dnewton3

If I weren't such a hoarder, I'd consider selling some of my .22lr; got a great deal on the 525 packs at $16 at Rural King last summer. I could make some $$$ if these prices are actaully what's being paid, or at least near those prices. But then I'd be low (it's a relative term) on my "stash" ...

Unfortunately, you make a very clear, lucid, poignant statment. Although rare in the total percentage of outings each day, accidents and evil plans to come to fruition. Thanks for the reminder; it will not go unheeded.

I wish to offer my sincere condolences and heart-felt respects for Navy SEAL Chris Kyle. As well, to Littlefield. Slain by the very warrior they were trying to help. Utterly senseless. Godspeed in your final tours of duty, dear patriots.

Interesting. And lucky! Always liked his writings; have a few of his books (Stressfire and In The Gravest Extreme). Good to hear that he walked away to shoot another day. I used to subscribe to that mag as well; even before it was BWHM when it was Survivalist mag.

Barry has made some excellent delineation, and some great points. I would like to add to them, in a manner that is more from an engineering point of view. Would you be attracked to a furnace that had approximately 1/2 the parts of a competitor, and yet heated your home in the same, safe manner? Would you like a car that had 10,000 parts versus 18,000 parts, yet provided the same performance, luxury, capability and capacity? I like simplicity. No - strike that. I LOVE simplicity. Which is why I love Glocks. I certainly appreciate other handguns; I own all kinds. But my go-to gun is a Glock. Why? Again - simplicity. Many handguns like Beretta 92's, Sig's P226, S&W's and such use a lot of parts to accomplish the same task as a Glock. Why have a gun that uses perhaps 60-70 parts to accurately fire a projectile when the Glock can do the same thing with 35 parts. (Note that there is some debate about the actual count, as you can subdivide spring cups, sights, etc). But you get the point, right? The design of a Glock is stupid simple, and when explained well, its design and function makes as much sense as one can find in a weapon. Further, I actually prefer the "passive safety" approach to the Safe Action Glocks. While I am capable of manipulating an active safety (think 1911 or such), I don't like that extra step. I agree with Barry that there is nothing inherently wrong with SA being cocked and locked; I find it a perfectly safe system. But I don't like the extra effort required to disengage the safety, especially in a time of panic (perhaps panic is a poor choice of words, but my intent is to infer a frationary second when I would have to deploy the weapon with much haste and no advance warning). Practice makes perfect, and muscle memory would help with this. But I like simple; did I mention that? As for feel, that is subjective. I am the opposite of Barry; I don't like the feel of the XD or M&P; I actually like the feel of a Glock. But of all the things people complain about when it comes to the Glock, the grip feel is probably the top one. You either love it or hate it; there is no in-between. The Glock also has a much shorter trigger reset than does the S&W; I like that, but some don't. So knowing all that, I recognize that you said you didn't like the trigger safety on the Glock and it gave you trouble. I guess I would ask, because I don't understand, how it gave you trouble? In essence, the trigger safey is passive and simply moves out of the way as you depress the trigger to the rear; what portion of this gave you trouble? If you didn't experience the trigger problem, would you have liked the Glock, that problem aside? Overall, guns, like many things, are a very subjective topic. You first need to find something you are comfortable with, because you will be more inclined to practice with it, and therefore be more proficient with it. Owning a gun you don't like isn't helpful in the least. So use Barry's excellent descriptions, add in a bit of my analysis, and find the one you think is most likely to suit a balance of your wants and needs. Feel is subjective; function is not. I'm trying to draw a distinction between the two. I place more value on function over form; other folks perfer form over function. Neither is right or wrong, but understanding your preferences will help you find a gun that you are most happy with. Good luck and let us know what you decide!

What I like best (and there is a lot to like in those photos) is that you are on open combat-ready sights with the AR. I get so tired of seeing red-dot sights on ARs, most often by guys who don't even know how to properly shoot them and cannot put down a tight group, because they think it's cool looking. That all goes out the window when TSHTF. Give me rugged, open sights any day. I just got a nice RRA AR recently and have outfitted it with a gas-block post sight and a carry handle A2 type rear. Practical, robust and nearly fail-proof, all at a low cost. Nice set up, Paul!

Range report after repairs ... All is fine. Functioning perfectly as before the incident. Ran a whole bulk box of Federal through it; no issues. They installed a new recoil spring (light blue rather than the original natural metal spring silver color). And it seems as though they many have replaced the hammer spring as well (also blue colored, but not sure if it's blue colored grease or a very light tint on the spring. As for the extractor itself, I don't have anything yet to compare/contrast it to. I'll have to get my buddy to bring over his original rifle, and we'll look them over side-by-side.

Rifle is back! Shipped out 6-15-12 and returned on 7-6-12; three weeks. They repaired the extractor and pin with new parts. The bolt group recoil spring is also new (and blue colored instead of the natural silver color previously ... new color to designate a new part design or repair?). I have a buddy with the exact same model, so I'd like to compare mine to his, but he's away on vacation so I'll have to wait until his return to compare/contrast the repair parts. Seems to function fine, as before the incident. Really missed this while it was gone. Good to have her home again! Ater a rocky start to the repair process, it ended very well.

I have a MkII Savage and love it. I sent it off to have the bbl threaded for use with a suppressor; very impressive. Mine does not have the Accutrigger, and it's not too bad. I very much like the rifle and would recommend it for the price. I got mine at Dick's Sporting Goods and it came with a scope for a very fair price of $171 out the door with tax included. The walnut stock is one of the nicest and cleanest pieces of furniture I've ever had, and this is on a mid-grade .22lr. I kind of wish I had a synthetic stock for it, because the stock is so very nice I had to think I might get a blemish on it. The accuracy of my MkII is excellent, and the action is as smooth as I could expect it to be. The mags feed very well; it comes with one and I bought an extra at a gun show. Being a bolt action, I only wanted two mags. I know Bill has more; perhaps he could comment on the quality of the mags over a larger sample. For what I paid, I could not have been more pleased. Another option would be the high end Savage with the Accutrigger, and also with a factory threaded bbl if you want that. Here is my thread for the one I bought. http://www.practicallyshooting.com/forums/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=1832&page=1

Those bozo's sent the FedEx prepaid label to my home address; I don't get home mail delivery. I had the good luck to be able to track the mail down before it was returned at the Post Office. What a bunch of goobers; in my email to S&W, I expressely told them not to send anything to my home. I also told "Joe" when I had him on the phone last week. And yet they sent the label via US Postal service to my home anyway, so it got rejected as undeliverable. No matter how much you explain things at times, people are just dumb. They get into a rut, and don't (or can't) think outside the box. Once I got the label in hand, I was OK. I found a shipping center near me (right down the road from where I work) and sent the rifle last Friday. Oddly - they cannot recieve the rifle back once it's ready for return at a FedEx "Service Center"; how bizzare is that? But, there is a FedEx "Office" center that can receive and hold the item for "customer pick-up" down the road in the opposite direction, so I'm going to use that. I drove over there and spoke with the manager myself so that I was confident they could recieve and hold the gun. I used the words "gun", "firearm" and "rifle" a few times so that there wold be no misunderstanding, and she assured me they can both receive it and hold for my pickup. She seems very knowledgeable about it, although she said she's not done one yet (it's a newer location). If this goes well, they just earned a loyal customer. For the box, I got a 17"x17"x7" FedEx box and used that. I broke the gun down (separated upper and lower) and it all fit nicely (upper had to go in diagonally). Bolt group in a heavy duty zip-loc baggie. Entire box stuffed tight with wadded newspaper. Should be safe. What a PITA. Shame that it's got to be so hard. Spoils what otherwise should be a customer-focused experience. "Customer Service" is pretty much a thing of the past, IMO. It's become "Customer Tolerance" at best for many companies. S&W is making me jump through hoops to fix their product. There's something just inherently wrong with that concept. I hope it gets done soon; I'd like to have it back the 4th of July for a big shoot we plan to have. I also hope that they just don't replace the parts with no thought as to the cause. I don't want this experience again. I'd like to believe there is some type of improvment afoot; not just the same parts reinstalled. Deeper pin pocket; stronger pin; bigger pin; something that makes me believe it won't happen again. Time will tell.

Update: S&W is willing to warrant it; that's the good news. The bad news is that I have to send the entire rifle back. How goofy is that? The extractor, spring and pin are missing from the bolt, but instead of sending them the bolt, I have to send them the entire rifle? Then the rep (I'll withhold his name at this point) tells me that the extractor is not a "drop in part" and must be fit to the bolt. He says that guns are items that must have a meticulous fit and the parts are not easily exchangeable. Really? I'm incredulous at this point! Am I to believe every single M&P rifle is hand built and fit? Seriously? I mentioned to him that (being a Glock and Armalite certified armorer) I find that VERY hard to believe. I would reckon we all would agree that most mass-produced firearms are actually very "modular" in their part interchangability. I know for sure that any authorized Glock part is a drop in for the matching part. I can understand their position; perhaps they want to function test it before returning it. But couldn't they take my bolt, replace the missing parts, test fire it in a company rifle, and return the bolt? WHY DO THEY NEED THE WHOLE RIFLE? Here's part of the problem; I live in the boondocks. WAY out there. So much so that you actually have to drive over a creek to get onto my property. As you can imagine, there is no home USPS mail delivery; we have a PO BOX. But FedEx (S&W's chosen carrier) will not deliver to a PO BOX, nor will the Postal Service accept personal delivers from 3rd party carriers. Unfortunately, FedEx also has the (well-earned) reputation of not being able to find my home. So, I have yet to recieve the shipping authorization even though it's been almost two weeks, and that REALLY makes me wonder if they will be able to return the rifle AFTER its been repaired. If S&W would utilize my PO BOX, and only repair JUST the bolt, then we could send the stuff via USPS. You can send non-registered gun parts via the mail. That way, the part would not be in the ABYSS of FedEX. Or, if they were to only work on the bolt, I could have it sent to my wife's workplace, but I surely cannot have an entire weapon sent to my wife's workplace (a bank). What a PITA. Larger parts = more shipping costs, etc. Why not just accept the bolt? In fact, why is there not a parts diagram and parts list? Are they going to NEVER put out parts to the public for the M&P? If they make it right, I guess I should quit complaining, but why to they have to make it so darn hard?

Update: Sadly the strong and steady M&P15-22 has seen it's first real failure. The extractor disappeared. As in Gone! Seems to be a matter of some repute upon internet search. I'd never heard of it until it happened to me and I had to search the topic. The extractor, the pin, etc are all missing. The clue was that the empty rounds started to intermittenly not be fully thrown out and clear the port. Often, the bolt would come forward and close upon the reversed, rear facing case (obviously because of the missing extractor). Oddly, about only 2 of 5 will fail to be ejected; I presume the simple blowback operation is enough to make the shell go back and hit the ejector much of the time. After probably 35k rounds, I don't know that I should be suprised given the abuse we heap upon it. Well - not true abuse, be we are not easy on this weapon. We run it hard and hot and it has been flawless until now. It is not uncommon for us to run an entire box of 550 bulk rounds in one outing. There is no "parts list" that I can find; not in the manual, not on their site, not on the net. However, many reports are that if the bolt is sent in, they will repair it and get quick turn-around. (probably enough problems that it's become a good will gesture on the part of S&W). Time will tell. I'll keep you informed.

I have one of the older BM ARs; LE A2 type model with the HBAR 5.56 full bbl. It's quality is quite good. But, I would not disagree that there have been some disturbing variances in their build quality from what I've seen. Your example would fit right into some of the "maybe, maybe not" guns I've seen. I must have been lucky and got a good one; bought it used sight unseen from a friend at my work back in the day.

Thank you, gentlemen. Good info. I like what I see; 1911 Gov model for around $450 out-the-door. Kind of hard to turn that down. Surely there are "better" (higher end) makes, but I think this will be a good tool to familiarize my son with the 1911.

Any specific experiences with the Rock Island brand, especially in .45? Very little turned up in my search here. Looking for an inexpensive plinker (well - as cheap as plinkin' with a .45 can be ...)

Excellent point, guys. Another good use for the laser. As for the CQB shooting, lasers and sights are (nearly) worthless. Good muscle memory will aid speed, as stated. That is why we train to shoot over the sights for short distances (out to 7 yards).

Item withdrawn. Decided to keep it; too much fun with it. Thanks for inquires though.

You both make great points. Much of it is personal preference, as I said. I abhor relying on something that might fail (and anything can fail in the "wrong" circumstances). So I try to keep my equipment, especially life-altering equipment, as simple as practical. I've shot a few of my Glocks until they were nearly untouchable, in an attempt to get them to cook off a round (didn't happen). I never noticed any accuracy degradation (past my own tiring), but then again I wasn't looking for the frame droop. Since I use iron sights, and that didn't change enough to effect my POA vs. POI, I never even thought to check the frame. But my point is valid; frame droop might affect something below the frame, but the impact point alignment with the slide stays true, so I'm not inclined to worry about frame flex or drooping. The fact that Glocks may droop when heat soaked matters little to me; I don’t use them in a situation that would rely on frame-aiming. Paul is spot-on right though, nothing is perfect and everything has benefits and limitations. His experience is valid as well. It's not relevant to me, but it surely gave him different results. Also, I doubt the shift of POI was enough to really warrant concern in a "shoot out" for two reasons: 1) it probably would never get that hot (not enough rounds downrange) 2) the vertical stringing still would most likely put the bullets on/near center mass, just an inch or two off his aim, and that would still be excellent placement overall As I write this, it occurs to me that a novice/noob with a handgun might actually benefit from a laser? If the laser were of high quality and reliable, it might assist in putting the shots where they belong. Think of the novice homeowner, or perhaps a young lady or older man that has limited experience with the gun. In a time of stress, he/she is only looking at the target and not the sights. In that case, I can see the laser perhaps being a good tool. As for the red-dots (Aimpoints and other brands), I've heard great things about them from these new generations and latest iterations. My experiences may not be valid any longer. Perhaps I need to crawl out and try a new one? For me, it's just an issue of focal point versus field of view. Maybe it's just my own personal limitation, but I cannot seem to concentrate on the dot, and my subject, at the same time. If I leave both eyes open, I cannot seem to acquire the dot. If I close one eye, I lose perspective in the framing of the instrument. Also, the red-dot type instruments seem to be VERY subjective to your cheek weld; this is what bothers me more than anything else. Just the slightest variance shifts the point of impact. I realize that the current trend is to shove your nose into the charging handle of an AR type long gun and "bone" your cheek to the stock, but it's not comfortable for me, and I'm not consistent with that technique. I am, however, really good at quick assessment and looking over iron sights. Kind of aligns with my comments about the laser and vertical stringing. At short yardages, I'm not worried if I'm off by one or two inches vertically. We train to be lethal (or, to be politically correct, to "incapacitate" the target), not to be "perfect" and punch the "x" out of the target. Only when we get out to 100 yards or more do I actually get down on the sights and use them. Heck, at our department, I don’t even get a long gun issued to me; they are checked out of the storage locker upon the start of my shift. I might have a mini-14 or I might have a decommissioned M-16 (converted to semi only). The upside is that I can shoot both well; the downside is that we cannot personalize the weapons to us individually. Hence, we learn to shoot what we’re handed, and we don’t get to put “toys” on top of them. At the SO, we shoot 9mm and .223; that’s all. But at home I shoot a large variety of stuff. And I probably “train” with .22lr more than anything else. Sight picture is sight picture. Muscle memory is muscle memory. I train more at home than I ever do at the SO. At home, I don’t even shoot paper; we shoot steel plates. Nothing gives immediate feedback like the hit/miss of steel. I don’t care that I’m not aiming for a 1” circle; I’m ringing a 5”x5” plate, and that is excellent tactical training for real world. I shoot standing, prone, upside down, behind barricades, stationary, moving, etc. So when I do have to officially “qualify” at the SO, I’m so used to putting the round in the same 25 square inches that I’m WELL within the rings of “Expert” ratings. (Note: just yesterday at the SO I shot 240/240 with my service Glock 19 and 180/180 for my BUG Glock 26 for annual qual’s). If I can do that without extra tools hanging off the weapon, then why complicate things? Not that I'm trying to take away the excellent points you both have made; they are valid and well thought-out. I just wonder if we don't have slightly different needs based upon our situations. We might really be in agreement, but perhaps for different reasons?

Interesting data; thanks. Looks much more impressive that I had initially thought. Do you have a chronograph to validate your actual stuff? My neighbor and I handload a lot and we're just about going to have to get one because we're trying to tune sub-sonic stuff for use with suppressors.

AS the LC9 is similar to the LCP, does the LCP have the same issues with light strikes?

The Glock is a battle weapon, first and foremost. Laser alignment items hanging down from the frame attachment point is not what Glock had in mind. It was added to accomodate lighting systems (flashlights). People are certainly free to add what they want, but a small light is what's practical (Of note, it's what we carry, our choice if we want to, at our SO, however we cannot add lasers of any kind). Here's why I bring this up ... You're MUCH more likely to put many more rounds through the weapon in one event (sport shooting on any given day/hour) than a cop or military person is. When we all sport-shoot, we can often send many mags down the barrel in a single session; that does not happen in a real shoot-out. VERY FEW law or military shootouts even empty the first magazine. Heat into the frame isn't a big deal. Plus, I'd point out that the advantage to the Glock system overall is that the frame will flex a bit; absorbs shock from firing, dropping, etc. However, if you use the slide sights (the tools for aiming the weapon by design intent), no amount of frame flex will affect your point of aim! I'm not aware of a single LE dept in my area that allows for lasers on the sidearms, but they do allow lights. If the light drops it's point of aim an inch or two in a night shoot, that's probably the last thing I'm going to worry about ... Further, there is merit tot he debate about the use of lasers in general; I find it to be a matter of personal preference. I personally find sight enhancement tools (toys) to be over-rated many times. I can shoot every bit as well with a handgun or longgun using open sights as anyone with one of those lasers or red-dot tools, given a "reasonable" distance target. (Yes, long shooting past such as 200 yards or more is certainly the baliwick of using a proper scope, but that's a different topic). People like the gizzmos they put on to accessorize the weapons; fine by me. But I've tried many of them and find I can shoot just as well without them. Open sights are reliable sights that don't need batteries, don't add weight, and won't fail at the worst possible time. (Self-imluminated sights like Trijicon or Meprolight as excluded as they are enhancements to existing sights that add no perceieable weight or complexity). Here's why I bring this up; using a single point aiming aid like a laser or red-dot encourages you to focus on the little red dot (be it on the person or one the tool). It takes away your "open" mind of viewing the target and the target's actions. While this may not be of concern at the range (a piece of paper or steel does not shoot back or offer other threats), a real person who is a target presents many attributes that must be considered. When in my mindset as a SO deputy, I need to focus my signts on the target, but my "eye" is taking in the whole scene. I need to see the whole picture. It's very easy for me to see a whole body (or most of a body anyway), but I'd have a terrible time, in a stress shoot, tying to get my eye to pick up the little red dot. AND, what happens if the little red dot lands on a red surface? It disappears into the background! Red dot on red jacket means no attainable point of aim, etc. In a stress shoot, you'd have to transition back to the sights after spending a second or two realizing you cannot see the laser. Or what if it simply malfunctions and does not come on, or (worst of all) sends you point of aim off target? Those one or two seconds may mean life or death. I understand that (especially red-dot sights) are very popular with the military, and now are being heavily utilized in the civilian and LE markets. But I think it's a crutch tool that promotes a dependency I'd rather not have an attachment too. I'm not trying to take away the fun of accessorizing the weapons we use; just trying to explain the rationale. Glock does not care if you mount a laser on your gun, but they also don't care if it drifts off POA. That's what your slide-mounted sights are for. They didn't design the weapon to be aimed with a laser, so if it drifts off due to frame flex, they don't care. Not saying anyone is wrong for using the extra goodies; it's a personal preference. More than anything else, as long as you're aware of the issue, you can self-correct for the POA error as you rack up the round count during your shooting session.

I'd wonder about the vel at the muzzle. When I researched the factory "long" barrel for my Glk 20, there was very little reported improvement in vel contrasting the "std" and "long" bbls. There isn't much accuracy gain, either. (Probably is some, but none that I'd capitalize on anyway when shooting off-hand). Therefore, I'd have to wonder if the 10mm round would really "gain" much energy out of a carbine over standard handgun? While I agree that every bit helps, you have to ask yourself where the cost/benefit ratio lays. There is a major convenience factor having a sidearm and long-gun chambered for the same round, but there's not even magazine compatibilty to assist with the choice. A bit off topic (caliber wise) but on topic weapon wise, I've considered the Oly K9-GL, a carbine chambered for 9mm and specifically set up for Glock mags. There would be direct ammo interchangeability there. But the cost (around $1000+) is high considering I'll not net much energy gain, if any. Pablo - do you have a chronograph where you could test the Vel from your Glock versus the carbine?

Typically a Glk 26 in a Glock belt hoster and mag holder and cuffs (we are requried to carry off duty). Summer is a fanny pack (due to shorts, etc.)

Pablo - which model did you get? I have an older blued ranch at home, but we shoot S/S ones at the SO. Both are accurate enough out to 150 yards, which is the max distance we shoot with iron sights. (

The dirt from the blowback is exactly why it doesn't work well long term. With a clean semi-auto, you can run a few rounds with no problem. But as they get dirty, they start to fail to extract or fail to feed. And the junk is everywhere ... I've given up shooting semi with the suppressor. I've got a Savage bolt action .22 that I had threaded (prior to their nice new factory threaded unit with Accu-trigger!). Very accurate, and it stays clean because the crap stays down the bbl where it belongs and out of the action.