Aug 2009
For those who were wondering.
Monday, August 31, 2009 Filed in:
Gunsmithing, Revolvers
FRIDAY SURPRISE: All Your Base Are Belong To Us.
Back in 1999 there was a Titan missile base for sale in California - Chico, if memory serves. If the salesman's information was to be believed, it was it great good condition, unlike most such abandoned facilities. I was fascinated by the possibilities of one of those huge complexes, but it was my brother who came up with the bright idea to buy the thing, convert it into a "Y2K Survival Community", and sell condos to rich people skittish about the coming millennium.
He figured that the three silos - each 150 deep and 55 feet in diameter - would net 45 condos of about 2,300 square feet each. Were there that many gullible millionaires who could be relieved of their money, if they could be assured that their families would survive the coming catastrophe? People in Hollywood are infamous for their susceptibility to even wilder schemes, so it seemed plausible.
Of course we never got beyond the talking stage, and as we all know nothing much happened on New Years Day 2000. It was fun to speculate and scheme, though!
That was as close as I ever got to one of those behemoth underground complexes. I've always wanted to visit one, but never have, and thus have settled for doing so vicariously.
Just as I did with this and this from www.terrastories.com
-=[ Grant ]=-
A little preoccupied.
Wednesday, August 26, 2009 Filed in:
My Life, Blog
stuff
It's been a tough week here in revolver land, and as a result I'm having trouble staying awake long enough to write anything coherent. Morning or evening, when I sit down in front of the computer I doze off. Consequently, I have nothizzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.
-=[ Grant ]=-
Wow, am I behind the times. Don't you be too!
Monday, August 24, 2009 Filed in:
Other
resources, General gun
stuff
This morning I found that the ProArms Podcast had been updated - a week ago - and I missed it. I'm late to the party!
This is particularly distressing because I'm privileged to know all of the folks involved: Gila Hayes, Diane Walls, Kathy Jackson, and (most recently) Gail Pepin. They are some of the most thoughtful people in the firearms/self defense community, and having all of them in the same room makes for a great discussion. (Gail should get Kathy, Diane, and Gila to do this on a semi-regular basis!)
If you have a loved one who has yet to take responsibility for her own safety, this is a good starting point. The women talk at length about the topic, and the resources they represent are the best in the business. I say that not because I'm trying to curry any favor, but because it's true.
(Don't let the "Women in the Gun Media" title turn you off, guys - this is one you shouldn't miss either. They talk at length about the often bone-headed approaches that we men take to exposing the women in our lives to self defense concepts. No matter how enlightened you think you are, you'll learn something from this podcast.)
Listen to it now.
-=[ Grant ]=-
I CAN'T HEAR YOU!
Monday, August 24, 2009 Filed in:
General gun
stuff
A comment on last Wednesday's article correctly reminded us that there seems to be some confusion about the phenomenon known as auditory exclusion.
Under times of high stress, such as a violent criminal attack, the body makes profound physiological adjustments to limit distracting data and focus on the threat. One of these is to radically attenuate (or even completely silence) aural inputs - in other words, it shuts your hearing down. This is called auditory exclusion.
It's important to understand that auditory exclusion is performed in the brain, not in the ears themselves. Though your brain isn't accepting the audio data being collected, your ears are still collecting it. It's a filtering mechanism, where the brain decides what's unimportant and ignores that to concentrate on what is important.
Since the physical parts of the ears are still functioning, they can and will be damaged by high sound levels just as they would under high sound pressure levels in a non-stressful environment. The tympanic membrane and the fragile hairs of the cochlea can still be profoundly affected by gunfire even in a high stress environment.
No doubt someone reading this is thinking "what about the aural reflex mechanism, smart guy?" Aural reflexes do physically protect your hearing by changing the curvature of the eardrum, and preventing the tiny bones of the inner ear from transmitting vibrations to the cochlea. This is designed to protect the sensitive parts of the ear from sustained loud sound. The key here is the word "sustained"; gunshots are simply too short in duration to activate the aural reflexes, and are not a function of auditory exclusion.
Simply put, auditory exclusion just doesn't pull a blanket over your ears to protect them!
In the case of a shooting, the extreme noise levels are doing damage to your ears even though your mind isn't reporting anything. It isn't until the aftermath, when your body starts to return to normal, that your brain turns the audio back on. That's when you discover that you don't hear as well as you used to.
The rationalization that "during a fight, you won't hear those Magnum rounds going off" is true, but the implication that auditory exclusion is preventing all harm to your ears isn't. You're going to have to weigh the risk of a certain amount of hearing loss, however small, against the perceived effectiveness of the ammunition being considered.
-=[ Grant ]=-
FRIDAY SURPRISE: All Jazzed Up, Part Deux.
If you ever get to attend a major shooting match, one thing that will impress you is how accessible the top competitors are. If you want to meet Rob Leatham or Jerry Miculek, no problem - they're usually happy to shake hands and talk.
The same is true for the top jazz musicians. Jazz is a personal music, and because of the smaller fan base getting to meet even the biggest names is relatively easy. Imagine being able to walk up to a well-known pop or rock artist and being able to do that. Unless you're a buxom groupie with a purse full of cocaine, their security staff isn't likely to let you get within a country mile of the star! Jazz musicians aren't like that, and I've had the experiences to prove it.
My interest in jazz matured in high school, which is also where my first brush with fame occurred. I went to school with the brother of Alan Yankee, who at the time was a saxophonist in the Stan Kenton Orchestra. Kenton was my idol, then and now, and meeting Alan was a highlight of my young musical life. Little did I know that it was only the beginning.
When I was attending college in Portland (Oregon) in the early '80s, there were a bunch of jazz clubs in the city. Portland was known as a jazz town, and major players would often make a stop on their way between San Francisco and Seattle. We had not one but two jazz radio stations (one commercial and one funded by a local college), as well as an internationally regarded jazz festival. Life was good for a jazz musician and lover of the genre.
By the turn of the century, the Festival had been reduced to a weekend in one of the city parks, one of the radio stations was gone and the other played more blues than jazz, and virtually all of the jazz clubs were no more. I was lucky enough to meet quite a few notable jazz musicians before jazz disappeared from Portland.
Freddy Hubbard played a single set at one of the local clubs, to a packed house. Despite the cramped surroundings, he made sure that he got around and shook people's hands before jetting off to who-knows-where.
One of the high schools managed to snag the great Clark Terry for a benefit concert. The school was in a bad part of town, and the concert was not well promoted. Still, I was surprised at the sparse crowd. For a city with a jazz reputation, it was embarrassing. That didn't stop Clark from putting on a great show, and I told him as much when we met afterwards. "I"ve played bigger crowds, but that's not important - I'm just happy that people appreciate my music." Clark is known as a consummate gentleman, and his reputation is well deserved.
One summer a local college held a small jazz festival, and the headliners were guitarists Herb Ellis and Barney Kessel. During a break between acts, I went to use the facilities. Standing at the next urinal was Herb himself, and we started talking. I normally wouldn't remember a conversation from almost 30 years ago, but the surreal setting burned this one into my mind: gardening. After finishing our respective business, we went outside and sat at a bench, still talking gardening. Nice guy, that Herb. (For those who think the sun rises and sets on rock guitarists like Van Halen, check out the link - Herb is the gray-haired gentleman. Perhaps you'll learn something.)
The Woody Herman Big Band, one of the most popular in the history of jazz, made a surprise visit to Portland one year. I don't remember the details, but for some reason they unexpectedly found themselves in town. Somehow they managed to find a venue at one of the colleges, which had an open auditorium that day. Word went out on the jazz radio stations that tickets were available for that evening - dirt cheap, with all proceeds going to some charity. The place was jammed, and the band was in top form. Later I got to thank Woody for the unexpected treat, and expressed my appreciation to number of the band members as well. One of them was Frank Tiberi, who would later take over the organization after Woody's death.
Trumpeters Pete and Conte Candoli appeared in Portland one year, and of course I saw their show. At the time the Candolis were at the top of their game; it was virtually impossible to find a big band that hadn't had one (or both) in their trumpet section at one time or another. I got to meet Conte, but Pete disappeared somewhere after their set was over. The next day The Oregonian newspaper had a review of the show. The writer, who apparently knew nothing of jazz, lamented that when they soloed together they often hit "clashing notes." I wrote a letter to the editor that said something along the lines of "yeah, that happens with simultaneous improvisation, you moron!" They didn't publish it, which wasn't a surprise.
I remember taking my buddy and roommate, Ed, to see a then-unknown Diane Schuur. Between sets I introduced myself and told her Ed was dying to meet her. She giggled and I motioned Ed over; he was quite taken with her. That was understandable, as she was a terrific singer and a wonderful person. I hope she hasn't changed in the intervening 25-odd years ; she certainly still sings well.
Of course, there has to be the exception that proves the rule, and in jazz that was Maynard Ferguson. I found him to be the single rudest person I'd ever met in music. That attitude had rubbed off on some of his band members, as the rest of his trumpet section was as obnoxious as he was. (His sax players, who apparently didn't get as much attention, were nicer. I almost felt sorry for them.) I originally chalked the snub up to his having a bad day, but have heard from many people since who tell me that it was SOP with him.
If memory serves it was the second Mount Hood Festival Of Jazz that featured an appearance by a young and highly touted Wynton Marsalis. I ended up (unintentionally) running into him around the venue, and though he was polite enough, I frankly didn't find much in his music to be impressed with. I haven't heard anything from him since which changes that impression. My contrarian opinion hasn't seemed to hurt his record sales, though, and I hope he doesn't hold it against me!
My favorite trumpet player is the late, great Red Rodney. In the early '80s he had a quintet with the phenomenal Ira Sullivan, a group which to this day gets my vote as the most overlooked in jazz. They showed up in Portland once, and my buddy Bob and I were there front row, center. Between sets Red ambled over and introduced himself, and asked if I was a trumpet player. Confused, I asked him how he knew; he said that I was the only one in the audience who "got" what he was playing. I never did quite understand what he meant, but he sat down at our table to chat and eat his dinner. It remains my favorite jazz experience, and on that note I'll leave you with this video of Red at his best.
-=[ Grant ]=-
Incorrect conclusions.
This morning I got a very nice email from a concerned gentleman in a southern state. His NRA instructor gave him numerous pieces of incorrect information about his new GP100, one of which I've heard many times before: "Don't carry Magnums, because the muzzle flash will blind you in a self-defense shooting!"
With all due respect, bull twaddle.
The .357 Magnum is notorious for muzzle flash, based largely on some well-known pictures from the 1980s. These days, even the Magnum uses flash-suppressed powders, and muzzle flash with the .357 has been dramatically reduced.
Still, the misconception remains that any muzzle flash will blind you and make it impossible to deliver followup shots. In my experience, that isn't the case.
I once did an experiment, in front of witnesses, on our club's indoor range - using not some wimpy .357 or even .44, but a Dan Wesson .445 SuperMag with a 3" barrel. I personally loaded the rounds to "full house" status, which means maximum velocity, recoil, and flash.
We turned off the range lights except for one in the adjacent classroom, which gave just enough illumination for me to make out the IDPA target about 20 feet downrange.
KA-BOOOOOOOOM! If you've never experienced a SuperMag on an indoor range, it's a treat. If, that is, you like lots of noise, concussion, and muzzle flash. We're talking muzzle flash that witnesses confirmed extended 5 feet from the barrel. I wish we'd taken pictures.
Guess what? I could still see my target; I wasn't blinded at all. So I fired another shot. Then another. Still no flash induced blindness. I could still see my target, but most importantly I could still hit it. Understand: I'm not saying that it had zero effect on my vision. I could see the afterimage of the fireball, but it wasn't at all debilitating even in near darkness.
Is this conclusive proof? Of course not, it's just one person's experience - but it's a heck of a lot more experience with the subject matter than most gunstore commandoes appear to have. No matter how impressive the fireball, it just doesn't seem to possess sufficient intensity to markedly reduce one's vision.
If a non-flash-suppressed SuperMag won't do it, I hardly think a .357 with modern suppressed propellants could. Of course I'm willing to be proven wrong, but at this moment I consider it ill advised to pick a round (caliber or brand) based solely on muzzle flash characteristics.
-=[ Grant ]=-
Monday meanderings.
Getting a late start today, and that means I'm already behind for the week. Sheesh - where does the time go?
---
Tam talks about the checkering on her gun. While this would seem to be an issue limited to autoloaders, sharp edges on the trigger and frame (particularly inside the cylinder window) have the same effect for wheelgunners. When people ask "what's the best modification I can do to my revolver?", I usually say round the trigger and dehorn the gun. It makes shooting much less of a chore.
---
Every so often a client will send me one of the S&W Scandium guns for work, and I'm always reminded of how much I dislike shooting the little beasts. Even with standard pressure Specials, the recoil gets to me very quickly. I can't imagine actually shooting one with Magnum loads, and I intend to never find out!
For me it's merely discomfort, but for others the experience could prove more serious.
I constantly encounter women who've been sold those guns, because the sales clerk wrongly assumed that "light" was synonymous with "best for the little lady." This weekend I ran into yet another such case: a thin, older lady. She wanted to know if the Magnum rounds the shop had sold her with the gun would be good for her to shoot! (My immediate thought was "only if you use them on the idiot who sold you this thing!", but I held my tongue.) I cautioned her that the combination of those rounds with her very thin, somewhat frail build could result in permanent nerve damage to her hands. I hope she got the message.
The best recommendation I have for such cases is a box of the 125gn Federal Nyclad standard-pressure Specials.
---
Serendipity...I wrote last week about a 2" Model 15 I'd recently worked on, and since then I've run into several of the things. The latest was yesterday, when buddy Jim Jacobe opened a case and said "weren't you just talking about how much you liked these?" I swear, if I wrote about a .577 Tranter he'd pull one out of his safe to show me...
---
Now it's time for me to get some work done. Happy Monday!
-=[ Grant ]=-
FRIDAY SURPRISE: All jazzed up and no place to go.
I believe I've made mention of my musical background. In college I minored in music performance, and I spent my off time playing in quartets and quintets. Jazz quartets and quintets.
Jazz has been my passion as far back as I can remember. When the other kids were listening to Queen and America, I was devouring Stan Kenton and Sonny Rollins. I reveled in the complexity of the music, which fed both the left and right sides of my brain.
To this day, I can't abide jazz playing as background or mood music; it engages me and comes to the foreground. If one is to truly understand and appreciate jazz, one has to actively listen to it. It requires the participation of the listener, for jazz at its core is music that is custom made, fresh, for the audience. It is demanding music, constantly evolving yet always retaining the essence that separates it from the insipid pop of American Idol.
Unfortunately not everyone desires that kind of music (and the world would be boring if they did!) From the WSJ we learn that the jazz audience is shrinking rapidly.
Liking jazz may put me in the minority, but there are some wonderful aspects of the genre that go beyond the music itself. Next Friday I'll talk about one of the unique perks of being a jazz fan - one that some "gunnies" can identify with.
-=[ Grant ]=-
Apparently I'm quite sharp.
Wednesday, August 12, 2009 Filed in:
Completely
irrelevant, Things I like
An email popped into my box on Monday which asked "do you have a favorite knife steel?" As it happens, I do!
Oregon seems to be a mecca for knife enthusiasts. We boast what is reputedly the largest knife show in the world (the annual Oregon Knife Collectors Association show), along with a stellar list of native knife companies: Benchmade. Kershaw. Al Mar. Gerber. Lone Wolf. Columbia River Knife & Tool.
If that's not enough, Oregon is home to some of the greatest knife designers and custom makers, people like Bob Lum, Wayne Goddard, Bill Harsey, Butch Valloton, Jess Horn, and Ron Lake - as well as a veritable army of well regarded "up and comers."
With all this edginess around me, is it any wonder I have an opinion?!?
I've owned knives made from D2, O1, 1095, VG-10, ATS-34, 154CM, S30v, and probably some I've forgotten about. Of all those different materials, from a number of different makers, my favorite steel is one most people consider pedestrian: Sandvik 13C26 (and its derivatives.)
Sandvik steels are made specifically for cutlery, and boast an exceedingly fine grain structure. When properly heat treated (in the area of 58-60 Rc) they make a blade that holds an edge surprisingly well, won't chip like some of the more esoteric types, and is still easy to resharpen. As an all-around daily use steel, I've not found anything that will surpass it.
I know it's not very exciting, and it's not sexy, and it's not high tech. It just works well at cutting things, which is what I want my knives to do. My knives get used every single day around the farm, and I want blades that perform well under such heavy use. Sandvik steels do so, well enough that I actually seek out those manufacturers who use the stuff.
-=[ Grant ]=-
I can't be the only one out there.
Monday, August 10, 2009 Filed in:
Revolvers, Gunsmithing
A recent job on a 2" S&W Model 15 brought back my admiration for the medium-framed "snub." This is a class of revolvers that seems to get no respect, and for reasons I can't quite fathom.
They're easy-carrying belt guns, quick out of the holster and carrying six shots - not to mention a delight to shoot. In the last month or so I've found myself contemplating a modern example on a Ruger GP100. Anyone else interested in such a thing?
The only major hangup I'm having is finding someone who can make proper concealment grips. They need to be short with no silly fingergrooves (I believe I've made my feelings about those quite clear), and getting that combination is proving to be a challenge. I'm told that Eagle will make their "Secret Service" grips to fit the GP, but a) I've not seen any, b) they don't have pictures of them on their website, and c) I've never been terribly enamored with their quality to begin with. The search continues...
---
One necessary mod is a reworking of the sights. As my eyes continue to age I've learned some important things about shooting with degraded vision, and any new gun I make for myself must carry some sort of "enhanced" sighting system. (Yes, I have some ideas, but nothing I'm ready to talk about!)
-=[ Grant ]=-
FRIDAY SURPRISE: Motor City Mildew.
Friday, August 07, 2009 Filed in:
Friday
Surprise!, History
I've featured a number of decay-chronicling websites, but this one is unique. onlynDetroit.com doesn't just show the deterioration of a once-proud city, it gives the why and how of urban decay. In its many pages you'll learn the stories behind the landmarks, where they came from and how they happened to get where they are today. Along with the analysis is the occasional prescription for renewal, and a happy ending or two as some eyesores get refurbished and reopened.
The photography isn't of the same standards as some urban exploration sites, spelling errors abound, and the text sometimes describes scenes for which there are no pictures - but those are minor quibbles that only help prove that the whole is greater than the sum if its parts. onlynDetroit.com is obviously the work of people who have great affection for their city despite its flaws, and the same can be said of their site. A great place to kill some free time.
-=[ Grant ]=-
Well, there's something you don't see every day.
Did you know your eye dominance can be changed? I didn't!
I recently had a problem with shots hitting several inches off my point of aim (at only 5 yards.) That's odd, I thought, it's as if I'm seeing out of my left eye. But that's impossible - I'm right eye dominant.
For some reason I did a quick dominance test, and I was shocked that it showed I was left-eye dominant! I must have done it wrong, I thought; I did the test again, and it showed the expected right eye dominance. Whew! One more time, just to be sure - darn it anyway, it came up left again. And again.
That's odd. Dominance, as I've always understood the mechanism, is neurological, not optical. Your brain simply prefers the vision from one eye or the other, and it appears to be hardwired from birth. I've always thought it to be unchanging, as most people do, yet mine had definitely changed.
Guess what? Turns out it's not as immutable as I'd believed. According to my ophthalmologist, who I called the next morning, eye dominance spontaneously changes only in a very, very small percentage of adults - usually as a symptom of an underlying neurological disorder.
Neurological disorder? Doesn't that mean...tumor?? YIKES!
As it happens, I'd had a complete physical (including a thorough eye exam by this doctor) just a couple of months ago. I had no other symptoms, and he reassured me that lack of symptoms and my recent positive tests made me an unlikely patient for surgery.
As it happens, he said, eye dominance can be trained away. The usual trick is to wear glasses with some Scotch-type tape on the lens of the dominant eye. The out-of-focus image forces the brain to use the other eye, and in time becomes used to the arrangement - thus changing the dominance.
But, I protested, I haven't put any tape on my glas....oh, wait.
For years I've worn a jeweler's loupe over my right eye. When I'm working, I swing it down so I can look through it and back up when I no longer need it. It's a hassle to swing it in and out of my vision all the time and get it perfectly aligned again, so for the last year I've just sort of looked around it instead of flipping it up. I use my left eye for distance vision, and the right when I need to do closeup work.
What I normally see in my right eye, then, is...an out-of-focus image. It's the same as tape on the lenses, and by doing that I've unintentionally trained away my right eye dominance! At this moment I'm part of the small number of people who have no strongly dominant eye. If I continued using the loupe in that manner I'd end up strongly cross-dominant.
I immediately swapped loupe positions to force my brain to accept the right eye again. It's been a month or so, and I'm already seeing results. Once I'm back to my normal, strong right eye dominance I'll swap my beloved loupe for a binocular magnifier.
Trouble is, I hate those things! Decisions, decisions...
-=[ Grant ]=-
Monday meanderings.
It appears that our spell of excessively hot weather has ended. Last week the digital thermometer at our house recorded a high of 111 degrees. (Yes, that's in the shade - who'd be stupid enough to go out into the sun on a day like that?) We set an all-time record for consecutive days over 90 degrees (9 and counting.) I'm just looking forward to being able to spend a full day (more or less) in the shop.
---
From The Firearms Blog comes the news of a(nother) special edition S&W 627 in .38 Super. This one should have a sticker on the box that says "Now With More Ugly!"
---
I'm pleased to note that QC at Ruger is improving - the last couple of SP101s I've seen, of recent production, are much improved over those of years past. Gail Pepin at the ProArms Podcast tells me that she's visited the plant recently, and their production floor has changed considerably. She credits their new emphasis on 'lean manufacturing', with its attendant focus on reducing waste and rework, for the quality bump.
---
The Firearms Blog also brings us happy news of Winchester's reprise of the Model 92 Takedown. I'd be tempted if they'd make it in .357 Magnum...
---
Now, if you'll excuse me, it's time to go to work!
-=[ Grant ]=-