When “New” Means “Expensive”

I’ve been thinking recently about supplementing the old Springfield 1911 with another one sometime.  So I’ve been idly browsing the usual places, looking for a new 1911, with only a few specific must-haves.  Mostly, it looks as though I’m going to have to spend around $800-$900 to get what I need.  I’m not ultra-fussy because to me, a 1911 is like a hammer:  you pick it up, it works, and I don’t need much in the way of add-ons.

Over at Shooting Times there’s an article talking about the new 1911s on the market, so I went there with all sorts of anticipation.  Here’s one they listed:

Now before you explode, go to the article and read the comments.

Me, I need a drink.

Enough Ammo

From Clay Martin (via Peter’s blog):

The one thing I see over and over again in prepping circles is a belief that a mountain of ammo is all you need. Absolutely not true! In fact, I believe that most people would be better off with 300 rounds and the skills of having shot 20,000 as opposed to 20,000 stockpiled and the skills of having shot 300.

Amen to that.  I cannot tell you the degree of comfort I feel when I unholster my Springfield 1911 and raise it to a shooting position.  I’ve put a lot  more than 20,000 rounds through this old friend, and I’m not sure that I can operate any other  piece of machinery as well as I can my 1911.

As for rounds on hand:  I have an ungodly amount of FMJ practice ammo, and maybe a few hundred rounds of self-defense ammo (which I add to on a monthly basis, a box or two at a time depending on the status of my bank account).  I’d have more of the HP stuff, but at the range I always shoot off a mag of premium hollowpoints first — following the maxim of “practice with what you’ll use” — but I can’t afford to shoot 200-odd rounds of premium self-defense .45 ACP ammo every week, sue me.  So I shoot 8, buy 20, week after week.  In my 1911’s “grab ‘n go” ammo bag, I have 200 rounds of .45 loaded in magazines, after which I’d probably need a rifle anyway.  Which brings me to my next point, and a confession.

I don’t have the same degree of familiarity with my rifle  part of the SHTF equation.  I know I should shoot the AK more, but hell;  in my life I’ve probably fired an AK more often than any rifle other than .22, and what’s to remember about shooting an AK-47?  I’m confident that in any SHTF (urban street fight), I can put 20 rounds into a dinner plate-area at 50 yards, shooting “aimed-rapid” (which is all you need to do in that scenario.  At 100 yards, I can’t even see  the damn target anymore because Old Fart Eyesight, and at that point I’d go to one of my scoped rifles anyway).

So I break out the AK every few months (vs. every week for the 1911) and shoot off three or four mags (20-rounders) before I get bored and put the thing away (after letting the barrel cool and the handguard stop smoking, don’t ask me how I learned to do that  before putting the thing away in a foam-rubber-lined gun case).  And yes, I have an ungodly amount of 7.62x39mm ammo too;  in my AK’s “grab ‘n go” ammo bag, I have 400 rounds of the “39”, which should suffice for any urban unrest I’m likely to encounter;  and let’s not even look into Ye Olde Ammoe Locquer for more.

Practice more, folks, and you’ll end up needing less ammo in storage.  To repeat those wise words:

Most people would be better off with 300 rounds and the skills of having shot 20,000 as opposed to 20,000 stockpiled and the skills of having shot 300.

Sound Advice

Kurt Schlichter tells us to be self-reliant (or, as he calls it, “rooftop Koreans”) during times when the SHTF, and lo, he speaketh da troof.

I suspect that the majority of my Readers have long since decided on that course of action — and if they haven’t, they’re either disarmed Brits (cricket bats are not much use on rooftops) or else Murkin denizens of liberal enclaves where they’ve been told to “leave it to the police” — and pretty much have  to do that because their local gummint has made the Koreans’ AR-15s illegal.

For discussion in Comments today:  assuming that possession of eeeeevil-looking AR / AK rifles is verboten  in your locale, what would be your alternative “rooftop” gun?  State gun type and chambering, please, with reasons.

Strange Fascination

This pic at C.W.’s blog got me thinking.

It makes me smile, too.

I have written before that men like to be in control of machinery — that many men, very much including myself, prefer stick shifts to automatic gearboxes, bolt-action rifles over semi-automatic rifles, ditto revolvers over pistols and so on.

Where we do use the auto / semi-auto doodads, it’s for practical reasons only, like buying a car with an automatic gearbox when having to navigate stop-start traffic on a daily basis, or needing the greater firepower in a pistol’s fifteen-round magazine compared to a revolver cylinder’s six, to give but two examples.  But those are simply reasons of practicality, while our enduring fondness for being in control — i.e. working  the action of a thing — can be found in the fact that the auto/semi-auto versions haven’t replaced the manual versions completely.

When it comes to rifles, men of the manual-operation persuasion are blessed in that we have several types of operation to choose from:  bolt action, lever action and pump action are all there, and all are still popular, hence our reaction to the pic above.

As Longtime Readers will know, I have an abiding love for all three of the above, and have fired countless rounds through all of them.  Don’t ask me to pick my favorite type, but I have to say, when it comes to pure fun, it takes a lot to beat an open field filled with old tin cans, fruit and suchlike, a pump-action rimfire rifle and a couple thousand rounds of .22 ammo.  I know, it takes a while to reload the tube magazine, but that also allows the barrel to cool, which is no small thing.  So let’s look at a few choices among the latter.

Browning Model 90 / Winchester Model 62 are the originals, and are still available today.  The fact that these old guns (discontinued in 1959) in good condition can fetch well over a grand at gun shows today is testament to their popularity.

But are they that popular?  Recent events seem to prove otherwise.  Of all the gunmakers extant, Henry is the only one which continues to make old-style pump-action rimfire rifles:

It’s a beautiful little rifle — that octagonal barrel! — but I think Henry does us gunnies a real disservice by pricing them so high.  I mean, if Marlin and Ruger can make semi-auto rimfire rifles which retail for less than $150, why do Henry pump rimfires typically cost close to $500 for an action which is much less complex?

I would love to own one of these rifles, most of all because it shoots .22 WMR as well as .22 LR and I can think of few better varmint-whackers than a magnum pump action, but at that nearly-$500 sticker?  Sorry.

Actually, I do know why Henry pump rifles are priced so high:  they have no competition.  Which brings me to my next gripe.

I don’t understand why Taurus discontinued manufacture of their Model 62 knock-offs, either.  (I know, they’ll say “no demand”, but they continue to make other guns which hardly sell at all — the Judge revolver in .45-70 Govt comes to mind, for some reason — so I don’t buy the excuse.)

My Taurus stainless-steel carbine model is beyond beautiful, and as I’ve said before, when I take friends shooting with this little thing, I have to take at least  a brick of .22 ammo with me, so much do people enjoy shooting it.  (Hell, I always carry over a hundred rounds in its case, just to make sure I don’t commit the cardinal sin of .22 ammo shortage at the range.)

Finally, we have a sorta-pump (in that it has a pump action, but doesn’t have an exposed hammer), the sleek, beautiful (and expensive, at around $600!!! new) Remington 572 Fieldmaster:

Look, I’ve fired the 572 dozens of times and sent many a hundred rounds downrange through its 21″ barrel, and if someone gave me one I’d never sell it — but I’d trade  it in a heartbeat for a rifle with an exposed hammer.  Like the Taurus Mod 62 long-barreled model:

It all has to do with that “manual operation” thing — and the more parts you can control, the better. De-cocking is easy with an exposed hammer, impossible with the Remington’s hidden one.

Anyway, let me end by saying that if you don’t have a pump-action rimfire rifle, you’re missing out on a whole lot of fun.  You know what to do.

Vítejte, Přátelé*

Oooooh I love this development (via Insty, thankee as always):

CZ-USA, the U.S.-based affiliate of Czech firearms manufacturer Česká zbrojovka a.s. Uherský Brod (CZUB), announced today plans to locate their North American Headquarters and build a new manufacturing facility on approximately 73 acres at the Port of Little Rock. CZ-USA plans to implement a two-phase approach with an investment of up to $90 million and create some 565 jobs over a six-year period. CZ products are considered some of the highest-quality firearms in defense, competition and sport shooting around the world.

Indeed they are.  I’ve owned several CZ / Brno guns in my life, and the only thing I can say is that I’ve regretted selling (because:  poverty) every single one of them.  In fact, here’s my list of Four CZ Guns I Would Own In A Heartbeat (in no specific order):

CZ 550 Safari / 602 Brno  (.375 H&H)

It is quite probably the most popular dangerous game rifle in Africa.  Arrive at any safari camp with one of these bad boys, and the guide / PH will nod his head approvingly.  Back in a previous life, I used a borrowed 602 (chambered in .458 Win Mag) on a large lion, with astonishing results.  (As the saying goes:  “The .458 Winchester Magnum:  delivering pain in equal amounts at both  ends of the rifle!”) More recently, the Cape buffalo head which fills most of a wall in Doc Russia’s den came from a beast taken with his .375 H&H 550.

CZ 550/557 Lux (any caliber):

I prefer the “hogsback” stock over the straight “American” style, but regardless of stock, the 557 (old: 550) is quite possibly the greatest rifle to be had anywhere for the price, and the single-set trigger (4lb pull to 3.5 ounces, with just a single forward push on the trigger) is beyond reproach.  My 550 was chambered in 6.5x55mm Swedish, I sold it to a Reader because poverty, and I’ve regretted it ever since.  (However, he tells me that he’s taken many, many  deer with it since, so I don’t feel too bad.)  What I love most about this rifle is that you can pick pretty much your favorite chambering (even the new 6.5 Creed!), and CZ makes it.

CZ 75B (9mm/.40S&W)

I have spoken before of my respect for this wonderful pistol, so no more need be said.

CZ 455/457 (rimfire)

Sure, you can get a better .22 rifle than the 457 (old: 455), but you’d have to spend a lot  more $$$.  As a 455 owner once put it to me:  “If you can’t one-hole a brick of .22 with this gun, you’re  the one at fault.”

And now a bonus:

Brno ZKM 611 (.22 Win Mag)

This was made by Brno before CZ bought them.  CZ doesn’t make the little 611 takedown rifle anymore [sob] , and that’s a pity, because it is the only rifle I’ve ever picked up and shouldered where it immediately felt like it was an extension of my arm.  Want, even second-hand.

The 611 has been replaced by the CZ 512 semi-auto , which also comes chambered in .22 Win Mag (as well as .22 LR):

Of all the CZ guns on this list, the little 512 is the only one I’ve never fired.  I’m reliably told that the 512 is an improvement.  Hmmm… have to say, I prefer the 611’s looks.

So welcome, my friends* at Česká zbrojovka Uherský Brod (CZ-UB).  Sorry you ended up in Little Rock instead of in my state, but hey… we’re almost neighbors (in Texas-distance terms, barely a couple 6-packs up Interstate 30), so expect a visit as soon as you open your doors.  (One question, though:  why did CZ-USA move out of Kansas City?)

Quote Of The Day

From the Knuckledragger, commenting on this article:

“I don’t buy into that horseshit about how we should spend the equivalent of our rifle’s value on an optic. I’m sorry, but save your money and invest it in a decent trigger instead. A quality trigger will improve your shooting much more than a fancy big name optic.”

I sorta-agree, with a couple of qualifications.

Don’t buy a $1,900 rifle and put a $49.99 scope on it.

In the same vein, don’t buy an old $200 mil-surp rifle and add $$$$$ Night Force glass.

What you’re getting with a very good scope is not just better optics, but reliability.  Those $49.99 red-dot sights from CheaperThanDirt are not going to work as well, or last as long as a Trijicon.  However (as with all things), once you get past a certain quality standard, incremental quality comes at enormous cost.

And if you’re buying an expensive rifle, you’d better  get a superior trigger for your money.  If you start off with a cheap rifle and add a Timney trigger, pretty soon you’ll discover that your barrel is sub-optimal — and by the time you’ve added that, plus a free-floating stock arrangement, you’ll end up with Washington’s axe.  (Don’t ask me how I know this.)

This, by the way, is why I love CZ rifles so much:  excellent reliability, a decent barrel and (most often) a single-set trigger, all for less than a grand.  Ditto the even-cheaper Savage rifles, ever since they started putting the fine Accu-Trigger into their rifles.

All that said, my policy is always to match three things when putting together a shooting platform:  rifle, scope, and intended use/frequency.  If all you’re going to do is plink away at a range every other month, you’re not going to need a $5,000 rifle/scope combination.  If you’re going to engage in long-distance competition shooting, spend as much or more than you can afford on both the rifle and scope.  My Mauser M12 / Minox scope combination was bought with a Scottish deer stalk in mind (bad visibility, horrible terrain, 200+ yard shots), hence the scope’s illuminated reticle and ruggedness of the Mauser action.  I could have spent a lot more on a hunting setup, but given my skill level (adequate), budget (don’t ask), and likely frequency of Scottish deerstalking (annual, at best), I “settled” for the M12 / Minox.

(More on the Mauser in a later post, by the way.)

Now, if you want to shoot rimfire ammo very  accurately all the time (and you should), the CZ 452 topped with Leupold glass will do you very well — I would humbly suggest that getting an Anschutz with Swarovski glass may be overkill, unless  you want to move on to competition shooting later.   My own rimfire setup, for example, is a Marlin 880SQ (~$280) topped with a Nikon scope (~$300).

Hell, I’ve spent more time working out what ammo works best in the 880 (CCI Mini-Max 40gr FMJ), and those who have seen me shoot with this setup will attest that while I’m no world-beater, I certainly don’t disgrace myself.  Given how often I go plinking (not as often as I’d like aaarrrrgh), it’s all I need.  YMMV.

Sorry, this post has turned into something much longer than a Quote Of The Day, but it’s on a topic about which I have a little experience.  Your comments, as always, are welcome.