the .45 HP bullet was seated out of the case just a little in order to give the same overall cartridge length&mdash;1911 magazines worked fine. Pressures were slightly higher, which produced a little more velocity, around the 860 fps range. Also, the.45 HP was fitted with a small rifle primer. For a time, it looked like the round might do pretty well, with Geco, Fiocchi and Hirtenberger all making ammo with the 230-grain FMJ bullet. <a title="See what Colt has to offer. " href="http://www.coltsmfg.com/" target="_blank">Colt</a> may have made some retrofit .45 HP barrels, but I am unable to find any verifiable source that says they made complete guns.&nbsp; </span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">It was a different thing at <a title="Visit the homepage of Smith &amp; Wesson. " href="http://www.smith-wesson.com/index.html" target="_blank">Smith &amp; Wesson</a>, which had just got into the big pistol business with the 645 and 4506. The Springfield, Massachusetts designers found that they could create a working .45 HP by installing a stock barrel, chambered for the HP cartridge. No other changes to breech face, extractor, etc. were necessary. An executive working at S&amp;W at that time estimates that no more than a couple of hundred guns made for an Italian distributor in the late 1980s. It seems like a great deal of trouble just to get around government red tape.<br /></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/the-45-hp-load#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/the-wolverineFri, 13 Jul 2012 00:00:00 GMT<p><span style="font-size: small;">In the years immediately following World War II, there was a great deal of developmental effort in the field of handguns. This included radical revolver makeovers, but even more with the semi-autos. Here, we saw a great deal of action or lockwork improvements, but also upgrades in style or appearance changes. In plain terms, the automatic pistol began to take on a new sleek and modernistic look. No pistol I can think of was any more modernistic than the <a title="Learn more about this futuristice plinker. " href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/GalleryItem.aspx?cid=22&amp;gid=108&amp;id=954" target="_blank">Whitney Wolverine</a>. This .22 plinker was an effort to build an inexpensive rimfire for light varminting or informal fun shooting. While it did not become a perennial favorite and saw only some 14,000 units sold in the 1950s, the Wolverine had features that caught the eye of none other than legendary handgunner Rex Applegate.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">Applegate was a point shooter and admired pistols with an extreme grip angle, because they did point well when they were punched forward in front of the torso. However, this occurred at that point in handgunning history when Cooper and friends were actively developing the Modern Technique of the Pistol, which involved driving the gun forward to an eye-level position and using the sights to quickly aim. This rendered moot the grip-angle advantage of the Wolverine. Long after the Wolverine was out of print, Colonel Applegate was lobbying hard to put it back in production. Olympic Arms was struggling to get that done, and it must have succeeded, because I stumbled on one in a Reno gun emporium recently and I bought it at a good price.&nbsp; </span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">The new version is almost all polymer, with both the grip and barrel housing in a single piece that houses the butt (with magazine well), hammer, trigger and related parts, as well as a tubular top. This latter part had space for the barrel and an almost cylindrical bolt. There is no moving slide as we saw in typical guns like the Woodsman, High Standard or even the S&amp;W Model 41. In terms of how it works, the best comparison is the Ruger Auto. In appearance, it is unique&mdash;racy and stretched out with Buck Rogers futuristic lines and a steeply raked grip. I suspect that the grip had that angle for reasons of functional reliability and not ergonomic pointability. It is nonetheless a really cute little gun that just could not compete with the Ruger .22 of the 1960s.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">It is, however, good to see that someone has taken the time, trouble and expense of bring the gun back to the marketplace. Designed by Bob Hilberg, one of the most ingenious designers who ever lived, the Whitney Wolverine is seen on the <a title="View the homepage of Olympic Arms. " href="http://www.olyarms.com/" target="_blank">Olympic Arms website</a>. You sure don&rsquo;t see them on dealer&rsquo;s shelves too often. I have no idea why.</span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/the-wolverine#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/the-colt-bisleyTue, 10 Jul 2012 00:00:00 GMT<p><span style="font-size: small;">Recently, I saw an old copy of a movie poster from the 1980s. The film was called &ldquo;<a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0085622/" target="_blank">The Grey Fox</a>&rdquo; and starred the late Richard Farnsworth&mdash;a wonderful actor in an off-beat western set in Canada at the turn of the century. That poster, a small triumph of the graphic arts, showed a dour Farnsworth in period dress with a big revolver stuffed in his waistband. It was the gun that caught my eye and intrigued me into seeing the movie when it was originally released. The film is a movie-go-er&rsquo;s delight, but I have to chuckle about why I was personally attracted to it. As a life-long so-called &ldquo;gun guy,&rdquo; I was enthralled with someone using a <a title="Learn more about the Bisley. " href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/articles/colt-bisley-revolver/">Bisley Colt</a>.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">From 1894 to 1915, Colt Firearms sold a special version of the classic <a title="Read an early article on the SAA. " href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/articles/colt-single-action-army-elmer-keith/" target="_blank">Single Action Army</a> revolver. Named for the internationally known shooting venue in England, the Bisley was intended to be a competition piece. The Bisley became as popular as the Single Action Army, if not more so, in the hands of shooters who realized that the gun&rsquo;s special features made it a natural for speed shooting. And&mdash;for the pure competition shooter&mdash;there was a Bisley Target Model with much improved sights.&nbsp; </span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">While the original Peacemaker worked very well, especially when fired with one hand, it was slow to quickly fire accurately because it rolled in the hand with recoil. The Bisley version was developed to keep the gun under better control and speed up recoil recovery. </span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">It starts with the distinctive Bisley hammer, which has a spur that is lower and wider than the original SAA type. Shaped in such a way that its highest point is below the line of the top of the frame, this hammer is easier to reach with the thumb of the shooting hand. Of course, like all Colt SAA variants, the outline of the butt is formed by the shape of the backstrap and trigger guard, and how these two parts abut the mainframe. On the SAA, they&rsquo;re shaped to make the gun point beautifully, but roll on firing. On a Bisley, they create a longer butt that forces the hand higher and takes recoil more straight to the rear. To finish off the modification, Colt fitted the Bisley with an enlarged trigger guard and a wider, more radically curved trigger. There&rsquo;s no doubt but that the modified Bisley is a better handling, easier to shoot handgun. </span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">While it all started for purposes of competition, revolver shooters took rather quickly to the Bisley and used it for just about everything. A decade into the 20th Century, Colt wasn&rsquo;t selling many single-actions of any kind. Then, in 1915, Colt sold the last Bisley, which many shooters thought was as ugly as a mud fence. I, however, always thought the gun was kind of classic Victorian in its look.</span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/the-colt-bisley#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/action-safety-bullet-revisitedTue, 03 Jul 2012 00:00:00 GMT<p><span style="font-size: small;">A couple of years ago, I mentioned the <a title="Read Wiley's first blog on the Action Safety bullet. " href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=2111&amp;cid=25" target="_blank">Action Safety Bullet</a>, and several readers responded with their observations. Since then, I have been made aware that limited quantities of this ammo have been imported in the last five to eight years. If you came in late, a brief explanation of the bullet is in order. </span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">Marketed in Europe as the Geco Action Safety (GAS) bullet, this product came in 9 mm Parabellum. It was developed in Germany at the behest of the officers of CSG9, Germany&rsquo;s elite border police. At the time of its introduction, these men were at war with dangerous terrorists, who frequently fled from the law on the high-speed autobahn. In pursuit, the CSG9 officers wanted a bullet that would instantly deflate a tire. The Action Safety bullet filled the bill.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">The bullet was solid copper and weighed about 84 grains. It had a conventional FMJ shape, except for a deep hollow-point nose cavity that lead back to a short tunnel running clear through to the base of the bullet, which was filled with a plastic plug that was shaped like a tiny umbrella with a handle that filled the bullet cavity all the way to the base. It functioned perfectly in the gun&rsquo;s firing cycle&mdash;feeding, chambering, extracting and ejecting. When fired, gas pressure drove the bullet out of the barrel, but pressure also drove the &ldquo;umbrella&rdquo; plug away from the bullet, which dropped away. On contact with a tire, the GAS bullet did not deform, but rather cut a perfect 9 mm plug of rubber and the tire went flat. While it was never intended to do anything more, the GAS also proved to be a formidable anti-personnel slug, particularly when it hit bone.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">An enthusiastic entrepreneur named Phil Engeldrum sold considerable quantities of the stuff in the mid-80s, fighting his way through the veritable bureaucrats who disapproved of his activities. He chose to market the Geco product as the Blitz Action Trauma (Get it?&nbsp; BAT). There was some police interest in the stuff, but I believe that most of it went to civilian shooters. I have just discovered that it came in a couple of variations. Also, it was made in another caliber&mdash;.357 Mag. I know because I have found a box of it. Ominously, it has a plain white box with rudimentary labeling.&nbsp; If any reader can fill me in on the background and intended use of this one, I would like to hear from you.</span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/action-safety-bullet-revisited#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/carryingWed, 27 Jun 2012 00:00:00 GMT<p><span style="font-size: small;">I had a small incident the other day and, while there were no lasting repercussions, it kind of got my attention. Several young men followed me and I don&rsquo;t think they were up to any good. The following was conducted from their vehicle but I was able to elude them. Since none of the group presented anything like a professional or businesslike appearance, I believe they were going to victimize me in some way&mdash;or try to. Everything came out OK, and I am very happy about that. The point to remember is that I did not have a gun.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">For 43 years, I have been carrying a concealed handgun with the blessings of society in general and the specific permission of several different sheriffs&rsquo; departments. I have undergone considerable training, have the appropriate credentials and am comfortable with the concept of going heeled. I even wrote a book on the subject. Yet, in a hurry to get out of the house and make an appointment, I managed to rationalize away the need to go back and get my gun. That&rsquo;s right; I remembered that I didn&rsquo;t have it before I turned the key in the ignition of my truck. But I went without it. This is a very serious error in judgment.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">Once you make the decision to carry, you should habitually carry. In many of the mass shootings we have experienced in the past few decades, there was often a moment when a single disciplined private citizen with a concealed handgun might have successfully intervened and saved lives. It is also true that carrying a concealed firearm for a period of time engenders an attitude of self-confidence that cannot be supported when the gun is not there. Just make sure that you have the gun&mdash;always. But you should also remember to carry another item and I am not talking about a reload. The other item of equipment that you should have is the modern cellular telephone.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">As a certified Curmudgeon First Class, cell phones annoy me greatly. I did OK for decades without one, right? Well, I guess I&rsquo;m overstating for emphasis a little bit, but I really don&rsquo;t like the things. However, there is a great deal of legitimate business conducted on these devices. More importantly, they are often useful in dealing with the scenarios that caused you to carry a gun in the first place. Road rage incidents are one example. When a potential adversary in another vehicle sees you making a phone call on your cell, he may rethink his actions and go away. In face-to-face confrontations, the cell phone can influence the way the scenario plays out. But most of all, in the event that shots are fired, quick use of the cell phone can summon emergency assistance in short order. You need one to back up that slick little snubby that just saved your bacon.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;"><img title="Carrying a Gun" src="../../Webcontent/gallery/167/2045Carrying_web.jpg" alt="Carrying a Gun" width="644" height="811" /><br /></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/carrying#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/enough-gunMon, 25 Jun 2012 00:00:00 GMT<p><span style="font-size: small;">It&rsquo;s fun to play off the title of a great book by Robert Ruark&mdash;&ldquo;Use Enough Gun.&rdquo; Ruark was writing about Africa and dangerous game hunting, and when you are facing some humongous beast that can kill you in an instant, it is wise to use all the gun you can manage. Most people never get to fire one of those big .470 <a title="Watch the Lure of the Double Gun video. " href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/videos/double-rifle-video/" target="_blank">doubles</a>, so they nod wisely at the title and agree. The key element in the equation is &ldquo;all the gun you can manage.&rdquo; I believe that most defense shooters never really determine what they can handle. Further, I&rsquo;m guessing that they can probably use a lot more gun than they realize. Guns are mysterious things to most people, having been formed by the chronic mis-use of firearms on TV and in the movies. Most new shooters choose a firearm for personal defense on the basis of a brief conversation with an enthusiastic young man at a gun store counter. While it is logistically difficult to pull off, a beginner really needs to shoot a variety of calibers, styles and models of guns before choosing. Unfortunately, this is probably not going to happen.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">In the sense of terminal effectiveness, it should be obvious that the gun that delivers the greater blow to the target is closest to achieving the mystical &ldquo;enough gun&rdquo; status. In spite of how well they are managed, some guns are inadequate in the sense that they don&rsquo;t develop enough energy to stop a criminal attack quickly. I have strong personal beliefs about light cartridges and would not consider anything lighter than .38 Spl. in revolvers or 9 mm Luger in pistols. On the other hand, I have witnessed a wide variety of beginner handgunners of both sexes, as well as different sizes and shooting backgrounds, in the course of their training at Gunsite. With the quiet, systematic and well-organized training system in use there, complete neophytes acquire strong shooting skills very quickly. And that is really the major point. The firearm is only a part of the defensive system; the shooter&rsquo;s skill and mindset are far more important.&nbsp; </span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">Training is the way to close the confidence gap in personal defense. You cannot buy some mystical ideal gun that will make all the boogey men go away. But in the process of developing serious shooting skills, you will find that you can handle a lot more gun than you thought you could.</span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/enough-gun#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/handgun-rounds-in-riflesMon, 18 Jun 2012 00:00:00 GMT<p><span style="font-size: small;">In the 1870s, an interesting phenomenon burst on the firearms scene. Cartridge firearms had been in use since the mid-50s, but most of the early ones were small calibers that were plagued with problems. The first widespread use of practical and powerful metallic cartridges in handguns came with the Peacemaker Colt and the .45 Colt cartridge in 1873. Both gun and ammo are still manufactured and are well known as milestones in firearms history. The big breakthrough was in the centerfire design. The big ol&rsquo; .45 Colt case was straight-sided and worked perfectly in the revolver&rsquo;s cylinder with the rod extractor. In the same year, Winchester introduced a new rifle also destined for gun hall of fame&mdash;the 1873 Winchester rifle, chambered for the equally new .44 Winchester Center Fire (.44 W.C.F. or .44-40) cartridge. This cartridge was properly designed for the complicated lever-action feeding and extraction system. Since that mechanism had relatively low camming power and produced considerable cruddy residue, the new .44 cartridge came with a sort of tapered, semi-bottlenecked shape. It proved to be a very workable solution. Then, Colt realized that the new Winchester rifle cartridge could also be made to work in the Single Action Army revolver. Within a short time, the .44 WCF was available in Colt revolvers and Winchester rifles. Thus began the tradition of a cowboy using the same ammo in both carbine and revolver. </span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">By the time this combo became an accepted practice, the .45 Colt had grown in popularity to be the most common of Peacemaker calibers. Virtually the same in rim size and overall length, the .45 Colt is close to the .44 WCF. Why couldn&rsquo;t we have a carbine/revolver combo of this size? I have no evidence that this was considered back in those Frontier years, but I would be very surprised if Winchester or Marlin didn&rsquo;t look at it. However, a .45 Colt rifle never existed until modern times, when the replication shops of Italy, Japan and Brazil cranked up and made them. I have had several of these for review&mdash;pumps and levers&mdash;and the performance never seem to be sufficiently reliable.&nbsp; </span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">I believe that the .45 Colt may be just a little too chubby and not properly tapered for use in a lever-action carbine. It is a great old cartridge, capable of great performance with the right handgun and ammo. This is pure speculation on my part, but it sure seems logical that the old-timers knew that it didn&rsquo;t belong in a rifle.</span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/handgun-rounds-in-rifles#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/tuff-stuffThu, 14 Jun 2012 00:00:00 GMT<p><span style="font-size: small;">Once in a while, a gun-savvy young man comes along with a better idea (or ideas) and Nat Stevens is just that guy. For a couple of years now, I have watched his product line, website and general success grow steadily. Nat makes simple and clever accessories for handguns through his company <a title="Visit the homepage of Tuff Products. " href="http://www.tuffproducts.com/home.php" target="_blank">Tuff Products</a>. I haven&rsquo;t seen a thing in his line that doesn&rsquo;t make sense, and some of it is pretty original.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">An example is the QuickStar, a flexible polymer loading device for single-action revolvers. Since these guns load through a loading gate on the right side of the frame that stays fixed to the gun, you can&rsquo;t maneuver a typical in-line loading strip into position to use it. The QuickStar has five arms or points, each of which has a molded recess for a cartridge, which are positioned far enough away from each other that it&rsquo;s a simple matter to refresh your sixgun. There are five rounds in a typical QuickStar, because that is the customary carrying load in the Peacemaker. A vest pocket full of pre-loaded QuickStars should keep the sixgunner in the fight for a while. Nat makes them for 44/45 rounds as well as 38/357s. It is a clever little gadget that makes a sixgunner&rsquo;s life about 2 percent easier.&nbsp;</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">It is my custom to carry a S&amp;W Centennial revolver when I am out of the house and almost always carry it in a pocket holster. Over the years, I have tried many kinds of pocket holsters, made from both leather and fabric. Most commonly these days, I am using a fabric one from Tuff Products. At 25 bucks this is one of the best buys in gundom. Made from a stout nylon cloth and padded, the Pocket-Roo has a tacky outer surface that tends to anchor the rig in place. The inner surface is slick, so the gun comes out quickly when the handgunner grabs and yanks. This puts the gun in the hand and an empty holster in the pocket. The Tuff Products is the best of the fabric breed and even includes a pocket for a five-round Quick Strip.</span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/tuff-stuff#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/the-feed-ramp-againMon, 11 Jun 2012 00:00:00 GMT<p><span style="font-size: small;">With some exceptions, the majority of common automatic pistols have a <a title="Read the blog that started this converations. " href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/question-about-feedramps/" target="_blank">feed ramp</a>. They have to have one because the ammo is fed from below and behind the barrel and its chamber. In the feeding and chambering cycle, the fresh cartridge moves forward and up to its place in the chamber. This is a simple invention that has been used since the very first pistols. More often than not, a small portion of the chamber mouth has a radius to form this feed ramp. This creates a small crescent of surface of the cartridge that is not supported by steel chamber walls. In firing, this area takes the full pressure for just an instant. But it takes the pressure at the head of the cartridge where the brass&mdash;a wonderfully elastic material&mdash;is thickest and strongest. Literally, billions of rounds of ammunition have been loaded, fired, extracted and ejected from typical pistols since the first one was fired.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">The barrel in the <a title="See an exploded view of a 1911. " href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/articles/m1911-exploded-view-diagram/" target="_blank">1911</a> pistol bearing serial No.1 has a feed ramp. If you replaced that barrel with a new one that had a fully supported chamber, I guarantee it would not work. It would appear that condemning a manufacturer for using an unsupported chamber as an unsafe practice is unsound. Manufacturers fired thousands of rounds through samples of before releasing it for sale. The testers also used a variety of ammunition even fired a few shots of proof loads, which are deliberately loaded to be over maximum pressure. But they did not use somebody&rsquo;s handload, which was concocted to produce <a title="Visit the homepage of the group that monitors firearm and ammunition pressures. " href="http://www.saami.org/" target="_blank">SAAMI</a>-maximum pressures. And the reason they did not do that is because they have no control over what went into that load. And that is why they will never warrantee guns with handloads. I love the fact that Americans have the right and the means to <a title="Learn how to get into reloading. " href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/articles/getting-started-handloading/" target="_blank">concoct their own ammunition</a>. However, doing so involves a major dose of common sense and discretion.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;"><br /></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/the-feed-ramp-again#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/speed-or-tacticalWed, 06 Jun 2012 00:00:00 GMT<p><span style="font-size: small;">Every time I do class at <a title="Visit the homepage of Gunsite. " href="http://www.gunsite.com/main/" target="_blank">Gunsite</a> with a pistol, the top-notch instructors repeat the techniques of performing both speed and tactical reloads. For the uninitiated, a <a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=1835&amp;cid=25" target="_blank">speed load</a> is when the shooter in an ongoing gunfight has fired several rounds, ejects the magazine onto the deck and inserts a fully loaded replacement. Contrast that with the tactical reload, where the shooter drops the partially expended magazine into the palm, then inserts another with the same hand. The partially expended one goes into a designated pocket or pouch.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">The major advantage of a speed reload is just that&mdash;speed. It returns the shooter to a fully loaded status in an absolute minimum of time. It should be obvious that in the midst of a fight with unknown assailants shooting from unknown places, a fully loaded gun is, to say the least, desirable. The major advantage of a tactical reload is that you retain the magazines that have at least some rounds in them. At some point in time, you may need to re-use those partials. If there is time to do a tactical reload, it may be prudent. As a doctrine, this is hard to fault.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">The vast majority of gunfight situations are likely to be populated with one or two opponents and not a battalion of black-hat bad guys. And the defensive shooter who faces one is less likely to have the supply of magazines at hand that he or she wore on the firing line at Gunsite. For these reasons, an additional phrase has crept into the defensive shooter's lexicon&mdash;<a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/when-to-reload/" target="_blank">reload when you can</a>, not when you have to. Here, the idea is to deal with each threat/target as quickly as you can. If you suddenly come on two black hats, standing shoulder and advancing, shoot the most serious first and then the lesser threat. With no more threats in sight, execute a fast tactical reload to bring your piece back to fully loaded status. If there is any possibility of another attacker, do a speed magazine change. Strive to always keep your gun in a fully loaded state. Make it a habit to keep the gun fully loaded. If it's habitual, then you will never have to wonder whether or not you need to reload.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">This attitude is becoming more pervasive and we are slowly seeing a greater number of speed changes and less of the tactical variety. The difference in time is very little, but an accomplished shooter can really fly on speed changes. It is every bit as important as sight alignment or trigger reset, and part of the skills of an accomplished handgunner.<br /></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/speed-or-tactical#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/walther-pps-40Thu, 31 May 2012 00:00:00 GMT<p><span style="font-size: small;">One of the things that stands high on my &ldquo;to-do&rdquo; list is shoot and write about a particular pistol that seems to be running under the radar. It is a <a href="http://www.waltherarms.com/" target="_blank">Walther</a>, sold in the United States by <a title="Visit the homepage of Smith &amp; Wesson. " href="http://www.smith-wesson.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/CustomContentDisplay?langId=-1&amp;storeId=750001&amp;catalogId=750051&amp;content=11001" target="_blank">Smith &amp; Wesson</a> under a strategic agreement with the legendary German gunmaker. Most shooters are aware that this agreement has resulted in a number of the very popular Walther pistols becoming available in the United States at competitive prices. The particular pistol to which I refer is the Walther PPS, which stands for Police Pistol, Slim. As a guy that has looked at all of the current genre of small, single column 9 mm Luger pistols in detail, I found the PPS in 9 mm to be a very appealing personal defense package. Best of all, it was reliable.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">But another version of the PPS was introduced a year or so back and has received very little attention. It is the PPS .40, a suitably modified version of the original that fires the more powerful .40 S&amp;W cartridge. Almost none of the range of skinny nines can be adapted to the larger cartridge&mdash;Kahr is the exception&mdash;but I just got delivery of the first PPS in that legendary planet wrecker of a personal defense cartridge, the .40 S&amp;W.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">I won't go into another tirade about this cartridge, which was arguably the most immediately successful round ever introduced. A potent medium bore, the Forty sometimes presents problems to less sturdily built guns. It operates at greater pressure than most of its contemporaries and that translates to high slide-velocities. Because of this, it takes a well-designed and strong pistol to run the .40 S&amp;W. The smallest pistol ever chambered for it was the Kahr, with the PPS is in the same size class. The Kahr was a nasty kicker and I anticipate the same from my new Walther. But the various desirable features of the PPS make a little recoil acceptable. </span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">In .40 S&amp;W, the gun comes with 5-, 6- and 7-shot magazines. Each additional round means another little bit of length to the butt section, as the five rounder fits flush. The longer the magazine, the more gun to grip. It really seems that Walther's designers understood the need for minimal dimensions on a concealed carry gun. The pistol's backstrap comes in three sizes to accommodate various hands, all slender in keeping with the gun's design parameters. This little Walther is not particularly expensive, seems to work well, but a further positive commentary on the model in .40 S&amp;W will have to wait for a detailed shooting review, which will appear in the pages of <em>American Rifleman</em> soon.<br /></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/walther-pps-40#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/frangible-ammoTue, 29 May 2012 00:00:00 GMT<p><span style="font-size: small;"><em>The above photo is a Federal Hydra-Shok hollow point</em>.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">I shot special frangible ammo in military training as far back as 1956. As I recall, the ammo was not very accurate, but did allow us to fire M1s on a small-bore range. It was a good way to get beginners familiar with the handling of the service rifle. Over my following years of military service, I was infrequently aware of frangible ammo use for special purposes. Mostly, we used the real stuff, because we had the ranges that would handle it. What I am saying is that my personal experience with frangible ammo is limited. But a while back, I fired about a 100 rounds of frangible ammunition in a series of indoor and outdoor steel-target exercises at <a title="Visit the homepage of Gunsite. " href="http://www.gunsite.com/main/" target="_blank">Gunsite</a>. It performed flawlessly. As it's made of powdered metal, the bullets fall apart on impact with hard surfaces like Gunsite's steel-plate targets. This virtually insures no ricochets, and sharply reduces wear on the steel. That is precisely what this ammo is designed to do&mdash;produce a particular terminal effect. It may very likely be lethal, but that is not what it's intended to do. What surprises me is that there are enough brands of the stuff that you can go comparative shopping. It has moved that much into the handgun scene.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">Apparently, there are some shooters, who are understandably concerned about over-penetration, that have concluded that this kind of ammo might be just the ticket for shooting attackers in the house. Please don't do this&mdash;it is not a good idea. The best ammo for home-defense is still a well-designed jacketed hollow-point round. Invariably, this kind of ammunition is developed to deliver the JHP bullet at a speed that will cause that hollow point to open and expand, assuming normal (short) combat distances and a center of mass hit. By the way, a seldom-appreciated benefit of a hollow point is enough expansion to increase the bullet's frontal diameter. This gives a greater braking effect in tissue and the bullet stops sooner than hard, non-deforming solid or FMJ bullets. If you should be so unfortunate as to be faced with a home invader in a justifiable shooting situation, the idea is to stop the attack quickly. The best bullet for the job is the aforementioned JHP. You should not expect the ammo maker to protect you with a disintegrating slug that breaks up on hard surfaces in the event that you miss. That's even truer when a hit with this stuff produces no better effect than a good JHP.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">Modern frangible ammunition is a boon to the shooting schools and police agencies that use reactive steel targets. The target reacts as designed, but the bullet becomes a spoonful of harmless, non-toxic powder.<br /><br /></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/frangible-ammo#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/the-mauser-c96Mon, 21 May 2012 00:00:00 GMT<p><span style="font-size: small;">One of the earliest automatic pistols enjoyed a pretty healthy service life. Mauser's exotic C96 is often called the Broomhandle because of the distinctively shape of the butt. It is a very strong, recoil-operated auto that is laid out a lot differently that most other autos. The integral box magazine is forward of the trigger guard, so the butt doesn't have to be shaped to accept a detachable magazine. On most C96s, the shooter uses stripper clips to load an integral magazine well. The magazine follower and spring are a part of the gun, not the magazine. This is not true of the Schnellfurer (full-auto) version made in the 1930s, which has a detachable magazine. Made in many variations, the Mauser-made broomhandle was produced until 1937.<br /><br />Not long after the broomhandle was introduced, the Browning style of pistol was developed and proved to be a lot easier to shoot, carry and handle. In short order, it was the Browning shape that was imitated and not the Mauser. Still, versions of the C96 were made in both <a title="Read about the Spanish Broomhandle. " href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/articles/spanish-broomhandle-pistols/" target="_blank">Spain</a> (at Astra) and China (Shansi arsenal). Some of the Chinese guns were chambered for the .45 ACP cartridge. Most C96s were chambered for the .30 Mauser cartridge, with a considerable number of the &ldquo;Red 9&rdquo; type made during World War I in 9 mm Luger. There was also an early commercial cartridge for sportsmen known as the 9 mm Mauser. Comparison of dimensions and ballistics suggests that this stretched 9 mm Luger had an uncanny resemblance to the 1990s vintage 9x23 mm Winchester. Even single specimens of the 9 mm Mauser cartridge are rare.&nbsp; <br /><br />Clearly, the C96 was an adaptable platform for anyone interested in a powerful, but rather large holster pistol. Outside of German military service, Mauser's best market for the gun was China, where various government agencies bought the pistol in quantities that totaled more than a million units. Indeed, many of today's American shooters would not have a chance to shoot the old Mauser had it not been for the quantities of the guns imported from China in the 1990s. Many of these were junk pieces that were rebuilt in American shops. Some of them were the full-autos&mdash;rebuilt as semi-autos&mdash;and had the popular detachable magazine.<br /><br />I had a couple of these guns in the 90s and shot them a good bit. In the interests of determining the gun's accuracy potential, I conned Chuck Ransom into making me a set of grip inserts for the Ransom Rest. Accuracy proved to excellent with one of the rebuilds in 9 mm Luger. That prompted me to borrow an original gun in .30 Mauser, which produced a 20-shot, 25-yard group that measured just over an inch. That was a spectacular day at the range, because the guy who had the C96 also had a 1920 Luger carbine. We also shot that classic in the Ransom Rest and got similar results. As much as we might want to think of the C96 as an antique, it still makes a pretty good bunny-buster.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;"><img title="Mauser C96" src="../../Webcontent/gallery/166/2038Mauser_C96_wiley-blog.jpg" alt="Mauser C96" width="644" height="508" /><br /></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/the-mauser-c96#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/model-29s-againThu, 17 May 2012 00:00:00 GMT<p><span style="font-size: small;">When I <a title="See Wiley's blog on Model 29s. " href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/s-w-big-44/" target="_blank">reminisced about Smith &amp; Wesson's grand magnum</a>&mdash;the <a title="Read the 1987 review of the Model 29. " href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/articles/smith-wesson-model-29/" target="_blank">Model 29</a>&mdash;a heck of a lot of readers chimed in with their recollections and impressions. I wish I knew how many of these guns have made their way from Springfield and into the holsters, hands and, I guess, hearts of American shooters. Controversial at the time of its introduction, the .44 Mag. has enjoyed steady sales for over half a century. Lots of readers commented on their favorites and preferences seemed to be equally divided between 4- and 6-inch guns. Oddly enough, no one mentioned the special edition gun that has its own cult following. <br /><br />I&rsquo;m talking about the Mountain Gun. It started as an elegant variation on the basic, stainless-steel Model 629. Designed to be a light and easily carried .44 Mag. that was still heavy enough to be shootable, the Mountain Gun was introduced in the late 1980s. Called either the Mountain Revolver or Mountain Gun, it was a stainless 4-inch .44 Mag. revolver. Although the gun had several special features&mdash;like the special chamfered face on the cylinder&mdash;its main difference from other 629s was the barrel contour. The Mountain Gun was a return to the much-admired barrel of the 1950 Target series. That shape was gracefully tapered toward the muzzle, and incorporated a slim sighting rib on top and ejector rod shroud underneath, showing a return to the classic shape of days gone by. The first run of guns was 5,000 and <a title="View the homepage of Smith &amp; Wesson. " href="http://www.smith-wesson.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/CustomContentDisplay?langId=-1&amp;storeId=750001&amp;catalogId=750051&amp;content=11001" target="_blank">Smith &amp; Wesson</a> was astounded at the instant popularity. As a practical matter, the gun made sense because it was lighter and more carryable than regular 629s. But the thing that really made the product a winner was the classic shape of the barrel. It was tapered with a fluted rib and short lug, making it look like a classic from the Golden Age of the 50s.<br /><br />When S&amp;W announced that there would only be 5,000 of them, they may have made a mistake. As special runs go, 5,000 is quite a lot. They could have sold more, but kept their promise. In time, they made runs of blue-steel Model 29 Mountain guns and they sold quite briskly. Eventually, the Mountain gun concept was applied to several other calibers. I have had review samples in .41 Mag., .45 Colt and .45 ACP, as well as the original .44 Mag. Most of the variations were made in both blue and stainless, but always with the four-inch barrel. I like the blue .41 Mag. a lot, but the .357 Mag version is hard to beat. Remember that S&amp;W created the L frame guns to be perfect for the .357 cartridge. Fitted with a special scaled-down version of the Mountain Gun barrel, the L frame was an absolutely perfect .357 Magnum revolver for carrying.<br /></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/model-29s-again#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/portingThu, 10 May 2012 00:00:00 GMT<p><span style="font-size: small;">Various systems exist by which handgun barrels have holes cut into them that run from the top outside surface all the way through to the rifled bore. It&rsquo;s called porting and it&rsquo;s done for specific reasons. In the process of firing a shot, some of the propellant gas that is working so hard to drive the bullet down the barrel takes a shortcut through the ports, flowing upwards and in so doing, tends to drive the gun down. This partially reduces the tendency of the handgun to twist back and up in your hand, which is distracting and sometimes uncomfortable. Porting is most commonly used on high-speed &ldquo;race&rdquo; guns used in action shooting games. It is common to hear people say that the ports reduce recoil. Close, but no cigar.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">Barrel ports do not reduce recoil─that&rsquo;s impossible. One of Newton&rsquo;s laws of motion is that for every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction. In a handgun, the reaction (recoil) is a function of the weight of the bullet at a given velocity matched against the weight of the gun from which it is fired. It makes no difference whatsoever how many or what size ports may be cut in the barrel. This does not mean that the ports have no value. In some situations, a good porting system can be very valuable. Look at the way you hold a revolver. Your shooting hand is grasping the butt, well below and behind the greatest mass of the handgun. When fired, the muzzle wants to come back, but it also turns up, following the path of least resistance. This twisting or pivoting action drives the rear of the frame into the tender web of your shooting hand. With hard-kicking loads, it can be painful. It&rsquo;s usually a little easier to shoot an automatic pistol, because of its shape. </span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">This is where porting can be very helpful in controlling the movement of the gun. When the expanding propellant gas jets out the barrel ports, it tends to drive the barrel downward. This partially counteracts the tendency of the barrel to rise. The recoil impulse is the same as though there were no ports, but it is re-directed in a more straight-to-the-rear direction. This is much easier for most shooters to handle. Of course, there is more at stake here than simple comfort. In some of today&rsquo;s action shooting games, your time is factored into your score. The quicker you can get back on the target after firing a shot, the quicker you get off the next one. Ports can really help, particularly when you are using a gun and caliber that doesn&rsquo;t really kick that much to start with. There&rsquo;s more to porting than drilling a couple of holes in your barrel. The size, shape, angle and number of holes involved are all a matter of considerable interest, as is the use of the mystical expansion chamber. But ports have no ability to lesson recoil.<br /></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/porting#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/more-on-plus-p-ammunitionMon, 07 May 2012 00:00:00 GMT<p><span style="font-size: small;">After I wrote about about <a title="Read Wiley's first blog on +P ammo. " href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/sammi-and-plus-p-ammo/" target="_blank">+P ammunition</a> a while back, there were several reader responses. For that reason, I have dug into the matter again to come up with more data on the subject.&nbsp; The term +P is associated with certain handgun cartridges. It essentially means &ldquo;loaded to greater pressure.&rdquo; In the strict sense of the word, the term belongs to SAAMI─<a title="Learn about ammo pressures from the source. " href="http://www.saami.org/" target="_blank">Small Arms Ammunition Manufacturer's Institute</a>.&nbsp; SAAMI technicians have determined that four pistol cartridges─.38 Spl., .38 Super, 9 mm Luger and .45 ACP─may be loaded to a certain higher pressure levels and sold, as long as they are marked &ldquo;+P.&rdquo;&nbsp; Note that .45 Colt is not a SAAMI-sanctioned +P cartridge. Some readers have mentioned that a popular internet information source says that it is, but the latest listings from the SAAMI are to the contrary.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">Apparently, some unknown number of small ammunition makers are in fact offering .45 Colt ammo that bears the +P stamp and box label. In view of the fact that certain of the handloading manuals actually list high pressure .45 Colt loads for use in Ruger and Freedom Arms revolvers, you can sort of see where these makers are coming from. If this kind of hot stuff is used in other, probably older revolvers, the guns stand a good chance of catastrophic failure. I can well understand the drive to build a more competitive product, but when their +P loads are not in accordance with the specific pressure levels SAAMI lists for use with the &ldquo;+P&rdquo; label, there is no way to identify what they are. This means you should approach the matter with extreme caution.<br /></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/more-on-plus-p-ammunition#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/first-shot-flyerTue, 01 May 2012 00:00:00 GMT<p><span style="font-size: small;">When the 19th Century rolled over to the 20th, a new type of handgun began to appear. It was the <a title="The auto pistol is now called the semi-auto. " href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/handguns-semi-auto" target="_blank">automatic pistol</a>, so named because the gun reloaded its own (single) chamber. Previous repeaters rotated a series of chambers into alignment with the barrel&mdash;the revolver. The auto had great advantages in its faster reloading&mdash;with&nbsp;its pre-loaded magazine&mdash;but a series of problems came with the new mechanism. Most of them have long since been resolved to various degrees of success, but one has not. However, many shooters are unaware that the problem even exists. The problem deals with pistol accuracy and is sometimes called the first shot flyer.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">Basically, it works like this. In order to load an automatic pistol, the shooter must manually retract and release the slide, which strips a round from the top of the magazine, feeds it into the firing chamber and closes the slide. After the first shot is fed and fired in this way, the slide snaps rearward and cycles the pistol's action. When the first round was fed (manually), the slide and barrel settled into a particular position in relation to the receiver. When subsequent rounds are fed, the violence of firing causes the slide to move at a different speed and the recoiling parts of the gun settle into a slightly different relationship. This means that the first shot goes to a different spot on the target than the remaining shots.&nbsp; </span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">It is a curious phenomenon, but it definitely exists in what I would estimate to be about 70 to 80 percent of all new autos that I fire. If that were not curious enough, I have noted that there are two types of first shot flyers. Usually, the first shot goes to a particular spot on the target, like one-inch out at 7 o&rsquo;clock. A few other guns shoot first shots all over the place, but usually settle down to a decent group with the rest of the magazine. I have also noticed that the phenomenon slowly disappears as the parts of the gun wear in with rounds fired. In one shoot, it took about 4,000 rounds to get a 7 o'clock flyer to slowly migrate into the group. And I have to mention that pistols that show evidence of hand fitting&mdash;like Browns, Baers, Nighthawks and Wilsons&mdash;usually don't have that first shot flyer. For that matter, custom guns fitted with premium barrels also seem to work with commendable accuracy and no flyer. I can't conclusively prove that most autos have the wandering first shot for the reasons I have given, but I have seen it happen enough times to be certain that it actually does happen.<br /></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/first-shot-flyer#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/357-or-357Tue, 24 Apr 2012 00:00:00 GMT<p><span style="font-size: small;">In past years, various writing projects have caused me to research a couple of cartridges with similar sounding names&mdash;the .357 Mag. and the .357 Sig. Trying to match the two is like comparing apples and oranges. It can be done, but doing so produces rather little in the way of really meaningful data. Nonetheless, let's take a look.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">The .357 Mag. is a wonderful cartridge introduced in 1935 as the first really high-velocity revolver cartridge. It is a remarkably versatile round and any gun chambered for it will also fire .38 Spl. loads, so it is really a gun that provides a big part of the versatile tab. But it is also true that the .357 Mag. cartridge is available in loadings with bullets running from 95 to 180 grains. That gives this vintage cartridge amazing versatility. Literally, you can find loads that deliver short range, low recoil speedsters of around 100 grains at zippy speeds and others that use heavier bullets (sometimes close to 200 grains) at a little more sedate velocities. Depending on personal preferences on how to best approach the shooting job at hand, a .357 Mag. gunner has many choices.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">Not so with the .357 Sig. This auto pistol cartridge is essentially a .40 S&amp;W necked down to take a .355-inch bullet. The case is reminiscent of the .30 Luger, except for a larger size, if not length. Intended for 9 mm sized pistols like the Sig P229, the cartridge is available with a smaller variety of bullet weights than the .357 Mag. Bob Forker's excellent book &ldquo;Ammo &amp; Ballistics 4&rdquo; lists a few loads with 115-grain and lighter bullets, as well as a few with 140 and heavier. But the near universal choice for this round is a 125-grain JHP bullet. I have had a considerable amount of shooting experience with this type of ammo in a couple of different pistols. The greatest strength of the concept is functional reliability&mdash;the small bullet feeding into a large chamber just plain works. You can't really compare the two in the broad sense, but as a personal defense round, there is some logic in a shootout.&nbsp;&nbsp; </span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">Police agencies once used the Magnum extensively and most commonly issued 125-grain ammo for it. Although the 125s were not the only police .357 loads, they were the most popular. Several police departments now use .357 Sig pistols, and the 125-grain JHP load is popular.&nbsp; In this sense&mdash;Magnum versus Sig&mdash;a comparison is in order, but only if you limit the field to that single bullet weight. I once did this and the results were startling. I used a selection of typical loads in the 125-grain bullet weight in both calibers, and the guns involved were of comparable barrel length&mdash;a 4-inch S&amp;W revolver against a 4.2-inch Sig pistol. There were eight different loads in each caliber, and I fired ten rounds of each through the appropriate guns, chronographing with an Oehler Model 35P chronograph.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">While the fastest single load&mdash;a red-hot 125-grain JHP&mdash;was a .357 Mag., the average velocity of all .357 Mag. loads was 1,270 fps. The average velocity for eight different .357 Sig loads was 1,350 fps. Although I have been accused of all manner of skullduggery in publishing these results, the fact remains that the Sig outruns the Magnum. It is also notably easier to shoot, with less felt recoil and much less muzzle blast. As pistol cartridges go, the Sig functions very reliably and appears to be easy on the gun. Finally, I can't leave the subject without mentioning the obvious. A fully loaded .357 revolver offers six or seven rounds on tap and a fully loaded .357 pistol gives you up to seventeen rounds (depending on model).&nbsp; <br /></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/357-or-357#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/ransom-restFri, 20 Apr 2012 00:00:00 GMT<p><span style="font-size: small;">The late Chuck Ransom was a very accomplished man. At various times, he was a U.S. Marine, firefighter, machine shop foreman, gunsmith, competitive shooter and inventor. At all times, he was a decent man and one of my best friends. I remember him for a lot of good times, but the world remembers him for a remarkable device called the Ransom Rest, a mechanical device that permits a scientifically oriented shooter to evaluate a pistol and/or the ammunition it is firing. The rest consists of a cast-steel base that the shooter attaches to a solid bench or pedestal and a movable rocker arm that is held in close contact to the base by a powerful spring. A handgun can be placed in the forward end of the rocker arm and held there in rubber-faced &ldquo;inserts&rdquo; made to the exact shape of the gun's butt. Built in this fashion, there was no possibility of marring the firearm.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">A shooter positions behind the rest, mounted solidly on an inert bench or table. Shaped to give the shooter complete access to the gun's controls and fitted with a remote controlled trigger, the rest's rocker arm and mounted pistol recoil upward when fired. The shooter manually returns it to the down position. The important characteristic of the rest is simply that it always returns to exactly the same position, so that every shot in a series is aimed at exactly the same spot.&nbsp; All human effort in the aiming and firing process is removed and the resulting on-target group is representative of what the gun and ammo combination will do under the best circumstances.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">The only limitation of the Ransom Rest is that you need a wide array of inserts to evaluate the various guns that come along. For a shooter, particularly a handloading one, the Ransom Rest provides the ability to maintain quality control over large batches of a given load. It's also handy in developing a new load or selecting a commercial load. Several 10 shot groups with a commercial or handmade load through the same gun will pretty much show what your gun will do. If you have a gun of known accuracy, careful use of the Ransom Rest can show you what each of many loads are capable of. Conversely, you can find out which of several similar pistols will shoot best with any given load. It is literally a handgun lie detector.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">Chuck Ransom never intended the Ransom Test to compete with handgunners, but there are several who insisted on trying to do just that. It is possible for a very good marksman to produce an occasional group that is better than the Ransom Rest's. But&mdash;in any meaningful multi-group comparison&mdash;the Ransom Rest will win. That's because Mr. Ransom's contraption never gets tired, has infinite patience and can keep shooting accurately from dawn to dusk. I know that because I have done it. The device delivers the last shot out of a group of 10, a thousand or even ten thousand, exactly like the first. Paired up with one of Dr. Oehler's magic boxes, the Ransom Rest lets you find out a great deal about your gun and its ammunition.<br /></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/ransom-rest#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/askins-hot-rodTue, 17 Apr 2012 00:00:00 GMT<p><span style="font-size: small;">I talked about the 5.5 mm <a title="Read about the Velo Dog. " href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/the-velo-dog/" target="_blank">Velo Dog</a> cartridge a while back and referred to its use as the parent cartridge for Col. Charles Askins' wildcat .22. This prompted readers to write and ask for more information about this long ago effort by the legendary adventurer/author/soldier/shooter. It's been awhile since anyone has written this one up, so let's take a look at one of the more clever&mdash;but controversial&mdash;wildcats of all time. It dates to before World War II and only one gun was ever made for this round.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">Just before WWII got rolling, Charley Askins was the reigning National Pistol Champion in a highly competitive game. This was the old <a title="Learn more about Camp Perry. " href="http://www.nrahq.org/compete/champ3.asp" target="_blank">Camp Perry</a> bullseye game, which featured a slow, timed and rapid fire aggregate of 90 rounds with three handguns&mdash;a .45, a .22 and an &ldquo;any center-fire.&rdquo; It's still the same basic course, but certain rules have changed to permit optical sights, etc. In those days, this was a sport closely watched by many large segments of the public. Large military teams showed up, as did a number of police agencies. Immense prestige accrued to the annual winners, which drove the competition ever more powerfully. One perennial winner was the U.S. Border Patrol, an organization of which Askins was a member. A working Patrol officer, Askins was well known for getting into shooting situations with smugglers and other criminal types. One night, he took a Velo Dog revolver from a <em>contrabandista</em> in the course of arresting him.&nbsp; </span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">The gun was lightweight junk and went in the trash. The ammo, however,&nbsp;was interesting and Askins kept it. That ammo was a long skinny .22 center-fire round, close in dimensions to the old .22 WRF. Center-fire is the key word in this equation, because the Velo Dog cartridge easily made the definition of &ldquo;any center-fire.&rdquo; Askins was competing primarily with autos, using an early Match grade 1911 for the .45s stages and a Colt Woodsman for the .22 events. He had no choice but to use a .38 revolver for the center-fire, as did almost all other competitors. Charley wanted to use an auto for center-fire, but there were none available. So he made his own, using a wildcat .22 round based on the Velo Dog cartridge. First he had to get the dimension of the Velo Dog down to approximately the same as that of the .22 Long Rifle. This was very complicated and included shortening the case, reducing the diameter of the rim and reaming the case mouth to accept .22 bullets. Tedious, but it was not as hard as converting a King Woodsman to fire the stuff. Buchanan, an ace pistolsmith, changed the gun to center-fire, modified the breech face and extractor for the thicker rim, and then opened the chamber and modified the magazine feed lips for proper feeding. It was cut-and-try gunsmithing, but they made it work.&nbsp; </span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">Dubbed the .221 Askins, the new round was an almost recoilless winner and the good Colonel started taking all the marbles in every match he entered. As Camp Perry approached, the word was out that Askins couldn't be beaten&mdash;his new gun and ammo raised his center-fire scores by an average of 9.7 points per string. For reasons that I can't completely understand, his innovative&mdash;but within-the-rules&mdash;gun was regarded as cheating by the disgruntled competition. It should be obvious that anyone was free to do exactly the same thing and therefore enjoy the same advantage. Eventually, Askins' boss caught so much flak that he started leaning on him to abandon the concept. At Perry, Askins waited until the last minute before withdrawing from competition. The rules of the game were quickly changed to preclude any caliber smaller than .32. In those days, the competitive atmosphere was such that something as unusual as this could be allowed to happen. Askins developed a breakthrough gun, but it was falsely perceived to be taking an unfair advantage.<br /></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/askins-hot-rod#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/near-zeroMon, 09 Apr 2012 00:00:00 GMT<p><span style="font-size: small;">As an amateurish but enthusiastic student of <a title="Learn about the Marine Corps." href="http://www.marines.mil/Pages/Default.aspx" target="_blank">Marine Corps </a>history, I remain fascinated with the battle of the Chosen Reservoir. One of the more interesting aspects of this battle was the performance of the various firearms the Marines used 60 years ago. Most of the <a title="See a few of JMB's best firearms. " href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/articles/history-john-browning-guns/" target="_blank">Browning-designed guns</a> did pretty well, but the <a title="Learn about the M1 Carbine. " href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/articles/the-m1-carbine/" target="_blank">M1 Carbine</a> and the <a title="The Garand was popular with our military forces. " href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/articles/m1-garand-our-new-service-rifle/" target="_blank">Garand</a> rifle did not function with their customary reliability. A lot of this had to do with ammunition, which is what I&rsquo;m dealing with here. Cold weather can have an impact on the performance of ammunition and there were a number of reports that the point of impact changed on various firearms shot at the Frozen Chosen.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">A few years ago, I was doing some in-depth shoots involving the handloading of magnum revolver ammunition. I was living in California at the time and had lost my range, so I was traveling to Wickenburg, Ariz, to shoot with my old partner Stan Waugh who had moved there and was burning his powder at the Wickenburg Sportsman's Club. The range was excellent and the trip was worth it. Most people see Arizona as a very hot place, which can be true. But the winters can be mighty cold and the northern part of the state gets some pretty heavy snow. I doubt that the Arizona desert ever sees temperatures as low as the Chosen Reservoir, but the old thermometer sometimes heads in that direction. On one memorable occasion, we did a shoot that produced some graphic effects of cold weather on ammunition. </span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">We were working up accurate loads for .357 Mag. revolvers, using heavy bullets and slow-burning powders. As was our custom, I was working the guns (mounted in machine rests), as well as keeping the records of chronograph results and changing the targets. Stan was set up at an adjacent bench with a loading press (Ponsness-Warren P200), scale and powder measure. The procedure went like this: I would come up with a load combination based on prior research and call it out to Stan who would assemble it and pass it over to me. I would load the gun, fire a five-shot group, and on the basis of the performance of that load, give Stan the change in powder charge for the next load. Of course, I was chronographing each load as I went along. Everything was proceeding OK, as this was the system we had established years earlier. However, the temperature was 23 to 24 degrees on this chilly winter day.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">After several loads were assembled and evaluated, I noticed an unusual pattern. The first shot in any group landed about 1.5 to 2 inches above the point of impact of the other four shots in the group. Also, velocity of that first shot was approximately 25 fps slower than the following four shots. This happened with every load, no matter what it was&mdash;first shot 2 inches higher and was 25 fps slower than all other shots with that load. Since the Freedom Arms revolver is probably the most accurate revolver on earth, it was monotonously the same with every load&mdash;a high first shot flyer followed by four shots in one hole. What was causing it?</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">The only constant in the equation was the ambient temperature. The gun was cold for that first shot, because enough time passed while Stan was loading five rounds for the gun to cool off. The cold gun produced a slower velocity. The bullet spent a longer time in the barrel, so recoil moved the gun's muzzle upward slightly farther and the bullet struck a little higher on target. Shooting itself warmed the gun up and subsequent shots were in the barrel for less time, striking lower on the target. In order to get results that were not skewed by the temperature, I asked Stan for six rounds instead of five. Then, I would fire the first one over the top of the target and have the chronograph forget that velocity. Then I would quickly eject that first cartridge, reloading the chamber with the sixth one.&nbsp; In this way, I got the five rounds through a warm gun.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">This is useful information. What would happen if a shooter was shooting coyotes on a cold morning on the plains? Say the target was 200 yards away and the gun was cold. At 25 yards, it shoots 2 inches high; at 100, it's 8 inches and it's 16 at 200. Thus, the first round is over the target's back. There won't be a second shot, because mama coyote raises no stupid children and the target is gone. </span></p> <p>&nbsp;</p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/near-zero#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/pattern-loadingWed, 28 Mar 2012 00:00:00 GMT<p><span style="font-size: small;">All of this current interest in revolvers that shoot several calibers from the same cylinder has set some handgunners minds a'racing. Since the <a title="The Judge Rules review" href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/ArticlePage.aspx?id=1526&amp;cid=26" target="_blank">Taurus Judge</a> and <a title="Read the full review on the Governor. " href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/articles/smith-and-wesson-governor-review/" target="_blank">S&amp;W Governor</a> shoot a .410 shotgun shell, as well as a .45 Colt, is there any tactical advantage to loading the cylinder in a pattern? For example, you could load two .410s with No. 4 shot, followed by two .45 Colt rounds with 225-grain JHP bullets and top it off with a single round of .410 with 000 buckshot&mdash;in a five-shot Judge. The Smith &amp; Wesson entry is different in that it is a six-shooter and also will work with .<a title="Read the .45 for Self-Defense. " href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/articles/the-45-for-self-defense/" target="_blank">45 ACPs</a> in special clips. Therefore, the options are considerably wider.&nbsp; You could go with two .45 Colts, two .410s and two .45 ACPs.&nbsp; The possibilities are quite varied with a revolver. The basic idea is to have the best load for a series of situations readily available in the gun.&nbsp; </span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">Even before we had wide availability of specialized revolvers that use shotgun shells, we were able to pattern-load standard revolvers in various ways. You could always use several kinds of .38 Spls. in a revolver chambered for that cartridge or a mixture of .38s and .357s in a magnum wheelgun. It was also true of a few others, like the .44 Spl./.44 Mag. situation. This kind of versatility was most valuable in training scenarios, but it saw some use in a single cylinder situation. I knew of an old-time cop who routinely carried .38 Spls. as the first four rounds in his revolver, followed by a pair of .357 Mags. By regulation, he was not allowed to use magnum loads, but reasoned that in a deadly shootout, he would prefer to have them at the ready if the .38s did not get it done. He had decided he would worry about the consequences of violating a regulation after he survived the fight.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">Not all of handgunning is of the life-and-death, white-knuckle stuff of personal defense. It can be handy for an outdoorsman to have a shot load or two in the cylinder of his holstered revolver. Usually, this is done to deal with a close range varmint or snake. Through quick manipulation of the gun, he could advance the cylinder to where the shot load(s) needed are chambered. It may be slower than a draw-and-fire situation, but there are times when you need the spread that comes with shot and nothing else will suffice.&nbsp; </span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">However, there is little doubt that this new class of handgun is primarily intended for personal defense. After several readers brought up the possibility of an defensive advantage to be gained by pattern loading the gun, I dug a little deeper into the matter. In my opinion, there is no real advantage to be gained by any sort of pattern in the way the gun is loaded with several kinds of ammo. Some may see this practice as somehow hitting harder with two kinds of loads. But if one of these loads is somehow more effective than the other, why not load with two (or more) of them? If you are anticipating a given range inside which you are going to be attacked, you are defying well-established statistics that show that it will be close&mdash;inside 7 yards. The new class of handgun is assuredly effective, if you can handle the mass and weight of the gun. But it's because it shoots special loadings of the .410 shotgun shell and not because you can also use .45s of either kind.<br /></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/pattern-loading#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/your-moneys-worthWed, 21 Mar 2012 00:00:00 GMT<p><span style="font-size: small;">It's no secret that the economy is hurting and that few Americans are spending heavy on recreational activities and equipment. Still, lots of folks are involved in the shooting sports and many are newcomers. And of course, most of us are interested in managing our funds to get the most for our money. So here's my take on where you need to put your money at the beginning of a career in handgun shooting. Obviously, the heart of the matter is making your money go as far as possible. It's the old homily of &ldquo;waste not, want not.&rdquo;</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">While a miss is a waste of sorts, you are going to have to accept that you'll miss to some extent. This happens in the process of learning. The point is that you need to practice a lot to learn the principles of good shooting. Your first purchases should be respectable quality eye and ear protection, and then you need a decent .22 pistol or revolver. From actual shooting experience, I know that the autos of Ruger, S&amp;W and Browning (even the low-end versions) will hold the X-ring of a standard American 25-yard target. Smith and <a title="The Ruger Single-Ten Revolver review. " href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/articles/ruger-single-ten-revolver-review/" target="_blank">Ruger revolvers</a> will do the same and I expect that there a lot of <a title="Read the full review of the Walther P22 pistol. " href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/articles/walther-p22-review/" target="_blank">other brands of .22s</a> that will stay with them. These guns are competitively priced and <a title="Learn about the inexpensive .22 rimfire. " href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/articles/Impossible-22-rimfire/" target="_blank">.22 long Rifle ammo</a> is one of the last great bargains in the business. You will get your money's worth in the learning process by shooting on the cheap until your skill develops. That may take a while, but the learning process is a big part of the fun. I have been doing this for a very long time, and I now understand that learning to shoot is protracted and may even go over my life's horizon. But I am still having a good time in the process. </span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">This may seem patronizingly simple, but I have seen too many shooters give up on the game by pricing themselves out of a great hobby. Skills are developed through diligent effort, and you can seldom buy your way in with equipment purchases. You don't buy smarts in a five-gallon can; you learn them through study and application. I have often seen shooters convince themselves that they need the latest and greatest custom 1911 with all the bells and whistles. They end up with a magnificent pistol that can cost well into four figures with special features that are worthwhile to only 1 percent of the shooting population. Disappointment is often the result and folks understandably give up when the new &ldquo;wundergun&rdquo; doesn't vault them to the top of the heap.&nbsp; </span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">This also applies to the defensive firearm situation. Personal defense is a function of mindset over all other factors. Good equipment matters, as does good gunhandling and pure marksmanship, but the ability to decide quickly in a life-threatening emergency is paramount. Accept that you can't buy bullseyes; you have to develop them.<br /></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/your-moneys-worth#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/model-28Thu, 15 Mar 2012 00:00:00 GMT<p><span style="font-size: small;">For 32 years&mdash;from 1954 until 1986&mdash;the best deal in the <a title="Smith &amp; Wesson's homepage. " href="http://www.smith-wesson.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/CustomContentDisplay?langId=-1&amp;storeId=750001&amp;catalogId=750051&amp;content=11001" target="_blank">Smith &amp; Wesson</a> catalog was the Model 28, a revolver built on the N frame and chambered for the .357 Mag. cartridge. Before S&amp;W assigned model numbers to all products, the maker called this gun the Highway Patrolman. Made with the user's choice of either 4- or 6-inch barrels, the Highway Patrolman had a matte-blue finish, with a very plebeian exterior. There was no grooving on the barrel rib or rear sight and no choices in sights, trigger or hammer. I have seen Target and Magna grips on them, almost always in oiled, checkered walnut. In other words, the Model 28 was a plain .357 Mag. revolver of the largest and strongest type. You got a lot of gun for your money and that made the Model 28 popular with cash-strapped police agencies and individual officers.&nbsp; </span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">Actually, the Model 28 was almost identical to a flashier gun called the Model 27. Originally, the <a href="http://www.smith-wesson.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/Product4_750001_750051_764900_-1_757767_757751_757751_ProductDisplayErrorView_Y" target="_blank">Model 27</a> was introduced in 1935, and was made to the individual specifications of the buyer. This system did very well for a few years, but eventually S&amp;W changed to producing the most-ordered variations as stock items. In the immediate pre-World War II era, lots of people wanted one of the new magnum revolvers and the demand picked up as soon as hostilities were over. By the mid-'50s, S&amp;W put this plain-jane magnum in the catalog. It sold well and continued to do so until police service revolvers started to lose popularity with the advent of the DA/SA autos in the 80s.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">Rumors about the Model 28 were rife for many years, the most common being the allegation that the gun was not quite as good as the upscale model 27. Several times over the years, I put Highway Patrolman revolvers in the Ransom Rest and fired them against Model 27s. There was no major difference in the two. As a matter of fact, I have seen Model 28s used for bullseye competition, as well as PPC and IHMSA matches. Model 27s, which I admire greatly, are lovely guns, but they are really no better than the economy-priced Highway Patrolman. I call it the &ldquo;Blue Collar&rdquo; Magnum.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; <br /></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/model-28#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/gutta-perchaTue, 13 Mar 2012 00:00:00 GMT<p><span style="font-size: small;">Remember back in the 1970s when Smith &amp; Wesson offered a series of beautiful die-struck belt buckles? A full collection of these handsome artifacts from a never-to-return era would be worth a lot more than what a 70s-era collector paid for them. Sadly, mine does not include every buckle in the series. It does, however, include the famed &ldquo;gun box&rdquo; buckle. This variation was a metal rendering of the top of the boxes found in the first few years of the Smith &amp; Wesson partnership. The top of those boxes portrayed the tip-up revolver contained in the box. The original boxes are of course quite valuable, but the belt buckle is also collectible. Original boxes were made from a material known as gutta percha, a form of sap from a particular tree.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">The tree grows on the <a title="Learn where this interesting material comes from. " href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malay_Peninsula" target="_blank">Malay Peninsula</a> and some of the East Indies. Collected by harvesters, the substance has been used commercially for a variety of applications. It was essential to the sealing of underwater cables that established telegraph and telephone service between continents, was used for inert containers to hold various kinds of chemicals and was once the basis for the fillers that took up the space in a root canal in dentistry. To say the least, this was a very flexible material.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">For gun folks who admire the old shooters, gutta percha is best known as a material for handgun grips. </span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">Sometimes used interchangeably with &ldquo;hard rubber,&rdquo; gutta percha is actually a little different. It molds well and produces a marbled swirling black intermingled with veins of reddish-brown. It is very exotic and old fashioned&mdash;a part of firearms history.<br /></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/gutta-percha#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/little-gunsWed, 07 Mar 2012 00:00:00 GMT<p><span style="font-size: small;">I love that old saying about &ldquo;what goes around, comes around.&rdquo; It means that history runs in cycles and what was once popular might be popular once again. We went through a long cycle of interest in larger, more powerful handguns for just about every use, including personal defense and concealed carry. The present conventional wisdom holds that the concealed-carry handgun must be small and light, but adequately powerful. To accomplish this, gunmakers have evolved both the conventional pistol and the even older revolver designs to new guns that fill the bill. All three of the major wheelgun makers now offer a light powerful snubnosed revolver with a polymer frame&mdash;<a title="Learn about the Ruger LCR. " href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/ArticlePage.aspx?id=1660&amp;cid=26" target="_blank">Ruger LCR</a>, <a title="Read Wiley Clapp's full review on the Smith &amp; Wesson Bodyguards. " href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/articles/smith-and-wesson-bodyguard-reviews/" target="_blank">S&amp;W Bodyguard</a>, Taurus 85PLYB2. The new designed automatics are so numerous as to be hard to enumerate.&nbsp; </span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">But there is another older design that has yet to be dragged into the modern materials and new styles era. The derringer was originally described as a one-shot caplock named after the first maker, <a title="Henry Deringer created the first compact handgun. " href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_Deringer" target="_blank">Henry Deringer</a> of Pennsylvania. This was once a popular gun, and when the cartridge era came about during the Civil War era, the simple derringer was one of the first types of guns to be used for this new cartridge. Generally speaking, the derringer was a small, light, short pistol with up to four barrels. They were popular enough to have been made by dozens of makers, including both Colt and Remington.&nbsp; </span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">Arguably the best known derringer was the Remington over-under in .41 Rimfire. This gun was in the Remington catalog from its inception in 1866 until 1935. Hollywood would have us believe that this gun was used by everyone from riverboat gamblers to working girls. Paladin routinely produced one from behind his gunbelt buckle and John Wayne, as J. B. Books, had one alongside his wallet, so there is considerable justification for picturing the gun as what was used on the Frontier. Are we about to see a renaissance of interest in the stackbarrel handgun with modern calibers and materials?</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">I have no great insight for such a thing on the horizon, but I recall an all-steel derringer coming from a California distributor in the mid-80's. It had a DAO trigger system like the even earlier High-Standard .22 Win. Mag. gun, and was chambered for the.38 Spl. Several ammo manufacturers have developed short-barrel loads in popular pistol and revolver calibers. A modernized and lightweight (alloy? polymer?) twin-barrel gun in 9 mm Luger or the venerable .38 Spl. sure seems workable to me. It would not be competitive with revolvers or semi-autos, but it would be much easier to hide and carry. Most personal attacks involve a single attacker and our hypothetical little gun would get it done when used skillfully. Anyway you look at it, it's better than nothing, and it could be pretty inexpensive.<br /></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/little-guns#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/zeroing-the-gunFri, 02 Mar 2012 00:00:00 GMT<p><span style="font-size: small;">I overheard a gun store conversations the other day that set my mind to thinking about the process of getting all the shots into the center of the target. One guy was talking to an experienced gun salesman and complaining about the work of a well-known custom pistolsmith. The smith had done an accuracy job on a pistol by installing a premium barrel and meticulously fitting it to the frame and slide. </span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">The pistolsmith then fired the gun and adjusted the sights to center the group in the bullseye. Our customer was unhappy because the group wasn't centered when he (the customer) fired the gun and the group &ldquo;wasn't very tight.&rdquo; Since I knew the pistolsmith involved, I had to chuckle at this one.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">Nobody can zero your gun except you. Differences in human eyesight, grip, stance and breathing, among other factors can contribute to two different shooters using the same gun/ammo combination and getting the same sized group in two different places on the target. If the gun has a good accuracy potential and both shooters are of virtually equal skill, the difference in group location is probably not very large. </span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">So when the pistolsmith zeroed the gun, he did so for his eyesight and shooting style, not the customer's. If the group is not centered for the customer, it's up to him to use the sight screwdriver and adjust the point of impact appropriately. And if he can't shoot as good a group as the gunsmith, the he has no choice except to get the larger group centered over the desired point of impact and then practice to develop his marksmanship skill. In the process of doing so, that group may migrate around the target.&nbsp; <br /></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/zeroing-the-gun#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/rant-on-targetsMon, 27 Feb 2012 00:00:00 GMT<p><span style="font-size: small;">I live in the state of Nevada, a glorious place of open spaces and gun-friendly politicians. For a gun guy, you couldn't find a better place to live and work. Like all of the other states, Nevada does its best to maintain the streets and highways to be safe places for all Americans to use. That includes the signs that abound our roads, telling you where you are and other important things, like the distance to Las Vegas. Apparently, some citizens seem to feel that those signs are there for other reasons. Sadly some of these people have guns.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">A road sign is a road sign and it's the same in Wisconsin, Delaware, Georgia or Oklahoma. The signs are put there for the public good and paid for by public funds. Their function is obvious, so I can't for the life of me understand why some people want to use them for targets. There are lots of reasons why this is an illegal act. For one thing, these signs are placed by the Highway Department where there is a need and seldom where there is a safe backstop. Therefore, a shot fired at a sign may simultaneously establish marksmanship and idiocy. I noticed one the other day absolutely riddled with bullets, some of which looked like high-velocity rifle bullets. Straight behind the sign, at a distance of several miles was a small town.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">Lots of Nevada is marked &ldquo;Open Range&rdquo; by a big diamond-shaped bright yellow sign depicting a bull. These seem to be particularly attractive to the dummy with a .30-30 and little common sense. I know that this is only done by a minority of shooters, but this stupid practice gives gun ownership a very bad image in the eyes of those who want all of the guns.<br /></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/rant-on-targets#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/question-about-feedrampsFri, 17 Feb 2012 00:00:00 GMT<p><span style="font-size: small;">A reader e-mailed with a question about the use and actual shape of feed ramps in modern pistols. He had apparently witnessed a catastrophic failure in a popular brand off semi-automatic pistol chambered for the 9 mm Luger cartridge. From this, he had begun to believe that certain types of so-called &ldquo;unsupported&rdquo; feed ramps were inherently unsafe and the use of supported ones would eliminate failures of this type. First of all, the use of some kind of feed ramp is virtually required in all pistols for efficient operation, with some feed ramps integral to the barrel and others in the receiver. Some manufacturers even build a feed ramp into the magazine. I genuinely believe that no maker (and certainly not the one the reader had named) would ever offer a pistol for sale that had a dangerous design flaw. There is simply too much at stake. The design of a particular feed ramp is developed to achieve efficient operation and not to cut corners.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">In the same light, the reader's request for a listing of the type of feed ramps used in common pistols is beyond the research capabilities of this author. I would need one of all of them and I don't have them. As it turns out, the reader was concerned&mdash;and understandably so&mdash;about the use of handloaded ammunition in his guns. I used to be an avid handloader and wrote a number of articles on the subject. Unhappily, that is not something with which I am deeply involved with these days. However, I can recall the elaborate care that went into everything I did at the handloading bench, as well as when I was writing on the subject. </span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">It is possible to go out to my loading shop and assemble something that will immediately destroy a top-quality gun. This, however, would have to be an accident, because I have instituted careful checks and double-checks into my reloading practices. But, I have no control whatsoever over what you are doing, so I can only tell you to follow established practices described in every handloading manual ever printed.<br /></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/question-about-feedramps#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/twist-and-pullFri, 10 Feb 2012 00:00:00 GMT<p><span style="font-size: small;">Not long ago in this blog, I mentioned the <a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/merwin-hulbert-folding-hammer/" target="_blank">folding hammer</a> on the Merwin, Hulbert revolvers. In doing so, I noted the interesting twist and pull system of selective ejection used on these guns. Several readers wrote to ask about that feature. I'm happy to once again talk about one of my two favorite odd-ball firearms that really differ from the norm. Merwin, Hulbert revolvers were Frontier-era wheelguns and contemporaries of the Colt, S&amp;W and Remington big-bores that we all recognize.&nbsp; </span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">Made in three different frame sizes, Merwin, Hulberts (we'll call them just Merwins for brevity) were manufactured to a very high order of fit and finish. Had these guns not been such precision instruments, they would not have worked at all. That's because the ejection/extraction system was so finely fitted that close tolerances were essential. In a time when Colt made solid frame revolvers and S&amp;W made hinged frames, Merwins were made with what some authorities have called a &ldquo;jointed&rdquo; frame. This was necessary to make the system work. The gun consisted of three major assemblies, the first being a more-or-less typical cylinder with ratchet at the rear side. The main frame was a one-piece forging fitted with lockwork parts and a loading gate on the right side. Basically, this was the butt of the gun, as well as most of the frame. There was a cylinder axis fitted to the main frame. The third unit was the barrel, to include the top strap over the cylinder. Part of the barrel was a lug at the rear end, which engaged a recess in the frame. This happened at a point right under the rear sight. There was a similar joint at the lower front corner of the frame.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">It worked like this. The shooter loaded the gun through a slide-open loading gate at the rear end. After firing, he extracted the fired rounds in a manner that can be accomplished about a hundred times faster than I can describe it. Our Merwin shooter grasps the barrel of the gun with an overhand grip and thumb along the lower edge of the gun, just forward of the trigger guard. Pushing rearward with the thumb on the cylinder latch, he rotates the barrel 90 degrees clockwise and pulls the barrel/cylinder unit forward on its axis pin. An internal stop lug limits travel to just over the length of a fired case. The six rounds in the cylinder are held back by a ring, so the shooter essentially pulls the cylinder away from the cartridges. The fired cartridges fall away with a shake of the hand. Loaded rounds have their bullet ends in the chambers and remain in place. Thus, extraction is selective; only the fired rounds leave the gun. Reverse the sequence to close the action. </span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">The problem with the Merwin line is that it was prohibitively expensive in the long haul, some 50 to 60 percent more than its competitors. Collectors now appreciate the Merwin, Hulbert &amp; Co. revolvers for what they are&mdash;superb examples of American gunmaking.<br /></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/twist-and-pull#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/handgun-bottlenecksTue, 07 Feb 2012 00:00:00 GMT<p><span style="font-size: small;">When the automatic pistol was a fresh new concept, designers of that time faced the same problem that modern designers also face&mdash;feeding. Since the slide and breech face of a pistol are directly behind the chamber end of the barrel, the pistol magazine has to be below and behind the chamber. A round of ammunition must come off the top end of a magazine, slide up a feed ramp and enter the chamber. At the same time, the rear end of the cartridge must clear the magazine feed lips and pivot upwards so the rim slides under the hook of the extractor. It is a complex series of mechanical functions that must happen in sequence or a serious malfunction will ensue. Many things can go wrong and any of them constitute a bottleneck in the feeding cycle. Curiously enough, designers of yesteryear worked out those problem bottlenecks with the help of yet another bottleneck. This one, however, was in the cartridge, not the gun and it was a shape, not a problem.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">Virtually all of the first generation autos used a type of cartridge where the body of the round is larger than the mouth. That portion tapers down from the body in an angled step, which gets its name from its resemblance to the shape of a wine bottle. Most popular sporting and military rifle cartridges have this type of contour. When it all started with repeating pistols, gun designers used the bottlenecked shape because it helped the mechanism's feeding. The rear end of the chamber had to be big enough to accept the full, greater diameter of the cartridge, so having a smaller front end was like throwing a one-inch ball into a two-inch hole. The early pistols of Borchardt, Luger and Mauser all used bottlenecked cartridges.&nbsp; </span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">For decades, the standard Russian service pistol was the Tokarev, which fired a high-velocity bottleneck cartridge. The same round worked very well in several models of submachine guns. There are some internal ballistics advantages to a cartridge of this shape, but it is in the feeding that really made it easy for gun designers. For unknown reasons, American designers went with straight-sided cases like the .45 ACP, .380 Auto and .38 Super. It was not until the mid &lsquo;90s that a new bottleneck cartridge appeared on the American handgun scene. The .357 Sig was developed by SIG for their P series autos. Based on the popular .40 S&amp;W, this little fireplug of a round will run with the legendary .357 Mag., as long as you keep bullet weight the same at 125 grains. Best of all, it doesn't jam. I have over 6,000 rounds through my P226 and it has never jammed. That's impressive.</span></p> <p>&nbsp;</p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/handgun-bottlenecks#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/read-the-manualWed, 01 Feb 2012 00:00:00 GMT<p><span style="font-size: small;">I know that it is considered unmanly, but we are all going to have to accept the necessity for reading the little book that comes with our new firearms. Modern automatic pistols are examples of advanced design and engineering, but they are also different from the handguns of years ago. I can clearly remember a time when all readily available pistols had single-action triggers and manual safeties, high on the left side of the frame. The operating procedure was pretty much the same for the all. But then the GIs started coming back with souvenir P38s and PPKs in their dufflebags and everything began to change. For the first time, we had semi-auto pistols with both DA and SA triggers in the same gun. It was all in the name of progress, but it could be confusing.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">Worse yet, some makers felt the need to work a decocker into the safety system of their DA/SA pistols.&nbsp;With some the safety turned&nbsp;up, while&nbsp;other models needed it to&nbsp;turned down. For a long time, <a href="http://www.sigsauer.com/" target="_blank">SIG Sauer</a> made every single pistol of any size, shape or caliber with the same kind of logical, easily learned system&mdash;DA/SA, decocker, no safety. Then, starting in the early &lsquo;80s, we saw a flood of new guns pouring into the country from Europe, Brazil and China. These guns worked on many different systems. The <a title="Glock created one of the first DAO pistols. " href="http://us.glock.com/" target="_blank">GLOCK</a> came&nbsp; out around '85 and nothing has been the same since. The GLOCK started with an ultra-simple Safe Action and never changed. Others were quick to imitate, but never quite equaled that successful Austrian import. We presently have makers with thick catalogs that show a myriad of pistols with radically different operating systems.&nbsp; </span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">I recently had an embarrassing experience with a pistol that I couldn't make fire. It took a long time for me to figure out that I didn't understand how it worked, because I did not read the manual. I therefore advise all readers to stop before they shoot and read the danged manual.<br /></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/read-the-manual#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/national-shooters-leagueMon, 23 Jan 2012 00:00:00 GMT<p><span style="font-size: small;">There are several games in which shooters can compete with handguns. There's the bullseye game for pure marksmen, PPC for policemen and IHMSA for long-range fanatics. Defensive shooters like to hone their skills with <a href="http://www.idpa.com/" target="_blank">IDPA</a> or IPSC, while Frontiersmen prefer <a href="http://www.sassnet.com/" target="_blank">SASS</a> and its derivatives. I encourage all handgunners to try their hand at some form of competition because&nbsp;it teaches you about your ability to shoot under pressure, and that's very important. Plus, the atmosphere surrounding a match is great, particularly in the exchange of ideas, techniques and the like. It is indeed unfortunate that certain people always&nbsp;look for ways to get an edge, usually by shading the rules, if not actually breaking them. However, once there was a game that kept shooters from breaking the rules by severely restricting the number of rules in force.&nbsp; </span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">The game was called the NSL (National Shooters League) and it was fired on a rural range near Laramie, Wyo. Developed by a devoted sportsman and shooter named Robert Burgess, the match involved shooting from varied distances at very small (fist-sized) targets. The shooter fired two shots at each of ten targets and was required to run from one shooting point to the next, a total of 216 yards, in less than 3 &frac12; minutes. If that was not enough, the course was laid out on the&nbsp;rough, up-and-down rolling country of Burgess' ranch. Targets were placed from 16 to 60 yards away. The course was not linear, but more like a miniature golf course, with shots angling both uphill and down, while presenting different conditions of light and shadow. Finally, the paper target was devilishly designed in sort of a tombstone shape with narrow 9 and 10 rings around an inner X zone. Anything else was scored a miss and, yes, your total time was factored in.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">What did this do? It placed a premium on athleticism, physical condition, pure marksmanship skill, intimate knowledge of your gun and ammo and keeping your wits about you. The layout of the course and targets favored large caliber guns with flat trajectories. PPC-like revolvers in big calibers, loaded for flat trajectory were seen, but most shooters went for autos for the faster reloading. It was tough, but in the late 70s, a guy who could beat the rest walked away with five grand in cash.You could buy many different kinds of cars for that much money in 1977.&nbsp;In the long run, the match fell from favor and was canceled after a few years. I never heard the detailed explanation, but I would hazard a guess as to why this happened. </span><span style="font-size: small;">It was just too dang hard.<br /></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/national-shooters-league#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/semi-auto-or-autoWed, 11 Jan 2012 00:00:00 GMT<p><span style="font-size: small;">A reader responded to a blog with his concerns over proper use of the terms &ldquo;automatic&rdquo; and &ldquo;semi-automatic.&rdquo; In terms of describing the type of action used in many magazine-fed firearms, automatic means continuous fire as long as the trigger is depressed and ammo is available in the gun. Semi-automatic means one shot for each trigger press and reset.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">However, early literature uses automatic as describing a gun that not only fires when you press the trigger, but also reloads its own chamber. It came into common parlance in that sense around the time when we needed to differentiate between handguns with cylinders and those with magazines.&nbsp; </span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">I see no reason why we shouldn't describe the Model 1911 as an automatic pistol. After all, it is chambered for the .45 ACP (Automatic Colt Pistol) cartridge, not the .45 SACP (Semi-Automatic Colt Pistol).&nbsp; <br /></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/semi-auto-or-auto#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/yesterdays-judgeMon, 09 Jan 2012 00:00:00 GMT<p><span style="font-size: small;">Taurus hit a real home run with the <a title="The Judge Rules" href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/ArticlePage.aspx?id=1526&amp;cid=26" target="_blank">Judge revolver</a>. Inside a few years, Taurus has sold tens of thousands of the guns which had all three of our major ammunition manufacturers creating special Judge loads. The idea of a special cartridge-firing revolver in .45 Colt with an extended cylinder that can take .410 shotgun shells apparently touched something very deep in the American shooter. Mostly, I think folks are seeing the Judge revolver as a multiple-projectile shooter, although I have no hard data to support this belief. Americans have always liked multi-function guns going back as far as the Revolutionary War, when George Washington 's soldiers sometimes used buck-and-ball loads in their muskets. </span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">The whole concept of a handgun with shotgun versatility is appealing to the combat shooter. It is not, however, particularly new. During the American Civil War, the first metallic cartridge firearms came into wide use. Still, most combatants in that bloody conflict were armed with cap lock (cap and ball) firearms. One of these was set up as a handgun for both a single projectile and shot. Sometimes called the Grapeshot Revolver, the gun was invented by Dr. Jean LeMat of New Orleans. Just under 3,000 were made during the Civil War period and all of them went to the Confederate Army. They were used by many famous soldiers including J.E.B. Stuart.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">The <a title="I Have This Old Gun" href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/videos/lemat-revolver/" target="_blank">LeMat revolver</a> was unique. It was a nine-shot revolver of either .36 or .44 caliber, depending on the model. It also had a large diameter axle for that cylinder. The axle was a 16-bore shotgun barrel, closed at the rear end and fitted with a nipple. A two-position nose on the hammer allowed the shooter to choose firing the center shotgun barrel or one of the nine chambers in the cylinder. In its short lifetime, the LeMat went through several makers and caliber variations. Since there were only a few of them in existence, they were not widely used. But they wound up in some famous hands and achieved a deadly reputation well beyond their actual impact on the war. The Judge is too new to have created a documented history, but I am guessing it will be a trendsetters.<br /></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/yesterdays-judge#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/long-legged-handgun-cartridgesThu, 22 Dec 2011 00:00:00 GMT<p><span style="font-size: small;">It is really amazing how many cartridges have long service lives. During this centennial year of the great .45 ACP cartridge (and the gun that shoots it), we remember a full century of service for this legendary problem-solver. Students of the .45 know that the basic idea is more than 100 years old, since Colt made early relatives of the <a title="Articles on the 1911 handgun. " href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/Search.aspx?query=1911" target="_blank">1911</a> as far back as 1905. The desirable ballistics of a big, slow-moving .45 slug for military service goes back as far as 1875 with the .45 Schofield round and 1873 for the .45 Colt. That turn of the century era was fertile time for ammunition designers. We saw the .38 Spl. introduced in 1898, the 9 mm Luger in 1904 and the .44 Spl. in 1907. The .38 Spl. became the top police cartridge of the 20th century in America. It also was the basis for .the famous .357 Mag., which ushered in the Magnum handgun era.&nbsp; </span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">The 9 mm has been by called many different names, but it went on to world-wide success as a military service cartridge, not only in countless handguns, but also in numerous submachine guns. In the 1970s, concern over low cartridge capacity in police revolvers drove the cops to semi-automatics and the 9 mm became the standard police round by default. Presently, it has become the most popular police and civilian defense cartridge, because of its great adaptability to small autos. Looking at the considerable range of fine 9 mms on today's market, it's easy to forget that the round got its start with the beautifully made Luger pistol more than a century ago.&nbsp; </span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">Elmer Keith's favorite .44 Spl. enjoyed limited success as a field cartridge, primarily as a handload in thousands of home ammo factories across the country. But it was the foundation for the enormously successful .44 Mag. of the 1950s. We are now seeing a resurgence of interest in the medium bore pistol&mdash;.40, 10mm, .41&mdash;but only the .40 S&amp;W shows much sign of having a future. It seems like the most long-winded cartridge ideas date to that turn-of-the-century era.&nbsp; </span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">Except for one that one started much earlier&mdash;the <a title="The history of the .22 rimfire is fascinating. " href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/articles/Impossible-22-rimfire/" target="_blank">.22 rimfire</a>. The earliest was the Short and that one dates back to 1857. It was followed by the .22 Long, which was first used in 1871 and then by the .22 Long Rifle, which first made its familiar craack in 1887. It is nothing less than amazing that the oldest metallic cartridge is the rimfire .22, which is alive and doing well, with no signs of slowing down.<br /></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/long-legged-handgun-cartridges#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/baughman-ramp-front-sightThu, 15 Dec 2011 00:00:00 GMT<p><span style="font-size: small;">The Baughman front sight was created on special order for a senior agent and firearms expert for the <a href="http://www.fbi.gov/" target="_blank">FBI</a>. Frank Baughman was well-known in the Bureau as a close confidant of J. Edgar Hoover in the tumultuous time before World War II. </span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">It was in this time that <a href="http://www.smith-wesson.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/CustomContentDisplay?langId=-1&amp;storeId=750001&amp;catalogId=750051&amp;content=11001" target="_blank">Smith &amp; Wesson</a> introduced the legendary Registered Magnum revolver, along with the new .357 Mag. cartridge. Baughman must have had some practical experience with combat shooting, training and equipment, because nothing makes as much sense as the ramp front sight that bears his name. He asked the S&amp;W factory to build his registered Magnum with this new feature. Essentially, the sight is a long, rearward-sloping ramp that presents a square post when viewed from the rear. Its advantage is in the slick way that the gun may be holstered and drawn. There is no sharp edge or corner to catch on flexible leather when the shooter executes a fast draw.&nbsp; </span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">Smith &amp; Wesson liked the idea well enough that they used it on hundreds of thousands of K- and N-frame revolvers, as well as on some adjustable-sight J frames. And when the L frames made their appearance, the trusty Baughman was right there. I consulted with a known authority on S&amp;Ws on this next point and we pretty much agree. It is not widely appreciated, but the Baughman ramp was the first ramp-type front sight to be used on a production revolver, and it is still in use today.<br /></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/baughman-ramp-front-sight#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/decockers-and-safetiesWed, 14 Dec 2011 00:00:00 GMT<p><span style="font-size: small;">For as long as automatic pistols have been in existence, designers have come up with many different ways to make them work. And by &ldquo;work,&rdquo; I mean handle or operate. Another term that I have often used is lockwork, which is the functional relationship between the various components of the action&mdash;hammer, trigger, sear, etc. Basically, we are talking about a series of hand motions or manipulations that make the gun shoot, reload and return to a safe, carrying condition. When it all started, the guns were almost always pure single-action, where the hammer was cocked by the movement of a recoiling slide, then released to fire by a crisp single-action trigger. Since the hammer was cocked, the designers usually provided a manual safety. This is the system used on the enduring Model 1911 and the one preferred by many professionally trained pistoleros.&nbsp; </span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">But another system came along in shortly before World War II, and grew to considerable prominence in the 1960s. This one used a trigger-cocking (double-action) pull for the first shot, after which the recoiling slide cocked the hammer for following shots in single-action. Invariably, there was a lever on the gun that permitted the shooter to safely lower a cocked hammer. Most of these guns also incorporated a safety function into this lever. At this point, the tactical logic of the system began to dissolve. If the basic purpose of the DA/SA system was to provide a safe, revolver-like means of carrying the pistol, why does it need something that revolvers don&rsquo;t have? </span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">A better means of making the DA/SA auto work is the one pioneered by <a href="http://www.sigsauer.com/" target="_blank">SIG Sauer</a>. In this system, the gun has a lever that serves only to decock the handgun. Better yet, it's mounted on the frame, right under the shooter's thumb. If the need to decock comes along, a quick downward flip of the lever drops the hammer and returns the pistol to the carry mode. The lever automatically snaps back to the up position. It is a safe and simple way to use a pistol as a tactical firearm. I have personally run through a number of Gunsite and Thunder Ranch courses with a <a title="22 Conversion Kit" href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/ArticlePage.aspx?id=2252&amp;cid=19" target="_blank">SIG P226</a> and strongly endorse the system. As things continue to evolve, we are seeing a number of newer semi-auto pistol designs that use some form of DAO trigger. These can be very workable, as evidenced by the success of the Glock system, but they give up that sweet, single-action pull that comes with SA and DA/SA designs.</span></p> <p>&nbsp;</p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/decockers-and-safeties#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/round-butts-and-squareWed, 07 Dec 2011 00:00:00 GMT<p><span style="font-size: small;">Older revolver catalogs used to list two basic butt shapes for their products&mdash;round and square.&nbsp;This actually meant slightly different things in the literature of the two big pre-World War II gunmakers&mdash;Colt and S&amp;W. </span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">For Colt users, round butts involved a light rounding of the lower corner of the revolver butt, front and back. Smith &amp; Wesson's use of the term involved rounding the corners and slimming the back strap. </span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">Further, the Springfield product enjoyed a slenderizing of the front strap, so much so that you needed a different length mainspring screw on the two different K-frame guns. </span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">Just thought this might be interesting to a few. </span></p> <p>&nbsp;</p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/round-butts-and-square#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/bouncing-targetsTue, 06 Dec 2011 00:00:00 GMT<p><span style="font-size: small;">Handgunners in search of a new target for informal plinking and impromptu competitions need to take a look at a new device I recently found. Made by a company called <a href="http://www.do-alltraps.com/" target="_blank">Do-All Outdoors</a>, this new target is known as a bouncing ground target. </span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">It comes in four variations&mdash;ribbed ball, cube, top hat and solid ball&mdash;each of which is made of bright orange plastic. The material is said to heal behind a bullet's path and my two samples do seem to be holding up pretty well. The idea is to throw the target well forward of the firing line, then shoot the target in an effort to make it bounce. Since the surfaces are irregular, it's hard to predict what trajectory the target will take when hit. It seems to be almost impossible to drive one straight back. I tried.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">This idea of a reactive target that hops, skips and jumps around presents a great many possibilities for shooting fun. How about setting the target at 20 yards and timing how long it takes to drive it to the 50 yard line? Or put out a pair for two shooters, who then race to the finish line. If you bounce your target up in the air and hit it again before it touches the ground, you get bonus points. The possibilities are seemingly endless.&nbsp; </span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">The maker's website claims that the targets will take up to a thousand hits. Mine have nowhere near that total, but seem to be holding up very well. Naturally, the longevity of the target depends on the caliber. Big magnums beat up the plastic more than .22 shorts. Also, you are shooting at a target on the ground. If the ground is hard, you are going to get ricochets. Be very careful that you are not bouncing bullets out of the range. As always, you are responsible for everything that happens when you press that trigger.&nbsp; <br /></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/bouncing-targets#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/handloadingTue, 29 Nov 2011 00:00:00 GMT<p><span style="font-size: small;">People approach handloading from different perspectives. When I was moving every few years in the service, handloading just didn't seem to be practical. Things eventually evolved to where I had the time and space for a good loading shop. My approach may be unusual, but I was so intrigued with the game that I dived headfirst into it by selling a minty Colt Single Action .44 Spl. for enough money to buy every single piece of equipment I thought I might need, along with die sets for every major pistol caliber. While most people piecemeal themselves into the game, yours truly did it all at once.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">I did a great deal of research before I got started, which really paid off. I still use every piece from my first <a href="http://www.rcbs.com/" target="_blank">RCBS</a> outfit, and my 30-plus-year old Rockchucker is still down at the far right end of the loading bench. My primary interest was developing the best possible load for every gun I owned.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">I know that this approach might be a little unusual, but it is far from unique. Many shooters try reloading as a matter of economy. Usually, that's because they are into a sport like action shooting or cowboy matches and they just can't afford the practice and match ammo off gun store shelves. This approach was the original goal of high volume. Thus, the handloader who rolled his own 148-grain LWC .38 Spl. rounds for bullseye matches may have transitioned to 147-grain 9 mms for the IPSC game. Some sports place a greater emphasis on consistently accurate ammunition, as with the NRA Outdoor Pistol matches. In this regard, one of the biggest challenges a reloader can face is the International Handgun Metallic Silhouette Association. In this sport, men and women shoot steel silhouettes of game animals at 50, 100, 150 and 200 meters. Considering the distance, the guns (and loads) have to be accurate, but since the targets are also heavy, the ammo has to be powerful enough to tumble the targets from their posts. Even the weather seems to be against the IHMSA shooter, where some ranges have powerful crosswinds and a few have tailwinds that tend to keep the silhouettes in place, even when hit.&nbsp; </span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">When you get right down to it, I suspect that unless you are a subsidized member of a police or military team, you are probably loading your own ammo in order to compete. In the absence of formal training on handloading, I would suggest that you find a friend who is into it and get some advice.&nbsp; That's what I did and Knobby Walsh set me out on a path that lead to many days of fun shooting with handloads. <br /></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/handloading#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/the-use-of-chronographsFri, 18 Nov 2011 00:00:00 GMT<p><span style="font-size: small;">For over three decades, I have had the good fortune of shooting for a living. Actually I have been writing for a living, but I had to shoot in order to have something to write about. And for almost every one of those shooting sessions, I've relied on a chronograph to measure the velocity of the various loads from guns as I fired them. Although I have used most brands of chronographs from time to time, my preference has been the Oehler and Millenium brands. I mention this because I believe that a chronograph is necessary to properly evaluate ammunition and firearms. </span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">Chronographs do more than measure the instrumental velocity of a bullet passing between the machine's start and stop screens. The mini-computer inside that little box can do a number of things, but let's stick with the systematic analysis of a sequence of velocities. In a string of 10 shots, the machine can tell you which was the fastest and the slowest, along with the difference between the two and the average velocity. But it also can tell you something called the &ldquo;standard deviation&rdquo; of velocities. But, what's that?</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">It is a statistician's index of consistency. It is a bit of an oversimplification to say it, but standard deviation (SD) is the average variation from the average score. Let's say you have two loads that each average 1,000 fps for 10 rounds. One of them has an SD of 10, the other is 20. That happens because the latter had several rounds that varied farther from the 1,000 fps norm than did the SD 10 load. In other words, the latter was less consistent. More consistency means more nearly similar paths down range and therefore, better accuracy.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">I will never forget the day when I was trying a new gun from a major maker, shooting the one load that was available for it. Although both gun and ammo bore famous trademarks, the accuracy was deplorable. I was in a hurry that day and did not take the time to set up the chronograph, which was a big mistake. The shots were up and down the target at 25 yards, about 8 inches between the highest and lowest. I somehow jumped to the conclusion that the 1911-type pistol was not fitted correctly and was going into battery in a very inconsistent manner. I said so in print, which was a bigger mistake. </span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">Had I used the chronograph, which I did in a second session, I would have seen that the extreme spread of velocities was well over 300 fps and the SD was right at 100. This much extreme spread invariably produces vertical stringing on the target. Good commercial ammo SDs are usually around 15 to 20 fps and often in single digits. It was a crappy lot of ammo and I was one embarrassed young gun writer who had to apologize&mdash;in print.<br /></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/the-use-of-chronographs#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/new-york-reloadTue, 15 Nov 2011 00:00:00 GMT<p><span style="font-size: small;">I got a question the other day at the gun store counter. A fellow customer wanted to know about a &ldquo;New York reload.&rdquo; That's an easy one and another of those elusive terms that surround the lore of guns and shooting. A <a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/why-a-back-up/" target="_blank">New York reload</a> is another gun. </span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">Although many autoloaders can be reloaded very quickly, nothing is quite as fast as dropping an empty or near-empty gun and drawing another one, fully loaded and ready to go. It's a little more fuss and discomfort to carry two pistols, but it can be done (I've done it). </span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">If there was a serious possibility of getting into a gunfight in the course of your duties, I wouldn't hesitate for a minute. I have no idea where the term came from, but I suspect it was somewhere on the Eastern seaboard.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; <br /></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/new-york-reload#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/a-blowback-9mmMon, 07 Nov 2011 00:00:00 GMT<p><span style="font-size: small;">There are two basic types of automatic pistol mechanisms, known as actions. One is the blowback; while the other is known as recoil operated. Both accomplish the same thing: The breech is held closed until the bullet exits the muzzle before using the residual energy to extract and eject the spent case, load another cartridge and close the breech. </span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">A blowback system is simpler, easier to manufacture and usually more compact.&nbsp; A recoil-operated system uses some form of mechanical lock&mdash;over-center toggle, rotating barrel, pivoting block or tilting barrel&mdash;to lock the barrel and slide together until the bullet exits the muzzle and pressure drops.&nbsp; </span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">For many years, the blowback type used a rather heavy slide and strong spring to do this, while the recoil-operated guns used one of the mentioned locks. It was customary for pistols of .380 and smaller to be blowback, with guns chambered for 9 mm Luger and larger to be recoil-operated guns. The 9 mm was a de facto dividing line and there were no exceptions. In the interest of building a smaller and more easily concealable gun of greater power, several firms tried to make a blowback 9 mm. Walther tried twice, so did Astra and the most recent effort was the S&amp;W SW9. All of these guns were plain failures. So, is it possible to make a blowback 9 mm?</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">Of course it is.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">And it has been done quite successfully. Consider the innovative Heckler &amp; Koch VP70. Among other distinctions, the gun had a polymer-covered steel receiver, brilliantly designed sights, rugged trigger mechanism and blowback operation. But the resulting gun was so big that it could not realistically fulfill any normal pistol role and fell into some gray area between service pistol and submachine gun.&nbsp; This is true of several other firearms that ended up being oddities and not widely distributed firearms.&nbsp; </span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">The irony of this situation lies in the modern designer's discovery that you can make a very small .380 pistol&mdash;if you use a recoil-operated breech locking system.<br /></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/a-blowback-9mm#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/sitting-down-with-beginnersTue, 01 Nov 2011 00:00:00 GMT<p><span style="font-size: small;">Handguns can be intimidating to a complete beginner trying to get over the fear of injury that comes with handling what can be a deadly tool. After teaching him or her <a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/articles/fundamentals-handgun-shooting/" target="_blank">The Fundamental Rules of Gun Safety</a>, it becomes time for the student to learn the operating drill for the particular handgun with which he or she will begin the training cycle. In my opinion, it is&nbsp;unwise to present a new shooter with more than one gun at a time. Ideally, the first gun should be a DA/SA revolver, but that is not always possible. Whatever the selected handgun is, make sure the beginner has a thorough understanding of how the gun works. Then you can move on to using the gun to its full potential.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">The business of teaching marksmanship is complex, with many manuals and books written on the subject. For the most part, however, experts agree on the basic principles with the most important being sight alignment, followed closely by trigger control. I have taught these skills to a lot of folks, but never thought of a particular teaching technique until I saw an instructional video a few years ago. It was radical stuff, but it really works.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">Try beginning handgun training with the student in a seated position. That's right&mdash;seated in a chair at a table or bench. The shooter is comfortable, can relax and you can sit behind or slightly to the side. The close proximity of the instructor in this kind of one-on-one situation facilitates communication. For this, you will&nbsp;need sandbags or a sturdy box to use as a rest. The shooter rests elbows and forearms on the bench and holds the handgun in both hands on the sandbags. Then, you talk the student through those first few shots. This technique has one minor and one major advantage for both students and instructors.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">The major advantage is concerned with safety. Inexperienced handgunners often cannot resist the impulse to turn around when they have a question. With a gun in a hand, this is a dangerous practice. But it is far less likely to happen when the shooter is seated with both feet flat on the ground.&nbsp;The minor advantage to this sitting approach is the increased steadiness. Despite all the quiet reassurance that the gun will settle down and quit wobbling all over as he tries to aim it, a new shooter has an unfamiliar struggle to aim and squeeze at the same time. It is frustrating in the extreme. By using a seated, resting position, the gun can be held more steady making it easier to aim. The budding handgunner therefore has nothing to do but align the sights and work the trigger. It is a temporary solution, but it results in increased confidence. The shooter sees tighter groups on the target and becomes aware of what can be done. <br /></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/sitting-down-with-beginners#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/s-w-big-44Fri, 21 Oct 2011 00:00:00 GMT<p><span style="font-size: small;">Developed in 1954 and '55 and announced in January of 1956, <a href="http://www.smith-wesson.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/Product4_750001_750051_766385_-1_757770_757767_757751_ProductDisplayErrorView_Y" target="_blank">Smith &amp; Wesson's .44 Mag.</a> has been a consistent favorite of the shooting public for over half a century. It came some 20 years after the company's first Magnum revolver&mdash;the .357. This earlier gun and cartridge were enormous trend-setters and got American handgunners thinking about really powerful revolvers because the added power offered two major advantages. The first was increased practical range, while the second advantage was plain smashing power that could harvest the largest game animals at closer ranges. The .357 did all of these things, but it was the .44 Mag. that took hold of the American consciousness and never let go. It was a bread and butter gun for the Massachusetts firm, with a little help from Clint Eastwood's Dirty Harry.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">Over the 50-plus years they have made .44 Mags. (called Model 29s after 1957), we have seen these guns in many forms. At first all we had was blue 4- and 6 &frac12;-inch versions, after which they added 8 3/8-inch guns, nickel-finishes, a handful of the exceptionally rare 5-inch models, Lew Horton 3-inchers and even stainless steel. In the late 80s, <a href="http://www.smith-wesson.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/CustomContentDisplay?catalogId=750051&amp;content=11001&amp;langId=-1&amp;storeId=750001" target="_blank">Smith &amp; Wesson</a> came out with heavy-barreled .44s with a new underlug and improved accuracy. Around this time, the Performance Center was created, which put a new spin on the 29 and 629. When scandium came along, the company's engineers applied themselves and produced a lightweight .44 Mag., which was the hardest-kicking, nastiest handgun of any kind I have ever fired. With real Magnum ammo, it takes the discipline of a Marine fresh out of boot camp to finish a cylinder of six rounds. I would venture a rough guess of somewhere between 50 and a 100 distinct variations of the .44 Mag. have been made.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">As a gunwriter specializing in pistols and revolvers, I have had the incredible good fortune&mdash;and the cooperation of Smith &amp; Wesson, Inc.&mdash;to have received samples of many of these variations for shooting evaluation and writeup. Heck, I once had seven samples of the 7 1/2- inch Classic DX after somebody complained to my editor that I was getting cherry picked samples. I collected seven guns from all over the country and shot them all in the same multi-load protocol. There was about 3/8-inch difference in average 6-shot group size. On maybe two dozen occasions, I have headed for the range with a new S&amp;W .44 Mag., a big box of assorted loads, Oehler chronograph and a Ransom Rest. I have never had one that was plainly inaccurate and there have been many that would shoot one-hole groups with several loads, going twice around the cylinder for twelve rounds. But the one gun that is my odds-on favorite is a Classic DX with the 5-inch barrel option. This one came along some 20 years back.&nbsp; It isn't the most accurate .44 I have ever fired, but it is very smooth on the trigger, rides easy in several different Milt Sparks and Lawrence holsters and will deliver one hole groups with three or four loads.&nbsp; Its handiness, balance, sight interchangeability and accuracy, along with a set of Herrett's Jordan Trooper stocks make for a hell of a fine field revolver and that's why I kept it.<br /></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/s-w-big-44#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/colts-new-serviceFri, 14 Oct 2011 00:00:00 GMT<p><span style="font-size: small;">For the first half of the 20th Century, one of the bread and butter mainstays of the revolver line was the New Service.&nbsp; A double-action sixgun of generous size, the New Service was big enough to take all of the big cartridges of the day&mdash;.476 Eley, .455, .45 Colt, .44-40, etc.&mdash;as well as .38 Spl. and other milder calibers. Made from just before the turn of the century until the beginning of World War II, the New Service was used primarily by police and military personnel. Variations included adjustable-sighte &ldquo;Target&rdquo; models, as well as the legendary Shooting Master of the 1930s. The gun's greatest use was in World War I, when the government bought a total of 151,800 5 1/2-inch barreled 1917s, all chambered for the .45 ACP cartridge. That was the most numerous variation of the many New Service models. It is a big, rugged gun that could (and often did) take a lot of abuse. But, for reasons I have never understood, the New Service has never drawn the same interest as other contemporary handguns.&nbsp;</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">Happily enough, that seems to be changing. In the big collector auctions around the country, the prices for cherry specimens are beginning to climb significantly. Another gauge of collector interest is a new book published by Collector Grade Publications. Timothy Mullin, author of several excellent gun books, has focused his considerable skill and wide experience on doing a full book on the grand old gun. The result is &ldquo;Colt's New Service Revolver.&rdquo; A large format volume with multiple illustrations, the book is the most thoroughly researched effort to tell the New Service story. The many variations are covered, as are the details of dimensions and markings that give the advanced collector a case of the vapors.&nbsp;</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">Reading the book, I am struck with the author's obvious effort to have his audience appreciate the gun as a cultural artifact. Having once published a very detailed account of the New Service by the late Chuck Karwan, I am impressed by Mullin's warm good humor over the rough-and-ready revolver that armed doughboys, Border Patrolmen and other pistoleros who used enough gun.&nbsp;&nbsp;</span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/colts-new-service#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/smith-wesson-model-12Wed, 05 Oct 2011 00:00:00 GMT<p><span style="font-size: small;">There was a 1950s-era trend in American handgun making that is still alive and even growing. It received its start because post-war handgunners suddenly awakened to the fact that handguns were really heavy to carry. </span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">At this time, there was little if any use of light materials in gunmaking. But the circumstances of World War II, as well as increased interest in aviation and its related equipment, combined with police and civilian interest in lighter armament started the ball rolling. </span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">The military voiced an interest in lighter firearms for aviators and gunmakers responded. In Hartford, Colt started a huge trend with the aluminum framed Commander pistol and Cobra revolver. <a href="http://www.smith-wesson.com/index.html" target="_blank">Smith &amp; Wesson</a> started with a light snub-nosed revolver on its newly-developed &ldquo;J&rdquo; frame and followed several years later with a revolutionary auto with the Model 39 in 9 mm. These guns were alike in one major particular way&mdash;each was made with a frame or receiver made of aluminum. Guns made in this fashion were 30 percent lighter.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">One such gun was the seldom-seen Smith &amp; Wesson Model 12 revolver. Guns numbered in the teens were all made on the firm's durable &ldquo;K&rdquo; frame. Essentially, the Model 12 was identical to the famous Military &amp; Police Model 10, with the exception that the frame was made of a strong aluminum alloy and that frame was .08-inch thinner. Made as a 2-inch round butt and 4-inch square butt, with the buyer's choice of blue or nickel finish, the Model 12 weighed 14.5 ounces in a 2-inch configuration. At the very beginning of production, the Model 12s were fitted with aluminum cylinders, but these quickly proved to be inadequate for use with many kinds of ammunition and were recalled. The Model 12 went through the same series of engineering changes as most K frames in its rather long life span. It's possible to find the gun with no model number in the yoke recess, and then later marked as Model 12 all the way through Mod 12-4. The last engineering change made the frame the same thickness as Model 10 M&amp;Ps.&nbsp; </span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">For reasons I don't completely understand, the Model 12 never really caught on. Part of it may be attributed to the well-known failure of the Airmans&rsquo; revolver project, which used an early aluminum cylinder that did not work with hot GI ammo. The lightweight, six-shot .38 Spl. was made from 1952 to 1986, but is seldom seen on used gun shelves. I found one in the gun case at Mark, Fore and Strike, a Reno gun emporium. It is in new condition and now lives in my personal collection.<br /></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/smith-wesson-model-12#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/fast-draw-holstersTue, 27 Sep 2011 00:00:00 GMT<p><span style="font-size: small;">Latter day students of gunfighters and their gear probably know about the Tom Threepersons holster as currently made by <a href="http://www.epsaddlery.com/c-12-classic-carry.aspx" target="_blank">El Paso Saddlery</a> and other custom makers. That rig is named for a legendary peace officer of the early 20th Century. There is some confusion surrounding him because of the fact that another famous westerner wore the same (almost) name. Threepersons was born in the Indian Nations in July of 1889. A Cherokee Indian, Tom grew up on the reservation and was educated in Indian schools and at the Carlisle Institute in Pennsylvania. Early in his adult life, Tom became a well-known and successful rodeo cowboy in the Pacific Northwest. I suspect that this is where things might have started getting confusing for latter-day researchers. Another young man named Tom Three Persons (note different spelling) was born in March 1888 in Alberta, Canada, and grew to adulthood as a cowboy and competition horseman. He also competed in rodeos and the great similarity in their names and early careers may have contributed to the confusion as to who did what. It is certain that Three Persons spent his life as stockman, while Threepersons became a lawman.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">Tom Threepersons worked as a peace officer in many locales during his life, but most of the time he was near the Border, particularly in New Mexico and Texas. A proficient tracker and man hunter, he was involved in many shootouts. Some accounts even have him responsible for a hard-to-believe total of as many as 60 deaths. After a few days of research, I am convinced that he was in fact a determined lawman who was extraordinarily adept with firearms.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">In this regard, his greatest legacy may be the Tom Threepersons holster. Still made by El Paso Saddlery, this rig is a minimalist holster primarily associated with medium and large revolvers. It rides high on the belt, the very antithesis of the low slung scabbards that Hollywood would have us believe were used on the frontier. In fact, before the Tom Threepersons became available, the typical western holster was an almost shapeless leather pouch that engulfed the gun. Its major function was retaining the revolver on the person of a man engaged in some pretty athletic work. Speedy deployment of a gun was a gunfighter tactic and most believed you should get the damned thing in your hand before it's needed. Threepersons was visionary enough to see that the time was coming that a pistolero might actually need the gun with no warning. He exposed all of the butt, plus the trigger and hammer, but left the rest of the gun in a tight-fitting sheath that would retain it in the same position.&nbsp; In effect, that old Tom Threepersons design was the first real-world, fast-draw holster.<br /></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/fast-draw-holsters#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/sammi-and-plus-p-ammoThu, 22 Sep 2011 00:00:00 GMT<p><span style="font-size: small;"><a href="http://www.saami.org/" target="_blank">SAAMI</a> stands for Small Arms Ammunition Manufacturer's Institute.&nbsp; It is an organization in which member companies establish standards for the production of all types of commercial ammunition. This includes the actual dimensions of a given round&mdash;width, length, case wall thickness, etc&mdash;as well as the pressure level to which it is loaded. When the SAAMI member companies agree to these yardsticks, gunmakers may proceed with building guns that can comfortably accept SAAMI-standard ammunition.&nbsp; Although handloading is an active and widely practiced adjunct to the shooting sports, no gunmaker will ever warrantee his gun when it is used with handloads. That's because they cannot exert any control over the way the ammo was loaded or what components were used. With virtually all commercial ammunition sold in America loaded by SAAMI members, the shooting public can proceed with their sport in relative safety. It is an excellent example of an industry regulating itself.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">In the case of a few cartridges, the need for greater performance has driven SAAMI to create a so-called &ldquo;+P&rdquo; level of pressure. This simply means that the ammunition is loaded to a slightly higher pressure and is safe to use in guns rated by their makers to be strong enough to handle it. Some shooters are insistent on squeezing every last bit of velocity out of their hardware and this +P business is a controlled and safe way to get it done. But only a few cartridges have a +P standard and printing that mark on a box of hot-loaded cartridges of another type just won't do.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">I have heard that .45 Colt ammunition loaded to high velocity and marked +P is available from several makers. The .45 Colt is an elderly cartridge, probably our longest-serving handgun round. Originally designed for use with black powder, the cavernous .45 Colt case will accept large charges of smokeless, which can destroy older revolvers. As loaded by SAMMI standards, .45 Colt ammo is on the mild side.&nbsp; Yes, I am aware that there are much stronger .45 Colt guns on the market, and some will take a great deal more pressure. But if higher pressure ammo finds its way into older guns, you have a recipe for accelerated wear and possibly&nbsp;disaster.&nbsp;That's why there is no SAAMI standard for .45 Colt +P.<br /></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/sammi-and-plus-p-ammo#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/magnum-autos-revisitedWed, 14 Sep 2011 00:00:00 GMT<p><span style="font-size: small;">When I took up the subject of a <a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/magnum-autos/" target="_blank">magnum semi-automatic pistol</a> a while back, I must have failed in my efforts to get one point firmly established. The only way to create an automatic pistol that provides the same kind of performance as the magnum revolvers is to build a bigger auto.&nbsp;This has been done with the Coonan, <a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/articles/desert-eagle-50-review/" target="_blank">Desert Eagle</a>, Wildey and Grizzly pistols. While all of these guns met with varying degrees of commercial success, they were all so big that they were difficult for most handgunners to carry and shoot comfortably. Readers have commented in such a way that I believe what they are asking for is a handgun the size of a conventional 1911 that delivers at least .357 Mag. performance. Some have asked for a .45 loaded up to higher levels of pressure and velocity performance. In my view, this is not a good idea.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">There have been a couple of efforts to build such a gun, sometimes involving wildcatting. While some of these souped-up 1911s have met with limited success, they never seem to be durable. Even hot commercial rounds like the 10 mm Auto and 9x23 mm Winchester, which were commercially loaded by Colt and others, exist in pistols that don't have long service lives. If they are used at all, the full velocity loads in these guns should be used sparingly. And who wants to use a favorite gun &ldquo;sparingly?&rdquo;<br /></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/magnum-autos-revisited#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/those-compact-gunsWed, 07 Sep 2011 00:00:00 GMT<p><span style="font-size: small;">The defensive handgun industry went nuts over the.380 auto over the last couple of years, even though there were signs that more powerful 9 mm guns were coming. By any standard, a pistol chambered for the century-old 9 mm Luger cartridge is more effective than one of comparable size chambered for the century-old .380 Auto. However, as of early last year, there were about twice as many medium-sized, single-column .380s as there were 9 mms. </span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;"><a href="http://www.ruger.com/index.html" target="_blank">Ruger</a>, a solid American firm, has had great success with a range of exotic hideout guns in .380 and 9 mm as well as revolvers in both .38 Spl. and .357 Mag. Their latest is the LC9, a flat, polymer and steel auto that handles a range of 9 mm loads. If you liked the .380 LCP, you will probably have a similar reaction to the <a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/articles/ruger-introduces-lc9/" target="_blank">LC9</a>, which is marginally larger, but styled much the same.&nbsp; </span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;"><a href="http://www.sigsauer.com/" target="_blank">SIG Sauer</a>, up in Exeter, N. H., did not upgrade their small .380, but rather chose to go to a completely new design called the <a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/articles/sig-p290-review/" target="_blank">P290</a>, which is an impressive compact. Following a trend, SIG Sauer will offer the new 9 mm with a factory installed laser sighting arrangement. Hedging its bets, SIG will also offer the gun without the expensive laser. I am interested to see how each version does in the competitive marketplace.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">A major player in the 1911 market&mdash;with seemingly endless variations of the timeless classic&mdash;<a href="http://www.kimberamerica.com/" target="_blank">Kimber</a> has been slow to get into the compact 9 mm arena. While Kimber is definitely in it now, it resisted the temptation to use the so-popular polymer receiver. The <a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/kimber-solo-9/" target="_blank">Solo</a> is a gun that many savvy shooters have compared favorably with the Colt 1903 and 1908. It's a striker-fired, single-action (according to the company's description) and even has a diminutive ambidextrous safety. The buzz on this aluminum-and-steel hideout is very strong.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">There are eight different compact 9 mm models out there now. Alphabetically, it's Kahr, Kel-Tec, Kimber, Rohrbaugh,&nbsp; Ruger, SIG Sauer, Taurus and Walther. It seems that we live in interesting times.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; <br /></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/those-compact-guns#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/trigger-pull-weightMon, 22 Aug 2011 00:00:00 GMT<p><span style="font-size: small;">I am old-fashioned and still cling to the idea that a handgun is primarily for personal defense and that every shot should be aimed and hit something. I know that there are handgun competitions where a high volume of fire is acceptable. This has led to gun modifications that are not really a good idea.&nbsp; Trigger pull weight is one such modification. By far, the most common handgun type you'll find in my hands is the <a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/articles/tuning-the-m1911-for-reliability/" target="_blank">1911</a> pistol, followed closely by DA/SA revolvers. Both types of guns have SA or DA trigger systems that lend themselves to modification.&nbsp; </span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">In the case of the 1911 and its SA trigger, modification can do two different things. One is to reduce the amount of pressure required to fire; the other is to smooth the release to make it a single uninterrupted motion. Go easy on the former, since a too-light trigger pull is not a good idea on a defense gun. When the adrenaline is flowing, the wimpiest clerk at the ribbon counter will make a 1911 with a 6 1/2-pound trigger work just fine, but a 3-pounder might go before he is really ready to have that happen. The smoothness of the trigger motion is far more important the weight. Experienced shooters are usually more annoyed with a trigger that creeps to the rear with fits and starts than they are with one that is heavy. The <a href="http://www.novaksights.com/" target="_blank">website</a> of ace pistolsmith Wayne Novak recommends a crisp, 5-pound-plus trigger pull on a custom 1911 used for defensive work.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">DA revolvers are a little different in that the trigger has to move in order to turn the cylinder and fully flex the mainspring. For many years, we have accepted that the DA revolver trigger pull averaged about 12 pounds, but improvements in springs has lowered that to around 10. It is possible to make it less than that, but the risk of misfires grows exponentially as the effort to do so increases. It is better to put training effort into managing heavier trigger pulls than it is to risk problems with premature discharges and misfires. In short, if it ain't (really) broke, don't fix it.<br /></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/trigger-pull-weight#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/tokarev-kitsMon, 15 Aug 2011 00:00:00 GMT<p><span style="font-family: &quot;Verdana&quot;,&quot;sans-serif&quot;; color: black;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">Shoot as much as you can. In doing so, you learn more about the techniques and equipment involved, enjoy the company of other gun folks and help preserve the precious rights to do so. In this economy, shooting can be an expensive proposition, so anything that productively burns powder has at least some merit. For a gadget that's perfect for this line of reasoning, check out </span></span><a href="http://www.jgsales.com/" target="_blank"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">J&amp;G Sales</span></span></a><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;"> in Prescott, Ariz. </span></span></span><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">You will find a new product that strikes me as a good idea. It's a conversion kit for most 1911 pistols in 9 mm Luger or .38 Super that permits the use of 7.62x25 mm Tokarev ammo. Please note the large quantities of this stuff that is currently on the surplus market.<span style="color: black;"></span></span></span></span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="color: black;">The conversion is possible because of the similarity in case head dimensions.&nbsp; All three are pretty close to the same size. Although the website does not mention them, I would guess that Colts in 9x23 mm Winchester might also work. The kit consists of a new barrel and barrel bushing, as well as recoil, hammer and firing pin springs. Your base gun must be set up for a non-ramped barrel and you have to use .38 Super magazines as 9 mm magazines have a spacer to serve the much shorter round. You have to use the supplied springs because the Tokarev round drives a light .30 caliber bullet to some pretty zippy speeds. This changes inertia balances and timing cycles in the functioning of the gun.</span><span style="color: black;"></span></span></span></span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: &quot;Verdana&quot;,&quot;sans-serif&quot;; color: black;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">The J&amp;G website also shows a </span></span><a href="http://jggunsmith.wordpress.com/2011/01/26/1911-tokarev-barrels/" target="_blank"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">brief video</span></span></a><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;"> of a J&amp;G gunsmith shooting a converted pistol with the Russian ammunition. It's obvious that there is not a great deal of recoil and he seems to be doing pretty well with this clever conversion. If anyone has tried this system, I would appreciate hearing about it.</span></span></span></span><span style="font-family: &quot;Verdana&quot;,&quot;sans-serif&quot;; color: black; font-size: 6pt;"></span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: &quot;Verdana&quot;,&quot;sans-serif&quot;; color: black;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">Also, J&amp;G had an </span></span><a href="http://jggunsmith.wordpress.com/2011/03/01/7-62x25mm-1911-barrel-notice/" target="_blank"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">early issue</span></span></a><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;"> and had to rework the design. Anyone with an early conversion kit should not fire surplus 7.62 ammunition (modern 7.62 is fine) and should contact J&amp;G about exchanging barrels. </span></span></span></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/tokarev-kits#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/smith-wesson-e-seriesMon, 08 Aug 2011 00:00:00 GMT<p><span style="font-size: small;"><a href="http://www.smith-wesson.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/CustomContentDisplay?langId=-1&amp;storeId=750001&amp;catalogId=750051&amp;content=11001" target="_blank">Smith &amp; Wesson</a> has a new product introduction that has been long overdue&mdash;the &ldquo;<a href="http://www.smith-wesson.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/Category4_750001_750051_770151_-1_757752_757751_image" target="_blank">E&rdquo; Series of 1911s</a>. Like so many other handgunners, I was delighted when S&amp;W introduced their own line of 1911 pistols several years ago. But I was less than happy with the grip-activated firing pin safety system. To work properly, this safety required an exceptionally firm grip on the butt of the pistol. To my considerable dismay, I found that I didn't fully depress the grip safety every time, particularly when using a one-handed grip. The hammer would drop, but the gun didn't fire.&nbsp; </span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">For 2011, the decision-makers at S&amp;W charged my old friend Herb Belin with the job of up-grading the entire line of S&amp;W 1911 pistols. Belin is an old hand at the Springfield plant and was the moving force behind the introduction of the Scandium-frame, lightweight revolvers and the X-frame .460 and .500 S&amp;W Magnums. He tied into the 1911 problems with gusto and the first improvement made was changing the firing pin safety to a less complex&mdash;and foolproof&mdash;inertia-based system. Herb then performed some cosmetic changes before cranking up one of those fancy CNC machines to cut good-looking 20 lpi checkering on the frontstrap of every &ldquo;E&rdquo; series 1911. I haven't fired one yet, but they look like some pretty nifty 1911s for the big anniversary year.<br /></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/smith-wesson-e-series#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/dump-the-dotsWed, 03 Aug 2011 00:00:00 GMT<p><span style="font-size: small;">At the 2011 <a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogList.aspx?cid=25&amp;id=27" target="_blank">SHOT Show</a> in Las Vegas, I looked at most of the new handgun models that were being introduced. With a few notable exceptions, sights on these guns follow the modern trend of three painted or imbedded white dots. The idea is that the shooter aligns the three dots in an equally-spaced row. I believe that this pattern of sights started to appear on some European models in the 1970s, quickly achieved popularity and is now a virtual standard. As a matter of fact, when I suggested to a gun company executive that he should leave the dots off of a particular model, he looked horrified and assured me that a pistol would not sell without three dots. In truth, this guy probably knows more about selling guns than I ever will, but we are in a situation where the dots are there because they have always been there. I firmly believe that the three-dot system commonly used on most modern service pistols does not add anything to the gun's utility value.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">Precise aiming with iron sights requires the simplest, easy-to-see sight picture one can get. As far as I&rsquo;m concerned, nobody ever came up with anything better than a large, square notch rear sight and a plain Partridge post front sight. This combination is simple to see and align, and so good and durable that it has evolved very little except in size since first used in Victorian times. The various system of dots, squares, lines and even colors all came along in the post World War II era. The idea was to develop a sight system that offered highlights that made sight acquisition faster. Some of the better highlighted systems can be pretty speedy, but none of them are as fast as plain black. That's because dots can be confusing. For example, a pair of white dots on the rear sight notch encourages the shooter's eye to go to the rear sight when the focus should be on the front sight. I know a lot of great shooters and trainers who use a highlight only on the front sight, acquiring the dot first, then slipping it into the rear sight notch.&nbsp; </span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">When it is too dark to shoot, there's nothing you can do. Although you can align three tritium dots perfectly in total darkness, you cannot identify your target and therefore should not fire. It's in all of the many stages of reduced light that the tritium sights come into their own. As I try various combination of highlights (or none at all), I grow ever more convinced that you are better off with plain black sights or sometimes a highlight on the front sight only. When I am shooting, I want to see sights and not a geometry problem.<br /></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/dump-the-dots#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/magnum-autosTue, 26 Jul 2011 00:00:00 GMT<p><span style="font-size: small;">We live in a time of fast-moving innovation. Applied technology has conditioned us to believe that anything is possible. Certainly this trend is applicable to the world of firearms. I mean this in the sense that new makers and technologies challenge existing stereotypes as to the size, weight, shape and performance of particular kinds of guns. In other words, it is not outside of reason to want a feathery-light magnum revolver. When enough folks said this, Smith &amp;Wesson came up with the scandium-aluminum alloy that made it happen. But it sometimes happens that what the market wants is just a little beyond what technology can provide and the result is not so good.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">Shortly after the popularity of magnum revolvers exploded, the high-capacity pistol also arrived on the scene. We had several brands of big rugged wheelguns permitted sportsmen to shoot farther and harder. At the same time, another branch of the handgun world was all wrapped up in shooting multiple targets in a race-like atmosphere. This was the province of the modern &ldquo;race gun.&rdquo; Both types of mechanisms have both strong and weak points. It was inevitable that someone would find a way to make an auto behave like a revolver. The goal was to develop a pistol capable of cycling more than six of the long magnum cartridges common to revolvers. For a few years there, the competition to do so was vigorous.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">The first gun to attempt the feat borrowed heavily from the 1911. It was known as the Coonan, from the name of the developer. Made in only a few variations, the Coonan was essentially a recoil-operated pistol in the 1911 style. The receiver and magazine well were extended slightly to accept a magazine of long .357 Mag. cartridges. Even then, the designers came up with a clever rib that induced a tilt in the column of cartridges. I understand a few guns were made in .41 Mag., but I also remember working away at a rimless .41 called the .41 Charger. The Coonan went away after 10 years or so, but I am glad to see that it came back&mdash;this is a nice gun. </span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">An even earlier magnum auto was the exotic Wildey. It seemed to have more lives than a cat, but all iterations came from the same design. It is a gas-operated gun that taps off gas to turn a lugged bolt in and out of engagement with the frame. Using special ammo made by Winchester in 9 mm and .45, the Wildey was a powerful pistol that was plagued with technical and production problems. I once reviewed one of these beasts and recall murderous recoil.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">The supply of great Winchester ammo in .45 Win. Mag. created by and for the Wildey pistol prompted another company to bring out a much beefed-up 1911 pistol called the Grizzly. Adapted to the .44 Mag., the Grizzly was a strong, accurate, reliable pistol that was not difficult to shoot. For reasons that are not particularly apparent, the Grizzly began to slip and eventually disappeared, which leaves the one remaining gun&mdash;the Desert Eagle. I was lucky enough to shoot a <a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/articles/desert-eagle-50-review/" target="_blank">Desert Eagle</a> in four calibers and was particularly impressed with the accuracy. The .41 Mag. would shoot with the best revolvers in that caliber and that is a rarefied atmosphere. These guns are still available as of this writing, but I don't believe they are a big seller for <a href="http://www.magnumresearch.com/" target="_blank">Magnum Research</a>.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">It's quite understandable that when autos were blossoming in general popularity, people would want one that was as powerful as the most powerful revolvers made at the time. We have established that it can be done. All four of the Magnum Autos worked and a couple of them were both accurate and rugged. But the guns themselves were hugely expensive, way too big and heavy to carry in the field and kicked like the proverbial Missouri mule. In short, they were impractical.&nbsp; <br /></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/magnum-autos#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/the-gun-digestMon, 11 Jul 2011 00:00:00 GMT<p><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">I have Good news and bad news. The good news is that I have every single issue of &ldquo;<a href="http://www.gundigeststore.com/product/gun-digest-2012/gun-digest-books" target="_blank">Gun Digest</a>,&rdquo; all 65 of them. The bad news is that I picked them all up new. </span></span></p> <p><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">Since 1944, &ldquo;Gun Digest&rdquo; has presented articles, catalog sections and round ups of every major shooting category, such as revolvers, ammunition, optics, etc. There is no other single volume that puts so much reliable data in one spot. </span></span></p> <p><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">Over the years, there have been issues that were not kind to handgunners, but those days seem to be gone. This year's volume has some great handgun information to go with a new look and a new editor.&nbsp; </span></span></p> <p><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">One feature that has been there for many years is a sprinkling of articles on what most magazine editors would reject as too &ldquo;obscure&rdquo; to fit in a typical gunzine. I particularly like this year's stories on the Mossberg Brownie (the first handgun I ever owned) and the .38 S&amp;W cartridge (millions of guns sold and no one understands it).&nbsp; </span></span></p> <p><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">The editor gave the authors enough space to make their points in appropriate detail. Can't wait for the next one!<br /></span></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/the-gun-digest#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/h-r-32-autoThu, 30 Jun 2011 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">The automatic pistol was a new and intriguing device in the early part of the 20th Century. While the first ones may have come from Europe, it didn't take the canny American arms industry very long to pick up on the potential of a quick-to-load handgun that automatically removed and replaced the fired cartridge in the chamber. The guns caught on quickly and gun makers soon offered their own seme-auto pistols, particularly those of the small-to-medium size commonly known as &ldquo;pocket&rdquo; autos. By 1920, gun stores offered a number of both domestic and imported guns. While the market was dominated by Colt and Savage, you could also find elegant Smith &amp;Wesson and Remington gun as well. Any one of these models is worth a complete book. But there is yet another model that was made in Gun Valley and was nowhere near as popular. It was the Harrington &amp; Richardson .32 ACP. All guns in this category&mdash;made by these five makers&mdash;were very well made, fitted and finished. Lots of good tool steel. </span></span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">I have an idea that the H&amp;R's unwieldy appearance may have contributed to its lack of popularity. The gun had a big squared slide and a skinny barrel sticking out the front. A blowback pistol, this H&amp;R needed a hefty slide to work right and that meant the weight was to the rear. I have handled samples of all five makes and I believe the clumsy H&amp;R is ergonomically superior to all the others. That is, superior in the sense of performing well in the owner's hand during the act of firing. The H&amp;R may not look as cool or hide in the waistband as neatly, but it is comfortable and easy to shoot. The reason for this is when you are aiming a pistol at eye level, you want a butt section that sits at a slight angle to the axis of the barrel (yeah, like the immortal 1911). The H&amp;R has that, as well as a trigger positioned for a straight-to-the-rear pull. With a butt long enough to accept a full three-fingered grip and an oval trigger guard that permits a good high grip, this little pistol is a natural for aimed fire. For a pocket gun, where sights are often an afterthought, this one has sights that are an excellent compromise. Purists would be aghast at the up-to-fire, down-to-safe thumb safety (it's backwards!), but they need to get over it.</span></span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">You have to wonder who came up with this design and the answer is pretty simple. It was the legendary revolver makers of Webley &amp; Scott in the United Kingdom. This respected maker offered a line of vest pocket and pocket autos in the same period.&nbsp; The Webleys were very similar in appearance, although they most commonly had exposed spur hammers, while the H&amp;R versions had internal hammers. Apparently, the H&amp;R management was able to acquire the rights to make these guns in the United States. They appear to be well-designed, solidly built pistols cursed by chambering in an ineffectual caliber and a rather unorthodox profile. <br /></span></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/h-r-32-auto#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/merwin-hulbert-folding-hammerWed, 22 Jun 2011 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">One of those odd guns that has always caught my fancy is the <a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=2153&amp;cid=25" target="_blank">Merwin, Hulbert revolver</a> and one of its more intriguing feature has recently got me &ldquo;what-if-ing&rdquo; again. The Merwins are a series of handsome revolvers made during the Frontier era in three sizes and several calibers. Known for their unusual twist-and-pull system of selective ejection, the Merwins were a popular gun in their day, selling slightly behind Colt, S&amp;W and Remington wheelguns. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">An optional feature on many of the models was an ingenious folding hammer. Actually this was really a folding hammer spur. In this system, the rearmost extension of the hammer&mdash;the checkered part that you put your thumb on to cock the action&mdash;was a separate piece of steel. Held in its extended position by a tiny leaf spring, the unusual hammer spur offered the shooter a means of cocking the gun's DA/SA action. Defensive revolvers are most commonly fired by means of the DA trigger, with a long-arc pull of 9 or 10 pounds of pressure. There are times when cocking the action for a more precise shot in SA style with 3 or 4 pounds is desirable. This is the nature of the DA/SA revolver. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">Carrying a little gun like this is made easier by the folding hammer. It hinges forward in such a way that the spur snugs down against the body of the hammer, completely out of the way and not likely to snag on pocket edges or coat linings. If you need to use it, you catch the tip with your thumb nail and bring the hammer to full cock. Trigger pressure will release the hammer and fire a shot, but something else also happens. Inertia causes the hammer spur to fold closed when the hammer strikes the frame. You'll have to unfold it to manually cock the action, but as long as you are happy with DA shooting, the folding spur will stay folded and out of the way. Could this system be applied to a modern gun? My fellow gunwriter and shooting buddy Walt Rauch thinks so. He found a gunsmith that built one on a clean old Model 12 M&amp;P Smith, and he now has a neat gun.</span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/merwin-hulbert-folding-hammer#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/the-practical-elegance-of-checkeringTue, 14 Jun 2011 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">Rows and rows of perfect pyramids run down the frontstrap of your pistol, all of them aligned with the precision of 8th &amp; I Marines on Parade. It looks sharp, but it is also practical for assisting in handling the gun under stress. When your hands are wet with sweat, water, grease, mud or even blood, and you still need to shoot, those little pyramids bite into the skin of your hand and give you a solid grip on that life-saving tool. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">For years, I shot 1911s without checkering, but I never looked back when I finally got a <a href="http://www.novaksights.com/" target="_blank">Novak</a> with proper checkering. For many years now, Wayne Novak has relied on ace metal smith Pete Single for all his checkering work. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">Checkering can be made more or less coarse by changing the number of lines per inch (lpi). In the early days of checkering, most jobs were done 20 lpi, while fewer were 30. I personally prefer a 30 lpi pistol, as I don't have hands calloused by manual labor. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">I even have one pistol that <a href="http://www.gunsite.com/main/" target="_blank">Gunsite's</a> Ted Yost checkered a very difficult 40 lpi. It would seem that a compromise between the 20s and 30s might be a good idea, so Novak went to Single to develop a 25 lpi system that has become the industry standard. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">Originally, checkering was done by hand. This meant the craftsman put the pistol receiver in a holding fixture and went at it with a fine-toothed file made specifically for the job. This is a very difficult job, requiring a steady, deliberate touch and great patience. It is possible to get a really outstanding result in the sense of perfect diamonds, but it is not easy or quick. Pete Single knew that some machinists had tried to automate the process with modern machinery, but had not produced the perfect job he was after. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">In studying the matter, Single saw that one of the main problems was the irregularities in the shape of the pistol's front strap, which can vary in every way imaginable&mdash;uneven, crooked, bumpy, thick and thin. So, he set out to write a CNC program that would true up the receiver of any 1911 pistol before he started cutting the intersecting lines that form the checkering pattern. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">With that done, he was able to set up the CNC machine to work on an even, perfectly radius surface. Single's techniques (which he calls Precision Metal Checkering) now permit him to tie into cases of new Colt frames and produce a perfect checkering job on each and every one of them. It may be possible for a by-hand craftsman to produce a perfect job. But don't believe that Precision Metal Checkering can't also do it, over and over again.</span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/the-practical-elegance-of-checkering#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/vest-pocket-autosThu, 09 Jun 2011 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">I recently picked up a gun that establishes just how small a true functional automatic pistol can be made. In fact, this tiny Bernardelli pistol is a fine example of the gunmaker's craft. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">At one point in our history, there were a great many such guns in production, most of them European in origin. These guns were often referred to as vest pocket pistols and it was once the fashion for gentlemen to go about their business in three-piece suits that had vests. These vests had several small pockets, which were ideal for packing a small auto. Of course, the rules about people carrying guns were not so restrictive in the early 20th Century, so there was an active market. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">Naturally, most of these little pistols are chambered for cartridges that fall short of dragonslayer status&mdash;either .25 ACP or .22 Short. A few made it into production as .22 Long Rifles and there were smaller numbers of .32s. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">By any measurable standard, none of these are manstopping calibers, but no one seemed to care. Personally, I see guns like these as milestones. While none are ideal for personal defense in any age, they led to the modern small autos in better calibers such as .380 and 9 mm Luger. If anything, these little guns accustomed people to the idea of a flat pistol of diminutive size. Now we can work on pistols of that size class that delivers power up to the obvious demands of personal defense.</span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/vest-pocket-autos#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/i-didnt-hear-thatWed, 01 Jun 2011 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">At the <a href="http://www.nraam.org/" target="_blank">NRA Annual Meetings &amp; Exhibits</a>&nbsp;in Pittsburgh, a great many members stopped me to say hello and chat for a few minutes. This is one of the most rewarding aspects of the job. Conversations of this sort are fun, develop new gun information and provide a lot of data on what shooters might really want to read about. But I fear that some of those who approached me may have come away with a wrong idea about my responses to their questions that was not a reflection of any kind of bad attitude on my part. The truth is I have a pretty severe <a href="http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/hearing-loss/DS00172" target="_blank">hearing loss</a> and I may have not understood correctly, if I heard at all. It is also an entry to one of my pet rants&mdash;the need for effective hearing protection for anyone involved in the shooting sports. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">I have been on a military firing line with fifty BARs steadily blazing away and the noise is incredible. I once lived next to a full battery of 155 mm self-propelled howitzers and that was worse. The human ear was never intended to accept that kind of abuse, but can recover if the sound is not protracted over a long period of time. If it is, the inevitable result is hearing loss. Unless, that is, you protect your ears with some form of hearing protection. In the 50s and 60s, the military did not emphasize this, a situation that I'm told is no longer true. In civilian shooting, the onus is on the shooter. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">Effective hearing protection is available in the form of plugs and muffs. Both types muffle the sharp crack before it can over-stress the delicate mechanism of the inner ear. I have plugs that are custom-made for my ear canals and they do a pretty good job. I also use <a href="http://www.championtarget.com/shooting_accessories/ears/muffs.aspx" target="_blank">sturdy muffs that actually amplify</a> the sounds of normal conversation, but instantly shut off the high-pitched bark of a firearm. Other muffs are less expensive with no electronics involved, just lots of sound-deadening foam rubber. Whatever you can manage will do a far better job than no protection at all. Loss of hearing is a subtle disability that gradually isolates you in crowded world. When the background noise is enough that a partially deaf person cannot hold a normal conversation, he or she subconsciously avoids any possibility of having to converse. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">If your hearing is gone, it's gone. But that doesn't mean that you can't do everything possible to protect younger shooters in your circle of shooting friends.</span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/i-didnt-hear-that#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/bullets-and-cartridgesWed, 25 May 2011 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">There appears to be a modern misuse of gun terms in magazine articles, on the web and even conversationally that is causing some problems. In some quarters, it has become popular to describe certain objects incorrectly, because some folks regard this as kind of cute. It's akin to saying &ldquo;ain't&rdquo; when you really mean &ldquo;am not.&rdquo; What do you load into a modern handgun? Is it a bullet or a cartridge? It is probably a cartridge, but if that's true, the cartridge contains a bullet. Confused? </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">For terminology questions, I prefer the &ldquo;<a href="http://www.nrastore.com/nra/Product.aspx?productid=PB%2001548" target="_blank">NRA Firearms Sourcebook</a>.&rdquo; This outstanding effort on the part of the <em>American Rifleman</em> Technical staff tells us that a bullet is a &ldquo;non-spherical projectile for use in a rifled barrel...&rdquo; and a cartridge is &ldquo;a single round of ammunition consisting of case, primer and propellant with one or more projectiles.&rdquo; In other words, a bullet is the part of a cartridge that goes sailing downrange to do its work. The terms are not interchangeable and should be used for their specific and individual meanings. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">But the goofs continue. After I wrote the first part of this blog, I had occasion to begin a new&mdash;and long awaited&mdash;thriller novel. Hardly a hundred pages down and&mdash;you guessed it&mdash;the author had one of his characters open the action of a villain's pistol and a &ldquo;bullet&rdquo; comes tumbling out. Now this is possible, but I am dead-bang certain that he meant to have a cartridge in play. The author is well-known for his extreme attention to detail, particularly technical details. That doesn't mean that it isn't an error that can tend to confuse. Bullets are bullets, cartridges are cartridges and they need to be referred to as such.</span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/bullets-and-cartridges#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/terminology-trigger-cockingMon, 16 May 2011 00:00:00 GMT<p><span style="font-size: small;">Trigger-cocking is a term first used in the Frontier era and almost never used today. It describes a form of trigger action where pressure on the trigger cocks a hammer from the down position all the way through to full tension and release to fire. Modern terminology for this system is double action. </span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">In the late Frontier period, the major American handgun makers were Colt, Smith &amp; Wesson, Remington and Merwin, Hulbert. All but Remington offered a large-frame six gun with this type of trigger action and each of those hefty six guns also had a thumb-cocking single action feature. This was the beginning of the modern revolver. </span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">The major guns, from companies that persisted in the marketplace, combined features of earlier designs. The Colt 1878 DA revolver retained the side-mounted extractor rod of the Single Action Army and S&amp;W DA Frontier had the same break-open action of the Number 3 series of guns. In essence, these transitional Models were stepping stones to the strong and powerful revolvers that we first saw around the turn of the century&mdash;the Colt New Service and the S&amp;W 1st Model .44 Hand Ejector.</span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/terminology-trigger-cocking#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/walter-walshWed, 04 May 2011 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">NRA members have their choice of either <em>American Rifleman</em>, <em>American Hunter</em> or <em>America&rsquo;s 1st Freedom</em> as a benefit with their membership. All are fine books, but those of you who opt for the legendary first-ever gun magazine&mdash;<em>American Rifleman</em>&mdash;got a special treat in November. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">Bill Vanderpool, retired from the FBI but still very active in matters gun, has written a long overdue <a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/articles/walter-walsh/" target="_blank">biographical piece on Walter Walsh</a>. Walsh is 103 as the piece comes to print and nobody ever enjoyed a life so long and so full of service to the Republic. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">Walsh was a competitor from childhood and capped a long competitive career with the so-called &ldquo;Triple Distinguished&rdquo; status. A graduate lawyer, Walsh became an FBI agent in the early 1930s and participated in several violent confrontations with Depression-era gangsters, as well chronicled by Vanderpool. As a Marine in World War II, he served on several of the great island battles and was involved in a number of close-range fights. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">After the War, Walsh got into the competition business in a big way, not only as a competitor, but also as a coach and manager. By the '60s, he was the Marine Corps' main shooter as the director of marksmanship programs. His mail code at HQMC was &ldquo;AO3M&rdquo; and that was the address to which I routinely reported my team's competitive scores. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">I had the pleasure of meeting Walsh through my friendship with Rex Applegate. No more courtly gentleman could ever be found and I count it a pleasure to know him. Walter Walsh came from a time of legendary shooter/warriors&mdash;Askins, Jordan, Applegate&mdash;and has set an example for all of us to follow, both on and off the range. Bill Vanderpool's great article gives us a little more insight into this determined little man who stood toe-to-toe with giants.</span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/walter-walsh#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/the-measure-of-accuracyTue, 03 May 2011 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">I stumbled onto a new website not long ago. The author was doing a pretty good job of evaluating the usefulness of a number of handguns that appealed to him. With an open-mind approach, he was shooting the subject pistols and revolvers in a number of different exercises, including accuracy at 25 yards and controlled pairs at 7 yards. Since I have been doing pretty much the same thing for more than 25 years, I appreciate the effort that goes into doing this, but I sometimes wonder about the precision of the information I have developed and reported over the years. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">When you are attempting to tell an informed readership about the accuracy of a particular handgun, you have to remember the several screens you are working through. For one thing, the gun is nothing without ammunition. In any caliber, there is a wide range of accuracy performance in the several different loads from any given maker. There are probably three or four dozen different loads available from each manufacturer in popular calibers such as .45 ACP and .357 Mag. You can't possibly shoot all of them to determine the most accurate for the gun, but when you do get good results with a particular load, it's time to try it in other guns and lay in a test supply if it proves to be a consistent performer. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">It's also important to look at how you are shooting the gun since the skill of the shooter is very important, as is the technique he or she is using. The handgunner's ability to align the sights, assume a proper sight picture and smoothly release the trigger is a function of training and experience. Shooting one-handed standing is much harder than sitting at a bench with the pistol on sandbags. If you are trying to evaluate the gun, the ammo or the gun and the ammo, then you have to remove as many human variables out of the equation as possible. Sandbags on solid benches (preferably concrete), combined with several kinds of commercially available rests have made gun articles much more credible than they once were, and more gun writers seem to be going about their work in this fashion. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">Now before I set out to be a gun writer, I bought two pieces of equipment that are still in use and still accompany me to the range. One of these is an Oehler chronograph, used to measure and analyze the velocities of ammunition. There's often a little more information than just average velocities that come from Ken Oehler's magic box. If you learn to use it well, it will tell you things about the quality of the ammunition. However, the other device&mdash;the <a href="http://www.ransomrest.com/RansomRest.html" target="_blank">Ransom Rest</a>&mdash;is even more useful. Chuck Ransom's original device has been manufactured in pretty much the same way since the 1960s. This mechanical device holds a handgun during firing and recoil in such a way that it returns to exactly the same spot with respect to alignment with the target. This permits the shooter to literally fire hundreds of rounds of ammunition at exactly the same spot. This way, you can evaluate many kinds of ammo in the same gun, or by changing the gun, you can evaluate the accuracy potential of different guns using the same ammo. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">I have been accused of all manner of wrongdoing for using this device. Some of the critics feel that I am cheating, while others claim that the gun can only be measured by firing in the human hand. I believe that removing the human element simply makes the information derived much more reliable. If the Ransom Rest has any limitation in my opinion, it lies in the fact that the maker can't provide grip inserts for everything on the planet.</span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/the-measure-of-accuracy#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/the-ruger-1911Wed, 20 Apr 2011 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">I&rsquo;m sure you are aware that Colt Firearms has entered into an agreement with the U.S. Army to produce a new service pistol chambered for a rimless .45 caliber cartridge. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">Sure they did&mdash;a century ago. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">In the years since Americans first took up the 1911 .45 pistol, the republic has fought in two World Wars and countless smaller ones. In most of these engagements, the pistol of choice has been the Government Model, made by the original maker and reproduced by countless other firms. The demand for the gun continues to the present day, but now the demand is primarily from civilians for sporting and defensive use. Surprisingly, there are more factories now making 1911s than ever before and new versions join the lineup often. Remington began production of the <a href="http://www.1911r1.com/" target="_blank">R1911</a> just last year, and the latest bit of 1911 news is equally significant. The last major American handgun maker has just introduced a 1911 .45 called the <a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/articles/ruger-sr1911-pistol/" target="_blank">Ruger SR1911</a>. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">In early December of 2010, I was privileged to attend a new product introduction at the <a href="http://www.gunsite.com/main/" target="_blank">Gunsite Academy</a>, near Ruger's plant in Prescott, Ariz. Ruger was showing a nifty variation of their Model 77 rifle called the Ruger Gunsite Scout rifle. As well received as that arm certainly was, the bigger news, in my mind, was the advent of the <a href="http://www.ruger.com/products/sr1911/models.html" target="_blank">Ruger SR1911</a> pistol. Over the course of three days, I had a chance to talk to the engineers who developed the gun, watch the production in progress and, most of all, shoot a production sample of the gun as much as I wanted. It was a good experience, to say the least. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">The pistol is a very straightforward version of the classic pistol. It's real basic, with no superfluous bells and whistles like guide rods or ambidextrous safeties. The grips are classic double-diamond checkered in hard rubber, and the frame is stainless, with an investment cast receiver and a machined slide. Performance was 100 percent on my sample and I was particularly happy with the light trigger pull. Also, accuracy was very good and it looks like the new Ruger 1911 will group under 2 inches in the Ransom Rest. It was a solid first showing and all that you might expect from a major player like Ruger.</span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/the-ruger-1911#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/terminology-thumbrestThu, 14 Apr 2011 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">Thumbrest is a term associated with handgun grips. Usually it refers to revolvers, but some automatic pistols also have grips that include a thumbrest. Typically, a thumbrest is a carved or molded ledge of material in the top left side of the grip (for a right-handed shooter). When a shooter acquires a grip on his or her gun, the thumb rests on this ledge in a comfortably natural manner. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">When bullseye shooting was the main handgun shooting sport, many shooters used revolvers and cocked them in the single action style. It was handy to have that thumbrest just slightly below and to the left of the hammer spur. At that point in history, several craftsmen built special thumbrest grips to the shooter's individual specifications&mdash;Roper, Sanderson, Hurst and others. Today, made-to-measure grips are still around, but they are more commonly found on hunting or combat guns. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">The thumbrest can be an aid to good shooting, but I personally believe that its greatest value is simply the fact that it helps to establish a consistent grip. Some of them, like the ones still made by Herrett's, are so good that you almost cannot handle the pistol without getting your hand in a proper position. Now, they are original equipment only on a few Smith &amp; Wesson and High Standard rimfire target autos. There was a time when they were often seen in the best of places.</span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/terminology-thumbrest#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/the-velo-dogTue, 05 Apr 2011 00:00:00 GMT<p><span style="font-size: small;">I understand the reasons why this cartridge was originally designed. But I can't begin to understand why the round took the form that it did. It's called the 5.5 mm Velo Dog and it was designed in France before the 19th Century rolled over into the 20th. Imagine a straight-sided revolver cartridge case about the length of a .38 Spl., with a typical, but rather wide rim. The bullet was a .22, actually measuring about .225 inches in diameter and weighing (I think) about 30 to 35 grains. Fired from several brands of compact French, Belgian or German revolvers, the 5.5 mm Velo Dog delivered performance much like a rimfire .22 Long (not Long Rifle). Bicyclists of that Victorian era were apparently so troubled by pursuing dogs that this cartridge and the guns that fired it were the result. They just couldn't forgive Woofy and his canine indiscretions. And that's where the name came from: &ldquo;Velo&rdquo; is an abbreviated form of the French word for bicycle, so it is literally &ldquo;bicyclist's dog gun.&rdquo; In view of the annual billions of dollars currently spent on dogs, dog food and dog care, it's hard to envision a time when we deliberately produced a specialized gun/cartridge combo with which to shoot them. But it happened. </span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">It is even more curious why the round was designed as it was&mdash;a long, skinny centerfire cartridge. The rim diameter on the 5.5 mm was, according to Frank Barnes' &ldquo;Cartridges of the World,&rdquo; about .308-inch. There's enough room for a small pistol primer pocket in that circle, but not a lot of excess metal outside of it. You'd think that the .22 Long or Long Rifle, both rimfires, would be a better way to go, but who knows? Many of the little revolvers still exist and some of them are very well-made little wheel guns with neat features like folding triggers, DAO actions, internal hammers and even manual safeties. The current production mini-revolvers from North American Arms are reminiscent of the Velo Dogs of yesteryear. Obviously, the guns are long gone, but the ammo was once loaded by the big American companies and only recently removed from the production list at Fiocchi. There's one final point to look at in the odd history of this strange little round. Ol' Charlie Askins took a Velo Dog revolver off of a <em>contrabandista</em> one night outside of El Paso. The ammo in that gun was his introduction to the Velo Dog concept. It was this round that served as the parent cartridge for his .221 Askins, a rule-beating bullseye wildcat that got him in trouble with his boss, but made cartridge history in the process.</span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/the-velo-dog#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/the-aspFri, 01 Apr 2011 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">What is an ASP? Among other things, it is an exotic custom-made 9 mm pistol developed by the mysterious Paris Theodore, who was reportedly an undercover agent for the U.S. government. It is documented that Theodore, a New Yorker, was the driving force behind Seventrees, a maker of custom holsters of legendary quality. Primarily designed for the concealed carry market of the &lsquo;60s and &lsquo;70s, Seventrees made innovative designs with unusual fasteners and materials. Theodore was also involved with ASP (Armament Systems and Procedures), a specialized equipment company that pioneered restraints, collapsible batons, lighting and other law enforcement equipment. The firm's first products, however, were highly specialized custom handguns that bore the &ldquo;ASP&rdquo; designation (with obvious reference to the deadly little snake of biblical lore). One such gun was a five-shot conversion of a Ruger Speed Six to .44 Spl., but relatively few of these were made. A much more common pistol was the ASP 9 mm. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">These slick little guns used the popular and easily obtained (in the &lsquo;60s and &lsquo;70s) S&amp;W Model 39 9 mm as a starting point. The basic Smith was shortened in both height and length. This required shortening the magazine, which sounds easy, but is a bear of a job to do. Original sights came off, to be replaced with the innovative &ldquo;Guttersnipe&rdquo; one-piece rear sight. This was a long, tapered block of metal with a tapered, square-bottomed trough down the middle. When the trough was aligned on the target by the shooter, he saw a yellowish &ldquo;U&rdquo; with the target therein. I fired one once, but wasn&rsquo;t real fond of it. The remainder of the gun included features that were different enough to be copied on other guns. This is particularly true of the hooked forward edge of the trigger guard, a feature that still crops up on some guns. ASP slides had radical lightening cuts, as well as the melted treatment. Intended to be a slick, easy-to-carry, easy-to-draw little gun, the ASP was a great trend-setter. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">But it had one feature that I don't recall being used on anything else since. ASP magazines had great windows cut in their sides, so the single column of cartridges was visible. Theodore (or some other designer) developed a clear plastic window grip for the ASP pistol, so the cartridges could be viewed under stress from outside the gun. This is a slightly different form of a &ldquo;cartridge counting&rdquo; system once found on a few early auto pistols. The ASP was a milestone custom gun and set a lot of nimble minds to work.</span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/the-asp#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/sideplate-screwsFri, 25 Mar 2011 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">Among <a href="http://www.smith-wesson.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/CustomContentDisplay?langId=-1&amp;storeId=750001&amp;catalogId=750051&amp;content=11001" target="_blank">Smith &amp; Wesson</a> fans, there is still some confusion surrounding the use of the terms &ldquo;three-screw, four-screw and five-screw.&rdquo; If you are one of the many younger students of the great products of the legendary Massachusetts gunmaker, you may have been puzzled by what seems to be insider use of these terms. To get everyone on the same page, a brief history lesson and explanation should help out. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">The term &ldquo;screw&rdquo; applies to the <a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/articles/smith-and-wesson-model-10/" target="_blank">Hand Ejector</a> series of revolvers, meaning everything introduced since the mid-1890s. In chronological order, that's the I-, K-, M-, N-, J-, L- and most recently, the X-frame guns. To put it another way, the term covers almost every S&amp;W revolver in use. Every one of these guns have a side plate on the right side of the frame that covers the various parts that make up the revolver's lockwork&mdash;hammer, mainspring, rebound slide, etc. It is an old fashioned way to make a gun, but it works to perfection, so it remains in use. Screws hold the plate in position on the gun and the number of screws used helps tell us when a particular gun was made. To further complicate the issue, S&amp;W used another screw in the front edge of the trigger guard to retain the spring and lug that locks the cylinder in place. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">The Hand Ejector series of revolvers has literally defined Smith &amp; Wesson revolver in the 20th Century. The first guns&mdash;I-, K- and N-frames&mdash;were made with five screws. That's four on the sideplate and one in the trigger guard. Designers have updated the guns in a variety of ways, but it wasn't until 1955 that they came up with a method of manufacturing the sideplate that permitted the omission of the topmost sideplate screw. It worked quite well and simplified the manufacturing process, so it was now a four screw gun. A little later, the engineers found a way to sidestep a nagging problem with the forward screw in the trigger guard. Frequent clogging of this screw hole with bluing residue drove a need to do away with this screw and matching threaded hole. We now have a three-screw revolver. Mechanically, I doubt if an early century five-screw M&amp;P revolver was in any way mechanically superior to a similar three-screw gun made last week. The 3-, 4- and 5-screw designations help in identifying a particular gun and dating it to a general time period. It's part of the history of one of America&rsquo;s great firearms makers.</span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/sideplate-screws#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/terminology-bore-diameter-groove-diameterTue, 15 Mar 2011 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">Here's the definition, right out of the <em><a href="http://www.nrastore.com/nra/Product.aspx?productid=PB%2001548" target="_blank">NRA Firearms Sourcebook</a></em>. It is &ldquo;...the minor interior diameter of a barrel that is the diameter of a circle formed by the tops of the lands.&rdquo; That is the bore diameter, but groove diameter is &ldquo;...the diameter of a circle circumscribed by the bottom of the grooves...&rdquo; </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">Look at it this way&mdash;a gunmaker starts with a thick-walled steel tube when he or she goes about making a barrel for a firearm. The tube is gun-drilled, straight and true to a dimension that is a few thousandths less than the diameter of the bullet. This dimension will be just about the same as the bore diameter in the finished barrel. He then forces or draws a button or cutter through the barrel with a twisting motion in order to impart spiral grooves evenly down the bore. This action removes or displaces enough metal as to produce consistently deep, evenly-spaced grooves from end to end. The dimension from the bottom of the groove to the bottom of the opposite groove is the groove diameter. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">When the gun is fired, a bullet is forced into the barrel under great pressure. The bullet has a diameter very close to the groove diameter of the barrel, so it is a tight fit. Expanding powder gasses force it forward, thereby engraving it into the rifling and causing it to turn. The fit is tight enough to prevent powder gasses from getting around the bullet as it traverses the barrel, so it comes out of the barrel spinning at a rate imparted by the twist rate of those spiral grooves. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">There are two diameters in a barrel. The greater (major) diameter is the groove; the lesser (minor) is the bore.</span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/terminology-bore-diameter-groove-diameter#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/accuracy-and-the-hollowpointTue, 08 Mar 2011 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">If there is a pervasive trend in the development of modern handgun ammunition, it is the development of more effective personal-defense ammunition. Much of this effort can be traced to the early years of the Wondernine Wars, when various makers struggled for supremacy in building double-action 9 mm pistols. To match the guns, ammo makers focused great attention on effective 9 mm ammo that would reliably stop criminal attacks. They developed some great loads and the effort to improve continues. Eventually, these techniques were expanded to apply to all kinds of handgun bullets in many calibers. The result is handgun ammo that really does what we want it to, both in terms of penetration and expansion. This is a matter of great interest to this handgunner and I have watched over the years as handgun ammo became better for real-world effectiveness. Today's police ammunition is far better than the 200-grain lead round-nosed stuff I was issued as a rookie cop in the &lsquo;60s. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">But something else has also happened in the course of these evolving events&mdash;today's ammo is more accurate than ever before. Since I started work as a gunwriter over 25 years ago, I have been systematically evaluating ammunition by means of Chuck Ransom's reliable machine rest. Looking back at articles written long years ago, as well as some of the tattered notebooks in which I recorded shooting results, I can see a steady improvement in accuracy, though it is possible that part of the improvement may come from better materials and methods used in building the guns themselves. I strongly believe that is true in the case of the 1911 pistol. Still, handguns in general seem to be delivering much tighter groups using commercial ammunition in Ransom Rest shooting. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">I can't prove it, but I think the better accuracy may be an off-shoot of the drive to build a better hollow point. When the bullet engineers strove to make their JHP penetrate well and expand over a wide range of velocities, they focused on making the bullet spin at a consistent rate. Part of doing that is making the bullet concentric. The more that a bullet spins, the better the performance of the hollow point will be when it encounters resistance in barriers and the tissue of a target. But a balanced, concentric bullet, spinning at a proper rate in flight, simply flies more true than one that is lacking in concentricity. And obviously, the bullet that flies true, shot after shot, will strike more closely to the point of aim, time after time.</span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/accuracy-and-the-hollowpoint#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/varmint-revolverMon, 07 Mar 2011 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">I recall a very pleasant day at my gun club, shooting a handsome old <a href="http://www.smith-wesson.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/CustomContentDisplay?langId=-1&amp;storeId=750001&amp;catalogId=750051&amp;content=11001" target="_blank">Smith &amp; Wesson</a> revolver that had somehow turned out to be a commercial dud. This was sometime in the early 1980s and the gun in question&mdash;called the <a href="http://smith-wessonforum.com/s-w-revolvers-1961-1980/101436-s-w-model-53-remington-jet-question.html" target="_blank">Model 53</a>&mdash;had been officially discontinued in 1974. In fact, it was dead long before that, with leftover specimens languishing on dealer's shelves at pricetags that had to make you wonder. The gun was also called the .22 Centerfire Magnum, a model intended for the handgunning outdoorsman who wanted to engage small-game animals and varmints at ranges well beyond those normally associated with pistols and revolvers. It was, in short, a varminting revolver, useful at distances out to 100 yards or a little more. The thing that made this happen was a hot cartridge called the .22 Remington Jet. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">The Jet was based on the familiar .357 Mag. case, necked down to .22 caliber. This required a rather steep taper, so much so that the resulting case resembled a champagne bottle. In the shooting sense, this turned out to be the gun's undoing. If the shooter was less than careful about keeping his chambers clean and dry, firing the round would cause not only normal expansion, but also a tendency to back out of the chamber. This sometimes wedged the case so firmly against the breech face that the cylinder would not turn and could not easily be opened. However, it must be noted that being careful about gun maintenance would deliver perfect performance. Nevertheless, the cartridge developed a bad reputation and the gun-cartridge combination suffered an undeserved early demise. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">This is not, however, the complete story of the Model 53 revolver. While the gun was designed to fire the centerfire cartridge, S&amp;W engineers could not resist the obvious possibilities of .22 rimfires. The gun was fitted with twin firing pins in the breech face, one of them central and the other offset from the centerline of the bore in order to work with rimfire rounds. To hit the correct firing pin, the gun's hammer had a pivoting nose that let the shooter select either the center-fire or rimfire option. It worked as slick as glass. In order to hold .22 long rifles in position in the chambers, every Model 53 came with six chamber insert that were machined to the same outside dimensions as a .22 Jet case with a centrally cut .22 Long Rifle chamber insert. The shooter slipped a Long Rifle into each insert, then loaded six of them into the cylinder of the revolver and went to work. It worked perfectly, although it was a bit tedious to pick out the empties after firing. Some specimens of the revolver came with a.22 Long Rifle cylinder that interchanged with the .22 Jet one. This is the way to go and these cylinders add to the value of the gun in the second market. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">Model 53s command good prices today. As a .22 Long Rifle, with either inserts or a second cylinder, Smith &amp; Wesson's long ago venture into a varminting wheelgun makes an outstanding target or sportsman's rimfire revolver. And devoted experimenters like Hamilton Bowen have managed to rechamber those Long Rifle cylinders to some pretty exotic cartridges.</span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/varmint-revolver#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/importance-of-pairsWed, 23 Feb 2011 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">It's pretty much a given that savvy police officers often carry a second handgun to back up their primary service auto. I believe that the second gun needs to be very similar to the primary in its handling and operation. In my day, this requirement was most commonly manifested with a Model 19 (or 15) in the holster with a 2-inch Model 36 (or 42) in hiding. Under stress, the similar loading, handling and firing was very comforting. But now that the police service revolver is pursuing the Dodo bird, this practice seems to be falling into disuse. It doesn't need to. In fact, there is more reason than ever to pair up the service handgun with a hideout pistol of the same make and/or similar handling. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">The biggest reason for doing this often goes unnoticed. Much of the time, the longer magazine of the full-sized holster gun can be used in the shorter backup gun. This simply means that a badly jammed or broken holster gun can be replaced with the hideout pistol and reloaded with magazines for the bigger gun. The shooter needs to understand that this is an emergency procedure only, in that an excessively long magazine can be damaged by violent magazine changes that drive the magazine into the underside of the slide. Whatever the action style of the holster gun&mdash;DAO, DA/SA, SA etc.&mdash; the backup needs to be an available model with the same lockwork from the same maker. There are many possibilities. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">How about a <a href="http://www.sigsauer.com/" target="_blank">SIG</a> P226 (a full-size auto in .40 S&amp;W) backed up by a P229 in the same caliber? A <a href="http://www.smith-wesson.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/CustomContentDisplay?langId=-1&amp;storeId=750001&amp;catalogId=750051&amp;content=11001" target="_blank">S&amp;W</a> M&amp;P pairs beautifully with an M&amp;P Compact in four different calibers&mdash;9 mm, .357 Sig, .40 S&amp;W and .45 ACP. <a href="http://www.glock.com/" target="_blank">Glock</a> has a number of models that compliment well&mdash;G17 and G19, G22, G23 and others. There are even some even-smaller third options in the Glock line. There may be some other makers in the race, but the latest is <a href="http://www.ruger.com/" target="_blank">Ruger</a> with their SR9 and SR9c 9 mm pistols with the long magazine usable in the short gun. I have to believe this is a sales point the company is neglecting. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">Finally, may I point out that the greatest of the modern handguns, John Browning's immortal 1911 Colt, actually fits into this limited category. If the shooter carries either the Government Model or Commander using a 7-shot or 8-shot magazine, he or she can back up with several different short-slide, short-butt models from Colt&mdash;CCO, Officer's ACP and Defender. These guns may use a shorter magazine to go with their short butts, but they will work with same magazines as were in use since 1911.</span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/importance-of-pairs#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/bullseye-22sWed, 16 Feb 2011 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">In the golden era of bullseye shooting&mdash;1950s and '60s&mdash;the great 2700 aggregate matches were fired on ranges all over this country. A 2700 was actually three different 900 aggregates fired with three different guns&mdash;a .45, a centerfire of some kind and a .22 Long Rifle. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">While many shooters in fact used three different guns, a great many chose to use only two. Their .45 also filled the bill as &ldquo;any centerfire,&rdquo; so that gun did double duty. In the .22 field early matches saw <a href="http://www.coltsmfg.com/Default.aspx" target="_blank">Colt</a> or <a href="http://www.smith-wesson.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/CustomContentDisplay?langId=-1&amp;storeId=750001&amp;catalogId=750051&amp;content=11001" target="_blank">S&amp;W</a> .22 revolvers in frequent use. Typically, they were fired by thumb-cocking the hammer, single-action style. But, the inherent advantage of a self-loader eventually caused most shooters to use them for the so-called &ldquo;mouse gun&rdquo; third of the long program. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">Obviously, if the .22 pistol was shaped like the .45, the more familiar feel was an advantage. Colt made the Ace model on the 1911 platform, but its accuracy was not up to the competition. Early on, it was mostly the Colt Woodsman (particularly the Match Target version) and several <a href="http://www.highstandard.com/" target="_blank">High Standard</a> models. Both guns were decently accurate, but neither had the feel of the 1911. Their grips were more steeply angled, probably to facilitate feeding from the more efficient raked magazine. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">As the competition progressed, Smith &amp; Wesson entered the fray with the Model 41, a pistol with a very 1911-like butt and blue-chip accuracy. In no time at all, the Smith was the gun to have. Colt never responded to this challenge, so their beautiful little Woodsman lost heavily in popularity and eventually disappeared from the catalog. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">High Standard took a different tack by modifying their basic frame to a more 1911-like feel and retaining the same magazine. The magazine now angled through the frame, rather than running parallel with the frontstrap, but it worked beautifully. It quickly became a battle between the S&amp;W Model 41 and the High Standard Military Model. And contrary to whatever else you might hear, a pistol shaped like a 1911 is going to shoot better than an angled butt design when you are using the sights in deliberate aimed fire.</span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/bullseye-22s#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/clapp-on-gun-sightsMon, 14 Feb 2011 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">I have always been interested in handgun sights and, in the past few years, have been fortunate enough to get to experiment with a variety of different types. It's really amazing what was once factory-installed as a so-called &ldquo;target&rdquo; sight. I believe that iron sights intended for target shooting should be large enough to be seen in the changing light conditions of a long and arduous day at the range. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">Having handled some of the target revolvers of the turn of the century era, I am amazed at the miniscule little lumps of metal that passed for sighting equipment for the likes of Ira Paine and Walter Winans. Fortunately for today's shooters (at least the ones who are not using optical devices), sights have evolved to something a little larger and a lot better. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">I have credit Jeff Cooper with crystallizing thought on the matter of gun sights. In his extensive writings, Col. Cooper often commented that stock handguns had a lot of room for improvement in the size of sights. He had tried many combinations over the years including various sizes, shapes and colors. In the end, he was pretty well certain that the best all around sight system was a plain black post front and an appropriate square notch rear. Some of his various sight experimentations can still be found on guns in his armory&mdash;like a long-barreled <a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/articles/smith-wesson-model-29/" target="_blank">Model 29 .44 Mag.</a> with a red ramp front sight. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">There is still use for fast-to-use sights for close crisis shooting. The <a href="http://www.xssights.com/index.html" target="_blank">XS system</a>, with its wide, shallow &ldquo;V&rdquo; and huge white dot is an example. As originally conceived, the sight was simplicity itself, with a black rear and white front, and it worked very well. Again, this is a sighting system intended for fast work at close range. For more precise use, a square notch and post is a great choice. Just make sure the sights are big enough to see easily and without squinting into the sun like you&rsquo;re a soldier in a John Ford western.</span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/clapp-on-gun-sights#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/how-about-the-ccosThu, 03 Feb 2011 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">Several friends have asked me to find out why <a href="http://www.colt.com/" target="_blank">Colt</a> no longer makes the CCO, which stands for Concealed Carry Officer's Model. I have to wonder if any readers are also interested. This little 1911 variant is one of the slickest 1911 iterations I have ever seen. Colt made a number of them in the 90s, then followed up with a short run of Gunsite CCOs. They were very popular and are approaching cult favorite status. Basically, this gun was an Officer's ACP frame with a Commander slide fitted thereto. This gave the gun the length of a Commander and the height of a Defender. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">The resulting pistol had a 4 1/4-inch barrel for performance and sight radius advantages, but a receiver that took a short 6-round magazine. The shorter butt was much easier to hide than a long one and the top end had all of the advantages of a Commander, particularly in the reliability sense. The Gunsite pistols were much preferred by concealed carry handgunners and bring top dollar in the secondary market. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">Making one of these pistols is simply choosing the right parts. Colt currently makes everything required to assemble a CCO, so I am puzzled that they have not done so. If you want to write with your concerns about the availability of such a gun, write to me care of this blog. I will get your feelings to the right folks at Colt.</span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/how-about-the-ccos#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/police-trade-insWed, 26 Jan 2011 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">There are a lot of cops in this country and every one of them carries a modern handgun of some kind. Most of these guns are seldom fired, but carried habitually, and these guns are updated with new models every few years. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">What happens to the old guns? Usually, they're purchased en masse by a wholesale gun broker, which makes sense in that a good chunk of money goes back to the city or county that bought them in the first place. The wholesaler puts them on the market at a price point that will sell them fast. Your local dealer can buy them for sale to you. I never met a handgunner who didn't have room for one more good pistol in his or her battery, as long as it was priced right. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">Browsing through the latest circular from Zander's of Illinois, I find a veritable candy store of guns that once rode in John Law's holster somewhere in this nation. There are several kinds of Berettas and about as many kinds of <a href="http://www.sigsauer.com/" target="_blank">SIGs</a>, as well as HKs, <a href="http://www.glock.com/" target="_blank">Glocks</a> and <a href="http://www.smith-wesson.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/CustomContentDisplay?langId=-1&amp;storeId=750001&amp;catalogId=750051&amp;content=11001" target="_blank">S&amp;Ws</a>. All of them are in Good or Very Good condition and attractively priced. The firm's aggressive buyers even uncovered a small cache of brand-new, unfired commercial Colt 1911A1 .45s, made in the 1950s. They want a little more for those.</span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/police-trade-ins#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/m1911-series-70Mon, 24 Jan 2011 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">We are now in the centennial year of the magnificent Government Model Colt 1911, arguably the greatest handgun of all time. Just a few months from now, we will reach March 29th, 2011&mdash;exactly 100 years from the day that Colonel Thompson wrote the letter that advised Colt Firearms of the official adoption of the M1911 pistol. We are going to be very 1911-oriented this year. Everybody is sure to focus on the gun and the many new variations that are sure to appear. Several makers are advertising a (presumably desirable) return to something called a Series 70 Firing Pin Safety System. This is puzzling, because there is no such thing. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">That's right, I said there is no such thing as a series 70 firing pin safety&mdash;it does not now exist, nor has it ever existed. This is a complete misnomer, one that we have to go to the history books to unravel. By the early 1970s, Colt had been manufacturing the legendary .45 pistol for some six decades. In an effort to boost sales, the company updated the line&mdash;Government Model, Commander, Gold Cup and others&mdash;with several new features and the Series 70 roll marks. The single most important feature of the gun was a barrel bushing with flexible collet fingers, which was intended to better center the barrel in position, thereby improving accuracy. Although it worked pretty well, it proved to be unpopular and was quietly discontinued several years later. More important to our discussion of the Series 70 guns, the firing pin system was exactly the same one used since 1911. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">Do not be confused by Colt's experimental use of the Schwartz safety system on a small number of guns in the late 1930s. A gun of this type is the delight of a collector for its rarity, but the bane of a serious shooter for its poor trigger action. Intended to prevent a discharge in the event of a dropped gun, the Schwartz system worked off pressure on the grip safety when the gun was in the shooter's grasp. It was never produced in quantity, but collectors know of a few 1911A1s, National Match .45s and even .38 Supers. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">The original Browning-designed inertia firing pin was the way the gun was built from 1911 until the Series 70 guns ran their course in the early 1980s. At this point, Colt began to use a firing pin safety that worked off trigger pressure. It raised a spring-loaded plunger that cleared a path for the firing pin to move. Part of the so-called Series 80 guns, it was not a well-received feature, as it did not contribute to the crisp trigger pull for which the gun was so popular. Colt is currently making both types of guns&mdash;70s and 80s. The 70s are configured like the original guns, but they will pass any drop test because of a slightly stronger firing pin spring and a lighter firing pin. It's a matter of balancing inertia. This kind of system is currently very popular and used in several makes of guns. Without a good reason, this is what they mean when they say &ldquo;Series 70 firing pin safety.&rdquo;</span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/m1911-series-70#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/waiting-on-a-holsterFri, 14 Jan 2011 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">There is still a great demand for custom holsters and accessories, made one at a time from leather, though I am well aware that <a href="http://www.unclemikes.com/products/kydex_paddle_holsters.html" target="_blank">Kydex</a> and other forms of synthetic materials are on their way to dominating the gun-carrying business. That's progress, I guess and I have to confess that I often use such holsters when attending various shooting schools. There are many advantages to synthetics, not the least of them being the reduced cost of materials. But, having carried various pistols and revolvers in my military and law enforcement years, I am inclined to fondly recall the leather holsters that were then the norm. &ldquo;Leather&rdquo; was even the policeman's slang for the entire ensemble of belt, holster and all the various other pouches and pockets that went along with it. It was cool stuff and the best of leather gear displayed exceptional quality. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">Several craftsmen around the country are still hard at work making leather goods one at a time. They seem to be doing a brisk business, so it looks like I am not alone in my curmudgeonly preference for leather. But an ugly monster rears its head in this situation. The really good holster makers&mdash;<a href="http://www.miltsparks.com/" target="_blank">Milt Sparks</a>, <a href="http://www.frontiergunleather.com/" target="_blank">Frontier Gunleather</a>, <a href="http://www.delfatti.com/" target="_blank">Matt Del Fatti</a>&mdash;all have waiting lists for completing custom projects. You may have to wait for many months before you get your dream rig. It's probably going to be worth the wait for holsters from these and other craftsmen, but waiting is still waiting. So my advice to you is simple. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">If you want a special rig from one of them, order it now. Don&rsquo;t delay&mdash;do it now.</span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/waiting-on-a-holster#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/marathon-shootsWed, 12 Jan 2011 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">I have been involved in several marathon shoots that gunzine editors take such delight in ordering. One was with a rifle (Colt H-BAR), another was a disaster with a gun that was quickly withdrawn from production and one more was with a <a href="http://www.sigsauer.com/Products/ShowCatalogProduct.aspx?categoryid=6" target="_blank">Sig P220</a> .45. This last one was easily the most memorable. The project consisted of a crew of volunteers running 10,000 rounds of high-quality Black Hills ball ammunition through the gun in one day-long session. We could have done it quicker, but I insisted on being fair to the gun, as well as finding out some interesting stuff along the way. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">We took the pistol right out of the carton at the range and wiped the shipping oil off before checking to be sure that it was properly lubricated for extended shooting. Then we mounted the gun in a Ransom Rest, fired a few settling shots and before firing a 10-shot group &ldquo;for record.&rdquo; After this, we took the pistol out of the Rest and fired two cases of ammo through it (1,000 rounds) by hand using relays of shooters and several guys loading magazines. At the one-grand point, we stopped, let the gun cool, cleaned it and fired another 10-round group from the Ransom Rest. This procedure went on until we had completed ten full cycles. The accuracy started to deteriorate at around 7,000 rounds and was pretty bad for the last group after 10,000 rounds. But I later discovered that the poor grouping was not the gun's fault. We got most of the primer residue and powder fouling out of the barrel at each cleaning. However, you can't shoot that much and that fast without plating the bore grooves with copper from all those bullets. In an at-home cleaning session, I was able to remove all of the copper fouling, at which time it was back to the range for another session with the same ammo. The last group was just about the same size as the baseline group we fired right after breakfast of the first day. In other words, we didn't hurt that barrel; we just burnished it smooth. It was an amazing performance by that high quality pistol. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">I also learned other things at that shoot. I found out what really happens with the first-shot flyer syndrome. This is the tendency of almost all automatic pistols to deliver the first shot from a magazine to a spot away from the rest of the shots in the magazine. This particular pistol wanted to shoot the first shot out of the group at 7 o'clock. So the first shot on paper was low and left by about an inch. At 1,000 rounds, the first one was about three-quarters of an inch out of the major group. It was a little closer for each successive group until about 5,000 round mark, when the first one was in the group&mdash;on its lower left edge. The first one stayed at that relative position through the end of the shoot. I had always believed that the first shot flyer syndrome went away as the gun wore in. This shoot pretty well proved it.</span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/marathon-shoots#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/illuminationWed, 05 Jan 2011 00:00:00 GMT<p><span style="font-size: small;">As an infantry guy, I called for illumination quite often. It usually came from mortars or howitzers, but occasionally from naval gunfire or aerial flares. As a cop, I used my big 4-cell Kel-Lite far more than my Model 19. And as the saying goes, you can't fight 'em if you can't see 'em. Of all the possible accessories to a good fighting handgun you could possibly buy, one of the most important is an effective light. It's so important that the synonym for flashlight in the tactical sense is &ldquo;target identifier.&rdquo; There's a vast liability issue awaiting the police officer or even armed citizen who lets fly with old Betsy without positively identifying the target, but that's only part of the handgunner's need for a good light. </span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">In close range confrontations with guns, a light can be used as a shield. Sure, the bad guy knows generally where you are, but studies have shown that he has a hard time shooting back when he's getting 160 lumens right in the eyeballs. In fact, a whole range of low-light tactics has evolved to deal with the best means of handling and using the broad array of tactical flashlights that are available on today's market. Much of that market is dominated by the products of <a href="http://www.surefire.com/" target="_blank">SureFire</a>, founded and run by Dr, John Matthews. </span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">Close to my working desk, I have a shelf of various kinds of flashlights, made by seven or eight different makers. Many of them are made by SureFire, a company with which I have a long relationship and great respect. This is no endorsement of their products over those of other fine makers. It's just that one SureFire or another most commonly fills the bill for whatever I am doing. However, until recently there was a gap in the line&mdash;a hand-held light with a strobe capability. I discovered the benefits of a strobe on a writer's junket several years ago. Basically, it is a brief blast of high-intensity light, blinking rapidly. This tends to confuse, disorient and otherwise mess up the hostile actions of another party who is facing you. For some people, exposure to strobe light even causes nausea. It's tough to remain hostile when facing this, because most of us only want to get away from it. I just received a sample of a compact and powerful little light from SureFire&mdash;the <a href="http://www.surefire.com/maxexp/main.pl?pgm=co_disp&amp;func=displ&amp;strfnbr=6&amp;prrfnbr=25121&amp;sesent=0,0&amp;search_id=2471558" target="_blank">model Z2-S</a>. It is rapidly worming its way into my affections and may turn out to be SureFire's best product yet.</span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/illumination#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/terminology-hammer-spurMon, 20 Dec 2010 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">Times are a' changing. Not so long ago, almost every handgun hammer had a spur. This is the rearmost visible extension of the hammer on a pistol or revolver. It's the part on which the shooter places his thumb in order to cock the gun's action. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">Hammer spur shape was very important on revolvers with single action trigger systems. Manual cocking was the only way in which to make these revolvers fire. The large contact pad on the spur of so-called &ldquo;Target&rdquo; revolvers (which usually have DA/SA trigger systems) was there to make cocking easier in the Timed and Rapid fire stages of the National Match course. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">Without exception that I can think of, hammer spurs are not operationally required on hammer-fired semi-automatic pistols. Frequently, manufacturers simply leave them off and thereby achieve a smooth, clean contour to the rear face of the slide. However, if you are tempted to cut off your own hammer spur, proceed with caution. The mass of the hammer spur has another function and it's a lot more subtle. The weight of the spur contributes to a positive strike on the firing pin. You may have to make an adjustment somewhere else in the gun's action.</span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/terminology-hammer-spur#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/old-dogs-new-tricksFri, 17 Dec 2010 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">I recently picked up a brand new pistol. The gun was the new <a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/ArticlePage.aspx?id=2139&amp;cid=19" target="_blank">Taurus 709 SLIM</a> and it appeared to be the latest in a seemingly unending string of polymer receiver autos with simple DAO lockwork. This is a highly successful system, used by many makers and available in all the popular calibers. Most models follow the example set by Glock, where the slide's movement to the rear partially cocks the internal striker while trigger pressure completes the cocking action before releasing the striker to fire. The new Taurus model appeared to be another DAO, but I should have seen that it was not. This was particularly true when I couldn't get the pistol to fire and blamed the good folks at Taurus for sending me a broke gun. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">Welcome to the 21st Century, Wiley. It's a time of new tricks for old dogs like you. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">Before there were DAO autos of various kinds, the standard was some form of DA/SA trigger action, where the first shot was delivered by a long, sweeping arc of the trigger. Subsequent shots were all with a short, crisp SA trigger pull. This DA/SA stuff started with Walther of Germany and spread like wildfire. For a couple of decades in the 70s and 80s, this was the basic plan for a service auto. Before that, fighting autos (1911, Luger, HiPower, et al) were pure single actions, but a cocked.45 in a cop's holster is enough to give the police administrators of America a massive coronary. Suffice it to stay that the current service handgun scene has some DA/SAs and a lot of DAOs. Enter the new Taurus, which is neither. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">The perceived advantage of the DA/SA is that it is &ldquo;safer&rdquo; to carry with hammer down. But almost everyone agrees that the single action trigger is easier to use for both speed and accuracy. Taurus has come up with a new system that has both types of trigger action. The difference is in an easy-to-use single-action trigger for each and every shot, but a standby double action trigger for the infrequent possibility of a misfire. It works like this. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">Insert a loaded magazine in an empty gun and rack the slide. This chambers a round and fully cocks the striker. The trigger needs to be pulled through a long take-up stroke, but releases with a crisp 5 pound press. On firing, the slide cycles and the process may be repeated. If there's a misfire, the slide doesn't move and the striker isn't cocked. But you can get a second strike on the round by sweeping the trigger through a long arc and cocking the striker. This action may be repeated if the shooter so desires. Classically trained 1911 shooters know that the more common reason for click-instead-of-bang is an empty chamber, but that's another issue. <a href="http://www.taurususa.com/" target="_blank">Taurus</a> has effectively resolved the misfire problem with a unique SA/DA trigger system. The cocked trigger is so far back in the trigger guard that my kielbasa-sized fingers just didn't get it back there. Expecting a typical DAO, I short-stroked the trigger, so the gun didn&rsquo;t go bang and my face is red.</span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/old-dogs-new-tricks#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/concealed-carry-home-defenseMon, 13 Dec 2010 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">A lot of what I hear and read on the subject of defensive handguns shows evidence of confusion on terminology. There is a world of difference between a concealed-carry handgun and a home-defense handgun. Since we don't usually carry our handguns openly as we go about our daily lives in public view, we need to carry them concealed. I must emphasize that this can only be done where it is legally permissible and usually only when we have obtained the necessary governmental license to do so. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;"><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/articles/concealed-carry-strong-side/" target="_blank">Carrying concealed</a> is a complicated matter, but it should be obvious that a concealed-carry handgun is one that is adequate for personal defense and can be easily concealed. For a number of reasons, such a firearm tends to be small, simple and above all, light. If it isn't, you will eventually rationalize away the need for carrying it. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">If the defensive handgun is not going to be carried concealed, but rather kept for use in the home when needed. Once again, the gun should be adequate for personal defense, but there are no tactical restrictions imposed by its size and weight. You can keep a large, heavy handgun in a variety of locations around your home and have it ready for use against an intruder. I digress for a moment to advise that where and how the gun is stored is your responsibility, but it must be kept out of the hands of those who are not skilled in its use. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">For either role, we choose a handgun that is &ldquo;adequate for personal defense&rdquo; in the tactical sense, so any concealed-carry handgun is also a home-defense handgun, but it is not necessarily true the other way around. As a general rule, a larger, heavier handgun is better when a fight really starts, but a smaller lighter one is more likely to be there. As a matter of economy, I can understand a person using his concealed carry gun at home, but if he is never going to carry it away from the house, better to choose something that has a little more heft to it.</span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/concealed-carry-home-defense#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/terminology-underlugThu, 09 Dec 2010 00:00:00 GMT<p><span style="font-size: small;">I'm not sure where this underlug business really got its start, but I was around when it really got rolling. A term that relates most commonly to DA/SA revolvers, underlug refers to an integral extension of metal that runs along the bottom side of the barrel. Although underlug-like fixtures are found on some of the Frontier-era S&amp;W break tops, I think the first gun to have one (in the modern sense) was the Triple Lock of 1908. It was necessary for the complex locking system of that magnificent old gun, but it came to be highly regarded because it protected (or shrouded) the revolver's ejector rod. These shrouds are still a regular feature on most of S&amp;W's N-frame revolver models. However, not until the 1950s did we see a shroud on the barrel of a K frame. It was on the Model 19, developed at the instigation of the late Bill Jordan. Bill was a real humorist at times; I can remember him chuckling over the use of an ejector rod shroud like it was a Holy Grail. He called it a &ldquo;stroud,&rdquo; solemnly assuring his listeners that every gun needed a good &ldquo;stroud.&rdquo; </span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">Lots of things happened in the revolver world of the 50s. Among them was the introduction of a superb revolver in the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colt_Python" target="_blank">Colt Python</a>. This was a premier gun in every sense, including the introductory price of $125. There was much to commend the Python, including the gun's accuracy. It's most recognizable feature was an ejector rod shroud that was almost cylindrical in cross-section and extended to the muzzle end of the barrel. Now, there was no need for all that metal for shrouding the ejector rod, but it looked cool as hell. After people used their Pythons, the feature came to be prized for the positive effect on the gun's heft and balance. The weight was now much more forward, which contributed to stability in aimed shots and recoil recovery at any time. It was at this point that I recall the first use of the term &ldquo;underlug.&rdquo; It got to the point where a full length underlug was so desirable that shooters were buying Colt Python barrels and having good gunsmiths install them on S&amp;W K frame revolvers, resulting in a &ldquo;Smython&rdquo; or &ldquo;Smolt.&rdquo; In doing so, they accomplished the same thing that the old King Gunsight Co. did with the tube-mounted adjustable weight system that dated to the late 1930s. Underlugs were in and it was no surprise that they showed up on S&amp;W's L frames in the late 1970s. The L frames were the first, but not the last, 'Smiths to have the full-length slab of steel under the barrel. You can even see a similar device on Ruger GP100s. </span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">It is now part of American (even European) revolver design. But&mdash;in my humble opinion&mdash;you can get too much of a good thing. Like sunshine or single malt scotch, too much can produce problems. Frankly, an 8-inch Python or equivalent S&amp;W 686 is an unwieldy gun for most handgun uses. Even the 6-inch versions are just a tad muzzle heavy. I think the full underlug serves a good purpose on guns up to four inches in barrel length. After that, its utilitarian value drops off rapidly. </span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">The underlug is a feature that started out of necessity on the Triple Lock and persists for other reasons on just about every modern DA/SA revolver worth having.</span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/terminology-underlug#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/price-pointMon, 29 Nov 2010 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">Marketing executives at our major gun companies are aware that they need to offer their customers many choices in every gun style. That's true not only for optional features such as sights, grips and lasers, but also for pricing . The overwhelmingly most popular type of handgun today is the high capacity, DAO auto in 9 mm or .40 S&amp;W, usually with a receiver made of molded polymer. This style of gun is available at a wide array of prices. Current industry jargon for the suggested retail price is the &ldquo;price point.&rdquo; The point I am making is simply that big makers would like to have a gun of this type available at several different price points&mdash;literally several different guns. Obviously, this is done to attract as big a percentage of the potential buyers as possible. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">With the advent of their new line of <a href="http://www.smith-wesson.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/Category4_750001_750051_757962_-1_757752_757751_image" target="_blank">SD pistols</a> (introduced at the 2010 NRA Annual Meetings in Charlotte), <a href="http://www.smith-wesson.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/CustomContentDisplay?langId=-1&amp;storeId=750001&amp;catalogId=750051&amp;content=11001" target="_blank">Smith &amp; Wesson</a> now offers a wider array of 9 mm pistols that fill the bill more than ever before. They would not do this if there was not a demand. Thus we see the legendary New England gunmaker offering no less than four price levels of high-capacity, polymer-frame DAO 9 mm pistols. Because of the clever engineering that went into the development of the .40 S&amp;W cartridge, these guns will all accept the .40 S&amp;W cartridge with suitable changes to key dimensions in the gun. Begin with the Sigma series pistol, originally built to contend with the Glock. A simple and uncomplicated gun, the Sigma has been through lengthy improvement programs to fix little glitches that cropped up following the pistol's introduction in 1994. It's still available and the $482 that it costs gets the buyer a pretty sound&mdash;if admittedly plain&mdash;little pistol. However, for another $48, you can get into the new gun. It's called the SD9 (or <a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/articles/SD40-Pistol-Review/" target="_blank">SD40</a>) for its intended use as a self-defense tool. I haven't had the chance to wring one out, but handling samples at the Annual Meetings in Charlotte looked and felt pretty good. Here is a marketing effort to build a gun that has all of the bare-bones necessities of a defensive pistol, but without frills. At $530, it is a great choice in a pistol. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">When S&amp;W sends their sales people out to do battle in the sales wars, a goodly number of those guys head for police departments. It makes a lot of sense to conduct a sales transaction that involves a truckload of guns rather than just one or two. Specifically developed for service use by soldiers and cops, the <a href="http://www.smith-wesson.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/Category4_750001_750051_757955_-1_757781_757781_image" target="_blank">M&amp;P series</a> of guns have many advanced features that suit them for the job, including an exceptional system of interchangeable grip inserts. The M&amp;Ps come in endless variations of size, capacity, sights and even colors. They are also available in .357 Sig and .45 ACP. They run $189 more than the less costly SD9s, beginning at $719. The M&amp;P pistols are the flagship of the S&amp;W semi-auto line. However, they are not the most expensive. That distinction falls to the Walther-developed P99, made partially in Germany, then finished and marketed in America by S&amp;W. It's called a &ldquo;strategic alliance&rdquo; and benefits both makers. The gun is an advanced and sophisticated gun with a complex operating system and a lot of value for the money. P99s were once known as SW99s and currently sell for $825, which is $106 more than the M&amp;P series. If there is something to be learned from all this, it should be that the service pistol market is alive and thriving&mdash;and is densely populated.</span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/price-point#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/worst-of-the-bestThu, 18 Nov 2010 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">Question: You have said that a handgun is the worst possible weapon for personal defense. How about telling us what are better choices and ranking them in order, 1 through 10. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">Answer: I have made that statement a number of times and stand willing to defend it. But I can't do so here in exactly the manner that you ask. I will attempt to clear up any possible confusion about the question, but I have to put matters in context first. There are practical considerations at work here, so let's first mention the difference between personal defense and home defense. Personal defense implies that the defense may have to occur anywhere and anytime, so that gun has to be both relatively portable and completely concealable. There are very few places in America where you can go about your business with a gun slung on your shoulder or openly carried in a holster&mdash;the codes and customs of society usually don't permit this. It can be argued that it should be permissible, but the practical reality is that the shooter who ventures from his home with a firearm is going to be limited to a handgun that is both portable and concealable. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">Still, I am reminded of the old gun man's observation that &ldquo;...the closer you get to hitting 'em with a coffee can full of concrete, the better off you are.&rdquo; He meant that a life-threatening criminal assault is best met with a skillful application of overwhelming power. In a home, that means anything you want. Many guns are desirable, but anything with a bore over fifty caliber is a destructive device and illegal to own. I might be partial to a vintage Thompson Submachine Gun and I could own one in my state, but that are so expensive as to be impractical for almost anyone, including (sadly) me. Common sense and practical considerations of over-penetration, mobility and expense inevitability force you back toward various handguns. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">They have many positive attributes, but overwhelming power is not one of them. If the handgun is the chosen gun, I cannot advocate a caliber smaller than 9 mm in autos or .38 Spl. in revolvers. Choose as big and powerful a handgun as you can handle. Choose ammo with care, avoiding loads that over-penetrate. My best bet is the .45 ACP in either pistol or revolver. Still, any .45 is not as reliable a stopper as a simple 12-gauge pump shotgun with proper ammo. These guns are often found for prices significantly less than suitable .45s. You should buy the best quality pump-action you can afford, usually an American-made <a href="http://www.remington.com/" target="_blank">Remington</a> or <a href="http://www.mossberg.com/" target="_blank">Mossberg</a>. The ammo should be chosen for terminal effect and not to increase hit probability. I know of several police departments that use one ounce slugs exclusively. They are almost 100 percent effective in close range shooting situations. I have yet to see any study that proves that slugs at close range are any more effective than loads with either No. 00 or No. 000 buckshot. As much as this might seem to be strange stuff for a guy that lives with the one-handed gun, it is what I believe. All factors considered, my choice for a home defense firearm is an <a href="http://www.remington.com/product-families/firearms/shotgun-families/pump-action-model-870.aspx" target="_blank">870</a> with 000 or one-ounce slugs.</span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/worst-of-the-best#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/double-tap-deniedWed, 10 Nov 2010 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">&ldquo;Double Tap&rdquo; is a slang term that I don't believe has a precise meaning. They don't use the term at Gunsite, which has been teaching for a long time now. Most commonly, I believe it means two fast pistol shots. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">Similar terms which do have precise meanings are &ldquo;controlled pair&rdquo; and &ldquo;hammer.&rdquo; But some students of this combat shooting business are now suggesting that the very idea of delivering two shots to the target&mdash;whatever you call it&mdash;is fallacious teaching. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">They argue that programming shooters to perform this technique may be wasteful of ammunition, because one shot may very well get it done. More, they contend that it is better to teach the student to shoot until the threat is resolved. That is a very good point and one with which I agree in principle. However, I also believe that what you should do in a life-threatening emergency is never simple. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">Since a handgun of any caliber is the worst possible firearm for personal defense, but nonetheless the only one you may have with you in an emergency, its use should be optimized. For that reason, I argue that every beginning shooter should develop the ability to deliver two fast shots to the center of mass as a basic response. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">It can be demonstrated that two shots more than double the terminal effect of a single one. If more are needed, two more is not out of the question, but the general rule is two shots per customer. It isn't done to increase the possibility of a hit, but rather to increase the probability of stopping the fight quickly.</span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/double-tap-denied#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/100-years-reminiscingFri, 05 Nov 2010 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">Remington's recent decision to offer the public a 1911 style .45 pistol is well timed. Back in March, we passed the 99th anniversary of the official adoption of the M1911 pistol as the sidearm of the U.S. Army. Next year, we'll see the centennial of that great old classic. For a host of reasons, the 1911 is an enduring firearm. I have yet to handle a sample of the Remington version, but it looks good and the early reviews of the gun by other writers are favorable. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">Most shooters are aware that a lineal predecessor of today's <a href="http://www.remington.com/" target="_blank">Remington</a> arms company&mdash;Remington UMC&mdash;made 1911s in the World War I era and Remington Rand (an unrelated company) made them during World War II. However, it has been many years since Big Green had anything to do with handguns, so the new 1911 pistol requires completely new set-up, tooling, etc. I am confident that they will handle the project very well&mdash;after all, they have been making guns of all types for almost 200 years. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">The association of the terms &ldquo;Remington&rdquo; and &ldquo;.45&rdquo; sends my mind racing back to another gun that embodied both those words, but ended up little more than a footnote in gun history. The gun was another automatic pistol, but there is no connection (and only passing resemblance) to the Colt-Browning gun that made so much history. Remington produced only prototypes of a pistol called the Model 53. In the immediate post-WWI period, the Navy and Marine Corps were having some problems getting enough M1911 style autos and began to explore options of their own. This type of arms procurement may seem unusual in today's Department of Defense atmosphere, but it was done in 1919-1920. A full-sized service auto with single action trigger and single column magazine, the Model 53 was developed exclusively for a possible contract with the U.S. Navy. Designed by <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Pedersen" target="_blank">John Pedersen</a>, the new .45 was based on his Model 51 pocket auto in .32 ACP and .380 ACP. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">Even today, there are serious shooters who place great stock in the slim little Remington Model 51. It is an exceptionally pocketable auto. Designer Pedersen is said to have spent a great deal of time building models, which were tried by everyone in the Remington plant. Pedersen wanted the best possible ergonomics for the greatest number of people and he worked hard to get it. I found and used a 51 when I was a police officer many years ago. Eventually, I put it away, but only because of the limited power of the .380 cartridge and not any lack of satisfaction with the gun. Remington's advertising slogan for the pistol was: &ldquo;Fits your palm like the hand of a friend.&rdquo; That was as true a statement as was ever used in advertising. From the shooter's perspective, the Model 51 shape pointed better than anything else in use. Better yet, the bore axis was closer to the hand than any other auto I have ever tried. That's why I am intrigued with the possibility of a scaled-up version of the gun in .45. That would be the pistol that was evaluated by the Navy in 1920, but not adopted and never put into serial production. As far as I know, there were only prototypes of the pistol made, but looking at their pictures suggests a very graceful gun that I would love to shoot.</span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/100-years-reminiscing#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/s-w-centennialThu, 28 Oct 2010 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">Over 20 years ago, I was just beginning to get rolling as a gunwriter. I had a couple of years behind me working for one of the smaller magazines and had just been called up to the show at one of the big books. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">At my suggestion, that magazine started a new handgun column and I was given that assignment. In the very first edition of that column, I included a couple of paragraphs on a gun that I heard <a href="http://www.smith-wesson.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/CustomContentDisplay?langId=-1&amp;storeId=750001&amp;catalogId=750051&amp;content=11001" target="_blank">Smith &amp; Wesson</a> was considering. At that point in time, they did not offer any version of the Centennial revolver. This gun was an outgrowth of the older New Departure Safety Hammerless, a breaktop gun introduced in the Frontier era. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">Discontinued at the onset of World War II in 1941, this handy little gun was replaced with a solid, J-frame called the Centennial in 1952. Known as the Model 40 in steel and Model 42 with an aluminum frame, the original Centennials lasted until 1974, when they were once again removed from production. I had carried a Centennial as a backup gun when I was a cop and had come to love the various features that made this a great gun. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">In that first column (1989), I commented on the value of the gun in a modern world. I went so far as ask my readers to write to S&amp;W's president and tell him how much they would like to see the Centennial put back in production. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">Lo and behold&mdash;they did and he did. Re-introduced as the models 640 and 642, the new Centennial came without the grip safety, which it never needed in the first place. At the present, there are new versions of the gun in steel, scandium and aluminum alloys, and in several calibers to include (for the first time) .22 LR and .22 WMR. I was impressed&mdash;both then and now&mdash;with the willingness of the company to build a gun that people really wanted. My personal pet is the top-of-the-line 340PD. It is a near ideal package of sweet-handling power and performance in a light carry gun. Don't be afraid to write and tell the gunmakers what you need.</span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/s-w-centennial#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/double-wide-with-double-problemsTue, 26 Oct 2010 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">The high capacity automatic pistol is now an accepted necessity in the 21st Century gun culture. While it is most commonly done in 9 mm Luger, the double-wide pistol may or may not be a necessity in the real world. That's an opinion, so we had better take a deeper look at the virtues and vices associated with this class of gun. The advantages of a high capacity magazine should be obvious, but are best summarized in Wayne Novak's words: &ldquo;the reload is in the gun.&rdquo; Sure, there is a great potential for misuse in a seemingly endless supply of ammunition, but the answer to that one lies in good training. It doesn't make sense for the traditionalist to condemn the pistol's capacity for potential misuse when the gun doesn't have anything to do with the way it's used. In my view, the problems associated with this class of pistol are the physical characteristics that are by-products of those two columns of cartridges. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">Many of the double wide service pistols have complicated trigger systems that are hard to learn. In great measure, this problem is being engineered away. The current trend is to simplify triggers that work on some form of DAO (double action only) system. In this kind of gun, pioneered by the <a href="http://www.glock.com/" target="_blank">Glock</a>, trigger action performs two functions&mdash;fully cocking the hammer or striker, and releasing it to fire. This revolver-like simplicity does not require de-activating a safety, so it is essentially an aim-and-shoot drill. While the trend is toward the simplified triggers, they have disadvantages in that the triggers usually have to move through a long arc requiring considerable pressure. In short, they're harder to shoot with accuracy. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">I am more concerned with the second high-capacity problem, which is the trend toward a thicker, harder-to-handle grip section. In law enforcement in particular, there are smaller officers taking up the badge. The guns that some of them are required to carry are just too thick for their short fingers and narrow palms. This trend is lessening with such guns as the <a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/articles/Ruger-SR9s/" target="_blank">Ruger SR9</a>, S&amp;W M&amp;P, FNP, H&amp;K, all of which use some form of adaptable butt section that lets the smaller shooters have a workable pistol. Even Glock has introduced a system to make the grip surfaces adaptable to a variety of hands. However, there was one pistol that had both a workable trigger system and extremely good ergonomics. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">That pistol was the Peter Sodoma-designed Browning BDM. I may be a little like Don Quixote tilting at windmills to fondly endorse this gun, because it was not a great commercial success. BDMs were introduced almost 20 years ago and lasted until about 1998. I remember my review pistol very fondly, because it addressed both the trigger problem and the ergonomic problem&mdash;and handled them both very well. It had a slide-mounted catch that let you choose between a simple, revolver-like DAO system and a Wondernine-like DA/SA trigger system. One or the other, either-or, but a 90 degree catch took it back to the alternate mode. One of the great advantages of the DAO (revolver mode) was your ability to thumb cock the hammer for a more precise shot, should the tactical circumstances demand it. It was a good design, but its best feature was slimness. Sodoma used a different kind of hammer spring and therefore avoided a long coil spring on a strut behind the magazine. There was little more than the magazine in that skinny little butt section. My buddy Bob Hoelscher&mdash;who held a cop's badge for 50 years in Florida&mdash;was an advocate of this gun and got it approved in Dade County. The real proof of the radical Browning was the fact that cops, who could have handled anything on the planet, chose the BDM. I have no idea why it didn't last, but I suspect that too few people saw it and used it.</span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/double-wide-with-double-problems#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/loading-the-judgeMon, 25 Oct 2010 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">At this year's SHOT Show in Las Vegas, <a href="http://www.taurususa.com/" target="_blank">Taurus</a> introduced new variations of the <a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/ArticlePage.aspx?id=1526&amp;cid=26" target="_blank">Judge</a> revolver. The Judge is the whimsical name that the Brazilian-based American gunmaker gave to their revolver that fires both .45 Colt cartridges and .410 shotgun shells. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">This is a different idea if there ever was one, as well as a product I've watched closely from its inception. It is, quite simply, taking the handgun world by storm. Before the Judge came along, we had a couple of .410 slug loads on the market, as well as a few buckshot rounds. Naturally, there were also many kinds of regular shotshells loaded with different shot sizes that would work in a handgun. For a variety of reasons, 000 buckshot was arguably the most effective defensive load in a .410 revolver&mdash;remember that the reason for using any shotgun in a defensive role is increased terminal effect, not increased spread in the hopes of getting a hit. Judges have already been used effectively in several real world encounters, so the real acceptance of their place in the armory would have to be the development of ever better ammo to use in them. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">It's a pleasure to report that ammunition makers have taken these factors into consideration and Judge-specific ammo is now being loaded. <a href="http://www.winchester.com/Products/shotshell-ammunition/supreme-elite/pdx1410/Pages/S410PDX1.aspx" target="_blank">Winchester</a> just introduced a load featuring two sizes and types of projectiles, which matches up well with several existing buckshot and slug loads in their line. <a href="http://www.remington.com/products/ammunition/shotshells/home-defense/home-defense-410-loads.aspx" target="_blank">Remington</a> just announced a new .410 handgun load that features four 000 buckshot pellets. Federal also has a similar load, as well as one with No. 4 shot. Even the Europeans (who doubtless talk to U.S. importers) have come up with Judge loads. There's one from Russia, as well as a really interesting Italian load for the 3-inch-cylindered Judges that uses four .40-caliber balls. At one point in early shotgun history, there was a buckshot pellet described as No. 0000; it measured .39-inch. This is essentially the same thing. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">I am in the process of preparing a detailed article on the range of Judge ammo and you should see it in the pages of <em>American Rifleman</em> before the year is out. Taurus has come up with their most salable product yet and the Yankee handgunner is well armed because of it. I have to wonder how long it will be before some other handgun maker starts imitating the Judge.</span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/loading-the-judge#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/the-mag-makes-the-gunWed, 20 Oct 2010 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">I was on the line at <a href="http://www.gunsite.com/main/" target="_blank">Gunsite</a> with perennial shooting buddies Novak, Blumenthal and Johnston. It was an advanced class and my partners don't tend to be understanding or forgiving of screw-ups or failures that distract the class or interrupt the training. The instructors are of the same frame of mind. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">So when I began to have problems with my gun, I just shut up and worked through it. I was having frequent failures-to-fire on what should have been the second round, so I developed considerable speed with my &ldquo;<a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/The-Tap-Rack/" target="_blank">Tap &amp; Rack</a>.&rdquo; This drill is supposed to re-seat the magazine in the pistol and then remove the problem round from the chamber, replacing it with a fresh round. After a few cycles of this problem, I realized that I had no round in the chamber to be removed. My problem was in the magazine itself. I was using a good brand of a then-new eight-round magazine. When the standard 1911 magazine holds seven rounds, an eight-rounder is a major breakthrough. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">This happened almost 20 years ago and at the time I had relatively little hands-on experience with the new magazines. In retrospect, I am not sure that I would care to use them with a &ldquo;bet-your-butt&rdquo; carryin' pistol because of my earlier problems. The magazine for the 1911 was engineered by the master, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Browning" target="_blank">John Browning</a>. These magazines were intended to hold seven rounds of .45 ACP ammo in such a way that they will feed reliably all through the cycle. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">It is possible to re-configure the magazine spring to permit it to accordion into itself at the bottom end of the coil, thereby allowing a little more space for one more round, which produces an eight-round magazine. But the column of cartridges is actually under a little more pressure than the gun was built to handle, which over-stresses the ability of the magazine catch to keep the magazine locked into the gun. As a result, my fully-loaded eight-round magazines were dropping out of position just a little when I fired the first round. If they are just a fraction of an inch lower than they should be, the moving slide can't engage the topmost round and run it into the chamber, and you get the dreaded &ldquo;click&rdquo; and not the welcomed &ldquo;bang.&rdquo; </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">I began to check each magazine by pulling down on the floorplate after seating it. In a surprising number of cases, the magazine came out and had to be re-seated. If the magazine isn't fully seated, and drops a little, the gun will fire the round in the chamber, but can't feed the next one. I tried various solutions, but the most reliable is to simply use one of the old-fashioned seven-round magazines. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">Understand that I am not condemning the modern eight-round magazine, which is useful for many kinds of shooting. I am merely saying that I have had enough problems with them that I choose to use the original seven-round magazine, at least in defensive handguns.</span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/the-mag-makes-the-gun#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/terminology-magazines-clipsTue, 12 Oct 2010 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">Magazines and clips are not the same thing. They're different. But there is probably no more common misuse of terms in the handgun world than calling a magazine a clip. A magazine is (usually) a sheet steel box that holds cartridges in position for feeding in the magazine well of an autoloading pistol. I say &ldquo;usually...sheet steel&rdquo; because we are seeing polymer magazines more frequently these days. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">A <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magazine_(firearms)" target="_blank">magazine</a> is actually a part of the gun, in the sense that it has a follower and a spring. The first round to be loaded into the magazine rests against the follower and the next one rests against the first, etc. in order to form a column of cartridges. A magazine spring under the follower provides constant upward pressure on the column of cartridges. Loaded into a pistol, the magazine keeps the top cartridge in a position that will ensure proper feeding into the chamber when the pistol's slide cycles. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">For some unknown reason, it has become popular to call magazines clips, which they aren't. Clips are also often made of sheet metal and they do hold cartridges. However, clips are not directly involved in feeding as part of the gun's operating cycle. The most common form of clip known to 21st Century handgunners is the half- or full-moon clip used to load and headspace automatic pistols cartridges in revolvers. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">Usually, this is the venerable .45 ACP round. There is also a device called the stripper clip, which holds a column of cartridges by their rims. The shooter indexes the stripper clip into the top of a pistol's magazine well, then strips them off against the pressure of a magazine spring and follower mounted in the gun. A loading convenience, the pistol stripper clip is often used for the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mauser_C96" target="_blank">Mauser C96 pistol</a> in America. Similar devices were once used on a variety of military rifles. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">Clips are a different breed of cat than the magazine, although they are both concerned with ammunition and firearms.</span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/terminology-magazines-clips#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/laughridges-hammerlessWed, 06 Oct 2010 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">In the early decades of the 20th Century, a number of makers offered a new class of gun called the pocket pistol. These were among the very first semi-automatic pistols ever made and they attracted a great deal of attention. There were many makes offered&mdash;Browning, Beretta, Mauser, Walther, Astra Star, et.al., in Europe, but the American makes were fewer. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">Americans saw S&amp;Ws, Remingtons and Savages, but the most popular was the so-called Hammerless Colt. Actually, the sleek Colt guns of 1903 (.32 ACP) and .1908 (.380 ACP) were not hammerless in the pure sense of the word, because there was an internal hammer that was not visible. By any name, the easy-handling Colts were naturals for the large pockets of gentleman's attire of that period. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">The .380 was particularly well-regarded and stayed in regular production until the beginning of World War II. Browning-designed the 1908 Colt and it was&mdash;and still is&mdash;a great little gun. It is sleek, carries easy and shoots well. The lines of the gun are classic, even if the modest power of the .380 cartridge makes it marginal in stopping power. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">Bill Laughridge, the genial proprietor of <a href="http://www.cylinder-slide.com/" target="_blank">Cylinder &amp; Slide</a> in Fremont, Neb., is a longtime fan of this great little auto. But he's a practical guy who makes a good hunk of his gunsmithing business on custom 1911 .45s. He has developed a new creation in the form of a 1911-style .45 with the major features of the old pocket hammerless Colt. He calls the gun <a href="http://www.cylinder-slide.com/index.php?app=ccp0&amp;ns=prodshow&amp;ref=CSP901" target="_blank">M2008 Historical Pocket Model</a> 45 ACP. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">These are not pistols modified from ordinary 1911s. They are custom guns, built one at a time with custom parts. Almost all of the sleek styling of the original little pistol is there in this new one. Beyond any doubt, the feature that is the most immediately noticeable is the rounded shape at the rear of the slide. It caused the gun to be called a hammerless in the old days, but that was not quite right. There was a hammer (with no spur) inside the mechanism. So it is with the new gun, which is larger by a good bit to accept .45 ACP cartridges. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">Is there any practical value to this pistol? Of course there is&mdash;it is a sound, very well-made gun that should conceal and otherwise perform very well. But at over three grand apiece, I doubt if you will see hundreds of them in real use. That consideration is economic and not functional. The point is simply that a very savvy gun guy went way out of his way to build something that has a very high co-efficient of cool. Way to go, Bill!</span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/laughridges-hammerless#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/legality-of-hollywood-gunsFri, 01 Oct 2010 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">In the movies, you see all kinds of guns that are illegal to own&mdash;machine guns, sawed-off shotguns, silencers, etc. Most of this stuff is legal to own if it is registered under the provisions of the National Firearms Act and if you live in a state that permits it. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">Most movies are made in California, which does not permit private parties to own even registered NFA items. Where do the movie makers get their guns? They come from firearm rental firms who legally own them under a specific provision of the Penal Code in California. In this way, one of the Golden State's legitimate businesses is allowed to conduct business. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">I have toured the gun vaults of one of the great movie gun rental firms and looked in awe at the thousands of firearms they own for use in films, including Thompson Submachine Guns they bought from <a href="http://www.autoordnance.com/" target="_blank">Auto Ordnance</a> in the 1920s. Under these laws, it was legal for them to make the famous Mare's Leg handgun used by the late Steve McQueen in the TV show <em><a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0051327/" target="_blank">Wanted Dead or Alive</a>.</em> </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">The gun in question is a Model 92 Winchester rifle cut down to very short length&mdash;both barrel and butt&mdash;so that McQueen could carry it in a special holster. There is little practical reason to do this because it ended up with a 6-round magazine tube, essentially the same capacity as a Colt six-shooter. But this was the era of &ldquo;different,&rdquo; so the gun lived on. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">A private party, then or now, could not legally build such a gun, in that it would violate the provision of the law that prohibits the shortening of a rifle below a 16-inch barrel. However, if the gun is built at a factory in the McQueen configuration and registered as a handgun, it is perfectly legal to own. In this way, a nostalgic shooter can re-live those thrilling days of yesteryear&mdash;with live ammo and a replica. In fact, <a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/ArticlePage.aspx?id=2447&amp;cid=1" target="_blank">Rossi</a> has recently created a Mare's Leg. Josh Randall lives!</span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/legality-of-hollywood-guns#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/The-Hi-PowerTue, 28 Sep 2010 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">We have one of those firearms milestones coming up. It is the 75th anniversary of the introduction of the <a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/articles/browning-hi-power/" target="_blank">Hi-Power pistol</a>. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">This classic handgun is still made in Belgium and possibly in Argentina. In the past, the Hi-Power was made in several other locales, both as a copy and as a licensed (by FN of Belgium) version. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">It may be the first pistol specifically designed for the 9 mm Luger cartridge and has had a long history of service to fighting men around the world. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">Hi-Powers were the choice of such diverse users as the British SAS, Belgian police detectives and Saddam Hussein. Exactly who is responsible for this classic handgun is still debated, but it is most likely a combination of ideas from John Browning and Dieudonne Saive, who was working for FN when the gun was introduced in 1935. Browning had passed away in 1926. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">As a practical matter, it really doesn't make much difference. Regardless of who created it, or where and when, the old Browning is about as reliable a firearm as any man could ever have created. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">Even with some of the mediocre aftermarket magazines that are out there, this elderly design continues to perform with only occasional stutters. It's accurate, reliable and very shootable. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">Besides that, the gun has kind of an old world look, with distinctive contours made from machined forgings. The 13-shot magazine was a first for the industry and the gun's most copied feature. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">Most of all, the Hi-Power is a gun that prospers with improved grip panels and a few other custom touches. I have tried to like the pistol chambered for the .40 S&amp;W, but the re-engineering required just changes it too much. The Belgian import was best in the original caliber&mdash; 9 mm Luger.</span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/The-Hi-Power#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/A-Gunwriter-GoofThu, 23 Sep 2010 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">In the past few months, I have been working with a number of .380 pistols. They're pretty hot right now, with many competing models on dealer's shelves. Two .380 pistol articles have appeared under my by-line, one in <em>Shooting Illustrated</em>, the other in <em>American Rifleman</em>. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">Since their publication, S&amp;W introduced yet another little .380 in the polymer framed Bodyguard. It's safe to say that the .380 auto is a hot gun right now. I have spent a great deal of time dealing with them. Apparently, I didn't spend quite enough </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">Both NRA articles contained a rather glaring error. Bluntly, I was wrong when I described the Magnum Research Micro Desert Eagle as a straight blowback .380. It is actually a unique form of gas-assisted blowback. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">I somehow missed this and regret not providing this information to interested readers. And I am indebted to my colleague J.B. Wood, who had written for many publications for many years. He took the time to call and point out my error. He did so in the most gentlemanly way possible. As it happens, he caught me on another one over 20 years ago, so I owe him.</span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/A-Gunwriter-Goof#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/blowback-recoil-operatedTue, 21 Sep 2010 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">Reader &ldquo;MJ&rdquo; sent an e-mail in which he voices his confusion over the proper use of the terms &ldquo;blowback&rdquo; and &ldquo;recoil operated.&rdquo; He went on to say that he had completely failed to understand why the barrel on his new Ruger LCP was flopping around. Enough similar questions have come my way that I think it's probably time to revisit this business of how semi-automatic pistols work. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">This class of firearm came into common use right around the turn of the last century. Many designers had noticed that two things happened when you fired a round from a handgun. One, the bullet left the cartridge, spiraled down the barrel, exited the muzzle and headed toward the target. Two, the gun moved violently back in the shooter's hand. The act of firing developed a rearward motion and some designers saw that if it could be harnessed, it could be used for productive work. In short order, we had the first automatic handguns, which I believe picked up that designation because they automatically reloaded their own chambers. This new style of handgun most commonly had a lower receiver with a removable magazine of cartridges in the butt and the trigger/hammer mechanism. The top half of the pistol (slide) moved (or &ldquo;recoiled&rdquo;) on rails and was pressed forward by a strong coil spring. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">Depending on the nature of the cartridges to be used, a pistol with a fixed barrel, heavy slide and strong recoil spring will work quite well. The concept calls for keeping the slide closed until the bullet leaves the muzzle and gas pressure drops abruptly. If you don't, burning powder and hot gasses will come out the ejection port and injure the shooter. Since the recoiling upper of the gun is at rest when the shot is fired, it wants to stay at rest. A heavy slide and a strong recoil spring will work to keep the slide in position for the millisecond that it takes the bullet to get all the way down the barrel and out. Then residual energy causes the slide to move back against the pressure of the recoil spring and the rest of the extraction, ejection, feeding, chambering, etc. cycle occurs. As long as the pressure is fairly modest, this system works quite well and is easy to manufacture. In precise terminology, this is called a <em>blowback</em> system. Most commonly, its use is confined to small-to-medium sized autos in cartridges such as the .25 ACP, .32.ACP and .380 Auto. Understand that it would also work with much more powerful rounds, but building the gun to fire higher pressure rounds would demand a slide so heavy you wouldn't or couldn't carry it or a recoil spring so strong that you couldn't rack the slide. Or possibly both. As a practical matter, such a gun is unworkable. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">For more powerful rounds, the designers found ways to lock the barrel and slide solidly together until the heavier, faster-moving bullets left the muzzle. These guns also have a fitted barrel, moving slide and strong recoil spring, but they are designed in such a way as to mechanically lock the barrel to the slide. For a very short distance of initial slide travel, the barrel is fixed to the slide. When pressure drops, the natural recoil process operates an internal cam mechanism, which causes the barrel to unlock from the slide, stop and then allow the moving slide to complete its rearwards travel. In this fashion, we can truly state that the system is <em>recoil-operated</em>. This is the way that most service automatic pistols work, and over the century-plus they've been in existence many designers have found different way to accomplish the locking/unlocking process. I have just been playing with a Beretta that uses a rotary barrel locking system and recall that the service Beretta, Model 92 or M9, uses a pivoting locking block first developed by Walther. There are a couple of other types, but the vast majority of pistols rely on the basic system developed by John Browning. Here, the barrel-to-slide lockup has the barrel tilting up to lock integral lugs into recesses in the slide or the entire breech end of the barrel locking into the ejection port. On recoil, they stay together until an underbarrel cam moves the barrel down out engagement with the slide. This system was first used on Colt and Browning pistols and now finds its way onto many other makes. It is simple, has become easy to manufacture and has particular use in today's shooting world. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">Yesterday's .380 autos were almost exclusively blowback guns, but a blowback pistol for current ammo must have a certain amount of size and weight. If you take the same basic locking system used in a .45 automatic and scale it down to fit a much smaller gun, you can actually use this type of mechanism to build a light, portable pistol chambered for .32 and .380 cartridges. You can do the same thing with a 9 mm pistol and there are many out there. If 9 mm recoil is intolerable, the mini-.380 &mdash;with a modern, recoil-operated system&mdash;is an alternative. Ruger, Kahr, Sig Sauer, Smith &amp; Wesson and Kel-Tec among others are some of the available choices.</span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/blowback-recoil-operated#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/How-Far-Can-a-Handgun-ShootWed, 15 Sep 2010 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">I have personally stood up on my hind legs and hit targets at 200 meters with a powerful handgun. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">In fact, that was the original IHMSA (<a href="http://www.ihmsa.org/" target="_blank">International Handgun Metallic Silhouette Association</a>) shooting game, where you take down five steel rams in two minutes, using iron sights. But it is still only a partial answer to the question of how far a handgun will shoot with any predictable accuracy. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">I have also set up a <a href="http://www.ransomrest.com/" target="_blank">Ransom Rest</a> and fired at targets as far out as 200 yards, producing groups as small as 2 to 3 inches. When Elmer Keith first worked with the pre-war Registered Magnums, he propped up an old door and consistently hit it at more than 600 yards. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">I have personally observed such good handgun shooters as Dave Spaulding and Ken Hackatrorn consistently ring a Pepper Popper at 100 yards, using service grade autos with sights designed for the close work of 7 yards or less. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">The limitations in the range of handguns are more in the sighting system than in the pure mechanical sense. And most of all, the limitations are in the handgunner and not the handgun. Just learn to shoot and it will all come together.</span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/How-Far-Can-a-Handgun-Shoot#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/Learn-with-a-22Fri, 10 Sep 2010 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">Increasingly, I am getting questions from readers who are obviously new to the world of guns in general and handgunning in particular. That's fine with me, because the sport is in danger if there isn't interest on the part of new shooters. I want handgunning to thrive for tomorrow's shooters, as well as for the continuing enjoyment of today's. Sometimes, the newcomers are a little reluctant to ask questions, for fear of sounding ignorant. Ignorance is a reversible condition&mdash;all it takes is information, which reminds me of the adage: &ldquo;The only dumb question is the one that's never asked.&rdquo; </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">At the very beginning of a person's interest in the handgun, the question almost always is &ldquo;What handgun should I buy to learn with?&rdquo; Without exception, I believe that everyone should begin with a quality handgun chambered for the venerable .22 Long Rifle cartridge. There are several specific reasons why this is true. Certainly the most immediately obvious is expense. Shooting is a sport in which skill develops through repetitive practice. Shooters know how expensive center-fire ammo has become, but a little competitive shopping also shows that a brick (500 rounds) of plain .22s can be had for about the same cost as a full box of .45s. If your learning sessions concentrate on the basics of stance, grip, sight alignment, trigger control and follow through&mdash;as they should&mdash;it doesn't matter what caliber you&rsquo;re shooting. Developing an understanding of the basic process and skill in applying to a given situation is the same with a .22 as it is with a .44 Mag. Also, using a .22 as a learner removes one distracting element from the practice session&mdash;recoil. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">Now don't confuse basic handgun marksmanship ability with any form of advanced handgun shooting skill. For example, defensive shooting is best done with a pistol or revolver that is carefully chosen for that role. Here, the on-target effect requires more energy than .22s are capable of delivering. The same is true of many forms of handgun hunting and there are several forms of shooting sports that require heavier calibers. Obviously, your learning tool isn't good for this kind of work, but not all of handgunning is the white-knuckle stuff. If your .22 helps develop your overall ability to shoot, it has done its job. Finally, I would have to tell you that I know a whole lot of pretty macho dudes who still get a lot of enjoyment out of popping pine cones or dirt clods with a plain old .22.</span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/Learn-with-a-22#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/The-Side-CantTue, 07 Sep 2010 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">When I was struggling to learn the pistol as a target firearm, I read every book, manual and magazine article that was even remotely connected to the topic. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">Eventually, I came to accept that some things the manuals required you to do were simply wrong. The biggest of which is the mandate that you must hold the pistol in a perfectly vertical manner, so the top of the rear sight is level. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">Obviously, this can be done, but it results in a bent wrist when you also attempt to keep a straight line from the front sight back through the rear sight notch and back down the arm to the eye. Such a line of sight is important for repeat shots in that it helps recovery from recoil. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">One day, I was struggling to do this and found that I could do all of those things only when I tilted the gun inward just slightly. For a right-handed shooter, this is a so-called &ldquo;5 o'clock&rdquo; cant and I now shoot everything this way. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">This technique works very well for me and I am now seeing a few instructors actually teach this method. The danger in doing it is simply that you must use the same degree of cant for every shot. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">If you have an inconsistent cant, your group will wander all over the target. I am also a little concerned about using it with optical sights that sit well above the bore and out of the traditional line of sight.</span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/The-Side-Cant#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/Convertible-RevolversWed, 01 Sep 2010 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">I remember reading in someone's old catalog that Colt used only seven different kinds of barrel stock for all those many calibers of the Single Action Army revolver. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">I have never had the resources to completely verify this statement, but it seems reasonable. It also gets a guy thinking about the possibilities inherent in twin-cylinder &ldquo;convertible&rdquo; revolvers. The idea is easiest in Frontier-style revolvers where the cylinder comes out so easy. Ruger has made convertible 9 mm/.357 and .45 ACP/.45 Colt sets for years and I have a current production Colt SAA in .45 Colt with a second factory produced and fitted cylinder in .45 ACP. It allows me to shoot two kinds of ammunition in the same gun. The .357 Blackhawk was a popular gun when it came out, but was even more popular when Ruger made it with a 9 mm cylinder. As it happened, that was a time when the surplus stores sold World War II leftover 9 mm for as little as 2 cents a round (oh, for those days again!). In .45, you have always been able to find .45 ACP cheaper than .45 Colt ammunition. By the way, now that we have readily available .45 Schofield ammo, a Blackhawk Convertible is a <em>three</em>-caliber gun, because Schofield rounds will work perfectly in the .45 Colt cylinder. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">To the best of my knowledge, no one has ever taken the extra cylinder concept to its full extension. Consider that a 9 mm/.357 Magnum Blackhawk revolver could easily be fitted with additional cylinders for common cartridges such as the .380 Auto and .38 Super, as well as a dozen or so unusual European rounds like the 9x21, 9x22, 9 mm Largo or others. They might even make the .357 Sig work. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">Much is possible and actual production would have to be a function of demand. The principle that makes the concept work is a common bore diameter. If it runs to somewhere around .355 inches to .357 inches you can probably make almost any semi-auto pistol cartridge work. Of course a separate cylinder is required for each auto round, in order that the cartridges headspace in the cylinder on the case mouth. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">I once reviewed an interesting custom cylinder that worked with most of these rounds. I do not believe that this product remains on the market. The least common convertible size is 10 mm, but I recall seeing a special run of Blackhawks in 10 mm with extra cylinders in .38/40. The bore diameter on that one is .400 of an inch and it was before the .40 S&amp;W was introduced. Yep, now it could have an extra cylinder in that popular caliber as well.</span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/Convertible-Revolvers#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/Conducting-Press-CheckFri, 27 Aug 2010 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">Of all the annoying things that movie actors do with their pistols, there is one that is the most unrealistic. This is when our &ldquo;let's pretend&rdquo; gun man senses danger and ceremoniously hauls out his Colt, Glock, Smith, Ruger or (you fill in the blank) from the holster and racks the slide back hard all the way. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">Apparently, this is intended to strike awe in the mind of the audience, as &ldquo;Omygawd, he put a round in the chamber!&rdquo; </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">In real life, such an action would have put a round in the chamber, but not before you took the one out of the chamber and ejected it onto the deck. Real world autos usually ride with a round in the chamber. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">On the other hand, I saw an old movie the other night where the protagonist performed a period-correct press check where he retracted the slide only far enough to see that the chamber was loaded. A press-check is good gun-handling.</span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/Conducting-Press-Check#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/The-Smell-of-GunleatherFri, 20 Aug 2010 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">Actually, it's a lot more than the smell, but have you ever been in a shop that builds plastic holsters? I have and the smell of that solvent is revolting. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">I have also visited <a href="http://www.miltsparks.com/" target="_blank">Milt Sparks</a>' place, as well as <a href="http://www.frontiergunleather.com/" target="_blank">John Bianchi's</a>. It may not be sweet as the bodice of your beloved, but the earthy aroma of the dyes and oils used in leather crafting are downright pleasurable. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">It reminds me that hand-made stuff like a finely crafted gunstock is somehow better than the machine-produced version of the same thing. But when I recall how Tim Wegner goes about building his Kydex holsters up there at <a href="http://www.blade-tech.com/home.php" target="_blank">Blade Tech</a>&mdash;as well as how well they work&mdash;I have to concede that this is one concession to the changing times that I am going to have to make. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">I was introduced to the plastic holster by Jim Smullen at <a href="http://www.holstersplus.com/" target="_blank">Holsters Plus</a> and used his on several memorable shoots. I eventually acquired several of the Blade Techs, one of which I used to the point that the holster actually faded in color from too much Arizona sun. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">Yeah, I have come to respect the Kydex holster and pouches in these modern times, but remain enough of a curmudgeon to treasure and often use quality leather from the likes of El Paso, Bianchi, Sparks, Sherrick and my current find, <a href="http://www.delfatti.com/" target="_blank">Matt Del Fatti</a>. I still believe leather holsters are fabulous stuff.</span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/The-Smell-of-Gunleather#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/380Ammo-hard-findTue, 17 Aug 2010 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">Actually, I do have a (very) few rounds left over from recent survey stories on .380 autos in both <em><a href="http://www.shootingillustrated.com/" target="_blank">Shooting Illustrated</a></em> and <em>American Rifleman</em>. NRA Publications Division received a great deal of feedback in the form of letters, e-mails and phone calls about these articles. The most persistent lament from readers is the lack of .380 ammunition on dealer shelves. Obviously, there is nothing that we can really do to resolve the shortage. But we can look at the situation and possibly get some kind of handle on what happened. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">.380 ammo is a product like any other product. A gun store owner wants to have a variety of the stuff on his shelves all the time. But he doesn't want it to stay on the shelf very long. For that reason, he tries to keep enough to satisfy what is most commonly a steady, continuing demand. For a long time, .380 ammo was a steady, but not spectacular seller. Then, two events combined to throw this cozy formula out of whack. The first was the election of a gun-unfriendly administration; the second was the introduction of an all-new, high-tech .380 pistol by one of our big three domestic gunmakers. <a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/videos/ruger-lcp-review/" target="_blank">Ruger's LCP</a> was a nifty little gun and it brought many people into stores to see them. Some folks found one while others didn't and settled for one of several other new models from other makers. But the cumulative effect was a sudden spike in demand for inexpensive .380s, guns they could afford in a climate of uncertainty about the ongoing availability of any defensive firearm. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">Naturally, everybody wanted a box of ammo for their new gun and that cleaned out the retailer's stock in short order. He or she immediately ordered more from the wholesaler, who is like the retailer on a much larger scale. Wholesalers don&rsquo;t want to sit on vast inventories either, so he keeps enough to meet the traditional, steady demand. When Mr. Wholesaler sees warehouse shelves empty of .380 ammo, but in-baskets full of orders for it, he gets on the phone to the ammo factory. Ammo manufacturers schedule production facilities months, sometimes years in advance. For a complex of reasons, they are not going to be able to respond immediately to a demand for a product. Production begins as soon as possible because they want to keep everybody in the supply chain happy, but it takes time. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">We are currently in a situation where ammunition, particularly handgun ammo, is in short supply. Shooters are apprehensive and I don't blame them. I seriously doubt that we are shooting more, but we are unquestionably storing more. Like many other perceived crises, this one may blow over in time, but no one can be sure. But the laws of economics never change. In an industrial society, where there is a demand, there will be a supply.</span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/380Ammo-hard-find#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/S-W-DX-SeriesFri, 13 Aug 2010 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">Back in the late 1980's, <a href="http://www.smith-wesson.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/CustomContentDisplay?langId=-1&amp;storeId=750001&amp;catalogId=750051&amp;content=11001" target="_blank">Smith &amp; Wesson</a> was in the midst of a radical update of the entire product line. This was the era of the Third Generation autos that ended up filling the holsters of the majority of cops in America. It was also the much-mocked &ldquo;Gun of the Week&rdquo; era when an absolute flood of new models hit the market with astounding frequency. The company's marketing was, to say the least, aggressive. Eventually, things calmed down and the product line firmed up. In this period, the old line Massachusetts gunmaker produced some of the finest firearms in their history. These weren't all the self-loaders, either. While not all that well known, the Model 629 Classic DX .44 Mag. revolvers of that era may have been the most accurate wheelguns the company ever produced. There weren't that many of them, but they earned their &ldquo;DX&rdquo; marking on the basis of objective evaluation. It makes for an interesting story. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">The company wanted to introduce a premium .44 Mag. that delivered a great deal of power with the best possible accuracy. Metallic Silhouette shooting was at its peak and more handgun hunters than ever before were afield in pursuit of big game. Both needed accurate, powerful revolvers. The company had just introduced a new variant of the stainless steel .44 Mag. called the .44 Classic Stainless. This revolver had a number of updated features, the most visible of which being a heavy, full underlug barrel. As produced in those days, this was a very high-quality piece, particularly in the sense of shooting very tight groups. Every one of them was fired for accuracy and very few if any were rejected. But the factory staff began to notice that a few delivered accuracy bordering on the spectacular. They hit on the idea of culling out the most accurate ones and marking them differently. Eventually, the shooting evaluation was performed before the markings were applied. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">If your version of the gun wears the barrel marking of &ldquo;Classic DX,&rdquo; you have one of the better revolvers that ever left the plant in modern times. Depending on what kind of wear is on the gun, the accuracy potential may be as good as it ever was. I once did a very detailed evaluation of several samples of these outstanding guns. At 25 yards, they were all capable of delivering tight one-hole groups with at least one good commercial load and at 50, they never seemed to run outside of the 1.5-inch mark. This means a theoretical group of 3 inches at 100 yards and 6 inches at 200. They came with five interchangeable front sights and an extra-strong, smooth action. I was always surprised that the company never made more than they did. Naturally, these guns were never completely appreciated and are no longer available in the regular catalog.</span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/S-W-DX-Series#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/Reality-of-CompetitionMon, 09 Aug 2010 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">In a lifetime of shooting, I have been involved in a number of forms of competition. My first pistol match was in Basic School at Quantico over 50 years ago. It was a bullseye match fired on the National Match course of slow, timed and rapid fire. Over time, I became an avid, if not spectacularly successful, bullseye competitor. Naturally, I had to have all kinds of specially modified pistols to shoot the course. Later, as a police officer, I was bitten by the PPC bug and traveled all over California to compete. It was a great time (particularly when I was driving a Volkswagen and gas was 30 cents a gallon) and I had the practical advantage of competing on the same course I fired for qualification. Literally, I was training as I was competing&mdash;great idea. Then, I became interested the <a href="http://www.ihmsa.org/" target="_blank">IHMSA</a> game, where we shot at silhouettes of game animals at great distances. This took a powerful and accurate handgun, but the basics of the game were still sight alignment and trigger management. In time, I discovered IPSC, <a href="http://www.idpa.com/" target="_blank">IDPA</a> and <a href="http://www.sassnet.com/" target="_blank">SASS</a> and had brief flirtations with these sports. Yep, I have had a heck of a good time competing with handguns. In so doing, I have developed a huge fund of knowledge on how to lose a pistol match, because I have lost more than my share of matches. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">Now, you must consider that the original purpose of a handgun was close combat, but it must be put in perspective. The minute that formal competition of any kind started, realism began to leave. Nobody can write rules for a deadly engagement, because everybody wants an edge. If everyone agrees on the rules and abides by them, then the competition may be very interesting and somewhat challenging, but never relevant to the real world of personal defense. There is just no way to format rules that make matches easy to run and interesting enough to draw competitors&mdash;and yet have any real relevance to a deadly encounter. In other words, if you draw competitors, you will get people who want the understandable camaraderie and challenge of a game. But it isn't real. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">Nevertheless, there are many benefits to active competition with firearms. For one thing, it tends to drive the development of better guns and accessories for true combat shooting. By way of example, consider the distinctive underlugged barrel contour of S&amp;W's L frame service revolvers. This came about when PPC competitors found a way to install Colt Python barrels on Model 14 and 19 S&amp;Ws to shift their balance forward and improve accuracy. The improved heft of the L frame meant a generation of police officers went to work with a better gun. There's an added benefit to learning to handle a pistol with speed and dexterity, as is required in several of our shooting games. When malfunction and reloading exercises become instinctive due to repetition in games, you may not have to think about them when the real world need arises. If nothing else, when it becomes popular to have handguns on hand for sporting purposes, you will have a larger corps of active shooters who will enthusiastically fight to keep them when another politician tries to take them away. Competition has always tended to attract people who like a challenge and shooting competition is in no way different. It attracts active, alert and self-disciplined folks. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">So when I ruefully reflect on the number of pistol matches in which I have participated and lost, I am really just admitting that I may have mastered the understanding of winning principles, but have yet to conquer applying them under stress. The effort continues.</span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/Reality-of-Competition#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/The-Thomas-PistolFri, 06 Aug 2010 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">One interesting gun that came out of California in the 1970s was the Thomas pistol. The Thomas was a light, mid-sized DAO gun with single-column magazine of .45 cartridges. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">For its day, that combination of features made it different. While there are several similar guns on today's market, the Thomas locking system was quite unique. It was a form of retarded blowback that wasn&rsquo;t really strong enough to contain .45 pressures. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">Gripping the gun activated a lever that raised a pair of wedge-shaped blocks into contact with matching, sloped recesses in the slide. There was enough adhesion between the blocks and the recesses to momentarily stop the rearward movement of the recoiling slide. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">It was a little like the Blish adhesion locks used on original Thompson Machine Guns. When the slide inertia of firing was overcome, the blocks moved out of the way and the slide cycled. I have never fired one, but admit to being very interested. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">Thomas pistols began to develop structural integrity problems (they broke) and they disappeared from the market.</span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/The-Thomas-Pistol#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=2633&cid=25Mon, 02 Aug 2010 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">It must have been the last gallant battle of the Wondernine Wars, but after everybody developed a durable, shootable 9 mm pistol in the 70s and 80s, the ammo industry went into herculean efforts to make 9 mm hollow point ammo that would expand reliably and penetrate deeply. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">The JHP learning curve went straight up and we ended up with PMC Starfire, Federal Hydra-Shok, Hornady HP/XTP, Remington Golden Saber, Speer Gold Dot and Winchester Black Talon. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">It was all tremendous ammo with varying degrees of expansion and penetration. Development of this kind of ammo, particularly in 147-grain weight, literally got the 9 mm up off its knees in the performance sense. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">All of a sudden, the 9 mm cartridge was a contender in the terminal ballistic performance field. That is, until you took the same developed bullet construction principles and applied them to...ah, larger cartridges.</span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=2633&cid=25#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/Reader-S-W-NightguardTue, 27 Jul 2010 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">Mr.Clapp: </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">I have a question about the S&amp;W Nightguard 386 revolver. They're now made with a steel cylinder, whereas the original guns had a titanium cylinder. Is the steel better? Mine weighs 17.5 ounces and the new ones weigh 24. Why did they change to steel&mdash;does the titanium fail? </span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;"> <hr /> </span></p> <p>&nbsp;</p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">Good question and one that does provoke some controversy. While your question concerns L-frame revolvers, it is equally applicable to some of the common J frames. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">I use a 340PD Centennial, one of the very first to come out of the factory. It has a titanium cylinder and it is still shooting perfectly. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">I have a spare gun that is a Model M&amp;P340 which comes with a steel cylinder. The 340PD costs $1122, the M&amp;P340 runs to $948 (2010 prices). </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">In this comparison, you have essentially the same gun, but the titanium cylinder on the 340PD elevates the price of the gun by a hefty $174. Smith &amp; Wesson can't control the costs of their raw materials. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">As much as they would like to put a feathery light .357 Mag. in every holster and handbag in America, they have to get a bigger price for the 340PD. Therefore, the lighter gun costs more and the slightly heavier version of the same gun cost much less. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">The same is true in regards to your L frames. It is a question of economics, since both versions are structurally sound.</span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/Reader-S-W-Nightguard#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/art-of-revolver-shootingFri, 23 Jul 2010 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">I&rsquo;ve always enjoyed my collection of vintage handgun books, particularly when I get the chance to turn my friends on to a book of which few have heard. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">This being said, I recommend to you an older volume called <em>The Art of Handgun Shooting</em> written by Walter Winans, a legendary turn-of-the-century handgun marksman. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">This hefty volume is really rare and I don't think any of the reprint specialists have found it yet. In essence, this is a gentleman's take on the world of handgun shooting before World War I. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">The copyright was in 1911, which was a very good year. Among other treasures between the covers of the book are a chapter on sights and adjusting them, and another on care and cleaning. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">Remember, this was in the latter years of black powder and corrosive primers. But there's also a carefully measured treatise on &ldquo;coursing the stags&rdquo; or hunting deer with a handgun from the back of a running horse. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">In his later years, Jeff Cooper grew interested in horseback shooting and was even planning to emulate Winston Churchill's ride at Omdurman, shooting a C/96 Mauser. Great Stuff!</span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/blogs/art-of-revolver-shooting#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=2562&cid=25Fri, 16 Jul 2010 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">One of the more logical concepts to ever come along was the 9 mm revolver. I am not talking about an extra cylinder in a Ruger Blackhawk, but rather a compact DA/SA or DAO defensive gun. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">The 9 mm revolver has been made in the past. In fact, Smtih &amp; Wesson introduced several J-Frame guns in the early 90s and Taurus had a really neat little scaled-down gun in the last decade. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">About 20 years ago, I made a herculean effort to convince <a href="http://www.smith-wesson.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/CustomContentDisplay?langId=-1&amp;storeId=750001&amp;catalogId=750051&amp;content=11001" target="_blank">Smith &amp; Wesson</a> to build an Airweight 9 mm Centennial. This was before Scandium .357 Magnums, a time when a .38 Spl. +P-rated gun was the best you could get. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">To evaluate a 9 mm's potential in the ballistic sense, I fired a steel 9 mm against a comparable barreled .38 Special. Using a variety of ammo in both calibers, I did a velocity shoot-off. The results were startling. Both guns had cylinders of the same length, but the 9 mm cartridge is much shorter than the .38 Special. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">However, the 9 mm almost invariably outran the .38 Spl. with bullets of equivalent weight. This is probably because of the greater freebore in the cylinder, but it means that a 9 mm revolver will produce a little better ballistic performance than a .38. For most people's defensive use, it is therefore a better choice.</span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=2562&cid=25#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=2539&cid=25Wed, 14 Jul 2010 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">There's a new product on the market, one that's quickly wormed its way into my affection&mdash;<a href="http://www.tuffproducts.com/home.php?cat=265" target="_blank">QuickStrips</a>. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">These simple little molded rubber strips hold several cartridges in a row positioned in readiness to be loaded into a revolver cylinder, allowing you to carry several rounds of ammo for any gun in your pocket as a unit. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">While the idea is not new&mdash;revolver loaders of various types have been around for many years&mdash;QuickStrips are made in great variety and for several capacities. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">We've had six-round .38/.357 strips for years, but you can now get QuickStrips in five-shot, seven-shot and eight-shot versions as well. Made of molded rubber, the new product is a bit more flexible than previous types. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">The management of Tuff Products is very aggressive and adds new products all the time. I am particularly impressed with their five-shot units that go with a J frame S&amp;W and another one in .410 shotshell for the Taurus Judge.</span></p> <p style="text-align: left;">&nbsp;</p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=2539&cid=25#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=2529&cid=25Fri, 09 Jul 2010 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">Louis Seecamp was an ingenious gun designer from a family of gunmakers. Over the years, he worked on a lot of gun matters, but settled into double-action conversions for .45s in the days when there were no such things available on the open market. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">A DAO or DA/SA .45 was a real hot topic in the late 60s&nbsp;and early 70s. However, when several commercial makers started introducing them, Seecamp's market went away. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">He turned to another interesting style of gun, the sub-miniature (read: itty-bitty) pocket auto. These were tiny little guns made in small quantities and delivered to whoever was next on the waiting list. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">Initially, the little <a href="http://www.seecamp.com/index.htm" target="_blank">Seecamps</a> were made in .25 ACP, but the company eventually mastered the complexities of making the same gun in the larger .32 ACP caliber. On their new website, the company advertises a .380 Auto version of the same handy little pocket auto. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">Seecamp pistols have achieved an almost cult-favorite status and are unquestionably almost hand-made guns. The company keeps the quality high and the production low, and every gun they make is sold before they finish it. Naturally, they are copied.</span></p> <p style="text-align: left;">&nbsp;</p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=2529&cid=25#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=2521&cid=25Wed, 07 Jul 2010 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">As much as I am fond of old classic gun books, I also enjoy modern ones when they present themselves. One of the best I have seen in several years is Mike Bussard's &ldquo;<a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/ArticlePage.aspx?id=2278&amp;cid=30" target="_blank">Ammo Encyclopedia</a>,&rdquo; published by <a href="https://store.bluebookinc.com/home/default.aspx" target="_blank">Blue Books Publications</a>. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">This reference manual lists virtually everything in the way of small arms ammunition, using a logical classification system. For example, one chapter lists obsolete commercial handgun cartridges, while the next might be on obsolete military handgun rounds. In similar fashion, rimfire, shotshell and rifle rounds all get their due. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">For every cartridge, there is a history, description, dimensional drawing and performance specifications. The book is more than a listing of cartridges, because there are separate chapters on ammunition performance, manufacturing, terminology, history and other topics. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">This is one book that every serious beginner needs to buy at the start of his or her interest in the shooting sports, but it also will be included in the libraries of many advanced shooters. I'm not sure where I fit in that classification, but I can tell you that I have moved this reference to a spot close at hand in my office. I had to&mdash;I use it often enough that I don't want to walk very far to find it.</span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=2521&cid=25#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=2510&cid=25Thu, 01 Jul 2010 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">I am endlessly fascinated with the .45 Auto Rim cartridge developed by the Peters Cartridge Co. during the 1920s. The cartridge was designed to be used in.45 ACP revolvers made during World War I. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">To work with rimless ACP pistol ammo, Colt and Smith &amp; Wesson wheelguns needed a sheet steel clip to hold a trio of rounds with the correct headspace in the gun. The Auto Rim has an extra thick rim that equals the thickness of the clip with the ACP rim, so they work like regular rimmed revolver rounds. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">Before World War II, the round was loaded by all of the major companies, but over the years has fallen into disuse. Black Hills now offers a 255-grain LSWC that works well in the old guns as well as the many variations of the S&amp;W Model 25 revolver.</span></p> <p style="text-align: left;">&nbsp;</p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=2510&cid=25#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=2491&cid=25Mon, 28 Jun 2010 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;"><a href="http://www.smith-wesson.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/CustomContentDisplay?langId=-1&amp;storeId=750001&amp;catalogId=750051&amp;content=11001" target="_blank">Smith &amp; Wesson</a> grew very progressive in the 1960s, showing a willingness to try all kinds of things. <br /><br /></span><span style="font-size: small;">One of their innovations was the Model 53 revolver, which was a K-frame gun chambered for the exotic <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/.22_Remington_Jet" target="_blank">.22 Remington Jet cartridge</a>. Both were very handsome pieces. <br /><br /></span><span style="font-size: small;">The Model 53 came with S&amp;W's &ldquo;full-target&rdquo; setup and a choice of barrel lengths. Made for long-range pest and varmint shooting, the Jet cartridge was basically a .357 Mag. case, sharply tapered down to .22 caliber. <br /><br /></span><span style="font-size: small;">The Remington Jet created some zippy velocities and blew up its share of ground squirrels and prairie dogs. Eventually, the gun was discontinued because shooters wanted to shoot it a lot without cleaning it. <br /><br /></span><span style="font-size: small;">Those radically tapered rounds tended to back out of the chambers and tie up the gun. All that it takes to keep the gun running is meticulous&mdash;and frequent&mdash;chamber <a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/Video.aspx?vid=1926&amp;cid=23" target="_blank">cleaning</a>. <br /><br /></span><span style="font-size: small;">I know this to be true from personal experience. I would love to see S&amp;W come back with a new revolver made in this style, but the best I think someone is going to get is the .218 Bee.</span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=2491&cid=25#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=2477&cid=25Tue, 22 Jun 2010 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">In one form or another, this question comes at me fairly often. For a gun buff, Paradise on earth would seem to be a steady gig writing about guns. I confess that it is pretty cool, but I can also tell you that getting such a position is largely dependent on being in the right place at an equally proper time. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">In other words, it takes pure dumb luck. You do need a certain skill in managing the English language. More than that, you would be well-advised to have a lifetime interest in guns and ammunition&mdash;indeed, the entire culture surrounding their history, development and use. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">One way is to study what is being written in current magazines and give it a try. Be maniacal about detail and in-depth research. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">You can also go to the head of the line outside an editor's door by developing a simple skill. Buy a good digital SLR camera with a macro lens and get good with it. If you are sending your material to New York (for example) for consideration, your submission must contain both text and pictures. The magazine might be able to work with a manuscript that needs help, but they can't do anything with bad illustrations and photos. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">That's what they look at first and if they aren't very good, they may not even bother with a first read of your text. As hard as this is to accept, it is true. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">However, it is happening. I see new and unfamiliar names on the Table of Contents pages of the gun magazines all the time. In this profession, like any other, new blood is a sign of health and progress.</span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=2477&cid=25#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=2473&cid=25Fri, 18 Jun 2010 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">If you haven't tried one, you need to check out a little gadget called the BoreSnake. <br /><br /></span><span style="font-size: small;">This woven, pull-through bore cleaning device makes firearm cleaning faster and easier. The <a href="http://www.hoppes.com/products/ca_boresnakes.html " target="_blank">BoreSnake</a> comes compressible and caliber-specific.<br /><br /></span><span style="font-size: small;">All you have to do is feed the thin end into the barrel from the rear until the loop exits the muzzle, then grab it and pull the thick section completely through the bore. <br /><br /></span><span style="font-size: small;">A bore brush is woven into the thick part of the device and one or two passes will do a good job of cleaning a barrel. <br /><br /></span><span style="font-size: small;">The rest of the gun needs attention in the long run, but a Boresnake can keep you shooting accurately for a long time.</span></p> <p style="text-align: left;">&nbsp;</p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=2473&cid=25#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=2444&cid=25Mon, 14 Jun 2010 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">I like revolvers and I like the .45 ACP caliber, so I occasionally carry either a Colt or Ruger using cylinders in .45 ACP. </span> <p><span style="font-size: small;">One day, Ed Head, operations manager at <a href="http://www.gunsite.com/" target="_blank">Gunsite</a>, asked me how I carry my spare ammo in these situations. He then showed me a neat little trick for carrying spare ammo for my revolver. </span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">His trick was quite simple. He reminded me that I own .45 ACP pistol magazines, which can keep between seven and 14 rounds of .45 ACP ammo in an accessible unit. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">Just flip open the loading gate and punch out the empties with one hand and line up the top of a loaded .45 magazine with the other. When you punch one out, slip a fresh one into the empty charge hole.</span></p> <p style="text-align: left;">&nbsp;</p> </p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=2444&cid=25#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=2426&cid=25Thu, 10 Jun 2010 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">In the Victorian era, lots of short, powerful revolvers came to be called Bulldogs because they resembled the short pugnacious snout of the English Bulldog. </span> <p><span style="font-size: small;">While the short-barreled revolver has long been a part of the handgunning scene, the shorties with big bores and relatively compact dimensions were not made or imported after World War II. That is until the 1970s, when a small New England company called <a href="http://www.charterfirearms.com/" target="_blank">Charter Arms</a> introduced a model called the Bulldog chambered for the very popular .44 Spl. cartridge. </span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">At the time of its introduction, the Charter Arms Bulldog had this interesting niche in the market to itself, and it had two major things going for it. The first was the caliber, which came with the blanket endorsement of legendary handgunner Elmer Keith. Second, the size and weight of the gun, which made it a good choice for concealed carry. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">Since the original was introduced, Charter Arms has offered the gun in several variations and it's still in the company's line. Eventually, other companies offered their take on the .44 five-shooter, but Charter was the first.</span></p> <p style="text-align: left;">&nbsp;</p> </p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=2426&cid=25#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=2425&cid=25Mon, 07 Jun 2010 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">The word "prawl" means a bump, knob or projecting corner on the frame of a revolver. As best as I can determine, the term prawl originated during the 19th century. This is when repeating handguns first became common.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">You occasionally see the word used in describing something like a S&amp;W Russian or Number Three New Model. </span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">The prawl had a useful function in firing the gun. Held in a positive grasp, a prawl-equipped revolver wouldn't move around when the gun is fired. It also tended to position the gun firmly in the shooters grasp when he reached for the hammer with the thumb of the shooting hand. </span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">Peacemaker Colts, Remington Frontiers and S&amp;W Schofields didn't have prawls in their design. Carried over to modern guns, you could say that a Model 29 .44 Magnum has a prawl of sorts.</span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">The revolver on the left is a S&amp;W Russian with a prawl on the top rear of the frame. The other one is the S&amp;W American without a prawl. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;">&nbsp;</p> <p>&nbsp;</p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=2425&cid=25#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=2424&cid=25Fri, 04 Jun 2010 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">When Jeff Cooper first started competing at Big Bear, Calif., the shooting sports took on a whole new look. That look was based on defensive or combat shooting and courses took on a practical orientation. Eventually, that style of shooting became IPSC, which has also evolved into several other variations. </span> <p><span style="font-size: small;">In those times, everybody did their shooting "from the leather." More often than not, the leather was real leather and the most prolific holster maker was <a href="http://www.miltsparks.com/" target="_blank">Milt Sparks</a>. </span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">Milt had his shop in a rough 'n ready little town in rural Idaho. I recall visiting that shop to do a story almost 25 years ago. Several years back, Milt passed away, but his partner Tony Kanaley moved the shop to Boise and continued their work. </span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">Many of the old designs&mdash;such as the immortal Summer Special&mdash;are still in the catalog, but there are also a passel of new ones. I've had the privilege of visiting the Idaho shop on a couple of occasions and watched two different holsters progress from a cowhide blank to finished rig. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">The Sparks crew uses the best possible materials and time-honored techniques to build as fine a leather holster as is made anywhere. I have some fine rigs made by other makers, but Milt Sparks holsters are some of the best. They have my unqualified endorsement.</span></p> <p style="text-align: left;">&nbsp;</p> </p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=2424&cid=25#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=2404&cid=25Wed, 26 May 2010 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">I have learned to be cautious about making positive statements concerning what gunmakers have or have not made in the past. This is particularly true in regards to the many models and variations made by <a href="http://www.smith-wesson.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/CustomContentDisplay?langId=-1&amp;storeId=750001&amp;catalogId=750051&amp;content=11001" target="_blank">Smith &amp; Wesson</a>.</span> <p><span style="font-size: small;">I am sort of a low-level accumulator of Smiths and I have picked up a little bit of information about them. For example-most know that S&amp;W made the Model 19 revolver in two finishes (blue and nickel) with three barrel lengths (2 &frac12;, 4 and 6 inches). More advanced collectors know that the company also made small batches of so-called "pintos" or bi-color guns with major parts in different finishes, such blue frames and nickel barrels and cylinders. Some collectors spend years looking for the highly unusual 3-inch guns or the ultra-rare 5-inch models.</span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">We know that the company made a very large order of 2 1/2 and 4 inch Model 19s without adjustable sights for export to Peru, and there were lots of short runs of Model 19s that were made and marked for various police agencies or specific people. </span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">The Texas Ranger and Bill Jordan commemoratives are examples of this. But every once in a while, the factory will indulge somebody's whim and make up something completely out of the ordinary. In fact, one-of-a-kind guns are not unknown.</span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">I recently got a chance to examine and get a quick photograph of one of the more unusual guns I have ever seen. It is a bi-color Model 19, which is already rare, but further rare because of the unique barrel. The barrel runs 3 1/2 inches from forcing cone to muzzle. This combination of features makes this one of the rarest handguns you will ever see, and it's kept at the <a href="http://www.springfield-armory.com/" target="_blank">Springfield</a> factory.</span></p> </p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=2404&cid=25#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=2395&cid=25Tue, 25 May 2010 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">I was recently given a nice old .22 automatic pistol with an unopened box of ammo. The ammo was Remington's Mohawk brand, made in the late 50s or early 60s. </span> <p><span style="font-size: small;">A sticker on the end of the box proclaimed the price to be 84 cents-for 50 rounds. I don't shoot a lot of .22s, so I was surprised to find that.22 ammo is currently around $2.50 to $3 bucks for the same 50 rounds. </span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">Apparently, inflation just didn't quite have the same effect on .22 rimfire ammo as it has on everything from buttermilk to building supplies. As a matter of fact, a few bricks of .22s put away in a clean dry place might make pretty fine trading stock in the event of some kind of disaster. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">If nothing else, you could do a lot to feed yourself if the wheels really came off.</span></p> <p style="text-align: left;">&nbsp;</p> </p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=2395&cid=25#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=2389&cid=25Thu, 20 May 2010 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">In every decent-sized collection of handgun books, there are always a few that stand out. Many of these are accepted standards such Elmer Keith's "Sixguns" or Jordan's "No Second Place Winner." Others are relatively unknown-what I refer to as "sleepers." </span> <p><span style="font-size: small;">One of my favorite all-time sleepers is a slim little book published in 1949. Written by handgunning legend Walter Roper, the book is "Experiments of a Handgunner." In the early and middle part of the 20th Century, Roper worked for several of the major handgun companies, including <a href="http://www.smith-wesson.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/CustomContentDisplay?langId=-1&amp;storeId=750001&amp;catalogId=750051&amp;content=11001" target="_blank">Smith &amp; Wesson</a>. He was a very advanced enthusiast on the handgun scene, a man who personally conducted a wide variety of experiments to learn more about how they work. </span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">The book is a survey of his most significant investigations. I think that his work with handgun sights is very important, but the information he developed on handgun grips (or "stocks" if they're made by Herrett's) is still in common usage. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">Roper grips are much prized relics of the mid-20th Century handgun scene. As a matter of fact, S&amp;W's famous target grips for K and N frame revolvers are derived from Roper's original design. The book, if you can find a copy, is great reading for those who remain interested in the esoteric of handgun design.</span></p> </p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=2389&cid=25#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=2376&cid=25Fri, 14 May 2010 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">One of the hottest pistol cartridges ever conceived was the 7.63x25 mm Mauser. Known as the .30 Mauser on the American shores, this was a bottlenecked round that drove an 87-grain bullet to more than 1,400 feet per second. </span> <p><span style="font-size: small;">Used in the quite ugly C/96 Mauser pistol, known as the Broomhandle, this was a popular combo in Germany and other European locales. </span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">The Chinese took to the gun and ammo big time in the early 20th century and became Mauser's best single customer for the guns. Eventually, the Russians made a couple of very slight changes to the case dimensions and created the 7.65x25 mm Tokarev round, which was the standard Russian pistol and submachine gun cartridge for decades and even showed up in Vietnam in converted French MAT 49 submachine guns. </span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">A bullet weighing that little is not a bone-crusher, but with velocity that high can produce some shocking tissue damage. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">I recently shot a .357 Sig cartridge that clocked 1,404 (with a 124-grain bullet), now I am wondering what handloading with 100- or 110-grain bullets might deliver with the hot little Sig cartridge.</span></p> <p style="text-align: left;">&nbsp;</p> </p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=2376&cid=25#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=2360&cid=25Tue, 11 May 2010 00:00:00 GMT<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left; margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">The Semmerling was a handgun that came out of the miniaturization craze of the late 70s and early 80s. A 4+1 .45 ACP repeating handgun, the little Semmerling bore a strong resemblance to many autos of the day. Indeed, it worked from a unique four-round, single-column magazine. </span></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left; margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">However, unlike almost all automatic pistols, the gun did not automatically reload its own firing chamber. To fire repeat shots, the shooter had to cycle the action by hand, which effectively makes the gun a manually operated repeater. </span></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left; margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">The designers set out to build the smallest, lightest, most reliable .45 pistol possible and quickly determined that the size limits they imposed on themselves didn't allow enough space for the repeating mechanism they wanted. This made them abandoned the idea of a semi-auto. </span></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left; margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">While I have no experience with the Semmerling, my buddy, the late Chuck Karwan fired one extensively during his service with Special Forces. He told me that it worked, kicked and couldn't keep up with a good mini-revolver. American Derringer of Texas still lists the gun in their catalog, but I haven't seen one yet.</span></span></p> <p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left; margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=2360&cid=25#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=2353&cid=25Fri, 07 May 2010 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">Bisley is a place that gave its name to a gun. It is a range complex in Great Britain where many great matches were once fired. I am told that the range is still in use for some shooting. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">When Colt wanted into the competition revolver business in the early part of the 20th Century, they modified the Single Action Army's grip, hammer and trigger shape and called the gun the Bisley in recognition of the major range for international shooting. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">The Bisley revolver turned out to be sort of odd-looking, but those who used it really liked it. It was used more as a service revolver than as a competition one, but an adjustable-sight Target Bisley is a great find for the avid collector. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">It is as if someone made a gun associated with high-level competition called the Camp Perry. Come to think of it, there is. Colt did that one, too.</span></p> <p style="text-align: left;">&nbsp;</p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=2353&cid=25#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=2349&cid=25Wed, 05 May 2010 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">This interesting term was coined by my late buddy, Chuck Karwan. It really means the same thing as accepted fallacies. In other words&mdash;baloney. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">Over the years, one of the more ridiculous myth-conceptions had to do with those colored flakes in Hercules Red, Blue and Green Dot powders. It was often repeated that they were more potent flakes of powder, used to alter the burning rate of the overall product.</span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">Another colleague from the old days just couldn't let this one pass. Dean Grennell once carefully plucked the red flakes out of a saucer full of Blue Dot, then used them to load a couple of rounds of some long-forgotten load.</span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">When fired and chronographed, there was no discernible difference in performance. Only an avid scientist could tell you that because few others would go to the trouble.</span></p> <p style="text-align: left;">&nbsp;</p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=2349&cid=25#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=2339&cid=25Wed, 28 Apr 2010 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">The first products of High Standard were not guns, but rather machinery and tools with which to make guns. That was in the 1920s, but by the early 30s, this old-time gunmaker offered a high quality .22 pistol.</span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">Over the years, High Standard has made a broader variety of handguns, but their main product has always been that same rugged and durable .22 pistol. I am pleased to see that the company's Web site is still up. This old New England company is now based in Texas, but their main models&mdash;Citation, Trophy, Victor&mdash;are still listed. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">High Standards were made in a bewildering variety of models intended for shooting from casual plinking to competition at the Olympic level. They were at their peak in the glory days of bullseye shooting in the 60s. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">At that point, they changed the grip angle of their guns to match that of the M1911A1. Suddenly, their pistols went from competitive to dominant. Same gun, different grip. They were always accurate, but that change made them shootable.</span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=2339&cid=25#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=2336&cid=25Mon, 26 Apr 2010 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">In another of those gun store counter sessions, I got into a discussion of accuracy with a couple of new shooters. One of them asked a probing question: &ldquo;What's the most accurate handgun cartridge?&rdquo; </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">He was really wanting to know about the accuracy of typical handgun cartridges, ones that we commonly associate with pistols and revolvers. But I answered the question as it was put to me&mdash;&ldquo;.22 Long Rifle.&rdquo; </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">In the majority of guns, decent quality .22 Long Rifle ammo will shoot quite well and the premium stuff will sometimes put ten rounds into a group that mikes under an inch. When Bullseye shooting was in flower, we had many different kinds of .22 handgun ammo, but that is no longer true. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">Nevertheless, I have found some of the premium rifle ammo to work very well. Probably the most accurate load in the world is Eley Tenex, which is made for rifle competition. In a good pistol, it is equally outstanding.</span></p> <p style="text-align: left;">&nbsp;</p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=2336&cid=25#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=2322&cid=25Tue, 20 Apr 2010 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">I handle guns all the time and sometimes find my attitude becoming a little overly-familiar. Since I know that familiarity breeds contempt, I periodically take a look at the sign above my working desk and reflect on the wisdom thereon. </span> <p><span style="font-size: small;">The first line: "All guns are always loaded" Note that it is not "treat all guns as though they were loaded." but rather a positive declaration that says in effect, "if it's a gun, it's loaded." </span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">This was a principle first stated by Col. Cooper, who was sufficiently skilled with the language as to require no editing from latter day hotshots. </span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;">If you accept what he said, there is no excuse or argument for any form of negligent discharge. And if you don't get the subtlety of his phrasing, you need to stay away from firearms.</span></p> <p>&nbsp;</p> </p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=2322&cid=25#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=2320&cid=25Fri, 16 Apr 2010 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">Old-timers from the 30s, 40s and 50s may remember the Berns-Martin holsters, but a couple of generations of handgunners have now come of age without this classic gun scabbard as an available product. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">The late Elmer Keith was only one of the founding fathers of modern handgun shooting who used and endorsed the slick Berns-Martin rigs. Charley Askins was another and Skeeter Skelton mentioned them in his excellent writings. Basically, the holsters featured the best in leather working with a unique design. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">Originally intended as a field holster that protected the revolver from the elements, but provided for speedy access, the Berns Martin also found favor with police officers. In this timeless design, the revolver came out the front of the holster in a sort of rocking motion. The trick was a spring formed from flat stock and specially contoured to go around the cylinder of the revolver, holding it into the holster. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">Covered with leather and securely positioned inside the holster, the spring positively retained the gun until the handgunner grabbed the exposed butt and popped the gun out. When carried, the holster kept the butt where you could get to it, but the remainder of the gun was protected from the elements. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">Many surviving examples are quite plain, but some were elaborately carved or stamped. There's a lot of open area for a leather artist to do his thing. Rusty Sherrick is making a great replica, but originals still command serious prices.</span></p> <p style="text-align: left;">&nbsp;</p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=2320&cid=25#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=2291&cid=25Fri, 09 Apr 2010 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">We may be missing a bet with the new .327 Federal Magnum cartridge. It is being touted as a defense revolver round. OK, I'll concede that it whips up a fair amount of energy, but in my book, no cartridge that uses a 100-grain bullet is ever going to have enough smack 'em to stop fights. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">The .327&mdash;which is really a .312&mdash;is closer to the grand old .32 WCF or .32-20. This is one of the greatest critter-gitter rounds ever, but not what I would call a man stopper. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">What I would like to see is this: Mike Harvey, down at Cimarron, ought to have his Italian associates whip up a pair of guns for this round. How about a light Model '92 rifle with 2/3 magazine and slim barrel matched up with his scaled-down Peacemaker with flat top frame and adjustable sights&mdash;both in .327?</span></p> <p style="text-align: left;">&nbsp;</p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=2291&cid=25#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=2289&cid=25Tue, 06 Apr 2010 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">One of the great breakthroughs in modern revolvers of power is the S&amp;W X-frame in.500 S&amp;W Magnum. This monster of a gun throws huge, half-inch bullets that weigh as much as 450 grains. That's just over an ounce. When you consider that the extended length of the case permits a veritable sugar scoop of powder, you get lots of velocity and recoil in the extreme. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">I fired the guns extensively when they came out and recognize them for the advance in handgun power they represent. But I am not complaining about the lack of any more assignments to write them up. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">I was looking at one in a gun store not long ago while a fellow shooter was looking over my shoulder. When he asked about the gun's recoil, we got into a conversation about grips, recoil and the real-world practicality of using one of these beasts. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">With heavy bullets, the recoil is so bad that most people will not shoot one of these big guns. The only thing that I have found that will tame them down a bit is a pair of Herrett's trooper stocks. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">Originally designed by Bill Jordan and Walter Roper, these stocks are made to fit the hand of the individual shooter. Their main feature is a shape that vectors recoil into the palm of the hand. Fast DA shooting was the original purpose, usually on light S&amp;W revolvers. These same principles make them a good idea for making .500 shooting a bit more bearable.</span></p> <p style="text-align: left;">&nbsp;</p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=2289&cid=25#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=2282&cid=25Fri, 26 Mar 2010 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;"><a href="http://www.smith-wesson.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/CustomContentDisplay?langId=-1&amp;storeId=10001&amp;catalogId=10001&amp;content=11001" target="_blank">Smith &amp; Wesson</a>, the legendary gunmaker, experienced a wave of innovation in the 1950s. Basically, it was adapt to modern methods and models or die a commercial death. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">Company president Carl Hellstrom was not going to let that happen, so a lot of great new models came out of the old Springfield plant. One of the most prolific guns, according to Bill Jordan, was the &ldquo;answer to a policeman's prayer.&rdquo; It was the revolver numbered as the Model 19 and named the Combat Magnum. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">Today's pistoleros may not be aware of how big a breakthrough this medium frame Magnum actually was. While the .357 Mag. cartridge had been around since 1935, it was always found in big, heavy &ldquo;N&rdquo; frame revolvers. When modern engineering permitted the powerful round to be fired in a &ldquo;K&rdquo;frame gun, it meant that police officers could get the on-target performance of the bigger gun in a much lighter and more maneuverable package that was easier to carry, deploy and shoot. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">Almost overnight, the Model 19 was the gun to have for the working cop. Made in high-polish blue or nickel finishes and with standard 2 1/2, 4 or 6-inch barrels, the Model 19 is encountered in (scarce) 3-inch and (rare) 5-inch versions. And at least one 3 1/2-incher was made in the old days. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">When stainless steel blossomed in the 1970s, the stainless Combat Magnum was called the Model 66. However, it is the original Model 19 was a gun that I remember fondly as the first revolver I ever carried as a professional tool.</span></p> <p style="text-align: left;">&nbsp;</p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=2282&cid=25#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=2263&cid=25Fri, 19 Mar 2010 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">This term applies to revolvers and is used to describe the bridge of metal running along the top of the main frame from the vicinity of the rear sight forward to the threaded portion of the frame that accepts the barrel. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">On early revolvers of the cap-and-ball era, a top strap was frequently omitted as superfluous. Indeed the first big cartridge Colt revolver&mdash;the so-called Open Top of 1872&mdash;had no topstrap. But they found that a stronger design with a topstrap was necessary for the more powerful cartridges of the 1873 Peacemaker.</span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">It is a virtual fixture on modern revolvers and I can't think of a single model from any maker that does not include a top strap. </span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=2263&cid=25#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=2243&cid=25Mon, 15 Mar 2010 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">Just a silly millimeter&mdash;that's all that spells the difference in these three successively longer auto pistol cartridges. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">The 9x17 mm is just one of several names for the .380 Auto, which was a John Browning creation in the first decade of the 20th Century. Used in scores of different blowback pocket autos, the .380 (aka 9 mm Corto, 9 mm Kurz, etc.) is experiencing a resurgence of popularity, some of which are actually recoil-operated. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">At the other end of the spectrum, the 9x19 mm is a European designation for what we call the 9 mm Luger, but the Europeans know as the 9 mm Parabellum. It is the most popular and widely used pistol cartridge in the world. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">In the middle, there is a seldom-seen round called the 9x18 mm. Developed by the Germans for <em>Luftwaffe</em> pistols before World War II, the 9x18 mm was also known as the 9 mm police or 9 mm Ultra. The design was intended to split the performance gap between the other two 9 mm cartridges. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">The 9x18 was resurrected for German police service in the 1970s, but fizzled once again. However, two out of three isn't bad for the little 9 mm rounds. Of course, there were some others. I know of no 9x20 mm, but there was a 9x21 mm, a 9x22 mm and the really zippy 9x23 mm made a lot of sense, but not the popularity chart.</span></p> <p style="text-align: left;">&nbsp;</p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=2243&cid=25#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=2221&cid=25Thu, 11 Mar 2010 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">When Colt cast about for a name for their latest big revolver and came up with &ldquo;New Service,&rdquo; it was just before the turn of the 19th Century. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">The big brute that got the new moniker was a first in many ways. It was the first revolver to have a DA and SA trigger system and a swing out cylinder, which adapted to many large-caliber cartridges. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">In that period, the big revolver cartridge was king and Colt wanted a gun that got it done. A large, strong and heavy six-shot revolver, the New Service was made in great quantity&mdash;more than 350,000 units&mdash;over a time span of approximately 44 years&mdash;1898 to 1942. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">The New Service was the service pistol of such police agencies as the Canadian Mounties, U.S. Border Patrol and New York State Troopers. However, its greatest single buyer was the U.S. Army, which bought approximately 155,000 of them for use in World War I. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">These 1917 revolvers were chambered in .45 ACP, and required full-moon clips to properly work. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">A popular Colt for many years, the New Service had multiple variations including a target model with adjustable sights and even a fancy version called the Shooting Master. Eventually however, the popularity waned to the point that the guns were in the catalog, but relatively few were made. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">The pictured sample is one of the last guns made in the late 1930s, a rare .357 Mag.</span></p> <p style="text-align: left;">&nbsp;</p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=2221&cid=25#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=2217&cid=25Mon, 08 Mar 2010 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">Occasionally I get questions about handgun terminology such as: &ldquo;Where is the forcing cone in a revolver? Answering these questions is useful to the readers and often fun. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">The easiest way to explain the location of the forcing cone is that it is at the extreme rear end of the barrel. The forcing cone is an unrifled section of barrel cut in the shape of a steep funnel. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">When a bullet leaves the front side of a revolver cylinder, it crosses the barrel cylinder gap. For a brief moment, the bullet is a little wobbly and the forcing cone &ldquo;forces&rdquo; it into the rifling. Here, the spiral grooves true up the bullet's path and start the spinning motion that will stabilize the bullet in flight. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">If it were not for the forcing cone, the bullet would not make the transition from the cylinder to the barrel in a smooth and even manner, which makes it essential to a gun's accuracy.</span></p> <p style="text-align: left;">&nbsp;</p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=2217&cid=25#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=2216&cid=25Fri, 05 Mar 2010 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">Smith &amp; Wesson makes many thousands of guns every year and has made many millions of them since the first partnership of Horace Smith &amp; D.B. Wesson in 1852.</span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">The one gun that has been the most prolific for them is the Military &amp; Police Model revolver, which remains in the catalog as the Model 10. Although it has been in continuous production since 1899, the recent centennial of this grand old gun passed with relatively little fanfare.</span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">When the company first offered the old warrior, it was the first use of the K frame as well as the launching platform for the .38 Special cartridge. Dozens of other models have been built on the same foundation in the intervening years.</span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">The .38 Spl.&mdash;111 years after its introduction&mdash;is not only alive, but also the most popular cartridge for personal defense in revolvers.</span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">The gun itself was the answer to a great many questions. It was the most widely issued police service revolver of all time and civilians have used the gun for a variety of purposes. And I vividly recall seeing aging World War II M&amp;Ps in the shoulder holsters of nearly every Marine aviator I ever ran into.</span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=2216&cid=25#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=2215&cid=25Thu, 04 Mar 2010 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">I'm not sure that it is necessarily the most versatile cartridge, but a revolver chambered for the .357 Mag. is an almighty good all-around handgun. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">Ammo is available with bullet weights ranging from 110 to 180 grains, and for the handloader, bullet range is even wider. Many people use speedy 125-grain bullets for defense or police work, but I would argue for more weight&mdash;140 to 158 grains&mdash;to get the job done. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">In addition, 180-grain loads are great stoppers and a guy with a good Magnum revolver and a supply of them could keep himself fed in an emergency. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">Above all, the .357 has a huge advantage in that it is also a .38 Spl. and the range of ammo in both calibers is simply enormous.</span></p> <p style="text-align: left;">&nbsp;</p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=2215&cid=25#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=2198&cid=25Thu, 25 Feb 2010 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">It may be growing a little long in the tooth, but the <a href="http://www.tcarms.com/" target="_blank">Thompson/Center</a>&nbsp;Contender pistol is one of the more influential handguns of our time. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">A single shot pistol that hinges open for loading, the Contender came along in the late 60s and took the handgun world by storm. This system permitted the use of many barrels on the same receiver, and was an inexpensive gun that got a lot of shooters into the handgunning business on a budget. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">From a .22 barrel for casual plinking to a powerful hunting barrel in .35 Remington, the Contender covered the spectrum of sporting handgun uses. With few exceptions, Contender shooters were also handloaders and they gave the handloading industry a boost. Contenders were also very easy to fit with scopes and contributed to the development of better optics for handguns in general. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">My first Contender was a .357 Mag. for which I bought a spare .22 LR barrel, giving me a great deal of versatility. But the Contender got its biggest boost when IHMSA shooting burst on the scene and many shooters picked it up. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">One of the most popular wildcats in history was the 7mm T/C-U, which used plentiful GI 5.56mm brass, necked up to take 7 mm bullets. This cartridge dropped scores of steel chickens, pigs, turkeys and rams in the IHMSA sport.</span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=2198&cid=25#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=2180&cid=25Mon, 22 Feb 2010 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">As a matter of habit, I grasp every handgun that I fire in the same way&mdash;as high as possible to get my hand as close to the axis of the bore I&rsquo;m able. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">This high grip lessens the gun&rsquo;s leverage on my hand at the instant it fires; therefore, felt recoil is reduced. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">In a semi-automatic pistol, your ability to do this is invariably limited by the tang at the top rear of the grip. Nevertheless, shooter&rsquo;s should get as high as possible on the grip. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">Revolvers are a little different. The rounded handles of most single-action revolvers is such that you can get a very high grip. This is good for recoil control, but make sure the hammer can still be easily cocked. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">Where double-action revolvers are concerned, a high grip is beneficial in that it provides better leverage to stroke that long trigger pull. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">Regardless of the type or style of handgun, a high grip is beneficial for shooting. Try it and see what you think.</span></p> <p style="text-align: left;">&nbsp;</p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=2180&cid=25#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=2177&cid=25Thu, 18 Feb 2010 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">William E. Fairbairn was a proper English gentleman who emigrated to China in the early 20th Century. He was a police inspector in the fabled Shanghai Municipal Police and served most of that time as a combat training expert. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">His first writings were on the Asian martial arts and I wish I could find copies of these centuries-old books. I do have an original copy of his shooting book called <em>Shooting to Live with the One-Handed Gun</em>, Co-authored with Eric A. Sykes. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">This is one of the earliest known books on combat pistol shooting. Interestingly, illustrations in this slim little volume, show a policeman shooting (two-handed) from a stance much like the modern Weaver. The text explains the need to fire in two-round &ldquo;bursts&rdquo; in order to achieve the best terminal effect on an opponent.</span></p> <p style="text-align: left;">&nbsp;</p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=2177&cid=25#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=2153&cid=25Tue, 16 Feb 2010 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">In the Frontier period, there was a need for powerful revolvers. This need was met with such guns as the brute-strong '75 Remington, classic S&amp;W Schofield and the immortal Colt Peacemaker. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">What many do not realize is that there was an additional gun that was very competitive&mdash;the Merwin, Hulbert. These revolvers came in three sizes, several calibers, many barrel lengths and four different model variations. However, all of them had one feature in common&mdash;a unique twist-and-pull system of selective extraction. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">In this system, the shooter works a latch on the bottom of the frame, twists the barrel and cylinder 90 degrees, pulls it forward and then gives it a little shake. Cartridges are held against the standing breech. The distance the cylinder moves forward is that of a fired case, so those fall away, leaving live rounds in place. Close the action and top off with fresh rounds. The system demanded meticulous hand-fitting, but is a delight to use. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">Merwins had other features that also helped them stand out, such as scoop flute cylinders and folding hammers for concealed carry. However the feature that I like most of all is the interchangeable spare barrels. You could have a 3 1/2-inch barrel for going to town and a 7-incher for daily carry out on the range. Beautiful!</span></p> <p style="text-align: left;">&nbsp;</p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=2153&cid=25#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=2152&cid=25Fri, 12 Feb 2010 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">When you are out shooting your revolver the next time, take a close look at the sights by putting the gun in the hands of a shooting partner and watching him or her shoot from a vantage point off to one side. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">With little effort, you can tell that the barrel is actually pointed well below a line that runs through the sights. If those sights are aligned on a target, the barrel is actually pointed several inches lower. In other words, there is an angle between the axis of the bore and the axis of the sights. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">If you did this with a K38 with 6-inch barrel, you would see a pretty pronounced angle, but if you substituted a 6-inch K22, the angle would be noticeably less. Why? Well, because the gun companies long ago had to decide on how high to make the front sight in order to get centered hits, so they did some empirical testing. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">The riddle is easier to understand if you accept that the revolver will move in the hand when it is fired and recoil will move the barrel upward before the bullet exits the muzzle. Since the .38 kicks more than the .22, there is more of an angle of offset required to drop a shot right in the old X-ring.</span></p> <p style="text-align: left;">&nbsp;</p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=2152&cid=25#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=2150&cid=25Tue, 09 Feb 2010 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">The Makarov is an interesting cartridge that was unknown for many years in the west. From just after World War II until the end of the century, it was the primary Russian pistol cartridge used in both Makarov and Steckchin pistols. Fifty-plus years of service is pretty good for any cartridge. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">Since the Russians rarely exported surplus guns and ammunition, Americans have had little practical shooting experience with this round. But a flood of military surplus began just after the Iron Curtain came down and we are now able to get both pistols and ammunition in this caliber. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">Intermediate in power between the .380 Auto and the 9 mm Parabellum, the PPK-like Makarov uses a unique 95-grain bullet of .365 inches in size, which leaves the muzzle at over 1,000 fps. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">The Russian ammo is mostly ball, but several American makers have built JHPs, which help the modest ballistic performance considerably. As noted by the late Chuck Karwan, a clean Makarov with Hornady ammo is a decent&mdash;and inexpensive&mdash;defense pistol.</span></p> <p style="text-align: left;">&nbsp;</p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=2150&cid=25#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=2147&cid=25Thu, 04 Feb 2010 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;">&ldquo;Mr. Clapp did not mention the dominant eye under aiming (in his article about the <a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/ArticlePage.aspx?id=1839&amp;cid=19" target="_blank">ABCs of Pistol Shooting</a>). Should I learn to shoot with both eyes open for rapid target acquisition?&rdquo; <br /><span style="mso-fareast-font-family: 'Lucida Sans Unicode'; mso-font-kerning: .5pt; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-language: #00FF; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA;">Vance Norton</span></span></span></p> <p><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"> <hr /> </span></span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;">Thanks for writing. This is a good question. Simply stated, the answer is yes, but not necessarily for rapid target acquisition. </span></span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;">If you are using both eyes, you are getting a form of binocular vision. Also, the muscles of your face are much more relaxed and you see more. However, many people&mdash;including this writer&mdash;just can't seem to align the sights with both eyes open, so they close one eye and focus on the front sight much better. </span></span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;">Also, the question of the dominant eye can be addressed here. Most humans have one eye that works better than the other. Regardless of which hand you use to grasp the pistol, use the dominant eye to align the sights. This is true even if it results in a so-called &ldquo;cross-eyed&rdquo; situation, as right-hand, left-eye. I do that every day. Hope this helps.</span></span></p> </p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=2147&cid=25#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=2138&cid=25Tue, 02 Feb 2010 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">Longevity in a handgun design is measured in years. A few classics have managed to last a few decades. But any gun that remains in production&mdash;and on dealer's shelves&mdash;for more than fifty years is a downright wonder. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">Clearly, there has to be a reason for handguns that last through time. So, why is the Walther PP and PPK series of guns still in production? </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">First offered in 1929, the PP was quickly followed by the slightly smaller PPK in 1931. That's 80 years of almost continuous production (there was a gap after World War II). </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">These guns were made in four calibers: .22 LR, .25 ACP, .32 ACP and the more popular .380 Auto. While none of these are fight-stopping wonder cartridges, the .380 has persisted in this role. And true enough, the unique PP/PPK lockwork was part of a great WWII service auto, the P38. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">It was that lockwork&mdash;the first commercially and militarily successful DA/SA trigger system&mdash;that distinguished the little Walthers as milestone guns to the point that some were even made by Smith &amp; Wesson.</span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=2138&cid=25#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=2135&cid=25Mon, 01 Feb 2010 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">The twists and turns in the history of the Peacemaker Colt and its many variations are unending and fascinating. Initially made in the 60s, Colt&rsquo;s New Frontier six-shooters were adjustable-sighted, flat-topped Peacemakers in several different barrel lengths and calibers. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">They were named after the Kennedy administration and enjoyed mixed approval over the years. Unquestionably, the adjustable sights made the gun easier to use, but the attempt to &ldquo;modernize&rdquo; an acknowledged classic was not that well received by everyone. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">Interestingly enough, part of the rationale for introducing the New Frontier was the appearance of the adjustable-sight Ruger Blackhawk, a gun that had something to do with Colt's re-introduction of the original Peacemaker in the mid-50's. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">I owned a New Frontier in .44 Spl. for a while. It was a very good shooter, and like other guns I have had over the years, I regret selling it.</span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=2135&cid=25#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=2111&cid=25Wed, 27 Jan 2010 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">In the late 70s and early 80s, the ammunition industry was going crazy trying to match strides with the arms industry in the development of semi-automatic pistols. While gunmakers of the time were building the best revolvers in history, it was clear the service handgun of the future would be the semi-automatic pistol. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">At the time, there were new guns, new styles of guns and new calibers galore. There was also a perceived need for ammo that would do things never before asked of the humble pistol bullet. An excellent example of this trend was the mysterious GAS bullet (sometimes known as the BAT bullet) made by GECO of Germany and Austria. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">The GAS bullet was designed with several interesting parameters. Intended for the troopers of Germany's CSG-9, the GAS slug was originally intended for use in 9 mm pistols and submachine guns, meaning it had to feed with total reliability. For that, an FMJ or ball profile was in order. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">Since these elite troops were often involved in pursuits of terrorists on Germany's high-speed highways, they wanted a bullet that would instantly deflate a tire. They decided on an all-copper bullet with a huge hollow point that led down to a hole that ran clear through to the base of the bullet. It was essentially tubular, but the front cavity was filled with a plastic plug shaped a bit like an opened umbrella. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">The rounded contour insured good feeding and the bullet came out of the gun's muzzle with the &ldquo;umbrella&rdquo; in place. Pressure popped it loose and it fell away harmlessly, leaving a light (86 grain) bullet with a huge, razor-edged hollow point cavity whizzing along at 1400 fps. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">When it hit a tire, it cut a perfect 9 mm hole taking a plug of rubber with it. The tire went flat in an instant. Although the GAS bullet was never intended for antipersonnel use, it was pretty good at that, cutting bleeding holes and absolutely splintering bone in the process. The GAS bullet is an interesting footnote in ammunition history.</span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=2111&cid=25#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=2084&cid=25Fri, 15 Jan 2010 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">I was reading Wiley Clapp's article on DA/SA pistols in the magazine. I have a question for him. When I fire my Taurus 24/7 the first time it is the normal trigger pull for the DA. As I've always understood, (I'm mainly a revolver guy) the SA kicks in after the first shot and I should have firm pressure on the trigger with the trigger having minimum trigger pull. On the pistol I have, I need to take up about 1/2 inch of spring pressure on the trigger before the trigger pressure is firm and with a little more pressure the pistol fires. Is this normal? What I'm talking about is the 1/2 inch spring takeup on the trigger. Please reply. I talked to Taurus and the guy just said send it in. If this is normal I'd rather not, but I would like the trigger to respond correctly as I understand it. My pistol is the 24/7 OSS DS Tactical in 40 Cal. </span></span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">Brad, </span></span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">I appreciate your taking the time to write with your question about the Taurus trigger system. Like so many other auto pistol triggers, this one is perplexing. </span></span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">You made the comment that &ldquo;...the SA trigger is supposed to kick in&rdquo; and I have to tell you that it never will. The 24/7 uses a DAO (double action only) trigger system. Here, trigger pressure performs the dual functions of cocking the striker in the slide and then releasing it to fire. </span></span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">Unlike several other DAO guns (Glock, Sigma, M&amp;P), there is no partial cocking when the slide cycles. When the 24/7 slide returns to battery (fully forward), the striker is all the way forward and at rest. </span></span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">Pressing the trigger through that long arc moves the striker from rest to fully loaded and releases it. There is no cocking in single action mode, because there is no single action. What feels like a GI-type takeup is actually the trigger movement necessary to clear an internal safety. </span></span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">If this seems awkward, try using the short reset aspect of the system. With an unloaded gun, pull the trigger and hold it to the rear. Now slowly release the trigger until you here and feel a click. The trigger is now reset for another shot, so pull it back again and the striker will drop. The reset point is well short of all the way forward. Multiple shots may thus be delivered quickly. I hope this helps your ability to shoot your Taurus.</span></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=2084&cid=25#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=2068&cid=25Mon, 11 Jan 2010 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">Magazines are a critically important factor in the continued functioning of any semi-automatic pistol. <br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">If you shoot as much as you should, you need to inspect magazines every time you clean your gun. Look for cracks or dents on the feed lips, particularly at the rear. Then, make sure that the magazine springs have enough tension to lift a column of cartridges. <br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">Also, learn how to disassemble your magazine. Clean the dirt and sand out of the magazine's innards on a regular basis, and be sure you know how to put them back together. Some types, like the SIG Sauer P series, can be tricky. <br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">You can rehabilitate some magazines with new springs, but when the feed lips crack, the next stop on the line is Malfunction Junction. <br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">Take any cracked magazine, remove the spring, and crush the magazine in a vise. If you don't, it will take on a life of its own and crawl back into your supply bag with all the other functional magazines. </span></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=2068&cid=25#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=2063&cid=25Wed, 06 Jan 2010 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">It is interesting to note that pistols use various style features that go in and out of vogue. For example, take the square or hooked trigger guard. </span></span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">For the better part of the 20th Century, all pistol makers furnished their guns with various kinds of rounded trigger guards. But in the 1960s, a shooting stance came into common use, a two-handed stance where the index finger of the support hand went to the front of the trigger guard and pulled back. Supposedly, this produced a more positive grip. </span></span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">Those who study shooting technique in meticulous detail were able to determine that this technique was not as stable as using three fingers on the butt. However, enough folks were doing the finger forward stuff that makers started making their pistols flat or hooked forward. </span></span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">Slowly, this is going away, as evidenced by the introduction of the Smith &amp; Wesson Military &amp; Police model auto. This gun doesn't have a squared trigger guard, mostly because its designer is a shooter and he knows that serious shooters just don't shoot that way.</span></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=2063&cid=25#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=2054&cid=25Mon, 21 Dec 2009 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">Probably without realizing it and certainly without planning it, I have become a collector of classic holsters. <br /><br /></span><span style="font-size: small;">It started when I just a kid. I would save my pennies and buy post cards that I used to get catalogs advertised in the pages of the American Rifleman. Thus did I first become aware of such names as S.D. Myers, Berns-Martin, Audley, Heiser and of course, the George Lawrence company. <br /><br /></span><span style="font-size: small;">Later on in life, I saw examples of these great hand-crafted scabbards at gun shows and garage sales. Having carried a gun daily for most of my adult life, I have come to appreciate the great leather work that goes into quality leather holsters. <br /><br /></span><span style="font-size: small;">So I have begun to accumulate good examples of the great makers of yesteryear. One of the best was the George Lawrence Co. of Portland, Ore. I have no idea where this maker ever got the leather that he used, but it was extremely thick. <br /><br /></span><span style="font-size: small;">Lawrence's stitching was top quality while the Lawrence design was straightforward and functional. The pictured rig for a Peacemaker came out of a bargain box at the Big Reno Gun Show and shows the perfection of their 1930s craftsmanship. <br /><br /></span><span style="font-size: small;">I even have fond memories of driving to Portland on one of my "walkabout" vacations and ordering a quarter-flap Lawrence rig for a 5-inch N frame S&amp;W&mdash;right at the factory. </span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=2054&cid=25#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=2048&cid=25Wed, 16 Dec 2009 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">Use two hands to close your revolver cylinder. The practice of swinging an opened revolver cylinder closed with a snap of the wrist is pure crap. Repeated over time, this gun store commando practice will eventually spring the yoke (or crane) and adversely impact barrel-cylinder alignment. <br /><br /></span><span style="font-size: small;">The better way (for right handers) is to hold the gun in the right hand and carefully close the cylinder with the left. Some sources advise us to activate the thumb latch with the right thumb as we are closing the cylinder. <br /><br /></span><span style="font-size: small;">I know that it looks cool for some Hollywood handgunner to do a quick snap of the wrist to close his or her revolver, but I could fill a book with the stupid things that Hollywood would have us believe about guns and gun handling.<br /><br /><br /></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=2048&cid=25#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=2042&cid=25Tue, 15 Dec 2009 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">Some revolver cylinders turn clockwise while others turn counterclockwise. Which way revolvers turn is determined by the manufacturer. <br /><br /></span><span style="font-size: small;">For the majority of the 20th Century, the major revolver makers were <a href="http://www.coltsmfg.com/" target="_blank">Colt</a> and <a href="http://www.smith-wesson.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/CustomContentDisplay?langId=-1&amp;storeId=10001&amp;catalogId=10001&amp;content=11001" target="_blank">Smith &amp; Wesson</a>. Colt designed their revolvers to spin to the right while Smith's went to the left&mdash;clockwise versus counterclockwise. During the years the two major makers butted heads over supremacy, there was a debate as to which system was superior. <br /><br /></span><span style="font-size: small;">Supposedly, Colt design was stronger because the cylinder turned into the strength of the frame, rather than away from it as in the case of the S&amp;W. However, after firing a great many of both makes over the years, I have come to the conclusion that, if there is any difference, it is in the ease of manufacturing the guns. <br /><br /></span><span style="font-size: small;">In other words, the S&amp;W action is easier to make with a counterclockwise cylinder and the Colt is easier to make with a clockwise cylinder. Any other reasoning is simply old shooters' tales. </span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=2042&cid=25#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=2036&cid=25Wed, 09 Dec 2009 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">For the most part, the 38 has had one meaning to handgunners&mdash;the .38 S&amp;W Spl. It might be argued that this was the handgun cartridge of the 20th Century for Americans. <br /><br /></span><span style="font-size: small;">Personally, I think I have probably fired more .38 Spl. rounds than any other handgun round, including my personal favorite, the .45 ACP. Most of this comes from my early years as a deputy sheriff, when I was shooting on the team and running over the PPC and Bullseye courses a dozen times a week. <br /><br /></span><span style="font-size: small;">When I got into handloading, I put together thousands of 5.5 grains of Unique/158 grain LSWC loads that duplicated our duty ammo. It was with a .38 that I really learned the revolver, just as earlier military experience with .45s taught me the pistol. <br /><br /></span><span style="font-size: small;">The .38 Spl. is a grand old cartridge. It has armed cops and civilians, won matches, taken its share of game and generally performed it all well. Since 1899, when the first M&amp;P S&amp;W revolvers came out of the Springfield plant, the .38 Special has been the "go-to" cartridge for American handgunners, and&mdash;like Dangerfield&mdash;it don't get no respect.</span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=2036&cid=25#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=2031&cid=25Mon, 07 Dec 2009 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">In 1983, the world of handgun shooting was locked onto the International Handgun Metallic Silhouette Association sport. With origins in Mexico, this game had shooters engaging steel silhouettes of game animals at the long distances of 50, 100, 150 and 200 meters. <br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">Essentially, IHMSA was long range handgunning and a lot of fun among some great people. The sport sparked much interest in new guns and ammunition, and one development was the .357 Maximum. <br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">An extended .357 Mag, the Maximum was instantly misunderstood. People saw it as a way to get more velocity out of the .357 Mag. Handloaders immediately started using light (110, 125 and 140-grain) bullets and firewall charges of fast-burning powders. <br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">A better approach would have been using heavier bullets at normal .357 velocities. Serious gas erosion of the Ruger revolver's top strap caused the gun to be discontinued and withdrawn. As there was nothing to shoot it in, the ammo just phased out. <br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">I think there may have been a few Contender barrels made, but most guns chambered for this cartridge were Dan Wessons or Rugers. It was a good idea that was misapplied.</span></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=2031&cid=25#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=2029&cid=25Wed, 02 Dec 2009 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">One of the more popular natural materials from which to craft handgun grips is Sambar Stag. The discarded antlers of a deer native to India, Sambar Stag is easily the best of the many kinds of antlers found around the world. <br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">Our own elk and some deer antlers work pretty well, but nothing seems to do quite as well as the Indian stuff. It is hard, dense material that has the one quality essential to a handgun grip&mdash;dimensional stability. Sambar Stag will not crack, split or warp. Better yet, it will not shrink. It comes in many shades of brown and gray, shading from an almost creamy white to near black. <br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">The pair shown on this old 5-screw S&amp;W .38/44 Heavy Duty are probably at least 50 years old. They have yellowed up nicely with time and handling, but still fit the frame perfectly. <br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">Some unknown craftsman of many years past selected the material carefully. Note that the right grip is larger than the left, built to include a palm swell for a right-handed shooter.<br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">I bought the gun many years ago, out of one of the old time great gun emporiums, Sam Fowler's stockade in Westminster, Calif. I recall that I was about as impressed with the grips as the gun.</span></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=2029&cid=25#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=2028&cid=25Tue, 01 Dec 2009 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">Over the many years that the handgun has been produced in factories and shops around the world, there have been repeated efforts to make it even more powerful than normal. Sometimes that effort results in a blade being added somewhere on the pistol or revolver. <br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">Such devices as the Elgin Cutlass pistol, which had a whopper of a Bowie-type blade built in, and French Apache revolvers, with their fold-forward stiletto-type blades are just two examples. <br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">Today's service pistols all have accessory rails forward of the trigger guard (on the so-called "dust cover") and it was inevitable that someone would use this handy mounting point to affix the most esoteric of handgun accessories. <br /></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">We now have a handgun bayonet. Offered by <a href="http://www.laserlyte.com/" target="_blank">LaserLyte</a>, the <a href="http://www.laserlyte.com/Pistol_Bayonet/PB-1/PB-1.html" target="_blank">Pistol Bayonet</a> slides onto most rail-equipped pistols and locking firmly in place on the gun. <br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">I will not comment on the real-world practicality of the unit, but it is a guaranteed show-stopper on the pistol of someone who has gone to the local range for some light practice with his or her fightin' iron.</span></span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;"><a href="../../BlogList.aspx?id=12&amp;cid=25" target="_blank">Clapp on Handguns</a></span></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=2028&cid=25#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=2018&cid=25Tue, 24 Nov 2009 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">Never load the chamber of your 1911 by dropping a round through the ejection port and into the chamber, then closing the slide. This forces the extractor to snap over the rim of the cartridge, which could cause later problems. John Browning designed the gun to have cartridges slide up the breech face and under the hook of the extractor. <br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">You can get away with this for a while, but eventually it will cause the delicate tip of the extractor to chip or even break clear through. Baby that extractor&mdash;the advanced pistolsmiths will tell you that the extractor is the most critical part in the gun. <br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">The correct way to fully load the 1911 pistol is to insert a full magazine in an empty pistol, rack the slide to chamber the top round, put the safety in the up position and holster the gun. <br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">If you must have it fully loaded, then remove the magazine, load a single round to replace the topmost one and slide the magazine back into the gun. <br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">However, make sure you hear and feel it click into place. If you don't, the next gunfight may be a one-shot affair.</span></span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;"><a href="../../BlogList.aspx?id=12&amp;cid=25">Clapp on Handguns</a></span></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=2018&cid=25#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=2017&cid=25Mon, 23 Nov 2009 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">It has been almost 75 years since the first Magnum handgun&mdash;Smith &amp; Wesson's .357, which was introduced in 1935. <br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">What has happened in the world of handgunning since that great day has been well covered in books and magazines. However, what happened before is not as well known and certainly not as appreciated. <br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">Magnum handguns got their early beginning through a handful of intrepid souls such as Phil Sharpe and Elmer Keith who worked up firewall handloads for the .38 Spl. and cautiously tried them in the special N frame .38s called .38-44s. This name was applied to a fixed sight gun called the Heavy Duty and an adjustable sighted one called the Outdoorsman. <br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">There was even commercially loaded .38-44 ammunition. This was the first cautious step toward handgunning with serious power.</span></span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;"><a href="../../BlogList.aspx?id=12&amp;cid=25">Clapp on Handguns</a></span></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=2017&cid=25#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=2002&cid=25Mon, 16 Nov 2009 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">By the time the 19th Century rolled over into the 20th, the revolver was well established as THE repeating handgun while the current favorite automatic pistol was in the early stages of development.<br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">However, there was a style of revolver that was far more popular than anyone currently understands. It was the double-action-only break-top, usually made in medium or small caliber. Since <a href="http://www.smith-wesson.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/CustomContentDisplay?langId=-1&amp;storeId=10001&amp;catalogId=10001&amp;content=11001" target="_blank">Smith &amp; Wesson</a> has returned these guns to production&mdash;for a host of excellent reasons&mdash;they are seen as being the pioneer in such revolvers. <br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">In fact though, both <a href="http://www.charterfirearms.com/" target="_blank">Charter Arms</a> and <a href="http://www.taurususa.com/" target="_blank">Taurus</a> currently produce revolvers in this style. During the Frontier era, as well as the first half of the 20th Century, both Iver Johnson and Harrington &amp; Richardson made hammerless (actually, internal hammer) revolvers of quality. <br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">These guns were among the highest quality pocket revolvers ever made. Forged from steel with precise machining and fine fit and finish, these were good guns in every sense of the word.</span></span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;"><a href="../../BlogList.aspx?id=12&amp;cid=25">Clapp on Handguns</a></span></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=2002&cid=25#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=1998&cid=25Thu, 12 Nov 2009 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">The act of carrying concealed has taken on some interesting aspects. One of which is the development of new and unique carrying methods. <br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">For example, take the fanny pack. First designed by holster maker Gene DeSantis, this nylon gun bag has an internal holster permanently sewn to a heavy duty belt. There are endless makes and styles of these things and they are an excellent way to carry a gun.<br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">This is particularly true for women in casual or sport clothing. My wife took to the concept instantly and has a collection of fanny packs in various prints, colors and styles. Recently, she made an interesting point about them&mdash;they are all different, and therefore, have different sequences of hand motions necessary to get a gun into action. Therefore, you must practice even more regularly for presenting a handgun from a fanny pack. <br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">Practicing these skills should be approached in the same way we approach dry fire practice. First remove all live ammunition and put it in a container that is never used for anything else. Put the container in another room, then set your mind to practice mode. This means complete focus on practicing the draw stroke&mdash;and nothing else. <br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">Do this for a given period of time, maybe 20 minutes. When the period is up, stop and put the gun away. Do not go back for a few more reps, because this is how bad accidents happen. Do this kind of practice several times a week and master the techniques of drawing efficiently.</span></span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;"><a href="../../BlogList.aspx?id=12&amp;cid=25">Clapp on Handguns</a></span></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=1998&cid=25#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=1994&cid=25Mon, 09 Nov 2009 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">On more than one occasion over the years, I have nodded appreciatively at the good advice of nearly every shooting instructor I have ever listened to: "Carry a reload." On my rare forays into teaching combat shooting, I personally told my students to be sure they had at least enough ammo on them to completely reload their chosen gun at least once. <br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">It is a common axiom and it should be obvious that an empty gun in the middle of a firefight is worse than useless. Yet, this simple rule is probably the most violated one in the short list of "Do's" of defensive shooting. <br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">Although I knew I was making a mistake, I have periodically violated this rule, so I am sympathetic to your plight. <br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">In the case of a small auto, a second magazine can be carried easily and the best way to carry five rounds of ammo for the J frame is one of the new five-round Quick Strips from <a href="http://www.tuffproducts.com/home.php" target="_blank">Tuff Products</a>. They have a nylon pouch that takes one strip or, better yet, a holster that positions a loaded strip behind the gun. <br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">By dint of a simple device, I have been absolved of the hypocrisy that comes from comes from saying one thing and doing another. Good Show!</span></span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;"><a href="../../BlogList.aspx?id=12&amp;cid=25">Clapp on Handguns</a></span></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=1994&cid=25#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=1993&cid=25Fri, 06 Nov 2009 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">Ivory would have to be the unquestioned king of handgun grip materials. As far back as the first presentation Colt revolvers, mirror matched panels of ivory have found their way onto handguns that the user just wanted to spruce up a little bit. <br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">There are several kinds of ivory, but the best comes from the African elephant. A rich, creamy white material that can be checkered, carved or scrimshawed, ivory also looks good in polished form. It also changes over time, darkening and taking on a range of light, exotic colors. <br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">At the present time, there is a good deal of perfectly legal trophy ivory available to our grip makers. There are certain guns that really respond to a set of ivory grips and I believe that the Peacemaker Colt revolver leads the list.</span></span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;"><a href="../../BlogList.aspx?id=12&amp;cid=25">Clapp on Handguns</a></span></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=1993&cid=25#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=1980&cid=25Wed, 04 Nov 2009 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">When the Bren Ten pistol came along in the early 1980s, it caused a great deal of interest and speculation. The gun was loosely based on some of the features of the Czech CZ75, a 9 mm service auto that could not even be legally imported into the United States from Czechoslovakia. It was one of the early "Wondernines" and even had a cocked-and-locked carry feature. <br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">Jeff Cooper had conditionally endorsed the CZ at the same time that he condemned its less powerful cartridge. When a pair of Southern California entrepreneurs&mdash;Dornaus and Dixon&mdash;came up with a CZ based pistol, to try and supplant the 1911 .45, it needed a new cartridge to stand a chance. <br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">Accordingly, they were part of a developmental effort that produced the 10 mm Auto. The Bren Ten story is as much the story of a cartridge as it is the story of a pistol. What happened in just a few short years is fascinating. The 10mm Auto was probably just a little more powerful than it should have been and the Bren Ten pistol had no end of production problems. <br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">Ultimately, the project failed. It was a grand and glorious effort to give combat handgunners a better arm. The story is best told in a great book, "Bren Ten, The Heir Apparent" by Ronald Carrillo. No gun book that I know of was ever as thoroughly researched and accurately reported. Carrillo did a great job.</span></span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;"><a href="../../BlogList.aspx?id=12&amp;cid=25">Clapp on Handguns</a></span></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=1980&cid=25#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=1977&cid=25Mon, 02 Nov 2009 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">The gunsmith who specializes in custom work on handguns is more common today than when I was growing up as a handgunner. Back then, it wasn't all that easy to find a gunsmith that could work on handguns. <br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">Things have changed in today's shooting world, but the gunsmith who specializes in the admittedly declining revolver is getting harder to find. In this regard, I commend to you the work of Hamilton Bowen. <br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">Bowen, a Tennessean, is the acknowledged master of the Custom revolver. He works on Smiths, Colts, Rugers and sometimes others. Bowen does all kinds of work, including caliber and style changes, as well as accuracy work and action jobs. <br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">I have had a good deal of experience with custom revolvers and I have never seen anyone who could equal his work.</span></span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;"><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogList.aspx?id=12&amp;cid=25">Clapp on Handguns</a></span></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=1977&cid=25#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=1957&cid=25Thu, 22 Oct 2009 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">A cry echoes off the banks surrounding combat ranges all over the country. Tactical shooters have grown accustomed to the Rangemaster's cry of "Finger straight, dangit, finger straight!" The finger in question is the trigger finger and it should be obvious that if it is straight, it cannot be on the trigger.<br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">Thus, in two cryptic words, we have compacted the wisdom of Rule Three&mdash;Keep your finger off the trigger until your sights are on the target&mdash;and made it easier to put in practice. <br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">It's working, too. Rule three may have started with Colonel Cooper at Gunsite, but it has spread though out our Armed Forces and police agencies nationwide.<br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;"><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogList.aspx?id=12&amp;cid=25">Clapp on Handguns</a></span></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=1957&cid=25#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=1951&cid=25Tue, 20 Oct 2009 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">The late Bill Jordan left an impressive legacy to American handgunners. One of the more useful is the revolver stocks design that bears his name&mdash;the Jordan Trooper made by <a href="http://www.herrett-stocks.com/" target="_blank">Herrett's Stocks</a> of Twin Falls, Idaho. It is a pleasure to report that the company still makes these for savvy revolver men. <br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">Several years ago, I watched as a skilled craftsperson carved out a pair for a S&amp;W Mountain Revolver.<br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">Jordan worked with Walter Roper to design stocks that would direct the recoil thrust into the palm of the hand rather than the web. When shooting double action, the gun doesn't shift in the hand as much, so recovery from recoil is quick. <br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">I've used Jordan grips on a big .45 revolver, during week-long courses at Gunsite and generally did pretty well. Making proper revolver stocks is an art at Herrett's and they are still at it.</span></span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;"><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogList.aspx?id=12&amp;cid=25">Clapp on Handguns</a></span></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=1951&cid=25#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=1941&cid=25Tue, 13 Oct 2009 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">From 1954 until 1986, the best dollar value in the <a href="http://www.smith-wesson.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/CustomContentDisplay?langId=-1&amp;storeId=10001&amp;catalogId=11101&amp;content=11001" target="_blank">Smith &amp; Wesson</a> catalog was the Highway Patrolman revolver. Introduced with that name in April of 1954 and later given the Model 28 designation, this big revolver was a six-shot .357 Mag. built on the N frame. <br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">To appeal to police agencies and cops on a budget, the gun got a plain satin blue finish and plain walnut Magna grips. It was made with the buyer's choice of 4- or 6-inch barrels. Essentially, it was the exotic Model 27 without the fancy touches of polished blue finish, sight options and the checkering atop the frame and barrel. <br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">A workhorse, the Highway Patrolman often shot like a thoroughbred. The book says there were a few options and rarities, such as the 5-inch versions made for the Florida Highway Patrol, but I have never seen anything but standard guns. <br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">I once had a very early 5-screw gun, but it was stolen in a burglary. I'd sure like to talk to the guy that got it. </span></span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;"><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogList.aspx?id=12&amp;cid=25">Clapp on Handguns</a></span></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=1941&cid=25#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=1928&cid=25Wed, 07 Oct 2009 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">I wish it were not true, but the most important characteristic of a concealed carry handgun is its weight. This is for pragmatic rather than practical reasons. <br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">The first thing that will cause you to leave your gun home&mdash;on the day that you walk into a bloody mess at the Dry Cleaner's&mdash;is the gun's weight. When it becomes onerous, you will rationalize the need away if just heading out to grab a gallon of milk.<br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">If I say that you need to carry the biggest, heaviest gun that you can possibly manage, well, that's good, practical advice. But it is better&mdash;and far more pragmatic&mdash;advice to tell you that you should pack the lightest and most compact gun of adequate power that you can find. <br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">If you have the self discipline to pack the better tool&mdash;then do it. If not, then carry what you can.<br /><br /></span></span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;"><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogList.aspx?id=12&amp;cid=25">Clapp on Handguns</a></span></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=1928&cid=25#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=1918&cid=25Mon, 05 Oct 2009 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">I was once issued shot cartridges for my .45 ACP pistol. It was on Okinawa in the late 1950s and someone had found some of the rounds in an Air Force ammo dump. Left over from WWII survival kits, the rounds were good medicine for the poisonous snakes we often encountered in the brush. They used an extended brass case and a charge of&mdash;I think&mdash;No.9 shot. <br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">These rounds were too long to cycle in the 1911, but one could finesse a round into the chamber. The idea is a very solid one that still makes a lot of sense today. A small charge of shot is excellent for venomous snakes and other pests, and a compact survival kit should have a few. <br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">For many years, <a href="http://www.speer-bullets.com/default.aspx" target="_blank">Speer</a> has sold the empty shot capsules for handloaders to load their own. But they also load a good variety of shot cartridges in a number of calibers including the all-time favorite 9 mm Luger. <br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">Ergo, if your woods-walking companion is a 9 mm pistol, you can carry a spare magazine of creepy-crawler loads and be prepared.</span></span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;"><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogList.aspx?id=12&amp;cid=25">Clapp on Handguns</a></span></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=1918&cid=25#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=1904&cid=25Tue, 29 Sep 2009 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">Few handgunners have ever learned this lesson, but they should. If you ever move the hammer of a Peacemaker (or any clone thereof) back, it should go all the way back before it is allowed to go forward. <br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">The SAA action will work for years with proper care, but you should never pull the gun store cowboy trick of partially cocking the gun, then easing the hammer down between stops. The hammer notches are not rugged and they can easily chip when handled in this way. <br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">Many years ago, I recall seeing a gunwise Westerner going through the dozens of Peacemakers on the shelves of a Reno, Nev., pawn shop, looking for a good shooter. <br /><br />He was checking the trigger pulls and explained what he was doing. Almost every one of them would have taken work to be put in proper condition for serious shooting. He found one or two that were OK.</span></span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;"><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogList.aspx?id=12&amp;cid=25">Clapp on Handguns</a></span></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=1904&cid=25#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=1898&cid=25Thu, 24 Sep 2009 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">In last few years, we have seen a new form of handgun holster come into common use&mdash;the pocket holster. For the purposes of concealed carry, the pocket holster can do a lot. <br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">There are several types and they work as the name implies. They're holsters for small handguns that fit into (usually) trousers pockets. In use, the shooter reaches into the pocket and grabs the butt of the gun, which extends up and out of the holster, but still inside the pocket. When the shooter lifts the gun, the holster stays in the pocket because of an edge, corner or extension on the holster that contacts the upper corner of the pocket and keeps the holster from coming out with the gun. <br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">Some makers also use sticky or coarse material on the outside of the holster to help keep it in place. These little folded-over pockets of cloth, leather or synthetic material work surprisingly well and are usually less expensive than more conventional holsters<br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">Their best single advantage, however, is the efficient way they break up the obvious outline of a gun showing through the thin cloth of a pair of today's lightweight pants. Pocket holsters hold a gun in readiness and they don't allow it to "print" to the world.</span></span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;"><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogList.aspx?id=12&amp;cid=25">Clapp on Handguns</a></span></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=1898&cid=25#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=1856&cid=25Mon, 21 Sep 2009 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">As we entered the last decade of the 20th Century, handguns were developing at breakneck speed. Cartridge development was hot, particularly for semi-automatic pistols. <br /><br />One branch of interest was a workable mid-bore round for the magazine-fed autos&mdash;a cartridge that bridged the gap between the 9 mm and the .45 ACP. Eventually, a joint Winchester/Smith &amp; Wesson effort won the day over the closest contender&mdash;the 10mm Auto. But for a year or two, there was another round out there that was mighty interesting. <br /><br />Called the .41 Action Express or .41 AE, it was developed in the devious mind of one Evan Whildin, Vietnam Marine and head of Action Arms of Philadelphia. Based on a shortened .41 Magnum case with its head rebated back to the dimensions of the 9 mm, the .41 AE worked well in suitably rebarreled 9 mm pistols. <br /><br />Bullets up to 210 grains in .41 Mag. could be used, and powder capacity of the cartridge allowed velocities around 900 f.p.s. Some ammunition was made by IMI in Israel, and a few pistols were sold that worked with it. <br /><br />In the end, the ingenious cartridge lost out to the heavily promoted .40 S&amp;W.<br /></span></span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;"><a href="../../BlogList.aspx?id=12&amp;cid=25">Clapp on Handguns</a></span></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=1856&cid=25#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=1855&cid=25Fri, 18 Sep 2009 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">Few handgunners really know where the term "Magna" grips comes from, and how they differ from any other grip. <br /><br />On Smith &amp; Wesson revolvers, Magna grips are wooden grips that extend upward to the top of the frame. They do not include the filler block behind the trigger guard, which is often hard for small hands to manage. <br /><br />Magnas were contrived to prevent the sharp edge at the rear of the frame from digging into the shooter's hand. They were the standard issue on many guns (Model 58s, 28s and others) for decades. <br /><br />Legend holds that they came from a little guy with a great big hat who came from out Idaho way.<br /><br /></span></span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;"><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogList.aspx?id=12&amp;cid=25">Clapp on Handguns</a></span></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=1855&cid=25#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=1835&cid=25Mon, 14 Sep 2009 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">One of the salient virtues of the semi-automatic pistol as a fighting weapon is the speed with which it can be reloaded. The technique of making a speedy reload is pretty simple&mdash;dump the magazine that's in the gun by pushing the magazine catch and letting it fall free. Then insert a pre-loaded spare and slam it home. <br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">While that is the essentials of the technique, good schools teach more. First, try not to let the gun run dry and go to slide lock. Doing so will require an extra hand motion to get back in the fight. When you decide to reload, get a positive grip on the replacement magazine&mdash;with the trigger finger of the support hand running down the front face of the magazine.<br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">Only when the grip on the spare is positive do you use the thumb of the shooting hand to push the catch and drop the partially expended magazine on the ground.<br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">Position the rear flat of the spare to the rear flat of the magazine well and drive it home with the heel of the support hand. A good pistolero can perform a speed magazine change well under a second. It is a basic technique that must be mastered.</span></span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;"><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogList.aspx?id=12&amp;cid=25">Clapp on Handguns</a></span></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=1835&cid=25#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=1822&cid=25Thu, 10 Sep 2009 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">The darn gun is just gorgeous. It is a Colt Commander .45, which starts out as a danged handsome shootin' iron in my book. But this one is gussied up in a version for <a href="http://www.taloinc.com/" target="_blank">TALO</a> distributors, who ordered a&nbsp; very special run. <br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;"><a href="http://www.coltsmfg.com/default.aspx" target="_blank">Colt</a> still has the senior craftsmen who can polish a flat metal surface to a mirror shine, and that is exactly what they did for the Royal Combat Commander. It has several upgraded features for Combat shooting <span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: &quot;Times New Roman&quot;; mso-fareast-font-family: 'Times New Roman'; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA;">&ndash; </span>long three-hole trigger, extended thumb safety, really handsome walnut grips with Colt script logo, checkered mainspring housing and more. <br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">The real effort is in the finish <span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: &quot;Times New Roman&quot;; mso-fareast-font-family: 'Times New Roman'; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA;">&ndash; </span>polished Colt Royal blue everywhere, even the slide top. And to top it all off, it shoots like a Colt. <br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">The Royal Combat Commander comes in a presentation-quality case and is intended to be a special gift. I plan on giving my sample to the nicest guy that I know <span style="font-size: 12pt; font-family: &quot;Times New Roman&quot;; mso-fareast-font-family: 'Times New Roman'; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA;">&ndash; </span>if I can afford it.<br /><br /></span></span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;"><a href="../../BlogList.aspx?id=12&amp;cid=25">Clapp on Handguns</a></span></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=1822&cid=25#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=1809&cid=25Thu, 03 Sep 2009 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">The look and shape of handguns sometimes have an impact on their popularity. Several companies have told me that some of their models have not sold well, when they would seem to have everything going for them. <br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">Here's a very good example. In 1999, <a href="http://www.smith-wesson.com" target="_blank">Smith &amp; Wesson</a> combined the features of two very popular models - the internal hammer Centennial and the five shot L frame .44 Spl. Called the Model 296Ti, the resulting gun had the snag free contours of an internal hammer DAO and the almost legendary clout of the .44 Spl. In a world that's deeply concerned with finding the ideal concealed carry handgun, this combination should have been really popular. Add in the fact that the gun was very light, using a strong titanium cylinder in an alloy frame. This should have been a real crowd-pleaser, but it never took off and was discontinued in 2001. <br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">The chunky little powerhouse was more than a scaled-up J frame, using a frame that had a pronounced hump for the internal hammer to swing through its arc. To the critical eye of too many prospective buyers, it appeared that the humpback frame contour was as ugly as the Hunchback of Notre Dame. Even though the 296 was a nice compilation of features, it just didn't look right and people didn't buy them. <br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">Evidence that looks alone killed off a good model - proving gun buyers are remarkably subjective about their decisions. True enough, but then how can you explain the current popularity of the <a href="http://www.taurususa.com/gun-selector-results.cfm?series=41&amp;toggle=tr" target="_new">Taurus Judge</a>? One of the most out-of-proportion revolvers ever made, the Judge is really beautiful only to Taurus management. They sell them by the thousands.</span></span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;"><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogList.aspx?id=12&amp;cid=25">Clapp on Handguns</a></span></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=1809&cid=25#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=1799&cid=25Fri, 28 Aug 2009 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">Ed McGivern was one of the most unlikely handgunners of all time. He had no background in professional use of the handgun, i.e., police or military service. A stocky little man with fantastic eye-hand coordination, Montanan McGivern was a sign painter by trade. <br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">Back in the 1930s, he became intrigued with the alleged feats of the western gunman of the Frontier era. The interest drove him to attempt to duplicate their feats and eventually led to revolver shooting way beyond what the old-timers had ever done. <br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">Part of this came from far better guns, but more of it was an analytical approach and practice, practice, practice. <br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">Much of his work was reported in a great book, <em>Fast and Fancy Revolver Shooting</em>. He did long range work with a handgun at hundreds of yards and shot up to six targets thrown in the air, but was best known for speed. When he reported shooting five rounds into a playing card at 15 feet <span style="font-size: 12pt; color: black; font-family: &quot;Times New Roman&quot;; mso-fareast-font-family: 'Times New Roman'; mso-bidi-font-family: Univers-Condensed; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-bidi-font-weight: bold;">&ndash; </span>in 45/100 of a second <span style="font-size: 12pt; color: black; font-family: &quot;Times New Roman&quot;; mso-fareast-font-family: 'Times New Roman'; mso-bidi-font-family: Univers-Condensed; mso-ansi-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-bidi-font-weight: bold;">&ndash; </span>he set off a wave of controversy.<br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">I have seen some grainy old film of McGivern at work and I believe he did everything he claimed he did. The book is a great read and has been reprinted several times. <br /></span></span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;"><a href="../../BlogList.aspx?id=12&amp;cid=25">Clapp on Handguns</a></span></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=1799&cid=25#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=1790&cid=25Tue, 25 Aug 2009 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">I got my first indication that Remington was loading some special .38 Spl. and .357 Mag. ammo when I saw an unusually marked case. A typical cardboard carton that held 500 rounds, it was empty when I saw it, but was plainly marked ".38 Special Multi-Ball" and "Two #000 Buckshot."&nbsp;<br /><br />I finally persuaded Remington to ship me a few boxes, discovering in the process that they also made it in .357 Magnum. As many handgunners are aware, #000 buckshot pellets are the same diameter as .38 Spl. bullets. It is possible to load a pair of them into either .38 Spl. or .357 Mag. brass, atop a charge of powder that drives them to respectable velocities.<br /><br />Remington made an unknown amount of this ammo, but rather quickly discontinued it. I fired enough to satisfy my curiosity about the load's performance. It would easily put both pellets into a silhouette out to 10 yards, sometimes a little more. For a defensive cartridge, that's pretty good, but it just never caught fire. Go figure.<br /><br /></span></span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;"><a href="../../BlogList.aspx?id=12&amp;cid=25">Clapp on Handguns</a></span></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=1790&cid=25#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=1786&cid=25Fri, 21 Aug 2009 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">The 356 TSW was an interesting cartridge that lasted only very briefly and is now out of print. It stands for 356 Team Smith &amp; Wesson and was offered in several S&amp;W autos as well as a few Centennial revolvers. <br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">The S&amp;W engineers created the little 9 mm round for the early 1990s IPSC venues. Their goal was to use existing pistol platforms to build competitive autos. <br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">Loaded to the same overall length as the 9 mm Luger, the 356 TSW drove 147-grain JHPs fast enough to do the trick. Using a strong case about 21.5 mms in length, the 356 TSW made major with room to spare. At one point, I had several guns for evaluation and enjoyed shooting them very much. Basically, it was a way to hot rod the 9 mm round and it worked. <br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">For one reason or another, the round was barred from competition and passed from the scene. S&amp;W may still make some of the guns for sales in Europe, where things are different.<br /><br /></span></span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;"><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogList.aspx?id=12&amp;cid=25">Clapp on Handguns</a></span></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=1786&cid=25#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=1734&cid=25Mon, 10 Aug 2009 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">I can well remember Smith &amp;Wesson's Tommy Campbell standing in front of the Gunwriting Corps with a big announcement. It was during SHOT (Shooting, Hunting, Outdoor Trade) Show in early 1990 and the big news was the .40 S&amp;W cartridge. <br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">This was the time of the semi-automatic pistol in law enforcement, when the 9 mm was most common, but a sprinkling of .45s were around. Everybody wanted to have a 9 mm-sized .45 cartridge and they wanted it in a 9mm-sized gun. Impossible on the face of it, but the clever gun engineers at Smith &amp; Wesson and the equally clever ammo engineers at Winchester came up with a 9 mm-length cartridge that shot a medium-bore (.40-caliber) bullet. <br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">Called the .40 S&amp;W, the new round took off like a moon rocket. Within the year, most pistol makers were building a .40 S&amp;W pistol on their 9 mm platform. Then, several leading police agencies&nbsp;put the .40 in service as soon as the first guns were available. <br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">In actual street shootings, the new load quickly earned its spurs. It was literally a great idea and the .40 is the unquestioned champion of American law enforcement service pistol cartridges. Campbell was right on the money when he said: "It gives you a 180 at 950 and it <em>will</em> make major." </span></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=1734&cid=25#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=1707&cid=25Mon, 03 Aug 2009 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">Handgunners with long memories may recall the curiosity surrounding those early one-inch ads in the outdoor magazines and The American Rifleman. They pictured a curious .22 pistol called a <a href="http://www.ruger.com/" target="_new">Ruger</a>. <br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">Since the pistol bore some resemblance to the Luger, some felt the new gun and company were playing on the name similarity. Nothing could be farther from the truth - the first Ruger was a completely new and different handgun that got more than one post-WWII pistolero off to a flying start in shooting. <br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">The first Standard Autos went for $37.50 and it was years before Ruger announced a price increase. <br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">Improved and modified in several ways - but never materially changed - the gun is still in the slick Ruger catalog. The sheer common sense practicality of that first Ruger is what made it work, combined with a fair price and respectable quality. <br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">I hate to admit that I clearly remember when all of this happened - 60 years ago.<br /><br /></span></span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;"><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogList.aspx?id=12&amp;cid=25">Clapp on Hanguns</a></span></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=1707&cid=25#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=1702&cid=25Wed, 29 Jul 2009 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">The next time that you are dry-firing your favorite handgun, I would ask that you try a little exercise. It is most applicable to the autos, but applies also to a few revolvers as well. <br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">With a verified unloaded pistol, cock the hammer or striker. Press the trigger through a complete cycle, which drops the hammer or releases the striker and <em>hold the trigger fully to the rear</em>. Now, from the all-the-way-back position, slowly allow the trigger to come forward. <br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">When you hear and feel a light click, you have identified a very interesting point in the gun's action. It is the reset point and the click is the lockwork parts resetting for another pull. Continue this exercise until you have memorized exactly how far forward you need to move the trigger before it resets. <br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">Now, go to the range and repeat with live ammo. Do it until resetting the trigger of your chosen pistol has become a habit and you do it without thinking. The last act in firing a shot is to re-acquire the front sight and re-set the trigger. <br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">Trigger reset is one of the keys to fast and accurate combat shooting.<br /><br /></span></span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;"><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogList.aspx?id=12&amp;cid=25">Clapp on Handguns</a></span></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=1702&cid=25#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=1690&cid=25Thu, 23 Jul 2009 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;"><a href="http://www.taurususa.com/" target="_new">Taurus</a> firearms are selling very well for the Miami-based company that imports them from Brazil. Their hottest product is almost certainly the <a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/ArticlePage.aspx?id=1526&amp;cid=26">Judge</a>, a five-shot, long-cylindered, short-barreled revolver that fires .45 Colt cartridges or .410 shot shells interchangeably. It is a powerful defensive firearm that I have written up twice in the pages of The American Rifleman. <br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">However, the Judge is not my personal favorite Taurus firearm. By a wide margin, I like the Millennium Pro .45 more than any other Taurus firearm. This gun has features that other don't - compact, light, easy to shoot and with an impressive 10+1 capacity. <br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">The trigger system is a so-called "pure" DAO in that the trigger is fully forward and at rest when the shooter applies pressure and sweeps the trigger through a full arc. It's among the safest to carry with a chambered round, because of passive safeties and an optional, down-to-fire manual one. <br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">If you want an even flatter gun, Taurus offers a 6+1 version that hides very easy. My only complaint with the Millennium Pro is sights that are barely adequate and I am working on that one. Give this one a look at your local gun dealer.<br /><br /></span></span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;"><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogList.aspx?id=12&amp;cid=25">Clapp on Handguns</a></span></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=1690&cid=25#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=1686&cid=25Tue, 21 Jul 2009 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">No, not parachutists - magazines. European shooters still scratch their heads over American shooters who insist that their magazines fall free when the magazine catch is depressed. Gaston Glock carefully designed his G17 pistol to drop the magazine a few millimeters, where it stopped. The shooter could then remove and reload the magazine since in the Austrian service, he only had one. It was much easier to have it contained in the gun. <br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">Eighteen rounds of 9 mm ammunition was deemed sufficient for any normal use. The Continental shooter was once perplexed by Americans who insisted on the capability of dropping expended magazines all over the landscape, but I think they have now come to expect it. <br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">Glock wanted to sell lots of his guns in the United States, and he has done so. They all come with free-falling magazines. <br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">To understand all of this, you have to recall that our gunhandling procedures were developed, for the most part, by shooters who were armed with 7+1 .45s. The fewer the rounds in the gun, the greater the need for a drop-free magazine, thereby to speed up the reload. <br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">Frankly, I prefer to have magazines gone if they are empty or I otherwise need to reload. But I did a 250 round pistol shoot at Gunsite last year - with a high-cap Ruger 9mm - and I only really needed a drop-free capability on one occasion. That was the final shoot-off.<br /><br /><br /></span></span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">Go back to <a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogList.aspx?id=12&amp;cid=25">Clapp on Handguns</a></span></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=1686&cid=25#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=1674&cid=25Fri, 17 Jul 2009 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">A so-called &ldquo;Hammer&rdquo; is a shooting technique where the shooter delivers two quick shots to the center of mass of a target. <br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">To do it, the handgunner presents the pistol, aligns the sights on the target, then breaks a shot, resets the trigger and delivers a second shot. There is no aligning of the sights before the second shot, but it must be followed by the correct re-aligning of sights and reseting the trigger, which follows the delivery of any shot. <br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">At close range and from a proper Weaver stance, the two shots will strike close to one another. If they are within an inch of one another, you are probably shooting too slow- speed up. Once you can deliver two shots about two to three inches apart at three yards, it's time to move back to five yards. <br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">Master the five yard line and move to seven, etc. A mild spread of as much as four to five inches is acceptable, as long as they strike within a few tenths of a second. <br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">It is well established that a pair delivered in this fashion have a greater traumatic effect on a real-world opponent than two through the same hole over a greater span of time.<br /><br /><br /></span></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=1674&cid=25#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=1672&cid=25Tue, 14 Jul 2009 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">Occasionally, the relationship between the .38 S&amp;W and .38 S&amp;W Special rounds comes up in discussion. Both cartridges were developed for and first used in Smith &amp; Wesson revolvers. The slightly shorter .38 S&amp;W came along circa 1877 and was designed for a succession of breaktop revolvers beginning with the Baby Russian. <br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">About 20 years later, the company wanted an improved .38 cartridge for their medium-frame Hand Ejector known as the Military &amp; Police model. Somewhat longer and more powerful, the .38 S&amp;W Special was the result. It became one of the bread and butter cartridges of the 20th Century. It is still made in many loadings, as is the M&amp;P revolver. <br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">Oddly enough, that K frame revolver was also used for hundreds of thousands of .38 S&amp;W revolvers for forces of the United Kingdom during WWII. The Brits used it with a 200-grain round nosed bullet and called it the .38/200. <br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">It is important to understand that the .38 S&amp;W Special is not a lengthened version of the .38 S&amp;W. The shorter and less powerful .38 S&amp;W is larger in case and bullet diameter and usually will not slide into a .38 Special chamber. <br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">Beware of WWII British surplus S&amp;W revolvers which had their chambers lengthened to take .38 Specials. They didn't work well because the rear of the chamber was oversized for the larger .38 S&amp;W round. Hot .38 Specials often split when fired in one of these mutilated guns. <br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">If in doubt, take it to a competent gunsmith for examination. In a proper revolver, the old .38 S&amp;W &ndash; still loaded by Remington &ndash; is a good cartridge.<br /><br /><br /></span></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=1672&cid=25#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=1638&cid=25Mon, 13 Jul 2009 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">The idea of a clip or hook built onto a pistol is centuries-old. The clip permits the handgunner to attach the gun to his sash, belt or bandoleer instead of carrying it in a much more bulky holster.<br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">It's a concept that has merit, particularly in view of today's light clothing, featherweight guns and rust free gun materials. A new company called <a href="http://www.covertcarrier.com/index.html#done" target="_new">Covert Carrier</a> has come out with a modern refinement of the gun clip concept. <br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">They install their nicely engineered clips to project forward from the rear edge of the auto pistol grip. In use, the gun rides just below - and inside - the waistband of a pair of trousers with the only part of the gun visible being the clip. This keeps the gun from dropping below the belt line and within easy access. <br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">The concealed carry handgunner simple draws the pistol with a pinching action that lifts it from its concealment location and right into the shooter's hand. This is good-looking gear for the concealed-carry proponents.<br /><br /><br /></span></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=1638&cid=25#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=1624&cid=25Fri, 10 Jul 2009 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">It looks as if we are on the threshold of another battle among the giants of gunmaking. For reasons that are not entirely clear to me, there is a sharp resurgence of interest in .380 ACP pistols. <br /><br />Combined with increasing numbers of CCW holders, this renewed interest has driven handgun designers to create smaller than ever versions of the .380 ACP. New designs from Kel-Tec, Ruger, Rohrbaugh, Kahr, Sig Sauer, Taurus and possibly others will be going head to head in 2009. <br /><br />Almost certainly, this will stimulate interest on the part of the ammo makers and they will be cranking out elephant stopping loads for the .380, a cartridge that has slithered past the century mark in age. <br /><br />Many shooters would be better served by a compact 9 mm pistol, but those guns recoil enough to pre-occupy some folk. I can't deny that the .380 compacts are easier to handle, so let's hear it for the 9x17 mms.<br /><br /><br /><br /></span></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=1624&cid=25#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=1623&cid=25Wed, 08 Jul 2009 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">In the era of the 1st Generation Colt Single Action (1873-1941), the maker offered many kinds of special order features, most of them never to see a catalog. One such variation is the so-called Sheriff's Model. <br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">Colt never referred to them this way in the old days, preferring to use "Ejectorless" SAAs. Over the years since WWII, Colt has made several runs of modern guns with the no ejector format. The old line company's new and colorful catalog shows a new version of the Sheriff's Model (which was also called a "Storekeeper's Model" in old literature). <br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">Better yet, they are true 4-inchers, which was the most common barrel length of the guns actually made in this format. Colt seems to be coming back strong in the early years of the 21st Century.<br /><br /></span></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=1623&cid=25#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=1615&cid=25Tue, 07 Jul 2009 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">Chick Gaylord was a writer and gun authority of the 50s and 60s. A great heavy bull of a guy, Gaylord was best known for designing and promoting holsters of various kinds. He was associated with the old Seventrees company, run by a mysterious character named Paris Theodore. <br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">In addition, Gaylord penned a great little book called the Handgunner's Guide, which was mostly concerned with combat handgun shooting. This volume has all kinds of handgun data, including photos of a 1911 carried GI style in the issued holster with a massive leather flap. <br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">Since the government required an empty chamber on the military .45 in those days, a shooter needed a way to rack the slide in the course of his draw stroke. Gaylord and a few friends worked one out and the book shows an Air Force MP in full uniform performing the technique. <br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">It is another of those gun books that belong in any complete shooter's library and Paladin offers a quality reprint of the old book.<br /><br /></span></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=1615&cid=25#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=1607&cid=25Wed, 01 Jul 2009 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">One of the more interesting of modern handgun cartridges that just never made it, is the almost forgotten 9 mm Winchester Magnum. Designed for the exotic gas-operated Wildey pistol, the 9 mm Win Mag was basically a lengthened 9 mm Luger. <br /><br />With its cartridge overall length out there at 1.575 inches, the round is way too long for any pistol other than something in the size class of the massive Desert Eagle. However, it was a real speed freak, delivering a 115-grain 9 mm bullet at almost 1500 fps. The Wildey guns never materialized in quantity and the round just died for want of a shooting platform. <br /><br />My buddy, the late Chuck Karwan, told me that he had seen an MI Carbine chambered for this round. It is a little shorter than the .30 Carbine cartridge, but seems to work through the magazine very easily. That makes me wonder if one of the handy little "War Babies" might be made to work with the hot 9 mm. <br /><br />Hmmmm. I have brass......<br /><br /></span></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=1607&cid=25#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=1594&cid=25Mon, 29 Jun 2009 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">Charley Askins was a legendary Border Patrolman, soldier and pre-war National Pistol champion. He did a lot of writing for gun magazine and published several books. While his biography, "Unrepentant Sinner" is a great read, I have always preferred another of his books. <br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">"The Pistol Shooter's Book" was printed in several editions and has a wonderful assortment of practical information about managing the pistol in competition and combat. <br /><br />Askins' books are great reads, as he was the only guy I ever saw who could write with an accent. His tales of Border Patrol Service before the big war are both exciting and entertaining, as well as being full of practical advice for those who go armed in the course of their daily work. <br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">You are going to have to work the used book services to find a copy, but the book is worth the search. In the 1961 edition of the book, there is a wonderful chapter on the then-new Smith &amp; Wesson .44 Mag. The old-timer had by then used the big Smith in Vietnam - for real.</span></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=1594&cid=25#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=1590&cid=25Thu, 25 Jun 2009 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">Wiley - I own an early edition Kel-Tec P3AT which I carry about 50% of the time, when my clothing choice makes it impractical to carry a heavier firearm. My Kel-Tec has no problem with hollow point anmmunition, but stovepipes every time I try to shoot FMJ ammunition, regardless of manufacturer.&nbsp; Is this common to the early edition Kel-Tec P3AT's? I obviously carry it only with HP ammo, but it is a pain at the range to have to clear it after every shot with FMJ.<br /><br />Jim Pimentel<br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;"> <hr /> <br /></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">Dear Jim:<br /><br />Thanks for writing with your question about feeding problems on a Kel-Tec pistol. While I have no recent experience with that particular model, I have had Kel-Tecs in the past and have encountered several problems.&nbsp;<br /><br />However, as long as you paid your money, you have every reason to expect proper performance. I would contact this firm and explain your difficulty. Be prepared to tell them the brands and types of ammo that gave you the grief. They are a reputable firm and I believe they will resolve your problem. <br /><br />To me, it sounds like you have a cartridge overall length issue, but I can't be sure without seeing the gun and shooting it.<br /><br />Thanks, <br /><br />Wiley Clapp.&nbsp; <br /></span></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=1590&cid=25#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=1579&cid=25Mon, 22 Jun 2009 00:00:00 GMT<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt; text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">The Legendary NYPD is one of the oldest police agencies in the country and certainly viewed by most as having a rich tradition of competent gun handling and use. After all, this was the heritage of Jim Cirillo and the famed stakeout squad. Many innovations in gun handling came from this organization, along with terms not heard outside of Police circles. <br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">One of the least known is the folding speedloader used by the department before WWII. A better known one was probably coined by an unknown member of the PD &ndash; the New York Reload. In short, these guys know their guns and shooting. <br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">Now what is a New York Reload? Is it some exotic technique or custom piece of equipment? Not hardly &ndash; A New York reload is another gun, tucked away in concealment , but ready to go when needed. And if the primary gun runs dry and there is no time to reload it, the New York reload allows the officer to continue protecting and serving. </span></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=1579&cid=25#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=1575&cid=25Fri, 19 Jun 2009 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">What is the type and caliber of pistol that is best for personal defense? I don`t want to be outgunned by a criminal. I want a safe, reliable handgun, and the odds to be with me and my family, God forbid if the need arises.<br />Chuck Pickford<br /><br /> <hr /> <br /><br />Dear Chuck<br />Wow, that is one big question! I cannot begin to answer it in the amount of space that is available, but let's take a look at the matter and see if I can help just a little bit. <br /><br />I get the feeling that you are concerned with the safety of yourself and your family and I respect that greatly. The most crucial part of a life-threatening situation is your own personal skill and state of mind if and when it happens. Training and advance planning are far more important than the tool that you use. I would advise spending some time and money at a good training school such as Thunder Ranch or Gunsite. <br /><br />But you asked about guns, so let's talk about guns. Out of thin air, I can't recommend the ideal gun for anyone. However, I can repeat the advice that I put in an article many years ago. It may not be your mythical ideal handgun, but a plain DA/SA revolver, in .38 Spl. or larger is adequate for everyone. Hope that helps<br /><br />Wiley Clapp</span></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=1575&cid=25#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=1568&cid=25Thu, 18 Jun 2009 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">When I was growing up as a handgunner, you could have any kind of sight you wanted, as long as it was black.<br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">Today, I am amazed at the number of sight options that are available. The plain square notch rear and post front is still produced and workable. However, there are endless variations available, both as original equipment and in after-market choices. The red ramp front sight used to be the hot ticket, usually paired up with a white outline rear sight. Those white outlines were never very easy to align, so I'm seeing less of them all the time.<br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">Most of the modern improvements seem to be on the front sight - colored ramps, gold beads, tritium dots, fiber optic rods (that show up as a bright dot) and the Big Dot matched to a shallow V rear sight. The tritium dots are deservedly popular, with my favorite of this type being a horizontal bar rear and dot front. For me, it seems to work with less confusion than the three dot system. One of the least useful for me is three painted white dots.<br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">There's so much to choose from that it is a veritable embarrassment of riches. However, when my friend Wayne Novak wanted to know what kind of sights I wanted on a pair of scandium 1911s he was finishing, I copped out. I asked for, and got, plain black post and square notch rear sights. The rear notch was extra-extra wide (.170-inch) to accommodate my increasingly geezer-y vision.<br /></span></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=1568&cid=25#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=1562&cid=25Wed, 17 Jun 2009 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">Caught in the middle of a complex tactical problem, I made a procedural error. During a Gunsite exercise, I was using a Sig Sauer P226 in .357 Sig with full 12+1 capacity. I had already fired six of those thirteen rounds. When Rangemaster Ed Stock quietly asked if there was something else I wanted to do, I replied, &ldquo;No&rdquo; and continued forward with seven rounds in the gun. <br /><br />The next room had more targets than fleas on a hound dog and I ran dry in the middle of a complicated, multiple-target problem &ndash; Dead Wiley. I should have taken the previous hint and reloaded. Sure, I knew exactly how many rounds were left in my gun and that is an important tactical precept. But knowing how many you have left and doing the right thing with that information are two different things. <br /><br />A more important rule is summarized in the little mantra &ldquo;Reload when you can, not when you have to.&rdquo; If you find yourself in a fight and fire a couple of rounds, take any opportunity to reload.</span></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=1562&cid=25#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=1557&cid=25Tue, 16 Jun 2009 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">Despite 50 years of experience in carrying the single action auto in Condition One (loaded chamber, cocked and locked), there are still folks who are antsy about a cocked hammer/loaded chamber and can't bring themselves to do it. There is also Condition Two for DA/SA pistols and even Condition Three (empty chamber, hammer down, safety off) for 1911 shooters who are willing to risk the time it takes to rack one into the chamber before they can shoot. I once heard an instructor teach an alternate to this method that he whimsically called Condition Five.<br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">Actually, Condition Five makes better sense to me than Condition Three. Condition Five is empty chamber, hammer cocked, safety off. Essentially, this is the same carry mode as Condition Three, with the exception of cocking the pistol's hammer. The advantage of Condition Five is that while you must rack a round into the chamber, you do not have to compress the hammer spring when you do. It simply makes chambering that first round a little quicker and easier. </span></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=1557&cid=25#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=1555&cid=25Mon, 15 Jun 2009 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">Mr. Clapp,</span></span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">My next purchase is likely to be a scoped, hunting handgun. Can you give a rundown of the cartridges and handguns currently available above .44 Magnum?</span></span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">I&rsquo;m asking about cartridges from the .454 Casull to the .500 S&amp;W. I have heard that some cartridges, or the handguns for them, have been discontinued. If the topic is too broad, please limit your answer to guns and cartridges currently in production. Is there a cartridge in this category that is taking the lead in popularity? Which has the biggest variety of bullets available for reloading? </span></span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">Richard Hayward<br /> <hr /> Dear Sir:</span></span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">Thanks for taking the time to direct your excellent question to me. I would be happy to provide you with my feeling on the matter. </span></span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">Above .44 Magnum? There&rsquo;s more than there used to be - .45 Colt (loaded hot), .454 Cassull, .460 S&amp;W Magnum and .500 S&amp;W Magnum. Others, such as the .480 Ruger, .475 Linebaugh and some wildcats, have never become sufficiently popular to be included in a broad discussion. Ruger has even discontinued the .480, probably because of limited sales.</span></span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">You didn&rsquo;t give me a lot of parameters for the survey, but I will assume that you accept the inevitability of gun size and weight. I will further assume that versatility has some importance in your consideration. I would discount the first two (Colt and Casull) as lacking versatility. Both of them are great and versatile cartridges for the handloader, but there is limited availability of a variety of factory ammo. </span></span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">To me, one of the more useful cartridges for guys who can handle a big gun is the .460 S&amp;W Magnum. My friend Jon Maxwell has several of them and uses almost everything with a .45-inch bullet in them. This includes .460 ammo in several bullet weights, .454 Casull, .45 Colt and even those stubby little .45 Schofield rounds. They are great to start youngsters with, and we all need to start a new shooter once in a while. You can&rsquo;t make the .45 ACP or Autorim work, but that&rsquo;s the breaks. If I was serious about a hunting handgun that would be a go-anywhere, do-anything arm, I believe this would be my choice. And there are enough loads on dealer&rsquo;s shelves that handloading isn&rsquo;t required. The .500 is a magnificent accomplishment, but it has limited versatility. </span></span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">Of course, there is also much to be said for the plain old .44 Mag., but I digress. Thanks for writing. Consider upgrading your membership. </span></span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">Wiley Clapp</span></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=1555&cid=25#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=1548&cid=25Thu, 11 Jun 2009 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">Mr. Clapp<br /><br />I am considering buying a Judge for general household protection and occasional grouse shooting. I am interested in pure function only for this pistol. Are these worth having? I understand they come in a 3" - 6.5" barrel, and are chambered in 2.5" and 3". Give an opinion in you would. Thanks. J.R.<br /><br />____________________________________<br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">John<br /><br />Can I refer you to a story I wrote about the Judge on <a href="../../ArticlePage.aspx?id=1526&amp;cid=26">AmericanRifleman.org</a>? It answers most of your questions in reqards to the Judge revolver. It is a big, heavy brute, but would make a great home defense handgun. <br /><br />I would strongly recommend the gun with the 3-inch barrel and long cylinder that takes 3-inch .410 shells. Also, my load of choice is the Winchester five-pellet #000 load. This shell delivers five .36 caliber pellets, each weighing 73 grains, at a velocity of about 1,000 feet per second on to a dinner plate all the way out to 10 yards. It is a specialty gun that works well for home defense. <br /><br />Wiley Clapp</span></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=1548&cid=25#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=1547&cid=25Tue, 09 Jun 2009 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">Down in the my old stomping grounds - Orange County, California - John Matthews keeps a bunch of clever engineers at work building more and more great products wearing the SureFire label. One of the handiest I have ever seen is an accessory rail to mount the company's lights on pistols that don't normally come wit them.<br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">It's particularly valuable for Colt 1911s of any vintage. The aluminum rail mounts forward of the triggerguard and locks in place via a new slide lock pin.<br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">If you are shooting your grandpa's 1917-vintage Government Model, you can install this portable light rail and be as modern as tomorrow. Better yet, you can pull the unit off with minimal trouble and send the old gun back to the old-timey doughboy look. Check out the company's Web site at <a href="http://www.surefire.com/" target="_new">SureFire.com</a>.</span></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=1547&cid=25#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=1529&cid=25Tue, 02 Jun 2009 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">In the days when revolvers ruled the roost and only a few automatic pistol models were made in America, the major makers were Smith &amp; Wesson and Colt. The competition between the two was quite vigorous. This period was the early and middle parts of the 20th Century and the major products included small, medium and large revolvers. Both companies made big guns - the Colt New service and the S&amp;W .44 Hand Ejector series - but the major competition came from the medium frame guns. These were the Colt Official Police and S&amp;W Military &amp; Police models.<br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">However, there were also some little guns, built on Colt's D frame and S&amp;W's I frame. Eventually, I frames were phased out to make way for the new and improved J frame. Colt used the small D frame very successfully for years. Models included the Police Positive and Police Positive Special. The latter gun was simply a lengthened version of the former, made slightly longer to take .38 Spl. <br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">Then, before World War II, Colt introduced the first 2-inch snubby on the Police Positive Special frame and named it the Detective Special. When aluminum alloys became available, Colt made the first lightweight wheelgun and called it the Cobra. Over the years, Colt used the D frame for lots of guns - Police Positive Specials, Dick Specials, Cobras, Agents, Couriers, Vipers and even an adjustable sight version called the Diamondback. <br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">I have recently come into the possession of a short butt, lightweight D frame called the Agent and I have had it on my desk for several weeks. That's enough to set off the rememberin' cycle. But I can't help but chuckle over Colt ads of days gone by - the ones that accurately noted that the Colts were six-shooters, while the competition offered only a five-gun.</span></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=1529&cid=25#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=1523&cid=25Mon, 01 Jun 2009 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">Occasionally, the handgun and ammo designers completely miss the mark with a new firearm and/or a new cartridge. They missed on both counts with the Ruger Hawkeye and the .256 Winchester Magnum cartridge. </span></span></p> <p><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">Introduced in the early 1960s and before the gun was available, the .256 was basically a necked-down .357 Magnum. Marlin made a nice little lever gun for the round, but it was primarily a handgun cartridge. Ruger addressed that role with a unique single shot pistol built on the Blackhawk revolver frame. Called the Hawkeye, the gun used a fixed barrel and a pivoting breechblock. </span></span></p> <p><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">For some unknown reason, it went over like a chicken-wire canoe. The shooting public just never saw the advantages of this as a varmint gun, although it delivered impressive performance: a 60-gr. roundnosed bullet at well over 2000 f.p.s. Since the Hawkeye was a manual feed gun, there were no cycling problems. It never caught on and both gun and cartridge lasted only briefly. </span></span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">The Thompson/Center Contender was the raging popular single-shot of the time and the Hawkeye may have been a bit awkward by comparison. However, I can remember a pleasant afternoon busting clay pigeons on the ground beyond the butts at my gun club with a scoped Hawkeye. Ranges were well beyond 120 meters.</span></span></p> <p>&nbsp;</p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=1523&cid=25#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=1524&cid=25Sat, 30 May 2009 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">Good news! The world of firearms is such that some guns achieve almost cult status. Usually, that happens just after the model is discontinued. So it was with the biggest, heaviest M&amp;P that S&amp;W ever built - the fixed sight N-frame made as a platform for the then-new .41 Magnum cartridge in 1964. </span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-size: small;">Introduced as a police sidearm, the Model 58 caught on in only a few places - San Francisco and San Antonio to name the most memorable. It had a short service life and was discontinued rather quickly. A rugged horse of a gun, it was often customized into all manner of things, usually .44 Mag. or .45 Colts. I have had a half dozen of these guns and usually made something else out of them. However, the one that belonged to Rex Applegate is going to stay the way it is. Now, for all of you who have wanted one, Smith &amp; Wesson has re-introduced the gun in their Classic series. At least for the immediate future, you can have one of these much sought-after brutes for your collection.</span></p> <p>&nbsp;</p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=1524&cid=25#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=1525&cid=25Thu, 28 May 2009 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">Wiley,<br />I have always enjoyed your articles throughout the years, especially on revolver accuracy. The 4000 round "100 Yard Dash" 357 shootout is one of my all time favorites! I have no Ransom Rest but have managed to shoot good groups over the years utilizing a scope and firing from a benchrest. Two of my current revolvers are the best I have ever fired. A 686 six inch and 629 Classic 6 1/2". The picture shows my best effort to date at 50 yards with the 629 Classic. The VV N-110 seems to be some good stuff! Thanks for the great write ups all these years! Always a fan! <br />Rob&nbsp;</span></span></p> <p><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;"> <hr style="text-align: left;" /> </span></span></p> <p style="text-align: left;">&nbsp;</p> <p><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">Dear Rob: <br />Thanks for all the kind words about my writing over the years. I remember that "100-yard Dash" story, which I wrote with the assistance of my long term friend Stan Waugh. That shoot took four full days of shooting to complete and we were ready to kill each other by the time it was over. It's a tribute to Stan's loyalty that he kept putting up with me. I really got a kick out of some of those marathon shoots, though. If you are that interested in long range revolver accuracy, you need to get a Ransom Rest. However, I freely concede that a scope off a good bench can produce excellent results. Also, I have two early S&amp;W L frames that are keepers in every sense of the word. One of them delivered the smallest handloaded group I ever fired - .29-inch for six at 25 yards. Handguns are far more accurate than anybody realizes and I like to talk with guys like you that know this. I'll keep writing as long as you keep reading.</span></span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">I just got a look at your group with the 629 and I am impressed in the extreme! If that is a one-inch background grid, your group is almost exactly an inch wide and about three quarters of an inch high. I can't read the writing, but that one-holer is a tribute to your shooting and your equipment. My congratulations, sir. <br />Wiley Clapp</span></span></p> <p>&nbsp;</p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=1525&cid=25#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=1504&cid=25Tue, 26 May 2009 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">One of the handiest little gun gadgets that ever came along is the revolver grip adapter. When DA/SA revolvers ruled the roost, most handgunners quickly realized that the shape of the frame was too small for good shooting. The hollow behind the trigger guard did not provide enough gripping surface for the middle finger of the shooting hand.<br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">Some shooters solved this problem with special grips that incorporated a filler block, but the economy-minded went to a Pachmayr grip adapter. It was nothing more than a crescent of hard rubber, manufactured in various sizes to fit perfectly behind the trigger guard of all popular types of revolvers. Held in place with a metal clip that went under the factory grips, the grip adapter filled the hand nicely.<br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">Prowling the gun shows and pawn shops of my out-west home turf will often turn up a worn revolver with the grip adapter still in place after decades of use. They were once made by several firms--Pachmayr, Mershon, Smith &amp; Wesson and the still-in-circulation aluminum ones by Melvin Tyler. Particularly on the small J frame S&amp;Ws that are hugely popular, a grip adapter works very well. It was nothing but a little crescent of hard rubber or plastic with a clip to hold it in place, but the grips adapter solved a lot of problems.</span></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=1504&cid=25#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=1507&cid=25Mon, 25 May 2009 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">In my opinion, the little .25 automatic is a useless firearm that somehow remains curiously effective. There was never any role for these sometimes beautifully made little guns except personal defense. In the immediate post-turn-of-the-century era, dozens of makers cranked out vest pocket autos by the tens of thousands. People used to slip them into pockets in the belief that they would dispatch an attacker and even in modern times, cops used to carry them as a No. 2 (sometimes No. 3) gun.<br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">By any measurable standard, a 50-gr. bullet at 800 f.p.s. is not enough to reliably stop a serious attack and applying everything in the way of bullet technology to make a .25 ACP JHP expand will never work. It just ain't enough gun. But they are still carried and they still stop attacks. I suspect that it's because people sometimes apparently believe that if they are shot, they have to stop. Urban legend or something.</span></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=1507&cid=25#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=1508&cid=25Sat, 23 May 2009 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">Custom pistolsmiths respond to the demands of the shooting sport or the practical needs of their customers. Sometimes the modification makes sense and others times it doesn't. An example of the former is the speed bump at the bottom of the M1911 grip safety. If you use today's high hold with two hands, the base of the shooting hand thumb will sometimes fail to fully compress the grip safety. A larger pad of material just ensures that the needed contact is there, and that's a good thing. But a revolver trigger guard cut away at the front is at best a modification that makes sense only in the hands of the most experienced handgunners on the planet. For most of us, it's a bad thing.<br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">Here's an idea that might make sense on some of today's hot shot revolvers, which are invariably fired single-action. King Gunsight Co. used to build what they called the &ldquo;Cockeyed Hammer.&rdquo; It was a standard hammer with additional material welded to one side of the spur&mdash;the left side for a right-handed shooter. The extra material was then shaped and checkered to form an off-center spur. I have them on a couple of guns, and they really help with speed cocking the revolver for such events as the Rapid Fire matches in which the shooter must fire five rounds in 10 seconds.</span></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=1508&cid=25#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=1506&cid=25Fri, 22 May 2009 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">Elmer Keith used to discourse at length about all things revolver, and Mr. Keith was particularly adamant about the way a man was supposed to carry the immortal Peacemaker. In the western tradition, it was &ldquo;five beans in the wheel.&rdquo; This refers to the practice of carrying a Single Action Army with five chambers loaded and the hammer down on the empty one. For a new single-action shooter with a gun designed in the old style, getting the gun into this configuration might be a little puzzling. <br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">It is remarkably easy to do once you have the formula. With a verified empty gun in hand, open the loading gate and pull the hammer back to the half-cock position (two clicks). At about the 2:30 position in the cylinder, you will see an empty charge hole. Insert a cartridge and turn the cylinder 60 degrees clockwise, which brings another charge hole into view. Skip this one and turn to the next, which you load. Then load the next three in the same way. The mantra is &ldquo;load one, skip one, load four.&rdquo; When you load the last one, ease the hammer all the way back and then lower it all the way down. It will be down on the empty chamber you skipped and the gun may now be carried safely.</span></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=1506&cid=25#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=1509&cid=25Wed, 20 May 2009 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">I have two revolvers in my collection that really serve no useful purpose other than periodically providing a few moments of pleasant reflection. Made in the time I call the Golden Age of the revolver &mdash; basically, the first half of the 20th Century &mdash; the two guns are from the two great American revolver makers, Colt and Smith &amp; Wesson. <br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">They are both big guns, plain of finish and simply equipped, but the heaviest and best that the industry could offer the working cop in the &rsquo;30s. The Smith was called a .38-44 Heavy Duty and was built on the same big N-frame as the 1917 S&amp;W .45 revolver. Its competitor, known as the Colt New Service, was likewise made on a frame that Colt used for World War I .45 ACPs. <br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">Both guns were chambered for the .38 Special cartridge. A special high-velocity version of the old .38 round was developed for use in these guns. It was called the .38-44. Today, such a round would probably be called the .38 Special +P or even +P+. Both companies also made smaller and lighter guns for the .38 Special, and the Colt Official Police and S&amp;W M&amp;P were deservedly popular for their smooth actions and relatively light weight. <br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">But when a shooter wanted more smack &rsquo;em from a .38 revolver, he went to one of the big bruisers. They worked, too. I once ran over the PPC course with a .38-44 Heavy Duty and the hottest .38 Special ammo I could find. The extra weight in that big frame and massive cylinder really tamed everything down quite nicely. We all know where this all led &mdash; right to the .357 Magnum of 1935.</span></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=1509&cid=25#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=1522&cid=25Tue, 19 May 2009 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">One of the curious anomalies of cartridge design is the .38 Super. It came along in the late 1920s, when law enforcement was concerned about punching through the heavy steel of automobile bodies of that day. That is an understandable concern, but the means of getting it done is decidedly strange. The .38 Super is the same cartridge (dimensionally) as the earlier .38 ACP. It is just loaded much hotter. </span></span></p> <p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">It worked OK, but was never well known for accuracy. That's because it used an unusual semi-rimmed case that headspaced on a small shelf in the chamber. The Super got a major lease on life when Irv Stone of Bar-Sto developed a proper barrel that headspaced on the case mouth. I recall the day I went to the range with a new Commander in .38 Super. With the original factory barrel, the gun shot about a 12-inch group at 25 yards; with the Bar-Sto in place, it was about an inch. Colt's own barrels are now made to headspace like the Bar-Sto. By the way, never shoot .38 Super ammo in one of the original .38 ACP pistols.</span></span></p> <p>&nbsp;</p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=1522&cid=25#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=1505&cid=25Mon, 18 May 2009 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">Good gun books used to be hard to find, a situation that a gaggle of good writers are hard at work to remedy. There are, however, some great little gems in gun book collecting and they weren't written yesterday. Consider Bob Nichols' The Secrets of Double Action Shooting written way back in 1950. It is a slim little volume of 152 pages, written by a guy who was an active competitor in several handgun disciplines, as well as a hotshot writer of that time. Much of the book quotes or refers to the work of the great shooters of the period&mdash;Askins, Keith, Hatcher, FitzGerald and McGivern. It would be of historical interest for that matter alone, but tracking down a copy for its historical value only would be missing the point. The book is well titled, in that it is the most careful, in-depth examination of the procedures by which a wheelgunner may master the double-action revolver. It is a dying art that needs to be resurrected for use with today's superb new revolvers. There is still great practical value to this great old book.</span></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=1505&cid=25#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=1503&cid=25Fri, 15 May 2009 00:00:00 GMT<p style="text-align: left;"><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;">Howdy. My name is Wiley Clapp and I am an avowed handgunner. I have been fooling around with these things for a lot of years-Bullseye in the 60s, PPC in the 70s, Silhouette in the 80s, etc-and writing about them for a quarter century. We know that a large percentage of American Rifleman readers are also more than a little preoccupied with the handgun and we've always tried to service that interest in the magazine. <br /></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br />But there is a lot of handgun stuff that just doesn't seem to fit into our regular features or columns. Editor-in-Chief Mark Keefe has asked me to use this blog to cover some of the more interesting little pieces of information about pistols and revolvers. This may include comments on little-known handgunners of the past, historical perspectives on older guns or handgun ammunition, even certain techniques of managing a handgun effectively. For all these reasons, I look forward to my electronic visits with you. But I am also greatly interested in getting into an occasional topic that has more than one facet-in short, a controversy. <br /></span></span><span style="font-family: verdana,geneva;"><span style="font-size: small;"><br />Mark tells me that the blog will be set up so that you can respond. When your point is such that we believe readers in general might also be interested, we'll run it. We hope that the result will be vigorous discussion that produces more information for everyone, as well as more interest. After a lifetime of playing with these curious artifacts, I think that I know a little about them. But-collectively-you know everything about them. Let's just get the info out for all to share. OK?</span></span></p><p><a href="http://www.americanrifleman.org/BlogEntry.aspx?id=1503&cid=25#listbutblog">Comment on this post</a></p>