Category: The Gun Thing

Not just the guns, but all the stuff that goes with them

Carry Trends

The Gun Thing

Tami Keel talks about the trend in carry guns that she’s witnessed over the years:

The first [competition] I attended, at DARC in Arkansas back in 2017, was largely after the “Caliber Wars” were over. I’m sure there were a few .40s and .45s in attendance, but 9mm was the overwhelmingly most common chambering and it wasn’t even close. I’d feel pretty comfortable stating that probably half everybody was shooting a Glock of one variant or another, with M&Ps being the second most common, and the remainder a mishmash of Sig Sauers, HKs, and Berettas, mostly

Next year TacCon was at DARC again. Glocks were still the most common gun, but probably only a plurality at this point. Sig P320s were already vying with M&Ps as the second most commonly seen pistol. There were a handful of people using red dot optics in 2018, and John Johnston made it into the man-on-man shootoff with one.

At 2019, down in Louisiana at NOLATAC, there were more red dots, and Rick Remington won the shootoff with an RMR atop a 9mm Wilson. Glock alternatives continued to grow in popularity.

After a one-year hiatus during the Plague Year of 2020, TacCon was held at Dallas Pistol Club in 2021. That’s when I first started seeing significant numbers of the smaller pistols, like Glock 48s and Sig P365s. Red dots were commonly spotted in every class and were no longer limited to hardcore dot proponents who’d had pistol slides custom milled for RMRs.

2022 was back at DPC again. Red dots and smaller pistols were everywhere, even in the shootoffs.

2023? More of the same.

For 2024, the biggest difference I noticed was that there was a greater number of people who were willing to talk openly about living “the snubby lifestyle” à la Darryl Bolke. Gear-wise, dots had become downright prevalent. Walthers had become more common. I don’t know how Walther’s doing in terms of overall market share, but they’ve certainly penetrated the serious training hobbyist demographic. The majority of optics were now Holosuns.

All very interesting.  I couldn’t help thinking how my personal carry choices have changed over the same period of time.

2017:

2018:

2019:

2020:


(briefly, then back to the usual)

2021:

2022:

2023:

2024:

I know, this is carry as opposed to competition, but still.  One assumes that the competitive shooters were carrying the same as, or at least copies of the ones they were shooting.  (If not… LOL.)

The only changes I can foresee in my carry choice would be substituting one 1911 for another.

Occasionally, if I’m in the mood, I may carry my bedside S&W Model 65 instead of a 1911, because that’s the holster belted onto a different pair of jeans and I’m too lazy to swap it out:

So you see, I can be flexible.

I’m just not interested in carrying a little gun like a SIG or Walther in 9mm Europellet, unless one day I decide to substitute it for my backup Model 637.

Don’t hold yer breath.

By the way, I typically carry two or four backup 1911 Chip McCormick mags (depending on whether or not I’m wearing a gilet), and a couple of 5-round speedloaders for the 637.  That should be enough ammo to get me back to the car rifle, after which I can really bring down the thunder.

Update:  Several people have written to me, speaking of their preference for hi-cap mags.  One asked me whether the 8-round Chip McCormick 1911 mags would be sufficient in a BLM-type encounter.

I have two responses to this:  firstly, three CMC mags = 24 rounds, five mags = 40 rounds, and three .38 Spec loads = 15 rounds.  If I wanted to get serious, and with a little foreknowledge, I could just swap out the 8-round mags for 10-round CMC mags, of which I have a half-dozen or so on hand.  Should be enough.

Any more than the above, and I probably would avoid going out to where there’s a chance I may be heavily outnumbered — OR I could just turn the trunk gun into a front-seat gun (with several backup mags), if you get my drift.  I venture to suggest that this combination of weaponry would be adequate for any group of scraggly scrotes.

Gratuitous Gun Pic: Remington Nylon 66 (.22 LR)

Gratuitous Gun Pics

I stumbled on this fine article SOTI, and I had to share it with everyone because not only is it a good analysis and background story on the wonderful old Nylon 66, but it evokes from me a feeling of deep regret, because I was once offered one for about $20, and I turned it down because to me the little gun looked kinda cheap and nasty.

It was a Black Apache like this one:

No, don’t bother to offer to kick my ass, because said ass already has an excellent set of bruises thereon, self-inflicted.

In my defense, I didn’t know as much about guns back then as I do now, and in fact I’d never even heard of the thing because of my deprived South African childhood.

Anyway, here’s a different model, the brown one:

…and one that was recently on sale at Collector’s (it’s long gone, don’t bother), and for around $650 (!!!!):

Now go and read the article, because it’s full of interesting stuff.

By the way, I rejected the Nylon 66 because it looked flimsy and cheap, whereas it’s anything but.

Don’t trust me with any investment advice;  I suck.

Out Of Your Element

Hunting

Whenever someone asks me what it’s like to hunt in Africa, I’m kind of at a loss for words.

The African bushveldt, you see, is pretty difficult to hunt.  Here’s a representative sample:

It’s pretty dense — not tropical jungle, though as much densely covered, and visibility is often measured in feet rather than in yards.

To give you an idea of what this means:  from a standing start, a lion can cover 100 yards in about 3.5 seconds.  Typical visibility in lion country:  about 100 feet, as above.  (Do the math.)

And death is everywhere, the minute you leave the relative safety of your Land Rover or hunting camp.  It could be a mamba, a scorpion, a Cape buffalo, or any number of things with teeth and claws, for whom a human is kinda like a marshmallow:  can’t run that fast, no tough hide, no horns or whatever to protect itself, and laughably slow reflexes and crap hearing by comparison to the typical prey animal.

Like this leopard:

Now you know.

Gratuitous Gun Pic: Brno Mod 22F (8x57mm)

Gratuitous Gun Pics

Long Time Readers will know of my fondness for full-stocked rifles like the SMLE.  Try this beauty on for size, at Steve Barnett’s Very Very Bad Place:

Okay, it looks beautiful, and the chambering is of course excellent — the 8mm Mauser cartridge is adequate for almost any purpose, like its Murkin .30-06 counterpart — but I have a couple of reservations about the Mannlicher flat or “butter-knife” bolt handle.

You see, it’s lovely to look at and of course it works very well;  but after more than half a dozen shots, that sharp edge starts to hurt your hand.  Granted, in the hunting activity, you seldom have to shoot more than a couple of times in a row — unless things are going very, very wrong — but I must say I prefer a regular rounded bolt handle like this one to the butterknife above:

But would I shy away from the Brno (later named CZ) if offered?  Hell, no.

And this little short-barreled carbine would be extremely handy in the field.

Gratuitous Gun Pic: MAC 1911 JSOC (.45 ACP)

Gratuitous Gun Pics, Gun/Ammo Tests

Evil Reader John C. sent me a link to the 1,000-round test of this lovely budget 1911:

Okay, it’s a 1911 so I’m going to like it, and it comes with all sorts of standard stuff like a titanium trigger, ambi-safety, adjustable rear sight and (yes!) a brass bead front sight.  My only quibble is this unnecessary protuberance on the grip safety…
…but I’ve griped about it often enough so I won’t repeat it here.

Most of all, I like the price point (around $750 street) which, considering the effects of Bidenflation (don’t get me started) is quite acceptable.

And the tester likes it fine, but they always do, don’t they?  Certainly, though, the MAC came through the 1,000-round test without any major issues, which is more than you can say about a lot of the budget guns on the market nowadays.

And it looks like a proper 1911, none of that front-of-slide serration nonsense that all the cool kids seem to demand.

Gratuitous Gun Pic: Pre-64 Winchester Mod 70 (.300 H&H Mag)

Gratuitous Gun Pics

I’m often asked, when at a meeting of the local Beer ‘N Treason chapter while we watch a luckless hippie turning gently on a spit:  “Kim, what’s it all about with this ‘Pre-64 Winchester rifle’ thing?  What’s so special about 1964, and why are these rifles so popular?”

At the risk of boring my Readers (who doubtless know all about this stuff), let me explain.

After 1964, the Winchester Repeating Arms Company changed their manufacturing methodology for their bolt-action rifles.  [insert anti-beancounter tirade here]  In the words of Scott Weber:

“Winchester went to stamped checkering on the gun stocks instead of hand checkering. Plastic replaced metal in some components, and a lesser grade of bluing was used on the rifle’s actions and barrels.  None of that changed the basic function and accuracy of the Model 70s, but the downgrades in craftsmanship angered many customers, and Model 70s made after 1964 don’t carry the same value as pre-’64s.”

As I recall, the actions were likewise changed, from forged- to cast steel.  While there is no appreciable change in efficacy, when working the bolt action there is a distinct change in the action’s sound from the pre-64 rifles to their post-64 successors.  The change in sound is likewise noticeable in other rifle generation changes, e.g. the Swiss K11 to the K31:  the cast steel makes a clacking sound, while the forged action rings. (No prizes for guessing which one I prefer.)

Anyway, what brought all this on was this rifle, newly-arrived at Merchant Of Death Steve Barnett:

Now let’s talk a little about the chambering of the above beauty.  The .300 H&H Magnum is often compared to the older (and much more common, certainly in the Mod 70) .30-06 Springfield, but the H&H is actually more powerful.  Frank Barnes gives the following data, using a common 190gr. bullet:

Muzzle velocity (fps)
.30-06 : 2,700
.300 H&H : 3,000

Muzzle energy (ft-lbs)
.30-06 : 3,076
.300 H&H : 3,798

I’ve used the .300 H&H myself back in the day, and its effect on thin-skinned game like warthog and impala is, to put it mildly, impressive.

Where the .30-06 excels, of course, is in the old “Bubba’s Bait & Tackle” test (especially in the U.S.).  If you forgot your ammo at home, any ammo store will have .30-06 on the shelf, probably with a choice of manufacturer.  (Actually, I think it’s against the law in some states not to carry any.) The .300 H&H?  Not so much — in fact, unless there’s a large chain store like Cabela’s in the offing, you can pretty much forget about finding it anywhere.

And the price difference reflects that availability:  .30-06 runs about $1.50 per round, whereas the .300 H&H will set you back $5 (!!!).

Not that this is too important, in hunting terms, because you’re not going to blast off hundreds of rounds, either way.

But if your other rifle is an old M1 Garand…

Note:  this post was supposed to appear yesterday, but Mr. Fumblefingers cocked up the date.  Mea maxima culo.