Real Guns

[Michael88]

Shot my little 22 target rifle. On the way to the 100 meter targets I picked up some shards of shattered clay birds and put a few of those pieces next to my 100 meter targets. Those pieces were roughly as big as match boxes and I was able to pick them off one by one with only two misses. The rifle is scarily accurate, to hit targets so small that reliable so far away.

Whenever I pulled the trigger I watched the 22 bullet making an arced trace through the air and then shatter the clay bird piece about a tenth of a second later. Very spectacular. Another spectacular thing I noticed is a miss hit the beam the targets were sitting on, a massive wooden 4x4 probably 1.5 inches thick, even at 100 meters the little 22 penetrated it completely.

Fun, fun!

 

[a6m5]

I have a police trade in Glock 22, the fullsize 40. I've been checking out the 27 a lot lately and I'm convinced on sticking to a smaller Glock as a carry gun for familiarity (not to mention reliability and all other reasons to own a Glock). I imagine you're referring to what should be a pretty decent recoil. I think it'll be plenty manageable.

Gonna run by the FFL I'm transferring to tomorrow and get my waiting period started. Might have the gun by Wednesday.

I was referring to the recoil, but yes, I couldn't agree more with the part in bold. K.I.S.S. approach is an advantage in itself. 👍

I made it out to the range today for a short time and shot 60 rounds through my Tavor and about ten rounds through a Mosin Nagant. It was also the first time I had shot something chambered in a battle rifle cartridge. Of the ten rounds, I put about eight of them on the gong. I also plastered the gong with my Tavor, ripping off about six or seven straight just as soon as I let the trigger reset. Shooting steel is pretty freaking awesome. It was a good, short day of shooting.

So jealous right now. I was able to finally put together a group of people to go shooting on the 23rd. I'm really looking forward to rapid firing my AR & USP, which is not something allowed at the shooting range.

Shot my little 22 target rifle. On the way to the 100 meter targets I picked up some shards of shattered clay birds and put a few of those pieces next to my 100 meter targets. Those pieces were roughly as big as match boxes and I was able to pick them off one by one with only two misses. The rifle is scarily accurate, to hit targets so small that reliable so far away.

Whenever I pulled the trigger I watched the 22 bullet making an arced trace through the air and then shatter the clay bird piece about a tenth of a second later. Very spectacular. Another spectacular thing I noticed is a miss hit the beam the targets were sitting on, a massive wooden 4x4 probably 1.5 inches thick, even at 100 meters the little 22 penetrated it completely.

Fun, fun!

.22LR do sound like more fun in the way that its ballistics are more easily observable. I've never shot them at distance, so I have no grasp of their arc in one hundred yards, but it's good to know that there is one.

 

[Michael88]

I've never shot them at distance, so I have no grasp of their arc in one hundred yards, but it's good to know that there is one.

22 drops a lot. A sub sonic 22 drops so much on its way to the 100 meter target my scope adjustment (elevation) maxed out so I had to use a trick.

My Weaver Grand Slam scope has a normal plex reticle, I use different parts of the reticle for different ranges. At max power (10x) I use the top part of the reticle (red circle) to aim at 50 meters, the center of the reticle is for 75 meters and the bottom part of the reticle for 100 meters. It works perfectly to compensate for the arced flight path of the 22, but it something you have to get used to.

 

[a6m5]

Sounds like a sniper technique at a miniature scale. So awesome.

 

[Enzo_Guy]

Well, congrats. 👍

I don't mean to be a party pooper, but have you shot one before? I don't know of anyone who carry one, but I know of people who used to own them. .40 caliber sounds interesting though, and although I've yet to shoot a 4th Gen Gock, I am also a fan of the Gen 3.

The recoil isn't as bad as many would have you believe. It's more of a snappy muzzle jump like a short-barrel .38 revolver than it is a .45ACP thump back into the palm. Not my personal choice, though. The whole "light and fast" theory is great against soft tissue, but if you hit bone the .40 will have more of a tendency to ricochet off whereas a heavier .45 slug is more likely to shatter the bone (which is going to hurt a LOT, remember they have no painkillers for bone pain either so you're going to be feeling that one).

That's my personal take on it. Obviously accuracy and shot placement is 99.9% more important than handgun caliber, the .22 that hits the bad guy hurts more than the .45 that hits the wall.

 

[a6m5]

The recoil isn't as bad as many would have you believe. It's more of a snappy muzzle jump like a short-barrel .38 revolver than it is a .45ACP thump back into the palm. Not my personal choice, though. The whole "light and fast" theory is great against soft tissue, but if you hit bone the .40 will have more of a tendency to ricochet off whereas a heavier .45 slug is more likely to shatter the bone (which is going to hurt a LOT, remember they have no painkillers for bone pain either so you're going to be feeling that one).

That's my personal take on it. Obviously accuracy and shot placement is 99.9% more important than handgun caliber, the .22 that hits the bad guy hurts more than the .45 that hits the wall.

I am a .45 guy, but for carry, I do find the lighter, more compact calibers attractive, also due to higher capacity. I'm not allowed to conceal carry anyway(not U.S. Citizen), so I'll cross that bridge if, and when that time comes.

 

[Eric.]

The recoil isn't as bad as many would have you believe. It's more of a snappy muzzle jump like a short-barrel .38 revolver than it is a .45ACP thump back into the palm. Not my personal choice, though. The whole "light and fast" theory is great against soft tissue, but if you hit bone the .40 will have more of a tendency to ricochet off whereas a heavier .45 slug is more likely to shatter the bone (which is going to hurt a LOT, remember they have no painkillers for bone pain either so you're going to be feeling that one).

That's my personal take on it. Obviously accuracy and shot placement is 99.9% more important than handgun caliber, the .22 that hits the bad guy hurts more than the .45 that hits the wall.

Gotta say that's one of the first times I've heard someone saying that a 40 isn't adequate to put the hurt on the bad guy...

 

[Michael88]

.45 has an abysmal track record in penetrating bone, in fact its one of the worst possible choice for destroying bone. So bad in fact that hunters do not use the .45 for finishing shots because it tends to glance off boar skull.

Why is that? Simple physics, the .45 is extremely slow, to penetrate hard stuff like bone you need velocity and a hard bullet. Not energy nor bullet size, its mainly about velocity and bullet construction.

Just ask hunters what they carry as sidearm (non-dangerous game), they carry pistols chambered in .357SIG (40 necked down to 9mm), 9mm+P's, or 10mm's.

I remember a friend of mine shooting a frying pan and a washing machine with his .45 230 grain FMJ's, the .45 made thumb-sized dents while 40, .357 and 9mm made clean holes. .38 special also made only dents.

 

[a6m5]

I'm the farthest thing from a qualified personnel on the matter, but you guys both make sense to me.

I have seen stuff on youtube, also heard from hunters that against large dangerous animals, sidearm of choice in North America is .357 Magnum. For penetration.

Way Enzo worded in his statement though, he did say "shatter", and in human bones, slow, big & heavy .45 excelling in breaking smaller human bones, that makes sense to me. At least in my head.

To be honest, I routinely hear about how .45ACP excels in hydrostatic shock & stopping power, but this may have been the first argument I've seen in the benefit of taking out the perpetrator's bones. For these reasons stated, also on the assumption that .45 do contribute to better than average blood loss, I do like the .45ACP. I almost forgot that availability of the caliber is important to me, and .45 is EVERYWHERE in the U.S.

 

[Michael88]

Just to be clear I've never intended to diss the .45, its an excellent caliber its just that each chambering has its limitations. 45 makes a big ole hole into soft tissue which leads to rapid incapacitation through blood loss, and thats ideal in a self defense scenario. However, you should be aware that the 45 tends to fair poorly against thick skinned animals and shots against direct bone, especially when shot at an angle, more so than most loads of .40 and 9mm.
A very slow rapid expansion bullet will always easily glance off hard objects.

And just as a side note, service pistol rounds do not cause a big permanent cavity no matter the caliber, much-larger-than-caliber cavities are created with bullets moving in the 1800+ area. Handgun bullets really just make holes as big as their caliber + expansion.

 

[a6m5]

Just to be clear I've never intended to diss the .45, its an excellent caliber its just that each chambering has its limitations. 45 makes a big ole hole into soft tissue which leads to rapid incapacitation through blood loss, and thats ideal in a self defense scenario. However, you should be aware that the 45 tends to fair poorly against thick skinned animals and shots against direct bone, especially when shot at an angle, more so than most loads of .40 and 9mm.
A very slow rapid expansion bullet will always easily glance off hard objects.

Yeah, I was totally aware that you weren't dissing the .45. 👍 Also, while I never gave any thought to thicker animal hide, I also never even entertained an idea of shooting anything other than targets, or assailant with a .45. If I actually hunted in the woods, I would want .357 Magnum as my sidearm, but really, even that would be a pretty desperate backup option, just before trying to outrun my friends.

Before choosing the .45ACP, like any enthusiasts, I weighed the pros & cons, and I did realize that penetration is one department where the caliber lacked(good thing, it's my home defense round). More than anything, two major points I liked with the .45 was the size & expansion with the hollow points, and also the wide availability of this round in stores & amongst my peeps. It should also be noted that I do personally find its recoil to be mild & manageable. 👍

I have told friends that if high-capacity semi-automatic .357 magnums were more mainstream(I realize they do exist), that would likely be the caliber of choice for me.

And just as a side note, service pistol rounds do not cause a big permanent cavity no matter the caliber, much-larger-than-caliber cavities are created with bullets moving in the 1800+ area. Handgun bullets really just make holes as big as their caliber + expansion.

Thank you! That is really good to know. I knew that we keep you around for a reason. j/k

 

[Walrus76]

Well, my own experience with guns is somewhat limited, but when I served in Finnish army, which was nearly 20 years ago, I was trained for aiming coastal artillery guns. Some of them where (back then) quite modern (like 100mm and 130mm guns) but this pictured thing was a whole different beast..a six inch gun which had some really old parts in it. In fact, there was engraved cyrillic text in gun which was something like this : Obuhov Stalenski Zavod 1904 - originally these were Imperial Russian guns, and Finland 'inherited' them when we gained our independence in 1917. The barrel was later modified by Finnish steel manufacturer Tampella.

During one practice shooting session I got the chance for actually 'shoot' once with this type of gun: the trigger was a piece of strap (clothesline?) which was bond to firing pin. Very basic system but effective indeed. The maximum firing rate of gun was 6 shots in one minute - with well trained gun crew. Nowadays these guns are obviously obsolete - actually they were that already back in my serving time. I think that my 'class' was last ever which were trained to use these 152/50-T guns...

 

[Michael88]

Pretty amazing that those guns had a service life of what, approx 70-80 years? Guess there is always use for a big 'ole cannon. 👍

Speaking of cannons, here is my Savage .300WM, with it I'm shooting my load which is a 240 grain Very Low Drag Sierra Matchking with a .711 BC (for comparison a typical .308 winchester SMK has a BC of .435) at approx 2650 fps which stays supersonic till 1500yds or so.

Has a Mepota R1-Tactical 4-16x44 ''diamond'' Mildot on it mounted on a 20 MOA German Era-Tac angled one piece mount.

 

[Walrus76]

Yes, they served long. I think some of them saw even 'real' action between 1939-44 too. However, I think that most of them were not used often after 80's - until mid 90's (last time?). Actually, during my army period I once had chance to look briefly the 'logbook' of one particular gun, that we used at the time in war exercise. That happened in island called Hästö-Busö in Gulf of Finland. I remember that there was an official 'maintenance book' where every single shot and action including repairs that ever were done with the gun were marked. The last time the gun was used according to book was in summer of 1980. And then me and the other crew (all young lads then) got a chance to use it again - in autumn of 1996. I remember one officer being very sceptical about the condition of this old weapon. And he was right - during an intense shooting session the huge barrel dropped from its suspension (!) - that was a very dangerous situation, we were very lucky that no one wasn't hurt or even worse killed. The recoil was simply too much for the fragile 'bed' that held the heavy barrel. What amazes me even this day is, that some civilian mechanics came with boat from mainland, worked all night, welded, patched and fixed the broken thing back together again... and the next day it was intense shooting again - like nothing was happened!

But the old gun that was used in our basic artillery training in island of Örö (from where the picture above is) was very interesting and is well-known for most WWII history buffs: the legendary German 88mm Flak (slightly modified for our coastal artillery). It had even some original German text on controls - I remember Links (left) and Rechts (right) on horizontal scale for example. Once 'rapid fire!' was commanded during an action, we could shoot up to 10-12 rounds per minute with this gun. It's no miracle that Allied tank crews feared the mighty 88mm. Our squad leader with his binoculars and bad estimation skills couldn't get us hit even on empty oil barrels standing still on frozen sea about five miles away, but one can not deny that in capable hands this gun must have been a terrifying weapon. Those old 88mm guns were quite rare in basic training by the way, a more commonly used gun was the Soviet-made 76mm or 3-inch gun. In Örö there were however two of these 'museum pieces' left in perfect condition.

 

[Eric.]

Picked up my new baby Glock today!

 

[High-Test]

I'm pretty excited, friends. I just ordered a 1911 copy. It'll be a whole different animal than my friend's Ruger SR9C, but I'm looking forward to getting the hang of it.

Here's my 10-22:

Neat little gun. The clockmaker in me had to have the takedown over the other models.

 

[Eric.]

I need to get a 10/22, but I don't really shoot 22 much (or ever)...

 

[Brett]

Ruger 10/22 Takedowns are pretty slick. I really like mine, except for the whole .22 still being a pain to find.

 

[a6m5]

I wish I had a 10/22, but unfortunately, Ruger 597 was the first firearm I ever purchased(didn't know nothing about guns), so I'd rather keep the 597 than lose money on it, then buy a whole another .22 rifle. If I buy another .22LR rifle, it'd most likely be a bolt-action, just for fun.

Ruger 10/22 Takedowns are pretty slick. I really like mine, except for the whole .22 still being a pain to find.

Don't you exaggerate, Brett. I think I saw one as recent as just few months ago!



I honestly don't understand how production still hasn't caught up. They used to fill the shelves with 525 round bricks, and now, they stay absolutely empty for 2, 3 months, easily.

 

[Eric.]

A new Gander Mountain opened up here and they've got a lot of 22lr. I think Winchester 333rd packs on one display. Forgot how much, didn't seem too high but I'm so used to 5.56 prices being my measuring stick of who is high or not.

I actually went in today planning to spend about $100 on some .40, I want to run a few hundred rounds through the new G27 and also get a couple boxes of defensive ammo (and shoot some through it to test). Walked out empty handed when most FMJ .40 was 45 cents per, and 20rd boxes of defensive ammo around $25. Walmart has been impossible to beat on 40 S&W so far, even online is higher. I'll have to get the defensive ammo online though ($17 vs $25).

 

[High-Test]

I just bought two boxes of .22LR.. But then again, Kansas. I'm sitting pretty on a 1500+ round stockpile.

I took the scope off. I really don't care for it. Plus, it makes the nifty carrying bag rather difficult to use. There are some aperture sights that look pretty nifty. I might get a set next month. I hear the foresight is more than a pain to remove, which is what will have to happen if I go that route. Suggestions, gents?

 

[Brett]

A new Gander Mountain opened up here and they've got a lot of 22lr. I think Winchester 333rd packs on one display. Forgot how much, didn't seem too high but I'm so used to 5.56 prices being my measuring stick of who is high or not.

I actually went in today planning to spend about $100 on some .40, I want to run a few hundred rounds through the new G27 and also get a couple boxes of defensive ammo (and shoot some through it to test). Walked out empty handed when most FMJ .40 was 45 cents per, and 20rd boxes of defensive ammo around $25. Walmart has been impossible to beat on 40 S&W so far, even online is higher. I'll have to get the defensive ammo online though ($17 vs $25).

Every time I have looked at SGAmmo, their prices on defensive ammunition has been awesome. They sell 50 round boxes of defense ammunition for, or very nearly, the price of 20 round boxes. This is at least true for 9mm. I would assume they are the same with .40 S&W.

 

[a6m5]

I had never heard of SG, but their pricing seems to be very competitive. I just checked Walmart on the way home though, and their .45ACP prices are coming down some more. Now, if I shop right, I think I can get them for close to $17 a box(thru multi-pack). .308/7.62x51(my rifle caliber) pricing has been the best ever. Best pricing & availability I've ever seen. Now just bring back the .22.

I just bought two boxes of .22LR.. But then again, Kansas. I'm sitting pretty on a 1500+ round stockpile.

If I were you, I'd just keep buying whenever you can. This current shortage has been going over 2 years. I had thousands & thousands of .22LR stocked up, but there were many who were forced to buy from scalpers. I keep most of my ammo in proper ammo can(gasket sealed) with silica gel, so they should last for year & years.

Just for the record, I'm not hoarding. I still buy the .22LRs, if I actually encounter them, but I pass them on to my friends for exactly what I paid the store. Only exception are the nicer CCI ammo. I don't have very many of those, and I would like little more on hand.

I took the scope off. I really don't care for it. Plus, it makes the nifty carrying bag rather difficult to use. There are some aperture sights that look pretty nifty. I might get a set next month. I hear the foresight is more than a pain to remove, which is what will have to happen if I go that route. Suggestions, gents?

I have zero knowledge on this, but are the stock sights on 10/22 so bad?

A new Gander Mountain opened up here and they've got a lot of 22lr. I think Winchester 333rd packs on one display. Forgot how much, didn't seem too high but I'm so used to 5.56 prices being my measuring stick of who is high or not.

Maybe it's more to do with Walmart, where I mostly buy my ammo. I used to be able to buy a brick(500rds or more) for $18 or less. Today, the new "brick" is like 325~333 rounds, and they seem to cost as much as the old 525 round brick. When I actually see one, that is.

 

[Eric.]

I just bought two boxes of .22LR.. But then again, Kansas. I'm sitting pretty on a 1500+ round stockpile.

I took the scope off. I really don't care for it. Plus, it makes the nifty carrying bag rather difficult to use. There are some aperture sights that look pretty nifty. I might get a set next month. I hear the foresight is more than a pain to remove, which is what will have to happen if I go that route. Suggestions, gents?

Look up Tech Sights for the 10/22. Its what people swear by in building a "Liberty Training Rifle", the basic gun suggested for participating in Appleseed. Essentially a 10/22 with Tech Sights and a GI web sling.

 

[Brett]

I had never heard of SG, but their pricing seems to be very competitive. I just checked Walmart on the way home though, and their .45ACP prices are coming down some more. Now, if I shop right, I think I can get them for close to $17 a box(thru multi-pack). .308/7.62x51(my rifle caliber) pricing has been the best ever. Best pricing & availability I've ever seen. Now just bring back the .22.

I have not ordered anything from SGAmmo just yet. I have read quite a few good things about them though. However, once my stock of 9mm and 5.56x45mm dwindles some more, I will be making an order through them. Unfortunately, I will have to pay tax on the order since they are in Oklahoma.

 

[High-Test]

Look up Tech Sights for the 10/22. Its what people swear by in building a "Liberty Training Rifle", the basic gun suggested for participating in Appleseed. Essentially a 10/22 with Tech Sights and a GI web sling.

For even the tech sights, the front sight needs to be changed. I have read that it's a bear to do. I don't want to use anymore brute force than necessary.

 

[Eric.]

Sounds like you just whack it out with a punch. If you don't have the nerve to do it (brass punch isn't going to damage it, steel might dimple the sight,but if you never need it again, that's fine) take it to a smith. Probably be a pretty cheap job.

 

[Enzo_Guy]

Gotta say that's one of the first times I've heard someone saying that a 40 isn't adequate to put the hurt on the bad guy...

Well considering I've got about half of a .40 caliber slug permanently lodged in my leg, I'll let you draw your own conclusions as to why I might think .45 is better haha!

 

[Brett]

I made a trip to the range during my lunch break today. I started out putting a handful of rounds at a 25 yard target and then moved to the 200 yard gongs. I put about 10 of the remaining 15 rounds on the gong with the first magazine. I started the second magazine with 10 straight on the gong and put 17 of the 20 rounds on the gong. My third and final magazine, I only managed 16 of the 20 rounds on the gong. It was a very good lunch break and a nice stress reliever after an otherwise crappy morning.

 

[Eric.]

Well considering I've got about half of a .40 caliber slug permanently lodged in my leg, I'll let you draw your own conclusions as to why I might think .45 is better haha!

Sounds like poor marksmanship to blame.