Now that AR parts are somewhat more available I am able to replace some stock stocks (haha). The M4 stocks work, but there are definitely better in terms of durability (or so I think) and especially storage. For my 6.8 I even would like to replace an M4 stock with a full A2.

So who builds the "best" one? Everyone has their opinion and favorite brand. Ever want to drop-test all of them and see which comes out ahead?

Well, GearScout.com did and it makes for a good read: http://blogs.militarytimes.com/gearscout/2012/02/01/buttstock-bashfest-gearscout-finds-out-just-how-far-tough-talk-goes/

The good news? It seems like they all did comparably. The bad news? The all broke.
Oh well, I still need some place to put extra batteries.

Source: opb.org

"So the sheriff made the decision to go ahead and focus on Multnomah County resident applications, try and reduce that backlog, and then we'll re-open the process for Washington State residents who have business here in Oregon."

Oregon is a little different than most states in that while resident CCW licenses are required by law (shall issue) if the person meets the requirements, non-resident CCW licenses (contiguous states only) are completely discretionary (may issue). This means that the it can (and does) vary from county to county. I know of at least one county that simply does not issue to non-Oregon residents.

It would appear that the Multnomah County is currently inundated by applications. We can assume that since they get a lot of WA applications because of Portland. They state that they will reopen the applications at least from WA in the future. What about the other states, I wonder?

Is it coincidental to the fact that Multinomah County just passed some interesting new firearm restrictions? New restrictions include the open carrying of a firearm while hiking and making it illegal to have a loaded magazine in "public" even if you don't have a firearm! See source: Oregonian

I guess we will find out what happens in the future.

My local gunshop called to let me know that my Glock 23 and 27 Gen4s had come in! They said that Glock was definitely shipping now and that they had received more Glocks in the last two weeks than they have all year. Blue Labels, even for law enforcement were running almost two months. My pistols took 2 1/2 months.

Initial impressions?
Build quality is very good. Finish looks like it has changed again. It is more dull and a little greyer. It looks like it will scratch easier than previous iterations, but it is too early to tell. Frame is still stamped made in Austria - folks had been telling me that the all U.S. made models had replaced the Austrian made ones. While the U.S. made models do exist, it appears that they are not in U.S. distribution yet (at least for the models I bought).

The trigger?
It also seems that Glock has been doing some work here. The original Gen4 triggers felt gritty, heavy and stiff (IMO), at least when compared with Gen3s. This pair have great triggers. It is clean with a crisp break. In fact, I think that the reset it better than the Gen3. The break itself seems to have less of the "sproing" found in Gen3s.

The feel?
I really like the "cuboid" grip texture. The small grip of the 23 fits my hand even better than the Gen3. The 27 small grip may be a bit too small. Range time will tell. I didn't like the mag release in pics but it does feel pretty good. I found nothing wrong with the Gen3 release so I would have preferred that they didn't change it.

That's all I can think of at the moment. I am glad to have some Gen4 to gain some experience on. Even the Glock Armorers Course was very light on them. I will report back when I get some range time on them. Unfortunately, I didn't expect both to come in at the same time, so I ran out of $ to buy ammmo :)

Eventually these will replace my other non-Glock brand polymer pistols as my daily CCW.

Obligatory camera phone pic below (click pic to enlarge):

gen4

I was talking to someone that is very firearm knowledgeable and I was surprised to hear him say that he carries his backup (a J-frame revolver) on an empty chamber.

I know that this was common in older revolvers, however most modern brand name revolvers have some sort of firing pin block. In fact, most of them are based on the Charter Arms design back in (I believe) the 60's. A lot of folks do not realize that Charter Arms released their design to the rest of the gun manufacturers - royalty free!

There are several variations of the revolver firing pin block system: S&W (tm - owned by its respective company) previously used a pivoting firing pin on its hammer and its more recent firing pin block and Ruger uses a transfer-bar safety.

In a nutshell, I have no hesitation carrying a modern quality revolver all chambers loaded. A J-frame only has 5-shots to begin with! Strange that a person would carry a J-frame with the hammer on an empty chamber, but have no problem carrying a striker-fired pistol chambered. But you need to do what you feel comfortable with.

In fact, I think I will also buy a couple of Charter Arms revolvers. I saw a southpaw lightweight at my LGS and the quality was very good, although a little rougher than the other two brands. I think it would smooth out nicely.

If you have recent experience with Charter Arms, please drop me a line. I am interested to know how it has worked out. Their new moon-clipless revolvers intrigue me.

She is one of our Senators. She represents CA. She writes and votes on legislation (although by her own admission doesn't read it first). And as she says:

I know the Constitution.

Well. She doesn't. And she doesn't even know she doesn't.

From http://michellemalkin.com/2013/02/10/constitutional-scholar-nancy-pelosi/ which has video:

“We avow the First Amendment. We stand with that and say that people have a right to have a gun to protect themselves. in their homes and their jobs, whatever, and that they — and the workplace and that they, for recreation and hunting and the rest,” Pelosi inarticulately told Wallace."

Apparently we have the right of workplace recreation and hunting.

If you haven't contacted your legislators yet, I urge you to do so immediately. I have posted the letter I wrote as a sample, as well as links to finding and contacting your legislators.

My sample letter: http://fortreg.com/firearms/?p=2715

This illustrates that Senators Feinstein and Boxer live in LA LA LAND. They are asking as a sign of how the people want gun control for civilians AND law enfocement to lay down their arms!

“The Senators feel the best course of action is to remove all weapons from law enforcement and private citizens so no one else gets hurt,” said a Senate communications intern. “When the gunman realizes that nobody else is armed, he will lay down his weapons and turn himself in…. that’s just human nature.”

Throughout the day, Senators Feinstein and Boxer made desperate pleas for their California constituents to turn in their guns and not confront the crazed gunman because this would be a perfect test of their anti-gun proposals.

Here is a great article/source: http://cleowaller.blogspot.com/2013/02/feinstein-and-boxer-ask-californians-to.html?spref=tw

and http://www.palookavillepost.com/2013/02/07/feinstein-and-boxer-ask-californians-to-lay-down-their-weapons-during-statewide-manhunt/

Glock Gen4s get a lot of flack for using a captive dual-recoil spring.
Ironically, Gen3s used them also but they were limited to their subcompact line: 26/27/etc. and also the much larger (although still called sub-compact) 29/30, etc. Other companies have quietly adopted them too, including S&W. I wonder how long until other companies adopt them for their full size pistols?

Now there have been some problems with the Gen4s dual-springs when used in the full-size pistols. It appears it has more to do with trying to use the same spring for multiple calibers. Something that Glock is famous for - instead of another part they slightly vary the mass/weight of their slides and use the same Recoil Spring Assembly (I will use Glock's acronym "RSA" here out).

The fix? A new recoil spring. According to Glock this was to reduce perceived/transmitted recoil to the shooter but also to reduce "battering" to their pistols. During their Armorer's course they specifically listed the 40 S&W as hard on pistols. They didn't say it but they implied that law enforcement guns had to be replaced/rebuilt mroe frequently than they would like.

You may have seen me refer to this captive system as the SeeCamp recoil system. SeeCamp was a pioneer in sub-compact pistols. They built a pistol and the dual-recoil system that actually works. I have attached their patent 4201113 from 1980. LINK to PDF: US4201113. Unfortunately, I couldn't find any actual pics.

seecamp

The Glock 26 RSA from http://www.southernoutdoorlife.com/mouseguns/glockall/stripped.jpg:

But Glock isn't the only one. Let's take a look at a few others in no particular order...

Colt Defender from: http://i218.photobucket.com/albums/cc177/DoubleAction77/Defender/000_0005.jpg

Kimber (Aeigis, CDP, etc): http://i71.photobucket.com/albums/i160/thegerk/Colt%20Automatics/Colt3inchDefenderRecoilsAssemblytopKimber3inchRecoilAssemblybottom.jpg

STI: http://i69.photobucket.com/albums/i64/tideclean/DSC00842.jpg

S&W 659: http://i814.photobucket.com/albums/zz62/prsabordo/smith%20and%20wesson/102_6394.jpg

Rohrbough: http://gunsgunsguns.net/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/4-Rohrbaugh-disassembled-300x176.jpg

S&W Shield: http://gunsgunsguns.net/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/8-disassembled-step-4.jpg

Springfield XDS: http://gunsgunsguns.net/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/10-disassembled-passive-safety-300x181.jpg

I include the S&W 3rd non-captive but still dual spring because it is similar (secondary spring is used as a buffer): http://www.vintagepistols.com/images/4506-4.jpg

Along somewhat similar notes Colt has been using dual springs for a while. Both the Delta Elite, Officers, and Mustang use dual springs of different weights and circumference so that one fits inside the other.
Colt Delta Elite: http://www.gunblast.com/images/Colt-DeltaElite/DSC05149.JPG

Colt Mustang: http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQjUzH8knvW6eFf7seTPqfZ1VtZjAvwOKWfuwbrVjzQIZI3VZG9uA

ParaOrdnance P10: http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v323/sv1cec/reviews/POcarry9/IMG_1139.jpg

So you can see that Glock is not alone in using the SeeCamp as "inspiration." All from a design and a sub-compact pistol made over 30 years ago! Glock, AFAIK is one of the few to put them into a mass production full size pistol. One has to wonder too...the S&W M&P Compact uses a standard single spring RSA. However, the Shield as we can see uses a dual-spring. hmm..

Not to be outdone by NY as the most restrictive state regarding firearms CA has introduced a new draconian bill:

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/02/08/gun-confiscation-bill-introduced-in-california-we-can-save-lives/?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

From: http://www.mercurynews.com/breaking-news/ci_22544460/californias-state-senate-democrats-roll-out-big-gun

The 10-bill package constitutes the single largest gun control push in decades in the Golden State, which already boasts some of the nation's strictest gun laws. It joins equally controversial proposals from Assembly Democrats that would regulate and tax ammunition sales and consider taking the state's 166,000 registered assault weapons from their owners.

I heard that next for consideration was a complete ban on birthday candles to follow (and expand) on Australia's model: http://world.time.com/2013/02/07/australian-kids-face-birthday-candle-ban-to-prevent-spreading-germs/

Somebody asked me for details on my earlier blog post about travelling through CA that high capacity mags (normal mags to most people) are classified by California Penal Code (recently) as a "public nuisance" and subject to confiscation. These are changes for 2012.

Here are a couple of sources:

http://www.easylawlookup.com/_easylookup.blp?grp_reset=ON&data=PENAL&site=EASY&pgno=0&dlevel=0&location=78232&subject=&ret_sz=50&stype=Paragraphs&sdata_=PENAL&sexact=exactly&smode=all+of+these+words&sterm=+18010&GO=Search

and

http://www.easylawlookup.com/_easylookup.blp?grp_reset=ON&data=PENAL&site=EASY&pgno=0&dlevel=0&location=78232&subject=&ret_sz=50&stype=Paragraphs&sdata_=PENAL&sexact=exactly&smode=all+of+these+words&sterm=+18010&GO=Search

and

http://www.easylawlookup.com/_easylookup.blp?data=PENAL&site=EASY&location=78232&spon=EASY&stype=P&sterm=18010&smode=AND&sexact=ON&ru_sz=50&pgno=1219&par=26654&dlevel=0&subject=#par_26654

and you might be surprised what else is on the list:

California Penal Code Section 18010

Legal Research Home > California Laws > Penal Code > California Penal Code Section 18010

(a) The Attorney General, district attorney, or city
attorney may bring an action to enjoin the manufacture of,
importation of, keeping for sale of, offering or exposing for sale,
giving, lending, or possession of, any item that constitutes a
nuisance under any of the following provisions
:
(1) Section 19290, relating to metal handgrenades.
(2) Section 20390, relating to an air gauge knife.
(3) Section 20490, relating to a belt buckle knife.
(4) Section 20590, relating to a cane sword.
(5) Section 20690, relating to a lipstick case knife.
(6) Section 20790, relating to a shobi-zue.
(7) Section 20990, relating to a writing pen knife.
(8) Section 21190, relating to a ballistic knife.
(9) Section 21890, relating to metal knuckles.
(10) Section 22090, relating to a nunchaku.
(11) Section 22290, relating to a leaded cane or an instrument or
weapon of the kind commonly known as a billy, blackjack, sandbag,
sandclub, sap, or slungshot.
(12) Section 22490, relating to a shuriken.
(13) Section 24390, relating to a camouflaging firearm container.
(14) Section 24490, relating to a cane gun.
(15) Section 24590, relating to a firearm not immediately
recognizable as a firearm.
(16) Section 24690, relating to an undetectable firearm.
(17) Section 24790, relating to a wallet gun.
(18) Section 30290, relating to flechette dart ammunition and to a
bullet with an explosive agent.
(19) Section 31590, relating to an unconventional pistol.
(20) Section 32390, relating to a large-capacity magazine.
(21) Section 32990, relating to a multiburst trigger activator.
(22) Section 33290, relating to a short-barreled rifle or a
short-barreled shotgun.
(23) Section 33690, relating to a zip gun.
(b) These weapons shall be subject to confiscation and summary
destruction whenever found within the state.
(c) These weapons shall be destroyed in the same manner described
in Section 18005
, except that upon the certification of a judge or of
the district attorney that the ends of justice will be served
thereby, the weapon shall be preserved until the necessity for its
use ceases.

and here is what Section 32390 says (just a circular reference):

Except as provided in Article 2 (commencing with Section
32400) of this chapter and in Chapter 1 (commencing with Section
17700) of Division 2 of Title 2, any large-capacity magazine is a
nuisance and is subject to Section 18010.

Wednesday, 09 January 2013 16:03

Some short Barrel 357 Magnum chronographed loads

Written by

Folks keep pinging me on data for short barrel revolvers and 357magnum. I am not done yet, but here is a snapshot of some of the data I have collected. It is limited but does have a sample from Ruger SP101 2.25", 3", Ruger GP100 3", and a couple of different S&W 2.5", 3" and 4" revolvers.

Click on image for fullsize:
357mag_loads

I know that some of them look weird (like the Speer 158gr 2.5" vs 3"), but that is what I have recorded. I will have to doublecheck those.

Page 6 of 17