Firearms and Shooting

Ryan, more capacity is always nice, but for an edc concealed carry gun I'm good as long as it has 6 rounds. More power is also nice, but I value controllability more than power.

Part of my hierarchy of desireable attributes has to do with enjoyment of shooting. I go shooting frequently, and I want to be well practiced with what I carry. I could carry a 19 ounce 357 mag, but I wouldn't want to practice with it regularly, therefore it won't be a carry gun for me.

Edit to add: Not sure if the above answered your question. I won't be carrying the 43X instead of the 42. If I want to conceal carry something with more capacity and/or power than the 42 I would probably go with my Walther Q5. If I knew I was going to keep a coat on I would carry my CZ P09. If I were to open carry, or carry sort-of concealed ie. hiking with the gun in a pack I would carry my S&W 8 shot 357 mag. However, more than not if I'm hiking I'll just open carry the 357 mag. 99% of the time, regardless of clothing or weather I'm just going to carry the 42... because it is light, small, and shoots like a full sized gun.


Chumgeyser on Youtube
E-nep throwing Brotherhood. Charter Member



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/30/2019 08:17PM by Chum.

Ryan, one more thing. I have on several occasions open carried my 357 while conceal carrying the 42. I like that combo.


Chumgeyser on Youtube
E-nep throwing Brotherhood. Charter Member

Quote
Chum
Not sure if the above answered your question.

Yeah you answered it perfectly, no worries dude. I agree on the capacity thing, I view 6 as sufficient and something like the 12 rounds in the USPc as being a virtual guarantee that you won’t run out. I didn’t know you had an 8 shot .357, that’s awesome! Great outdoors gun. Don’t you have that Kimber K6 3”, too?

—

I got the TLR-3 in the mail today, opened it after work, and at this point all I can say is that I hope it withstands the recoil of the gun and cartridge because I couldn’t be happier with a $70 addition to the gun. This is far more advantageous than a $120 set of night sights on this particular pistol.

If it survives a few hundred rounds of .40 without any problems, I think I’ll even get an OWB holster for the gun/light combo to use as an outdoors gun. The light would be tremendous in the woods, camping, night fishing for brown trout, etc. It’s really cool.

I can’t imagine going back to a no-light setup for home defense now, I see why guys are so insistent on the light as part of that setup. It’s a huge advantage and probably a good bit of legal insurance in the event you had to use it, what with the target identification and all.

The tree is about 30 or 35 yards away:

Also, Sunday evening I decided to do a full disassembly of the USP Compact’s frame, with the exception of the trigger itself, the slide stop spring, and the mag release. I wanted to do it for cleaning purposes and for a bit of light polishing of all known contact points in the trigger parts.

It really wasn’t that bad. Certainly more complicated than a Glock, it’s probably on par with a 1911 as far as complexity and the finesse required to put all the parts back together, but overall it’s not that bad. I’d have no reservations about doing it again or changing out parts on my own.

Ryan, nice on the tlr3. I have a 6 on the 42 and 43x and a 1HL on my CZ. The 1 is like a spotlight, plus it has a green laser. It brings a lot to the platform imo.

That USP compact looks slick.

Yes, I do have a Kimber K6 3". I need to send it back to Kimber as the cylinder locks up after I shoot it awhile.


Chumgeyser on Youtube
E-nep throwing Brotherhood. Charter Member

Quote
Chum
That USP compact looks slick.

Yeah I’m quite happy with it. In terms of looks, I think the USP series is about as good as it gets. It’s got a retro 90’s European vibe and also represents one of the very best handguns of the late 1900’s. It’l make a really cool nostalgia piece in 50 years. [me as an old guy] : “Back when I was a young whippersnapper...”

The light is about the perfect size for it, the overall package is still quite small, and a few people with smaller and weaker hands than me (not that I’m Shane Carwin) have been able to use the gun without any issues. I think it’s gonna remain the home defense gun for quite some time. The DA/SA with manual safety makes it unlikely to be fired accidentally, chicks can get a good grip and fire it just fine, it’s small enough for various drawers and small safes, packs 12 rounds of the hottest .40 I can find, and it’s got a light on it. Pretty close to ideal for inside the house. At least in my view.

Quote
Chum
Yes, I do have a Kimber K6 3". I need to send it back to Kimber as the cylinder locks up after I shoot it awhile.

Dang! That stinks. I bet they’ll take care of it though.

Size comparison of the Glock 27 and the PM40, I can also replicate the comparative pictures with the USPc if you’re curious:

This is a comparison I did in order to determine what ammo type I might want to invest in as my standard load for my standard pistol cartridge, the .40 S&W.

Velocity and trajectory were calculated on the Hornady app using Nosler’s claimed BC’s for each bullet, TKO and Momentum were calculated here - [www.n4lcd.com] - Muzzle velocities are estimates based on customer-reported velocities from pistols in the 3” to 3.5” barrel range that’s representative of my pistols. Actual velocities may vary slightly but the general comparative values should remain consistent enough to make the following things useful, regardless of slight changes in actual muzzle velocity :


Comparison of Underwood/Nosler .40 S&W Ammo: Power Across the 75 Yard Effective Range Using 180, 150, and 135 Grain Bullets:

At the Muzzle -

180’s : 1,025 FPS and TKO/Momentum of 10/26

150’s : 1,225 FPS and TKO/Momentum of 10/26

135’s : 1,325 FPS and TKO/Momentum of 10/25



At 25 yards -

180’s : 990 FPS and TKO/Momentum of 10/25

150’s : 1,130 FPS and TKO/Momentum of 9/24

135’s : 1,195 FPS and TKO/Momentum of 9/23



At 50 yards -

180’s : 955 FPS and TKO/Momentum of 9/24

150’s : 1,055 FPS and TKO/Momentum of 9/22

135’s : 1,085 FPS and TKO/Momentum of 8/20



At 75 yards -

180’s : 5.2” low, 925 FPS, and TKO/Momentum of 9/23

150’s : 3.15” low, 995 FPS, and TKO/Momentum of 8/21

135’s : 2.5” low, 1,005 FPS, and TKO/Momentum of 7/19


Net Results:

- All were approximately equal in power at point-blank range but with a probable and not unimportant advantage to the lighter/faster bullets in expansion speed.

- The 180’s maintained their power the most consistently, losing only 10%/11.5% at 75 yards vs. the loss of 20%/19% and 30%/24% for the 150 and 135 grain bullets, respectively.

- For all-around use in any environment or circumstance, especially outdoors/hunting, the 180 grain bullet is the clear choice. It will basically punch 0.625” holes through whatever I happen to need to shoot and at all possible ranges, indoors or out.

- If close ranges of 25 yards or under on human targets are known to be the only use case, the 150 grain loading is quite possibly a superior choice due to the likely faster expansion created by the higher impact velocity. It would presumably make larger holes and than the 180 grain bullet and still get good penetration, out to about 20 yards or so, but begin to taper off in performance after that while the 180 grain just keeps chugging along and doing its thing.

- The 135 grain load may be an excellent choice for point-blank ranges on human targets, but it simply loses velocity too quickly to be an interesting option to me.

- Considering that the 180 grain bullet is the most broadly useful, I will probably choose to standardize to that cartridge and simply switch between guns depending upon the role that needs filling. The G27 for all-around use in any environment, the PM40 for highly-concealed carry, and the USPc for home defense.

- Using 180’s in the Glock, 150’s in the PM40, and 135’s in the USPc would actually have some real merit and make a lot of sense because of the potential ranges and potential targets. However, that would create a lot of complexity and require a lot of trial and error in order to find practice ammo for each gun that hits to a similar point on the target. I think it’s more sensible to simply go with the 180 grain bullet across all platforms and know that any of the three firearms can handle anything I get myself into with equal effectiveness.

I fired 6 rounds of two types of ammo through the PM40 and G27 this morning side-by-side, and the results were somewhat in line with what I had expected; the G27 needs a much heavier recoil spring, the slide is really slamming back hard and this creates a pop to the hand that is uncomfortable, the PM40 is more pleasant to shoot at this point. The Glock had less muzzle rise but a harder impact on the hand and the brass ejection was very erratic. A Wolff non-captive guide rod and probably a set of 20 or 22 pound springs is order. That should reduce the felt recoil by slowing down the slide, improve the consistency of the brass ejection pattern, and save the gun from unnecessary wear and tear.

Ryan,
I had always wanted some Wolff springs for my two S&W 5906's, you look like you have a lot of experience with them. They were always recommended from the gun mags, but that isn't saying much. The stock springs seem to work fine, but I am only dealing with 9mm. Do you think they are worth upgrading to?

"I am still discussing issues of steels and performance at this stage."
--Cliff Stamp

"Cause geometry cuts, .....steel determines the level and the duration"
--Roman Landes

"But in general, I'm all about high performance, Ergos, safety. That's why I've been accused of 'designing in the dark' "
--Sal Glesser

Jason, I’ve used various Wolff springs on a few of my autos. I mainly like them because they’re not terribly expensive, they have always appeared to be noticeably nicer looking than the factory springs (they look and feel smoother in texture and are very consistently shaped/sized), and I know they’ll have springs for virtually any gun I own. Shotguns, rifles, revolvers, autos, etc. If it was at all popular in the last 100 years, they’ve probably got full replacements for it.

I’m not sure if your two guns need them, it would depend on how much they’ve been shot and/or stored loaded. But it certainly couldn’t hurt to get some new springs. With your 5906s, since you’ve got two of them, you could just get a Wolff “Service Pak” for one pistol and then compare feel and function to the other one with the original springs. You’d need SKU # 69391, which is $15 before shipping and contains the following:

“recoil spring, extra power firing pin spring, hammer spring, extractor spring, 2 ejector springs, magazine catch spring, drawbar plunger spring, safety lever plunger spring, slide lock plunger spring, safety lever detent spring and rear sight body plunger spring.”

Not bad at all for $15. I think it’s wise to get a couple of their service paks for a given gun if you plan on keeping it indefinitely, that way you’ll always have spares ready when you need them.

Note also Jason that in most cases the only springs that might need regular replacement are basically the recoil spring and the hammer or striker or firing pin spring. Most of the other small springs in pistols will last a very very long time because they just don’t see the same type of constant and heavy loading that the others do.

Edited for grammar.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 10/03/2019 12:28AM by Ryan Nafe.

Ryan,
Awesome, thank you. I will take a look. I haven't been going shooting lately because I don't have a car anymore and money has been tight. It definitely is on my list of things to get, and the price isn't that bad. I need to get a good set of drift punches also if I wanted to replace all of the springs, or I could get a gunsmith to do it.

"I am still discussing issues of steels and performance at this stage."
--Cliff Stamp

"Cause geometry cuts, .....steel determines the level and the duration"
--Roman Landes

"But in general, I'm all about high performance, Ergos, safety. That's why I've been accused of 'designing in the dark' "
--Sal Glesser

No problem dude.

I think for sights on the G27 I’m gonna keep it simple and inexpensive and do what this guy did:

Considering a p365 or waiting for the new p365sas. Seems like the bugs have been worked out of the platform. Any thoughts?

Well Tarantella, I’ve still not shot one of those or handled it much, but from a practical perspective the 365 does have a lot going for it. Small, good trigger, plenty of ammo capacity, etc. And as much as I prefer .40 over 9mm, especially from short guns, the 9mm still has a meaningful increase in power over both a .38 revolver or a .380 auto. I say go for it.

I hadn’t heard of the SAS version until you mentioned it, it does look interesting. I would be cautious of the sight system though because it you don’t like it, well, you’re basically stuck with it anyway. It’s certainly an interesting setup.

I did order the Glock factory steel sights last night. $29 and change, including shipping and tax. The Wolff recoil springs and guide rod system came in at $39 and change, including shipping and tax. Those should be here in about a week.

Other than the above two things, I did install an OEM 8lb. connector that I had on hand and at the moment I’m planning to keep it that way. I like it, the pull weight is a bit heavier (less likely to have an AD when re-holstering in the suede Galco appendix holster and also more friendly to cold of gloved hands) and the whole action is much more crisp and positive. The wall is very clear and solid, and there’s much less creep before the break.

Aside from those three things it’s gonna be left alone. If I need an elevation adjustment on the sights I can just get the appropriate rear sight for all of $10.

I finally got the 336 back together and was going to try sighting it in today, but I'm sick and it's very windy, so that will have to wait.

It took 3 tries and I chased the magazine tube spring across the garage twice, and the hammer strut 3 times. Were an outsider watching, it would have been pretty comical to watch me put all the action parts in, then realize the loading gate was left out, then do it again and realize the safety gate was left out.

Of all things the front barrel band gave me the most trouble. It's not marked and appears symmetrical. There evidently is a top/bottom/left/right, because I could only get it to go on one way. I think I could take it apart and reassemble it without video help now, and I learned a couple tricks to keep from shooting the hammer strut across the room again.

Me2, I bet it wasn’t easy to re-assemble but at least it all came together. Levers are notoriously complicated with that kinda stuff. Perhaps I forgot, but why did you have it taken apart to begin with?

—-

Shot 50 rounds of fmj through the G27 as well as the Kahr and the H&K today just to get a feel for the Glock as compared to the Kahr and H&K. I have to say, it’s looking to me like I can shoot the gun faster and more accurately at 15 yards than either of the other two. It’s almost disappointing because of how much I like the other two guns. I’d still bet they’re more accurate than the G27 when fired from a rest, but just in terms of my ability to hit the 8” plate at 15 yards as quickly as I can get back on target, the G27 was faster than both others and I had fewer misses.

The mags are still stiff so it’s very difficult to fully load them to 9 rounds, but I managed to do three consecutive 8 round strings without a single miss at 15 yards. Probably not more than one second between shots, I was firing pretty quickly. It’s certainly bulkier than the PM40 but at the moment I’m not complaining about that if I can shoot it that well when I’m only 60 or so rounds into the gun.

I mostly wanted to take the front down so I could lock the barrel in a vise and take the rear sight off. I also needed to clean the action since shooting it last time. Locking the barrel in a vise near the rear sight required taking all the furniture off the front. There was some rust on the dovetail so I had to hit it pretty hard to start it moving.

Beyond that it was just a good cleaning and inspection to see what was under the furniture and if anything was in really bad shape. I found a pretty rusty spot under the front barrel band on the magazine tube and wanted to check for more. Fortunately it was just surface rust and no pitting. I'm sure it has never been taken down and cleaned to this point before.

I still might put new sights on it, but I wanted to be able to sight the factory ones in and at least see if I like them, now that putting a scope on it isn't something I want to do.

Ok so here’s a puzzle that I can’t currently solve:

Today I attempted to verify the point of impact at 50 yards with my grandpa’s Remington 760 pump .308, using the iron sights, and I had some very puzzling results. At 50 yards it was shooting 6 to 7 inches high, regardless of rear sight elevation or ammo type. I used Federal 180 grain soft points and Federal 130 grain hollow points, the rear sight was moved from the highest to lowest elevation, and I couldn’t get the point of impact to shift by more than an inch or so.

Anyone have an idea on why that’s happening?

Sorry, got nothing on that one. Is 50 yards too close? The iron sights are high at that range no matter how low? How were you shooting, like standing, kneeling, prone, rested, off hand?

Well 50 yards shouldn’t be too close for that gun, and the bullets were landing in more or less the same place every time regardless of sight adjustment. We were shooting it off a bench, just letting your hand rest on top of the bag while holding the forend. Nothing fancy.

—-



Offhand at 7 yards, 10 shots with about one second between each, using the Magtech 155 grain JHP ammo. Other than the first shot being pulled low because of a flinch (it’s the one just below the black circle) I’m pretty satisfied with that level of accuracy. Triple the distance to about 21 yards and subsequently triple the group size (excluding the flinch shot) from 2.75” to 8.25” and it looks like I should have no problems with using the gun effectively out to 20 yards or so. Not bad at all. I’ll have to redo it once I put the steel sights on it, pick a load and zero the gun with it, but after that it looks like I’ll be ready to roll.

"Del City Woman Who Fatally Shot Intruder Speaking Out To Clear Her Name
Sunday, October 6th 2019, 10:11 PM CDT
Updated: Sunday, October 6th 2019, 10:26 PM CDT
By: Aaron Brilbeck
Play Video

A woman who fatally shot a home intruder last month says the district attorney is not pursuing charges. So now she’s speaking out to clear her name. But, she says, more importantly, to give the victim’s family some peace.

Christy Birdsall says she was staying with a friend at a home located on Southeast 14th Street when Jason Grandstaff began to force his way in.

Earlier that morning she says Grandstaff slashed her tires. Birdsall says she barricaded herself in a bedroom and grabbed a 22-caliber pistol as Grandstaff broke through the door.

“He said ‘what are you going to do shoot me? I ain’t scared.’ And at that point the gun went off,” Birdsall said. “I saw a puff of smoke and heard a bang and he said it again, he said, 'I’m not scared.' Then he just kinda wobbled a little bit and fell over next to the table.”

[www.news9.com]

Anecdotal, but I still think too much is made of caliber when it comes to self defense.


Chumgeyser on Youtube
E-nep throwing Brotherhood. Charter Member

I wouldn’t argue that you couldn’t get the job done with a .22 or .25 or another tiny cartridge, what I would argue is that bigger cartridges that produce wider wounds coupled with exit wounds are gonna bleed people out faster, shutting them down even if they don’t voluntarily stop doing what they were doing.

I’ve observed many times when shooting animals that if a bullet does enough damage, even in the absence of a direct CNS hit, the animal can try all it wants to keep doing what it was doing, but it’s body will very quickly stop functioning as normal and it will be prevented from doing what it wants. Smaller or marginal cartridges will still kill it, but it will move off as if it wasn’t hit at all.

What I want to achieve by using things like the .40 is to cause enough damage to get the body to stop working as fast as possible because I won’t ever shoot someone unless I believe my life or someone else’s is in immediate mortal danger.

-

On Monday morning I made one sale and a straight trade, later in the week when I pick up my end of the trade I’ll show you guys what it is. I think it’s a near-perfect counterpart to the G27 and will be my choice over both a shotgun and an AR.

A couple things to add:

There’s a distinction to be made between a person getting shot and subsequently giving up, and someone who’s determined enough to not give up unless they’re physically incapable of it because they’ been hurt badly enough to not function anymore. The first case is one where the mouse guns could be perfectly adequate, the second case is where the larger cartridges become especially useful.

Another reason why I like the more powerful cartridges is because they offer more utility in outdoors situations. With something like a small .40 S&W like the Kahr or the Glock, they could be used with defensive hollow points to kill deer, wolves, or mountain lions, and can be used with regular FMJ practice ammo to kill bear or moose with CNS shots.

It’s a one-gun solution to my needs. Urban or rural, extreme emergency or just day-to-day life, a small .40 will get the job done. A .22 isn’t in the same class there, it just doesn’t have the versatility I want.

[youtu.be]

This is a YT interview of a man who was in a self defense shooting. He was using a 40 caliber handgun. He shoot two people two times each. One of the two froze up and eventually dropped to the ground. The other ran away.

By posting this I'm not suggesting a .40 is the same as a 22lr. I'm just noting that in real life defensive use shootings there doesn't seem to be much of a difference in outcomes when humans are shot with various handgun calibers. Shot placement seems to be the main determining factor in stopping someone with a handgun. Taking the threat of cougars and bears out of the equation, doesn't it seem reasonable to suggest that a handgun that allows better and faster shot placement is more important in the defensive use role than power?


Chumgeyser on Youtube
E-nep throwing Brotherhood. Charter Member

Quote
Chum
He shoot two people two times each. One of the two froze up and eventually dropped to the ground. The other ran away.

While you’re not technically wrong in your description, I think you’re leaving out some facts that are directly in alignment with the points I made about the larger handgun cartridges. One guy was hurt badly enough that his body stopped functioning normally, collapsing soon afterwards and unable to harm the shooter. The other guy was hurt badly enough that not only did he stop doing what he was doing but he also barely made it out of the building before collapsing and dying. I would be very doubtful of the same two outcomes being produced if the guy had a .22.

Quote
Chum
...doesn't it seem reasonable to suggest that a handgun that allows better and faster shot placement is more important in the defensive use role than power?

If you’ve got a very powerful gun and you can’t hit what you’re aiming at and you can’t shoot it quickly, then yes. But if I can shoot a .40 or a .45 or a .357 Sig or Magnum with no meaningful loss in speed or accuracy compared to a .380 or 9mm, then why not use the more powerful rounds?

Chum, Ryan:
That is why it is a common suggestion for a SD gun to be the biggest bore that you can shoot accurately and quickly. Most modern HP designs perform similarly well for a handgun round. This is talked about in the Federal HP YouTube I shared a while back in this thread. Things are different for home defense or an all around gun. For SD you are trying to stop the person from doing the action that they are doing. This is why a baseball bat or a baton isn't a great self defense tool while a a gun is. That being said, I wouldn't want to be shot with a .22 LR, or hit with a baton or baseball bat. The only thing that stops people faster than a handgun is a rifle. One could argue a taser might work, but I wouldn't bet my life on one.

"I am still discussing issues of steels and performance at this stage."
--Cliff Stamp

"Cause geometry cuts, .....steel determines the level and the duration"
--Roman Landes

"But in general, I'm all about high performance, Ergos, safety. That's why I've been accused of 'designing in the dark' "
--Sal Glesser

Quote
Ryan Nafe
with no meaningful loss in speed or accuracy compared to a .380 or 9mm, then why not use the more powerful rounds?

Agreed. I will contend that there is a loss of speed when shooting multiple rounds with more power. The meaningful part is debatable.


Chumgeyser on Youtube
E-nep throwing Brotherhood. Charter Member