Jump to content
Practically Shooting

BarryinIN

Administrators
  • Posts

    1,648
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    3

Everything posted by BarryinIN

  1. Are there documented (lettered) SAAs with that grip frame from the factory? I've never heard of such, though there could be 10,000 of them for all I know.
  2. A lot of the SAA replicas are replicas of nothing. There are some that use the grip from the 1878 "Lightning" or "Thunderers" but no such gun was made in single action form. The Cimmaron Lightning comes to mind. So you can have the look and feel if you want. However, the 1878s don't bring as much as Colt SAAs, so you might be able to get an original one for not much more than one of the "replicas of nothing". Of course there are $2000 examples, but I have seen several $500 examples too. You sure don't see $500 SAAs unless they are complete junk. I wouldn't know since I've never owned one, but I always heard the 1878 had some fragile/delicate parts in it. Between that, and there being no gun game it really fits into, that's probably why nobody makes a replica. There is a picture of Billy the Kid with one, and he supposedly carried one. If so, it must have worked good enough for him to do his nasty work. My nominee for a cool offbeat old west gun is the Merwin Hulbert. http://armchairgunshow.com/MH-info.html I want one of those just to watch it work. The cylinder and barrel pull forward off the cartridges to eject them, and it only dumps the fired ones. If the cartridges are fired, they fall free, but if unfired, the cylinder doesn't pull forward far enough for them to clear. They were made in both SA and DA form, I believe. A company started up to make new M-Hs, but they have been around a while and I don't think any guns have appeared.
  3. I haven't owned one for as long as you (1984, which was long enough before they became popular that I had to order it, since nobody stocked a rifle that would sit on the rack for so long) but I agree. Like most guns, if made reasonably close to right, they work fine. I've seen some of the lesser ones crash in classes where they get used harder than most guns ever get used, but that's to be expected. I see the same thing with handguns too, and might say I've seen a larger percentage of handguns go down. Come to think of it, I have only had one shotgun class, and a third of them didn't make it through, and a shotgun is (seemingly) more simple and robust than an AR and we fired fewer rounds at a slower pace than in a carbine class. Of the ARs that died in classes, many of them were repaired at the first break. Maybe most of them. The problems were fixable because they were assembly problems, not design problems (loose/not staked carrier key screws are too common). The biggest design flaw in my opinion is that when popped primers fall from the case (it happens) they fall into the trigger mechanism and tie it up. But that is really an ammunition problem. I need to preface the following with: I love the Garand. Love it. I take at least one on every range visit, I keep a Garand handy as a car gun instead of an AR, and I used a Garand in the last carbine class I took. But- I have had more trouble with Garands than ARs. It still wasn't much, but it was more. Little things like gas cylinder plugs getting loose enough to leak, rear sights loosening and dropping elevation, or trigger guards popping, but it's more than I've had to mess with on ARs. And even though the gas cyl plugs and rear sights perhaps could have been caught earlier, I don't have similar things happen on ARs. Granted, the ARs were bought new or nearly new, while the Garands were decades old, but a couple of them were rebuilt to nearly new condition and the ARs have seen a lot of use since. I know of some registered M16s that have had a ton of ammo through them and their owners haven't had to do much, if anything to them aside from cleaning. When I started shooting Highpower, Garands were still pretty common there and someone was always fiddling around with one that was giving them fits. I'm sure it was from wear; something like trying to get by without replacing a worn operating rod that keeps jumping the track, but there are a lot of ARs that have seen as much use now that don't seen to have trouble. I'm not saying the AR is superior. I just don't think it's a piece of junk in comparison, as some people make them out to be. Some individual ones are junk, but so are individual examples of a lot of guns. And yes, they are easy to shoot well. I always thought it was one of the easiest rifles to use to get people shooting reasonably well with the least effort. They often help already good shooters become better shooters. At a place I shoot 3-gun, they started setting up some 300 yard stages. Most of these guys are close range burners, so I know most of them didn't shoot at 300, and I have my doubts they did much at 100. But they hopped down with their ARs and did pretty well from the start. I think if they had used any of a number of other rifles, they would have a lot more trouble, just from fighting the rifle if nothing else. With the AR, they know the rifle is perfectly capable, the trigger and sights are good, recoil is negligible, so they just have to shoot. I used to see it in Highpower too. When the change was on from M1/M1A/M14 to the AR15, people would change rifles and their scores would climb immediately. I came within two points of my best M1A score the first time out with an AR, and moved up in classification within three matches. That was typical.
  4. WITH a gun, not BY a gun. I don't think that error was a political comment, but a typical journalism expert's mastery of English.
  5. From the Salt Lake Tribune http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/home/51111900-76/browning-state-utah-herbert.html.csp State Honors Gun Maker By Lee Davidson The Salt Lake Tribune First published 3 hours ago Updated 1 hour ago Updated Jan 24, 2011 03:11PM The Browning model 1911 handgun may — or may not — soon become the official Utah State Firearm but famed Utah gunmaker John Moses Browning had his day of honor at the State Capitol on Monday with speeches, guns, soldiers and even an Apache helicopter to celebrate him. Browning "had a great deal to do with us as a nation and the wars we fought in," Gov. Gary Herbert told a noon celebration. "We recognize his efforts to preserve the Constitution." The Legislature last year designated Jan. 24, 2011, as a one-time holiday to honor Browning. The original proposal sought for Browning Day to share Martin Luther King Day, but was moved a bit to the day after his Jan. 23 birthday as civil rights groups protested honoring a gunmaker the same day as King — who was assassinated by a gun. The Capitol rotunda on Monday featured displays of handguns, machine guns, shot guns, riles and other firearms invented by Browning — some displayed by men wearing vintage World War I uniforms. The Utah National Guard parked an Apache helicopter on the Capitol lawn as part of the celebration. Herbert signed a declaration on the Capitol steps and handed it to Christopher Browning, the great-grandson of John Moses Browning. He, in turn, gave a special copy of the Browning 1911 to Herbert and the state. That handgun is probably Browning’s most famous invention, and was used by the U.S military for 70 years — and is still used by some units. Christopher Browning said his great-grandfather gave the patent for that gun and others for next to nothing to the federal government to help the effort in World War I. Rep. Carl Wimmer, R-Herriman, who is pushing a bill to declare the Browning 1911 as the official Utah State Firearm, used the celebration to drum up support for his bill. He urged the crowd to stay for a hearing on his bill later in the afternoon. "There’s going to be some people there who don’t like the idea because they say we’re glorifying an implement of death. No we’re not; we’re glorifying an implement of freedom that has defended America for 100 years," Wimmer said. He added, "This firearm is Utah." Utah National Guard Adjutant Gen. Brian Tarbet told the celebration, "When the U.S. military went to war with Browning arms, we went with the best." Herbert noted that Browning had 128 patents for different firearms, from cannons to handguns. He said he also built Browning firearms into an important Utah company. "He was one of the great entrepreneurs in our state," Herbert said.
  6. The 357/44 Bain & Davis and the 357 AutoMag cartridges always sounded like two peas in a pod to me. The B&D was based on the .44 Magnum case, and the 357 AM was based on the .44 AM case, which are extremely close ballistically. The big problem with bottleneck cases in revolvers is that when fired, the shoulder will push the case back. After some of those (A few? A couple? Just one?) they will be pressed up against the frame so tight the cylinder will be hard to turn. That's what I always read anyway. But...The one and only guy I know of who messed with the 357/44 B&D (on a S&W 28) said he had no trouble but he would only shoot a couple of cylinderfulls before giving it a good cleaning. He also kept the chambers absolutely oil free with alcohol or something. For a hunting or playing around gun, that would probably be OK. I doubt you would shoot a couple hundred at a time. I once read of a version called the 357/44 Bobcat. The cylinder was bored through, so it resembled a 44 Mag cylinder, and used with the .357 barrel. The case was bottlenecked, but I don;t remember if it was the same as the B&D or not. The item that made it work was a collar made of some sort of plastic. This collar went over the case neck and seated against the shoulder. I don't recall if it was glued in place or press-fit. They were only good for a loading or two before cracking or splitting, but they eliminated the case setback thing. This was 30 years ago and I never read a bit more about it, so it must not have been a big hit. Or maybe there was so little interest nobody much cared whether it worked or not. For some reason, I've always had a desire for a carbine in a similar chambering. A lever action in 357/44 B&D might be neat (for some reason), and I think they've been done, but what I'd really like would be an AR15 in 357 AutoMag.
  7. Just trying to help.... You know, get it out of your system.... From Reloadammo.com: 357/44 Bain & Davis Historical Notes: Intended for use in special, rebuilt 44 Magnum revolvers, the 357/44 Bain & Davis had a rather short life and fell into disuse. However, in more recent times it has resurfaced as a chambering for Thompson Center Contender single shot pistols, and in this application, it really comes into its own. The cartridge was developed by gunsmith Keith Davis and first announced in an article by Dan Cotterman appearing in the January 1964 issue of Gun World magazine. The original purpose for the design was to bring the velocity of the 38 caliber revolver up to 1410 fps with the 158 grain bullet. Actual velocity is, of course, some 200 to 300 fps below that figure. Ammunition catalogs no longer list the 158 grain 357 Magnum at anything like 1410 fps. In any event, the 357/44 B&D did achieve its goal by developing velocities in the revolver of over 1400 fps. The case is based on the 44 Magnum necked down without any other change. General Comments: The 357/44 B&D is another wildcat that started off as one thing (a high velocity 38 revolver cartridge) and ended up as something else (a silhouette and hunting round for single shot pistols). What is interesting about this cartridge is that although smaller than the 357 Herrett, it produces equal or slightly superior ballistics. It is a potent and effective cartridge for either metallic silhouette or small game hunting with bullets of 110 to 158 grains. As a field cartridge, it will cover the spectrum from small game and varmints up to deer, although it's a bit marginal for the latter. Cases are easy to make, requiring only a full length sizing and seating die. And from Cartridges of the World: 357/44 Bain & Davis Reloading Data Bullet (grs.) Powder / (grs.) MV ME Source 110 JHP W296 / 24.0 2120 1100 N/A 110 JHP W296 / 28.0 2365 1370 N/A 125 JHP IMR4227 / 26.0 2085 1205 N/A 125 JHP W296 / 25.0 2170 1310 N/A 158 JSP W296 / 24.0 2045 1465 N/A 158 JSP 2400 / 18.0 1700 1020 N/A All data for a 10" TC Contender only.
  8. Nice review. I honestly haven't followed Ruger centerfire autos much since a bad experience with a P90 (I know, I shouldn't base much on a single gun), but that looks pretty nice. It looks pretty slim- Is it?
  9. Thanks. That same place sometimes has used, but like new, Sig mags. I don't know if they would have P225 mags, but it might be worth looking. Here is the link, but I don't see any for P225s. It might pay to keep checking, because I know their P7 mags come and go. http://www.topgunsupply.com/magazines-sig-sauer-used/
  10. Examples of what I call P7 Myths (or at least exaggerations): 1- The most common thing I hear is it's "unique manual of arms", that can confuse you if you carry multiple gun types. In other words: You might forget to cock it and "it'll gitcha kilt". Response- I usually blame this on gun magazines. In fact, depending on the phrases used, I've sometimes been able to tell what article it came from. There aren't that many. The theory is that if you alternate between different carry guns, you might have the P7 when you need to shoot in self-defense but forget that you need to cock the gun. I suppose it's possible if you carry a P7 once every couple of years instead of something else. Still, after 30 years of the gun's existence, I have never heard of a case of it. The P7 is cocked by squeezing the grip. You compress the front strap into the grip frame, cocking the gun via linkage to the striker. I don't know how the gunwriters hold their pistols when they shoot, so maybe they can have this happen, but when I fire a pistol I take a firm firing grip. On a P7, that squeeze-cocks the gun. It's about as natural to operate as they come. To further convince me this is a non-issue is what I've seen when others shoot mine. I've let quite a few people shoot mine (they draw a crowd) and while some have needed initial instruction on the gun, they operated it just fine from that point on. Most telling has been when I've let someone shoot it, then let them shoot it when I saw them several months to a year later. I always keep quiet to see what happens. Even though they have probably not even picked one up since shooting mine the first time, none had any trouble shooting it. Nobody forgot how it worked. They picked it up and shot it, simple as could be. 2- They get hot. Response- Yes they do. But it's not the ordeal it's often made out to be. The P7's odd gas-pressure-operated locking system taps gas into a chamber beneath the barrel. This chamber gets hot, much like a barrel will. Since this chamber starts just above the trigger opening, it is fairly close to the trigger finger and heat can radiate off and warm the finger. People have said this hurts the gun for self-defense, either because it's unsuited for rapid fire or because it effects training. Um, OK. The early type PSP (like the German police guns) does heat up quicker than the P7M8 because of changes to the trigger guard area, but I can still burn through about 50 rounds before noticing at all. It takes more than that to make the gun unshootable, but I don't know how many because I haven't found the point yet. When mine start to get hot, it's time to refill magazines or change targets anyway, so it gets a cool down. I've used it in classes that called for over 500 rounds per day and neither the gun nor my hand melted down and I was able to holster it IWB without setting my pants on fire. I find it interesting that I often hear the heating complaint from people who also complain about magazine cost. They say they only have a couple of magazines, yet they get the gun too hot to shoot? They must be a lot faster at refilling mags than I. 3- Expense. Response: That was true for most of it's lifespan, but with the surplus guns at $500 that doesn't hold up so well. Magazines aren't cheap at $55 and up, but it's a good rugged magazine. I consider magazines to be expendable items that only last so long before needing replaced, but I'm still using P7 mags I've had for over ten years. 4- It's complicated with a lot of parts. Response: I can see how one would think this. The way the gun is designed, most of the fire control parts are under the grips instead of buried within the frame. When I first took a grip panel off and saw about 30 parts right there, I thought there must be 500 parts in the gun. I didn't realize I was looking at most of the parts in the gun. I forget the exact number now, but it only has a few more parts than a 1911, and a 1911 doesn't have a tremendous number of parts in it. The P7 parts total is similar to most DA autos and less than some (For one, I think the S&W 3rd Gen autos have more parts). It lacks locking system parts like links, bushings, and slide stop pins; and the actual fire control system is pretty simple. If not for springs and levers to reduce the force needed to hold squeeze-cock lever cocked, it might be down to a Glock parts count. 5- Weight. People complain they are heavy. Response: Maybe it's from still thinking polymer framed guns are new, but I don't think they are that heavy. I don't have the weights handy, but looking at the guns it most directly compares to, the S&W 3913, Sig P225, and Sig P239, it weighs within a couple of ounces. I can't tell the difference two ounces makes. The P7 is the only one with a steel frame too. Nothing against aluminum alloy frames, but I'd prefer steel if alum only saves me a couple of ounces. Polymer frame guns might be noticeably lighter, especially the comparably sized Glock 26, but they are noticeably wider too. Maybe it's just me, but width bothers me a lot more than a few ounces of weight. I can take a few ounces easier than a few 16ths of an inch more width. I've had several Glocks, but would rather carry the "heavy" P7 IWB any day. They aren't perfect, and I don't think any gun is. I'm not trying to say that. I just wanted to try to shoot down or at least explain the common complaints I hear about these because I heard them for 20 years and it made me wonder about the gun. I wish I had someone to tell me how it really was, because maybe I would have got one sooner. I wanted to try a P7 long before I got one. Every time I would bring the P7 up, someone would name off one or more of these supposed faults. Some of them sounded reasonable to me at the time, but after getting my first P7, I quickly decided some might have a basis in fact but are not nearly the problem they are often made out to be. Others don't hold much water at all. One thing I later realized was that a lot of people "know" things about the P7, yet not very many have actually owned one. Hmmm.
  11. I just got an email from Top Gun Supply saying they had German Police HK P7s in stock again. Grade B only, at $499.95. http://www.topgunsupply.com/h-k-p7-psp.html I'm new here so you haven't heard me yammer on about the P7 yet. I will. I usually carry either a HiPower or 1911, but love the P7s too and carry one plenty. They are incredible shooting guns. There are a lot of myths surrounding them, so when you hear something against them, think carefully about what you heard. A lot of it doesn't stand up to careful examination. I prefer the M8, but snapped up a PSP like this a few years ago for a spare. At 500 bucks, it's hard to go wrong. If you have been curious about them and just want to try one out, it's a good way to do it. When they dried up last time they were quickly bringing more than $500, so even if you try one and don't like it, you might get your money back and then some.
  12. This does sound odd, because most 9mm cases run short when I've measured. Plenty short. That would almost be a plus in this situation. Then again... I've never had a convertible Blackhawk (only regular revolver calibers) so am not sure how the cylinder is made on the 9mm or 45ACPs, but: Due to the case design, there might supposed to be some case showing above the cylinder. Might. It would almost be necessary if the cylinder is the same length externally as the .357 cylinder. On the .357 cylinder, there has to be space between the cylinder and frame for the .357's rim. That space is filled by the rim and a couple thousandths' clearance. If they use that same length cylinder for 9mm, and the case fit flush like we would expect it to, there would be a gap between the frame and case big enough the firing pin wouldn't reach the primer (or at least reliably). I doubt they use a longer cylinder with the 9mm because some get their 9mm cylinder rechambered to wildcat cartridges like the 357/44 B&D (44 Mag necked to 357) and it's a simple rechambering job. If the cylinder was longer, it would need faced off at the rear with the ratchet left in place, which could get complicated and I'm sure would have been mentioned. Are the cases sticking out farther than the extractor groove? I would think they could stick out that far and be OK. The internal powder chamber starts above there on rimless cases like that. The extractor groove portion sticks out on moonclip guns like S&W 625s for the moonlip to go on. Sticking out any farther beyond that though, and I wouldn't be so comfortable. My first move would be to call Ruger and describe it. You could even email pictures.
  13. He had two ideas going at the same time. One about like what we know now, and that one (which I think of as the Luger Shotgun). Apparently, he was not sure which one was the better design until right before he took them to Winchester. It seems pretty obvious to me which was the way to go, but I wasn't there. He let half of Utah shoot them before deciding which one to push harder, so the toggle action must have had something going for it to get as far as it did. Interesting the placard distinctly refers to it as the first model. From the book (American Gunmaker) it makes it sound like they were parallel designs.
  14. Two great quotes: "Quigley Shotgun" "Life's really good" I'm both impressed with his skill, and not surprised at the shotgun's capability. In a class a couple of years ago, the instructor had us shoot at a gong about 12" across and kept pushing us back until we couldn't hit it. We shot from whatever position we wanted (nearly all of us prone) but the thing is, he made us hold center- no holdover- just to show us what that could give us. We ran out of room (100 yards) before we ran out of shotgun/ammo combinations that were capable.
  15. You're right. I'm the same way. We guys are all born knowing all there is to know about guns, cars, and sex, and the smallest suggestion can become a heated argument. I have to bite my lip and look the other way (on all three things). Still, when it's a new shooter about to be screwed up for a long time, I try to overcome it and step in. People do tend to stop at only partial information. One ounce? Sure, it must have less recoil than these 1-1/8 ounce loads (at 1055 fps). I've seen the same thing with handgun ammo, the worst case being when 125 grain .357 Mag was chosen over 158 grain 38 Spl because of the lighter bullet. BTW, my pet peeve here, and one I have to really fight myself to keep quiet over, is suggesting a nice light little snubby revolver for "the little lady". Sure, just about the hardest gun to shoot well. You over there down the gun counter suggesting that: Is the snubby your first choice? How well do you shoot a snubby? Is it the gun you shoot best or the worst? The usual explanation is that it's simpler to operate. Yeah, sure, moving a latch some people think is the "safety" if they can even find it, then doing what looks like taking the gun halfway apart to put each cartridge in individually then closing it again is a lot easier than sticking a magazine in an auto and pulling that sliding thing on top like she has seen in a few thousand movies. It's easier than starting a car, and if the "expert" adviser really and truly thinks someone lacks the sense to do that, should they be arming them?
  16. I don't usually like bullpups for a couple of reasons, but this one has me thinking. I like the dual mag tubes, for the choice of buck or slug. Some have complained the tubes don't automatically switch over, but I like it as it is so I can choose. I'll have to look at one before deciding much, because bullpups tend to either feel really good or really bad to me and I never know until I actually see them. My other holdup is the bullpup issue of touching off a 12,000 psi shell with my skull pressed against the chamber. The two or three millimeters of metal separating the shell and I provides little comfort. At least it beats doing it with a 50,000 psi rifle cartridge. I've read a bunch of fuss that started at the SHOT Show concerning the trigger function on these. From what I'm hearing, it does this: You fire a shot, then if you don't let the trigger return before pumping the action, the trigger goes dead. The action then has to be cycled again, ejecting a live shell, to reset it. I've tried to get clarification from people who were at the show, but I'm still not absolutely certain about some details. I'm not sure if the trigger has to be completely reset, or just starting to move any at all. I'm not sure if there has to be zero pump movement or if it can be starting back. What I really want to know is how it functions in real deal shooting. What guns do when handled empty or at a show (where the guns must be deactivated) is one thing, and what they do under the slam bang of shooting is another. For all I know, the recoil forces cause enough movement to make it all a non-issue. Nevertheless, some people are jumping up and down about this "serious flaw" and pronouncing it unfit for defensive use and advising people to steer clear. Maybe they are right. Maybe they are making a big fuss over nothing. I truly don't see how we'll know until guns are sold and actually shot. I don't like buying any brand new design of gun anyway. Let others find and work out any unforeseen bugs. Even if I would get one, by that time, we should know what's what.
  17. Great. I see you you got the P225. Nice guns. I'm not a DA auto fan, but even I like those. Nice size for carrying, yet big enough to shoot easy enough. In my fondness for single stack mid-size 9mms (they used to be compacts) I've tried most guns in it's class. If the particular Deuce and a Quarter (225) I had didn't have the heaviest DA pull I've ever felt on a Sig, I might still have it. Luck of the draw there, I guess.
  18. Looks neat. I didn't see what the targets were. You say steel, but how big? It looks like 100 yards offhand... Rectangle, Lollipop, and "Dia." from the bench... Plus some bonus targets. Depending on what the target sizes were, that could be fair to miserable. The scores look like most people hit 50% or more, and just judging from the matches I've been at, the targets would need to be generous to get such good results across the board. I wonder if only the bonus targets are the only ones way out there. Usually at something like this, if the targets were set incrementally farther out (like 100, 200, 400, 500, and 600) you would see a drop off at some point. Meaning that if you took ten shots at each distance, the 100 yard target would have a lot of 8-10 hits, the 200 a lot of 7-9 hits, then at 400 it would drop to about 4-5 hits and stay down. But the scores look pretty even across the columns. That makes me think they do something like: Shoot offhand at 100, then the others are all shot at a farther distance (but all the same distance) like 200 yards except the bonus targets way out in the hills. The main difference in the 200 yarders being the shape. If I were to shoot in it, my biggest concern would be sights. I have an awful time with open sights and would have to use a peep. I would take a 4 MOA rifle with sights I could use pretty well before I'd take a 1 MOA rifle with sights I'd struggle with. Looking at what was used last year, however, I am surprised that most of the higher placing rifles used plain old notch and barleycorn sights. I would think the advantage would go to the 1903A3s because the sights would be best suited. I saw some did well, yet not on top. Of course, swap rifles among shooters and it might be different. 600 or 700 yards is a loooong way. I used to shoot Highpower, and if you didn't have a super good zero at 300, you were in big trouble when going to 600. The farthest I've shot in a match in the last couple of years is 300 yards in 3-gun, and you should hear the crying when we get to that stage.
  19. Self healing rubbery/plasticy about 1/4 to 3/8 inch thick. Edit: Found 'em. The ones I have are these very targets, I think: http://www.newboldtargets.com/more-infor...-target-red.htm The price is not as bad as I remember, at $11.95. In the smaller sizes like mine, they came two to a package. I don't see anything about that price being for two now. Maybe they went to one per package and dropped the price a little. I wish I had a better picture. When you see my targets up close, the only indication of hits are these little black specks all over them. A closer look shows they are holes a little larger than pinholes. If you take hold with a hand on each side and bend the target like cracking a stick in half, the holes spread open and you can see they are bullet holes. The only sign of real damage are edge hits, where a teeny tiny piece gets taken out. That size is good for .22s I think because they are light enough to move when hit, but heavy enough that you don't have to wait for them to straighten out. I'll shoot one, then shoot the other, then come back to the first one and it's nearly still. A heavier caliber would throw this size around pretty good.
  20. 20, 60, some even number! Correcting momentarily. I always liked that as a trivia question, because people naturally assume the first reasonably successful gas auto shotgun came from Remington. Even if they know the H-S was earlier, they are surprised to hear Sears sold the gun first.
  21. Thanks. You know, I've seen the M11 called both, but didn't realize the reason. What was the J.C. Higgins semiauto called? I've known but am drawing a blank now. I know what I was thinking- I was thinking of your model 20 I was commenting on a day or so ago. Thinking it and typing it.
  22. I don't have that particular type, but I have a pair of Newbold targets hanging up by the woods. I've been shooting at them for years now, using a suppressed .22 rifle. I leave them hanging all the time, year-round. They make it nice to get a couple of magazines' worth of offhand practice by just sliding the back door open. They have faded from red to pink, but I expect that from staying out all the time. I always thought the Newbolds were expensive, but I found these in the clearance box at a gun shop. Even if I had paid full price, I would have gotten my money's worth several times over. They have held up well, but they only see .22s. I would guess that the larger the caliber (and less rounded the bullet) the shorter their life would be. EDIT: Wow, that's a poor picture. Nice focus job.
×
×
  • Create New...