Archive for the 'Firearms' Category

I keep hearing folks complain about 1911 reliability, and frankly I’m nonplussed every time I hear it.  Out of thousands and thousands of round through two 1911s, I’ve never had a single FTF/FTE.  No malfunctions of any kind, and that’s without extensive cleaning (although I do lubricate them before range trips).  Then again, these are high quality 1911s.

But I do enjoy listening to Ken Hackathorn and Bill Wilson discuss the history and engineering behind Browning’s design.  It was a gun built around the cartridge.  This is fine with me – I like the cartridge.  I always have, and I shoot it better than any other.

I haven’t tried it, but I don’t think I very much like it.  It seems to me that if you intend actually to use it, you’d better practice it a lot.

It’s a very long article with pros and cons on each of the many guns they tested.  The Beretta A400 Xtreme Plus was the winner.

The post title is correct.  That’s good shooting by both of them.

Of course, she’s shooting a very nice 223 rifle (SAKO) with a very long barrel (24″) along with a heavy bullet (80.5 grain Berger).  But still, that’s good shooting and a great job of taking the 223 out that far.

Rex.

Competition is a good thing.  I like the recent flurry of red dot sight designs, prism sights, LPVO, etc.  If EOTech and Trijicon want to stay competitive, they’re going to have to come down a bit on prices.

But what do I know.

I love competition, and not the kind that awards every participant with a trophy.  Competition makes everyone better.  In the end, it’s up to the buyer.

First, Beretta 92X.  This is just an unboxing.

Next, CZ Shadow 2, which seems to be quite popular among competition shooters.

BLUF: This gun is heavy, but it’s a race car and wants to run fast and has a very high capacity magazine (19 rounds).

TTAG has what I consider a very good explanation on FFP versus SFP (although we’ve covered that before as well).  It’s worth lifting a bit out.

As you may have gathered, first focal plane scopes place the reticle in front of the magnification lens, resulting in a reticle that shrinks or grows as the magnification is adjusted. That means the reticle’s tic marks or gradations always cover the same minutes of angle or milliradians, regardless of the magnification level. The measurements of the reticle are accurate at any magnification.

So your holdovers are correct at any magnification.  That’s the upshot.

That can be really useful for rapid ranging or engagement at distances without dialing the magnification up or setting the turrets. While that might be of limited use in a more simplistic reticle, with a mil grid like the HorusVision Tremor or the Schmidt & Bender GR²ID reticles, there is little need to manipulate the turrets once the optic is zeroed.

The shooter can accomplish all adjustments using holds. But those holds would be dependent on magnification in a second focal plane scope. In contrast, the shooter can range, engage, and adjust at any magnification with a first focal plane. It makes engagement far quicker. That might be much more of a tactical consideration than for, say, competition or hunting. But it is still a valid consideration.

In many ways, this choice does depend on your budget and requirements. Many with a sniper background (including the author) still question the point of a second focal plane variable optic. Others argue that the reticle on a first focal plane optic gets too small at lower magnifications and too large at higher, obscuring the target.

So there are downsides too.