Archive for the 'Firearms' Category

He has some hard ones.  Can’t help him.

But I do want his rifle.

Now this looks like it would be fun. And who else would teach it except Chris Costa.

Outdoor Life.

It’s a common sight to see someone pull the trigger on the rifle, shotgun, or pistol they just emptied, whether they are finishing up at the gun range or jumping in the truck after the evening deer hunt. The intent is to confirm that the gun is clear. But is that safe gun handling? Or is it a pointless risk?

I think the answer depends on what you’re doing. But I do know some hunters and shooters click their trigger every single time—and that’s not the right approach.

Before getting into those less-than-safe scenarios, let’s talk about when it makes sense. At every 3-gun, multi-gun, or handgun competition I’ve attended, the standard procedure after finishing a stage is to unload the pistol by pulling the magazine, racking the slide, and pointing downrange and dropping the hammer. The Range Officer managing the stage watches this process to verify that the blaster is clear to his or her satisfaction. The same procedure holds true for showing that a long gun is clear.

At a gun range, you can point the muzzle at a solid backstop. If you do produce a negligent discharge when attempting to show clear, it isn’t going to cause any problems other than a potential stage or match DQ. I’ve witnessed this myself and recently saw a video of shooter at a match crank off a round in front of the range officers after pulling the magazine and racking the slide repeatedly. Obviously, he had a round in the chamber that the extractor didn’t engage (perhaps the extractor had broken) and when he dropped the hammer the pistol went off. The fact that he had an utterly safe backstop to shoot into is what prevented it from being a dangerous situation.

Now out in the wild, the safety of the backstop becomes relative. When you’re exiting your deer stand or hopping into your truck, is it possible to have a backstop as certain as the berm at a rifle range? Sure, in theory. In practice, you won’t have that every single time.

With that in mind, dropping the hammer becomes a risk-reward scenario where it’s often better to not pull the trigger.

Years ago, I discussed this issue with Jim Carmichel, my predecessor as Outdoor Life’s shooting editor. He was firmly in the “don’t dry fire to show safe” camp. “What is it you’re trying to prove?” he said. Good point. You’re trying to demonstrate that the gun is empty—but if it isn’t you just opened a whole can of worms for you and everyone who might be around you.

Some shooters have argued with me that they’d rather have the negligent discharge happen then, rather than risk carrying or transporting a gun they thought had a clear chamber but didn’t.

My problem with this logic is that it ignores the first rule of gun safety: Every gun is always loaded. If someone hands me a firearm I don’t care if they just field stripped the thing and put it back together to show it is empty—I’m still going to check it myself. We shouldn’t consider any firearm, even the deer rifle that just went “click” in your buddy’s hands, any safer than one we just found on the side of the road. To ignore this is to become complacent, and when handling firearms, complacency kills. (It also ignores the second rule, which is to keep your finger off the trigger until you are ready to shoot.)

The article goes on and you can read the rest at Outdoor Life.

Here’s what I do, and readers can weigh in as well.  This is an interesting subject and one that I’ve thought about before.

I’ll normally empty the chamber of any gun (rifle, pistol or shotgun) by removing the magazine and cycling the slide (or action) several times.  But here’s the next step.  I visually examine the chamber to ensure that it’s empty.  This is an absolutely essential step for me.  And then I do a self-check of my judgment.

I normally carry the firearm home with the action open and the spring tensioned.  I don’t see a problem with that.  It also lets me self-check my visual inspection as many times as I want.

But I don’t store the firearm with the action open and springs tensioned.  We’ve had this conversation before, but springs undergo creep.

Do not make the claim that stainless steel (like SS304) doesn’t suffer creep below the yield limit and at low temperatures.  Yes … it … does  (“In all tests at applied stress/yield strength ratios above 0.73 some plastic deformation was recorded”).

No offense, but don’t try to be an engineer if you’re not one. If you make the claim that SS304 (I presume the material of most magazine springs) doesn’t suffer from metal creep, you’d be wrong, and then you’d also be answering the question the wrong way.

The right way to look at the question is one of whether the creep is significant.  It usually isn’t, and it is less significant than for carbon steel.  It’s also not significant for applied stress/yield strength ratios lower than what the authors tested.  Where your specific magazine spring falls in this data set is best determined by the designer, not me (I don’t have drawings or any other design information).

Gun springs are an essential part of the gun, and the gun needs to function every time I pull the trigger.  On the other hand, magazines can be replaced.  I don’t leave gun springs tensioned.  I de-tension the spring before storing the weapon.  That requires that I pull the trigger while having the gun pointed in a safe direction and after visually verifying again that the chamber is empty (since I only shoot hammer fired pistols, that’s an easy fix – I let the hammer slide down smoothly, and this is also an easy fix with bolt actions).  I don’t care so much about magazine springs.  And I don’t shoot striker fired pistols.

I know that this is done different ways for different people and that multiple strategies are advocated by shooters everywhere.  If there was one answer, there wouldn’t have been an article to begin with and no conversation necessary.

Ammoland.

While the world’s attention is focused on the horrific events unfolding in Eastern Europe, the Biden-Harris administration quietly unleashed hell on American gun dealers.

As the NRA first noted, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives has started revoking licenses of gun dealers for the most minor of paperwork errors – errors that never led to license revocations until Biden took office.

The move was intended to bolster Biden’s politically motivated strategem, which he first announced June 23, 2021, that “rogue” gun dealers are responsible for skyrocketing crime rates in large cities that historically have been controlled by Democrats. The “epidemic of gun violence” wasn’t caused by weak prosecutors who refuse to hold criminals accountable, or gangs or underfunded police departments or by any combination thereof, Biden claimed. It was all the fault of “rogue gun dealers.”

Inner city crime has nothing to do with so-called “rogue” gun dealers.  It has to do with the destruction of the nuclear family and rejection of God’s laws.  We all know that.  This is just another ploy to make it as difficult as they can on firearms manufacturers, dealers and owners.

Having said all of that, I observed some number of months ago that if FFLs want to stay in business in the future, they’re going to have to implement human performance and error reduction tools, to include: (1) routine training and retraining, (2) qualification measures, (3) self check and STAR (stop, think, act and review), (4) independent verification, and so on.

Staying in business will require error-free performance of employees.  In the future, I see no other way.

By the way, as best as I can cipher the statistics, the lowest error rates by industry in the country are nuclear (coming in at the lowest), airlines, and pharmaceutical manufacturers and distributors.  The medical profession comes in at one of the highest human error prone professions.  I’m not criticizing – I’m just reporting.

I did this on Saturday.  I shot at clays with a Beretta 1301, Langdon Tactical.  And yes, I was able to connect, but it’s more challenging with a 18.5″ barrel.

Did you make it to the range over the weekend, and what did you shoot?

I think he does a good job in this video.

So there you have it.  This is why we can’t have nice things.  The ATF.

And sooner or later the U.S. won’t be able to manufacture state of the art open bolt weapons systems for the military.  No one is working on that because it’s illegal.

The civilian market drives the military market, and most advancements are first found in the civilian sector.

Field & Stream.

First, Ruger moved Marlin manufacturing to Mayodan, North Carolina. Then they changed the blue Marlin Man logo to Ruger red. And finally, after about a year, they announced that the 1895 SBL in .45/70 would be the first of the third iteration of American-made Marlins.

[ … ]

Remington purchased Marlin in 2007. They didn’t run Marlin very well, but in 2009 they did introduce the model 1895 SBL in .45/70. It was a better thought-out version of Marlin’s popular Guide Gun. It didn’t have the silly integral muzzle brake, but it did have a full-length XS Sights’ Lever Rail and a large loop lever. I purchased the first 1895 SBLs I found and have used them to take everything from bear in Alberta to buffalo in Africa.

[Editorial Note: Remington didn’t run anything very well, being owned by financial engineers bent on squeezing every last drop out of the company]

I was reluctant to report how well this rifle shot for fear of being thought a charlatan. I tested four loads from a sandbag rest at 100 yards using Leupold’s intermediate eye relief (IER) VX-2, 1.5-4×28 riflescope. The average for 12 3-shot groups—three, 3-shot groups with each load—was a stunningly small 1.125 inches. And two of the loads averaged less than an inch. Just let that sink in; this is a sub-MOA, big bore, lever-action rifle.

I’m sure it’s a fine shooter.  And I’m sure Ruger will do a great job with this line of rifles.

What I’m not sure about is availability.  I recently saw at a local gun store this very rifle going for nearly $2000.  Furthermore, availability is virtually non-existent (which is a corollary – when availability is limited on a high demand item, the price will be high).

Ruger is going to have to do better than what I’ve seen in order for the price point to be reasonable.

I’ve seen an awful lot of AK variants, mostly with iron sights.  This American is carrying one.

We’ve also seen that the AR-15 is in use.

But I haven’t seen one of these.  It’s a Ukrainian weapon called IPI Malyuk.

Source.

It could be shooting the 7.62×39 round, or the 5.56×45 round, or the 5.45×39 round.  It was built for all three (of course, not at the same time).

It’s a bullpup design.  For the life of me I just can’t seem to like the bullpup design.

I know it has its advantages like longer barrel for field shooting combined with maneuverability in confined spaces.  But I just don’t like the idea of the explosion being that close to my face.

When an ejection port is too close you get blowback into the face, especially with over-gassed systems.

Field & Stream.

This cartridge became available in 1895 in Winchester’s Model 1894 lever action rifle. It was America’s first sporting cartridge to be loaded with smokeless powder and was originally loaded with a 160-grain bullet and 30 grains of powder. This produced a muzzle velocity of about 1950 fps. The cartridge got its name from its .30-caliber (.308-inch) bullet and the 30 grains of powder that fueled it. Since then, the cartridge has been chambered in a wide range of rifles but gained its fame and popularity in the 94 and the Marlin 336.

When it comes to modern .30-30 ballistics, things are a bit improved today. The most common loading is a 150-grain bullet at an advertised 2390 fps. However, for common 20-inch barreled traditional lever guns, real muzzle velocities are closer to 2300 fps. This is a powerful combination and has been used effectively on everything from feral hogs all the way up to moose. You can also get 125 and 170-grain loads, but neither offer any practical advantage over 150-grain loadings, especially the excellent 150-grain Federal HammerDown, which has been specifically tuned for lever guns.

However, there is another option. Hornady offers 140- and 160-grain LEVERevolution loads. What sets these apart is that they utilize a spitzer instead of a round nose bullet. Round nose bullets have always been required in tube fed lever guns, but the soft rubber FlexTip used by Hornady makes these pointy bullets safe in the magazine tube. With the LEVERevolution ammunition the .30-30 has a 13% flatter trajectory and retains about 6% more energy. Regardless the loading, a traditional 30-30 lever gun will recoil between 10 and 13 foot-pounds of energy.

[ … ]

When most think of a 45-70, they think of a 45-70 lever action rifle. However, the first 45-70 was not a lever gun. The cartridge was adopted by the U.S. military in 1873 in the single shot Trapdoor Springfield rifle. The ballistics of original .45-70 ammo was nothing to crow about by today’s standards. It was originally loaded with a 405-grain .45-caliber bullet ahead of 70 grains of black powder, hence the name 45-70. This load had a muzzle velocity of around 1300 fps and compared to modern .45-70 ballistics; it was like throwing a rock. At 200 yards the bullet would drop more than two feet.

With the arrival of the .30-30 Winchester and the 20th Century, interest in the .45-70 waned. It simply could not compete with the flatter shooting .30-30 or the even more modern .30-06. However, in the early 70s Marlin reintroduced their 1895 lever action rifle chambered for the .45-70. A version of Marlin’s much more robust 336 action, the new 1895 could handle ammunition loaded with much higher pressures. Soon, we began to see the second power level of .45-70 ammunition, which included 300-grain bullets being pushed to around 1800 fps. These carried more than 1000 foot-pounds of energy to 200 yards, with trajectories twice as flat as the original loading.

But the advancement in .45-70 ammo did not stop there. The 1895 is a very strong action and companies like Buffalo Bore began loading third power level “heavy” .45-70 ammunition. Recoil is however brutal; out of a Marlin 1895 these heavy loads generate nearly 50 foot-pounds of shoulder shoving punch.

He goes on to discuss some of the advantages and disadvantages, and ends up recommending the 30-30 for white tail and 45-70 for moose and elk (or bear and other dangerous game).

From my perspective, I just don’t want that much shoulder punch.  I’m of the opinion that shooting ought to be a reasonably pleasurable experience, and if it is I’ll do it more and get better at it.

A 30-30 lever action rifle is easy to shoot.  Really easy.  Fun, accurate and pleasurable.

Then again, there are folks who have shot all of these guns so much that it doesn’t really matter.  They’re already that good at it all, so no need for much more time at the range or in the field plinking or target shooting.

And if the really big bore gun meets your needs the best, that’s why we have variety.

By the way, I once knew a Marine Scout Sniper who shot the Barret .50.  He came away with headaches every day from the range because of the concussive blast.