Latest Posts

A Weighty Matter

Gun/Ammo Tests, The Gun Thing

One of the Newtonian principles is that of the mass : velocity equilibrium (if I may call it that).  Simply explained in gun terms, it’s that compromise that one has to make between bullet weight and velocity (and eventually, terminal velocity and impact).

The simplest example is a comparison between a .22 bullet and .45-70 Government:  the first zips along with a muzzle velocity in excess of 3,000 feet per second, while (relatively speaking) the huge .45-70 struggles to leave the barrel altogether.  Yet as fast as the .22 may be, its diminutive 40gr weight arrives without much authority, so to speak, at (say) 100 yards distance, while the .45-70’s 300gr lump of lead will crush everything in its path when it eventually gets there.

Which is all very well and good, because the difference between the two bullets is vast.

But what if there’s little difference in bullet weight between two (or three) bullets, the only difference being the amount of powder driving them?

Here’s a fun video of just such a test, made by shooting the .22 LR, .22 Mag (WMR), and the .17 Hornady Magnum.  (By the way, I love the fact that Our Hero eschews the appallingly-expensive ballistic gelatin, using instead large cubes of pottery clay to make his point.  It’s as valid a medium as any other, I think, when making comparisons of this sort.)  Go ahead and watch the thing (it’s just over 10 minutes long), and then come back here for my thoughts.

Read more

10 Best / Worst

Movies

Here’s a list of movies I can get behind:

10 Brilliant British War Films That Completely Tanked
(That Are Now Classics)

I’ve seen all but one or two (I have got to watch Colonel Blimp at some point in the near future), and all I can do is offer a ringing endorsement.  That they all failed at the box office just reinforces how good they really are.

I have DVD copies of A Bridge Too Far,  Aces High and Charge of the Light Brigade, and having been reminded by the video, I think I need to look at acquiring a couple more — The War Game and Zulu Dawn, especially.

Do ye (y’all) the same.

The Old Cartridge Question

Hunting, The Gun Thing

Ron Spomer was recently challenged to name his favorite cartridges for specific animals.  The catch?  He was restricted to only those cartridges developed and commercially sold before 1950.

In case you don’t have 20 minutes to watch the video, here’s the executive summary (with my very respectful preferences in parentheses):

Elk:  .300 H&H Magnum (9.3x62mm)
Mule Deer:  .270 Win
Whitetail:  7×57 Mauser
Moose:  .30-06 Springfield (9.3x62mm)
Pronghorn Antelope:  .257 Weatherby Magnum (.25-06 Remington)
Bison:  .375 H&H Magnum
Black Bear:  .35 Whelen (.32 Win Special OR .45-70 Govt, depending on the terrain)
Grizzly Bear:  .375 H&H Magnum
Elephant:  .375 H&H Magnum (.416 Rigby)

And by the way, I have absolutely no argument with any of Ron’s choices.  My “alternatives” are a personal preference, no more.  (I’d hope that he wouldn’t have a problem with any of mine, in return.)

Of course, I have opined on those wonderful cartridges of yore, and for those New Readers or else Elderly Readers Of Fading Memory, here’s a link to that 2003 post.

Almost Perfect

Gratuitous Gun Pics, The Gun Thing

For purposes unknown (LOL), Friend & Reader JC in PA sends me this link about a gun:

Of course, there’s a lot to like about this gun (it’s a 1911, for starters):  Novak-style sights, lightweight hammer, beavertail grip (hammer bite, for the alleviation of), to mention just some.

For me, the flies in this lovely ointment are the extruded grip safety (unnecessary and a massive irritant in an extended range session) and of course the fact that it’s chambered for the Europellet.

Nevertheless, I think it’s a Good Thing (albeit not for me and in any event, I own a sufficiency of 1911s, and properly chambered withal).

Some might ask:  Why not just use a Browning-type SA-35 (High Power), if one wants to use a John Moses Browning-designed gun? 

There’s no reason not to, of course;  as any fule kno, I yield to no man in my love of the High Power (despite its Europellet chambering).

If one is going to go the Euro way and use the 9mm Parabellum, then both are sound choices — the 1911’s shorter barrel may even make it more portable than the full-size High Power.

The problem, however, is that deciding on the 9mm does open up the choice of gun, bigly.  Sticking with all-steel construction, there’s the CZ 75 series (e.g. the compact):

…not to mention the full-size SIG P210 (a longtime favorite of mine):

…and of course, the Beretta line (e.g. the 92X Performance):

…to mention but some.

Once you go completely over to the Dark Side and espouse such filth as the plastic guns, of course, the choice expands exponentially, and this post has gone on long enough already.

So thanks, JC;  but I’ll be sticking to my beloved 1911 .45 ACP guns.  If ever I do want to downsize, I’ll step down to the short-barreled Combat Commander type:

…but that’s as far as I’ll go.