The Why of CCW
I found this in Triggernometry by Eugene Cunningham. First published in 1934.
[in El Paso, Texas circa 1858]
"The green Indianan, [W. W.] Mills, who still regarded a necktie as a more important part of his costume than the product of Colonel Colt, once burst forth upon the public street in what was- for the day and place- semi-nakedness. An acquaintance jerked him frantically to a halt.
"'Buckle it on, Mills. Go back and buckle it on!' cried this experienced citizen. 'We don't often need 'em, but when we do need 'em. we need 'em!'"
That pretty much sums it up. When we need them, we NEED them.
Saturday, September 13, 2003
Interesting Gunfight Story
I ran across an old copy of Wild West (June 2000). In it was an account of a gunfight between Frank Loving and Levi Richardson in Dodge City in 1879. Neither man is famous in any way, but the fight does show what stress can do during a lethal confrontation.
The showdown did not take place outside in the street like the movies. It happened inside the Long Branch Saloon (which was not nearly as glamorous as Miss Kitty's Long Branch on Gunsmoke).
Both men initially missed. Loving took shelter behind a stove but was nicked in the hand by Richardson's second shot. He then hit Richardson twice (side and right arm). Despite his wounds Richardson chased Loving around the stove and then a billiard table but missed with all three shots. Loving then put a bullet in his chest with one of his last two shots. The wound was fatal, but not instantly incapacitating. After a deputy sheriff took his revolver from his hand, Richardson broke away and attempted to chase Loving but fell dead before he could get to him.
The local paper noted "it seems strange that Loving was not hit, except a slight scratch on the hand, as the two men were so close together that their pistols almost touched each other." (Richardson's coat caught fire from the muzzle blast of Loving's revolver-- that's pretty close).
James at Hell in a Handbasket has often emphasized the need for frequent and extensive practice with handguns if we plan to use them for self-defense. I think this incident shows why he is right. Eight shots at slapping distance and only three hits. Stress, movement, and muzzle blast will degrade most peoples abilities with a handgun. We have to start out with skill and well-honed habits if we are to be effective.
I ran across an old copy of Wild West (June 2000). In it was an account of a gunfight between Frank Loving and Levi Richardson in Dodge City in 1879. Neither man is famous in any way, but the fight does show what stress can do during a lethal confrontation.
The showdown did not take place outside in the street like the movies. It happened inside the Long Branch Saloon (which was not nearly as glamorous as Miss Kitty's Long Branch on Gunsmoke).
Both men initially missed. Loving took shelter behind a stove but was nicked in the hand by Richardson's second shot. He then hit Richardson twice (side and right arm). Despite his wounds Richardson chased Loving around the stove and then a billiard table but missed with all three shots. Loving then put a bullet in his chest with one of his last two shots. The wound was fatal, but not instantly incapacitating. After a deputy sheriff took his revolver from his hand, Richardson broke away and attempted to chase Loving but fell dead before he could get to him.
The local paper noted "it seems strange that Loving was not hit, except a slight scratch on the hand, as the two men were so close together that their pistols almost touched each other." (Richardson's coat caught fire from the muzzle blast of Loving's revolver-- that's pretty close).
James at Hell in a Handbasket has often emphasized the need for frequent and extensive practice with handguns if we plan to use them for self-defense. I think this incident shows why he is right. Eight shots at slapping distance and only three hits. Stress, movement, and muzzle blast will degrade most peoples abilities with a handgun. We have to start out with skill and well-honed habits if we are to be effective.
Just a reminder
I only post about hunting and shooting here. My other blog is updated more frequently and has the stuff about media, advertising, and politics.
I only post about hunting and shooting here. My other blog is updated more frequently and has the stuff about media, advertising, and politics.
Wednesday, September 10, 2003
New Blog in Town
Check out Carnival of the Shooters . It is a group blog that focuses on shooting rather than the politics of gun ownership. There are already some great posts up on gun safety, gun cleaning, and other such. It really deserves a look.
Check out Carnival of the Shooters . It is a group blog that focuses on shooting rather than the politics of gun ownership. There are already some great posts up on gun safety, gun cleaning, and other such. It really deserves a look.
Thursday, August 21, 2003
Handguns and Self-defense
Hell in a Handbasket has an interesting discussion going with Spoons in the comments to this post. He makes one point that deserves serious reflection.
In my handgun course I have the student take part in three lessons. 1,000 rounds are fired by the student over those three lessons, and it's only then that I figure that they have a reasonable chance to defend themselves when they're going through the worst few seconds of their lives. This is good enough if the student goes to the range at least once a month and fires 100 rounds to maintain the minimum level of skill.
Hell in a Handbasket has an interesting discussion going with Spoons in the comments to this post. He makes one point that deserves serious reflection.
In my handgun course I have the student take part in three lessons. 1,000 rounds are fired by the student over those three lessons, and it's only then that I figure that they have a reasonable chance to defend themselves when they're going through the worst few seconds of their lives. This is good enough if the student goes to the range at least once a month and fires 100 rounds to maintain the minimum level of skill.
Monday, August 18, 2003
A Good Place
I have this picture in my mind of the perfect gunshop. It is more than a place with a good selection of new and used guns. It should have a good selection of ammo, of course, and reloading supplies. But that isn't enough. I am fortunate to have several places nearby who offer all of this. They are good, but not perfect.
What makes a good shop great is a combination of knowledgeable staff and a neighborly atmosphere that draws in knowledgeable customers and encourages conversation (OK, I mean BS-ing). The kind of place where you might stop in to get primers and some targets and end up learning something about the relative performance of Nosler Ballistic Tips versus Hornady SSTs in a .270 Win.
I haven't found a place like that yet. But blogs really help to fill the gap. Witness the rolling discussion on carbines and the bullpup design which has been going on at Hell in a Handbasket, Backroads Blog, and Coyote at the Dogshow.
I have this picture in my mind of the perfect gunshop. It is more than a place with a good selection of new and used guns. It should have a good selection of ammo, of course, and reloading supplies. But that isn't enough. I am fortunate to have several places nearby who offer all of this. They are good, but not perfect.
What makes a good shop great is a combination of knowledgeable staff and a neighborly atmosphere that draws in knowledgeable customers and encourages conversation (OK, I mean BS-ing). The kind of place where you might stop in to get primers and some targets and end up learning something about the relative performance of Nosler Ballistic Tips versus Hornady SSTs in a .270 Win.
I haven't found a place like that yet. But blogs really help to fill the gap. Witness the rolling discussion on carbines and the bullpup design which has been going on at Hell in a Handbasket, Backroads Blog, and Coyote at the Dogshow.
Size Doesn't Matter (Much) II
Shooting Times Handgun Guide 2004 has an interesting article on personal defense handgun ammunition. What most drew my interest was the results for three short barreled guns. They tested the 38 Special in a 2" Smith, the .357 in a 2.25" Ruger, and the .45 ACP in a 3.25" Kimber. The typical ballistics table reports the .38/.357 in a 6-8" barrel and the .45 in a 5". As noted below, a short barrel used to mean lower velocities which led to poor bullet expansion.
Some ammo makers seem to have addressed that problem with their personal protection products.
For example, in the 38 Special Shooting Times got a velocity of 874 fps for the Winchester 130 grain PP. That compares to 925 fps in the 2003 Shooter's Bible ballistics tables. Federal 110 grain Personal Defense load tested at 989 fps and lists at 1,000.
For the .357 the Federal 130 Personal Protection, Remington 125 Golden Saber, and PMC 150 Starfire all tested within 5% of their listed velocity. For the .45 ACP, the Remington 185 Golden Saber +P, Federal 165 Personal Protection, and Winchester 230 SXT all tested within 10%.
All of this suggests that the personal defense offerings of the major makers will perform as advertised in snubbies and chopped autos. Which is good news for CCW holders.
Shooting Times Handgun Guide 2004 has an interesting article on personal defense handgun ammunition. What most drew my interest was the results for three short barreled guns. They tested the 38 Special in a 2" Smith, the .357 in a 2.25" Ruger, and the .45 ACP in a 3.25" Kimber. The typical ballistics table reports the .38/.357 in a 6-8" barrel and the .45 in a 5". As noted below, a short barrel used to mean lower velocities which led to poor bullet expansion.
Some ammo makers seem to have addressed that problem with their personal protection products.
For example, in the 38 Special Shooting Times got a velocity of 874 fps for the Winchester 130 grain PP. That compares to 925 fps in the 2003 Shooter's Bible ballistics tables. Federal 110 grain Personal Defense load tested at 989 fps and lists at 1,000.
For the .357 the Federal 130 Personal Protection, Remington 125 Golden Saber, and PMC 150 Starfire all tested within 5% of their listed velocity. For the .45 ACP, the Remington 185 Golden Saber +P, Federal 165 Personal Protection, and Winchester 230 SXT all tested within 10%.
All of this suggests that the personal defense offerings of the major makers will perform as advertised in snubbies and chopped autos. Which is good news for CCW holders.
Carbines and Bullet Selction
Coyote at the Dog Show weighs in on the matter and makes a critical point:
Expanding bullets are designed to work within a narrow range of velocities. Push them too slow and they don't expand, push them too fast and they explode on impact like a varmint bullet. Thus, the 357 magnum 125gr. JHP that is so very effective from a handgun frequently vaporizes on impact when fired from a carbine, failing to penetrate or cause more than superficial wounds.
This used to be a problem for the .357 Magnum. JHPs were designed to expand at max velocities which could only obtained from barrels of 6" or more. When the bullets were fired in revolvers with 2-4" barrels, they behaved more like round-nosed lead or FMJ bullets.
Ammo makers addressed that by creating rounds designed with personal protection/concealed carry in mind. They were slower and often lighter than standard rounds. For example, Federal offered a 165 grain hollow point for the .45 ACP and Remington loaded its 125 grain Golden Saber to 1,220 fps in the .357 rather than the 1,450 fps that is the norm for that weight. Most importantly, the jackets were designed to allow the hollow points to open up at lower velocities.
But as the Coyote points out, a good bullet at 1,200 fps will probably fail at 1,700 fps. Which is something to keep in mind when choosing ammo. One size does not fit all, especially in the .357.
On the other hand, just because you can shoot the same load in both your revolver and carbine, nothing says you have to. Nothing says you can't use the 125 grain Golden Saber in you CCW piece, and a 158 grain lead semi-wadcutter for the carbine. In a pinch, they are still interchangeable.
Coyote at the Dog Show weighs in on the matter and makes a critical point:
Expanding bullets are designed to work within a narrow range of velocities. Push them too slow and they don't expand, push them too fast and they explode on impact like a varmint bullet. Thus, the 357 magnum 125gr. JHP that is so very effective from a handgun frequently vaporizes on impact when fired from a carbine, failing to penetrate or cause more than superficial wounds.
This used to be a problem for the .357 Magnum. JHPs were designed to expand at max velocities which could only obtained from barrels of 6" or more. When the bullets were fired in revolvers with 2-4" barrels, they behaved more like round-nosed lead or FMJ bullets.
Ammo makers addressed that by creating rounds designed with personal protection/concealed carry in mind. They were slower and often lighter than standard rounds. For example, Federal offered a 165 grain hollow point for the .45 ACP and Remington loaded its 125 grain Golden Saber to 1,220 fps in the .357 rather than the 1,450 fps that is the norm for that weight. Most importantly, the jackets were designed to allow the hollow points to open up at lower velocities.
But as the Coyote points out, a good bullet at 1,200 fps will probably fail at 1,700 fps. Which is something to keep in mind when choosing ammo. One size does not fit all, especially in the .357.
On the other hand, just because you can shoot the same load in both your revolver and carbine, nothing says you have to. Nothing says you can't use the 125 grain Golden Saber in you CCW piece, and a 158 grain lead semi-wadcutter for the carbine. In a pinch, they are still interchangeable.
Friday, August 08, 2003
Size Doesn't Matter (Much)
The latest issue of Petersen's Rifle Shooter has an interesting article on barrel length and velocity in rifles. They look at several common calibers (including magnums) and find that the velocity loss is 15-20 fps per inch when shortening the barrel. This is much less than the common rules of thumb which estimate velocity loss at 25-50 fps per inch.
These results are consistent with Rifle Magazine's test of the Ruger M77 Compact in the March issue. This model has a 16.5" barrel yet produced velocities only 90-110 fps slower than 24" barrels.
All of which is great news if you are looking for a woods and brush rifle. The Ruger Compact and Remington Model 7 still deliver modern velocities in these short packages.
I hunted last year with a Ruger Compact. To me, it is the perfect rifle for deer and black bear. Overall length is only 35.5" and weight (with scope) is just a few ounces over six pounds. It is actually shorter and lighter than most leveractions.
In a daypack a pound or two doesn't matter much for eastern hunting. But when it is carried in the hands like a rifle, a little less weight matters as the day goes on. The length, though, is the big benefit. Compared to my 30-06, there is 6" less barrel to get snagged or caught in brush and grape vines.
The rifle is more accurate than i am. With Remington factory ammo it held to 1" at 100 yards off sandbags. I'm sure it could do better, but i am not an accomplished bench rest shooter.
Finally, in, 260 Remington, or 7mm-08, either model are near perfect deer rifles for kids. Recoil is manageable and the shorter lighter package is easier to handle for short or small shooters.
The latest issue of Petersen's Rifle Shooter has an interesting article on barrel length and velocity in rifles. They look at several common calibers (including magnums) and find that the velocity loss is 15-20 fps per inch when shortening the barrel. This is much less than the common rules of thumb which estimate velocity loss at 25-50 fps per inch.
These results are consistent with Rifle Magazine's test of the Ruger M77 Compact in the March issue. This model has a 16.5" barrel yet produced velocities only 90-110 fps slower than 24" barrels.
All of which is great news if you are looking for a woods and brush rifle. The Ruger Compact and Remington Model 7 still deliver modern velocities in these short packages.
I hunted last year with a Ruger Compact. To me, it is the perfect rifle for deer and black bear. Overall length is only 35.5" and weight (with scope) is just a few ounces over six pounds. It is actually shorter and lighter than most leveractions.
In a daypack a pound or two doesn't matter much for eastern hunting. But when it is carried in the hands like a rifle, a little less weight matters as the day goes on. The length, though, is the big benefit. Compared to my 30-06, there is 6" less barrel to get snagged or caught in brush and grape vines.
The rifle is more accurate than i am. With Remington factory ammo it held to 1" at 100 yards off sandbags. I'm sure it could do better, but i am not an accomplished bench rest shooter.
Finally, in, 260 Remington, or 7mm-08, either model are near perfect deer rifles for kids. Recoil is manageable and the shorter lighter package is easier to handle for short or small shooters.
Monday, August 04, 2003
Even More on Carbines
This is a nice write-up on the Marlin 1894. It includes performance and reloading data for .357 Mag, .44 Mag, and .45 Colt.
This is a nice write-up on the Marlin 1894. It includes performance and reloading data for .357 Mag, .44 Mag, and .45 Colt.
Friday, August 01, 2003
Carbines
The discussion continues at Hell in a Handbasket and Backroad Blog.
Definitely worth reading.
The discussion continues at Hell in a Handbasket and Backroad Blog.
Definitely worth reading.
Thursday, July 31, 2003
Farmers and Hunters
Julie Neidlinger has an interesting post on the growing tensions between farmers and in-state hunters in North Dakota.
Julie Neidlinger has an interesting post on the growing tensions between farmers and in-state hunters in North Dakota.
Tuesday, July 29, 2003
Handguns Suck
So says Hell in a Handbasket and i have to say i agree with him. Objectively speaking, they are underpowered, inaccurate, and hard to shoot. When things turn serious, it is much better to have a rifle. You carry a handgun when you don't expect to need it.
His discussion on carbine replacements for handguns got me thinking. In the military, it is usually either/or. You are issued a .45 ACP or a .30 carbine. Civilians can have both (and should, no point wasting space in that safe).
There is a lot to be said for having a rifle and carbine in the same caliber. Frank James, for one, recommended it. It does simplify things when it comes to ammo inventory. In some cases, you can even use the same magazine in both pistol and carbine (Ruger's 9mm and .40 S&W carbines use the same magazines as their pistols and the Marlin Camp Carbine in 9mm uses Smith and Wesson mags.)
What you won't get with semiautos is a big performance boost when using a carbine. According to my Lyman reloading manual the 9mm 125 FMJ does 1190 fps in the pistol and 1,336 from a carbine. Which means that the Camp Carbine is still less powerful than a 357 magnum revolver.
The .45 ACP is a similar story. You gain roughly 100 fps with the 230 grain ball out of a carbine barrel.
Sixgun rounds are a completely different story. Here you get a tremendous increase in velocity and kinetic energy. The .357 mag 158 grain load goes from 1,279 fps to 1,742 For the 41 mag (210 grain ) the gain is nearly 600 fps (from 1,233 to 1,816). Both of these are more powerful than the .30 carbine.
What is surprising is that mild revolver loadings become magnums out of a longer barrel. The .45 Colt for example, loaded to give a modest 845 fps in a revolver, will produce 1,110 fps from a rifle. That produces more kinetic energy than the hottest .357 load in a revolver and is close to a lot of 44 mag loadings. So you can have a mild shooting load for your Taurus or Smith revolver and still have a good thumper at 100 yds if you use it in your Winchester Trapper or Marlin 1894.
Lever actions are not ideal for law enforcement, but they do offer alot for civilians. See this article for more on that score.
So says Hell in a Handbasket and i have to say i agree with him. Objectively speaking, they are underpowered, inaccurate, and hard to shoot. When things turn serious, it is much better to have a rifle. You carry a handgun when you don't expect to need it.
His discussion on carbine replacements for handguns got me thinking. In the military, it is usually either/or. You are issued a .45 ACP or a .30 carbine. Civilians can have both (and should, no point wasting space in that safe).
There is a lot to be said for having a rifle and carbine in the same caliber. Frank James, for one, recommended it. It does simplify things when it comes to ammo inventory. In some cases, you can even use the same magazine in both pistol and carbine (Ruger's 9mm and .40 S&W carbines use the same magazines as their pistols and the Marlin Camp Carbine in 9mm uses Smith and Wesson mags.)
What you won't get with semiautos is a big performance boost when using a carbine. According to my Lyman reloading manual the 9mm 125 FMJ does 1190 fps in the pistol and 1,336 from a carbine. Which means that the Camp Carbine is still less powerful than a 357 magnum revolver.
The .45 ACP is a similar story. You gain roughly 100 fps with the 230 grain ball out of a carbine barrel.
Sixgun rounds are a completely different story. Here you get a tremendous increase in velocity and kinetic energy. The .357 mag 158 grain load goes from 1,279 fps to 1,742 For the 41 mag (210 grain ) the gain is nearly 600 fps (from 1,233 to 1,816). Both of these are more powerful than the .30 carbine.
What is surprising is that mild revolver loadings become magnums out of a longer barrel. The .45 Colt for example, loaded to give a modest 845 fps in a revolver, will produce 1,110 fps from a rifle. That produces more kinetic energy than the hottest .357 load in a revolver and is close to a lot of 44 mag loadings. So you can have a mild shooting load for your Taurus or Smith revolver and still have a good thumper at 100 yds if you use it in your Winchester Trapper or Marlin 1894.
Lever actions are not ideal for law enforcement, but they do offer alot for civilians. See this article for more on that score.
Wednesday, July 23, 2003
Home Invasion Lessons
Here is a good article on what not to do and good advice for those who want to survive
1). Alertness and Attitude. Don't rationalize what you think might be wrong. If it looks bad, it probably IS bad. If its not, then you've lost nothing. Be alert and wise to the ways of the world.
2). Security whether personal or of the "homeland" begins with the individual and NOT with an agency. Armed people can fight and defend themselves. Unarmed people can only call for help.
3). Whether the home owner could have drawn a concealed gun or not is a moot point when you have a gun in your face. Nevertheless, a gun man CAN be disarmed and smashed into unconsciousness if you know what to do. If he's within arm's reach, he is more danger from you than you from him.
Here is a good article on what not to do and good advice for those who want to survive
1). Alertness and Attitude. Don't rationalize what you think might be wrong. If it looks bad, it probably IS bad. If its not, then you've lost nothing. Be alert and wise to the ways of the world.
2). Security whether personal or of the "homeland" begins with the individual and NOT with an agency. Armed people can fight and defend themselves. Unarmed people can only call for help.
3). Whether the home owner could have drawn a concealed gun or not is a moot point when you have a gun in your face. Nevertheless, a gun man CAN be disarmed and smashed into unconsciousness if you know what to do. If he's within arm's reach, he is more danger from you than you from him.
Monday, July 21, 2003
Daily Stop
You have to love a blog that announces "I'm a slut for a pretty gun." So, make sure that Coyote at the Dig Show is one of your regular reads.
You have to love a blog that announces "I'm a slut for a pretty gun." So, make sure that Coyote at the Dig Show is one of your regular reads.
Monday, July 14, 2003
348 Winchester
Both Guns and Ammo and Handloader have articles in their August issue on the .348 Winchester. An odd coincidence given that rifles for this cartridge have been out of production for over 45 years except for a limited reproduction run in 1987.
The .348 is a big-bore, lever-action cartridge. It drives a 200 grain slug at 2,520 fps (2,820 ft.lbs). This makes the .348 the rough equivalent of the 30-06 for close-in work. Reloaders can also get 220 grain and 250 grain bullets from Barnes. The 250 grainer can be loaded to over 2,200 fps and that is a lot of oomph out of a levergun.
The cartridge is the odd man out in many ways. Even though it was introduced in 1935, the case was based on the .50-110 black powder cartridge. The .348 WCF is the only factory round that ever used bullets in .348 caliber. The only rifle it was ever chambered in was the Winchester 71 and that rifle was a available only in the .348 WCF.
So one reason to own the .348 is to have something a little different.
The second reason is that the .348 WCF is one of the most powerful leverguns ever produced. It is a fast handling rifle for hunting big game in heavy cover especially if the rifle is to be carried in a saddle scabbard. This is part of the reason the Model 71 remains popular in Alaska to this day.
A third reason is aesthetic and historic. The 71 is an updated version of John Browning's Model 1886 lever-action. As such it represents a milestone in rifle heritage. Moreover, the rifles have a fit and finish that is beyond the normal factory offering. Nearly every writer who has commented on the Model 71 has noted its smooth workings, comforting heft, and inherent strength.
If the bears were bigger in Pennsylvania, the .348 would be my choice for hunting them in the brush and laurel tangles. As it is, it is a little too much gun for most of our game. BUT, if i ever draw one of our elk tags, or go after wild boar down south, the .348 will be ideal.
Both Guns and Ammo and Handloader have articles in their August issue on the .348 Winchester. An odd coincidence given that rifles for this cartridge have been out of production for over 45 years except for a limited reproduction run in 1987.
The .348 is a big-bore, lever-action cartridge. It drives a 200 grain slug at 2,520 fps (2,820 ft.lbs). This makes the .348 the rough equivalent of the 30-06 for close-in work. Reloaders can also get 220 grain and 250 grain bullets from Barnes. The 250 grainer can be loaded to over 2,200 fps and that is a lot of oomph out of a levergun.
The cartridge is the odd man out in many ways. Even though it was introduced in 1935, the case was based on the .50-110 black powder cartridge. The .348 WCF is the only factory round that ever used bullets in .348 caliber. The only rifle it was ever chambered in was the Winchester 71 and that rifle was a available only in the .348 WCF.
So one reason to own the .348 is to have something a little different.
The second reason is that the .348 WCF is one of the most powerful leverguns ever produced. It is a fast handling rifle for hunting big game in heavy cover especially if the rifle is to be carried in a saddle scabbard. This is part of the reason the Model 71 remains popular in Alaska to this day.
A third reason is aesthetic and historic. The 71 is an updated version of John Browning's Model 1886 lever-action. As such it represents a milestone in rifle heritage. Moreover, the rifles have a fit and finish that is beyond the normal factory offering. Nearly every writer who has commented on the Model 71 has noted its smooth workings, comforting heft, and inherent strength.
If the bears were bigger in Pennsylvania, the .348 would be my choice for hunting them in the brush and laurel tangles. As it is, it is a little too much gun for most of our game. BUT, if i ever draw one of our elk tags, or go after wild boar down south, the .348 will be ideal.
Thursday, July 10, 2003
Temptation
Just saw a copy of Guns and Ammo Handguns (not online yet) and on the cover they have a nickle finished (i think) 1911 IN 38 SUPER. Apparently, it will be a new offering from Springfield Armory.
I mentioned before that i'd like a 1911 in 38 Super. It was a safe item on the wish list because they were basically unavailable.
But now they might be out there soon.
(How much is in the checking account again?).......................
Just saw a copy of Guns and Ammo Handguns (not online yet) and on the cover they have a nickle finished (i think) 1911 IN 38 SUPER. Apparently, it will be a new offering from Springfield Armory.
I mentioned before that i'd like a 1911 in 38 Super. It was a safe item on the wish list because they were basically unavailable.
But now they might be out there soon.
(How much is in the checking account again?).......................
Tuesday, July 08, 2003
Pet Peeve
I heard a network news report on one of the wildfires out west. At the conclusion of the report they said "the fire has destroyed 22,000 acres."
Another victim of Smokey Bear propaganda.
The fire may have burned 22,000 acres of forest but it surely did not destroy the land itself. Fire transforms wild areas and that is often for the better. It releases nutrients back to the soil and promotes new plant growth.
Those new plants provide much more food per acre than tall forests. Deer and turkey love burned-over areas. Quail plantations use fire regularly as part of their habitat management. Without regular burns prairie grasses get squeezed out by lawn grasses and other invasive weeds.
Fire, in wild areas, is just part of the natural order.
I heard a network news report on one of the wildfires out west. At the conclusion of the report they said "the fire has destroyed 22,000 acres."
Another victim of Smokey Bear propaganda.
The fire may have burned 22,000 acres of forest but it surely did not destroy the land itself. Fire transforms wild areas and that is often for the better. It releases nutrients back to the soil and promotes new plant growth.
Those new plants provide much more food per acre than tall forests. Deer and turkey love burned-over areas. Quail plantations use fire regularly as part of their habitat management. Without regular burns prairie grasses get squeezed out by lawn grasses and other invasive weeds.
Fire, in wild areas, is just part of the natural order.
Thursday, July 03, 2003
The Wrong Compromise
The 41 Magnum is not a popular cartridge today. It hangs on because there are a few fans, but new firearms are comparatively rare. (Currently Davidson's only list seven models with a total of 29 guns in inventory.)
It was probably doomed from the start. Marketed as a compromise cartridge, it was hard to get excited about. Sure it was more powerful than the 357,but it still played second fiddle to the 44 Magnum. And unlike the 357, the 41 came only in heavy revolvers like the S&W N-frame and Ruger Redhawk.
The 41 does have less recoil than the 44 Magnum. But that was a weak selling point. The 44 was "the powerful handgun in the world" and Dirty Harry carried it. Choosing a 41 seemed like an admission of wimphood. (Even though most 44s are fired with 44 Special ammo at the range).
The energy/recoil compromise was a nonstarter from a marketing perspective.
There was another compromise, however, that was made to order for the 41. That was "stopping power."
There are two churches when it comes to this concept. High velocity and high kinetic energy like the 125 grain 357 magnum load. Or big bore momentum, Taylor Knockout factor, the church of 230 grain 45 ACP.
In 1965, in revolvers, these were antithetical choices.
The 357 125 grain load left the barrel at 1,450 fps and generated 583 ft-lb But its TKO value was only 9.2.
The 44 special 246 grain load clocked 755 fps with only 310 ft-lbs. But its TKO was 11.4. (The 45 ACP 230 grain rates a TKO of 12.3 @ 835 fps. Energy is 356 ft.lbs.)
The original plan for the 41 split the difference nicely. A 210 grain lead bullet at 950 fps and 434 ft. lb also generated a TKO of 11.7. Better energy than the 44 special, better TKO than the 357. And a superior sectional density of .178 compared to .140 for the .357 or .162 for the 45 ACP.
Plus, where the 357 round is maxed out at these numbers, the 41 was capable of being loaded up to much higher velociities if such was needed. A max load 41 generates 788 ft. lbs. with a 210 grain JHP at 1300 fps..
This sort of compromise-- between light fast bullets and slow, heavy ones-- later proved to be a winning ticket for the 40 S&W.
The 41 never caught on with the police market, and ammo makers soon dropped the milder load as they chased the 44 mag. It is now a moot point since the autoloader has become standard for the police market. The wheelgun is for civilians.
I shoot a handload that mimics the original specs Elmer Keith and Bill Jordan laid out. It is as easy to control in a heavy frame Redhawk as 38+P loads are in a medium frame Smith. If I could get my hands on a 4 inch model 57 i would scarf it up quick and it would become a regular working gun. (The Redhawk is for hunting given its weight
The 41 Magnum is not a popular cartridge today. It hangs on because there are a few fans, but new firearms are comparatively rare. (Currently Davidson's only list seven models with a total of 29 guns in inventory.)
It was probably doomed from the start. Marketed as a compromise cartridge, it was hard to get excited about. Sure it was more powerful than the 357,but it still played second fiddle to the 44 Magnum. And unlike the 357, the 41 came only in heavy revolvers like the S&W N-frame and Ruger Redhawk.
The 41 does have less recoil than the 44 Magnum. But that was a weak selling point. The 44 was "the powerful handgun in the world" and Dirty Harry carried it. Choosing a 41 seemed like an admission of wimphood. (Even though most 44s are fired with 44 Special ammo at the range).
The energy/recoil compromise was a nonstarter from a marketing perspective.
There was another compromise, however, that was made to order for the 41. That was "stopping power."
There are two churches when it comes to this concept. High velocity and high kinetic energy like the 125 grain 357 magnum load. Or big bore momentum, Taylor Knockout factor, the church of 230 grain 45 ACP.
In 1965, in revolvers, these were antithetical choices.
The 357 125 grain load left the barrel at 1,450 fps and generated 583 ft-lb But its TKO value was only 9.2.
The 44 special 246 grain load clocked 755 fps with only 310 ft-lbs. But its TKO was 11.4. (The 45 ACP 230 grain rates a TKO of 12.3 @ 835 fps. Energy is 356 ft.lbs.)
The original plan for the 41 split the difference nicely. A 210 grain lead bullet at 950 fps and 434 ft. lb also generated a TKO of 11.7. Better energy than the 44 special, better TKO than the 357. And a superior sectional density of .178 compared to .140 for the .357 or .162 for the 45 ACP.
Plus, where the 357 round is maxed out at these numbers, the 41 was capable of being loaded up to much higher velociities if such was needed. A max load 41 generates 788 ft. lbs. with a 210 grain JHP at 1300 fps..
This sort of compromise-- between light fast bullets and slow, heavy ones-- later proved to be a winning ticket for the 40 S&W.
The 41 never caught on with the police market, and ammo makers soon dropped the milder load as they chased the 44 mag. It is now a moot point since the autoloader has become standard for the police market. The wheelgun is for civilians.
I shoot a handload that mimics the original specs Elmer Keith and Bill Jordan laid out. It is as easy to control in a heavy frame Redhawk as 38+P loads are in a medium frame Smith. If I could get my hands on a 4 inch model 57 i would scarf it up quick and it would become a regular working gun. (The Redhawk is for hunting given its weight
Monday, June 30, 2003
More on the '06
James Rummel has an excellent discussion of the 30-06's versatility over on Hell in a Handbasket . He is absolutely correct that the '06 is the best choice for if you only have one hunting rifle. The load selection is unmatched so even a non-reloader can start with low recoil rounds for practice. And, as Col. Townsend Whelen said, the 30-06 is never a mistake for any North American game. Those were some of the reasons why i bought my 30-06 back in the days of disco and Jimmy Carter.
The "problem" is that, for many of us, the gun safe refuses to stay empty. Even at a modest rate of acquisition-- say a new rifle every 5-10 years- we end up with a selection of calibers. Often, one of new rifles is better suited to the task at hand than the 30-06. It's more pleasant to shoot varmints with a 243 than an '06. A Model Seven in 7mm-08 is a more compact, lighter rifle that is a better adapted to rough country hunts where more hiking and crawlingtakes place than long-range shooting.
I am not immune to the attractive spartan simplicity of using one gun for everything. I see Col Jeff Cooper's point that after buying a 1911 in 45 ACP and a bolt in 30-06 everything else is just shopping. Yet, even the Colonel didn't stop there since he also worked on the Scout Rifle concept in .308, the Steyr rifle in .376, and the Bren Ten autoloader.
A friend of a friend went the consolidation route with pistols. Except for a .22, he got rid of everything that wasn't a.45 ACP. He has several different models, but he only has to worry about one caliber of ammo and components. He likes the lack of clutter and simplified inventory management.
While i see his point, i don't want to follow it. As much as i like the .357/38 class revolvers for self-defense, i see no need to give up my Ruger Blackhawk in 45 Colt. Just because i like DA revolvers best, i still want a single action to plink with sometimes. And while the .357 magnum is the best all round choice, the 41 mag still has advantages for hunting.
Moreover, i don't think i am done buying guns. Another 1911 would be nice, but not in 45 ACP. I want one in 38 Super, with ivory grips. Makes no pragmatic sense, but it would be neat to own one and shoot it sometimes.
I feel the same way about the 10mm. But if i but one, it will be based on a CZ-75 action like it was originally intended.
Browning Hi-Power- check. Don't have one; often think i want one, though i don't need one.
The list of wanted items can get to be very long.
I guess there are three facets to gun ownership: the pragmatist, the collector, and the tinkerer. Anyone who was ruthlessly pragmatic would pick a weapon, choose a suitable load, and devote all available time to practice and efficiently reloading that one load (if they reloaded at all.)
But shooting, for most of us, is a hobby, so why should pragmatism be the sole standard? Collecting, tinkering, trying different guns and loads, they have at least some value.
James Rummel has an excellent discussion of the 30-06's versatility over on Hell in a Handbasket . He is absolutely correct that the '06 is the best choice for if you only have one hunting rifle. The load selection is unmatched so even a non-reloader can start with low recoil rounds for practice. And, as Col. Townsend Whelen said, the 30-06 is never a mistake for any North American game. Those were some of the reasons why i bought my 30-06 back in the days of disco and Jimmy Carter.
The "problem" is that, for many of us, the gun safe refuses to stay empty. Even at a modest rate of acquisition-- say a new rifle every 5-10 years- we end up with a selection of calibers. Often, one of new rifles is better suited to the task at hand than the 30-06. It's more pleasant to shoot varmints with a 243 than an '06. A Model Seven in 7mm-08 is a more compact, lighter rifle that is a better adapted to rough country hunts where more hiking and crawlingtakes place than long-range shooting.
I am not immune to the attractive spartan simplicity of using one gun for everything. I see Col Jeff Cooper's point that after buying a 1911 in 45 ACP and a bolt in 30-06 everything else is just shopping. Yet, even the Colonel didn't stop there since he also worked on the Scout Rifle concept in .308, the Steyr rifle in .376, and the Bren Ten autoloader.
A friend of a friend went the consolidation route with pistols. Except for a .22, he got rid of everything that wasn't a.45 ACP. He has several different models, but he only has to worry about one caliber of ammo and components. He likes the lack of clutter and simplified inventory management.
While i see his point, i don't want to follow it. As much as i like the .357/38 class revolvers for self-defense, i see no need to give up my Ruger Blackhawk in 45 Colt. Just because i like DA revolvers best, i still want a single action to plink with sometimes. And while the .357 magnum is the best all round choice, the 41 mag still has advantages for hunting.
Moreover, i don't think i am done buying guns. Another 1911 would be nice, but not in 45 ACP. I want one in 38 Super, with ivory grips. Makes no pragmatic sense, but it would be neat to own one and shoot it sometimes.
I feel the same way about the 10mm. But if i but one, it will be based on a CZ-75 action like it was originally intended.
Browning Hi-Power- check. Don't have one; often think i want one, though i don't need one.
The list of wanted items can get to be very long.
I guess there are three facets to gun ownership: the pragmatist, the collector, and the tinkerer. Anyone who was ruthlessly pragmatic would pick a weapon, choose a suitable load, and devote all available time to practice and efficiently reloading that one load (if they reloaded at all.)
But shooting, for most of us, is a hobby, so why should pragmatism be the sole standard? Collecting, tinkering, trying different guns and loads, they have at least some value.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)