Category: The Gun Thing

Not just the guns, but all the stuff that goes with them

But Don’t Take My Word For It…

The Gun Thing

As any fule (and Longtime Readers. no overlap) will attest, I am not a fan of either of the NATO cartridges, be it the 9mm Europellet or the 5.56mm poodleshooter.  I have been assailed for such beliefs, e.g. “The military  uses them, dude!” (as if the armed forces of any nation always make the best decisions when it comes to arming their soldiers).  The only good thing about that situation is that it makes the ammo cheaper.

But hey, what do I know?  So as the title suggests, try this guy’s opinion (he’s a former combat medic) instead of mine.  It contains such gems as:

In just about every country I have been in, our host nation counterparts — army and police — used the 9X19 NATO round. Because so much of what I did was house-to-house police searches, I’ve seen a lot of pistol shootings, much more than US police would ever see, and much more than experienced by most medics deploying solely with US personnel. And yet, I have zero, not one single experience, where a single gunshot wound from a 9X19 NATO round killed someone prior to them being able to return fire or flee. This includes people shot in the chest, back, back of the head (one hit behind the left ear) the neck and the face. None.

That’s the Europellet. Now for the poodleshooter:

Unfortunately, the same goes for the 5.56 NATO round. I have yet to witness a single shot quick kill with this round. I even recorded a patient shot from less than three feet away, square in the back of the head, who lived. The round did not exit his body. Yes, he was immediately rendered unconscious and required (might I say exceptional) medical treatment. He was comatose for at least six months after that, but he lived.
But more importantly, in every experience, at ranges from zero (negligent discharges) to 35 yards (my closest, and worst-placed, shot on a person) to 400 yards (our average initial engagement distance in Afghanistan) individuals shot with a single 5.56 NATO round had time to fire, maneuver, or both. Did I see single shots that killed eventually? Yes. Does that matter in combat? Not one damn bit if you are the one they are still shooting at.

I’ve said many times before that I’m not in the market for an AR-15 because poodleshooter.  (I know, “Get an AR-10 in 7.62 NATO, Kim!” — I already have an AK-47, thankee.)

As the man says:

“Shoot the heaviest rifle round…shoot at what (you) can hit, and then shoot it again”

Ditto for my handgun loads.

I acknowledge that of late I’ve been flirting with the idea of carrying my 9mm High Power instead of the .45 ACP 1911 as my primary self-defense handgun.  After reading the above… let’s just say that I’m just going to get more of those .45 ACP 185-grain zingers. And shoot a lot more than I’m currently doing (which means I’m going to have to get that “backup” 1911 soon).

And now, if you’ll excuse me… it’s Range Time.

1911 Criteria

The Gun Thing

Following yesterday’s post, I knew that people were going to ask me for my criteria in buying a new 1911 (and they did — I got a dozen emails just last night).  Just to remind everyone, here’s my (much-modified) Springfield Mil-Spec (G.I.) model:

My new 1911 will have to look close to this one, except I’d like Novak sights or similar.

To recap then, here are my purchase criteria:

  • between $650* and $900 retail
  • bobbed hammer (no more Colt “hammer-bites” for Kimmy)
  • no serrations on the front of the slide  (chews up my holster, and I don’t need them anyway)
  • no serrations on the front of the grip (chews up my hand in an extended range session)
  • smooth (not that extruded crap) beavertail grip safety (ditto)
  • decent-sized ejection port
  • 5″ barrel
  • fixed Novak-style rear sight
  • I’m pretty agnostic about frame color (blued or stainless steel will work for me, although blue has a 51% chance, all things being equal)

*sorry, but I work my 1911s to death, and I’m unconvinced that Taurus, Iver Johnson, Metro, Rock Island et al. are up to the task.  At some point down the cost curve, too many sacrifices in materials and quality have to be made — and I think that nowadays, $600 represents that point.

So these 5″ models are priced right, but fail on features:

Kimber Custom Two-tone

Remington R1 Stainless (I can live with the small rear sight)

Here’s one (Ruger SR1911) which comes thisclose, but fails because of a single feature

See what I mean?  [sigh] I guess I’ll end up with the Ruger SR1911, but have a gunsmith replace the grip safety with a traditional “flat” one.  And those stupid grips on the blued model will go bye-bye as well.

Watch this space.

What Price History?

Advice, The Gun Thing

From Reader Ranger:

When to restore an old gun versus keeping it with honest wear? For example:  I have several old firearms.

1.) Old heavily worn SMLE, lots of interesting carving on the furniture, but the barrel might as well be a smooth bore. If i remove anymore rust, then fire the rifle I’ll start seeing daylight thought the side of the barrel. Originally I bought this for a song to convert to a modern De Lisle through one of those kits Rhineland Arms sells, by the time I got around to buying the kit (also putting the money together) Rhineland Arms stopped selling the conversion kit.

2.) A between-the-wars commercial 1911A1, which I picked up for a song. It looks like the previous owner had taken a belt sander to it. The rampant Colt is half gone and the serial number is barely visible. Before I dare fire it, I would replace the barrel, grips (broken), and replace all the springs, at a minimum. Of course since I like to shoot, I probably would get a gunsmith to lower and flare the ejection port, fit modern sights, and put some finish on the exterior. This would probably remove the faded Colt, etc. In other words, I’d probably spend the equivalent of buying a new Springfield 1911A1 to turn old steel into new. At the same time, I would be destroying another little piece of history.

The SMLE is easy:  turn it into a “mantlepiece gun” — put it up on the wall somewhere as a decoration, and give the old war weapon a dignified retirement.  There’s no point in “fixing” it, because the history is too important — why lose that piece of history when you could take the same money and get a new gun for about the same price?

As for the 1911,  I say the opposite:  go for it, and fix it up;  turn it into a shooter.  Frankly, from the sound of it, the gun has been all but destroyed, and as such it has little real intrinsic value, especially as it wasn’t a service piece.  By all means replace all the innards (don’t forget the firing pin) and get it running.  Oh, and you may want to talk to a gunsmith about the serial number:  for some reason, the fuzz don’t take too kindly to an anonymous gun, and it may be necessary to redo the stamping (along with a certified notification for future use).  Also check for frame cracks, because from all accounts the poor old thing has been horribly abused.

It’s an interesting conundrum, isn’t it?  And thanks for the letter.

Gun Story

Gratuitous Gun Pics, The Gun Thing

From Reader Dave L.:

Should you run out of stuff for your blog (highly doubtful) here’s nice piece of gun porn. It’s a Uberti Cattleman in .357.  I really like the case hardened frame against the blued cylinder and barrel  (me too — K).

I bought this some years back when the gov did an “economic stimulus” of $400 for veterans.  I decided that the best thing I could do with the check was to piss off Nancy Pelosi and buy a gun so I took a ride up to H&H in Oklahoma City.  I may have paid a bit too much but I fell in love with the look and just had to add it to my collection.
I went with .357 because I have several revolvers and one long gun (Rossi 92) in that caliber.  I have .38 and .357 reloading dies and about 3500 rounds in stock.  The pistol rides in a nice holster that I bought down in Mexico back when it was safe to cross the border.
If our idiot governor had signed off on Constitutional Carry, this was going to be my BBQ gun.  It shoots pretty straight and with a stout hollow point .357 load I don’t think that I’m going to need more than six anyway.

“Hi, my name is Dave, and I’m addicted to pretty guns.”

Everybody say after me…

When “New” Means “Expensive”

The Gun Thing

I’ve been thinking recently about supplementing the old Springfield 1911 with another one sometime.  So I’ve been idly browsing the usual places, looking for a new 1911, with only a few specific must-haves.  Mostly, it looks as though I’m going to have to spend around $800-$900 to get what I need.  I’m not ultra-fussy because to me, a 1911 is like a hammer:  you pick it up, it works, and I don’t need much in the way of add-ons.

Over at Shooting Times there’s an article talking about the new 1911s on the market, so I went there with all sorts of anticipation.  Here’s one they listed:

Now before you explode, go to the article and read the comments.

Me, I need a drink.

Enough Ammo

QOTD, The Gun Thing

From Clay Martin (via Peter’s blog):

The one thing I see over and over again in prepping circles is a belief that a mountain of ammo is all you need. Absolutely not true! In fact, I believe that most people would be better off with 300 rounds and the skills of having shot 20,000 as opposed to 20,000 stockpiled and the skills of having shot 300.

Amen to that.  I cannot tell you the degree of comfort I feel when I unholster my Springfield 1911 and raise it to a shooting position.  I’ve put a lot  more than 20,000 rounds through this old friend, and I’m not sure that I can operate any other  piece of machinery as well as I can my 1911.

As for rounds on hand:  I have an ungodly amount of FMJ practice ammo, and maybe a few hundred rounds of self-defense ammo (which I add to on a monthly basis, a box or two at a time depending on the status of my bank account).  I’d have more of the HP stuff, but at the range I always shoot off a mag of premium hollowpoints first — following the maxim of “practice with what you’ll use” — but I can’t afford to shoot 200-odd rounds of premium self-defense .45 ACP ammo every week, sue me.  So I shoot 8, buy 20, week after week.  In my 1911’s “grab ‘n go” ammo bag, I have 200 rounds of .45 loaded in magazines, after which I’d probably need a rifle anyway.  Which brings me to my next point, and a confession.

I don’t have the same degree of familiarity with my rifle  part of the SHTF equation.  I know I should shoot the AK more, but hell;  in my life I’ve probably fired an AK more often than any rifle other than .22, and what’s to remember about shooting an AK-47?  I’m confident that in any SHTF (urban street fight), I can put 20 rounds into a dinner plate-area at 50 yards, shooting “aimed-rapid” (which is all you need to do in that scenario.  At 100 yards, I can’t even see  the damn target anymore because Old Fart Eyesight, and at that point I’d go to one of my scoped rifles anyway).

So I break out the AK every few months (vs. every week for the 1911) and shoot off three or four mags (20-rounders) before I get bored and put the thing away (after letting the barrel cool and the handguard stop smoking, don’t ask me how I learned to do that  before putting the thing away in a foam-rubber-lined gun case).  And yes, I have an ungodly amount of 7.62x39mm ammo too;  in my AK’s “grab ‘n go” ammo bag, I have 400 rounds of the “39”, which should suffice for any urban unrest I’m likely to encounter;  and let’s not even look into Ye Olde Ammoe Locquer for more.

Practice more, folks, and you’ll end up needing less ammo in storage.  To repeat those wise words:

Most people would be better off with 300 rounds and the skills of having shot 20,000 as opposed to 20,000 stockpiled and the skills of having shot 300.