Meds actually would be one of those things that virtually disappears, along with food in general. There might be vast amounts left at distribution hubs or manufacturers, but at places like stores and stuff it would be gone. Just look at what happens when you have the mere threat of a Hurricane or something of that nature.
But we're getting off topic for this thread. I'd be down to continue the conversation in another thread though.
Elbows wrote: Yep, it's just an extension of the false belief that we'll run out of everything in six months (despite 90% of the population disappearing...resulting in overwhelming surplus of almost every conceivable necessity - including ammo). But, ya know...zombie show?
The only downside is the inability to carry large amounts of ammo. I have perhaps 3-4K at the moment, but short of carrying it in a car, I wouldn't be able to throw it in a bag and run with it (that's 50-60 lbs. of ammo). So if you were forced to leave your own stash you would have to locate some others, but again - pretty easy pickin's in the free states.
I have enough .22s to stop the Zombie apocalypse cold. Its not going to fit in a truck...
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Grey Templar wrote: Meds actually would be one of those things that virtually disappears, along with food in general. There might be vast amounts left at distribution hubs or manufacturers, but at places like stores and stuff it would be gone. Just look at what happens when you have the mere threat of a Hurricane or something of that nature.
But we're getting off topic for this thread. I'd be down to continue the conversation in another thread though.
Another thing that would be in short supply in the US would be Textiles. The US does NOT produce clothing in any useful amount.
Back on topic though, my dad was an avid hunter in his youth. It kept us fed for cheap, and he even did some deep-woods elk hunting on a number of occasions. He had an old-school reloading machine.
About 10 years ago he remodeled his basement and got brand new duel reloading bays. However, his health quickly deteriorated, and to the best of my knowledge the stuff has never been used.
I've been wanting to breach the subject with him about using his basement to reload, but I'm afraid I'll look like a moocher. In addition, our preferences in calibers have little overlap, so I'd likely have to get my own dyes. I think the only calibers we both shoot are 12 gauge, 30-30, 308, and .357.
cuda1179 wrote: Another thing that would be in short supply in the US would be Textiles. The US does NOT produce clothing in any useful amount.
Back on topic though, my dad was an avid hunter in his youth. It kept us fed for cheap, and he even did some deep-woods elk hunting on a number of occasions. He had an old-school reloading machine.
About 10 years ago he remodeled his basement and got brand new duel reloading bays. However, his health quickly deteriorated, and to the best of my knowledge the stuff has never been used.
I've been wanting to breach the subject with him about using his basement to reload, but I'm afraid I'll look like a moocher. In addition, our preferences in calibers have little overlap, so I'd likely have to get my own dyes. I think the only calibers we both shoot are 12 gauge, 30-30, 308, and .357.
Reloading is actually a lot of fun...nothing better then being able to dial in a rifle with hand loads. My 22-250 are wicked accurate since I started hand loading 20+ yrs ago. Only problem is the price of powder is always increasing so if you find a good deal buy as much as you can afford
Quite possibly the dumbest question ever, Does gunpowder ever get old? My dad still has 3 20 pound kegs from the late 1970's in the basement. Probably more than I'd use in my lifetime.
Aye, as Templar said, should be fine as long as it wasn't exposed to moisture. Just make sure it's the right kind of powder and doesn't smell funkier than normal and I think you should be fine.
Had a range day at our place today. Wife and I had a few friends over. Fired over 20 different long guns and hand guns. Great crew of folks. I unfortunately didn't get any pictures but my wife may have. I'll try to snag them and upload a couple. We probably sent a couple thousand rounds downrange today.
EDIT: Adding pictures
Setting up a gong by the backstop berm.
Wife and Daughter look on as I'm firing one of the ARs.
Just a reminder that the bump stock ban goes into effect on Monday. I do not believe any of the appeals thus far have been successful.
If you own a bump stock, you must have destroyed it or turned it into law enforcement / the ATF prior to Monday, or you will be in possession of an unlicensed machine gun.
Showing Daughter how it works so she could shoot it.
Automatically Appended Next Post: So I'm reloading magazines. Load all the 9mm stuff, load the 7.62 NATO, load the .22LR, and then the 5.56. As I finish up the 5.56 I realize I'm down to less than 500 rounds left. I start to think 'Damn, I best get to ordering MOAR. Then I notice an ammo can in the back of the closet. I go to grab it thinking it is the one with all my cleaning materials and about throw out my back. It is 1000 rounds of M855 I forgot I had.
Ouze wrote: During the USS Iowa accident (1989), they were using powder from WW2.
(the accident had nothing to do with the age of the powder)
Which isn't to say that there were not problems with that. Off Vieques they barely got the breachlock shut in time before they had a accidental discharge. of a 16" gun...
Given the shenanigans that went on with Iowa, I swear to God they were TRYING to sink that ship.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Ouze wrote: Just a reminder that the bump stock ban goes into effect on Monday. I do not believe any of the appeals thus far have been successful.
If you own a bump stock, you must have destroyed it or turned it into law enforcement / the ATF prior to Monday, or you will be in possession of an unlicensed machine gun.
Just an interesting note: Nation Wide numbers for turn ins have been.... very low. New Jersey, Vermont and Mass have had.. three, two, and zero, respectively. I expect this is going to turn int oa massive headache for BATFE.
CptJake wrote: Had a range day at our place today. Wife and I had a few friends over. Fired over 20 different long guns and hand guns. Great crew of folks. I unfortunately didn't get any pictures but my wife may have. I'll try to snag them and upload a couple. We probably sent a couple thousand rounds downrange today.
EDIT: Adding pictures
Setting up a gong by the backstop berm.
Wife and Daughter look on as I'm firing one of the ARs.
Is that "range" propperly secured? You would not want heavy metals in the ground now would you?
Depends on the berm. Some berms are just that - piles of dirt - even professional and law enforcement ranges. For personal and private land, even after a lifetime of shooting the amount of actual lead or harmful metals in that small patch of ground is minimal.
Some people will occasionally dig up their berms to collect old spent bullets for recycling, etc.
(of course some of the more "well built" purpose aimed ranges will have big berms, but they'll have rubber tires or old rail-road ties stashed in the berm to "catch" the bullets, etc.)
Yes it is 'secure'. You have to bust through an iron gate and go up 1/4 mile of driveway to get to it, or trek through some gawd awful swamp. In either case the live stock guardian dogs will alert me to your presence. Bad day for someone who trespasses.
As for heavy metals in the ground, seriously? Isn't lead found in the ground to begin with? I'm just sending it home. None of our critters graze anywhere near there and I don't intend to grow tomatoes for my salads on the berm either.
CptJake wrote: That is the back side of one of my ponds.
Yes it is 'secure'. You have to bust through an iron gate and go up 1/4 mile of driveway to get to it, or trek through some gawd awful swamp. In either case the live stock guardian dogs will alert me to your presence. Bad day for someone who trespasses.
As for heavy metals in the ground, seriously? Isn't lead found in the ground to begin with? I'm just sending it home. None of our critters graze anywhere near there and I don't intend to grow tomatoes for my salads on the berm either.
Over here you would mostlikely get sued, not for firing your gun ofcourse but for A: noise pollution and B: environmental damage.
Also no you are not sending it home (except you also dig the lead up right there which you don't i think).
No worries though other Lands other manners
CptJake wrote: That is the back side of one of my ponds.
Yes it is 'secure'. You have to bust through an iron gate and go up 1/4 mile of driveway to get to it, or trek through some gawd awful swamp. In either case the live stock guardian dogs will alert me to your presence. Bad day for someone who trespasses. .
How 'back side' are we talking? A good ways, or is over-penetration a possibility? I use an old abandoned sand mine, so I'm sure I can fire ANYTHING and it's not an issue.
CptJake wrote: That is the back side of one of my ponds.
Yes it is 'secure'. You have to bust through an iron gate and go up 1/4 mile of driveway to get to it, or trek through some gawd awful swamp. In either case the live stock guardian dogs will alert me to your presence. Bad day for someone who trespasses. .
How 'back side' are we talking? A good ways, or is over-penetration a possibility? I use an old abandoned sand mine, so I'm sure I can fire ANYTHING and it's not an issue.
If the rounds penetrate 15-20 feet of dirt my pond may spring a leak. I'm not too worried.
Any range I’ve been to, public or private, has just had a dirt berm to shoot into.
And nobody gives a gak about noise pollution or environmental damage. I’m more bothered by the morons who rev their atv down my street for hours on end than hearing gunshots.
Nostromodamus wrote: Any range I’ve been to, public or private, has just had a dirt berm to shoot into.
And nobody gives a gak about noise pollution or environmental damage. I’m more bothered by the morons who rev their atv down my street for hours on end than hearing gunshots.
Yeah, where I live 'noise pollution' isn't going to get me in trouble. As long as I'm not firing within 200 yards of someone else's house (and I'm not, I'm on 30 acres) it is all legal. A couple of the 'neighbors' shoot almost as much as I do. As long as you know what direction your shooting and don't shoot towards someone else's critters or house it is all good.
If the rounds penetrate 15-20 feet of dirt my pond may spring a leak. I'm not too worried.
Yeah, you probably wouldn't have to worry about it. Was thinking though that the water might make it easier to recover solid rounds. Takes a lot of spade work to recover 20 pounders from a Parrott after it passes through a target.
It depends on the round. Pistol rounds are often intact with water, but rifle rounds often just shatter if they hit it. Incompressability and all that.
CptJake wrote: That is the back side of one of my ponds.
Yes it is 'secure'. You have to bust through an iron gate and go up 1/4 mile of driveway to get to it, or trek through some gawd awful swamp. In either case the live stock guardian dogs will alert me to your presence. Bad day for someone who trespasses.
As for heavy metals in the ground, seriously? Isn't lead found in the ground to begin with? I'm just sending it home. None of our critters graze anywhere near there and I don't intend to grow tomatoes for my salads on the berm either.
I have images of old Heavy Metal VCR tapes* sticking out of the ground...
*Childrenz gather around. In the Before Time, your ancient ancestors used to watch movies in their Model Ts on something called "VCRs." Imagine if all your Youtube videos were stored on flash drives the size of a brick, AND ONLY ONE MOVIE PER FLASH DRIVE!
In other news, did a Steel Challenge match Sunday. I was doing good except one type of the metal plates rang about the same tune level as my tinitis and I couldn't tell if they were being hit or not. Eventually I had to have a guy stand behind me calling me shots on them.
Grey Templar wrote: It depends on the round. Pistol rounds are often intact with water, but rifle rounds often just shatter if they hit it. Incompressability and all that.
20 pounder is subsonic, so maybe? To be honest, I'm not sure I want to fling a 20 pound shell at a target that I don't know what it's going to do if it hits. I've seen what that does to people, and it's not pretty.
In other news, did a Steel Challenge match Sunday. I was doing good except one type of the metal plates rang about the same tune level as my tinitis and I couldn't tell if they were being hit or not. Eventually I had to have a guy stand behind me calling me shots on them.
Sounds awesome except for the tinitis. Im hoping to get to shoot a match next month here if the course is open. What'd you roll out to the match with?
In other news, did a Steel Challenge match Sunday. I was doing good except one type of the metal plates rang about the same tune level as my tinitis and I couldn't tell if they were being hit or not. Eventually I had to have a guy stand behind me calling me shots on them.
Sounds awesome except for the tinitis. Im hoping to get to shoot a match next month here if the course is open. What'd you roll out to the match with?
M&P Pro with KKM barrel and Apex trigger (< 3lb pull weight). Gun is better than I am, which is not hard. Saturday I will be one of the also rans at the Gulf Coast Championship. watch out for that geezer! Is he having a heart attack? Yee ha.
Very cool, Im gonna try running a bone stock PX4 in a local match here next month if time allows, I really want to get into 3 gun but that's gonna be a bit yet due to range cert requirements here. Hope you place well
Vaktathi wrote: Very cool, Im gonna try running a bone stock PX4 in a local match here next month if time allows, I really want to get into 3 gun but that's gonna be a bit yet due to range cert requirements here. Hope you place well
First time I will be wearing colors (county sheriff's marksmanship team, yee hah) Range cert requirements?
Yeah the entity that owns the property requires taking a couple weekend courses before being cleared to use the action range, after which you can use it at any time. I guess they had problems with people following 180* rules and whatnot.
Vaktathi wrote: Yeah the entity that owns the property requires taking a couple weekend courses before being cleared to use the action range, after which you can use it at any time. I guess they had problems with people following 180* rules and whatnot.
Interesting that. Would not work for an IDPA / USPSA match.
Acquired a Greener Mk3 police shotgun in it’s original proprietary 12/14 guage chambering.
For those unfamiliar, it’s basically a smoothbore Martini-Henry that the British issued to colonial police forces. My particular one has Egyptian markings.
Nostromodamus wrote: Acquired a Greener Mk3 police shotgun in it’s original proprietary 12/14 guage chambering.
For those unfamiliar, it’s basically a smoothbore Martini-Henry that the British issued to colonial police forces. My particular one has Egyptian markings.
I'd still take the US import in 12 gauge. MK3's have the Hong Kong markings but were chambered for more standard US rounds for Prison guards in the 1930's.
12 gauge would be nice as I could shoot it! As it is, this one will fit nicely into my British arms collection and I couldn’t argue with the price, it was gifted to me by my father in law.
Grey Templar wrote: You'll maybe have to look into loading your own shells for it.
Good luck with that. Greener’s had a special 3-pointed firing pin that was incapable of piercing the primer of essentially anything but their proprietary cartridges. That's why you want the 12 gauge ones.
Get them while you can, since this is the kind of thing that can be reversed and CA is one of the few states where I could see them pulling an NY and actually confiscating stuff after changing their mind (most states you can normally plan on being grand-fathered in when stuff changes).
Good for CA. (first time I think I've ever said that...for any reason ever).
Remember that the Greener Mk3 was specifically designed to prevent British colonies from rebelling since the only source of usable ammunition was Greener, but at the same time they needed to arm police and other similar units. So not only was it not the same as British military munitions, but it was not the same as anything anyone else produced.
I'm fairly sure there's a conversion kit out there, but it's more than just the firing pin. The shells are an odd size and shape, so you're looking at rechambering it.
Grey Templar wrote: So I bought three 30 round mags and a 60 rd quadstack for my AK. They should be here in a week or so.
Should get one of those romanian 75 round drummies. I have one and like it, although I liked it better when I could use it with my lawfully acquired plastic firearm accessoryunlawful machine gun.
I know we're not supposed to talk about politics here and I'm not going to be the one to break that rule but I am really, really mad about that. Let us leave it there.
Anyway the drums are cool but make sure you use some kind of a tool to depress the spring release to unload it because I think you could lose a finger if you just used your hand. But seriously, they're good!
I have a handful of 45-round AK magazines and they're my "go to" if I were to leave the house in some form of bizarre disaster in which I feared for my life. The 45-round mag is great because it's large for an AK but not impossible or unwieldy. Also with a folded stock it looks...comical.
Iffin you need to get involved in a gunfight, extra capacity to start with is a nice little bonus.
PS: Fun "The More You Know" fact...Russian soldiers serving in Chechnya very quickly adopted the habit of running 45-round magazines taped inverted to eachother (90 rounds total), referring to this as a "King", "Monarch" or "Royal" magazine. They encountered such miserable fighting conditions they said as many as 8/10 soldiers would also field the 37mm grenade launchers on their AK-74. The general fighting response was a hell of a lot of dumped lead and a shed-load of grenades popped off. I used to have a link to a fantastic journal/diary being written by a Russian soldier/officer in the Chechen wars. I have since lost the link. :(
Tiny picture example:
The 45-rounder was originally intended for squad support use, but then saw service in any rifle chambered in 5.45 that could take it.
Grey Templar wrote: So I bought three 30 round mags and a 60 rd quadstack for my AK. They should be here in a week or so.
Should get one of those romanian 75 round drummies. I have one and like it, although I liked it better when I could use it with my lawfully acquired plastic firearm accessoryunlawful machine gun.
I know we're not supposed to talk about politics here and I'm not going to be the one to break that rule but I am really, really mad about that. Let us leave it there.
Anyway the drums are cool but make sure you use some kind of a tool to depress the spring release to unload it because I think you could lose a finger if you just used your hand. But seriously, they're good!
My Korean 75 isn't bad. The spring release disconnects it from the wheel so it doesn't spin it around inside the magazine like a blender when you release the tension. So you load it when it has no tension, then give it 3 cranks when you're going to use it. And if you need to unload it to press the button and it untensions before you take the ammo out.
I'm less insulted by the Gundam art-gun...and more insulted by the feth-awful nonsense going on with that rifle to make it "legal" in whatever gak state it's from.
(and yes I'd absolutely rock a Robotech REDF colour/styled rifle...for fun)
To be fair, for the specific case of a Gundam-esque gun, I don't think the CA stock looks too off-point given the wonkiness of weapons in that franchise (it reminds me of the original Zaku machinegun stock/grip in some ways). If one is stuck with the wonky stock, I think Gundam-theming it was an inspired choice.
So it turns out that the pistol is a .32 cal. revolver that seems to have something wrong with the mechanism. My mother said that supposedly having rounds in the cylinder will make it rotate when the trigger is pulled, but as I inspected it the cylinder was free wheeling. I may look into what it will take to fix it, but as it stands I am not even sure what model it is or who the maker is. I'll google the letters on the grip tomorrow, right now I'm not motivated to do so.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Hopkins & Allen Arms Co. Forehand Model 1901 .32 M&H Cal. Hammerless 5 Shot
Pretty sure the teeth for turning the cylinder are stripped, but as it's over a hundred years old I might be able to fetch a buck or two and then invest in a functional firearm. My brother has a .32 auto that he's wanting $50 for, may go that route.
Pretty sure the teeth for turning the cylinder are stripped, but as it's over a hundred years old I might be able to fetch a buck or two and then invest in a functional firearm. My brother has a .32 auto that he's wanting $50 for, may go that route.
Looking around at some auctions, you *might* be able to afford that 32 auto with it, but I wouldn't hold my breath. They bring $75 to $200 at auction for near immaculate, not broken. My Great grandfather bought two that I still have because he was looking for a cheap murder weapon, and that says pretty much all that needs to be said there.
At this point I'm wondering if it'd be simpler to try to chase down a replacement cylinder. The pawn shop was disinterested as they've apparently loaded up on "antique" firearms.
Just Tony wrote: At this point I'm wondering if it'd be simpler to try to chase down a replacement cylinder. The pawn shop was disinterested as they've apparently loaded up on "antique" firearms.
Any views on this pistol? My competition M&P is starting to get long in the teeth. This would likely be my last pistol purchase outside of .22s. It would be for competition or Zombies, not carry.
Advantages: minimal tweeking needed: adjustable fiber optic sights; 4-5lb good trigger pull with relatively tight reset; ~35 ounce weight (if taking off the mag well for SSP/Production). Sight already plated for red dot optic if I go that way in the future which is liekly due to eyesight.
Disadvantage: mags cost more; I would have to get a new holster, mag carrier and 10 magazines.
I've heard that the CZ (Shadow?) is still the king of off-the-shelf competition guns. The Walther is great (I'm a Walther fanboi), but I can't see giving Sig money even though their quality seems to slowly be turning around.
Elbows wrote: I've heard that the CZ (Shadow?) is still the king of off-the-shelf competition guns. The Walther is great (I'm a Walther fanboi), but I can't see giving Sig money even though their quality seems to slowly be turning around.
Yes indeed. I like CZs. However a Shadow is 1. substantially more expensive; and 2. DA/SA (I think it has a DA option but safety must be on also). I absolutely suck at DA/SA.
I like the Walther but it has a higher center of gravity and weighs less thus slowing up follow on shots. Ironically, if this were a carry I'd go with the Walther hands down. It has been one I have thought about though and am not averse to. PLus it has optic ready plates too.
Have you seen the new Steel Frame Q5? SWEET! but its $1,500 and pretty much sold out.
I'd suggest a look at the Arex Rex Zero 1 Tactical. It had the durability of a Glock, but feels and handles like a Sig P226, The tactical version is far more customizable, and you should be able to find one for under $800.
I have had range time with the Rex Zero 1 and loved it, and the tactical is on my to-buy list.
Got to fire both my HK rifles yesterday. The HK-91 was the first rifle I bought myself, way back in 1993 or so. I haven't had it out shooting in over 15 years. Picture is my HK MR556. I had not fired it since we were up at Bragg, so almost 2 years. The Aimpoint is still very much zeroed!
Sniper scopes. How do they adjust for the lost of binocular vision? Or is it all down to the shooter, and their chosen adjustments?
Just realised it’s something I’ve never thought about. But using only one eye, we lose some depth perception, which seems a bugger to any would-be sharp shooter?
And are sniper scopes like guitars and that, in they need retuning to satisfaction having been unpacked?
That’s why you zero for both windage and elevation. It does still require you to determine how far the target actually is. So lots of scopes have little indicators for helping determine the distance, like multiple step indicators that show the height of a man sized target at various distances.
Once you are zeroed, have the distance of the target, and know how to adjust for that you don’t need depth perception.
Sorry, I really am utterly clueless in this realm. You want the finer points of consumer credit law in the U.K., I’m your man. But previous statement needs to be as plebby as possible
Sorry, I really am utterly clueless in this realm. You want the finer points of consumer credit law in the U.K., I’m your man. But previous statement needs to be as plebby as possible
Eh, I still like how you Brits do it anyway. Line up the two halves of the target, that's your range, signal the guys in the 12 inch battery. Love those old Barr and Stroud's.
Depth perception doesn’t matter. Estimate/know your range, adjust windage/elevation (vertical and horizontal) on your scope, fire away. Most military (and many civilian) optics will have markings on the crosshairs for different ranges and some scopes have rangefinding capability. I like to zero my scope at 100m and I can adjust from there depending on range.
Nostromodamus wrote: Depth perception doesn’t matter. Estimate/know your range, adjust windage/elevation (vertical and horizontal) on your scope, fire away. Most military (and many civilian) optics will have markings on the crosshairs for different ranges and some scopes have rangefinding capability. I like to zero my scope at 100m and I can adjust from there depending on range.
Points to his above reference to the Barr and Stroud.
Perhaps a little too oblique a reference to range-finding, so...
Sorry, I really am utterly clueless in this realm. You want the finer points of consumer credit law in the U.K., I’m your man. But previous statement needs to be as plebby as possible
Even with a scope you should still have both eyes open. It takes some practice but I always shoot with both eyes open.
The reason you don't need depth perception is because we are already assuming the scope has been correctly zero'd in.
Scopes need to be adjusted for Windage(Left and right) and Elevation(up and down). Windage gets the scope aligned with the linear trajectory of the barrel, while Elevation determines at what distance the scope is zero'd at. IE: The distance at which, if the rifle is fired from a level position, the bullet will strike exactly where the reticle is placed. If you aim at a target that is closer than the range at which you are zero'd, the bullet will strike higher than the point of aim. If you aim at a target that is farther away than the range you zero'd at, the bullet will strike lower.
Now because the scope has been aligned with the barrel and path of the bullet, even without binocular vision you'll still hit the target because your eye will also be aligned with the trajectory of the bullet. Binocular vision is an enhancement for your vision to aid in gauging distance, but it is mostly relevant at close distances. The farther away an object is, the less relevant it becomes as the data gained by both eyes becomes more and more similar. And again, because the eye, scope, and bullet trajectory are all aligned in a scoped rifle the binocular vision is irrelevant when it comes to actually firing. Its only relevant when the distance to the target is in question and you need to know weather to aim high or low, but once you have that you just fire.
And are sniper scopes like guitars and that, in they need retuning to satisfaction having been unpacked?
Oh yeah. Even the act of firing can cause the scope to juggle out of alignment ever so slightly, as can simply carrying the rifle around in a case. Thats why to keep a good zero you need a solid carry case and you will be always making minor adjustments to bring it back. And removing a scope, even with a quick detach mount, can knock it out of zero. Not so much that if you do it you'll have to start all over again. Its more of a maintenance item.
Even with a scope you should still have both eyes open. It takes some practice but I always shoot with both eyes open.
I'd only do that if you were shooting at very close targets. If the zoom is quite high you're just going to be dividing your focus between the two images.
Grey Templar wrote: The reason you don't need depth perception is because we are already assuming the scope has been correctly zero'd in.
Scopes need to be adjusted for Windage(Left and right) and Elevation(up and down). Windage gets the scope aligned with the linear trajectory of the barrel, while Elevation determines at what distance the scope is zero'd at. IE: The distance at which, if the rifle is fired from a level position, the bullet will strike exactly where the reticle is placed. If you aim at a target that is closer than the range at which you are zero'd, the bullet will strike higher than the point of aim. If you aim at a target that is farther away than the range you zero'd at, the bullet will strike lower.
Now because the scope has been aligned with the barrel and path of the bullet, even without binocular vision you'll still hit the target because your eye will also be aligned with the trajectory of the bullet. Binocular vision is an enhancement for your vision to aid in gauging distance, but it is mostly relevant at close distances. The farther away an object is, the less relevant it becomes as the data gained by both eyes becomes more and more similar. And again, because the eye, scope, and bullet trajectory are all aligned in a scoped rifle the binocular vision is irrelevant when it comes to actually firing. Its only relevant when the distance to the target is in question and you need to know weather to aim high or low, but once you have that you just fire.
And are sniper scopes like guitars and that, in they need retuning to satisfaction having been unpacked?
Oh yeah. Even the act of firing can cause the scope to juggle out of alignment ever so slightly, as can simply carrying the rifle around in a case. Thats why to keep a good zero you need a solid carry case and you will be always making minor adjustments to bring it back. And removing a scope, even with a quick detach mount, can knock it out of zero. Not so much that if you do it you'll have to start all over again. Its more of a maintenance item.
Even with a scope you should still have both eyes open. It takes some practice but I always shoot with both eyes open.
I'd only do that if you were shooting at very close targets. If the zoom is quite high you're just going to be dividing your focus between the two images.
Part of learning to shoot with both eyes open is learning to control your eye dominance. Like I said it takes practice but you can do it. When I was still training to be an 0317 they required us to have that ability. Of course for casual shooting it's not that important but I personally still practice doing it.
cuda1179 wrote: How does everyone feel about reproductions/ parts kits rebuilds of older weapons, especially weirder ones?
I don't know why, but I am being drawn to a PPS-43 chambered in 9mm.
In and of themselves? They're great, and often are the only source for many firearms. The problems come usually with the builder and their QC, or newly made parts sometimes not being made to original spec. For something like a 9mm PPS43, go for it, because a real one isn't going to drop by at an affordable price any time soon
cuda1179 wrote: How does everyone feel about reproductions/ parts kits rebuilds of older weapons, especially weirder ones?
I don't know why, but I am being drawn to a PPS-43 chambered in 9mm.
In and of themselves? They're great, and often are the only source for many firearms. The problems come usually with the builder and their QC, or newly made parts sometimes not being made to original spec. For something like a 9mm PPS43, go for it, because a real one isn't going to drop by at an affordable price any time soon
I thought the PPS-43 was cool when I originally saw it, but the main drawback at the time was that it was chambered in 7.62x35. I didn't want to invest in a new gun with weird Russian ammo that isn't used by any other weapon I have. Now that I know that it is available in 9mm, for the same price, it's much more tempting. It might be one gun I'd consider getting a permit for a SBR for.
Yeah, I probably wouldn't be too interested in a 7.62x35 gun either. I'd love to get to play with one of the PPS43 9mm guns. Been looking at a Galil rebuild lately myself.
Aye, it appears Atlantic will have them for about $1k. That's my threshold for interest in a classic style Galil at this point. I'd love one just to have one, but it's hard to justify at the prices most of the rebuilds have been of late, and a preban is just straight off the table. I'm hoping there will be some build quality reviews soon.
I also had been looking at those. Unfortunately I think I just have no interest in anything without a top rail at this point: my vision is too gakky for using irons, and I don't think the Galeos even allow that lousy AK side mount.
OTOH they are very cool looking. It's a struggle to decide.
Sniper scopes. How do they adjust for the lost of binocular vision? Or is it all down to the shooter, and their chosen adjustments?
Just realised it’s something I’ve never thought about. But using only one eye, we lose some depth perception, which seems a bugger to any would-be sharp shooter?
And are sniper scopes like guitars and that, in they need retuning to satisfaction having been unpacked?
Given that depth perception/ranging is what you are losing there are three general situations:
A. Ranging doesn't matter (Ties in with B) : Depending on how precise you have to be range may not (Some cartridges drop more than others.) be a practical issue until you're a 2-3 hundred meters out, and a lot of places you won't really ever be able to shoot beyond this because of terrain and/or ethical or safety concerns. A 50 yard zero on my AR15 for example will have holes appearing in a strip extending a couple inches above or below my point of aim until I start reaching out past 250 and drop becomes something to start paying attention to.
B: You have already estimated range by eye/range finder/terrain knowledge/etc. If my target is next to a tree 150 meters from my firing point and has been pre measured, it's not difficult to find range (Also see: Ranging stakes.)
C: Ranging reticles like flavors of mil/moa dot, ACSS, etc. which rely on you knowing approximate size of an object and some math. If (easy example) I am looking at an object I know to be a meter wide with a mil dot reticle, and it measures one "mil" wide, I know it is 1000 meters distant and can either hold over or dial adjustment knobs accordingly. Others like the ACSS or the russian PSO reticle rely on the "average" height or shoulder width of a man for ranging, place feet at the bottom of the scale and where the top of his head is gives you an approximate range.
As for tuning, yes. After you put a new optic on a gun you will have to calibrate it so that the point of aim and point of impact meet at a selected distance and you make further adjustments from that point...just don't forget that if you dial 6 clicks for a windy day that you dial six clicks back at some point (Also a point about cheap scopes: When you dialed 6 clicks back, are you REALLY back where you started?) and if you remove an optic from a gun you're generally going to have to rezero it when you reattach unless you've got a good quick detach mount and there will still be some small but possibly irrelevant shift even then.
Yeah, I'd seen a couple on YouTube but they were always prototypes, test models, etc. It would be an exceptionally cool gun to own when it comes out - price depending. Sadly with as popular as the idea is, it could easily be a $2-3K gun.
Nearly 12 lbs...lol...taking a class with it would be a superb workout.
Anyone hear of the StG44 reproduction by HMG guns? It looks really nice.
The HMG guns sadly increasingly look to be vaporware, they've been "a month away from shipping" for...well, years now. I was really excited when they were first announced, but they've stopped doing any updates for many months.
Methinks they've run into subcontractor issues on parts, "waiting on parts" appears to be their standard line. Wouldn't be the first time such issues have sunk a project. If they ever actually come out, I'd love to snag one.
Took the bullpups to the range today
Spoiler:
Put about 150 rounds through the AUG, it ran both brass and steel just fine on the normal gas setting. I learned I really do not like the safety. That big cube switch is sharp, hard, and right in the way of where you want to put your finger most of the time.
So I've posted on another forum, but if anybody has or knows someone who wants to get rid of an AKU-94 conversion kit, I would love to have it. Yes, I know they're viewed as garbage, but I've seen some ways of fixing the problems people had with the kits. And I just really want a bullpup AK.
So I have been hand loading for a number of yrs with a single stage press... was just loading so 9mm pistol ammo and Using a single stage press is getting old for pistols ammo. Looking into getting a progressive style reloaded..leaning toward Dillon because their no BS warranty is the best in the biz. Anyone have any experience with Dillon or any other progressive style presses? Looking for the best bang for my buck. Thanks
Chute82 wrote: So I have been hand loading for a number of yrs with a single stage press... was just loading so 9mm pistol ammo and Using a single stage press is getting old for pistols ammo. Looking into getting a progressive style reloaded..leaning toward Dillon because their no BS warranty is the best in the biz. Anyone have any experience with Dillon or any other progressive style presses? Looking for the best bang for my buck. Thanks
Chute82 wrote: So I have been hand loading for a number of yrs with a single stage press... was just loading so 9mm pistol ammo and Using a single stage press is getting old for pistols ammo. Looking into getting a progressive style reloaded..leaning toward Dillon because their no BS warranty is the best in the biz. Anyone have any experience with Dillon or any other progressive style presses? Looking for the best bang for my buck. Thanks
If you are loading a lot like more than a couple of hundred a week lot, I would look more at the 650.
A big factor is some of side bits. You can get devices that make warn if your powder is low, if you have a weird powder batch in the case, etc.
Yeah the square B deal is the one I was looking at. Watched a few videos and is all I need... I will still use my single stage for rifle since I only use them for hunting... now going to search the internet for a deal on one
I went in the local gun store sizing up their revolvers, but I ended up looking at the couple 10mm pistols they had instead.
The wallet is begging me not to.
After looking into 10mm for the longest time myself (rifle for me) I'll give you some good reasons not to. It's not a problem with the firearms themselves, it's the ammo manufacturers. Most 10mm ammo out there isn't loaded to 10mm specs. For some reason they have too little powder in the cartridge. In effect all you end up having is a slightly stretched .40 S&W. This includes any ammo you'd find at Wal-Mart or big box stores, larger outdoor stores (Cabelas, Bass Pro), and even dedicated gun stores. If you want 10mm loaded to 10mm specs, be prepared to look long an hard and pay extra for it.
I didn't want to buy a weapon for 10mm prices to only get .40S&W performance. My happy compromise was to find a 40S&W weapon that was rated for +P ammo. That way you can shoot cheap Wal-mart ammo for target practice, and then if you want a little extra power get that +p ammo. Really the difference between 40+p and 10mm isn't that much.
funny, I've heard its sort of the other way around. People were getting way too zealous with their handloads of 10mm and were quite literally destroying their guns because they weren't playing it safe.
Grey Templar wrote: funny, I've heard its sort of the other way around. People were getting way too zealous with their handloads of 10mm and were quite literally destroying their guns because they weren't playing it safe.
.45 acp girl has nothing to worry about with me and 10mm. I pick my weapons based on the fact that I am 100% certain they WILL work when needed.
Grey Templar wrote: funny, I've heard its sort of the other way around. People were getting way too zealous with their handloads of 10mm and were quite literally destroying their guns because they weren't playing it safe.
Home reloading shots, yes. I'm talking about factory 10mm ammo.
I could have explained myself better. I had heard that it was best to go with factory because the vast majority of loading data will give you far too powerful rounds.
Grey Templar wrote: I could have explained myself better. I had heard that it was best to go with factory because the vast majority of loading data will give you far too powerful rounds.
For some reason that just reminded me of the time my younger brother exploded a shotgun doing that. he was pissed off with us for some reason, and decided that if we wouldn't give him ammo, he'd make his own. 'Wadding' was something he was unfamiliar with, so he filled the whole magnum shell with powder and shot...
Credit were it's due, that old H&R Baystate did not explode on the first shell he loaded... the second...
I'm surprised that, in going to all the trouble of learning how to reload a shotgun shell, he failed to learn how to properly measure the charge and assemble the shell
Grey Templar wrote: I'm surprised that, in going to all the trouble of learning how to reload a shotgun shell, he failed to learn how to properly measure the charge and assemble the shell
I don't think he 'learned' anything other than not to do that again.. Dad had left the reloader set up.
My friend's little brother ( years ago) used a reloader to put a paintball into a shotgun shell. He asked for a volunteer to be shot with it. None of us were that stupid.
cuda1179 wrote: My friend's little brother ( years ago) used a reloader to put a paintball into a shotgun shell. He asked for a volunteer to be shot with it. None of us were that stupid.
That just sounds on the face of it like asking someone to nominate themselves for a darwin award.
I mean, I have no idea what would actually happen, but it sounds like something where I just don't want to know the answer.
While we did not shoot it at anyone, we test fired a bunch of shotgun shells filled with airsoft pellets and only the shotgun primer. It actually worked really well. That was...15 years ago. No one was ever stupid enough to use it that way - of course.
cuda1179 wrote: My friend's little brother ( years ago) used a reloader to put a paintball into a shotgun shell. He asked for a volunteer to be shot with it. None of us were that stupid.
That just sounds on the face of it like asking someone to nominate themselves for a darwin award.
I mean, I have no idea what would actually happen, but it sounds like something where I just don't want to know the answer.
hmmmm. I can't imagine the paintball would retain any cohesive mass that could penetrate a target. I'd think beyond a foot or so it would just get atomized. The blast from the powder charge would be the dangerous part. Even blanks can hurt you at point blank range in the same way.
cuda1179 wrote: My friend's little brother ( years ago) used a reloader to put a paintball into a shotgun shell. He asked for a volunteer to be shot with it. None of us were that stupid.
That just sounds on the face of it like asking someone to nominate themselves for a darwin award.
I mean, I have no idea what would actually happen, but it sounds like something where I just don't want to know the answer.
I have no idea what gauge of shell he loaded. What is the size of a paintball anyway? Is it close to the diameter of 20 gauge or 410 slug? Not saying I'd want to do it, but hypothetically if you used just the perfect amount of powder it could theoretically work, maybe.
This seems like a thread of knowledgable people, so let me ask here. I picked up a mosin nagant a while back, and a couple cans of corrosive ammo. Recently lent it, and about 50 rounds of ammo to a friend to go shooting in the woods with the promise that he'd clean it when he was done.
Just got it back, and you can guess what wasn't done. Had a nice layer of rust on the muzzle and down the barrel. It cleaned off easy enough, and a look down the barrel didn't show any pitting or obvious damage.
For thosr in the know, for an otherwise well maintained mosin rifle, is there much of a chance that that one time of not cleaning it after shooting corrosive ammo has seriously messed up my barrel?
One time won’t mess it up, as long as you did clean it in a reasonable amount of time.
The danger of corrosive ammo is relatively long term, months. Though if the firearm got wet it would worsen the issue. And salt water would be even worse.
Bookwrack wrote: This seems like a thread of knowledgable people, so let me ask here. I picked up a mosin nagant a while back, and a couple cans of corrosive ammo. Recently lent it, and about 50 rounds of ammo to a friend to go shooting in the woods with the promise that he'd clean it when he was done.
Just got it back, and you can guess what wasn't done. Had a nice layer of rust on the muzzle and down the barrel. It cleaned off easy enough, and a look down the barrel didn't show any pitting or obvious damage.
For thosr in the know, for an otherwise well maintained mosin rifle, is there much of a chance that that one time of not cleaning it after shooting corrosive ammo has seriously messed up my barrel?
You may be the first person to have cleaned a Mosin since Berlin, 1945...
You're probably fine, as long as there is no major pitting which shouldn't happen from something like this. These rifles were after all designed to be issued to 19th century illiterate teenage peasants and fired corrosive ammo exclusively in service.
That said, best to avoid doing it a whole lot as eventually it will destroy the barrel, but from what it sounds like you should be fine.
There's a strong chance your rifle was already partly corroded/pitted when you purchased it. I'd clean it, and then shoot some groups. It's unlikely to ever make the gun dangerous, etc.
Elbows wrote: There's a strong chance your rifle was already partly corroded/pitted when you purchased it. I'd clean it, and then shoot some groups. It's unlikely to ever make the gun dangerous, etc.
Yeah, the barrels and breeches are quite thick on bolt actions. The worst it would do is basically turn it into a smooth-bore.
My Mosin's rifling is quite worn out closer to the muzzle, probably from its time in WW2. I actually don't think the ramrod that is provided with the rifle can actually clean the barrel. The part where you would ostensibly stuff a cloth is way too tight the sides of the barrel such that it won't fit down the barrel if it has a cloth on it. Best I could ever do with it was ram a cloth down the barrel just by pushing it along. To do it properly I have to use a modern cleaning kit.
Thanks for the answers. I figured given it's reputation and the fact that a that could be seriously impacted by a infantryman not taking care of it once, it never would've achieved that kind of prescience or name for itself, but opening up the bag and seeing it covered in corrosion threw me off my stride.
Bookwrack wrote: This seems like a thread of knowledgable people, so let me ask here. I picked up a mosin nagant a while back, and a couple cans of corrosive ammo. Recently lent it, and about 50 rounds of ammo to a friend to go shooting in the woods with the promise that he'd clean it when he was done.
Just got it back, and you can guess what wasn't done. Had a nice layer of rust on the muzzle and down the barrel. It cleaned off easy enough, and a look down the barrel didn't show any pitting or obvious damage.
For thosr in the know, for an otherwise well maintained mosin rifle, is there much of a chance that that one time of not cleaning it after shooting corrosive ammo has seriously messed up my barrel?
You should be good. Nice scrub down with oil to get the salt out...
Shame on your friend for not cleaning the thing. I hate to see historical arms get abused (doesn't matter the type.)
Unfortunately, not recently at all and I don't see it changing soon. The local shooting options have not improved recently. I am very jealous of guys who can shoot on their own land.
Spoiler:
1.) The closest place is in Moline, which is just across the river in Illinois (I live right on the border on the Iowa side). It's pistol only, and I'm not a great pistol shot so it's OK but eh not great (and while AR15 "pistols" are a legal fiction the ATF is willing to work with, the guys who own the backstop aren't letting anyone blast 5.56 into it regardless). The other downside is I'm not 100% sure I'm not riding dirty when I go there - I have a conceal carry permit for Iowa, so I can carry firearms in a car (regardless of loaded or not). Illinois doesn't reciprocate with Iowa, though, and doesn't offer FOID cards to nonresidents. FOPA would protect me if I was travelling through Illinois, but not if I was going to Illinois and back. My guess if I had a concealed carry permit for Iowa, and all the firearms were unloaded, cased, and in the trunk pursuant to FOPA, I'd be fine if I got pulled over... but Im also not 100% and don't really want to find out for sure.
2.) The next closest one is about 30 minutes away, also in Iowa - it's just a shooting range cut into a small wooded area on public land. This was formerly my go-too shooting place. The pros are you can bring whatever you want. The cons are there is no longer a RSO volunteering there, so I don't feel safe there - I've seen a lot of unsafe stuff shooting there, people messing with their guns while you're downrange, people on the far side continuing to shoot "since you're not near their lanes" when you're downrange, and so on. It's also completely covered in garbage now - people bring TVs there to shoot and stuff like that. It's ALSO only about 100 yards and while that is OK, I wish I had a little more room for the stuff I have decent glass for.
3.) There is a gun store in Davenport now with an indoor range but pistol only. I was there in March or so, that was fine, but I really prefer rifles or SBRs to pistols. It's also on the ass end of Davenport so it's a bit of a drive.
4.) There are a few rifle clubs in Illinois I would love to pay to join, but they combine the legal problem of 1 with the unpleasant requirement of an NRA membership. I refuse to join the NRA so that is a problem.
The solution to this is obviously building a PCC SBR / Scorpion EVO / something like that, of course perhaps in January.
What do you have on the right there, some kind of FAL? I'm a sucker for a folding carrying handle, I don't know why.
Brutal, that's a painful situation, I definitely feel ya about places where there are no RSO's, I avoid those sorts of venues when possible as well for the same reasons.
The solution to this is obviously building a PCC SBR / Scorpion EVO / something like that, of course perhaps in January.
What do you have on the right there, some kind of FAL? I'm a sucker for a folding carrying handle, I don't know why.
Yeah, PTR91/G3 clone and a DSA FAL. A Scorpion would be a most excellent idea
I sadly haven't been able to go to the range since April because of the fire danger. Its supposed to rain next week though so maybe they'll shut down the fire warnings.
I'm a bit interested in testing out my HK91 and HK93 in cold weather. They are supposed to do well in cold weather, but I'd like to test that theory.
As a side note, I'm getting interested in the .45 as a pistol round. Not that I really want to add another type of ammo to my collection, but something about the 1911 is starting to call out to me.
They are fun. Solid and simple. Heavy but not cumbersome. And for a pistol of that size and caliber it is surprisingly thin so it isn't a terrible idea as a carry weapon, if you can use a shoulder holster of some kind.
The 1911 is still my favorite pistol to shoot, though it's too unwieldy for daily carry for me - once I started carrying subcompacts I didn't want to go back to full size service pistols.
There are a lot of people who carry 1911s for CC. Depends as always on your frame, dress style, etc. They're obviously not light, but...that'll depend on your build/belt.
All my 1911 friends say the same thing: Stick to .45, normal size barrel, single-stack. Generally speaking 1911s are not on par with the modern reliable plastics, but they get worse as you get further from the basic formula - unless you're going to invest in an STI or something high dollar. Also the $3K "hand fitted" guns are barbeque guns at best in many instances.
Also, while not necessary for more modern guns, 1911s still tend to require a 1000-1500 round wearing in period before you can determine how good the on you got is. In short, it can be a lot of work to get a good, reliable (i.e. trust it with your life) consistent 1911. You'd be best served going to a full 1911 forum and getting the current low-down on what is good/bad/ugly.
1966 produced all-matching Factory 26 Chinese SKS...I promise it's there under all the cosmoline.
This is going to be a looooooooong cleanup job. Just touching it is gross
As absolutely stupid as it sounds, I've always wanted a Tec-9. The problem being it's long been out of production, and even at the best of times it was totally unreliable. I think I may have found a suitable substitute.
Did you get the Galil from Classic Firearms? I saw those, they look like they will be dope rifles. They went out of stock pretty quick too!
I know the listing says they have forged receivers, but I heard a rumor that they may be cast. I'm assuming the rumor is false, but can you tell by looking at it in person?
cuda1179 wrote:As absolutely stupid as it sounds, I've always wanted a Tec-9. The problem being it's long been out of production, and even at the best of times it was totally unreliable. I think I may have found a suitable substitute.
I understand the Tec-9 draw, there's a lot of pop culture value there, though for actual shooting and for history cool factor I think the vz61 is a winner
Hordini wrote:Did you get the Galil from Classic Firearms? I saw those, they look like they will be dope rifles. They went out of stock pretty quick too!
I know the listing says they have forged receivers, but I heard a rumor that they may be cast. I'm assuming the rumor is false, but can you tell by looking at it in person?
The markings are a nice touch too I thought.
Aye, it's from Classic. As far as I can tell the receiver looks forged, there's nothing that looks cast on it, no obvious lines or rough cast surfaces or voids that I can see. It's a heavy beast, even next to my milled SAM7 AK
That SKS wood will probably be oozing grease when fired for the next 20 years I've had some luck leaching grease out with degreasing spray, but there is a concern that can weaken the wood I believe.
On a different note, any reloaders who don't have a stainless steel tumbler to clean their brass should get one, it's magic
The great Cth'osmoline monster is truly a horrifying thing to behold. It's in my...everywhere...
More to the point, it was going fine (if messy) until I found that I'm unable to get the firing pin retainer out of the SKS bolt and the pin is stuck forward in petrified cosmoline, meaning until I can that out it can't be shot or it'll just slamfire through the whole mag.
I've got it soaking in mineral spirits, I'll try the oven route later tonight!
I took the Galil out to the range, it ran without any issues through a couple hundred rounds of mixed brass and steel cased ammo in the rain, but the US made 922r compliance trigger is...awful. It slaps like a beast, has miles of overtravel, the reset takes the full length of travel, the break is unpredictable, and nothing about it is smooth
Cosmoline melts at 110 degrees, but has a flashpoint as low as 325. Do not put it in the oven! What we do is boil the part in water (doesn’t even take that long) and then shake it dry. I use WD-40 after to remove any water/moisture, then lube it (my go to is either rem oil or mobil 1). Been doing this for years.
Got the SKS all cleaned up, took a few evenings, bent a couple punches working on the firing pin and retainer, and I think I've got cosmoline permanently embedded in parts of my body. After taking it to the range, it's a pretty enjoyable shooter (and the trigger is infinitely better than on my milled receiver AK), and while the wood is beat up, all the metal parts appear solidly maintained (if well used).
Definitely pick one up sooner rather than later, at this point most of the large stocks of surplus are gone or locked away behind sanctions, what's available now is pretty much the bottom of the barrel I think. The stuff coming in now is from Albania, their stocks now being old enough for C&R status so they can be sold in the US without running into sanctions on Chinese hardware, but I don't think there's a whole lot such surplus arsenals left that haven't been emptied already, leaving the days of cheap SKS's numbered. Atlantic's always solid to order from.
So it's 3:00 AM and I can't sleep. After coming home from a night of gaming with friends, I decided to clean up. As I was getting ready for bed, I heard voices outside my apartment, going to check I found two men attempting to break into my car.
The PD responded quickly, but not quick enough. The perpetrators were in the wind.
Now, I'm sitting here thinking about the fact I couldn't defend myself if someone tried to break into my home. Crime in my city is up quite significantly, every day the paper is full of drug crime and home invasions.
So.
I want to protect myself. I know that home defense isn't about having the flashiest gun, but about having the common sense fire arm. I don't want to shoot my neighbor by accident either.
Togusa wrote: So it's 3:00 AM and I can't sleep. After coming home from a night of gaming with friends, I decided to clean up. As I was getting ready for bed, I heard voices outside my apartment, going to check I found two men attempting to break into my car.
The PD responded quickly, but not quick enough. The perpetrators were in the wind.
Now, I'm sitting here thinking about the fact I couldn't defend myself if someone tried to break into my home. Crime in my city is up quite significantly, every day the paper is full of drug crime and home invasions.
So.
I want to protect myself. I know that home defense isn't about having the flashiest gun, but about having the common sense fire arm. I don't want to shoot my neighbor by accident either.
Any advice?
The best firearm is the one you have on you. A single-shot .22 pistol you have on you/you can get to quickly is better than a full-on machinegun that takes 5 minutes to locate and load.
Now, that being said, I'm not sure of the laws in your area so take the following with a grain of salt. If all you want is a decentish gun that will go bang when needed, and not go bang when no wanted, there is nothing wrong with some cheap-o firearms out there. The key is finding the firearm that suits your particular skills, body, and environment. If you are 5'6" tall and 150 pounds, you might not want to get that fancy hand canon.
Gun guys have what we call "closet queens". These are the guns that are fun to shoot, but we rarely actually use them. If you are getting a gun for self defense, do NOT make it a closet queen. Get to know it, in every sense of the word. Shoot it enough times and often enough that you know every quirk. You should know rather instinctively how to pull, aim, shoot, and clear common malfunctions. A personal rule of mine is that I don't even fire a gun until I've basically memorized the instruction manual and can do a basic disassembly and reassembly from memory. Be prepared to shell out a couple hundred dollars in ammo just to "get to know" your firearm. Taking it out for practice every couple months should be enough to keep you relatively in practice for your own safety.
As for the actual gun selection, that is a very personal choice. If I may make some suggestions though: It seems like you aren't concerned with either carrying it or for any "pretty" factor. High Point firearms has a large variety of cheap pistols and pistol-caliber rifles that are extremely cheap. They are ugly, and a tad heavy, but are dependable and accurate. If a shotgun is more your style (Honestly I say one handgun, one shotgun is minimal) I'd recommend a Maverick 88. It's made by the same company that makes Mossberg shotguns, but is more "entry level", even though it is basically the same gun and has the same components.
Anyway you cut it though, remember safety first. Practice practice practice.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Something else I forgot to mention: Don't overlook a good, simple revolver. They aren't flashy, don't hold 20+ rounds, and can't be reloaded super fast. But they can be kept loaded and ready to use. Their chances of jamming are almost zero.
Well, go into this with your eyes open. Getting a firearm is going to substantially increase your statistical odds of shooting someone you don't intend to shoot, as well as increase your chances of successfully committing suicide. I'm obviously not anti-gun, I own around 10 guns. But we have to be honest about what gun ownership entails - expense, responsibility, and danger.
Better than getting a firearm - if your schedule allows for it, get a dog. Nothing will deter burglars faster than a barking dog, and you don't have to worry about the vagaries of using lethal force where you live (in most states, shooting people breaking into a car would be murder since you can't use lethal force to defend property, but of course there are many exceptions like Texas).
Lets assume that you can't have a dog or whatever, and a firearm is the best choice.
Since you said this was for home defense, there probably isn't a great reason to get a pistol. It's hard to shoot well with a pistol without a lot of experience, and poor shooting grip will substantially increase your chance of the pistol jamming ("limp-wristing").
For home defense I think it's pretty hard to beat a AR-15 "pistol", that is, an AR15 with a short barrel and a brace, which legally counts as a pistol.
I think it's a superior choice over a shotgun for home defense for a few reasons:
Ammo capacity. You have 30 rounds, not 5
.
Overpenetration - .223 won't penetrate as many layers of drywall as buckshot or slugs will (and if you're not using buckshot or slugs, you shouldn't be using it for defense).
Easier to get around corners - I own a full length shotgun and it's terrible for going around corners, nothing stopping someone from just grabbing it. A tucked short barreled AR is shorter length than a pistol with arms extended.
More intuitive controls - while every weapon can jam, cheap shotguns can be short-shucked by the inexperienced and leave you weaponless.
Being able to easily mount a light on the rail is incredibly useful for home defense. Shotguns can do this too, but in my experience, the placement is awkward.
The shotgun isn't a bad pick, I just don't think it's the best pick. I also want to point out that contrary to popular belief, shotguns do need to be aimed just like any other firearm. You won't see any significant pellet spread inside home defense distances without some kind of choke.
If you are on a tight budget, Hi-Point pistols are very reliable and inexpensive despite being hideous. As was previously said, the best gun is the one you actually have available.
Regardless of which route you go, remember that your life can depend upon this gun - train with it, learn it well, and keep it clean.
Don't forget to factor the cost of secure storage (a safe or what have you) into your budget. Nothing will stop a dedicated thief, but lots of things stop casual or impulse thefts.
Ouze wrote: Getting a firearm is going to substantially increase your statistical odds of shooting someone you don't intend to shoot, as well as increase your chances of successfully committing suicide.
While this is true over having no gun at all, according to the CDC and Keck's Florida State University study on the matter, between about .5% and 1% of the US population uses a gun defensively per year, but only 40,000 people died of gun related injuries in 2017, the most recent year for which we have data. And that's from all causes including murder, suicide, accident, being shot by LEO/Military, and 'other'. That's about 50 people saved to every one lost. I'll take those odds.
It covers you in the event you do have to use your gun. I know I pray I never have to use mine against a person, but if I do, I am sure I'll have decent lawyers, bail, and other costs covered.
Togusa wrote: So it's 3:00 AM and I can't sleep. After coming home from a night of gaming with friends, I decided to clean up. As I was getting ready for bed, I heard voices outside my apartment, going to check I found two men attempting to break into my car.
The PD responded quickly, but not quick enough. The perpetrators were in the wind.
Now, I'm sitting here thinking about the fact I couldn't defend myself if someone tried to break into my home. Crime in my city is up quite significantly, every day the paper is full of drug crime and home invasions.
So.
I want to protect myself. I know that home defense isn't about having the flashiest gun, but about having the common sense fire arm. I don't want to shoot my neighbor by accident either.
Any advice?
The best firearm is the one you have on you. A single-shot .22 pistol you have on you/you can get to quickly is better than a full-on machinegun that takes 5 minutes to locate and load.
Now, that being said, I'm not sure of the laws in your area so take the following with a grain of salt. If all you want is a decentish gun that will go bang when needed, and not go bang when no wanted, there is nothing wrong with some cheap-o firearms out there. The key is finding the firearm that suits your particular skills, body, and environment. If you are 5'6" tall and 150 pounds, you might not want to get that fancy hand canon.
Gun guys have what we call "closet queens". These are the guns that are fun to shoot, but we rarely actually use them. If you are getting a gun for self defense, do NOT make it a closet queen. Get to know it, in every sense of the word. Shoot it enough times and often enough that you know every quirk. You should know rather instinctively how to pull, aim, shoot, and clear common malfunctions. A personal rule of mine is that I don't even fire a gun until I've basically memorized the instruction manual and can do a basic disassembly and reassembly from memory. Be prepared to shell out a couple hundred dollars in ammo just to "get to know" your firearm. Taking it out for practice every couple months should be enough to keep you relatively in practice for your own safety.
As for the actual gun selection, that is a very personal choice. If I may make some suggestions though: It seems like you aren't concerned with either carrying it or for any "pretty" factor. High Point firearms has a large variety of cheap pistols and pistol-caliber rifles that are extremely cheap. They are ugly, and a tad heavy, but are dependable and accurate. If a shotgun is more your style (Honestly I say one handgun, one shotgun is minimal) I'd recommend a Maverick 88. It's made by the same company that makes Mossberg shotguns, but is more "entry level", even though it is basically the same gun and has the same components.
Anyway you cut it though, remember safety first. Practice practice practice.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Something else I forgot to mention: Don't overlook a good, simple revolver. They aren't flashy, don't hold 20+ rounds, and can't be reloaded super fast. But they can be kept loaded and ready to use. Their chances of jamming are almost zero.
I live in the southwest, in a state with basically zero gun laws, open carry and so on. I own a 12ga Shotgun, but it's currently with my folks back east. I'm having them ship it to our local store next week so I can at least have that.
Ouze wrote: Getting a firearm is going to substantially increase your statistical odds of shooting someone you don't intend to shoot, as well as increase your chances of successfully committing suicide.
While this is true over having no gun at all, according to the CDC and Keck's Florida State University study on the matter, between about .5% and 1% of the US population uses a gun defensively per year, but only 40,000 people died of gun related injuries in 2017, the most recent year for which we have data. And that's from all causes including murder, suicide, accident, being shot by LEO/Military, and 'other'. That's about 50 people saved to every one lost. I'll take those odds.
i wish there wasn't s so much deep, fudgy bs around all firearm related statistics. It's very difficult, probably impossible, to determine what is really true. 3,000 defensive uses a day sounds really, really high to me - I don't think I believe it, but I also know it's kind of impossible to prove either way.
Either way it's kind of a moot point; we're in the same camp. Having a firearm adds some personal danger to yourself and others, and gives you a nonzero chance of using a firearm to defend your life. So each person needs to decide for themselves. You can mitigate both of the prior issues with training and diligence, but as gun owners we need to be honest with new people looking to own guns (which turns out Togusa already did, anyway).
The only way that level of firearm defense makes any sense (and the studies I've seen have been self report, so keep in mind there might be some "motivated" reporting) is to think of virtually any conflict that ended positively while a firearm was involved. We don't have good data on firearm injuries vs. deaths, but I just don't see that ratio of injury to death to support that level of actual gunfire.
Anyways, buying a gun for self defense can make you safer in a few instances. If you practice very high gun safety, if you have no mental illness, and you have nobody in the household likely to borrow the firearm. Even then, you are trading the very real safety of simply not being in a household with a firearm for the risk of having the weapon.
One of the joys of being an American is that you can decide if it's worth it to you, but the bleak reality is that a gun is far more likely to kill it's owner (or even a loved one) than it is to kill a "bad guy."
I definitely agree with Ouze on what to get for home defense.
A semi-auto rifle of some persuasion. You'll want to be able to mount a flashlight on it. Pump shotguns are much more manually complex to operate in an extremely stressful situation. Having to remember to *pump* *fire* *pump* *fire* is more on your plate than you need in what is going to be the scariest moment of your life, and you really do not want to bank on the first shot finishing the job.
Shop around. Go to all the different gun stores and look for what feels comfortable. ARs, AKs, etc... try them all out.
Once you've got your chosen weapon, keep at least 1 magazine that you nominate as your "bump in the night" magazine and keep it loaded at all times. Practice getting your weapon out from wherever you keep it secured and getting it loaded. Then have a plan on how to clear your house room by room. For ammo, use hollow points. This will further minimize the chance of over-penetration and increase lethality.
If there are any available in your area, take a live-fire self-defense firearms course.
Ouze wrote: Getting a firearm is going to substantially increase your statistical odds of shooting someone you don't intend to shoot, as well as increase your chances of successfully committing suicide.
While this is true over having no gun at all, according to the CDC and Keck's Florida State University study on the matter, between about .5% and 1% of the US population uses a gun defensively per year, but only 40,000 people died of gun related injuries in 2017, the most recent year for which we have data. And that's from all causes including murder, suicide, accident, being shot by LEO/Military, and 'other'. That's about 50 people saved to every one lost. I'll take those odds.
Aye. And really suicides and any type of legal self-defense/law enforcement shootings should not be counted in that number. If you eliminate those, the number becomes so small it is statistically insignificant. Suicide is its own thing, what it was done with is irrelevant.
i wish there wasn't s so much deep, fudgy bs around all firearm related statistics. It's very difficult, probably impossible, to determine what is really true. 3,000 defensive uses a day sounds really, really high to me - I don't think I believe it, but I also know it's kind of impossible to prove either way.
Either way it's kind of a moot point; we're in the same camp. Having a firearm adds some personal danger to yourself and others, and gives you a nonzero chance of using a firearm to defend your life. So each person needs to decide for themselves. You can mitigate both of the prior issues with training and diligence, but as gun owners we need to be honest with new people looking to own guns (which turns out Togusa already did, anyway).
Its a big country. 3,000 per day doesn't seem unreasonable. And when you consider how under-reported stuff like this will be it gets more reasonable. Lots of people don't trust the police, rightly so in many cases. So if someone who has that point of view is accosted by someone trying to rob them, they pull their gun, the robber flees, and nothing else happens how likely is it that it will get reported? Especially since this is a situation where catching the suspect is usually impossible, so what is even the point of calling the cops?
but the bleak reality is that a gun is far more likely to kill it's owner (or even a loved one) than it is to kill a "bad guy."
A misleading statement, since its implying that owning a gun makes you more likely to commit suicide. Owning a gun does not make you more likely to commit suicide in any way. We need to ditch language like that, its terrible for the perception of gun owners. The proper statement is "a suicidal person with access to a firearm is more likely to be successful". Which is not really relevant unless we are dealing with a specific scenario. It doesn't apply to the general population, so IMO isn't really any type of argument against gun ownership.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Polonius wrote: The only way that level of firearm defense makes any sense (and the studies I've seen have been self report, so keep in mind there might be some "motivated" reporting) is to think of virtually any conflict that ended positively while a firearm was involved. We don't have good data on firearm injuries vs. deaths, but I just don't see that ratio of injury to death to support that level of actual gunfire.
I suspect that in the vast majority of those incidents the firearm was never fired. Most of the time, the attack will be defeated simply by producing a firearm. Be it because they run away or surrender. The % of incidents where the firearm actually gets fired and it results in injury is probably a very tiny number of the overall number of incidents.
Bobthehero wrote: Possibly noobish question, but, wouldn't keeping a mag loaded at all time wear out the spring it and make it less reliable?
Technically a spring under tension does wear out, but only if the spring is being held under tension beyond its elastic limit. The springs in magazines will never be beyond their elastic limit because that could never happen through normal use(being fully loaded). So the only thing that can wear out a magazine spring is repeated motion.
Yep, a spring wears out when being worked, not when under stress (unless, as mentioned above it's beyond its intended tolerance).
RE: Togusa
Minor rant here, I suppose, but here goes:
If you do wish to carry a firearm, or have access to one for self-defense, it's a very "all or nothing" approach. If you get a firearm and expect to rely on it in a self-defense situation, you cannot half-ass it. Lack of training, lack of knowledge of laws, lack of willingness to actually employ it, etc...all of these things will end up with you dead or in jail. If you're even remotely skeptical about using it in a life or death situation; don't get one. Get wasp spray or bear mace instead. While I'm 100% behind people purchasing guns, there's nothing more dangerous than a person who owns or carries a defensive firearm and has zero idea how and when to functionally employ it. Do, or do not. There is no try.
Do not purchase a firearm to wave it around, or "scare off" the bad guys. If you're not going to employ it, you've just introduced a firearm to a already hostile situation. There is every chance it may be taken from you and used against you. Same goes for the bs "well, just rack a shotgun and it'll scare them away..." nonsense. Congratulations you've just given the other party advance warning of what you're about to do, etc.
Having said that, if you're 100% sure you want to own and possibly employ a firearm in self defense; LEARN YOUR STATE LAWS...top to bottom. If you have a family lawyer, see if he has any advice or anyone he can recommend for legal advice in the event that you employ a firearm in self-defense. You can consider buying CCW insurance, etc. If you're in an apartment you're in a bad place already for deploying a firearm safely. You'll need to identify in what directions and from what positions you could engage a hostile threat. As usual, you're responsible for every single round fired.
Simple bits of advice:
1) You use a firearm to STOP a threat, not to "kill someone". Everything you say on the phone or to police officers, etc. will be twisted to make you look like an overzealous gun-wielding maniac.
2) Do not glitz out your defensive firearm. Functional upgrades are fine, everything else will help an attorney accuse you of being the "overzealous gun nut" mentioned above. You don't have to use a race gun, or a Glock with "SHOOT EM ALL, LET GOD SORT EM OUT!" etched into the slide, etc.
3) Never state to anyone how many rounds you fired, because you're unlikely to know...and if you got the count wrong it becomes a point of accusation for the other side. "I'm not sure how many rounds I fired". Let the forensics folks determine that.
4) If you use a firearm in self-defense it'll be seized as evidence in most cases for 6-18 months, if not longer if it becomes a big case.
5) Find reliable and functional defensive rounds (or at the very least a simple hollow-point). If the time comes to stop a threat with a defensive firearm, you want to stop that threat immediately with efficiency.
6) Learn all of your state laws regarding carrying, storing, and transporting firearms. You don't want to be thrown in jail during a traffic stop because you don't know the laws of transporting firearms in your state (or other states you're passing through).
7) The most important part is remembering you're not Rambo. A lot of stupid and unnecessary shootings occur over stuff like vandalism, petty crime, car theft, etc. To deploy a firearm in a self-defense scenario you or another party must be under significant threat of grievous bodily harm, up to and including death. Most states will allow you to interact on behalf of others - but again, do your research.
8) Ignore all of the Hollywood bs. No warning shots, no shooting through a door, etc.
One option I've not seen mentioned yet is a pistol caliber carbine.
A lot less recoil in a 9mm carbine than a .223/5.56. Wider variety of ammo which can stop a threat but not blow through 3-4 walls and hurt someone else.
My Sig MPX controls are the same as on any AR15. Very easy to use, you can mount lights/sights whatever you want on it. Still has a 30 round capacity. Ammo is cheaper.
Bobthehero wrote: Possibly noobish question, but, wouldn't keeping a mag loaded at all time wear out the spring it and make it less reliable?
As was already mentioned, it's only actuating a spring that kills them, not storing them under "load" - many people have reported 1911 mags in excellent working condition that were loaded WW2 bringbacks.
One of the joys of being an American is that you can decide if it's worth it to you, but the bleak reality is that a gun is far more likely to kill it's owner (or even a loved one) than it is to kill a "bad guy."
That is a TAD misleading. Deaths to owners of firearms aren't exactly spread evenly. They are clustered around those with mental illness, drug use, and those involved in criminal enterprise. Avoid those and the stats are about a wash. Besides, the goal of having a gun isn't to "kill a bad guy" it is to protect yourself. If an intruder sees a gun and flees, no shots fired, the gun did it's job.
Also, that added risk of death is less than the added risk of owning a swimming pool or trampoline, and by a long shot.
but the bleak reality is that a gun is far more likely to kill it's owner (or even a loved one) than it is to kill a "bad guy."
A misleading statement, since its implying that owning a gun makes you more likely to commit suicide. Owning a gun does not make you more likely to commit suicide in any way. We need to ditch language like that, its terrible for the perception of gun owners. The proper statement is "a suicidal person with access to a firearm is more likely to be successful". Which is not really relevant unless we are dealing with a specific scenario. It doesn't apply to the general population, so IMO isn't really any type of argument against gun ownership.
I think you can parse the statements any way you want. I don't think anybody is dumb enough to think being near a gun will make you more suicidal, but we know that suicidal thoughts tend to be acute, not chronic, and that even minimal barriers will reduce lethal attempts. Not having access to a gun won't reduce suicide rates to zero, but probably closer to zero than they are now. And a gun bought for self defense at 25 will still be lethal at 55.
Yes, it's a rhetorical device, but given that two thirds of gun deaths are by suicide, it's important to be aware of personal gun safety over a lifetime.
Polonius wrote: The only way that level of firearm defense makes any sense (and the studies I've seen have been self report, so keep in mind there might be some "motivated" reporting) is to think of virtually any conflict that ended positively while a firearm was involved. We don't have good data on firearm injuries vs. deaths, but I just don't see that ratio of injury to death to support that level of actual gunfire.
I suspect that in the vast majority of those incidents the firearm was never fired. Most of the time, the attack will be defeated simply by producing a firearm. Be it because they run away or surrender. The % of incidents where the firearm actually gets fired and it results in injury is probably a very tiny number of the overall number of incidents.
That would be my assumption as well. What's harder to untangle is how many of those situations could have been resolved without the gun?
One of the joys of being an American is that you can decide if it's worth it to you, but the bleak reality is that a gun is far more likely to kill it's owner (or even a loved one) than it is to kill a "bad guy."
That is a TAD misleading. Deaths to owners of firearms aren't exactly spread evenly. They are clustered around those with mental illness, drug use, and those involved in criminal enterprise. Avoid those and the stats are about a wash. Besides, the goal of having a gun isn't to "kill a bad guy" it is to protect yourself. If an intruder sees a gun and flees, no shots fired, the gun did it's job.
It's really easy to minimize gun suicides by othering them. It's easy to think that if you keep guns away from suicidal people, then nobody will use their gun for suicide. But that's not how it works. According to the CDC, over half of suicides had no known mental health disorder. And people with no known mental health disorder are more likely to use a firearm. www.cdc.gov/vitalsigns/suicide/
I would bet that if you really dug into the data, men without mental health diagnoses and ready access to a firearm are a huge chunk of all suicides. Putting a gun in your house simply increases the risk that you, or somebody else, uses it to commit suicide. You really can't argue against that. There are ways to minimize and control for that, but you need to go in knowing that nobody can predict their stress or mental health in five years.
Also, that added risk of death is less than the added risk of owning a swimming pool or trampoline, and by a long shot.
I'd love a cite on that. I can see it if you don't include the suicides (which I wouldn't, but either way).
Polonius wrote: The only way that level of firearm defense makes any sense (and the studies I've seen have been self report, so keep in mind there might be some "motivated" reporting) is to think of virtually any conflict that ended positively while a firearm was involved. We don't have good data on firearm injuries vs. deaths, but I just don't see that ratio of injury to death to support that level of actual gunfire.
Your assumption is that all of them were against an armed assailant. I'm willing to bet that a large percentage of them were like mine, which involved an accidental encounter with an angry Mountain Lion.
I'd love a cite on that. I can see it if you don't include the suicides (which I wouldn't, but either way).
WHO determined that drowning accounts for 7% of all accidental deaths by injury. I dunno about trampolines, but falling causes 35% of all emergency room visits, and 14% of workplace fatalities.
I would bet that if you really dug into the data, men without mental health diagnoses and ready access to a firearm are a huge chunk of all suicides. Putting a gun in your house simply increases the risk that you, or somebody else, uses it to commit suicide. You really can't argue against that.
This is highly dependent on how far back you go in the records.
Frazzled wrote: This is not the place for that type of discussion as it borders on politics.
Or, you could just take it to Wasteland where all political discussion in this forum was supposed to go To, but no one seems to remember that, including some mods.
Frazzled wrote: This is not the place for that type of discussion as it borders on politics.
Or, you could just take it to Wasteland where all political discussion in this forum was supposed to go To, but no one seems to remember that, including some mods.
I honestly think there needs to be a better place for political discussion than the Wasteland. I tried reading that forum and it was...…. hostile. It's why I didn't join up. If you aren't part of the echo chamber you are made to feel REALLY unwelcomed. Admittedly there is a fine line between over modding and total anarchy, but if that place was IRL it's be a dozen guy that acted like a cross between man-child Will Ferrell characters and snoody Monopoly Guys.
Frazzled wrote: This is not the place for that type of discussion as it borders on politics.
Or, you could just take it to Wasteland where all political discussion in this forum was supposed to go To, but no one seems to remember that, including some mods.
Yes but thats full of nattering naybobs who don't know the difference between a Browning 1908 and a Browning 1909. Come on, if you can't get even the basics down...
Seriously, PF has an LEO input that gives a unique perspective for that type of issue.
Ayyyy I'm going shooting again this weekend. Long guns / outside private property. Last time I was there we had a blast messing around with refurbished and original WWII rifles.
m1 garand is a pleasure to use - compared to anything russian
Stevefamine wrote: Ayyyy I'm going shooting again this weekend. Long guns / outside private property. Last time I was there we had a blast messing around with refurbished and original WWII rifles.
m1 garand is a pleasure to use - compared to anything russian
The good old Mosin Nagant is pretty fun. Fun factor increases once you improve a few shortcomings, like putting a pad on the stock to keep that unergonomic metal plate from destroying your shoulder. Mine is modded to the point that the only original parts are the chamber and the barrel.
It's a neat varmint gun, but that round was a gigantic flop with all of the police departments who adopted it in the US. There is a reason why most have ditched it. It's a high speed tiny bullet, and you get a lot of capacity. It didn't do very well in actually stopping bad people though.
I shot an FN 5.7 one time...a large and bulky gun. Weird recoil.
5.7 is an extremely niche round. It’s purpose built for one thing. Penetrating body armor. And unless your target is wearing some it’s worse than every other round at stopping the threat. And even when they are wearing it, there are plenty of pistol calibers that can do the job alright.
Remember that the round was designed for the P90. An SMG firing on full auto. A bunch of tiny bullets makes sense there. Not so much in a pistol.
Also, the 5.7 penetrating body armour is an overstated fact, based on a very select type of ammunition. Even in that instance it's not terribly good at it. As you said, in a 50-round magazine, it's entirely okay in a sub-machine gun....but it's just a round looking for a purpose in the civilian market.
It doesn't help that FN used to literally advertise it as "The Lady's Home Companion" or something hilarious.
Looks like 5.7 is making a comeback with all the new ammunition hitting the market. It would be very interesting if Ruger released the PCC in 5.7 too. In a longer barrel 5.7mm performs pretty well. Almost anyone can handle firearm like a PS90 and own 300 yards. Looking forward to checking one of the pistols out if I get the opportunity.
Grey Templar wrote: 5.7 is an extremely niche round. It’s purpose built for one thing. Penetrating body armor. And unless your target is wearing some it’s worse than every other round at stopping the threat. And even when they are wearing it, there are plenty of pistol calibers that can do the job alright.
Remember that the round was designed for the P90. An SMG firing on full auto. A bunch of tiny bullets makes sense there. Not so much in a pistol.
Body armor has also moved on. Thats why I carry an assault wiener dog. He leaves landmines behind to stop people sneaking up on you, and his breath weapon has been rated at penetrating all known biohazard protective clothing.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Insurgency Walker wrote: Looks like 5.7 is making a comeback with all the new ammunition hitting the market. It would be very interesting if Ruger released the PCC in 5.7 too. In a longer barrel 5.7mm performs pretty well. Almost anyone can handle firearm like a PS90 and own 300 yards. Looking forward to checking one of the pistols out if I get the opportunity.
Its all DOA unless the ammo gets substantially cheaper. Its a round without a purpose.
jenniferbraud wrote: Unfortunately, we have no weapons at home and will never be, but I'm shocked that you have an AR-10A2. You probably feel safe.
Most of the people in this thread own an armalite 15~ or some varition at minimum. Depending on the state the laws are much more intense for pistols over long guns. I'm pretty sure you can own a .22 anywhere at 18 or so.
Grey Templar wrote: 5.7 is an extremely niche round. It’s purpose built for one thing. Penetrating body armor. And unless your target is wearing some it’s worse than every other round at stopping the threat. And even when they are wearing it, there are plenty of pistol calibers that can do the job alright.
Remember that the round was designed for the P90. An SMG firing on full auto. A bunch of tiny bullets makes sense there. Not so much in a pistol.
Body armor has also moved on. Thats why I carry an assault wiener dog. He leaves landmines behind to stop people sneaking up on you, and his breath weapon has been rated at penetrating all known biohazard protective clothing.
That's why despite all that talk about the best guns for personal protection and home use, I was disappointed and disillusioned that nobody here even _mentioned_ the single end-all, be-all answer to the question.
jenniferbraud wrote: Unfortunately, we have no weapons at home and will never be, but I'm shocked that you have an AR-10A2. You probably feel safe.
I have an AR-10 and I absolutely love it, but it's a little too big for home defense. Right now I am using a suppressed AR15 SBR with 300BLK for that. It's a nice platform I think.
Methinks tomorrow will be a range day for the PPS I've been carrying lately. Been trying to get more range time in with it. Pleasantly surprised with this gun so far. Hates steel cased ammo, but that's not a huge surprise.
Most of the people in this thread own an armalite 15~ or some varition at minimum.
I'm probably the only one that doesn't. Nor am really interested in one, to be honest. I have all the firepower I really need. Probably more.
I've owned my share of AR rifles, but I sold my last one a while ago. Wouldn't hesitate to buy another one if I needed it for some reason. I'm an AK guy and prefer them.
I also own an AK - it was my first long gun, actually - but the iron sights are too problematic for me, and I haven't found an optic system I really liked (and I've tried a few). I also have short little T-rex arms, so getting a proper cheek weld is another challenge.
Great firearms but the ergonomics just don't work well for me.
Ouze wrote: I also own an AK - it was my first long gun, actually - but the iron sights are too problematic for me, and I haven't found an optic system I really liked (and I've tried a few). I also have short little T-rex arms, so getting a proper cheek weld is another challenge.
Great firearms but the ergonomics just don't work well for me.
AKV 9mm fits TRex arms I bet.
As side note, 5.7mm isn't a round without a purpose but the purpose is best expressed with the LEO ammo.
Ouze wrote: I also own an AK - it was my first long gun, actually - but the iron sights are too problematic for me, and I haven't found an optic system I really liked (and I've tried a few). I also have short little T-rex arms, so getting a proper cheek weld is another challenge.
Great firearms but the ergonomics just don't work well for me.
Sadly it takes work to make an AK function like a modern fighting gun. I used to run a blog called MFAK (Modern Fighting AK), etc. The US is also a terrible place for AKs right now. You get monkey-built parts kit guns, or overly expensive factory guns. The glory days are gone, sadly. Around 2010-2011 you could get a new Saiga AK around $500.
Too many people trying to make some poorly re-built WASRs into fighting guns, etc.
I currently have two Rifle Dynamics builds which are excellent fighting guns, in 5.45. However it's not something you can easily assemble yourself, nor cheaply nowdays.
Ouze wrote: I also own an AK - it was my first long gun, actually - but the iron sights are too problematic for me, and I haven't found an optic system I really liked (and I've tried a few). I also have short little T-rex arms, so getting a proper cheek weld is another challenge.
Great firearms but the ergonomics just don't work well for me.
AKV 9mm fits TRex arms I bet.
As side note, 5.7mm isn't a round without a purpose but the purpose is best expressed with the LEO ammo.
My brother let me shoot his FN 57 a couple years back. I did like that you have the ability to quickly crack off 2-3 rounds while keeping the gun on target. It's something that I'd never be able to do with a 9mm or .40.
My brother let me shoot his FN 57 a couple years back. I did like that you have the ability to quickly crack off 2-3 rounds while keeping the gun on target. It's something that I'd never be able to do with a 9mm or .40.
Have you tried the Q5 SF or Sig X5 Legion or a USPSA race gun?
I have an AR-10 and I absolutely love it, but it's a little too big for home defense. Right now I am using a suppressed AR15 SBR with 300BLK for that. It's a nice platform I think.
What barrel length are you rolling on your 300, 8 to 9ish?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Polonius wrote: The only way that level of firearm defense makes any sense (and the studies I've seen have been self report, so keep in mind there might be some "motivated" reporting) is to think of virtually any conflict that ended positively while a firearm was involved. We don't have good data on firearm injuries vs. deaths, but I just don't see that ratio of injury to death to support that level of actual gunfire.
Anyways, buying a gun for self defense can make you safer in a few instances. If you practice very high gun safety, if you have no mental illness, and you have nobody in the household likely to borrow the firearm. Even then, you are trading the very real safety of simply not being in a household with a firearm for the risk of having the weapon.
One of the joys of being an American is that you can decide if it's worth it to you, but the bleak reality is that a gun is far more likely to kill it's owner (or even a loved one) than it is to kill a "bad guy."
Guns are used millions of times a year, many times without being fired, to deter or stop aggressors. This is a good thing. The idea that having a household without a firearm is "very real safety" is a false one. I had a neighbor defend themselves with a firearm against drug cartel home invaders who were after her dirtbag son. She was much safer with the gun than without. You may not be interested in trouble, but sometimes trouble is interested in you, best to be prepared.
As far as a gun being more likely to kill its owner, it's more complicated than that. Suicidal people kill themselves, guns are a convenient and effective method, so guns are highly represented in suicide statistics, but it isn't the gun in that case it's the person who wants to kill themselves. That statistic can not be extrapolated to the whole population. Likewise, if you practice good gun culture, which means safe handling according to all the rules all the time, and training each generation the same, you actually have a very low likelihood of issue. My family has had diverse arms in its posession for ages and no issues. If the statistics on "your gun is likely to kill you" had any merit, somebody would have had an issue by now. In essence, the probabilities mentioned are not properly descriptive or predictive.
I have an AR-10 and I absolutely love it, but it's a little too big for home defense. Right now I am using a suppressed AR15 SBR with 300BLK for that. It's a nice platform I think.
What barrel length are you rolling on your 300, 8 to 9ish?
A little longer, 10" - I don't think you gain anything but weight past the 9" mark, but I got a good deal on the 10" on from Ballistic Advantage.
Polonius wrote:
cuda1179 wrote: Also, that added risk of death is less than the added risk of owning a swimming pool or trampoline, and by a long shot.
I'd love a cite on that. I can see it if you don't include the suicides (which I wouldn't, but either way).
If we're getting back to stastics, and handwaving away the ones we don't like because reasons, then I too would love to see how we massaged approx 40,000 firearm deaths per year US to be less bad ("by a long shot") than around 3,500 drowning deaths per year US.
Even if we add in *checks notes* 6 people that have died from trampoline deaths in the last 7 years, which I will allow because I am generous that way.
Speaking of literal Dakka, my favorite axe these days is a 16 inch AR-15 with a binary trigger. I don't think a fellow can love a rifle as much as one with custom selected and self-assembled parts that ends up purring like a kitten. I only wish I had a lower that said "Safe", "Dak", "Dakka" Perhaps with the ork logo on the magwell. I should send a note to PSA, they'd probably make one.
Ouze wrote: I do like the binary trigger quite a bit, but as a former bump stock owner, I'm hesitant to throw down the cash for it.
Ah yes... I was sad to cut my fostech up per ATF procedures, but I figured, a) if we ultimately win in court (which we would if justice weren't blind to justice) I can afford to buy a new one, b) They are trivial to make if there ever really were a need for one, c) binary trigger goes dakka dakka nicely and is more stable for point of aim if somewhat less exhilarating.
All of this, including learning the fact that any semi-auto can bump fire straight from the factory, even a 1911, really brought to my attention the really nonsensical bogey man that "full auto" and "rapid fire" tend to be. It's nice that I'm not the only one as I observe a lot of people questioning the ban on full auto when semi can be fired just as fast. Mind you that's reason enough for a lot of people to say "ban anything that shoots fast", but once that line is on the chopping block a lot more gun owners come out to express their desire to keep their civil rights protections. Vis-a-vis the peaceful protests on Lobby Day yesterday.
I've played with my Binary a bit, but what unnerves me is that recoil likes to push the ambi safety against my knuckle and unintentionally move from "semi" to "fun mode" without realizing it.
Also, alas, I don't have anywhere particularly great to really go ham with it.
Vaktathi wrote: I've played with my Binary a bit, but what unnerves me is that recoil likes to push the ambi safety against my knuckle and unintentionally move from "semi" to "fun mode" without realizing it.
Also, alas, I don't have anywhere particularly great to really go ham with it.
Interesting, hadn't noticed an issue with the safety, perhaps a hand size/shape thing? Will definitely keep an eye out for it.
TBH I don't find the binary terribly useful, more of a for grins thing. In tactical matches I'm constantly just double tapping in semi-, unless were on the last stage and the drill is "empty into the target" or something.
I mostly enjoy having it for the sake of being able to have it. (and missing the raw dakka one could get out of a well anchored bump stock supported rifle).
Anyone who's had time to go full-auto on a duty weapon, etc. is well aware how pointless it is 95% of the time. There are a handful of instances when you want to flick that happy-switch, but most of the time it's just a way to run out of ammo too quick.
Would I like a lightweight support machine gun? Sure, but I don't miss select fire on my carbines.
So, can't remember if I updated from my prior situation, so I'll start over.
My father left me a .32 revolver that was over 100 years old but too worn to be functional. I found a collector at my workplace who restores guns with his son, perfect match. What he offered was the exact price my brother wanted for a .32 auto with two mags and a case of ammo.
Life got in the way, and I never got around to buying the pistol. Anyway, my mom decided she had no use for the one firearm left in the house, so she gave it to me: a .38 over/under Derringer. It's use? Close range theft deterrent.
If we're getting back to stastics, and handwaving away the ones we don't like because reasons, then I too would love to see how we massaged approx 40,000 firearm deaths per year US to be less bad ("by a long shot") than around 3,500 drowning deaths per year US.
That's because you're not factoring in proportionality. There are 350 million guns in the US, but only 10.5 million private swimming pools. Also, we were talking about guns being dangerous to the owner, so we're really looking at 26,000 suicides/accidents with guns.
Ouze wrote: And he definitely wants more. If Iowa ever legalized machine guns, I would have an Uzi so fast. Definitely my dream gun.
I was thinking of this myself. Full sized, or one of those little micro uzis though? I'd go full sized. I've always loved those multi-fold metal stocks. A while back one of the gun websites (Centerfire systems maybe?) had parts kits for ridiculously low prices where all you needed was a new receiver.
I was thinking of this myself. Full sized, or one of those little micro uzis though? I'd go full sized. I've always loved those multi-fold metal stocks. A while back one of the gun websites (Centerfire systems maybe?) had parts kits for ridiculously low prices where all you needed was a new receiver.
I liked the ergo of the full size uzi with it's collapsible stock. Kind of a neat little package. Never tried a micro. I don't think I could keep it on target without a stock to lock into.
I know 5-10 years ago Uzis were popular NFA select fire guns simply because they were "cheap", anywhere from $5K-$8500. I don't know if the market has changed on them since then.
They appear to tend to go for around $12k from what I've seen recently. There is no entry level or cheap MG market anymore sadly. Even stuff like Reisings are going for $6k nowadays, with Mac's increasingly inching up from 8k to 10k
I wish I could say I was surprised, but with the way the laws are, every select-fire firearm is only going to ever go-up since there are so few on the market, etc. As I said, the last time I heard people talking about the prices I mentioned was maybe close to 10 years ago. :(
Elbows wrote: I wish I could say I was surprised, but with the way the laws are, every select-fire firearm is only going to ever go-up since there are so few on the market, etc. As I said, the last time I heard people talking about the prices I mentioned was maybe close to 10 years ago. :(
Well, we can hope for laws to change. Hopefully we'll get some good court rulings that will allow for a challenge to that provision of the NFA.
Elbows wrote: I wish I could say I was surprised, but with the way the laws are, every select-fire firearm is only going to ever go-up since there are so few on the market, etc. As I said, the last time I heard people talking about the prices I mentioned was maybe close to 10 years ago. :(
Well, we can hope for laws to change. Hopefully we'll get some good court rulings that will allow for a challenge to that provision of the NFA.
For sensible people, 18 USC 922o was irrational from the beginning. The number of uses in crime of registered machine guns from the time NFA was passed to 1986 could be counted on one hand, so the move to ban machine guns laid naked the fact that registration and background checks weren't about public safety (which had arguably been achieved with the NFA), but were merely a pretext for prohibitions. People like to opine on and on about "why don't you support common sense gun safety" measures, but all you need to do is point back to the 1986 Hughes amendment to illustrate why gun owners do not believe in and fight against further expansion of policies demonstrated to be instrumental in further stripping people of their basic rights.
There's a lot of cultural education to occur and countering of the propaganda factories that are media and government schools on this front though before any progress is going to come. It's that culture changing that gun owners need to take a personal stake in.
Apparently all the voodoo that went missing from the last few SHOT shows was saved up for this year.
Apparently PSA is going to be making...everything, almost literally. Roller lock MP5's, Chinese spiker pattern AK's, AK103 approximations, RPK trunnion 5.56 AK's running STANAG magwells, Krink pistols, offering variations with both in-house and FN made CHF barrels, their own new AR upper (looks like a B&T gun actually) that doesn't need a buffer tube and can have a collapsing stock, their own line of handguns, and they're apparently starting development on SVD's.
Kalashnikov USA is apparently doing a really close 1:1 AK103 clone to follow up their 9mm.
DSA is doing heavy barrel Israeli pattern FAL's.
Brownells is doing all sorts of crazy AR-180 based stuff.
Seems like tons of import-replacements and retro styles going on.
EDIT: also, apparently IWI is going to start making...AR's
I'm happy to see so much potential Russian-based goodness, but more so from Palmetto State Armory. The AK-based market has gone full slow lately, and not in a good way. The import restrictions on the better AK rifles has led to a ridiculous price jump.
The US needs factory-fresh AKs, either classic or modernized...but we don't need them at $1500-2300. There are too many companies trying to convince people that you can only have a reliable/accurate modernized AK if you spend crazy money, making them into boutique ultra-expensive rifles.
I think the big issues on the price points is that until very recently was imports being made on fully amortized machinery churning out enormous production runs with eastern european labor rates and decades of experience doing the same thing made for a product that simply could not be replicated at the same price point in the US with US labor rates and new tooling and QC/production teething issues on relatively limited production volumes. What might cost Romania $150 to make might legitimately cost $2-3k to make in the US from scratch in a totally new factory, particularly without large production runs (such as for military contracts). Parts kits were an option, but with the barrel ban and lots of surplus drying up costs are spiking on those as well.
As eastern Europe has developed, increased pay, invested in new tooling, developed new products, prices have risen. WASR's and Zastava's are $700 not $250 anymore, Bulgarian and Polish guns are $1k+ if you can get them, and Russian & Chinese guns are just straight gone. Meanwhile US producers (DDI, Century, IO, etc) have been trying for years to get costs down and lots of companies have failed doing so trying to match eastern european prices at the same quality. PSA bought the assets of some of those older companies (DDI) and are now in a position to take advantage of their learning experiences and appear to now be able to match expected AK pricing as european prices have risen.
PSA is definitely the hot thing in firearms engineering these days, they seem to be getting into everything and doing it well.
Ive noticed a slight uptick in our costs and a lowering of availability for ARs from our distributors since the Virginia 2A rally. Funny how when something is threatened to be pulled, people rush out to "get theirs".
Spacemanvic wrote: Ive noticed a slight uptick in our costs and a lowering of availability for ARs from our distributors since the Virginia 2A rally. Funny how when something is threatened to be pulled, people rush out to "get theirs".
It's how America has always worked, there's a threat of a ban, so everyone runs out and hoards as many of them as they can get. It's why we still find caches of booze from Prohibition. Though I have to say, VA's new proposed law bans a lot more than ARs with how it's written. and allows seizures.
37mm launchers are legal all day long. Grenades are 40mm, so the bore is small enough this isn't really even a weapon, it can't chamber any existing weapon round. It's ultimately a flare gun, really. LMT has been selling them for years.
They sell an adapter to fire smaller flares, shotgun size - and the adapter is also cut to not allow a full size shotgun shell, so it too is not a firearm nor does it make a firearm when so installed in said launcher.
The concerns you have are more along the lines of your locality's specific pyrotechnic weirdness mixed with, I am guessing, burn\flare prohibitions in dry areas.
Huh. I was sure that 37mm was firmly in DD territory and that there were 37mm grenades. I thought anything greater than .50 was a DD unless it was a shotgun that had a sporting purpose.
There is no ammo in that caliber, so it's not a "weapon" - it's not expelling what would legally be a projectile. Otherwise roman candles and most firework mortars would also be DD's.
I watched a video (sorry no link) about a new round and rifle combo. They are calling the round a 500 Blackout. It is basically a .338 Lapua casing necked out to 50 caliber with an 850 grain projectile. The gun uses a lot of AR components (proprietary magazine) and is semi-auto.
So, it looks cool, but I am wondering what it would be good for. Quick plugging a bear at medium to close range?
Well yeah, but paintball guns aren't using exploding gas to get launched.
Anyway, did some digging. They are legal in CA. But to mount them on a firearm it needs to be a fixed magazine firearm that you disassemble to release the mag. If its the standalone version its also fine.
I could be spicy and stick it on my Mosin.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
cuda1179 wrote: I watched a video (sorry no link) about a new round and rifle combo. They are calling the round a 500 Blackout. It is basically a .338 Lapua casing necked out to 50 caliber with an 850 grain projectile. The gun uses a lot of AR components (proprietary magazine) and is semi-auto.
So, it looks cool, but I am wondering what it would be good for. Quick plugging a bear at medium to close range?
That would definitely be a specialized hunting caliber. Moose, Elk, Bear, etc...
Though I'm not sure what you'd really gain other than "RAARRG 50 CAL!". .338 Lapua is already plenty for anything on this planet.
Grey Templar wrote: Well yeah, but paintball guns aren't using exploding gas to get launched.
The NFA specifies: Any type of weapon by whatever name known which will, or which may readily be converted to expel a projectile, by the action of an explosive or other propellant,
So the reason none of these things are DDs isn't the mechanism by which they are expelled, but what they aren't (weapons) and to a lesser extent, what they are expelling (paintballs or flares). You load your 37mm launcher with a flare and a half pound of nails, you now have a DD.
Which I find them explicitly saying non-lethal rounds are DDs is weird.
Its fine for me to have a real gun, but if I have a beanbag launcher attached to it it is a DD! Sure, beanbag rounds hurt but they're still just beanbags...
Same logic behind banning bayonet lugs. All those bayonettings needed to be curbed eh?
Grey Templar wrote: Which I find them explicitly saying non-lethal rounds are DDs is weird.
Its fine for me to have a real gun, but if I have a beanbag launcher attached to it it is a DD! Sure, beanbag rounds hurt but they're still just beanbags...
Same logic behind banning bayonet lugs. All those bayonettings needed to be curbed eh?
It's been a while, but I think the actual stats are that there have only been 3 murders with bayonets (while attached to a gun) in the last 100 years in the US.
The laws mentioning bayonet lugs aren't intended to prevent bayonettings, any more than the laws requiring abortion providers show a woman the video of an ultrasound or to have hallways x wide or to have admitting privileges are actually intended to enhance women's health. They're all ways of chipping away at a right - banning weapons with bayonet lugs allows a roundabout ban of whole heaps of "military style" rifles.
Between talking about the "tyranny of Virginia gun laws" and the wisdom of how gun control laws are written, we're functionally discussing gun control in general - an unambiguously political topic - we seriously endanger a 7 year running thread.
The reason this thread has survived despite how corrosive the discourse between some of us has been on other topics has been that when someone pokes in here and asks "wHy dO yOu aMeRiCaNs nEeD aLl tHeM gUns aNyWaY", we've all immediately responded in a strong, unified voice that we don't discuss gun politics here, and it's been true.
Asking about why so and so isn't a DD is a great question, but then expanding into talking about how dumb the NFA\state gun laws are leads to the greasiest slope.
Ouze wrote: The laws mentioning bayonet lugs aren't intended to prevent bayonettings, any more than the laws requiring abortion providers show a woman the video of an ultrasound or to have hallways x wide or to have admitting privileges are actually intended to enhance women's health. They're all ways of chipping away at a right - banning weapons with bayonet lugs allows a roundabout ban of whole heaps of "military style" rifles.
Between talking about the "tyranny of Virginia gun laws" and the wisdom of how gun control laws are written, we're functionally discussing gun control in general - an unambiguously political topic - we seriously endanger a 7 year running thread.
The reason this thread has survived despite how corrosive the discourse between some of us has been on other topics has been that when someone pokes in here and asks "wHy dO yOu aMeRiCaNs nEeD aLl tHeM gUns aNyWaY", we've all immediately responded in a strong, unified voice that we don't discuss gun politics here, and it's been true.
Asking about why so and so isn't a DD is a great question, but then expanding into talking about how dumb the NFA\state gun laws are leads to the greasiest slope.
Though, atm a lot of other long running threads are also getting shut down for pretty much the same thing. We've been barreling toward my prediction coming true again, but until the mods get upset about it enough to reopen OT politics or start remembering that they're supposed to send people to wasteland to talk about it rather than just lock the threads...well...
Yup, .40 is just a cut down 10mm, FBI wanted to move up from 9mm after the Miami-Dade shootout (blaming the equipment instead of...everything else) but then found 10mm was a wee bit toasty and people had trouble qualifying with it, and in the process of toning that down came up with 40S&W and ironically basically coming back with something equivalent to a very hot 9mm
Yeah, and .40 is finally being ditched by a lot of departments. The cost/recoil/reduced capacity hasn't been worth the supposed benefits (which are slight to non-existent). I was always frustrated with .40 because my old duty gun was in that chambering. It was small, relatively low-capacity and we shot extremely hot ammo out of it (to ensure function due to our job being in the desert and we were frequently dirtied up). That made for a super snappy and unfun gun to shoot. I was able to shoot it fine during quals but I shot all of my personal 9mm handguns far better.
10 years after I left, they've now just gone to a Glock in 9mm. They're not the only agency I've seen do that either. I highly support that change, particularly because the non-shooters in our agency (i.e. agents who simply didn't put an emphasis on learning to really use their firearm) suffered exponentially worse than those of us who shot a lot and went to the range every week, etc. A lot of the older agents had trouble going from their old double/single Berettas to the new HKs we carried (though the .40 actually broke many of the Beretta frames - I was amazed how many guns were retired due to frame cracks on the Berettas).
Overall I suspect the 9mm Glock (I think it's bizarrely named Glock 45...the new 9mm service model?) will likely be better for most agents.
Elbows wrote: I was always frustrated with .40 because my old duty gun was in that chambering. It was small, relatively low-capacity and we shot extremely hot ammo out of it (to ensure function due to our job being in the desert and we were frequently dirtied up). That made for a super snappy and unfun gun to shoot. I was able to shoot it fine during quals but I shot all of my personal 9mm handguns far better.
I agree 100%. When I was first looking for a carry gun, I looked at .40 because on paper, it looks perfect - little more energy than 9mm, little more carry capacity than .45acp. In practice I too found it a very unpleasant round to shoot and fell back to 9mm.
I generally warn people away from .40, particularly new shooters, unless they have some strong reason to adopt it (maybe they're doing local law enforcement and can/must provide their own gun and it must be in .40 for the department etc.). Now in basic "retail" ammo it was far more forgiving. But the duty stuff we shot was straight up miserable (we had a crap trigger too...so overall it was just an unpleasant gun to shoot).
At the academy we did our first 1000-1500 rounds with softer shooting ammo, and then one day we walked in...loaded up (out of different ammo boxes than normal) and were suddenly made aware of how snappy our actual duty ammo would be. Unpleasant surprise.
I've actually liked the .40, but that might just be because I'm a 6'5" tall, large build guy and it take a lot of recoil for me to find anything unreasonable. I also like it because I have a couple carbines in .40 that use the same magazines as my pistols. I think .40 gets a little more out of the 16 inch barrels than the 9mm does.
As for 9mm and .40 S&W, has anyone else noticed that there seems to be a number of manufacturers out there now making revolvers in 9mm and .40? Also a few making 10mm auto revolvers. Some of these don't even require moon clips. It's nifty and all, but I'm not quite sure I understand this trend.
I've seen a handful of normal pistol caliber revolvers...which is indeed a bit bizarre. I mean, fewer ammo types is fewer ammo types. I can see an advantage if you're doing a concealed carry small revolver, so you can shrink the cylinder?
As I've said a few times in this thread, I've been wanting a revolver for quite some time, and I've been leaning towards .357. However, that means investing in a new caliber. As weird as I think .40S&W revolvers are, I might just go that way to keep from buying more ammo.
Really, this is the only thing I can think of other than the "wow, cool!" factor. Don't get me wrong here, I'd appreciate a .357 that could shoot 9mm with moon clips, or a 45 colt that could also shoot 45ACP. If I were just getting into pistols there is no way I'd ever intentionally buy a revolver in a automatic caliber.
If you're considering .357 vs another caliber, I personally find that .357 is magnificent out of a longer barreled heavier revolver, and increasingly begins to imitate a squirmy flash-bang the smaller and shorter you get.
I load my LCR with .38's
I've got no idea how .40 does out of a revolver however personally.
Anything is pretty "okay" out of a revolver, until you get into the .500 and .700 Turbo Nitro Express Unlimited bla bla bla....or you get a sub 12 oz. airweight thing. The lack of a cycling slide should make most any common caliber pretty palatable.
I've wanted a CZ Scorpion Evo 3 s2 w/ brace pretty much since I saw it. Now they seem to be readily available.
On the other hand, i hear tell on the internets that PSA is about to be putting out some MP5 clones.
You guys think the CZ is worth getting, or should I wait to see what the PSA stuff is like?
Difficulty: the CZ Scorpion Evo 3 s2 w/brace appears to have been discontinued for some reason. So I need to decide sight unseen, most likely. I don't know how long until they dry up.
I've wanted a CZ Scorpion Evo 3 s2 w/ brace pretty much since I saw it. Now they seem to be readily available.
On the other hand, i hear tell on the internets that PSA is about to be putting out some MP5 clones.
You guys think the CZ is worth getting, or should I wait to see what the PSA stuff is like?
Difficulty: the CZ Scorpion Evo 3 s2 w/brace appears to have been discontinued for some reason. So I need to decide sight unseen, most likely. I don't know how long until they dry up.
I take it that either way this will just be a "fun gun"? If so, go with whatever you think looks coolest.
That being said, I do like the MP5. It's on my list of "Guns of Die Hard" collection list. I have every gun from that movie except an MP5 and a Styer Aug. I do have an HK91 and HK93, which are basically the same gun, just longer. I have been pleased with them. A little heavy, but ridiculously reliable. It gives you the feeling you can run it over with a car and keep on going. I don't have the same feeling about the Scorpion. Also, I don't know what the aftermarket accessory market looks like for the Scorpion, but the MP5 has some neat stuff out there.
I've wanted a CZ Scorpion Evo 3 s2 w/ brace pretty much since I saw it. Now they seem to be readily available.
On the other hand, i hear tell on the internets that PSA is about to be putting out some MP5 clones.
You guys think the CZ is worth getting, or should I wait to see what the PSA stuff is like?
Difficulty: the CZ Scorpion Evo 3 s2 w/brace appears to have been discontinued for some reason. So I need to decide sight unseen, most likely. I don't know how long until they dry up.
Hrm, before SHOT this year, I'd have unreservedly said the Scorpion. I think that's still my ultimate answer, but hot damn did PSA come out like a boss this year.
As far as I can tell though, the braced S2 (SKU 91345) is still available.
From my experience with my Scorpion, it feels unbreakable (it's basically a thick polymer shell encasing a giant metal block for a bolt) and I've never had a malfunction in mine. The aftermarket has exploded with cool stuff for them, they're available in everything from micro 4" formats to 16" rifles, everything in between, multiple aftermarket triggers are available and every sort of stock/grip/handguard one could ask for, and Magpul is now making mags for them, PSA is even making AK's that take Scorpion mags
PSA however is looking awesome, and if they can put out an inexpensive MP5, that's gonna be hard to ignore, if for nothing else but cool pop culture factor. That said, we don't know how much they'll be or when they'll be available and it's always possible they never come out.
"Discontinued/Limited Production Product
CZ Scorpion EVO 3 S2 Pistol Micro w/ Brace – Discontinued 2019"
I'm probably going to buy it but wanted to make sure no one said it was a clunker. I've wanted it for a long time but it also had availability issues for a long time.
cuda1179 wrote: I take it that either way this will just be a "fun gun"? If so, go with whatever you think looks coolest.
Yeah, a range toy - it's too cold for shooting outside and all the indoor ranges here are pistol only. I'm tired of shooting the pistols I have and want one of these little miami vice drug runner guns.
Ah ok, I see now, it looks like they're discontinuing the collapsing brace in favor of the side folder, however SB tactical does sell the collapsing brace separately (though it's $280 it looks like ).
Yeah, I'm gonna get it. There is a new hole in the wall gun shop about 20 seconds from my house now, pinged that guy to see what his FFL fees are before buying.
But now we're concentrating on the peas, not the steak - as a Cheerios commercial once asked, "why not both?" I'm doing pretty well money wise, there is really not a good reason not to just buy this and then if the PSA roller locks are great, to buy one of those too.
Then I can have one in each hand, just like Carl Weathers in Predator.
Vaktathi wrote: Yup, .40 is just a cut down 10mm, FBI wanted to move up from 9mm after the Miami-Dade shootout (blaming the equipment instead of...everything else) but then found 10mm was a wee bit toasty and people had trouble qualifying with it, and in the process of toning that down came up with 40S&W and ironically basically coming back with something equivalent to a very hot 9mm
IIRC you can shoot 40S&W out of some 10mm guns.
Yeah, a common misnomer is that the S&W in 40S&W stands for Smith and Wesson when actually it stands for "short and weak ".
Just joking. Carry what you like and shoot best. Personally I don't find 10mm punishing at all. I carry a Glock 29 and keep it loaded with Underwood xtreme defenders or penetrators and love shooting it. Adding Pearce Grips to the mags makes a big difference.
Spacemanvic wrote: Ive noticed a slight uptick in our costs and a lowering of availability for ARs from our distributors since the Virginia 2A rally. Funny how when something is threatened to be pulled, people rush out to "get theirs".
Guilty as charged. I've always been more a fan of exotic/historical stuff (these are my go-to .308, .223, and 9mm long arms), but with legislation looming I went out and bought an Aero Precision lower yesterday. If there's going to be a ban on purchase, I can't argue with the flexibility of the AR platform.
Spacemanvic wrote: Ive noticed a slight uptick in our costs and a lowering of availability for ARs from our distributors since the Virginia 2A rally. Funny how when something is threatened to be pulled, people rush out to "get theirs".
Guilty as charged. I've always been more a fan of exotic/historical stuff (these are my go-to .308, .223, and 9mm long arms), but with legislation looming I went out and bought an Aero Precision lower yesterday. If there's going to be a ban on purchase, I can't argue with the flexibility of the AR platform.
Nice stock on the Uzi! I must admit I much prefer it over the folders. SBR or is that the prop barrel?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Ouze wrote: Yeah, I'm gonna get it. There is a new hole in the wall gun shop about 20 seconds from my house now, pinged that guy to see what his FFL fees are before buying.
But now we're concentrating on the peas, not the steak - as a Cheerios commercial once asked, "why not both?" I'm doing pretty well money wise, there is really not a good reason not to just buy this and then if the PSA roller locks are great, to buy one of those too.
Then I can have one in each hand, just like Carl Weathers in Predator.
I don't think you will be disappointed with the CZ. I suggest staying away from the PSA magazine if you want a magazine that drops free. They are tight, though could probably be sanded down. Magpuls are my favorite for the Skorp, they are releasing a drum.....
I imagine PSA can pull off the MP5. I'm happy with their Akv 9mm. Fething advice from Cheerios commercials why not both indeed. I like the sliding brace but it's a bit small for the best hookup. The dimensions seem to encourage chicken wings. I think I'm now waiting for an AR lower that takes scorpion magazines. Glock mags just aren't sexy.
Insurgency Walker wrote: Nice stock on the Uzi! I must admit I much prefer it over the folders. SBR or is that the prop barrel?
SBR. And yeah, it's a much nicer stock for actually shooting- the shorter LOP is more comfortable and the cheek weld is far better, and it can still be detached for compactness/transport. I find people tend to assume it's a civilian model thing, but it's actually the original configuration. From what I've read, Uzi Gal himself was strongly opposed to the metal folder.
I've still got the folder just because it's so iconic, but I don't ever need to concealed carry a submachine gun anymore so it stays in the parts bin.
Anyone have a Walther PPQ .45? I have one at a store here for a good price and it looks like a nice pistol. Any recomendations? I already have a 1911 but this Walther holds 12 rounds compares to the 1911's 8. That is impressive. I have heard nice things.
Haven't shot a PPQ in .45, but have owned a couple of PPQs and it's my main non-carry gun. Mine are first edition because I prefer the paddle magazine release. It's an excellent pistol all around. Comfortable, ergonomic, easy to manipulate, fully ambi-dextrous (Gen 1 at least, 2nd Gen lose that with the mag release).
Magazines for the 9mm are great quality and "okay" priced (around $35). Trigger is top three that you'll find in a plastic striker fired gun, mine easily rivals a 1911 trigger - but it's been heavily worn in. I don't know if the .45 trigger would be any different.
The ergos and trigger make the 9mm like a cheat button. I look like a far better shooter than I am, it's that easy. Thing's a laser.
PS: I have no idea on the reputation of the PPQ in .45. The 9mm is highly regarded as reliable with no major issues.
Xenomancers wrote: Anyone have a Walther PPQ .45? I have one at a store here for a good price and it looks like a nice pistol. Any recomendations? I already have a 1911 but this Walther holds 12 rounds compares to the 1911's 8. That is impressive. I have heard nice things.
Just FYI, if the magazine capacity is the main selling point, most double-stack .45 handguns have around that capacity. The Glock 21 has 13, the FNX-45 is 15, the P227 has 14 with an extended baseplate, and double-stack 1911 variants are typically 14.
The PPQ is pretty nice, but I think it handles better in 9mm. Same goes for most polymer handguns, really.
Xenomancers wrote: Anyone have a Walther PPQ .45? I have one at a store here for a good price and it looks like a nice pistol. Any recomendations? I already have a 1911 but this Walther holds 12 rounds compares to the 1911's 8. That is impressive. I have heard nice things.
Just FYI, if the magazine capacity is the main selling point, most double-stack .45 handguns have around that capacity. The Glock 21 has 13, the FNX-45 is 15, the P227 has 14 with an extended baseplate, and double-stack 1911 variants are typically 14.
The PPQ is pretty nice, but I think it handles better in 9mm. Same goes for most polymer handguns, really.
I am also looking at a 227. If I am gonna spend that much I am going to get a 220 in 10mm though (just cause it's cool). The Walther just seemed like a lot of bang for the buck and it is my favorite round to shoot. (not a fan of extended baseplates ether)(don't like glocks - they kill my hands)
I've wanted a CZ Scorpion Evo 3 s2 w/ brace pretty much since I saw it. Now they seem to be readily available.
On the other hand, i hear tell on the internets that PSA is about to be putting out some MP5 clones.
You guys think the CZ is worth getting, or should I wait to see what the PSA stuff is like?
Difficulty: the CZ Scorpion Evo 3 s2 w/brace appears to have been discontinued for some reason. So I need to decide sight unseen, most likely. I don't know how long until they dry up.
I have a braced folding evo 3 with a Franklin binary for the "dakka". Just need to get an Omega 9k suppressor for it. Lots of fun.
Insurgency Walker wrote: Nice stock on the Uzi! I must admit I much prefer it over the folders. SBR or is that the prop barrel?
SBR. And yeah, it's a much nicer stock for actually shooting- the shorter LOP is more comfortable and the cheek weld is far better, and it can still be detached for compactness/transport. I find people tend to assume it's a civilian model thing, but it's actually the original configuration. From what I've read, Uzi Gal himself was strongly opposed to the metal folder.
I've still got the folder just because it's so iconic, but I don't ever need to concealed carry a submachine gun anymore so it stays in the parts bin.
Call me strange, but if I had my pick of subgun for a hostile environment I'd probably still pick an Uzi. Just wish aftermarket parts were I little less expensive for rails and optics.
The Skorpion might be one of the few drum mags that makes practical sense if you are using it with the folding or a regular stock. They're not terribly huge unlike most other drum mags so carrying a couple around on a belt if you plan on using the weapon with the folding stock isn't bad. Only downside is you couldn't put it in a holster.
I can't really think of where I'd actually use one over a 30 in practical terms, but oh man do I need one anyway.
Hmmm...Practical. I like some drums because they let you get closer to the ground. Part of why I like some of the lower round count magazines for some firearms. Back in my day the monopod magazine position was considered to exacerbate feeding problems, but I served before anti tilt followers.
I did wind up ordering that Scorpion along with the Magpul grip / mags/extended mag release and a Burris Fastfire 3*. If they had the drums now I would have gotten those too, obviously. I'm a huge fan of drums - I don't think they're generally practical, but I love how they look. The only one I have so far is one of those Korean 75 rounders for my AK.
After this latest attack on my wallet subsides, I'll start looking into an appropriate can - I still need a 22LR can as well for my 22/45 Lite so maybe I can find a deal.
*Not wedded to the Fastfire, going to try it out and see what I think. I want something RMR style, but not RMR priced since I don't really need a rugged sight, this is a range toy.
They were a pretty top contender - a coworker brought one in for me to check out, and while I didn't run it through a torture test or anything, it seemed to have a surprisingly good build quality. I didn't really know the name as had assumed it was UTG airsoft grade junk... but after handling it, I was impressed. At least one thread I saw when looking around was full of people claiming they would trust Holosun over Eotech, which was mindblowing - I guess Eotech has had some quality control problems.
Eotech is hugely divisive. They've been extremely hit or miss (I had several issues with them on duty, personally). Their parent company(?), L3 was also caught installing counterfeit cheapo hardware in their products - and I think they were the military ones, a full CAGE contract/etc.
It was a big deal maybe 4-5 years ago, though I haven't followed it lately. Never had a reason or enthusiasm to purchase one. Mainly keep to Trijicon and Aimpoint. I'd definitely do a bit more research if you're heading that direction.
The only midrange companies I'm familiar with who seem to have generally solid reviews are Holosun and Vortex. I'm sure there are heaps more out there, but I haven't been in the game for a while. Once I slap an Aimpoint on a rifle I tend to stop shopping or paying much attention
I have Aimpoint, Eotech, and Vortex products. Oh, and a Sig red dot. And a Trijicon RMR. All are good. I love the Eotech reticule and it has been abused more than it should have been and still runs great.
My Aimpoint is also fantastic. No issues with it.
Having said all that, if I was doing it over I would probably own a lot more Vortex. Very solid products. I have one of their 3x magnifiers, and 3 different red dot sights. I don't think you can get a better sight for 1.5 times or even 2x their prices.
Very cool, interesting bolt action setup on that AR. The Viper is definitely a solid option.
I've got some Holosun optics. Their tube red dots I haven't been super impressed with, lots of battery related issues there (either parts falling out or batteries dying within hours). Their Eotech-esque Reflex sights like the 510C however have been awesome for me, I have 3 of these and have basically left them on 24/7 for a couple years now and they just work no matter what I do to them.
The Holosuns can be pretty hit-or-miss as far as quality, as can the Primary Arms (which are comparable OEM, but backed by better US support).
I have two SIG Romeo 5 red dots- one for airsoft, one for a 9mm PCC- and find them to be very good quality for the price. The motion activation is a handy feature, too.
Here's a question: I was looking at DDs yesterday and found something called the Anzio Takedown. It's chambered for 20mm Vulcan along with .50bmg and what sounds an awful lot like a 20mm necked down to 50cal. .
Anyone try one of these behemoths? If so, what's it like compared to the L-39?
Sorry to swing this back to the 5.7 ammo again, but I just saw something kind-of interesting. Diamondback Firearms has a new subgun/carbine called the DBX 57. AR fire control group and takes FN57 mags (Ruger 57 mag version coming).
