Every so often, a gun maker will get it right, as Merkel did with the Model 47SL:
They come up for auction every now and then, and generally sell for a grand more than they sold for the last time they were on the market.
In a heartbeat.
Category: Gratuitous Gun Pics
Gratuitous Gun Pic: Ruger SFAR (7.62x51mm)
Okay, it seems as though the writer of this article really likes the new Ruger AR variant (“Small-Frame Autoloading Rifle”), although when last did you see a gun writer say about a new gun: “Nah, this really sucks”?
My longtime reservations about the AR-15 platform notwithstanding, I have to say that I like the look of this little thing, especially when I read about how light it is, for a .308 rifle.
What I’d like is to have one of these… in .270 Win. Why? From a hunting perspective, there’s not much the .308 can do that the .270 cannot; and the reduced recoil of the smaller bullet takes away the need for that anti-social, range-emptying muzzle brake. (I’m quite serious about this; the last half-dozen range sessions have been spoiled by the guy next door shooting an AR-15 with a muzzle brake, with earsplitting consequences for me despite the combination of foam plugs and ear protection which have become standard gear for me at indoor ranges.)
Of course, the mechanics (and magazine) of the SFAR would be unaffected by the change to .270 Win as it uses the same casing as the .308 Win; so all that’s needed is a rechambered barrel for shooty goodness and Happy Days Smileyface Kim. (Why not the 6.5 Creedmoor? Because I don’t have any of that on hand, whereas the .270 Win is, let’s say, well represented in Ye Olde Ammoe Locquere.)
But nobody’s going to listen to me; so there I go, shouting into the uncaring void, again.
On a tangential note: a kind Reader once offered to send me a replacement extractor for my busted M1 Carbine. For the life of me, I can’t remember who it was, so please drop me an email if it was you, and we can get the thing taken care of, financially speaking.
Gratuitous Gun Pic – Pioneer Arms AK-47
While idly wandering through the halls of gunny goodness, I happened upon this variant of the AK-47:
Okay, it’s as ugly as a pig’s ass in springtime — although “pretty” is not a word oft associated the the AK-47 — and that green laminate wood looks like it was on sale in the decking section at Home Depot.
But hold on just a minute. Why would one use green laminate wood for a deck? Why, to protect it from the elements (sun, rain etc.); and if that works for decking, why not for a utilitarian rifle such as this one, to be used in all kinds of stinking weather when battling the Forces Of Darkness? (If you know wot I mean nudge nudge wink wink…)
Of course, the price ($720) makes my nose twitch, but as so many people remind me, this isn’t 2004 anymore, when an AK could be picked up for a couple-few hundred bucks — and at least the gun is priced well below the $1,000 mark, which really makes my nose twitch when it comes to the AK-47.
For a stocking stuffer, you could do a lot worse, but you may have to deal with a few sniggers at the range when you unbox it.
Gratuitous Gun Pic: Aguirre y Aranzabal No.2 (20ga)
Oh lookee here, at Gun Pusher Supreme Steve Barnett’s website: a delectable shotgun.
And yes, it fills all Kim’s checkboxes: side-by-side, double triggers, splinter forearm, straight stock, 20 gauge, 29-inch barrels.
Workmanlike-yet-classy gun case:
Decent-but not-showy engraving, plus a little case-coloring for a bonus:
And amazingly (for Barnett), a price that does not cause a nasal haemorrhage. (And for those who enjoy shoulder pain, they also have a 12ga version of the above.)
Have mercy.
Clarification
Some of you may have read the above article and gone “Huh?” at my choice of chambering (9.3x62mm) for the Mauser. A brief explanation follows.
As I’ve grown older, the thought of owning a whole bunch of different rifles (modern, not oldies) has palled somewhat, to the extent where I think I would prefer one astoundingly-good rifle in a do-it-all chambering. So why choose the 9.3mm Mauser?
It’s more powerful than the .30-06 Springfield and has less recoil than the .375H&H Magnum. Also, it’s old, having been developed back in 1905. So it could take pretty much anything I’d need to kill, certainly in the U.S., and just about anything I cared to shoot in Africa, were I ever to find myself back there. The premium hunting ammo (Federal Woodleigh 286gr) is horrendously expensive (over $4 per pull); but of course Prvi Partizan, bless their little Balkan socks, make it for about $1.25 each so practice is not as expensive as one might think.
Here’s a quick comparison:
…and then with the mighty .375 H&H:
Here’s the thing: the 9.3mm Mauser isn’t as powerful as the H&H. But that reduction in power comes with about 25% less owie to the shoulder — and lest we forget, the 9.3 was used to hunt all sorts of African game (including elephant) in the decade or so before the H&H came to the party.
I like the idea of it.
Evolution
In my innocence, I always imagined that evolution was a Good Thing, in that v.2.0 would always be an improved version of v.1.9.9, and so on. (Of course, that belief has been massively degraded by having to deal with software companies, but that’s for another time.)
I understand, therefore, that evolution is not necessarily an improvement, but by and large it has proven to be so — a 2021 Corvette is a much better car than its 1961 ancestor, at least mechanically speaking. As for its shape? I’ll let you decide:
Regardless of the shape change (ugh), I think we can agree that the 2021 model performs much better than the 1961 model, mechanically speaking, because let’s be honest, engine technology, materials and things like suspension- and brake technology are better now than they were sixty years ago. And even the modern shape is no doubt far more efficient in terms of air management than the older one, so at least there’s that.
Now let’s talk about guns. Here we have a situation where the technology has hardly changed at all, materials have improved somewhat, but (say) a .22 pistol’s operation and efficiency have stayed pretty much the same.
So sixty-odd years ago we had .22 pistols that looked like the High Standard and Beretta:
…which, I think we can all agree, did an excellent job of putting the boolet into its intended destination. Modern pistols, of course, do just as good a job of that — pistols like the FN and SIG:
…but for all their improved technology and materials, they somehow end up looking like a dog’s ass.
To return to the cars for a moment, it’s as though the Corvette:
…somehow ended up looking like this:
I know, I can hear y’all now: “The old fart’s lost it again, jabbering about the Good Ole Days.”
Yeah, maybe.
But I’d still rather own a Beretta 101 than any of the current crop of .22 hand-bricks.
And to wrap this whole train of thought up, I want somebody to explain how ideals of female beauty like this:
…have somehow evolved into this:
Same form, same basic functions between the two models… but ugh. No thank you.