Dorothea Lange made what is perhaps her most famous image, "Migrant
Mother", in 1936 while working for the Resettlement Administration.
What is often overlooked is her interaction with her subjects,
particularly Lange's reported use of a variant of the phrase "I'm
from the government, I'm here to help."
At SHOT I made a passing comment to Pharmacist Tommy that, in the
context of defensive shooting, practicing double taps was a tacit
admission that a person wasn't able to control their gun. He looked
at me quizzically, as I'm sure you're doing right now.
(Let's get some terminology out of the way. Most people shooting
double taps are firing two rounds in quick succession with one
sight picture. Adherents to the so-called "Modern" Technique would
scream that the term is used incorrectly, and that they are
actually shooting 'hammers'. I'll concede the point, in the same
way I concede that the Battle of Bunker Hill was in fact fought on
Breed's Hill - you'll note it's made no difference in elementary
school history lessons, however. I'll continue to use Bunker Hill
and double tap to describe what the majority hold that they
describe, because arguing the point wastes my time and doesn't
change the outcome anyhow.)
Let's start with a question: why practice the double tap as a
defensive tactic? When I watch surveillance and dashcam videos,
regardless of the training level of the shooter, I don't see the
stylized double tap. What I see instead, very consistently, is a
string of fire without artificial pauses. After all, bullets are
what stops bad guys -- and the faster those bullets get to him, the
better.
If you need to shoot your attacker six times, and choose to do so
with three double taps, that means the half-second pause between
those strings gives him a full second to hurt you more. How many
bullets can come out of his gun in one second? How many critical
stab wounds can he inflict? How far can he move? Giving the bad guy
any extra time is counter to your own self interest.
How about double-tapping, then assessing (as is still the
recommendation in some training backwaters)? The answer is that
there is no way to know ahead of time how many shots it's going to
take to make your bad guy go away. That being the case, why on
earth would you stop shooting at an arbitrary point if a threat is
present? The time to asses is after the threat is no longer in
front of your gun, whether that takes one, two, or five rounds.
Practicing to always do that at two rounds means that if your fight
goes longer and you stop to make your well-rehearsed assessment,
you're exposing yourself needlessly to danger.
I could go on, but my point is that the double tap makes no sense
in the context of surviving a lethal attack. The logical practice
routine would be to always fire a random-length string of shots:
two, three, four, and perhaps even occasionally five or six. Mix
'em up; don't get locked into any one pattern.
The double tap really doesn't have a use in defensive shooting, yet
people all over the country continue to practice it. I believe the
answer is simple, and I've observed it in action: if you ask any
random shooter, regardless of his or her proficiency or training
level, to shoot a string of three or four or five rounds at the
same cadence (with the same "split time", or elapsed time between
shots) as the double taps they're flinging downrange, the chances
are almost certain that they won't be able to do so.
What usually happens is that the first two shots land in acceptable
proximity to each other, but the third will climb significantly and
the fourth is usually off the target. In order to land all their
shots inside whatever reasonable target area is chosen, they need
to slow down - sometimes significantly. In other words, they can't
control their gun at that inflated rate.
Now, just about everyone will be faster at the double tap than at
an extended string of fire. The point is that the longer strings of
fire are what are most likely in the context of a defensive
shooting, because the natural reaction is likely to be shooting
until the threat goes away. If the gun can't be controlled in such
a realistic or plausible shooting scenario, then that shooter needs
a different gun (or much better technique) instead of gaming his or
her practice to artificially inflate competence.
Shooting double taps instead of more realistic strings serves as
proof that one cannot control the gun for the use to which it is
likely to be put. It's up to the shooter to recognize, admit, and
change.
I hope everyone enjoyed my little SHOT Show recap last week.
Between recovering from a nasty cold (which I picked up in Vegas)
and being a bit tired of talking guns, this morning is going to be
all linky, no thinky.
-- Over at theGeek With A Gun blog, there is a discussion
about my recent post on safety rules. He doesn't entirely agree
with me, which is okay - the important thing is that he's THINKING
about the rules and their effect on those who hear them, rather
than doing the knee-jerk "the four rules are immutable" routine.
The more people who understand that any rule which requires people
to pretend something is doomed to failure, the better off we'll all
be.
-- As you may know, I've become a fan of the Forgotten Weapons
blog. This morning I checked my RSS feed to find that they have an
article on theHotchkiss Revolving Cannon! (Hey, it's a revolver -
it's topical for this blog!)
-- There was an interesting article published in TheJury Expert,
which is the journal of the American Society of Trial Consultants,
back in September of 2009. In it, Glenn Meyer did a little test on
theeffect of firearm appearance on the opinions of a
mock jury. The results were a little
surprising.
I knew that my trip to SHOT Show, driving both ways as I did, would
force me well outside of my normal paleo diet. So be it! I embraced
the cheat, devouring several versions of a food which I normally
don't eat: the hamburger. I ate burgers at a number of places, some
chains and some local independents, including the almost mythical
(they're not in Oregon!) In-N-Out Burger.
One of the things I noticed right away is that most of the places
in California ask you how you'd like your burger cooked. This may
not seem like a big deal to you, but thanks to the nannies who
populate the Oregon legislature we're forced to eat our burgers one
way, and one way only: well done. It was a pleasure to once again
have a burger that was pink in the middle, the way they should
be!
I'll start with In-N-Out, since one of my goals this trip was to
give them a try. I ordered, with the help of a friendly and helpful
counter clerk, a Double-Double "Animal Style". It was edible, but
as I finished it I was left wondering what all the fuss was about.
It wasn't all that flavorful, the bland sauce covered up any beef
flavor, and even the grilled onions tasted like some sort of
polymer substitute. The chocolate shake wasn't much better, and
frankly I was amazed at how bad the fries were. I've been there,
done that, and don't plan to go back. I don't get the
attraction.
I also tried one of the Six Dollar Burgers at Carl's Jr. It was
actually pretty good! Lots of good quality vegetables, the meat was
seasoned decently, and there was just the right amount of sauce.
Probably the best chain restuarant hamburger I've had.
The surprising burger of the trip came from a little dive in
Corning, CA called "Bartel's Giant Hamburgers". I was looking for
something to eat and saw this little place with a parking lot full
of cars. Figuring that so many people couldn't be wrong, I walked
in and ordered one of their regular sized, two-patty burgers with
the works, medium rare. It was delicious! Lots of zesty onions (but
not too many), minimal sauce (but certainly enough to taste), and
well seasoned patties. It reminded me of the great burgers from the
little stand in the small town in which I grew up. I thought about
stopping again on my way home, but I wanted to sample the legendary
In-N-Out so I passed it by. I wish now that I hadn't!
All my other meals were eaten at restaurants in Vegas, including
the Wolfgang Puck Postrio in the Venetian - where I suffered a
major case of sticker shock when the bill arrived. It was a
terrific meal, I'll admit, and is a huge step up from the buffet
fare of the Vegas of the early 1980s, but you certainly pay for the
privilege.
I'm back home, back on my diet, and thinking wistfully of the
burgers I ate last week. So long, non-paleo food, it was good
knowing you!
In the last installment I bemoaned the current fad of attaching
AR-15 buttstocks to anything that doesn't move. I'd like to have
the adjustability, mind you, but without the wobble and general
unsightliness of the AR stock. I was passing by the ATI booth, and
found that in addition to their AR-style collapsible stocks
(they're big in that market), they also make a more traditional
looking collapsing stock that incorporates both a cheekrest and a
very thick recoil absorbing pad.
Called the Akita, they have models to fit a
wide variety of guns - including my beloved Ithaca Model 37 in 20
gauge! Comes in black, earthtones, or a faux woodgrain finish. It
will give me the adjustability my short arms need without the Mall
Ninja look I despise, and i think I'll be buying one or two!
Notice
how the cheekrest covers the extended portion of the Akita
stock.
If I had to pick the biggest crowd pleaser of this show, I'd have
to say it was the new Colt Model 1877 'Bulldog' Gatling gun.Colt is now making replicas(technically, I
suppose, it's simply a long production hiatus) of the smallest
production Gatling gun. Fully functional and authentic in every
way, they're limiting the first run of these beauties to 50;
ironically, that's almost three times the number that were
originally produced!
I had a good chat with John Buhay, the man in charge of the program
(and the person who assembles every one of them.) They went back to
the original Colt blueprints, but those proved to be incomplete and
in places actually inaccurate. It was necessary to find one of the
existing originals, take it apart, and reverse engineer some of the
parts. Getting their first prototype to work took a year and a
half! The result, though, is that the parts of the new guns will
interchange with the originals. That's testament to his team's
desire to make them exactly like Colt did originally.
Well, not exactly! The new guns have far better finishing than the
originals could ever hope to have, and they're stronger too. The
majority of the gun is produced from brass castings, and by using
more aluminum in the alloy and less of the original lead they were
able to dramatically increase the strength and wear resistance of
the brass. These guns are stronger, and will last longer, than the
originals.
It takes 200 man-hours to make one Bulldog. The main casting, of
brass, weighs in at 110 lbs. After machining away everything that
doesn't look like a Gatling, they end up with a part that weighs 40
lbs! After all the machining is done the parts are polished and
assembled. The polishing is amazing - not a flat spot or radius
change anywhere, and it reflects like a mirror. Gorgeous!
The MSRP is $50,000, and I'm told virtually all of the first run
are spoken for. Given that an original recently sold for over
$300k, I'd say it's something of a bargain!
The business end of the
Colt 1877 ‘Bulldog’ Gatling gun. Technically,
it’s a revolver - right?
It’s a small world! I was in the press room one day waiting
for a podcast interview when I noticed the fellow on the other side
of the table had a badge indicating he was from my neck of the
woods. We started talking, and it turns out that his company
produces a product that has become a staple of hunters here in the
Northwest: The Target Book For North American Game. It's a largish
book of targets to help the hunter understand ballistics,
trajectories, sight-in distances, and aiming points for a wide
range of animals.
The targets cover 95 different cartridges and their trajectories,
showing how to aim and sight in to reach a specified "kill zone"
with that cartridge. American Hunter magazine once called it
"ballistics for dummies", and the creators are proud of that
appellation! They wanted a product that would help the average
hunter take advantage of ballistics without having to dive into the
technicalities, and The Target Book does just that.
You can get it at Cabela's, Sportsman's Warehouse, and Wholesale
Sports ordirectly from the publisher: Percentage Tags, Inc. in
Salem, OR.
I'll end this SHOT Show review with something surprising. If you've
hung around here for more than a couple of minutes you know that
I'm not a huge fan of the 1911, so it takes something really
special to get me to even look at one. At SHOT I found the booth
ofCabot
Guns, and I've got to admit that
their guns are special.
I had a long talk with Ray Rozic, the fellow in charge of their
operation, and he showed me their products inside and out. He's a
tool and die maker, and the parent company's major business is
doing super high precision machining for the aerospace and medical
fields. There is more than enough talent there to build anything to
any tolerances desired, and we spent a lot of time talking about
metrology (the science of measurement), heat treating, tolerance
stacking, and a lot of other technical trivia. In just a few
moments I realized that I was in the presence of someone who not
only knows what precision is, but is capable of delivering it. He
also enjoys showing off what his team can do!
The quality of machining on their guns is stunning. I actually had
to break out a magnifying glass to examine the detail work on the
National Standard model he handed me; it was that good. The
breechface, for example, is smooth - not a bump or blemish on it.
Slide to frame fit was perfect, as was the barrel lockup, and with
zero lube on the rails the slide cycled like it was running on
linear bearings. The barrel bushing (their own design) is perfectly
fitted and even tiny details, like a reversing radius on the
disconnector slot in the slide, have been given attention and are
done to perfection. Flats are flat, the rounded surfaces have no
flat spots or changes in the radius, and the trigger breaks crisply
and cleanly. That's just the beginning.
This kind of quality doesn't come cheap; this particular gun sells
for $5,950.00, but given the level of workmanship I saw I think
it's a fair price. It's gorgeous, and people who I trust tell me
they shoot superbly.
If I were ever to purchase a new 1911, Cabot is the one I'd
buy.
Yes, I’m using a
magnifying glass on this 1911. The machining is that good. Photo by
Tom Walls.
Ray Rozic of Cabot
filling me in on one of the details I observed. Photo by Tom
Walls.
I hope you've enjoyed my SHOT Show Spectacular this week. But wait,
there’s more! Tune in tomorrow for a special Saturday edition
of The Revolver Liberation Alliance, where I'm going to be talking
about the food I chose to sample on my trip to and from Sin
CIty.
It seems that I’m always looking at new riflescopes. I'm
pretty particular about image quality, and given how I tend to
treat field gear (roughly!) I also need a scope that will stand up
to abuse. In past years I've been happy with the price/performance
balance of the IOR/Valdada and Leupold scopes I’ve owned, but
their optical quality isn't as good as the more expensive brands.
I’ve had the privilege to use a Schmidt & Bender scope,
and while I love the optical (and mechanical) quality I can’t
afford the stiff tariff! I’m thus in a constant quest for
something approaching the quality of the S&B, while costing
closer to the Leupold. Believe it or not, there may in fact exist
such a scope.
At SHOT I managed to stumble upon thePremier
Opticsbooth. Premier is familiar
to me (and I suspect a few of you) as the maker and installer of
custom reticles in Leupold scopes. Unbeknownst to me, a couple
years back they decided to start making their own scopes. They
hired some very experienced German scope makers to do the
engineering, then started building them here in the U.S. I've got
to say that what they've come out with is stunning!
Premier was showing their two basic lines: the Tactical line, which
features 34mm tubes and the biggest, best adjustment knobs I've
ever handled; and the Light Tactical line having 30mm tubes and
smaller (but still big) knobs. I examined the scopes closely, and
did a quick-and-dirty optical evaluation. I could find no obvious
spherical or lateral color aberrations and no field curvature. The
scopes have great contrast while color, to my eyes, was a little on
the cool side (but not so much that there was a cast.)
The Premier rep assured me that all of their scopes would pass a
box test with flying colors and return to zero perfectly. Given
their long experience in military and long range competition
circles, I’m inclined to believe them!
I was particularly taken by their Light Tactical 3-15x50. I has
very solid click adjustments, and they even built in a mechanical
turns counter so that you don't get confused trying to remember how
many clicks you've put into the adjustments. Neat!
Turns counter,
underneath dot on upper turret, shows the number “1” -
meaning the turret has been rotated one full
turn.
As noted, optical quality was top notch, which is not surprising
considering the pedigree. All reticles are in the first focal
plane, making rangefinding with the mil-dots a snap at any
magnification.
I did a double-take when I looked through their new 1-8x Tactical
scope. At magnifications under 3x you see a red dot, designed for
speed of acquisition and rapid close-quarters shooting. Once the
magnification is set beyond 3x, the reticle magically changes into
a standard cross-hair mil-dot! It's a cute trick, and I can see
this scope being very popular with AR-15 shooters who want its
unique attributes.
Like with anything else, quality costs - but not as much as it
might from some of the German brands. Yes, you’ll spend north
of two grand for the cheapest of their scopes, but given the very
high construction and optical quality I think that’s a
bargain.
There were quite a few vendors of what has come to be called
‘tactical gear’, things like pouches and bags and
load-bearing equipment, at SHOT. One I'd not heard of isMarz Tactical
Gear, a Phoenix-area company who
proudly marks their stuff as Made in USA. They showed a couple of
products that intrigued me.
First was a first aid kit pouch perfectly sized for a trauma kit.
Called the "Patrol IFAK", the pouch will hold a tourniquet,
pressure bandage, a roll of hemostatic gauze, and a few
incidentals. The cool part is that the back is covered with Velcro,
and they have a matching plate that straps onto the backside of an
automobile headrest. This keeps the kit in a known and easily
accessed location; in use, you simply grab the handle and rip the
kit from the mounting plate. You can then take it to where it is
needed. Very useful; I think I'll be buying a couple of them.
The other thing that caught my eye was what they call their "Field
Kit". It's a large piece of waterproofed Cordura nylon attached to
a couple of zippered pouches. The pouches can hold cleaning
supplies, lubricants, or even spare parts. When unrolled you have a
decent-sized work surface to catch parts and keep dirt away from
mechanisms, with the pouches on one side for easy access to the
aforementioned incidentals.
It would make a great field cleaning station or armorer's
go-anywhere emergency shop, and might be very useful for the
instructor who occasionally needs to fix a student’s gun. A
neat little idea to make life in the field (or at the range) a
little easier.
All week I kept hearing about Mossberg's new "tactical" lever
action. At least a half-dozen people told me that I just had to go
see it, so I did.
“Tactical”
has officially jumped the shark.
My initial reaction: “you’ve GOT to be kidding.”
Where to start? Mossberg managed to design out all of the lever
action's positive attributes while adding very little to its
usability. The collapsible AR-style stock wobbles and doesn't have
a comfortable grip; the rails add unnecessary weight and make
holding the forearm quite unpleasant; and the action was, to put it
charitably, rough.
The myriad protrusions of the butt stock and fore end rails simply
destroy the smooth, snag-free handling that is one of the chief
virtues of the lever action. It's a rifle that has been styled as
opposed to designed, perhaps by someone who might not have had the
opportunity to become familiar with the lever action and how it is
best employed.
Available in .22LR or .30-30, I'm sure it will sell - just like the
Taurus Judge sells. I'll stick to my traditional models, thank you,
as they've proven themselves capable of a wide range of tasks,
without poseur bolt-ons, for quite some time now.
(This is a perfect example of my belief that the rifle,
particularly the lever action, is a general purpose tool. The more
crap you hang on it, the more specialized and therefore less useful
it becomes. My AR-15s are pretty much stock, and I've found that
they're the most versatile in that configuration. As my eyes
continue to deteriorate I may have to fit them with optics, but
even then I'll make sure that the choice will leave them usable for
the variety of tasks I expect to encounter. The same can be said of
my lever actions. Someone at Mossberg, in my opinion, just
doesn’t Get It.)
One of the booths I wanted to visit was Elzetta. I've mentioned
before that myflashlight
of choice is their ZFL-M60with a (discontinued)
Malkoff MC-E module. This combination gives 500 lumens (!!) of pure
flood light, enough to light up a room no matter which direction
it's pointed. The beam is so soft that it has no hotspot and thus
produces no glare when pointed at anything short of a mirror. It
is, I contend, the ideal personal defense light.
The Elzetta light is also incredibly tough, more so than any other
light I've owned. Here's a ridiculously over-the-top torture test
between an Elzetta and a Surefire:
Having had (and witnessed) various Surefire failures, I can only
say "that's why I carry an Elzetta!" If there's a tougher light on
the market, I'd like to see it. This picture shows the light from
the video (on left), along with the light that drove all the nails
into the 2x4 on which it rests. Yes, it still works!
As I mentioned, the MC-E module was discontinued some time ago.
This left a huge gap in the market, as there was no high quality
flashlight with a flood beam available. This left me unable to
wholeheartedly recommend any light when asked, as I truly feel the
flood beam is a necessity in indoor environments. Turns out that
Malkoff listened, and I learned that the Elzetta light can be had
with theMalkoff M60F
module: 235 honest lumens with a
very floody beam! It's not as pure a flood as my MC-E, but it's
better than anything else on the market and the modified beam will
probably be more versatile for more people. Elzettas are made in
the U.S. and come from a fanatical company that takes their
products seriously.Highly recommended.
There was an entirely new line of revolvers unveiled at SHOT, from
a company called Sarsilmaz out of Turkey. I talked at length with
their chief engineer, Mr. Oner Ozylimaz, and he told me that they
made use of forged stainless frames, barrels and cylinders, but use
MIM (metal injection molding) for most everything else - including,
oddly, the cylinder crane. This gives the guns a two-tone
appearance, as the MIM crane is black set against the stainless of
the major parts.
The guns bear a superficial resemblance to the medium-frame Taurus,
but I was unable to get him to let me look inside of one. The guns
are all in .38/.357, are approximately of “K/L” frame
size, and have rounded butts. Barrel lengths range from
approximately 3" to 6", with all but the shortest having LPA
adjustable sights curiously mounted on a plate that's screwed to
the topstrap. The 3"-ish model had a simple drift-adjustable rear
sight that I found oddly appealing. The guns are of roughly Rossi
quality, both in terms of finish and action.
The guns themselves weren't all that exciting, though if properly
priced they may be a solid alternative to brands like Rossi and
Charter Arms. WhatISexciting is that a company
outside of the U.S. decided that the revolver market was lucrative
enough to justify the engineering and tooling costs (MIM molds
aren't cheap) for a new line of guns. I don't think I'll own a
Sarsilmaz, but I'm glad they're here!
Ithaca
shotguns, if you didn't know, are a
particular favorite of mine. Their Model 37 is a classic, an icon
in the shotgun world. If you've never handled one you should; if
you're used to Remington or (worse) Mossberg pumps, the Ithaca will
make you smile the first time you operate the slide! Their actions
are smooth, light, and are usually a cure for the person who has a
tendency to short-stroke other pump guns.
Ithaca has gone through several owners and a couple of shutdowns
over the last decade, but for the last few years has been making a
comeback. Not only are they producing a full line of the
traditional Model 37 in 12 and 20 gauges, this year they introduced
an absolutely darling 28 gauge version - which none of their
forebears, including the original Ithaca, ever did. It's made on a
special small frame, and is light and very quick-handling. Fans of
the '28' will want one, and I'm told they're being produced one at
a time in their Custom Shop. The workmanship shows!
That's not the only new thing: they're now producing an over/under
of their own design, which looks quite nice. (I'm not an O/U guy,
it must be said, but the workmanship was solid.) They've also
brought back an old favorite, the single shot single barrel Trap
model. They've also spun off their home defense and police shotguns
into an allied entity called Ithaca Tactical, and have quite a line
of tough-looking door breachers and similar accessories to help
them regain some of the police market they once dominated.
One product of Ithaca Tactical was sitting quietly on a back table
but wasn't officially introduced: the Ithaca Tactical AR-15. This
was the year of the AR-15 at SHOT, as you couldn't look in any
direction without seeing some company declaring that they make the
"best" AR-15 clones. The Ithaca version is at least different,
being fully machined in their factory from aluminum billet instead
of built on outsourced castings. Another AR is probably what the
market doesn't need, but apparently they feel they need for one if
Ithaca Tactical is to compete. OK, then.
I'm very big on keeping my knives sharp, and for the last decade or
so have been using the Lansky system to do so. It's able to produce
a decent edge, but I've never been happy with the quality of
Lansky's components. I've looked at other sharpeners, but have
never found anything that is as quick and easy as the Lansky -
until this show!
Wicked
Edgeis a relatively new company
out of Santa Fe, and their sharpening system combines easy
operation with a wide range of quality stone, ceramic, and diamond
hones, along with leather strops for a really polished edge.
Pharmacist Tommy had with him a knife that he'd tried (with his
Lansky) to get to a decent edge, without success. The Wicked Edge
had no problem handling the odd shape and size of the blade, and in
a few minutes it was shaving sharp (as proven by Tommy’s
suddenly smooth forearms.) He's sold, and so am I. I'm going to
order one as soon as I recover from the monetary impact of this
trip!
Check back tomorrow, because there's more to tell!
I'll start today with what I didn't see: any big introductions from
the major revolver manufacturers. Smith & Wesson had a couple
of Performance Center variants (I'd not seen the Model 647
Varminter before), Ruger was showing the previously announced
four-inch SP101 in .38/.357 and .22LR (the smallbore having vastly
improved sights), while Colt didn’t show any double action
revolvers - and probably won't any time soon.
I had a great chat with Brent Turchi, the head of Colt's Custom
Shop. He said that new revolvers weren't in the cards for at least
a few years yet, and if they ever do release a new wheelgun it will
probably be something like a King Cobra or Anaconda, or perhaps a
lightweight concealed carry piece based on the SFVI/Magnum Carry
action.
The Python is gone for good, he said - too expensive to make, and
they no longer have the skilled workforce to do so even if they
could justify it economically. In fact, the people who today work
repairing Pythons are nearing retirement, and when they go a lot of
knowledge and skill will go with them. On the plus side, 2011 was a
very good year for Colt as they were able to sell tons of 1911s. Of
course.
The big handgun news at SHOT was the official U.S. introduction of
the Caracal pistol. This is a new polymer striker fired pistol made
in (of all places) the United Arab Emirates. Apparently the UAE has
decided that even their large oil reserves won't last forever, and
have decided to get into manufacturing firearms. Their first
products are full-size (think Glock 17) and compact (Glock 19-ish)
pistols in 9mm (.40 S&W versions will come later this year.)
The Caracal is the brainchild of Wilhelm Bubits, former Glock
employee and designer of the Steyr M series of pistols. His new
design borrows some elements from the Steyr, but most of it is
new.
I first heard about the Caracal when Rob Pincus went to Italy last
year and found a couple of his students armed with this unknown
handgun. Apparently it's been sold in Italy and a few other places
for almost two years, and the reports he got from those students
were glowing. The guns were used hard during the three days of
intense training, and there were no failures. That says a lot about
the design.
The Caracal is unusual in that everything inside the gun is
modular. The fire control group in the frame, as well as the
striker assembly in the slide, are modules that are quickly and
easily removed for service, and just as easily replaced. The bore
axis is very low, approaching that of an HK P7, while the slide
mass has been reduced. The result, I'm told from those who have
fired them, is reduced recoil impulse and muzzle rise.
Ergonomics, even for my small hands, are superb. The Caracal fits
me better than either the Glock or the Steyr, and I can even hit
the magazine release without too much contortion! The trigger is
very smooth, very linear (once you get past take-up, of course) and
has a nice, jar-free letoff. It's very impressive.
What is also impressive is the construction quality. The machining,
inside and out, is superb - the underside of their slide makes a
Glock look like a gravel road. Everything is polished, there are no
tool marks, and even the plastic castings are perfectly clean. This
is top-notch quality, an amazing feat for a young company.
Caracal was all over Vegas; all of the buses for the convention had
Caracal banners on their sides, their booth was large and set up
for doing lots of business, and their marketing materials were
big-league. The folks behind Caracal have invested a ton of money
into both the product and the marketing, and it's obvious that they
intend to be a big player in this business. If the product holds up
to its promise, I think they will be. (Oddly enough, despite
seemingly being on top of every little detail they still
haven’t gotten their USA website up - even though the URL is
printed on all their materials!)
I'm impressed with the gun, and so was nearly everyone I talked to
who'd seen it. I think this might be one of the top autoloading
pistol choices for defensive shooting, particularly when the
sub-compact versions come out later this year. Caracal is worth
watching.
For those of you who might have wondered, I spent last week at the
annual SHOT Show in sunny Las Vegas. It was a busy week for me, as
I had several meetings lined up and those meetings generated still
more meetings, all of which turned out to be for the good. In fact,
I was so busy meeting and talking with other people that I didn't
get to see as much of the show as I'd wanted!
That actually fit in with my plan, as I go to trade shows to
network, not necessarily to see new products. From way back I
learned that every magazine (and today every blog and discussion
forum) will have tons of information on what was new at the show. I
could learn all about the new stuff from the comfort of my living
room, but I need to shake hands in order to get things done -
that’s what a trade show is really for!
This was my first SHOT, and I must say that compared to other
(larger) trade shows I've attended it is fairly compact and
relatively easy to navigate. The show organizers could stand to do
a little more work on attendee comfort - sideline benches and
beverage sources were scarce, for instance - but overall it was
pretty well set up. (The SHOT Show iPhone app, sadly, was more
trouble than it was worth, forcing me to rely on an old-fashioned
map that was surprisingly hard to lay my hands on.)
I didn't get there for Monday's media range day, an event which I
determined I really didn't need to attend (a view which was
reinforced after talking with those that did.) Tuesday was the
first day of the actual show, and was primarily spent going to
those meetings I'd arranged prior. A couple of those spawned the
first of my on-the-fly meetings, wherein someone would say "gee,
you should really meet so-and-so" and off we'd go!
My biggest meeting on Tuesday was with my publisher, Jim Schlender
at Gun Digest Books. We talked about the Gun Digest Book of The
Revolver, of course, but also some future products. I won't spill
the beans just yet, but there will be more Grant Cunningham titles
to come - along with some other great projects.
Me
with Jim Schlender of Gun Digest. I’m the short one with the
really cool hat.
(Sadly, I didn't get to meet my editor, Corrina Peterson, who had
to stay back at headquarters to mind the store. I'll get a picture
with her yet, even if it means flying back to Wisconsin to do
it!)
In case you didn't know, Gun Digest has an email newsletter that
goes out weekly, and often contains great information and deals on
Gun Digest publications.If you aren't
subscribed, may I suggest you do so?
Wednesday was more of the same, and one my favorite meetings was an
interview with Paul Carlson at theSafety Solutions Academy
podcast. I like Paul's podcast
because he always has interesting topics and the production is well
done. I'm a big fan, and it was an honor to be on his show. He was
working like a madman, doing a half-dozen interviews a day,
andyou can hear mine at this
link.
That afternoon I was able to get out a little bit and see some of
the actual show, rather than catching glimpses of it as I passed
through on my way to see someone else. I met up with Omari
Broussard and Eli Brown of 10x Defense, along with Bryan Collins (a
low-key but respected law enforcement instructor who is slowly
moving into the private sector) and as a group we went to some of
the booths that interested us.
I also got a rare chance to sit down and talk about training
concepts with Omari and Eli, who are working on a unique approach
to integrated instruction that I think will make some waves in the
training community. These guys are smart, organized, and motivated,
and I can see 10x Defense becoming a model for the rest of us in a
few years.
Thursday morning I got around to see the major revolver
manufacturers, visiting with Colt (whose people liked to talk);
Ruger (who would talk but didn’t have much to say); and
S&W (who wouldn't give me the time of day.) I also checked in
at some of the booths that were around them, including that
ofHonored American
Veterans Afield. This is a group that's
doing good work with a small budget, and deserves all our
support.
I made it a pointnotto stop at the Chiappa Arms
booth, as the grapevine had alerted me that I waspersona non
gratafor daring to point out, in
print, some of the Rhino's flaws. I also didn't stop at the
execrable GunsAmerica booth, but I did (very discreetly) flip them
off as I went past. (Yes, I know it's childish. Yes, I know it's
beneath my dignity. Yes, I know they probably didn’t even
notice. But it felt so darned good!)
Thursday afternoon was jam-packed: first, I was invited to a
meeting of some of the movers and shakers in the training business.
A low-key call had gone out to meet up at a specific place and
time, and you wouldn't believe the talent that showed up! It was an
honor to be invited to take part in that informal but influential
gathering. It gave me a chance to meet some of my heroes in the
field, including Claude Werner (something of a legend among those
whose opinions count) and Dr. Robert Smith ofDirect Action Medical Network(who developed
the "human weapon system" concepts.) When great minds get together
great things happen, and I think 2012 is going to see more than its
share of great things in the training world.
One of my Tuesday meetings had unexpectedly spawned another meeting
which was scheduled immediately after our instructor get-together.
It proved to be extremely intriguing. You never know how such
things will pan out, but it might just result in something really
cool. I'll let you know more as things develop.
Friday was "shiny rock day", a term coined by Diane Walls (an
honest, reliable writer whose work can be seen regularly in
Concealed Carry andWomen &
Gunsmagazines.) Along with her
husband Tom ("Pharmacist Tommy"), we walked around the show without
any preconceived plan, but rather looking for things that caught
our eye the way that shiny baubles dominate a magpie's attention.
We found plenty before the show closed for this year. A long drive
home (18 hours!), and here I am!
I'll be updating the blog daily until I get through all of the
material I gathered. Coming up this week: yet another gun maker is
clueless on the concept; a new line of revolvers from an unlikely
place; you won't believe who was showing yet another prototype
AR-15; the most impressive autoloading pistol I've seen in years;
rifle scopes I'm lusting after; keeping your first aid kit handy; a
real Gat; the only 1911 I'd want to own; and more. Stay
tuned!
Then, perhaps instead of using GunsAmerica, resolve instead to use
one of the quality gun auction sites likeGunBroker(my personal
favorite) andAuctionArms.
But hey, I’m just a nobody. What do I know?
-=[
Grant ]=-
P.S.:Here’s the link to the original
article.You have to read the
comments, as Mr. Helinski puts his foot in his mouth more than
once. My favorite quote:“You’ve
never heard of us, and we are the industry leader in internet
readership, after 15 years of hard work and dedication. Why should
I have to wait for you to finish taking a video with your phone at
range day?” - Paul Helinski,
GunsAmerica
Though I'm an admitted fan of jazz and certain eras of what is
colloquially called "classical" music (I’m especially fond of
Baroque and much of what is labeled "20th Century" music), I also
like to listen to marching bands (good ones - a rare commodity),
bluegrass, Scottish pipers, and lots more (you can keep the hip
hop/rap stuff to yourself, however.)
I'm also a fan of unknown local music, as that is where one finds
new artists and musical styles, new interpretations and
compositions regardless of where that “local” happens
to be. One of the Oregon bands I've listened to for a while, mainly
because I like their sound, is called simplyAmelia. Have a listen, and check
out more of their songs on theirYouTube
channel.
Early last year I embarked on something of an experiment: carrying
my gun not on my belt, as I've done for more years than I can
remember, but in my front pocket. Exclusively.
I've carried in a pocket holster from time to time, usually when
wearing a suit, so I'm not at all unfamiliar with the concept. I've
never done so as my default method, and I wanted to see what it was
like. What kinds of problems would I encounter?
My constant companion was one of a pair of pretty much identical,
save for color, S&W Airweight Cenennials: a blued Model 042 and
the dull silver-gray 642. Both of these are stock guns, meaning
that I've done nothing to either one. (No, really!) I tried several
holsters, and found that most of them really weren't terribly well
thought out. I ended up using a cheap, cheesy, but serviceable
Uncle Mike's pocket holster for the vast majority of the time. I
carried my spare ammunition in Bianchi Speedstrips.
Why did I do this? For some time now I've been talking about the
concept of congruency: that students should train with the guns
that they'll actually be using to defend themselves, and further
that instructors should be using the guns their students will be
using. The problem, of course, is that people generally don't do
that, and as a result instructors allow themselves to believe that
their students really do conceal full-sized Government Models in
their workaday world -- because that's what they bring to class.
It's a delusional feedback loop.
In reality, most of the people I talk to who are carrying medium-
to full-sized autoloaders in class sheepishly admit that during the
week they tote a compact auto or a five-shot revolver in their
front pocket, because that's what they can easily get away with in
their place of employment. As a fraternity, instructors are not
doing a very good job of getting past this deception; I don't think
they really want to know. Classes are structured to artificially
favor the larger autoloading pistols, because that's what usually
shows up on the belts of students. The students, for their part,
feel compelled to "up gun" for the class so that they can perform
well and save face. The loop intensifies.
What the instructor carries every day is irrelevant; it's what the
student carries that needs to be the primary consideration in
curriculum design. I decided that I wasn't living up to my own
criticisms, and resolved to spend the majority of 2011 carrying not
what I like to carry, but what an awful lot of people who look to
me for advice and guidance are going to be carrying. (No, I didn't
make the "I carry a 'J' frame as a backup, so that counts"
rationalization. This was to be my primary, and only, carry piece.
Just like everyone else.)
Save for one instructor's conference, where I used a Glock because
a) I hadn't had any serious autoloader trigger time in a couple of
years and b) had no one to negatively influence, I carried and
taught with those compact revolvers for the year.
I liked (actually loved) the ease with which I could dress around
the gun. I liked that I could carry in sweatpants in the same place
and manner of my street clothes. I liked that wether I wore a suit
or work pants, my gun was in the same place all the time. I learned
a lot about deploying the gun from that carry position, from the
difficulty accessing it at speed to the occasional instances of the
holster and gun coming out as a unit. I came away with some very
specific ideas on how a pocket holster for a revolver should be
made and marveled that almost none of the holster makers have
figured this out yet. (Then again, it’s hard to find really
well designed revolver belt holsters, a lament that I made in my
book.)
Did I ever feel under gunned? No. I remain unconvinced that
it’s necessary to carry a 51 rounds of ammunition just to
survive a criminal attack, an idea that has great support amongst
certain segments of the training industry. (I'm still looking for
all those cases in which someone involved in a private sector
defensive shooting incident was injured or killed because their gun
didn't contain enough bullets. Haven't found any yet, though I keep
asking people to forward them to me.)
At the end of the experiment, I'm finding it very difficult to
return to my belt-mounted carry pieces. I'm actually happy about
that, because I think I've now got a solid understanding of the
limitations (and the freedoms) that my students experience.
Suppositions have been replaced by evidence.
Now if you'll excuse me, I need to decide between blue or plain
aluminum for today.
Doc Wesson and Mark Vandenberg over at the Gun Rights Radio Network
did a sorta-formal review of my book last week, andthey just put a recording of that broadcast up on
their site. Have a listen; the whole
podcast is fun, but if you’re pressed for time they start
talking about me at the 42:00 mark.
Here's the issue: it's not that he didn't pay attention to Rule
One. It's that Rule One has a huge logic flaw, one that most people
in the gun world still don’t want to acknowledge - let alone
discuss. The flaw? The rule isn't, and can never, be universally
true!
If "all guns are always loaded" or "treat all guns as if they were
loaded" were true, we'd never be able to clean our guns.
If it were true, we'd never be able to engage in dry fire
practice.
If it were true, we'd never be able to put them into a case and
transport them to the range.
If it were true, the entire manufacturing and warehousing of
firearms would by necessity grind to a halt.
The reason none of that occurs, of course, is because we make
constant exceptions to that rule to allow those activities to
happen. We make these exceptions to what is supposed to be a
universal rule almost daily because we know we have to. We know
that guns aren't always loaded, else we wouldn't be able to do any
of these things (and many more) with them. We do this so often that
we don’t even think about it, and it’s those exceptions
that get us in trouble.
Face the facts: guns are not always loaded. You know it, and I know
it. Rule One is a joke. Why do we keep deluding ourselves?
The problem isn't that this guy didn't pretend hard enough that
"all guns are always loaded"; it's becausehe chose to do something stupidwith a gun that he was sure
was unloaded. That's the problem, and this continual Pavlovian
bleating about "Rule One" isn't helping prevent these
accidents.
The solution isn't to get people to pretend harder, it's to get
them tostop doing stupid things with guns!
Since I wrote that article several years ago I've modified the
Commandments a little. After conversations with a number of people,
and lots of thinking about the implications, I've come to this
version:
1.
Keep the muzzle pointed in a safe direction.
2. Keep your finger outside of the trigger guard until you are
ready to fire.
3. Always remember that you are handling a deadly weapon, and if
you do so negligently you may kill someone - including
yourself.
That last one takes care of things like watching for a proper
target, making sure that you know where your bullets are going to
land, following proper dry fire procedures, and all of the rest. It
allows situational variance (we really don't have to worry what's
behind our target when it's in front of a bullet trap at a range)
and better instills the proper safety mindset that I proposed when
I wrote the original article. It might have saved this guy's
life.
You're
reading... The Revolver Liberation
Alliance! The blog about revolvers,
training, self-defense, and shooting in general (along with an
occasional surprise!)