BarryinIN

Hmmm. Next time, could you try an experiment? Shoot those guns again with your lower two fingers really loose on the gun so they are applying no pressure at all. Basically hold it with your thumb and middle finger. With your support hand, apply just enough contact to steady things a little. Most of us have a bad shooting habit we don't even know about, and that's tightening the grip with the bottom two fingers as the trigger finger comes back. That really "steers" the gun. I know about it and how much of an effect it has, yet I catch myself doing it anyway. From what I can see, 99.99% of people do it to some degree. The effect can be somewhat covered up by tightening the entire grip on the gun. If the fingers are gripping hard, it's not easy for them to squeeze tighter. That's not so much a cure, but a band-aid and maybe an indicator. If tightening the grip shrinks the groups, that does not mean lower finger tension was the problem, but it is a strong possibility.

I had a large percentage of mine before ever meeting my wife. When other kids in high school were buying Sparkomatic power boosters for their junky cars they would sell two years layer, I was saving to buy my next gun that I would have for years and years. So I guess I had established the foundation already for lack of better words. Also, I sold two or three nice ones to partially buy her one ct engagement ring so the oft-used "but honey they are an investment" had actually been demonstrated before we were even married. Also, I don't do much else that costs money or time. I never owned a Corvette, or bought new running shoes several times a year, or bounce from one hobby to the next like so many guys I know. Not buying cigars or keeping a variety of extra special and extra costly microbrews in the fridge or not having three partially completed woodworking projects and one half-restored car in the garage has bought me some wiggle room. Also, they all look alike to her. Some fit in holsters, some are longer and have slings, and some have magazines hanging out the bottom, but the first one looks about like the next to her. This actually worked out differently than you might think. I was surprised once I realized anyway. She thought I had a lot more than I do, so was kind of relieved to learn there weren't more. Also, there was a time when I was buying and trading a lot. I was doing well enough at the time that whenever I saw a decent deal on a gun, I bought it whether it was something I needed or not. Then when I did see something I wanted and usually cost more, I would trade two or three guns for it. Eventually I had built up some "trading stock". When I left work with a back injury, I still got new guns pretty regularly...but...I spent very little cash doing it because they were trades. I was still getting new-to-me toys and hardly touching the budget. I often see people get offered a gun for a STEAL but pass it up because they don't want that particular gun. I would have bought them to trade with. Unless they were traded quickly, I got to shoot it for the experience which is always valuable to me. Then the kids came. My wife's maternal extincts really kicked in and she was really protective of our kids. I was affected too, and spent less on hardware and more on software (training). She has never begrudged me taking classes. With me being a stay-home dad now, she has no problem at all with me refining my skills.

I didn't even know it was slang for anything. I also wanted to point out that, although I don't think it was ever proven, it was believed that Plat and Matix got some of their weapons by stealing them from shooters at "informal" ranges (like abandoned gravel pits). In the months before the shootout, someone had been staking out these kinds of places around Miami, then when someone showed up with guns they liked, they would kill them and take the guns. Again, I don't think they were ever able to prove it was them, but the pieces all fit the puzzle. I've heard of similar things happening elsewhere over the years. So be careful if you shoot anywhere alone, whether in the boonies or not. I shoot rifle at the gun club and pistol in the woods behind the house, but the club is just about as desolate most times. I always keep at least one loaded gun on me in addition to what I'm shooting, and leave the electronic earmuffs turned on even while walking back through the woods when I'm done at home. If somebody shows up at the club I don't know, I try not to be weird about watching them, but I don't just lower my head back down, throw my concentration back into my trigger press, and continue shooting right away either. Not exactly the way I want to go out: Knocked in the head with a chair at the range, finished off with my own gun, then have my guns taken to be used in a crime spree.

That's about all I can figure, that they are going for the don't-want-to-spend-quite-as-much market, which is probably the people who won't know it's heritage. Once the M&P took hold, they should have put that line to bed and not looked back. I have heard they got them sorted out, but it was too late to do much with.

I've been tempted to shoot Cowboy several times. Then I realize how much stuff I'd need to buy. Not that I'm opposed to buying guns, but the guns seem to be only a start. I like lever actions and have a few, so I'm OK there. The revolver thing gets more involved the more I look at it. I usually have one centerfire SA revolver around, but I don't know if I've ever had more than one at the same time, and you really need two. The only one I have now is a Ruger Blackhawk, and it's adjustable sights put it in the Modern category. I'd rather have something more period-correct. And needing two, I'd be faced with the decision of either adding another adj sight gun or getting two SAA-types. I really want a nice USFA revolver, but two is a bit much. Shotgun is a problem. I have no CAS-legal shotguns. That puts me needing a shotgun and two revolvers- or, having one out of four guns covered. That doesn't look so great. I have no Old West clothing either. Truthfully, the need to dress up and the use of anemic loads keeps me away as much as anything. I might be able to take one of those things, but the combination lacks a logical connection that leaves me wondering about the point. The gun chamberings in this shooting contest can be nothing like what was used in the 1880s (downloaded 32 H&R Mag? Come on.). This is fine, but they seem to cut very little slack on your clothing? I can understand the desire to dress accordingly, but holding firm to that while the guns have shortened action throws and shoot cartridges that wouldn't have been used to shoot raccoons out of the henhouse seems a little screwy. Jeff Cooper used to say that IPSC had devolved into an "armed track meet". I'm sorry, but CAS has always seemed to be an armed dress-up day where the actual shooting part is a sideline. That's OK if it's what a person wants, but it's hard for me to justify buying a few guns if shooting isn't clearly the main thing. Zoot Shooting (1930s-era with 1911s and Thompsons) looks interesting too http://www.zootshooters.com/ but they have some gunhandling rules that concern me.

Twenty five years ago today. Agents Ben Grogan and Jerry Dove were killed. Agents Gordon MacNeil, Gilbert Orrantia, Edmundo Mireles, Jr, and John Hanlon were injured. Agent Ronald Risner was the only agent on the scene not to sustain an injury. And law enforcement sidearms were changed forever. I won't even try to describe what happened. This tells it best of anything I know short of a book: http://www.thegunzone.com/11april86.html There are several linked pages there.

Also, I have a heck of a time doing any fine shooting with the Sig bar-dot sights. They work OK quickly, but I can't get the most consistent sight picture with them.

Some guns magnify certain errors. As an example, Glocks, probably due to the grip angle, seem to exaggerate the low and left pull most of us have. Have them shoot a different gun, and it might still be there, but you might also have to look close to see it. I can't think of how that would fit with your Sigs though. At least comparing them to 1911s. The grip angle is similar, so my first thought was the Sig grip width that locates your hand differently so your trigger finger placement might not be optimal...but...you say the problem is there with the P225 and it's grip is not wide at all, so that shouldn't be it. The Sig boreline is high compared to 1911s. While that might influence muzzle climb, I don't know how it would exaggerate any shot stringing. What about trigger control? That is pretty much The Thing. Is there any chance you are letting your finger come off the trigger as the gun is fired? Don't answer now- wait until you shoot again because sometimes we don't know we do it until we are actually looking for it when shooting (I found I was doing it with a SA revolver lately and had no idea). That can cause mostly vertical errors, and like most things, some guns show it more than others. You never know. It could be something simple like the shape of the trigger face causes your finger to move during the trigger press.

Ah, cool. I will use it.

OK, for the past couple of hours, I have been thinking about farnarkling. I think I might like to farnarkle, but I'm not sure and am afraid to ask for help. I do have an Enfield that was made at ROF Fazakerly, and I like it, but I don't think that's the same.

I wouldn't hate having a 9mm barrel for my Contender. Pistol length or carbine either one would be OK. A .45 ACP Contender barrel wouldn't be bad either. I've had the itch for a suppressed 9mm Contender carbine barrel for a while. I've had semiautos and still have SMGs in both calibers and never found a longer barrel added that much velocity (at least not without loading specifically for that), but that's not what I'd be wanting one for anyway. But you could. I used to really enjoy the late Dean Grennell's articles (Gun World and some Gun Digest books), and he did some work with custom made Contender barrels in 9mm and 45ACP. He would load them specifically for those barrels and get some ridiculous velocities.

Thanks guys. Yeah, you're right, Pablo. I would guess the people who need to read that are more likely to be on a forum that isn't for people deep into the gun culture. Then again, people get too comfortable sometimes. Everybody has a gun safety story, which is why I didn't add mine to the string over there, but this one illustrates how people get all caught up in so many rules they miss the most important ones: I was at an IDPA match one time, and as I finished shooting a stage the wind blew part of it down on us. In the ruckus, the SO (Safety Officer) had me holster hastily and did not have me empty it and show clear. None of us noticed in the commotion. This is a cold range (no loaded guns except when actually shooting). I head off to the next stage with a loaded holstered gun. This is how I go around every day, but ironically it's a no-no at a shooting range- go figure. Since we were shooting the classifier and some side matches, things were a little different than usual and the SOs (Safety Officers) didn't move with squads of shooters. They stayed at the stages so you saw different people each time. Also, to speed up the slow-going Classifier, they had two identical courses set up at each Classifier stage so two competitors could shoot their strings then we would go downrange and score both. So I'm at my next stage, waiting my turn as another guy shoots, when I see he is sweeping his hand every time he draws or reholsters. He was reaching across with his weak hand and putting it on his holster each time, so the gun passed over his hand each time. The SO and scorekeeper didn't seem to notice, so I went over and told the SO (who I sorta knew). "Yeah, I thought I saw that". I think to myself: Ummm, you thought he was trying to shoot his hand but you didn't say anything? But then... The scorekeeper said "Yeah, he did that the first string too". Oh, so he knew it for sure and didn't say anything. I was so stunned I walked back to my spot without saying anything myself. They did tell the shooter to stop that, and he thanked me for pointing it out. Then the SO and scorekeeper come over to me and it's my turn to shoot. I get the command to load, take out a mag, bring it to the mag well and it stops with a "clunk"...as it hit the mag that was already in place. Uh-oh. I'm mumbling to myself about what happened at the last stage, and when I look at the SO, I see he is deep in thought. He's debating DQing me. By the rules, I should have been DQ'd, and told to pack up and go. But he heard me say what happened at he last stage, was mostly aware of it anyway, and said to go ahead and unload and reload to shoot. But here's the odd thing: While I'm doing that, I jokingly remark that maybe I should have been more concerned with myself than the other guy. Serious as a heart attack, the SO says: "Yes, what you did is a lot bigger deal". And he meant that too. He really believed that having a loaded gun on a shooting range, but violating club rules, was worse than repeatedly pointing a loaded gun at yourself a fraction of a second before pulling the trigger. I can't really blame him for thinking that way. That is the mentality that results from having 40,000 rules beat into people, few of which have anything directly to do with not shooting ourselves. There was no rule in the books saying word for word "Don't sweep your hand by placing it around your holster mouth on the draw" but there is one against loaded gun when not shooting.

Thanks for passing that along. I didn't have any info on this, but I was curious to know.

I was at the club range today and thinking about this, then came home and read a thread by Pablo on BITOG that made my mind up. It's time for a post on the subject everyone gets bored with immediately: Safety I'm going to post The Four Rules. It's sometimes handy to have them on the tip of your tongue. The beauty of these rules is their simplicity. Jeff Cooper worked these out when he started Gunsite/American Pistol Institute. He planned to train greater numbers of people than anyone before, ranging from complete novices to what is sometimes worse- assumed experts. Safety was paramount. With only a few days to get them more skilled than the vast majority of shooters, time was precious. Spending all of Training Day 1 on safety wasn't possible, and people wouldn't remember more than 20 minutes of it anyway. So he condensed gun safety into a set of rules. Originally there were three rules, but later a fourth was added. 1- All guns are always loaded. 2- Never let the muzzle cover anything you are not willing to destroy. 3- Keep your finger off the trigger until your sights are on target. 4- Be sure of your target. Just about anyone can learn these in minutes. They cover just about anything. While you shouldn't break any, you almost have to break two to cause injury. Their simplicity is wonderful. A couple of years ago, I got a fat envelope from my gun club. Inside was a new set of range rules. All members were required to read them and sign a paper attesting to that fact. This monstrosity was 11 pages long and had almost 40 rules. If anyone besides the people who made that list read all of it, I would be surprised. If anyone can repeat more than two or three of those rules today I would be equally surprised. The Four Rules could have replaced nearly all of the rules on the list. In fact, aside from the ones about shooting hours and signing in, I bet The Four Rules could be directly substituted. Firearm safety doesn't have to be complicated. It just has to be sensible.

I don't know if S&W is running a mag rebate now, but if they are, you won't see mags until it's over. Maybe a while after. At least that's how it's gone in the past. If S&W can't get enough for itself, they can't get them to other sellers. A placed called MSTN used to be pretty good at keeping S&W mags in stock, and at good prices, but it looks like their website is screwed up right now.

This is a plug for a place called Cornell Publications. I have no connection to them whatsoever other than being a customer. They sell reprints of old gun manuals and catalogs. They have the most amazing amount of stuff. I think they get it by people sending them old catalogs to copy, which they then reprint, so don't know if they have an old catalog library. I know if I were stranded on a desert island with their stock room, I could occupy myself for a long time. They have catalogs, manuals, ammunition catalogs, service manuals, etc from any gun company I can think of, and a lot I've never heard of before. Want a Winchester catalog from 1887? Be more specific; they have the January, June, and November editions. Want to see a Montgomery Ward gun catalog? Pick the year. How about a Three Barreled Gun Company catalog, a Krag reloading manual from Ideal, or a 1926 DWM catalog? They have catalogs from suppliers and retailers like Stoeger's, Abercrombie & Fitch, Griffin & Howe, etc. The first thing I got from them was a late 30s catalog from the National Target Company, which was partially owned by Townsend Whelen. It has guns (the Winchester 70 that had come out a couple of years before was $61.25) camping gear, Duxbak clothing, canoes, and the like, plus each section opens with an article by an expert in the field like Whelen, Julian Hatcher, or Charles Askins. I have got a lot of entertainment from looking through it. They go back to the early 1800s. They have a lot of European catalogs and manuals, military manuals, trapping gear catalogs, and reloading manuals and catalogs too. I like old reloading tools, and while I'm not a collector of them, I could go crazy buying old reloading catalogs from these people. They run from around $5 to maybe $20, depending on what you get. The 1898 Winchester catalog I got is pretty big and thick, and was around 15 bucks. It's worth looking at the site just to see how much they have. They add new items all the time from people sending them in, and they have added a lot since I found them two years ago. Ross Seyfried, one of the few living gunwriters I actually like, writes a monthly column for them now. http://www.cornellpubs.com/index.php

From when guns were not only socially acceptable, but cool. Sammy Davis Jr doing fast draw and gun spinning onstage: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L6aNzFYHyz8 Think about what you are watching here. The crowd was not only watching an entertainer handling a gun onstage, but one of the Rat Pack- the coolest of the cool. They not only accepted it, they loved it. Impressive to me is that he is spinning a 7-1/2" barreled gun there. I have done some SA spinning when I was younger and more foolish, and while the shorter barreled ones practically want to spin, a 7-1/2" SAA handled like a brick to me in comparison. Sammy was a small guy, almost tiny, and that 7-1/2" SAA would be like a Casull or BFR in average hands but he makes it look effortless. And Sammy on The Rifleman episode "Two Ounces of Tin": http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ddFqDq8LyKI&feature=related

Prescott (AZ) Daily Courier: Gunsite honors 1911 Colt on its 100th anniversary http://www.prescottdailycourier.com/main.asp?SectionID=1&SubSectionID=1086&ArticleID=92347 PAULDEN - One hundred years ago this past Tuesday, the U.S. Department of the Army adopted for standard military service the Colt 1911 semi-automatic, .45-caliber pistol, a firearm that would go on to become the most copied in the world. All last week, Gunsite, a 2,100-acre, privately operated gun training site in Paulden, celebrated the milestone with a Centennial Pistol Class in which several dozen participants from law enforcement and the military exclusively fired the 1911 Colt during simulated training runs. It's not the most technically accurate article I've ever read, but at least it's a gun-positive one.

I dont think the spring makes any difference in recoil. Not to me anyway.

Colt and others buy springs from outside vendors. I think most manufacturers get springs and screws from outside sources and multiple ones at that. If your springs came from two different places, they could look or feel different. I think they measure a spring's weight on a scale when the spring is compressed to a certain length. What they weigh at different points along the way may be different and account for them feeling different. I'm not too keen on variable power recoil springs. I think some of that came from IPSC Open Class guns where they want them sprung as light as possible to keep the bounce down when the slide returns. If the spring is light at the beginning, it will be light at the closing end to keep the bounce down, but still be heavy at the other end of travel to buffer the force. Another trick they use, btw, is using a heavy hammer spring to absorb the initial force but allow a lighter recoil spring. I like standard weight, standard force (non-variable), 16 lb, recoil springs myself. I think they are plenty for ball-equivalent loads and even some trial shots of heavier stuff. A heavier spring is less forgiving of a rare underload or limp wrist. We all know we should hold the gun firmly, but there are times when it can't be done. An injury or need to fire from an odd angle will give a poor hold. I try my guns with standard 16-lb springs and they will operate as light as I can still hang onto the gun. They work fine with 16 lb standard springs unless the gun is screwed up. I don't like to mess with Mother Nature or John Browning. I also change recoil springs fairly regularly, which helps me feel OK with std weight springs. I keep track of rounds fired and usually change them out at 2,000 rounds. A lot of people think that's overkill, but come on. It's a $7 item. That's only one magazineful of some ammo. I have some chrome silicon springs from IMSI that I have used longer. I went 5,000 rounds, but admit I was nervous and would probably change them at 4,000 next time.

Seen at today's IDPA match: I like.

Well I celebrated and honored the event by shooting this in the IDPA match today. It isn't an original made in 1911 gun, but is as close to original type as I have- a Colt WWI Reproduction, made just six years ago. I got it used and the sights had been replaced by the prior owner, but other than that it's like they started out. I had to tape my hand up to keep it from being eaten, but it was worth it for the style points. I don't shoot this gun much, usually on special occasions like Veteran's Day, and only had 319 rounds through it before today. But as always I found that I did not miss the magazine well without a funnel welded on, or failed to release the tiny thumb safety, or failed to disengage the hump-less grip safety. And it never malfunctioned either. What do you know, the gun in it's original form worked fine. Just fine. That Browning guy knew some things.

I can already see the day approaching that I will be getting an Amega Ranges Scout mount for some of my Garands to keep shooting them. I don't want to, but I will if I have to.

Since you haven't had a reply in a couple of days, I'll add my small experience. I have the 2nd Generation mount from SA, the one that uses the receiver threads and a second socket in a lug that replaces the stripper clip guide. It seemed solid enough, but I never really trusted it and was always twisting on the knobs to make sure. The problem I had is the one you're just about going to have regardless of what mount you use. The stock isn't shaped for scope use and the mount causes the scope to sit pretty high, so the two things combined create a poor cheek weld. Even with the lowest rings, when my eye was aligned with the scope I had a chin weld rather than a cheek weld. You can use it that way. but it's pretty awkward feeling. You are going to have to add a cheek riser to the stock or shoot that way. I never put one on mine, but have tried some M1A's with risers of various types (padded nylon with straps, home made foam and tape) and they still felt funny to me. I have better rifles for scope use, gave up on scoping the M1A, and haven't used my mount in over ten years. I don't even know where it is now.

That old manual he holds up briefly towards the beginning- get one if you don't have one. I don't have the one for the 1911 (yet) but I have the similar manuals for the Trapdoor and the M1903. Unlike most military manuals which basically tell you from which end the bullet departs and admonishes you to not shoot yourself, these are pretty informative. The ones I have go through each part, one by one, and detail it's purpose, how it works, what it's made of, any changes it went through over time, etc. They even go through the ammunition components in detail, trajectories, wind drift, accuracy specs, etc. Lots of interesting stuff. The title is: "Description of the Automatic Pistol, Caliber .45, Model 1911, With Rules For Management, Trajectory, and Ammunition". I think Bo-Mar is still business. I had a little panic attack when he said that, but I checked and think they are still around. He could have been thinking of MMC, who evidently vanished about a year ago. Good riddance based on my experience dealing with them. I'm with him. I like shooting the old WWI-era 1911 just for fun. Colt made a WWI Reproduction a few years ago, that they more or less replaced with the regular production model O1918. I got one of those WWIs, used, for a deal because the previous owner had replaced the sights with King's Hardball sights (similar to the M1991 Series 80 sights), which was an improvement on a shooter. It lets me get the original 1911 feel and still have sights I can see. I shoot it when shooting a 1911 just for fun, and started off shooting it yesterday. While it has the small thumb safety, no beveled magazine well, and no hump on the grip safety that we "need", I find it interesting I have never failed to disengage the thumb or grip safety or missed the magwell on a mag change on that WWI. Maybe the original isn't in need of so many changes. (They do make things easier though!) His shooting at the far off gong reminds me of a piece Elmer Keith wrote in his "GunNotes" column of G&A on long range shooting with the 1911. I have tried to find it to re-read for years, but can't locate it, so I probably have some details wrong. I think it was written when the Army was considering the change to 9mm, but had not yet done so. As I recall- He was working as an arms inspector at Ogden Arsenal in WWII, when some Army brass or other "experts" showed up. Somehow, the talk turned to the 1911 pistol, how difficult it was to shoot, and how it was impossible to get any hits with at distance. Keith picked a 1911 pistol at random from stores along with a handful of magazines and invited them outside. It was early spring or late winter, and there were clumps of snow/ice still remaining. Keith sat down in a reclining position resting the gun against the knee of his upraised leg, selected a snow pile at some undetermined but incredible distance, and took aim. After one or two shots to get the range, he emptied the magazine into the snow, reloaded, emptied another into the snow, then reloaded once more and emptied it. In a matter of seconds, he had obliterated the snow clump with a 1911 chosen at random. I don't think he spoke more than five words, but he changed their opinion more than any amount of talk could have.