The Revolver Liberation Alliance

Light blogging today, but take a look at these BIG guns!

www.grantcunningham.com — 2008-07-28T08:46:18-07:00

Somewhere out there, someone is disappointed that the title does not refer to scandalous pictures!

I had a long weekend, working as an assistant instructor in a rifle class. A very small class compared to others, but it still occupied a couple days of productive time. I'm back in the office today to catch up on a ton of paperwork.

Not to worry, though, because I've got a great link to a Dark Roasted Blend story. Normally we see their content in the FRIDAY SURPRISE, but today they've provided something that is more-or-less on topic: guns. Really big guns. Guns where the powder is measured in barrels, not grains.

Have a look.

-=[ Grant ]=-

FRIDAY SURPRISE: Fighting fire with fire

www.grantcunningham.com — 2008-07-25T07:37:43-07:00

You hate telemarketers. I hate telemarketers. Everyone hates telemarketers. (If you're a telemarketer, I'm sorry - I just can't work up any sympathy for you. Yes, I realize you need that job to buy diapers - but life's tough enough without getting your phone calls in the middle of my dinner!)

The hapless victims of telemarketers are finally starting to fight back. Take a look at this collection of tips about turning the tables on those who interrupt your life to sell you cheaper long distance. (Courtesy of Dark Roasted Blend.)

-=[ Grant ]=-

"You're gonna need a bigger holster"

www.grantcunningham.com — 2008-07-22T22:00:13-07:00

A reader emailed me this link to a rather unusual bar-b-que setup.

Me want. (If you have one, don't ask me for an action job!)

-=[ Grant ]=-

My muckraking safety articles

www.grantcunningham.com — 2008-07-21T18:26:31-07:00

I've been asked to provide a permanent link to my articles on the failings of gun safety rules. Happy to oblige!

The original article: "On Safety"
Followup article: "Following the safety rules religiously"

Please read them and consider them carefully. Of course, I'm always happy to hear comments from readers!

-=[ Grant ]=-

In praise of the "boy's rifle"

www.grantcunningham.com — 2008-07-21T07:00:41-07:00

When I was a kid (which was not all that long ago - at least I don't remember it being all that long ago) we had "boy's rifles." Today they're known by a more politically correct term, but as Juliet said "That which we call a rose, by any other name would smell as sweet."

The boy's rifle was chambered in .22 LR, and was most often a single-shot bolt action - though repeaters were not unheard of. Their wood stocks were sized slightly smaller to fit a teenager's frame (before the days when teenagers were routinely 6' tall and weighed in over 180 lbs), and were slim from butt to forearm. The grip area was smaller in circumference to fit shorter fingers, and the receivers and barrels were similarly proportioned.

Though not normally fitted as nicely as the adult-oriented rifles in their respective lines, they usually shot pretty well. Some, in fact, were downright amazing, especially considering the very simple sights they carried.

People used to larger guns are often astonished when they pick up an old boy's rifle; light weight, quick handling, and superb pointing characteristics are almost foreign concepts today. Unfortunately, those attributes usually lead to snide comments about feeling "like a toy." Were they to actually shoot one - or, better yet, pack one into the field - perhaps their opinions would change. I know mine did!

Like many people, I have a number of "adult" .22 rifles, none of them weighing under 7 lbs. I recently acquired an old Stevens Model 66, which is a bolt action tube fed repeater. At barely 5 lbs, it's definitely a lightweight - but this 70-year-old gun, well worn on the outside but pristine on the inside, is an absolute joy to shoot.

The best word I can use is "handy". It's the kind of gun that carries unobtrusively on the shoulder, yet springs immediately to eye level when needed. It makes my "grown up" .22 rifles seem ungainly by comparison.

Give one a try. You may just get hooked - and wasn't that the whole idea behind the boy's rifle to begin with?

-=[ Grant ]=-

FRIDAY DOUBLE FEATURE: An interesting thought about hunting

www.grantcunningham.com — 2008-07-18T08:12:22-07:00

I don't know why, but today's other feature about the vegan strip club seemed the perfect lead-in for this!

As I've mentioned, I'm not a "hunter" in the sense that most people use the term. Trophies do not interest me; I've never had my picture taken with a kill, and don't foresee the day when I would. For me, hunting is about eating. (I subscribe to the school of thought that claims "vegetarian" to be an old Native American word for "lousy hunter.")

At the same time, I'm also a bit of a health nut. I eat organic food whenever possible, not because I believe in any leftist/communist causes but because I care about my health. I'm uncertain about the long-term effects of the processed chemicals that we put in our bodies, and do whatever I can to reduce or eliminate them. Thus, the organic food - including delicious meat - in my diet.

(As an aside, it's always interesting when my wife and I go shopping in the local healthy food emporiums. Everyone in those havens of collectivism dresses in the trendy eco-friendly fashions of the minute. My wife and I, to put it delicately, do not. I'll admit that we do tend to stick out a bit amongst that crowd, but we would no matter what we wore.

Just by looking one could tell that we're not like the sheeple that populate those places, and it's as much about attitude as anything. One time she whispered in my ear "do you realize there are only two guns anywhere near this place, and we've got both of them?" I replied "I wonder how many of these people would faint if they found out!" We then chuckled softly yet maniacally as we went about our shopping.)

Forgive the digression.

As it happens, one of the most organic sources of protein available is wild game. Meat which has been harvested from animals in the wild not only tastes great, but is great for you. I won't bore you with the numerous studies which show various kinds of game having more good things and less bad things than factory-raised protein, but the facts are clear: wild meat is good for you.

It is odd, therefore, that some of the most vocal anti-hunting shills in the world wear their organic diets as badges of honor while denouncing some of the cleanest, purest foods available. It seems to me that if one is truly concerned about eating a healthy diet, one must of necessity either grow, or hunt, one's own meat. Hunting is the proactive approach to maintaining a healthy lifestyle when one does not have the real estate on which to raise their own.

(Of course, I don't want to get a trend started, else there wouldn't be any of that delicious and nutritious game left for me!)

-=[ Grant ]=-
A proud member of PETA: People Eating Tasty Animals

FRIDAY SURPRISE: Is that a parsnip in your pocket, or are you just happy to see me?

www.grantcunningham.com — 2008-07-18T08:07:12-07:00

As the New York Times observes, there are two things you can find in Portland: vegans and strip clubs. That's pretty accurate.

Out state constitution has a very broad protection of freedom of expression, which the courts have consistently held to cover "exotic dancing." The result is that Oregon in general tends to have more strip clubs than other parts of the country. Portland, being the biggest city, naturally has the largest single selection of such establishments.

So, one Johnny Diablo (Carpetbagger-CA) decided to combine his love of vegetarianism and his love of...uhhh....flesh to create the first vegan strip club.

This is not his first attempt at an off-the-wall establishment: he tried a pirate-themed vegan restaurant last year, which despite intense media attention failed miserably. His new venture, Casa Diablo Gentlemen’s Club, has gotten even more media attention, which I cannot recall a strip club ever receiving. When it seems that every other corner has such an establishment, one would have to do something very unusual to warrant any media notice. After all, how many other strip clubs have been profiled on the Earth First website?

Here's a local story on the joint.

Here's the NYT take on the place.

(Disclaimer: I'm not a vegetarian, nor a patron of strip clubs. My omnivorous wife is thankful for both.)

-=[ Grant ]=-

Yes, Virginia, there is such a thing as Evil.

www.grantcunningham.com — 2008-07-16T07:38:00-07:00

Go read this article over at Xavier's place. NOW.

Then take the time to read this terrific piece over at Michael Bane's hangout.

Then spend a bit of time considering the intersection of the two. You'll be safer and more confident for doing so.

-=[ Grant ]=-

This is WEIRD

www.grantcunningham.com — 2008-07-15T09:26:18-07:00

I don't usually post on Tuesdays, but I couldn't resist: I think I'm on some spammer/scammer list.

Roughly every week for the past couple of months, I've received an email inquiring about the feasibility of "building" a rather odd gun. I just got the second one of the week.

The details vary a bit from email to email, but they have several things in common: they all want a custom made top-break revolver in a large caliber, they all are from foreign countries, and they all have a gmail return address.

The first couple I actually responded to; after noting the repeating pattern, I've elected to round file subsequent occurrences.

On the off chance that someone is truly, legitimately interested in having such a gun made, here are a few things to consider before contacting any gunsmith:

1) If you're not in the U.S., you can pretty much forget it. Don't even ask.
2) Having a custom top-break revolver made will cost money. Lots of it. Yes, more than the "$5,000 US Dollars" one such email offered.
3) I'm not the guy to be asking. In fact, I can't imagine who would attempt such a job, so please don't ask me that, either.

-=[ Grant ]=-

Not so Special after all

www.grantcunningham.com — 2008-07-14T07:21:21-07:00

A client recently sent me a brand new S&W Model 25 for some work. As part of my normal checkout routine, I measured the trigger pulls. In single action, it was a nice and crisp 3-1/2 lbs. In double action, it....pegged my digital force gauge!

I had to get out the old mechanical unit to read the trigger pull of nearly 15lbs. Holy Sore Forefinger, Batman! Not only that, but the trigger return feels like a mile of bad gravel road. (Since I live on a mile of bad gravel road, I am something of an authority on the topic.)

Oh, did I mention that this was one of S&W's "Special Edition" Lew Horton models? That's right - S&W apparently doesn't feel that handing them close to a grand for one of their revolvers entitles you to a decent trigger. On the other hand, perhaps I should look at it as a perverse form of job security...

-=[ Grant ]=-

FRIDAY SURPRISE: "Ready for my close-up, Mr. DeMille!"

www.grantcunningham.com — 2008-07-10T23:17:17-07:00

Portland, Oregon has for years had one of the highest numbers of movie theater seats per capita. Oregonians, it would appear, can't get enough of the silver screen. (Save for this Oregonian, who sees one theater movie every five years or so whether he needs to or not.)

It seems to have always been this way. Portland had a large number of neighborhood movie theaters up through the '60s, and many of those buildings are still standing. The theaters were converted to other uses, and some of them actually retained some of their former features. Finding and exploring those old locations is a hobby for some, an obsession for others.

Back in the early '80s, when I was doing some moonlighting as a commercial photographer, I was retained by an older gentleman to photograph the abandoned Egyptian Theater in northeast Portland. The theater, originally built as a vaudeville venue, had been converted to the newfangled "moving pitchers" in the early '30s. It operated until 1962, when it was closed and used as overflow warehousing space for the chemical company which had purchased the location.

The gentleman who hired me was a serious movie buff, and was writing a book on old Oregon theaters. He wanted me to shoot pictures of the interior of the Egyptian. (I got the job because i was the only photographer he found who could light an entire large interior without benefit of electrical outlets or a generator. The power in the building had been shut off for years, the wiring having been declared a fire hazard. I'll leave you to guess how I pulled it off.)

Once in the building we found many of the seats still in place; the entire balcony was intact, as were the Egyptian-motif decorations and appointments throughout. There were torn ticket stubs littering the floor and even remnants of coming attraction posters in the lobby.

When theater closed, the awning (shown in this 1933 photo) was removed, and the front of the building simply covered with a false wall. The ticket booth and original doors were still there!

It was a surreal experience, as if the building was simply waiting for the janitors to arrive to clean up for that evening's business.

The building was torn down in 1989; sadly, the book never materialized. I had a good time, though.

What brought this to mind was this article at WebUrbanist about abandoned movie theaters across the U.S. (Somewhere in storage I have my shots of the Egyptian, but exactly where is a mystery. Until I can find them, you'll have to make do with WebUrbanist's article!)

-=[ Grant ]=-

The gun of dreams

www.grantcunningham.com — 2008-07-09T06:25:52-07:00

There are guns that we want - perhaps even "need" - but don't happen to have. This is not about those.

This is about the gun which consumes large amounts of our subconscious thought, in the way that the opposite sex did in high school. Though we desire others, one remains a constant; a gun that, it seems, we've always wanted and always will. Perhaps one day our dream is fulfilled, perhaps not - but it never goes away.

Admit it: you have one. We all have one.

Me? It might surprise you to know that mine is not a revolver. Don't get me wrong - there are a number of wheelguns I want but don't yet possess, the specifics changing a bit over time. My dream gun, though, has remained unchanged for many years now. That is the way of dreams.

My dream gun is a Mannlicher stocked bolt action carbine in 6.5x55 Swedish. Why? Romance, plain and simple. (That's the great part about dreams - they don't have to make any sense.)

Since I was a kid I've seen pictures of the lone hunter standing on a ridge, peering through binoculars at some unseen quarry, with "my" rifle perched on his knee. A graceful yet purposeful gun, lithe of line, whose mere presence brings gentility to the wilderness. (I told you it was romantic!)

Open up a hunting book from the '50s or '60s, and you'll probably see that picture. I have, more times than I can count. That's the reason I want one.

Of course I can recite all the technical justifications for owning my dream. I rationalize that it would make the perfect hunting rifle (which it would); the 6.5 Swede round is well suited for the game we have in North America, and it's one of my very favorite target cartridges to boot. The light weight and short barrel would make it wonderful to carry and even better to swing on target; it would be the perfect tool for "snap shooting" and tramping through our dense coastal rainforest. Yadda yadda yadda.

But, at the end of the day, it's all about peering off into the game-filled distance with the Dream perched ever-so-photogenically on MY knee.

Someday.

-=[ Grant ]=-

I'm not gloating....

www.grantcunningham.com — 2008-07-07T07:15:34-07:00

...quite the opposite, in fact.

A client sent me this link to the Washington, DC Metropolitan Police Department's FAQ regarding handgun ownership. As you know, the recent Supreme Court decision in the Heller case struck down the handgun ban in DC. However, it did not address the ban on semiautomatic handguns in the District, which still stands.

The result is that the only handgun DC residents will be allowed to own is a revolver.

As you are no doubt already aware, I'm a big fan of revolvers. I'm on record as saying that there is no job a good revolver can't do; I originated the phrase "the world isn't flat, your gun shouldn't be either." I believe that owning a revolver displays innate good sense and good taste, and an appreciation of the finer things in life.

Still, people shouldn't be forced to own one by limiting their freedom to choose something else.

It's great that the District's residents may now own a handgun; it's not so great that they won't get a choice in what kind of handgun. I'm hoping that someone will take the District back to court and have that part of their ineffective laws struck down. At that point, residents will be able to decide for themselves what they'd like to own.

If you're in DC, I support your right to decide for yourself which to own: a beautiful, graceful, efficient revolver - or an ugly, ungainly, unreliable, ill-fitting, bottom-feeding, ground littering, reciprocating monstrosity.

(Not that I'm biased, you understand!)

-=[ Grant ]=-

Happy Independence Day

www.grantcunningham.com — 2008-07-04T08:42:10-07:00

Nothing profound today. Just the fervent hope that our nation, on a collective basis, regains the spirit that so inspired the Founders. It's been awfully scarce as of late.

-=[ Grant ]=-

The stopping power series

www.grantcunningham.com — 2008-07-02T08:40:06-07:00

I've added a link to my "Stopping Power" series to the Library. I have no idea why I didn't think of doing so earlier!

-=[ Grant ]=-

On scope magnification

www.grantcunningham.com — 2008-07-02T08:38:11-07:00

Moving back to the farm as I recently did has changed my shooting habits. I'm shooting a larger amount of rimfire rifle lately, not just for fun but also predator/pest control.

For all the years I lived in suburbia (which is a Kafkaesque purgatory for a simple, ignorant country boy like me) I did all of my shooting at the gun club. When I shot rimfire there I invariably took the only scoped .22 rifle in my inventory, forsaking the other iron-sighted rimfires in the safe.

Out here, where the rimfire rifle is a constant companion, the scoped rifle is too awkward to constantly carry around. The open sighted rifles are slimmer, lighter, and less delicate, which means that I'm using them more and more often.

Shooting virtually all open sights has resulted in an interesting revelation: the less magnification I have, the better I shoot.

For years I shot long range rifles with higher magnification scopes. The last centerfire I built - a marvelous 6.5-284 screamer - got topped with a relatively low power 2.5x-10x variable scope, which I've found completely adequate all the way out to 800 yards. Friends shooting at that same range would use 16x or 20x optics, and wondered why I chose the "small" magnification. Even at that time I recognized that the 10x was enough; I just didn't need any more.

As to the rimfires, my scoped rifle carries a straight 4x optic. As I shoot more with iron sights, I find that even this modest magnification is more than I really need, especially from field positions. Even at 4x, movement is sufficiently magnified that my mind starts to play the game that is the bane of precision shooters everywhere: "hurry, the crosshairs are right on target! Pull the trigger now!"

In the field, I've proven to myself that I can shoot open sights more than accurately enough. There are times, though, when a scope would be handy - differentiating target from background in dappled sunlight, for instance. In those cases I'm dreaming of a nice fixed 2.5x scope - or maybe a 2.5x-5x variable, just in case I need a bit more magnification at some point. (In my heart I know that I won't, but the "I might need that someday!" attitude is part and parcel of being an avid shooter!)

For me, less magnification is definitely the way to go.

-=[ Grant ]=-

A new (to me) gun blog

www.grantcunningham.com — 2008-06-29T22:46:40-07:00

It's always good to find a fresh face in the gun blogging world. Say Uncle, who is becoming to gun bloggers what Johnny Carson was to new performers, recently came up with another: Politics, Guns, & Beer.

Now I know what you're thinking: you're thinking the author of that title must resemble Larry The Cable Guy. Boy, are you wrong! It's written (quite well, I might add) by a 20-something gal named Laurel. She's from Idaho, is a staunch libertarian ("small-L", as she's careful to remind us), likes guns and beer (duh!), eats organic food, uses a Mac, and is cute as the dickens.

(I'm sure that last comment would probably be labeled as "sexist" by a certain segment of society. Hey, I calls 'em as I sees 'em, folks!)

She takes a less aggressive approach to gunblogging, and her topics are more eclectic than most. Check her blog out - it's worth reading.

-=[ Grant ]=-

FRIDAY SURPRISE: Rodents aren't just for felines any more

www.grantcunningham.com — 2008-06-27T07:11:06-07:00

If you're under 40, the name Douglas Engelbart probably means nothing to you. It should, though, because a huge amount of the machine on which you're reading this sprang from his fertile mind.

Engelbart (yet another product of Oregon, having been born in Portland) worked at Stanford Research Institute (SRI) before the dawn of the personal computer revolution. Many of the things we now use without a second thought were developed by him, or made possible by his work: bitmapped screens, the graphical user interface (GUI), hypertext, and networking. The very birth of the internet occurred when his lab at SRI and it's counterpart at UCLA networked their computers to become the first two nodes of ARPANET.

His greatest moment would have to be his "Mother of All Demos" in 1968. In that presentation, he introduced to a stunned world the early working implementations of video conferencing, teleconferencing, interactive text, email and the aforementioned hypertext. It is, perhaps, the single most important event in the history of modern computing.

One of his inventions revealed for the first time at the Demo was a new invention: the computer mouse. It would take over a decade before his now-common pointing device finally reached the market (attached to the ill-fated Xerox 8010 Star Information System), and several years after that before it came to the notice of the general public (as an integral part of the original Macintosh.)

(John C. Dvorak, computer pundit, wrote in 1984 of the new Mac and Engelbart's invention : "The Macintosh uses an experimental pointing device called a 'mouse'. There is no evidence that people want to use these things." Dvorak is not known for his prescience, which surprisingly fails to deter his continued employment.)

YouTube has the entire Demo available.

-=[ Grant ]=-

BREAKING NEWS: DC v. Heller decision affirmed!

www.grantcunningham.com — 2008-06-26T07:18:52-07:00

The Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) just announced their decision in the District of Columbia v. Heller case: the lower court decision, striking down the onerous firearms laws in Washington, D.C., has been upheld.

The Court has confirmed that the Second Amendment does in fact protect an individual's right to keep and bear arms. Hooray! On the downside, there is only a single majority opinion and at least two dissenting, so it's not a slam-dunk. Still, it's good news.

UPDATE: The full text of the opinion is available at this link. (Note: it's a .pdf file, not a webpage.) Quote from the decision: " possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditional lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home."

You will see this phrase often: "traditional lawful purpose."

-=[ Grant ]=-

Supreme Court update

www.grantcunningham.com — 2008-06-25T07:13:00-07:00

The Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) will announce their decision in the District of Columbia v. Heller case tomorrow morning, commencing at 10:am EDT. The best place to follow their announcement is the SCOTUS Blog, which has live coverage of every Court decision.

Regardless of which direction the Court takes, tomorrow will be groundbreaking in the history of the Second Amendment.

-=[ Grant ]=-

Is the Ruger GP100 inaccurate?

www.grantcunningham.com — 2008-06-23T07:01:03-07:00

It sometimes amuses me how often one hears the same question, with only slight variations. One that I've heard over the years goes something like this: "Is it true that the GP100 isn't very accurate?" Personally, I've not noticed that any of mine are, but there is more to this story.

Assuming that the gun is "in spec" with regards to its construction (forcing cone, crown, chamber/barrel alignment, etc.) it should shoot quite well. Many GP owners, however, continue to complain about the accuracy of their individual example in the absence of those identifiable deficiencies. It so happens that there is a design defect in certain models of the GP100 that will definitely reduce the precision of the gun: the sights.

Owners of fixed-sight Rugers are generally much happier with the accuracy of the GP than those who have the adjustable sights, and I can't say I blame them. The first problem is Ruger's rear sight: it stinks, to put it bluntly. Don't get me wrong, the rear sight picture isn't bad (in fact I prefer it to Smith & Wesson's); the problem is that the Ruger rear sight often won't hold zero all that well.

It starts with a body which has a very loose fit in the frame's sight channel. It continues with universally sloppy fit on the sight pivot pin - the pin that holds the sight onto the gun, allowing the body to pivot up and down for elevation changes. The elevation screw, likewise, has a lot of "wiggle" in it, and the windage screw is often not any better. The net result is a sight that can't be relied upon to stay where it's set from shot to shot.

The rear sight isn't the only problem, just the biggest one. The interchangeable front sight often shows deficiencies of it's own. It is investment cast (like the rest of the gun), but without subsequent machining the edges and serrations remain quite indistinct. The sight picture isn't all that crisp, making a sure hold on target a bit like driving a well-worn 1951 GMC 2-1/2 ton flatbed farm truck. (For those who've never had the pleasure, imagine going down the street having to constantly move the steering wheel a half-turn in each direction just to maintain something like a straight line. Now try it in the rain. At night. Get the idea?)

I've seen more than a few front sights which also weren't secure in the dovetails, causing them to wobble a bit, and there are quite a few that don't have parallel sides. (Or worse, lack a straight top!)

The fixed-sight GP100 doesn't have any of these problems, which explains why their owners tend to be more satisfied with that model's performance.

There are solutions. The best is to replace the rear sight with the terrific Rough Country sight from Bowen Classic Arms. It fits precisely, and the opposing screws that adjust windage and elevation also serve as lockdowns for those adjustments. (If you've ever adjusted the rear sight on a FAL rifle, you know the concept.) The Rough Country sights have the easy change capability of an adjustable sight, but once locked down are as rugged as a fixed sight. There is nothing better on the market, period. Absolutely the best.

The Rough Country sight has a superb sight picture, and is available with a plain black blade, a white outline blade, an "express" (shallow "V") blade, and a blank blade - so that your friendly gunsmith can provide the notch that you feel is best.

The front sight can also be replaced with a Bowen unit. The Bowen front blade is precisely made, with perfect dovetails and parallel sides. It comes as a "blank" - it must be machined to shape and height, then blued, before it is of any use. It is an expensive part, and the additional machining adds to the cost, but if you're looking for the absolute best GP100 sight picture it is the way to go.

Outfitted with decent sights the GP100 really comes into its own, easily keeping up with the best from the competition. If you've not been happy with the way your GP100 shoots, take a hard look at those sights - my bet is you'll find they aren't terribly great!

-=[ Grant ]=-

The Hippy-Dippy Weatherman is no more

www.grantcunningham.com — 2008-06-23T06:59:20-07:00

Those of you who remember that character will be saddened to hear that George Carlin has died.

Carlin, aside from being side-splittingly funny, was the comedy touchstone for my generation. Even when I didn't agree with his politics, I had to laugh at his observations. Most of the time, though, he was simply the insightful man who poked fun at some of our fattest sacred cows. Even when he was profane he was funny, which is something most other comedians couldn't do on their best day. Heck, even my Dad liked the guy!

Everyone has their favorite Carlin routine. Mine was his observation about how Americans accumulate clutter in their lives: "Have you ever noticed that everyone else's stuff is crap, but your crap is 'stuff' ?"

RIP, George.

-=[ Grant ]=-

FRIDAY SURPRISE: "I want to win, but I don't want to see the b***tards go down, either"

www.grantcunningham.com — 2008-06-20T08:21:46-07:00

That's a quote from one of my favorite photographers, Life magazine's fantastically great Ralph Morse, about his rivals at Newsweek. Ralph, it was said, was of the "old school" - a term once used to describe a code of behavior, before the "hip hop" generation co-opted it to describe MTV's previous seasons.

It's ironic that Ralph's words came on the eve of his coverage of the first Space Shuttle launch in 1981, because it was this article on Soviet cosmonaut deaths which brought them back to me. The combination caused me to think not only about the attitude of the gracious winner, but of the trials and tribulations of the losers in all high-stakes games.

While I'm proud of U.S. achievements in space (I am a child of the Sputnik Era, after all), I'm simultaneously saddened at the loss of life experienced by our (former) enemies. I'm not talking about the maudlin, paralyzing, "new age sensitive man who cries at the drop of a hat" kind of sadness, but rather a genuine empathy for those who attempt something great and leave the world poorer by their absence.

Like our astronauts, the cosmonauts were proud of their homeland. They were willing to put their lives on the line to advance not only their nationalistic pride, but something more. There was an altruistic component to their flights, which they seemed to know were advancing science and technology to benefit all those who were firmly anchored to terra firma. Even as we celebrate our own successes we need to be reminded that we are as much in their debt as they are in ours.

We see where we are today only because we stand on the shoulders of all those who came before us.

(Thanks to Tam, who found the article.)

-=[ Grant ]=-

A disappointment

www.grantcunningham.com — 2008-06-18T08:30:23-07:00

A few weeks ago the online gun community started buzzing about an impending product announcement from Freedom Arms. FA, for those not familiar with the company, makes the world's best production single-action revolvers. They are strong, accurate, and well made - and dominate the revolver divisions in metallic silhouette competition.

When the news was leaked, speculation abounded. Like many others, I was hopeful that the product would be a double-action wheelgun. I've even mentioned in this blog that I believe FA to be the only company capable of bringing back the era of finely made double action revolvers.

Sadly, we find at gunblast.com they instead brought out a single-shot pistol for the hunting/silhouette market. To quote Gomer Pyle, "I'm sure it's a sight to behold", but I can't help thinking that the engineers at FA are wasting their talents.

I still hold out hope that FA will see the light and bring us a double action. Soon. Please??

-=[ Grant ]=-

On rimfire ammunition and accuracy

www.grantcunningham.com — 2008-06-16T07:37:50-07:00

Serendipity, that's what it is. Last week a consistent topic kept coming up in a variety of places: the necessity (or lack thereof) for "accurate" .22 long rifle ammunition.

"I don't shoot groups, I hunt {insert favorite furry tidbit here}."
"You can't shoot really accurately in the field anyway, so better ammo isn't worth the price."
"The ammo already shoots better than I can, so I just buy whatever is cheapest."

I believe such comments to be shortsighted. First, though, a bit of information for those not intimately familiar with the vast array of rimfire ammunition.

The .22lr is the most popular (by a huge margin) cartridge in the world. It is available in a bewildering number of forms, from the very cheapest to the "ohmigod, I could buy a good steak dinner for that amount of money!" In general, the more accurate the ammo, the more it will cost.

The odd thing, however, is that not every .22 gun (be it rifle or pistol) will necessarily shoot the most expensive ammo into the smallest group. Rimfires are notoriously finicky; you can, quite literally, take two different .22 rifles, of the same model and vintage (and very close to the same serial number) and each will have very different ammunition preferences. Sometimes the most expensive will in fact shoot the best; other times, a less expensive fodder will do the deed.

In terms of consistency, however, the more costly ammunition will win out - it simply won't vary as much from group to group, even if its absolute accuracy isn't as good. In other words, a cheaper ammo may produce a smaller group occasionally, but the more expensive stuff will shoot the same size group all the time. In the aggregate, the more expensive the ammunition, the more likely it will shoot better in any given gun.

There's no guarantee that you'll set records with more costly bullets, but it's a dead certainty that you won't with WallyWorld specials!

Back to the subject at hand...let's say that you have a rifle that at its absolute best is capable of shooting the magic 1 minute-of-angle (MOA) group (which is, for all intents and purposes, 1/2" at 50 yards.) What this means is that the group it shoots with its best ammunition choice will fit into a circle measuring 1/2" in diameter. Clear so far?

Assuming that the actual center of the group is at the actual point of aim, any shot fired will fall a maximum of 1/4" from the point of aim; this is known as 1/4" radial dispersion. If one shot lands at the extreme edge of that dispersion, and the next at the opposite side of that dispersion, the distance between them will be 1/2", which is the group size. See how that works?

Now, let's say that some other ammunition shoots 4 MOA in this rifle (2" at 50 yards.) Any shot that is fired will now land within 1" of the point of aim. That's still not bad; certainly not enough to even get you in the door at an Olympic training village, but enough to nail pop cans off the fence.

Or is it?

A standard 12oz pop can has a diameter of 2.6", or 1.3" on either side of the center. Aiming dead on that center point, with our 4 MOA ammo, means that the worst shot of the bunch only has .3" to spare to knock the can off the fence. In other words, with that ammo your aim and hold has to vary no more than .3" if you expect to hit the can with any given shot!

Will the better ammo give us an edge? You tell me...with 1 MOA ammunition, the expected radial dispersion is .25". That means that any given shot, holding absolutely dead center, now has a margin of error of 1.05". In other words, your aim and hold now has a bit over an inch of leeway to hit with 100% certainty. I'd say that's a significant advantage, wouldn't you?

Shooting is all about being able to trust your skills, but you can't get to trust your skills until you first can trust your equipment. If you practice by popping cans off the fence, how will you know if that miss was because of your skills, or because of your equipment - and is it the ammo, or the gun?

Someone will no doubt be yelling at his (or her) monitor that not every shot will be at the outer edges of the variables. In other words, an ammo that shoots 4 MOA will distribute shots all over that circle; not all of them will be in the center (otherwise it would shoot better than 4 MOA), but likewise not all of them will fall on the edge of that circle. This is true.

The trouble with this line of thinking is that we don't know where any given upcoming shot will fall. We know that it may hit in the center of its expected circle, or it may hit at the edge, or somewhere in between. We don't know where it will hit until it does; if we expect to hit the target with every shot, we have to assume the worst and prepare for it, looking on anything else as a wonderful happenstance.

It's all about probabilities. Let's take our 4 MOA ammo; it's possible that, say, 80% of its shots might fall within a 2 MOA circle. This means that 80% of the time, you have a bit over 1/2" of leeway on that pop can. Put differently, if you can aim and hold within 1/2" of center, you'll hit the can 80% of the time. If you're happy with 80%, great! (Yes, I'm aware that you can increase the hit probability by simply decreasing the distance to the target. If you're going to shoot everything from 20 feet away, you may feel free to use the worst ammo in the worst gun, and never have the need to improve your skills. Everyone wins - sort of.)

Personally, I'm not enamored with those numbers. Look at it from my perspective: I like to hunt small game with my .22 rifles, both for pest control and dinner. I'm an old farm boy who has a close relationship to the animals around him; if an animal is to die by my hand, I require that death to be as humane - quick and painless - as is possible. For me, that means headshots and instant incapacitation. If you eat small game, you know that head shots are necessary simply to maximize the amount of usable meat from the ammo. Squirrels aren't all that big to begin with!

Further, a missed shot is a lost animal; unlike targets and pop cans, they usually don't wait around for you to try again. I want 100% hit probability if I can supply the necessary foundation (sighting and hold.)

A small animal's head often has a kill zone of around 1-1/2" (even less if forced to take a frontal shot.) If I were to use ammunition that only shoots 4 MOA, that would require me to have absolutely zero error in both sighting and hold to make a clean kill at 50 yards. (Actually, it has negative error - meaning that even with perfect performance on my part, I cannot expect the ammo to deliver a clean hit 100% of the time.) At 25 yards, it doesn't get a lot better - my total allowable aim/hold error for a clean kill is a whopping quarter-inch! Can you do that from a field shooting position? Really? Every time?

Switching to the better ammunition gives me a big edge. At 50 yards my self-induced error allowance is now a half inch, and at 25 yards it is almost 3/4". It means that the chances of a successful clean kill are significantly improved by using the better fodder.

Higher quality .22lr ammunition isn't just for benchresters and group junkies. If one is just starting out, it means faster and surer skill development. For the hunter, it means greater yield and more humane treatment of the animal. In my mind, it's worth the price.

The only thing left is to get a whole bunch of different kinds of ammunition and test them all in your gun. You'll learn just how much you'll have to pay to get the accuracy you really need - not the accuracy someone insists you can settle for!

-=[ Grant ]=-

Nothing surprises me any more.

www.grantcunningham.com — 2008-06-13T07:36:24-07:00

Presented without comment. You may feel free to draw your own conclusions.

-=[ Grant ]=-

(Tip 'o the hat to Say Uncle.)

FRIDAY SURPRISE: No fun and games

www.grantcunningham.com — 2008-06-13T07:18:56-07:00

I suspect, in this Age of Wii, that board games are solidly out of fashion. When I was a kid that was most assuredly not the case!

Growing up on the farm, there was no such thing as cable (or satellite) television; music was on vinyl records, not iPods; and personal computers, let alone the internet, weren't even on the horizon. Board games were therefore a significant portion of our recreational activities, and we looked forward to getting together with friends and playing our favorites.

The king of games, of course, was the all-time best seller: Monopoly - "by Parker Brothers", as the TV commercials reminded us. Kids liked it, adults liked it. Everyone, it seems, enjoyed passing the time by passing "GO" - and collecting $200.

It turns out that for some people, Monopoly wasn't a pastime - it was deadly serious.

-=[ Grant ]=-

Illustrating the concept

www.grantcunningham.com — 2008-06-11T08:40:07-07:00

A reader sent me this link to an old Richard Davis "Second Chance" video. The video has Davis shooting a fellow - who is wearing one of Davis' vests, of course - with a .308 rifle and himself with a .44 magnum revolver. The reader's comment was "if this doesn't show an energy dump, I don't know what it shows."

I agree. With the second part of the statement, at least. Going back to our "Stopping power" series, as I pointed out the term "energy dump" is nonsensical - energy isn't "dumped", it is used to do work.

What is the work in this case?

First, I can guarantee that the bullet itself was grossly deformed in its contact with the vest material. It takes energy to deform the bullet, and that energy only comes from one place: the bullet itself.

Second, there is a huge amount of work being done by that slug. It is trying to part and sever the fibers in the vest material, which are quite tough and designed to resist such force. The bullet does manage to defeat some of the fibers - which is why it's buried between the layers of cloth - but the energy required to do that job, again and again (there are many layers in a vest) rapidly depletes the bullet's stored energy. The result is that all of the energy is used up doing the work of penetrating the vest.

Again, the bullet's energy wasn't "dumped" - it was used. Understand the difference, and terminal ballistics won't seem so mysterious.

(Notice also the second myth busted in the video: that a bullet has enough energy to knock a man down. As you can see, even full-power .308 NATO, at near contact distance, isn't sufficient to knock over a man standing on one foot. Again, there is nothing mysterious at work - simply basic physics.)

-=[ Grant ]=-

Wonder why?

www.grantcunningham.com — 2008-06-11T08:25:02-07:00

So, ParaOrdnance (Para USA, as they prefer to be known) has a contest wherein they'll send your favorite gunblogger to Blackwater for a class with Todd Jarrett.

Very cool. Of course, if you look at the list of candidates you'll notice one name conspicuously absent.

Not that I'm surprised, of course. I mean, why would Para USA want to reward someone who is completely unlikely to ever use their product?

Still, it would've been nice to have at least been mentioned. The only thing worse than being talked about, is NOT being talked about.

Sigh. Now I know how Ron Paul must feel.

(Yes, I voted. No, I won't tell.)

-=[ Grant ]=-

My reloading setup: the dies I actually use daily

www.grantcunningham.com — 2008-06-09T08:08:01-07:00

Someone emailed and asked me to detail my reloading die setups. With pleasure!

For handgun rounds, my setup for .38 Special is typical (and, not surprisingly, my most-used.) The sizing die is a Lee carbide, which I've had for decades. I would prefer an RCBS die in this spot, primarily for the better decapping pin system and easier handling of it's knurled body, but the Lee is perfectly serviceable (and I'm too cheap to spring for the new die.) For certain other calibers I have RCBS or DIllon carbide dies, and as I mentioned last time I find them all acceptable - but my favorite remains RCBS.

The next station on the press carries a Lyman "M" expander die. The Hornady powder measure, like other progressive press measures, has an integral case expander, but I still prefer to expand using the Lyman die. It expands in a unique manner that reduces lead shaving and promotes straighter bullet seating, and it works as advertised. (I do reload a number of calibers for which I don't have "M" dies; for those I rely on the expander in the powder measure, which works perfectly well - the "M" die is just in a class by itself.)

The bullet seating die for all calibers is the Hornady with the sliding bullet alignment collar. It is, hands down, the best seating die I've used. That sliding collar definitely helps bullet alignment, especially if the bullet tips a bit on the way up into the die. The bullet seating depth is precisely adjustable via a convenient knurled knob, and they have a micrometer seating adjustment available as an accessory. Absolutely "best in class" in terms of features.

I never crimp in the seating die. I know, most people do, but I've found that crimping separately results in significantly better ammunition. In .38, I use the superb Redding crimp die. This die is unique, in that it applies a slight taper crimp first, then a roll crimp. It produces the best .38 ammo I've ever made, and would not be without it for any cartridge where I want to squeeze out that last little bit of accuracy.

For all other pistol calibers, I use the Lee Factory Crimp Die. It is different than any other crimp die: it has a carbide sizing ring that sizes all the way to the base of the case, which is difficult to do in the initial size/decap process. Then it applies a taper or roll crimp (depending on the cartridge.) The neat part about the crimp stage is that it is adjustable via a knurled knob, making it a cinch to get exactly the right amount of crimp. The combination of to-the-base resizing and perfect crimping make the FCD (as it's known in reloading circles) great for all calibers, but an absolute must for rounds going into autoloading pistols. If you're having trouble getting your reloads to feed, the FCD will solve the problem. (If you're using a Dillon sizing die, which doesn't size are far down the case as others, the FCD is especially useful.)

For rifle rounds I've taken then same mix-and-match approach. (For those who don't reload bottleneck rifle cases, there are two approaches to resizing: full-length and neck only. Cases going into autoloading or lever-action repeating rifles must be full-length sized for proper feeding. For a bolt-action or single-shot rifle, you can get away with just resizing the neck of the case itself. This results in much improved brass life and simplified reloading, as lubrication isn't needed.)

As mentioned last time, my preferred sizing dies are Redding and RCBS, for a combination of finish, smoothness, and decapping pin arrangement. In full length dies I've decided to limit my choices to RCBS and Redding, mainly because I haven't been all that happy with Lee's internal finish. If neck sizing only, Lee's Collet Dies are actually quite nice - I've had pretty good luck with them, though I still prefer Redding or RCBS because of Lee's decapping pin design.

When I'm reloading for rifles, I use the same technique that I do for pistol rounds: I don't seat and crimp in the same operation, as most rifle reloaders do. As I mentioned before, I've found that seating and crimping separately results in better quality ammunition, with more consistent seating depth and crimp tension.

Again, the seating die of choice is Hornady - their alignment collar is just as important for rifles as for handguns, and works just as well. I adjust the die body so that the crimping ring never touches the mouth of the case, thereby using just the seating function. I buy a separate seating die to do the crimping, and simply remove or adjust the seating stem so that it never touches the bullet. I've found - again - the RCBS and Redding seating dies are the best in terms of crimp quality. They don't shave brass from (or deform) the case lips when they're adding a heavy crimp, which both Hornady and Lee seating dies do. (This isn't important for a single-shot rifle, but for a tube-fed lever action it sure is!)

Sharp-eyed readers will note that I mentioned Lyman only once. This is because I have very little experience with their products other than the "M" die. Their external finish seems to be a notch below RCBS and a couple below Redding, though as mentioned I am impressed with the performance of the "M" die. Readers with more extensive Lyman experience are encouraged to comment on their other offerings.

As you can see, there is no one maker of dies that has everything I want; I'm forced to pick and choose the best for my needs and desires. It's taken me a long time (and no small amount of money) to get to this point, but I'm quite happy with the results!

-=[ Grant ]=-

FRIDAY SURPRISE: Sand in my eyes!

www.grantcunningham.com — 2008-06-06T07:50:22-07:00

When I was growing up we spent a lot of time at the beach. My older sister, during her off-time from college, worked and lived at the Oregon coast. Since gas was cheap back then, we often made the trip over the mountains from our valley farm to visit her. As a result, I spent a whole lot of time playing in the sand.

My efforts at sand castle building were poor at best. I didn't have a bucket and a miniature shovel, and my imagination was limited, so I contented myself instead with making driftwood fortifications and defending them from imaginary invading hordes. It never occurred to me that one needn't be limited to building just castles from sand!

Flash forward, and today sand sculpture is a hot activity. There are several competitions on the Oregon coast every year, as well as around the world. Dark Roasted Blend has a great bunch of pictures from competitions all over the globe - including right here in Oregon.

My favorite:

(Allow me to get a bit political and suggest that it is a parable for what happens when one believes that government programs are the solution to everything.)

-=[ Grant ]=-

By popular request...more on reloading

www.grantcunningham.com — 2008-06-04T07:52:26-07:00

From the comments and emails I've been getting, there is a resurgence of interest in reloading. At the price of factory ammunition, I can see why!

I'd like to touch on some things that Jerry brought up in Monday's comments. Yes, I have rather extensive experience with Lee, Dillon, and Hornady progressives. Frankly, each will produce identical ammunition; properly set up, there is no qualitative difference between the cartridges that come off any of those brands. If someone is having problems with the quality of their ammo, switching press brands is quite unlikely to help!

The primary difference among press makers comes in the ease of operation and long-term durability. In my experience, Lee presses require a somewhat higher level of mechanical aptitude to run (and keep running.) They also have a higher percentage of wear-related parts replacement, though to be fair every press has certain pieces that need replacement at regular intervals. It's just that Lee's tend to be more integral to the operation, and have slightly shorter life spans.

Again, a Lee will produce fine ammo - you'll just have to "fiddle" a little more to get it to do so. (Jerry, don't lose hope - bottleneck pistol cartridges like the .357 SIG are notoriously difficult to reload, no matter what press you use!)

Jerry also asked about dies. In carbide pistol dies, I like RCBS, Lee, and Dillon, in roughly that order. Lyman and Redding carbide pistol dies are fine, in a single stage press. The problem with them is that their carbide sizing rings have a very small chamfer at the edge of entry. When operating a progressive press the larger, rounded chamfer of RCBS, Lee, and Dillon dies results in much smoother case entry into the die.

This does have a downside - the larger the edge radius, the further up from the cartridge base the case is sized. That means that the bottom of the case doesn't get sized as much, which can cause feeding problems in autoloading pistols. Dillons are by far the most radiused, which is why I place them at the last of my "preferred" list. Lee and RCBS, in my opinion, have a much more "balanced" approach between feeding and sizing. (The Dillon dies, however, have the very best decapping pin arrangement and Lee the worst. I guess you just can't have your cake and eat it too!)

The only pistol dies I don't like are Hornady's. Their TiN coating, while hard enough for the task, isn't as polished as the carbide rings the others use. Their dies require more pressure on the press handle, and are noticeably less smooth. In fact, the only die I've ever had that scratched cases - gouged them, actually - was a .38/.357 Hornady TiN sizing die. (Hornady's bullet seating die, in contrast, is the very best I've used. This goes to show that no one - and I mean no one - does everything right!)

In rifle dies, all seem to produce accurately sized cases. However, there is a big difference in the internal finish. Redding dies, not surprisingly, are the best - very smooth, very consistent, very nicely made. The RCBS dies are good as well, but some of the Lee dies I've tried have been a little rougher than I would like. I haven't had a scratched case with a Lee die, but handle effort seems higher than the others. They certainly work well enough that I don't feel a burning need to replace those that I have, but when I buy new dies I'll stick with Redding and RCBS.

One of the nice things about RCBS rifle dies is their decapping pin arrangement. Hornady makes a carbide sizing button to replace the stock steel button on the RCBS decapping rod, which makes internal neck lube unnecessary.

(Why not just use Hornady rifle dies? Their decapping pin arrangement stinks. The only brand better than RCBS in that regard is Redding - who make their own carbide buttons. See why my rifle die preferences are RCBS and Redding?)

-=[ Grant ]=-

A bit of reloading gear discussion

www.grantcunningham.com — 2008-06-02T08:59:38-07:00

I recently received an email wherein the author took me to task for recommending the Hornady Lock-N-Load AP as the tool for the 'serious' reloader. His claim was that 'serious' reloaders always use Dillon, and nothing but.

Sorry to have to disagree.

My definition of 'serious' is the ballistic experimenter, not the appliance operator. Someone who reloads for a number of both pistol and rifle calibers and does a lot of load experimentation (different bullets, powders, cases, and primers) is, in my mind, far more 'serious' than the person who simply constructs a single caliber/bullet/powder charge. Yes, I'll grant you that it's arbitrary, but it is (after all) my prerogative to do so!

For the person who fits my definition of serious, the Hornady press remains the progressive tool to beat. (Of course such a person also needs at least one single stage press, preferably a Hornady that takes the same LnL die holders.)

Allow me to illustrate. I've become (belatedly, perhaps) a fan of the .30 WCF cartridge, also know as the "thirty-thirty." (My odyssey from high-speed, pointy-bullet cartridges to the pudgy .30-30 is a story in itself. I promise to recount it sometime soon.) Aside from developing the "perfect" 170 grain hunting load, I've also been working up a very light load.

This project is to give me a 100-yard load to use against animals intent on raiding our henhouse (amongst other things.) This load needs to be accurate, effective enough to kill a coyote-size animal at 100 yards, low recoil, usable in a repeating rifle, and QUIET. (Not that I have neighbors that are looking in the windows, but I like to be considerate. Besides, if I have to get up in the middle of the night to dispatch an unruly varmint intent on dining at Che Chicken, I don't want to cause my ears to ring for the next 12 hours!)

When I conceived of this project I consulted Ed Harris, whose knowledge of such loads is perhaps unparalleled. He suggested an oversized, dead-soft lead bullet over a small quantity of fast-burning pistol powder. The current long-term test is of a 115 grain flat-point lead bullet of about 5 BHN hardness, sized to .311", over 4.1 grains of Alliant Red Dot powder. This gives me a load that is just under supersonic at the muzzle, and from a 24" barrel about as loud as one of the hyper-velocity .22LR cartridges.

Once the load passes final testing, I plan to make a whole pile of 'em.

The Lock-N-Load system has proven to be a real time saver in developing this load. The quick-change dies in the single-stage press make it much easier to put together 5 or 10 at a time for testing; when the load is settled, I'll just stick those dies (already adjusted and ready to go) into the progressive AP and crank out ammo! Nothing is as flexible, and when you're doing things that are somewhat out of the ordinary you need that kind of flexibility.

Enough about presses. In this project I needed to bell the mouths of the .30-30 cases ever so slightly, so that the very soft slug could be seated without shaving. Ever tried to buy a .30 caliber mouth flaring die?

After searching I found the answer: the Lee Universal Case Expanding Die. It has a couple of interchangeable flaring spuds, one for small caliber and one for large, which go inside of the die body which is then topped with a threaded adjuster. You simply turn the knurled adjuster knob for the precise amount of flare you need - and you can vary it in incredibly small increments. Frankly, I wish I'd found this thing years ago - it would have saved me tons of time and effort.

Of course, mounted in a Hornady LnL bushing I can pop it into any press setup as needed, so I don't have to buy a dozen of the things!

Lee comes under fire on the internet forums for being the low-cost gear supplier, but they have a lot of products that are both well made and absolutely unique. The Universal Case Expanding Die is one of them, and every serious reloader needs one on his or her reloading bench.

(Ooops, there goes that word again...!)

-=[ Grant ]=-

FRIDAY SURPRISE: Boy, that sure would make a good movie!

www.grantcunningham.com — 2008-05-30T08:48:39-07:00

I just came up with a hot idea for a film script. We take an archeaologist who is obsessed with the Holy Grail, and we set him out on a search for it...and we'll throw in some evil Nazis who are just waiting to get it for themselves! Wouldn't that make a great movie??

Drat. Turns out that not only is my idea not my own, it's also been done already.

Day late and a dollar short...

-=[ Grant ]=-

A different "Stupid Criminal" story

www.grantcunningham.com — 2008-05-28T08:21:59-07:00

I probably should have waited for the Friday Surprise for this one, but I just couldn't help myself...

The local news is buzzing with the story of a recent liquor store burglary. Yes, burglary - not robbery.

Seems our erstwhile rumrunner broke into a local adult beverage emporium a couple of weeks ago, bringing his own large-size garbage can to carry off the loot. He first raided the cigarette shelves, then proceeded to the liquids of his choice.

Allow me to digress for a moment to explain my strategy in such a situation. First, I don't smoke - never have - so the tobacco products would not interest me. No, were I to find myself alone in a liquor store at o-dark-thirty, trick-or-treat bucket firmly in hand, I would make my way to the single malt shelf. I would then proceed to gingerly (and with all due respect to the golden liquid contained therein) place the bottles in my basket. Starting, of course, with the Islays and working my way inland.

First to go would be the Lagavulin, then the Caol Ila, then (in no particular order) the Bowmore, Ardberg, and Laphroaig. That should easily fill up the 33-gallon can that this fellow toted, but should there be any room left a few bottles of Highland Park would easily fill any gaps. That is what I would do.

This fellow? He spent all that time alone in an adult candy store stealing Jack Daniels. What a waste. The man should be publicly flogged for terminal stupidity and a profound lack of good taste.

-=[ Grant ]=-

A reloading press perspective

www.grantcunningham.com — 2008-05-28T07:55:50-07:00

It's been a while since I've written anything about reloading. Given the upward spiral of ammunition prices, though, it's probably about time to revisit the topic.

I presented my opinions on progressive reloading presses some time back. Recently I found a great piece by one Aaron Burns that directly compares the Lee Loadmaster, Dillon 650, and Hornady AP. His analysis is extensive, fairly objective, and in general my experiences mirror his. (Warning: it is a PDF file, not an html page.)

Terrific reading for anyone contemplating the jump into "rolling their own." If the expense of shooting is starting to cut into your range time, you should consider reloading. It's easy, rewarding, and many find it a relaxing adjunct to the shooting sports.

-=[ Grant ]=-

Welcome, USCCA readers!

www.grantcunningham.com — 2008-05-26T07:19:39-07:00

For those not "in the loop", last week the lead article in my "Self Defense, Stopping Power, and Caliber" series was reprinted in the U.S. Concealed Carry Association's newsletter. It generated a lot of interest, and some very nice comments from people as diverse as career police officers and ER physicians. Thanks, folks, for the kind words!

For those USCCA members who have visited, I hope you'll find the Revolver Liberation Alliance interesting enough to put on your reading list. This blog is updated just about every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday. I generally try to keep things on topic (revolvers, shooting in general), but on Fridays I go a bit further afield - concentrating on non-related things I like, things I find interesting, or things that just annoy me. (If you prefer an RSS feed, you'll see a link for that option in the left-hand panel.)

Of course, please feel free to use the comment and voting options for each of the blog posts. Also, check out the archives (on the left) and some of my more important articles in The Library.

Thanks again for stopping by!

-=[ Grant ]=-

FRIDAY SURPRISE: Do you have the drive?

www.grantcunningham.com — 2008-05-22T22:58:31-07:00

Last Friday I linked to an article that described what I don't like about my home state of Oregon. Today, I'm linking to a terrific Dark Roasted Blend article on something I truly treasure about Oregon: our great scenic drives.

I must say that this article is a surprise. We're so used to reading about "great" drives along the California coast, when we know that our coastline is both more beautiful and more accessible. It's great to finally get some well deserved press, not to mention being ranked among the world's most beautiful roads!

(Did you know that the Oregon coast is open to everyone? That's right - the entire coastline is public property, and there are very few spots that are not easily accessed. Take that, California!)

Terrific article, great pictures. Thanks for the plug, Avi!

-=[ Grant ]=-

The MSM takes note

www.grantcunningham.com — 2008-05-21T08:08:52-07:00

I don't have to tell you that things are getting more expensive. While the "official" inflation rate hovers in the mid-four-percent range, look at your own expenditures versus last year. I'll bet you're spending at least 14% more than you did in 2007 - perhaps a lot more.

For a shooting hobbyist, ammo prices factor into that increase, and the mainstream media has finally noticed. I'm sure that the average lightweight yuppies reading the article are recoiling in horror that anyone would need to buy "so many bullets", but it's nice to be mentioned at least somewhat favorably. For once.

(Don't fret - I'm sure next week they'll be back to painting all gun owners as ignorant rednecked hicks, racists, and criminals. After all, they have a job to do!)

-=[ Grant ]=-

The "Holster of the Week" Club

www.grantcunningham.com — 2008-05-19T07:54:04-07:00

Last week I promised a story. I heard this from "the horse's mouth", and if you knew this particular horse the story would not surprise you...

Anyhow, I happen to know a fellow (I'll call him "Ted") who, back in the '70s, was a Detective in a very large eastern police department. He had just been promoted from patrol, which meant that for the first time in his career he got to dress in plainclothes.

Ted and his more experienced partner were headed to lunch one day. They worked in a not terribly good part of town, and picked a restaurant in the vicinity of their last call. They pulled up in front of the restaurant, just behind a taxicab.

As they were exiting their unmarked vehicle a male climbed out of the cab ahead of them. He drew what Ted described as "a chrome-plated automatic", and started firing at another person who was still in the back seat of the cab.

(Allow me to digress as I explain that Ted, taking advantage of his now much looser dress requirements, had taken to wearing all manner of holsters. He alternated between a shoulder holster, crossdraw, strong side hip, appendix, and even ankle. He made the decision about which one to wear almost on a whim each morning. I'm sure you're beginning to see where this is going.)

Ted, who was exiting on the curb side of the vehicle, was in direct line of sight of the suspect. Being the gung-ho young cop that he was, he yelled "police, freeze!" as he reached for his gun. The perp turned toward the source of the command, and seeing two witnesses in suits raised his pistol in their direction and started firing.

Here's where the story gets interesting: Ted habitually reached for the spot where his uniform belt had always placed his gun. Of course, it wasn't there! I wish I could convey the level of comical panic that he did, but the gist is that he started patting himself all over, trying to find his gun while at the same time diving for cover behind his car door. "I couldn't remember where my gun was," he exclaimed to me. "I suddenly had the horrible thought that maybe I'd left it on my dresser!"

In the meantime his older and wiser partner simply drew his "snubby" revolver from the crossdraw holster he always used, and proceeded to drop said perp in his tracks. Ted found his gun just in time to help clean up the mess.

Ted told me that this incident convinced him to carry his gun in the same holster and in the same place every day. His advice to me was that I should do likewise - and I always do.

A firefight, gentle readers, is not the time to try to remember where you put your gun, or where your bullets are landing relative to your sights. Standardize on your load and your holster, and practice regularly so that you can quickly draw and reliably put your shots where they need to go!

-=[ Grant ]=-

FRIDAY SURPRISE: It's not my fault!

www.grantcunningham.com — 2008-05-16T07:23:40-07:00

I'd planned to introduce today's topic with a short essay on the state of Oregon, about its natural wonders and its recent societal changes. No matter how I approached the topic, I couldn't help sounding like a malcontent.

You see, I'm an Oregonian - a proud member of SNOB (Society of Native Oregon Born.) I was born here, lived my entire life here, and hope to die here (not right away, you understand.) I love this state, but even my love has its limits.

I will add only this: Portland is not like the rest of the state. More precisely, the rest of the state is not like Portland, for which I am eternally grateful!

-=[ Grant ]=-

Self defense, stopping power, and caliber, Part 9

www.grantcunningham.com — 2008-05-14T08:26:52-07:00

(For convenience, you can access all the installments at this link.)

Stick with what works

You've all heard of the "Gun of the Week" club, right? That's the term used to describe an "enthusiast", the guy (gals are too smart to engage in such nonsense) who carries or competes with a different gun every time he goes out. (Closely related is the "Holster of the Week" club. I'll post an amusing story about that, soon.)

There is also the "Bullet of the Week" club. Some folks read the gun magazines assiduously, loading up with the latest and greatest "stopper" from the current issue. The next issue (or possibly a competing magazine) tells them about yet another new bullet, and off to the gunstore ammo shelves they go!

There are problems with this approach. Aside from the fact that one is unlikely to see any major performance differences between modern designs from major makers, there is a reliability issue. If you're shooting an autoloader (an affliction which elicits my sincere sympathies), you need to fire a minimum of 200 rounds of your chosen ammunition to ensure reliability. That's a lot of ammunition to buy and shoot every time you change loads!

Even with a revolver, you should shoot a full box of that ammo to ensure ignition reliability in your gun, especially if you've had action work performed.

The other issue is with the sights on your gun. Fixed sights, as featured on both revolvers and autos, will not shoot all ammunition to the same point of aim, necessitating on-the-fly windage or elevation corrections. Trying to remember whether this week's ammunition choice shoots up or down, right or left, relative to the sights is hard enough. Imagine trying to do that with someone lobbing rounds into your personal airspace!

If you have fixed sights, you should regulate them to match the load you'll be using - then use that load, and only that load, for "serious" use in that gun. If for some reason you change the standard load for that gun, have the sights adjusted to shoot to point-of-aim for that load.

That's why I say "stick with what works." Pick a decent load that proves itself to be reliable in your gun, have the sights regulated properly, and just use it. Constantly switching between different bullets gains you nothing, and may in fact cost you in a dynamic self-defense incident. Pick one load, practice with it, and use only that bullet in that particular gun.

I go even further - I've standardized on one load for all my .38/.357 guns, and I've regulated all of them to shoot that load. That way, I don't have to maintain a huge stock of ammunition to fit a bunch of different guns.

I think this finally does it for the "Self defense, stopping power, and caliber" series. I'm just about "talked out"! I hope that it has given you some insight into the task of selecting a gun/cartridge for your self defense needs.

Stay safe, make sensible choices, and practice. It's all you can do - but, as it happens, all you can do is enough!

-=[ Grant ]=-

Self defense, stopping power, and caliber, Part 8

www.grantcunningham.com — 2008-05-12T08:44:16-07:00

(For convenience, you can access all the installments at this link.)

"So, smarty pants - what gun should I get?"

I receive many emails asking, in essence, what the "best" self-defense caliber might be. (Those emails, in fact, have served as the motivation behind this series.) The correspondents are probably expecting sage advice, the wisdom of years, a sort of Ballistic Oracle. What they get is a non-commital "it depends!"

If you take nothing else from this series, take this: there is no such thing as "best" - there is only "suitability for purpose."

Why is that? As we learned in the first parts, there is a pretty large envelope - caliber, weight, and velocity - of performance criteria that have shown themselves to work well. Thus, any cartridge you select within that envelope is likely to do the job, as long as you do yours.

That's the most important part: that the gun in question enables you to do your job. It is the first place you should start. You need to be honest with yourself, accurately assess what you can and cannot handle. Remember that a self-defense scenario often will call for multiple, rapid, precisely-placed shots. Can you do that with the guns that you're considering? Really? Be honest with yourself!

I see many people who are talked into a gun that is touted as a "better stopper", but who are unable to handle it to the standards given above. Most of this is technique, and technique can be learned, but everyone has some upper limit. Remember: only accurate hits count, and you should strive to maximize your hit potential. As we've explored, power is irrelevant if it doesn't get to something important!

Once you've passed that hurdle, the choices almost make themselves. In any given cartridge, if you pick a hollowpoint load in the middle of the caliber's normal weight range, you'll generally have most of what you need. There are exceptions, of course: at the lowest ends of the energy spectrum (say, standard .38 Specials) penetration becomes an issue, so you should tend to the heavier rounds. At the other end (the heavy magnums), the more powerful loads often need lighter bullets to limit penetration and enhance expansion.

For everything else, stay away from the lightest and heaviest bullets, pick a decent hollowpoint, and you'll most likely be just fine.

The most important part of this whole selection process is to practice with the load that you've chosen. If the cartridge/gun combination is "too much" for you to do so, that's a sign that you need to pick something else. You need to practice with your safety/rescue equipment, and if you can't or don't want to, then you will be less prepared to face a deadly encounter. The old trick of practicing with Specials while carrying Magnums on the street has been thoroughly discredited, because it doesn't allow the user to get used to the dramatic difference in handling between the two.

(This isn't to say that you have to do all your training this way; I do a lot of work with light loads when I'm diagnosing a trigger control issue, or to help develop a specific skill. When I've got them down, though, I switch to my carry load and train extensively with that.)

So, what do I carry? Most of the time, I load up the trusted and proven .38 Special +P 158 grain all lead semi-wadcutter hollowpoint. I've spoken with many people who have actually used this load against an adversary, and to a person they were all very satisfied with the ballistic effect. Massad Ayoob tells me that his research showed police agencies who switched from that load to hot autoloading cartridges did so not to get "better" bullets, but to get "more bullets." I'm confident in it's abilities, and in my ability to handle the cartridge from any gun under any conditions.

This is a tradeoff for me. For instance, I really like the .44 Special. It's a great round, but in a concealable gun I just don't handle it as well as other calibers. I'm honest with my limitations; increasing joint pain, particularly in my elbows, is beginning to limit what I can handle, which means that the sweet .44 Special is no longer a good choice for my primary caliber.

In fact, a hot .357 Magnum from a Ruger SP101 is easier for me to control than a .44 Special from a small gun, and the Magnum has become to be too much for me in a normal range session. I like the .357 too, but I have to admit to myself that if I want to live relatively pain free, I can't shoot it from my carry guns any more.

The result is that I've picked the most effective round that falls within my limitations, and practice with it extensively. I think that is the most rational way to approach this whole topic!

Next time, we'll explore some less obvious considerations when picking your "ideal" self defense cartridge.

<--- Click here for the previous episode ..................... Click here for the next episode --->

-=[ Grant ]=-

FRIDAY SURPRISE: Drat - what luck!

www.grantcunningham.com — 2008-05-09T18:03:47-07:00

So, imagine you're a geologist searching for diamonds in Namibia. You haven't found any. You're disappointed; perhaps, you think, you should reconsider your chosen profession.

Then you trip over a shipwreck filled with gold, silver, and artifacts.

Think you'd feel better? I sure would!

-=[ Grant ]=-

More info on the new Taurus revolver

www.grantcunningham.com — 2008-05-06T10:49:45-07:00

Back in my February commentary on this year's SHOT show, I made mention of a new Taurus 6-shot revolver. I also made mention that I couldn't find it on their website, which isn't at all surprising - the latest entry on their "news" page is from October 2006!

However, reader Dave McDaniel had enough time (and tenacity) to scrounge through their site and find the information for us. (He did note that it wasn't easy. No kidding!)

Courtesy of taurususa.com

The new model is coined the 856, and comes in three delicious flavors: blue, stainless, and magnesium. (No "Total Titanium"? Hmmm...I thought that was their claim to fame in the lightweight handgun derby.) Here are the direct links to the products:

Model 856B2 (blue)
Model 856SS2 (stainless)
Model 856HL2MG (magnesium)

According to Taurus, what they've done is to take the "J" frame-sized "85" series and shoehorn in a 6-round cylinder. If there is no noticeable increase in overall size (other than cylinder diameter), this will beat even the late Colt Detective Special for size efficiency! I had hoped that it would actually be a .357 gun, and the fact that it isn't may hurt sales, but I'll settle for a true, readily available compact six shooter that is +P rated. I'm also happy to continue seeing blued versions available.

Of course, there are hurdles yet to clear: first, Taurus has a bit of a reputation for vaporware - announcing products that just never seem to make it into production (or at least take so long that you can't tell the difference.) They're promising the 856 for "third quarter", though of what year they are not specific.

Second is their lack of quality control, about which I've made my feelings quite clear. If the quality is typical of Taurus, the thing might not be worth owning. However, even I acknowledge that the 85 series has generally been their best revolver product; it's mature, well engineered, and generally pretty well fitted. So, there is hope - though I will remain uncommitted until one is actually in my hands.

Third, even if it does make it into production and it is worth owning, Taurus is also well known for discontinuing products at the drop of a hat, even before they can build sales momentum. If the first two hurdles are crossed you'll hear it here first; after that, it's up to you to snap one up before Taurus decides they don't want to make them any longer.

I'm pulling for Taurus on this one. I'd like to see them hit a "home run" for a change, and this is the product that could gain them serious "street cred" amongst devoted wheelgunners. Hopefully they won't screw it up, like they did the last time they had this opportunity (I refer, of course, to the late and shoddy "445" series.)

Stay tuned!

-=[ Grant ]=-

Series index: "Self defense, stopping power, and caliber"

www.grantcunningham.com — 2008-05-05T21:51:28-07:00

Here's the whole series for your perusal!

Part 1
Part 2
Part 3
Part 4
Part 5
Part 6
Part 7
Part 8
Part 9