Tag: Guns and such

The deadline for entries to the ULD rifle draw is this Saturday (Feb 29).  Details are back here, for those who’ve been living on the planet Manhattan till now.

All entries postmarked after this date will be returned, so get things rolling if you still want to participate.

If anyone would like to contribute further to my Boomershoot expedition this year (ammo, travel costs, shooting shelter, etc.), feel free to do so.  Just send your check with “BS Fund” on the Memo line, and I will accept your contribution with thanks.

Sheriff Jim talks about the myths of self-defense carry, and a couple of times I found myself nodding in agreement along with him.  Here’s one of them.

On long trips I carry a backup S&W 637, but it’s not all that easy to get to (certainly not as easy as my 1911), but I always had that nagging feeling about that “Two is one, one is none” trope — specifically, if you’re carrying a second gun in case your primary gun fails, then perhaps you need to have more faith in your choice of primary in the first place, and get a better gun.

That said:  even my faithful Springfield 1911 has failed, twice, and fortunately, both times at the range.  The first time (at around the 25,000-round mark) was when the slide stop broke (snapped halfway through), but the remnant of the pin still held the gun together through the rest of the shot string when the mag was empty.  So in a self-defense situation, that might not have been so bad.

The second failure was more substantial:  at the 35,000-round point the safety catch broke, almost literally disintegrated in the gun, and the gun became inoperable.  (Fun fact:  when that happens, the grip safety also becomes inoperable, so the 1911 is not safe to carry with a round in the chamber.)  It didn’t matter about the rarity of this event — not only had I never heard of it happening, but the gunsmith hadn’t, either;  nevertheless, it did happen, and I have to admit that it left me quite shaken.

So maybe, just maybe, Old Faithful isn’t that faithful after all — which makes an argument in favor of carrying a backup.

OR:

Maybe a revolver makes a better choice for a primary carry gun — I know, six, seven or even eight rounds aren’t the same as the fifteen-round mag in yer Glock — but revolvers are inherently more reliable than semi-autos, so…

Here’s the big “but” (and it’s bigger than Kim Kardashian’s):  would (say) a S&W 686 have been as reliable as my 1911 after 25,000 full-power loads, or is that an apples-oranges comparison?  What about a S&W 625 (which is chambered in .45 ACP like the 1911)?  Would that have lasted longer without a breakage (at, say, 25,000 rounds) than the 1911?

I have to tell you, after the 1911’s safety broke, I first started thinking about carrying a revolver instead of a semi-auto, and it’s something that weighs on me to this day.  I am very much tempted by the 8-shot Mod 627:

Eight rounds is what I carry in my 1911 anyway, and while a revolver loads a little slower with a speedloader than a mag-fed semi-auto, it’s not that  much slower (after considerable practice, which I’ve had).

This is what happens when you start looking at the carry myths (thanks, Sheriff Jim) — you start to rethink all sorts of long-held habits and beliefs.

“The one thing that I got from the professional hunters is that they don’t plan for when everything works right—they plan for when everything goes wrong.  And, just like the smart defensive shooter, it effects their choice of guns, gear and tactics.  And that, I submit, is a good way to stay alive.”

There you have it.

Now we can talk about the optics I’m thinking of putting on whatever rifle I finally choose for Boomershoot 2020.  To start with, I looked at this article, which lists the most popular scopes used by the majority of serious long-distance competitive shooters.  To spoil the surprise, I’ll tell you that pretty much all of them (e.g. Kahles) cost more than $3,000 — which, given my budget, makes them unreachable.  Back to Square 1, more or less.

I know a bit about scopes (admittedly, while not that up to date on the most recent developments), but having struggled with scopes at Boomershoots passim, I know a couple of features that are must-haves:

• at least 20x magnification (25x would be even better)
• a front aperture  (“bell”) of at least 50mm diameter
• preferably, an illuminated reticle for when the weather clouds over, or it gets towards evening — understanding that this feature typically adds about $300 – $400 to the price
• and of course I’d be looking at scopes priced in the $900 – $1,300 range

I’m also unimpressed by a fiddly reticle requiring a laptop to make calculations, because it would just take me time to get to work the things properly.  I know my way around scopes, pretty much, and Boomershoot is not a “precision” competition which would require such things anyway.

So with that in mind, I looked around at various online outlets which specialize in these things (SWFA, Europtics etc.) and came up with a shortlist (in no specific order, prices approximate):

 1) Sightron 6-24×50 SIII 30mm (illuminated MOA-2, side focus, 1/4 MOA, zero stop) $1,300
It’s an excellent scope, even though it’s at the very upper end of the price range.  The 6-32x model with the identical reticle is a couple hundred bucks cheaper.

2) Minox 5-25×56 ZX5i 30mm (matte, illuminated plex, side focus) $800
Minox is my favorite mid-range scope, but this one suffers by having no mil-dots or gradations. But the price means I could afford a better rifle…

3) Sig Sauer 5-25×52 WHISKEY5 30mm (illuminated MOA-2, quad plex, side focus, 0.25 MOA adjustment)
$1,300

I’ve never shot a SIG scope before, but this one has had some good reviews.  Likewise, no mil-dots etc.

4) Zeiss 6-24×50 Conquest V4 30mm (illuminated #93, side focus, ext. elevation turret)
$1,200

Right now, the Zeiss would get my vote.  Without the red-dot it’s $200 cheaper.

5) Steiner 4-20×50 GS3 30mm (Plex S1, Side Focus, 2/p)
$1,200
This Steiner doesn’t have an illuminated reticle, but nobody I know who shoots this brand has ever had any bad words about the quality.  There’s another one at the same price, with a different reticle.

6) Nikon Black FX1000 6-24×50 30mm (illuminated, side focus, FX-MOA FFP)  $800

If all else failed and the budget fell apart, I’d go with this one.  I just don’t know whether the Nikon scopes have the consistent quality of the others above — there’s a reason why their sales have tanked over the years –and I can’t take the risk.

7) Sightron 10-50×60 SIII 30mm (wide duplex, side focus, 1/8 MOA target knobs) $1,100

The upper end of the “regular” (i.e. crosshair) scopes, this would not ordinarily excite me except for that 50x magnification and massive 60mm bell (!).  That said, Sightron makes the same model with mil-dots, for a few bucks more.

These, so far, are my top seven choices.

(For those who are wondering “Where the Leupolds at?”  should know that the combination of illumination + >20x magnification puts most Leupolds outside the price range, as seen here and here, for example.  It’s a pity because I love the brand, but there ya go.  Ditto Nightforce here and here, also Leica;  and as for Swarovski… fergeddabahdit.)

All experiences with any of the above scopes, or any I may perhaps have missed, should be shared in Comments.

From one of my “List” posts, this one I think about Desert Island Guns, came this thought in Comments:

I look forward to Kim’s lists of “5 guns I would throw in the car if the commies were chasing me” and “5 guns I would pack into the wilderness, if I could find some”.

I’ve probably answered this question in one way or another many times, so I’m going to keep it short.

Commie invasion: AK-47, a scoped sniper rifle, a 12ga shotgun and two 1911 pistols.

In the (African or Canadian) wilderness:  if I had to carry them, I’d want a scoped dangerous game double rifle in .375 H&H and a Blackhawk .44 Magnum revolver.  If I were in a cart / off-road truck, then the above two plus a scoped light rifle in 6.5x55mm Swede, a .22 rifle and another .44 Mag revolver.

There is no “wilderness” in America anymore… [removes tongue from cheek]

Because I haven’t talked much about double rifles before, I’d look at something like this Franchi:

The double trigger is in case one breaks (it happens), in which case you still have one workable barrel.

Simple questions to answer, because I’ve thought about the two scenarios before, and quite often withal.

 

As promised yesterday, here are the .308 Win rifles I’m looking at.  I’ve split them into two groups:  inexpensive and premium.  “Inexpensive” means quite a bit less than $1,000, while “premium” means more than $1,000 but less than $1,200 — that budget constraint again.  Once again, all these rifles have good reviews from people whose opinions I trust, and I’ve shot a couple of them myself — with astonishing results.

Here are the inexpensive choices:

I have to say that the XPR is a little dubious to me because on several occasions, shooters have complained about the uneven trigger pull (i.e. gunsmithing needed) and the rifle itself is suspiciously cheap.  The Ruger has good reviews, but that 20″ barrel is not a good idea (in my experience) when shooting the .308 Win past 300 yards in windy conditions;  the bullet hasn’t got up to speed by the time it leaves the barrel.  So while I’ve listed these as options, I looked at them before I’d received a few more entries and I think I can do better.  Such as with these:

For me, this comes down to the trigger.  I have an admitted bias towards the CZ’s single-set trigger (pull it back, and it releases at about 4 pounds;  push it forward to “set” it, and it releases at about 3 ounces) — and the CZ is at the low end of this group, price-wise.  That said, I have very fond memories of Savage’s Accu-Trigger, which can be adjusted (even by a schmuck like me) to the desired weight, and Savage rifles are renowned for their out-of-the-box accuracy.  Which leaves the Howa, and while I’ve never shot this particular model, I have many fond memories of Howa rifles so it made the cut.

Ultimately, though, I prefer a long barrel when shooting the .308 Win at distance, so right now I would say that I’m leaning towards the 26-inch-barreled CZ and the Savage Model 12 — although the Savage 10FCP has quite possibly the best reviews of any rifle I’ve ever seen.  (I’ve shot a .308 Savage 10 before, but only the hunting type — which was excellent — and never the target rifles.)  So that might be a tie-breaker.

As with yesterday’s .300 Win Mag rifles, I don’t think that any of the latter group is a horrible choice.  (I should point out that I looked at both the Ruger M77 and Winchester 70 as part of this exercise, but neither comes with a heavy-barrel option, which I consider a must-have for Boomershoot.)

I might go to the Fort Worth gun show this coming weekend to see if I can find a diamond in the rough amongst the thousands of AR-15s [groan]  but I’m not holding my breath.

Feel free to add comments and suggestions below, based on your own experiences;  but remember my earlier admonition against customization and modification.

Next up:  the scope.