High End Defense has brought out an interesting new pistol optics mounting system at the 2024 NRA Annual Meeting. This new magnetic red dot mount allows users to add on a pistol dot onto a non-optic ready pistol easily utilizing the rear sight and magnets. So you no longer need to have any milling on the slide done, and no mounting plates or tools are needed for a pistol red dot. Instead, it locks into place using two components. The High End Defense rear sight first needs to be installed into place in the rear sight dovetail. Then the magnetic mount keys into place on the slide and the rear sight to lock into place.
Images at the link.
I wondered how long it would be before someone broke into this market. It made sense to me years ago. Slide a mount into the dove tail and you’re off to the races.
Apparently, the magnet doesn’t lose zero. It seems to me the only thing you lose without milling a slide is height over bore (if what you want is a sleek profile and low height).
I like Tim Harmsen and have talked with him before. Occasionally I disagree with him. This is one of those occasions.
Tim focuses on the fact that there isn’t a firing pin block on the CZ Shadow 2 Compact. I’ll let you watch the video for the details of his objections.
However, there are numerous videos where guys beat on the hammer with a mallet and cannot get the gun to fire. See here for an example. There are others like it.
The problem seems to stem from the use of an aftermarket firing pin, so the moral of the story is don’t use an aftermarket firing pin.
Frankly, I don’t think Tim did his research before posting this video.
During an exercise, shooting factory 115gr hardball from a well-known and reputable manufacturer, a bullet jumped forward far enough to protrude from the face of the cylinder and thus prevent the cylinder from rotating normally. In fact, the bullet jumped forward far enough to physically separate from the case. This not only precluded the revolver from continuing to fire, but it also made it impossible to swing out the cylinder, so the revolver could now not be reloaded!
Honestly I had never considered this failure mode before. But after all, the 9mm cartridge is a rimless cartridge, so one should maybe expect to see this from time to time.
However, I’ve never seen this failure when Jerry Miculek is shooting his S&W 9mm revolver, and he likes his a lot. In fact, he broke one world record with it.
But Jerry uses moon clips. I cannot see how this failure mode could occur if you’re using moon clips.
If any smart gunsmiths care to explain how this failure could happen while using moon clips I’ll listen. But absent such an explanation, I assume that using moon clips prevents this failure mode.
Many commonly-used terms in the shooting community aren’t widely understood or used in a consistent context, so it’s important to define what we are talking about. The technical term “node” refers to the points on a wave at which the amplitude or displacement is the smallest. In terms of a vibrating object like a rifle barrel, it’s the point at which the vibrating barrel moves the least. A rifle barrel does have nodes as it vibrates during and after a shot is fired, but when someone refers to “finding their rifle’s nodes,” they’re referring to finding the charge weight and velocity that causes the bullet to exit at or near that node or dead spot in the barrel’s movement as it vibrates back and forth.
[ … ]
When I brought up the subject with Shooting Editor John B. Snow, he said that all his data had supported the idea that chasing nodes doesn’t gain you anything. He and other high-level shooters at team events will even tailor their loads to target matching velocities to simplify drop and windage calculations between shooting partners …
He goes on to discuss a number of interesting points – interesting to me, at least, including whether a 3- or 5-round group is really sufficient to show anything of value. I agree with him. It’s not.
This is true for a number of reasons. Let’s move past the implications of chaos theory. Atoms are moved by Brownian motion. Atoms bond together to form crystalline structures. Crystalline structures can slip against each other. The barrel heats as it is fired. This motion changes each time the barrel sustains a round being fired through it.
There are other effects as well. This all means that a 3-round group isn’t really relevant for anything much except inflating your ego. Now, let’s move past the issue of repeatability due to physical effects and ponder whether the action of a bullet travelling down a barrel is governed by a deterministic process or a Monte Carlo process. That is, if you could exactly measure the grains of powder charge, exactly govern the bullet weight, and exactly control the barrel temperature, each and every time a rifle is fired, would the bullet go into exactly the same hole each time? Or would the group behave as a random process in which the grouping is always described by a standard distribution?
I think about things like that.
I prefer to just do the best I can and shoot the best equipment I can find within reason. I am not a performance precision rifle competition shooter. If I was, I would probably do the things he’s talking about.
But I wouldn’t assume that a 3-shot group meant much of anything.
I have found the trigger on the FN pistol to be squishy and with too much take up, whether in single action or double action. Even though hammer-fired, it’s not a 1911. But they make the 460 Rowland conversion kits for multiple handguns.
He tests JHPs, so it’s not a fair test for penetration (hint: the 460 Rowland dumps all of its energy in the first five inches, which would be good for personal defense). But wait until the end when he tests the penetrator round. The temporary and permanent wound cavity is enormous.
I have to say it’s a good looking gun and seems to run very well.
However, I also have to say that I would rather they come out with a commander size 1911 with the bobtail design and the SS slide rather than the aluminum slide. A 1911 carrier has already accepted that the gun will weigh more and has decided that he’s okay with that. In fact, I don’t consider it a detriment to the gun. I think it’s an advantage.
I also have to weigh in with one more comment, and it agrees with their comment. They should have put an optic cut on the gun. Most modern 1911 owners are not purists. I’m not.
Finally, in this reddit/Firearms post, Kimber is just taking a beat down in the comments for unreliability, FTF and FTE.
The 6.5 Creedmoor is a cartridge of great debate. Mention it among different groups of shooters, grab some popcorn, and wait; someone is going to get triggered. However, mention the 6.5 PRC in a group of shooters and the response will be different. The 6.5 PRC is loved by hunters.
Well, I’m sorry if I offend any 6.5 PRC fans out there, but that’s a dumb reaction.
He goes on to give a very good breakdown of the ballistic performance of each cartridge, and then ends with this.
Things change significantly when the PRC barrel is a 20-inch although the match load is still nearly 100 fps faster. But the hunting loads take a big hit, with velocities nearly the same as the 24-inch Creedmoor barrel. This being the case, energy on target will be the same. In other words, the 20-inch PRC is no more effective than the 6.5 Creedmoor. Yes, you benefit from a shorter rifle, but you also gain more recoil.
[ … ]
With four inches less barrel, the 6.5 PRC is basically a 6.5 Creedmoor with more recoil.
A 24″ barrel is front heavy anyway. I wouldn’t carry it.
So basically, you gain the ability to shorten the rifle barrel length and equal the performance of the 6.5 Creedmoor, and gain recoil.
7 months ago
