Friday Rambling Gun Stuff Discussion

In my recent discussion of the J frame Chris of Arma Borealis mentioned the reload advantage of automatic's vs J frame .38 or .357mag revolvers. For the sake of convenience I am going to break subcompact type automatics into 3 categories: subcompact double stack, subcompact single stack and tiny.

Subcompact double stack: Examples of this are the Glock 26/27 and the M&P/ XD equivalents. These guns offer a lot of firepower in a small package. A 9mm Glock 26 holds 11 and the grip extension (a must) buys you another round. I think the Glock .40 is 10. Unsure about the M&P/XD but they are probably similar. They are also pretty shootable if you have enough grip to get the pinky on it. Also these guns can take larger magazines like a Glock 15 rd or 17 rd mag which is handy. Power is good too as these guns are generally chambered in 9mm/.40S&W/.45acp.

 I notice little difference transitioning between subcompact and compact's of the same flavor. Being shorter in terms of length and grip makes these guns easier to conceal than their compact and full sized siblings. Also if the gun is of the polymer flavor (vs a tiny steel 1911 or whatever) they are pretty light. Reliability is comparable to their siblings, a Glock will of course fare better than a Kel Tech. However nothing is free.

The downside of these guns is that they are the same width as the bigger guns. As we saw before a J frame revolver is much thinner throughout (obviously not the cylinder).  This means while their height/ length and weight are minimal the width is a consideration. Depending on your method of carry it could be an issue.

As compared to the J frame these guns shoot better, hold a lot more bullets and reload faster but are thicker and this a but harder to conceal.

Sub Compact single stack: Old school examples are the Walther PP/PPK/S/PPK and the Bersa .380. Newer examples would be the Ruger LC9 and S&W Shield. These guns often hold 7-8 rounds. I think some of the .45 models hold 6. These guns offer moderate, at the high end of 8 to a J with 5, to negligible, the mini .45's with 6 to a J with 5, capacity advantages.

The reliability varies. Walther's have been made by so many people over the years with some better than others. In general they are well, German. A precision machine that functions perfectly however it demands good fuel (bullets it likes) and some maintenance to do so. If you cannot do this, or the concept of use does not allow it, then choose another gun. If you can meet the fairly modest requirements these guns will do their job well. Bersa's by every account I have heard will run all day long. The downside is they are a fairly big and heavy .380. The new Ruger and S&W offerings are by every account I have seen built to a professional standard and will perform as such. If you get a Kel Tech or Taurus that is a roll of the dice, some run all day long but many do not.

Power varies between adequate with 9mm to marginally adequate with .380 or weak with .32 (the only .32's I am aware of in this size are the Walther's like Brigid's). IMO as we compare to the .38 the only round that is equal in terms of power is the 9mm.

Accuracy is pretty good. The quality guns in this category are capable of excellent accuracy. The Walther's particular are very accurate. A buddy of mine had a little j frame .38 but at some point realized he couldn't hit squat with it and bought a beautiful Walther PPK/S that shot wonderfully. A HIT with a .380 is indisputably more effective than a miss with a .38/.357mag.

Measured up to the J frame. These auto's are thin and thus easy to conceal. The J is thinner in spots but not by a whole lot. Capacity varies but the reload goes decisively to the semi auto. Power varies from a wash (.38 to 9mm) to decisively favoring the J.

Tiny pistols: Examples of old school ones are the Beretta .22lr/.25/.32. Newer examples are the Kel Tech P3, Ruger LC380. These guns are IMO really in a different class than the J frame. Power sucks to varying degrees, they do not hold many bullets and are often difficult guns to shoot well. Some can be shot accurately and other's not so much. Realistically effective ranges vary from across the room to 'belly gun's. Some manufacturers do not bother putting sights on these guns. The J beats them in every category except concealability.

The real advantage of these guns is that they beat the hell out of knives, fists or harsh words. Short of a speedo/ bikini or nekid they can be carried any time.

Between a small semi automatic or a J frame .38/.357mag both are servicable weapons. Both type of weapons have pluses and minuses. In the last few years a lot of really viable options by professional grade manufacturers have come out on the semi automatic side. On the other hand I can see why there is still a market for the J framed revolver.

I recently handled a Glock with two common modifications; an extended mag release and an extended slide stop. The extended mag release was terrible. It stuck out too far and rubbed like crazy on my side when carrying the gun. Personally I have never had an issue hitting the mag release on a Glock, the extended one is not wider (which might let you hit it instead of missing it if you were off a bit) but just stuck out further, like not needing to push my thumb another 1/8th of an inch really matters. I see no reason for this modification. Maybe it would buy 1/32 of a second which matters to gamers. To me for a practical use CCW/ tactical pistol the trade off is not worth it.

The extended slide stop I was ambivalent about. The part looked similar except a tiny nubbin towards the back that stuck out a small fraction of an inch. Unlike the terrible extended mag release it did not bother me par se but it did not do anything for me either. I've never had an issue hitting the slide stop to bring the slide forward. My thumb sweeps down in light contact with the frame and there is so much surface area covered I can't see how the stop could be missed.

Personally I will stick with a 3.5lb connector and a steel guide rod as my choice Glock mod's.

For my Remington 12 gauge 870P I've done some thinking and plan to stick with a 1 point sling indefinitely. Between cycling the action and (once I get one) using the light there is enough going on toward the end of a shotgun that I do not need a sling up there.

Got a Blade Tech IWB holster as part of a trade. It is pretty nice. An undershirt is important as the edges can be a touch abrasive but otherwise it's comfortable and being able to reholster 1 handed with an IWB holster is nice. A good piece of kit.

Well that is all I can think of to talk about right now. Hope you all have a great Friday. As always input is welcome.

Letter Re: Checking Your Handguns for Feeding Problems: Round Nose Versus Hollow Points

This chain Checking Your Handguns for Feeding Problems: Round Nose Versus Hollow Points, re, re has gone on long enough and got off track enough that I have to weigh in. In no way am I disparaging Jim Rawles or his excellent blog. Jim has been a friend to me and this blog. I read his excellent blog daily. When you accept guest posts inevitably some will be a bit off track. 

To briefly recap a guy has a pair of Taurus pistols (a .45 Millemium Pro and a  TCP .380)and prudently, though a bit late, decides to actually try shooting his chosen defensive ammo out of them. Go figure both of them failed to feed multiple times within a few rounds.

The first reply is from one guy who goes into the history of care and feeding on 1911's (don't worry we will get there in a minute) and rambled about how hollow point ammunition is just a marketing gimmick. The second reply is from some guy who suggests using a dremel to polish the feed ramp of your pistol to improve feeding.

Onto my thoughts in no particular order:

1) Go figure a couple of new unproven designs by a notoriously mediocre company with spotty quality control had issues. Taurus revolvers are generally servicable but newly designed auto's probably aren't a good idea. (Though I have heard good things about their 1911's) Seriously this is like Lou Gehrig dying of Lou Gehrig's disease, how the hell did he not see it coming.

Weapons you are going to use to defend yourself and family (vs hunting, plinking, fun, etc) absolutely need to be built to a professional standard. They need to be able to be shot a lot and feed anything. Glock, Sig, HK, Smith and Wesson (M&P and revolvers), Springfield (specifically the XD), Beretta and Ruger all build guns to a professional standard. It would be an uphill battle to convince me there is a Taurus (specifically their automatics) or a Kel Tech that meets such a standard.

I'm not saying you have to spend a ton of money on a gun. We all have competing priorities and budgets. If you aren't willing to save another C note for a Glock/ M&P get a basic gun like a good used revolver instead of some POS automatic.

2) To further elaborate a fighting pistol needs to feed all ammunition put into it. We can break feeding issues down by broad gun type. In order older guns, pieces of junk and 1911's.

2A) Older guns. The older military surplus and pattern guns (WWII through the 1970's give or take) were designed to shoot ball ammo either FMJ or strait up lead round nose. I do not fault these guns for that. It was the ammunition used at the time so it just makes sense. With these guns IMO you have two valid options. The first is to just shoot ball ammo. A good friend of this blog (though lately absent) who is big into surplus guns and has quite an enviable collection does this. He often swaps through various high power's of different makes and it would be cost prohibitive and impractical to test and keep track of which gun feeds what ammo. So he just shoots ball in them. I'm not in love with this option but for some folks it makes sense.

The other option is to get your gun worked over by a qualified gunsmith who specializes in your particular type of gun. Send your high power to a high power guy, your older surplus 1911 to a 1911 guy, etc. This can be cost prohibitive. Unless there is some compelling reason you want to carry that particular gun it might be better to buy a modern pistol of professional grade.

2B) Pieces of Junk. Yes, I am saying that currently produced pistols which do not reliably feed modern defensive ammunition are pieces of junk. Do not buy a piece of junk for defensive purposes. Expecting a piece of junk to work when you need it is just not realistic. You wouldn't get upset when $10 Soldiers Choice scotch doesn't taste like Ballantine's let alone Glenlivet. Why should guns be any different? I am on the record as being in favor of quality used guns instead of new lower quality guns.

2C) 1911's. We addressed the older milsurp type 1911's already, as to the rest. At the risk of offending somebody here is my observation on 1911's. Two types of 1911's actually work reliably. The first are basic Mil Spec type guns from quality manufacturers specifically Springfield and Colt. These guns will shoot all day long with the accuracy you would expect from a service weapon (good but not amazing). The second are really high end custom guns like Ed Brown and Wilson Combat or the high end Colt's. These guns work well but they cost as much as a decent used car. Probably outside most peoples budget for a carry gun. If you can afford it without shorting yourself elsewhere then rock on.

The problems with 1911's come, in my not so humble opinion, from fly by night custom 'Bob's Mom's basement' makers and lower end "target guns". Bob sucks as an armorer and certainly is not a craftsmen. He slaps together a bunch of different brand parts without a clue what he is doing. There are issues with fitting and stacking tolerances. As to the lower end "target guns". Modern manufacturing technology makes it easy to crank down tolerances which makes guns more accurate but at the expense of reliability. Tight tolerances without serious quality control and craftsmen level fitting make for an unreliable gun. There is a reason AK's and those old WWII 1911's (with ball ammo they are designed for) will run all day long dirty as can be, they have fairly loose tolerances.

3) Good on this guy for actually testing his gun with the defensive ammunition he carries. I think far too few people actually do this and it is important. We could debate round count here. I've seen some folks say you need to shoot 500 rounds of carry ammo to know it is reliable. Honestly I am not doing that unless someone else foots the bill. Typically I shoot about 50 rounds. Since the only centerfire semi automatic pistols we own are Glock's there are never any issues, this is just a check.

4) To support #2 I do not carry super expensive all brass hollow points like the new Cor Bon stuff. I carry 115gr JHP Federal Classic Personal Defense. Awhile back I got a case of the stuff from Lucky Gunner for like .35 cents a round. They have it in stock now but given the state of things prices are considerably higher. They will come back down in due time at which point I will buy another case.

5) I am strongly against any home gunsmith work (not to be confused with basic armorer tasks like swapping out a simple drop in part) on defensive weapons unless you have some training and genuinely know what you are doing. By all means explore and try new things. Just do it with plinking/ fun, hunting or sporting guns. If your home repair/ work on a clay shooting shotgun or deer rifle fails worst case your day at the range or hunt is ruined. In the grand scheme of things neither of those are a huge deal. On the other hand if defensive weapons fail you and your family could end up dead.

This means either buy guns that work reliably which can be repaired using drop in parts (the way to go) or if that does not work or the problem is too serious take your defensive weapons to a legitimate gunsmith who is competent, or even specializes, in that particular weapon.

6. In conclusion- Buy modern professional grade guns for defensive use. If they break take them to a legitimate gunsmith to be fixed.


Thoughts?

Living With My J Frame

I've had my little Smith and Wesson 642 for a little while now. Since it's purchase I removed then ended up selling the Crimson trace laser grips and replacing them with Hogue boot grips. The boot grips are a lot smaller which lets the gun better suit my concept of use which is a little concealed carry piece. Here is what my little J frame looks like now.

I am pretty happy with it though at some point plan to set it up like Alexander's J frame with the wood S&W grips and a Tyler T grip. Aside from looking really good that setup will probably shoot better than my current grips. The only reason I haven't done it is that $60-75ish discretionary gun purchases are a long list.

My holster is a Blackhawk IWB.

It is perfectly adequate for carry in its intended role and does OK as a pocket holster. I'm not in love with it but it works; given the price point around a half rack of cheap light beer it offers a lot of value. If money were no object I would have a nice soft leather IWB holster, a Safariland pocket holster and an ankle holster for this gun. However as mentioned before gun stuff that would be nice to have is a really long list.

Awhile back Alexander Wolfe and I had a discussion about the size difference between compact Glock's like the G19 and J frame revolvers. Since I have been alternating carrying the two for a few months now plus the camera was already out I figured it might be fun to take some pictures then talk about my thoughts on the matter.

The Glock 19 and Smith and Wesson 642 side by side. Man who is the lucky duck that has both of these great carry options. At the first glance they look very similar in size. However as we will see appearances can be deceiving and the differences, however small, are in places where they matter a lot.

The Smith & Wesson 642 sitting on top of the Glock 19. The picture does not really show it bit the J frame is slightly offset and higher than the Glock 19 just because of the way the angles of the two guns came together. This is where the first significant difference in size becomes apparent. The length and height of the two guns are not THAT different. However as you can see the back of the J frame is curved while the back of the Glock 19 is roughly in the same location as the furthest point back on the pistols grip. The backstrap is one of the two points on a pistol that prints (shows through clothing while concealed) the most. Also it is one of the reasons the J frame vanishes under anything except a skin tight t shirt.

Looking at the two guns from the back we get a better picture of their relative height. The S&W is just a little but shorter than the Glock 19. However when we look at width it's a different story. Aside from the cylinder and the fattest part of the grips the S&W 642 is significantly thinner than the Glock 19. Also very significantly it is a lot thinner at the end of the grip. Combine that with the grip being shorter and you have most of the reason the J frame conceals much easier than the Glock 19. Personally I can hide a J frame under almost anything while the Glock 19 takes a loose button up or polo shirt that's roughly a size larger than my body.

A top view of the guns in the same position. Shows the overall differences in width and length.

Bottom line is the J frame is smaller in all the right places (barrel, width, grip size) to make it a much more concealable gun. It is much easier to conceal than the G 19. I can conceal the J frame wearing anything other than a swim suit. On the other hand the Glock 19 takes a polo or button up shirt 1 size larger than my body to conceal with a real belt to hold it.

Between the two there is no dispute the Glock 19 is a superior firearm. It holds 3x the darn bullets plus it's a much easier gun to shoot well. However that is not the point of this comparison. It's great for folks to pack a full sized Glock, M&P or 1911 with 2x reloads. Seriously good for those guys. However my observation is that most people will not actually pack a full sized heater with any regularity. The running joke that if you ask any guy who says he packs a full sized 1911 to show it to you right now he will mumble some BS about how it's in the glove box/ nightstand/ safe runs true far more often than not.

I genuinely believe in high percentage carry. Personally I carry a gun unless it is really illegal, like years in prison not 'asked to leave the establishment' kind of illegal. When you carry all the time the inevitable 'running to the store for a gallon of milk' scenarios come up. Also there are times you just plain don't feel like strapping on a larger pistol. Plus it is hot and getting hotter down here. Any gun beats the hell out of no gun.

Personally I go back and forth between carrying the J frame and the Glock 19. There is a sort of informal risk assessment for every trip. If I'm leaving our little town it's the Glock 19. If it's after 8 o'clock or so it is the Glock 19 with a light. If I am carrying a lot of cash or making a significant trade it is the Glock 19. Last weekend between my wallet, some garage sale cash and money for the the gun show I was walking around with about a grand; so I carried the  G19 on my right hip and the .38 in my off side cargo pocket.

However all things considered my lifestyle is pretty safe as there are not a lot of muggings and shootings between 3 and 6 pm. Since the risk assessment of going to the store for groceries at 4pm on a Tuesday is pretty low the J frame wins a lot. It wins because I should have a gun but don't need that much of one.

I feel adequately armed with the J frame and 2 reloads.  Sure it's not a Glock 19 with a reload. That being said what realistically concerns me these days is 1) somebody trying to rob me in the parking lot or 2) getting carjacked, the distant 3rd would be just getting caught in something here or there. Either of those  (2 probable) situations will be over one way or another before I shoot 5 rounds. The cold hard truth is that I'll have won, lost or be behind something with time to reload by then.

That being said I am in the market for a Glock 26. Sooner or later one will be saved from a life of an owner who is not me. That might just be the setup. Until then I will split my time between the Glock 19 and the S&W 642.


As always your opinion is welcome.

Basic Guns 4.5: Cheaper Alternatives to Basic Guns

So I have been doing this Basic Guns series and some folks have mentioned other cheaper generic/ off brand alternatives. In the case that brought this up it was Part 3: Shotguns and somebody mentioned the H&R Pardner.  This suggestion isn't good or bad parse it just brings up a point worth discussing.

Personally I would rather have a used quality gun than a newer less quality one. I'd take a Maverick 88 with a couple scratches and dings than a new H&R Pardner or a used Smith and Wesson .38 over a new no name revolver that has been in production for a year. The reason for this is that guns age very well and this goes double for good guns. Being honest most guns are not really shot much anyway. They sit in a nightstand, closet or gun safe most of the time. The bottom line is that good guns tend to last for a really long time. Also it is worth revisiting my thoughts on common manufacturer/ model/ caliber firearms before we go further. Some folks think otherwise and that is of course their right.

The reason I think this way is that good guns rarely fail you but cheaper guns often do. I'm not saying all the time but cheaper guns are more likely to have systemic issues and a higher rate of lemons. Especially since we are talking small differences in money the $20-40 difference is worth exponentially increasing the risk you will have issues with a gun. I know it's the basic guns series but people with few guns on tight budgets can afford to replace and fix stuff the least. They need the darn things to work as there are not backups.

The decisions about which guns to choose for this series come from my personal experience and the  experiences of others I have been able to draw on. I truly believe they are good choices but that does not mean they are the only choices. Other people might be comfortable with different, potentially cheaper guns and that is fine.

Well those are my thoughts on cheaper guns for this series. This weekend we will be talking rifles which should be fun.

Thoughts?

Basic Budget Guns Part 2: Handguns

To continue the ongoing series (Part 1, Part 1.5, Part 1.75) today we will talk about handguns. To catch you up I recommend buying common model firearms from reputable and common manufacturers chambered in a common caliber. Also remember to consider the cost of fully equipping them when comparing and pricing guns.

The goal here is to get a basic gun that fits a tight budget but is still a good solid weapon to bet your life on. The distinction between this and the cheapest guns out there is significant.

While I do not have a clear price range in mind a loose goal of $350 (of course markets vary so these guns might be 4 and a quarter in LA or 300ish in Alabama) to $400 seems like a good mark. This is of course for the gun itself, though if you buy used a holster (and maybe extra mag) might get tossed into the deal.

For a one handgun solution I tend to favor compact pistols. A .38/.357mag *3 inch* J(small) or 3-4" K(medium) sized revolver is a really good option. I would recommend Smith and Wesson or Ruger or if those are not available a fairly new Taurus. Unless you know what you are doing (which is not the target audience of this series) an older Charter Arms, Rossi, Taurus, etc might very well be a lemon and only useful as a paperweight. Newer Smiths run out of this price range in a hurry but an older revolver like a Model 10 or 64 can be had in this price range. Rugers do pop up here also. Both will probably run a bit closer to $400 but they do not need mags.

The reason revolvers will come in the cheapest is because you do not need mags. Figuring $25-35 for most mags (not today, we'll get to that in a minute) and that IMO you want a bare minimum of 6 mags cost adds up fast.

For semi auto's the Kel Tech PF9 and Ruger LC 9 both seem like pretty decent contenders and are in our price range. They are towards the smaller end of guns I would be comfortable with for an everything handgun but they are readily available and take single stack mags which are still out there at sane prices. The really little .380's and 2" J frames are difficult guns to shoot well and not especially fun to shoot which means you are less likely to put in the time to learn to use them. This combination makes them less than ideal beginner guns.

Interestingly Iraq Vet8888/ Barry of Moss Gun and Pawn did a video on handguns under $350.

Won't disagree with anything they said but there are inherent compromises in basic budge guns. Compromises that are acceptable for one person might not be acceptable for another. If you are a bit less concerned about commonality of ammunition and parts the Bersa .380 is worth looking into. If you plan to buy all the ammo and parts you will every need with the gun then the Makarov is a fine option.

Note that I really haven't talked about  any double stack auto's. Glock pistols and in particular the Glock 19 (which would otherwise be my choice here) are relatively hard to find these days. You can get them but (excluding oddballs like .45GAP) they are running a bit more expensive than before firearmagedon. In my neck of the woods it will be very hard to touch a non oddball used Glock for under $550 with $600 probably being average. Most significantly the price of full capacity double stack mags that hold more than 10 rounds (especially Glock 9's)  is up considerably, though they are slowly trending down. Glock mags are running $43-45 in my neck of the woods and it's a sellers market. This is significantly up from the $25-28 pre panic prices. For a guy like me who wants to have 9-10 mags that is a big price difference. Between the higher price of the gun and mags I think the Glock 9mm is currently priced out of a "common man" budget. The same can be said for the other pistols that would normally be in this range. Smith and Wesson Sigma's and the old Ruger P series still offer good value if you can find mags at a sane price.

My basic budget handgun setup would be:
-handgun (duh)
-6 magazines for an auto/ some speedloaders for a revolver
-500 rounds of ammunition. In a perfect world you might have 500 rounds of JHP ammo and then some FMJ for plinking but if the budget is tight consider getting 100 rounds of JHP and the rest FMJ. If the budget is uuber tight just rock boring old ball ammo.
-decent holster that can be used for concealment
-belt stuff enough to comfortably hold said gun in holster

Personally I would be looking for a decent used revolver either a Smith and Wesson Model 10/64 .38 or a Ruger Security 6 .357 really whichever came up first.

Hope that helps somebody. Next chapter we will talk shotguns which will be short and easy.

What Did You Do To Prepare This Week?

A few things happened here. Recently I have put some time and energy into stocking a few extra household items. Stuff like laundry soap, light bulbs, etc. Also picked up a few OTC meds and a half gallon of 'emergency whiskey'. While obviously not a good choice for some emergencies but for plenty of more likely ones 2 drinks at the end of a long day would be nice. It isn't a bad idea to stash some of whatever you like.

Didn't really do a long run but overall last weeks fitness efforts went decent. 

Ended up selling off the crimson trace laser grips that came with my new revolver. They are cumbersome for concealed carry being fairly large for a small gun like a J frame. They are just subtly too big to really let the gun do what I want. Also I shoot it better using the sights anyway. It's true they may be useful someday but that potential day is a long way off and during that time many new developments will likely come into play. Long before then I will probably be running red dots on my defensive pistols anyway. Also it dropped the price point for the little wheel gun which was nice. More importantly along with another sale freed up some cash for some things I will keep to myself at least for now.

Well that is what I did to prepare this week. What did you do?

Glock Modifications

I

I saw this video awhile back. Steve Fisher saying the goal of modifying a gun is to improve functionality without messing with durability or reliability I think is a good starting point.

While I do think the Glock is probably the best standard bone stock fighting pistol out there it could be a bit better. I like swapping the normal guide rod/ spring out with a spring that has the same tension (or whatever they call it) but a stainless steel body. The primary reason for this is that a little bit of weight up front helps decrease muzzle rise. Some might also argue they are more durable.

Something new I did today is to swap out the standard trigger connector with a #3.5 trigger connector. Between the reference manual and youtube it wasn't too hard to figure out. Took the gun to try at the range today and it was pretty awesome. It's just a bit lighter and smoother but makes a whole lot of difference. The combination of the steel guide rod and 3.5lbs connector is awesome. It is seriously like a whole different better shooting gun. I shot the same gun about a month back and groups were probably less than half the size this time.

Night sights are pretty much required and are an easy upgrade on most modern service type pistols if the gun does not come with them.

I think the combo of ss guide rod/ spring, 3.5lb connector and night sights is an upgrade all of my Glocks will get. Might just stash a spare set or three (at that mythical time when I have $500 for gun stuff and nothing else to buy) just in case. That way I could set up a Glock acquired however down the road the way I like it. Stole that idea from Matthew Bracken's newest book Castigo Cay.

A pistol mounted light like a Streamlight TLR-1 is a solid option. I have a love hate relationship with them. I love the capability but hate the added bulk. For a dedicated home defense or open carry/ tactical gun a light is an easy decision. For a gun that is going to regularly pull concealed carry duty it is a harder call. I like the idea but the Glock 19 with a light kept getting left at home in favor of the J frame. A more concealment oriented slimmer holster would help but that's still carry under a sweatshirt or something, not AIWB which is my preference for concealed carry. I do not think anybody makes an AIWB rig for a gun with a light and if they did I'm not sure it would be tolerable to carry. Definitely better to carry a Glock without a light than to think I carry a Glock with a light but actually pack the snubby 9/10 times. I think running a concealed carry Glock and a home/ tactical one is probably MY way forward.

That's what I have done to Glocks. Things I can see doing

A modern red dot like a Trijicon RMR or the new Leupold offering seems like a really cool way to go. I'm going to wait for some more R and D to happen and prices to slip down a little bit over a few years before seriously considering taking the plunge. Obviously higher suppressor sights would need to go with this setup.

A threaded barrel to go with a suppressor would be cool at some point.

Stippling has potential to help with grip, etc. I would want to see and handle a gun done by a shop before giving them my gun. Too many yahoos with a dremel and a soldering iron think they are gunsmiths these days to trust just anybody offering the service.

Beyond that I cannot think of anything currently available that I want to put on a fighting handgun.

What have you done to Glocks (or I guess other pistols)?

Readily Available Guns

An interesting video from the good folks at Moss Pawn and Gun on readily available guns in the current firearmagedon situation. My .02 are that Glock prices have gone up significantly. Used Gen III guns seem to be going for around 6 bills in Southern Arizona and they aren't being advertised long. Finding a 17 is easier than a 19 though. I think revolvers are worth thinking about if you cannot pay the current double stack semi auto (and especially Glock 9's for whatever reason) premiums as they have been essentially unaffected by this mess.

For whatever it is worth things seem to slowly be getting better as the freedom ban folks seem to be stalled out. Maybe it's just that the folks who wanted an AR/ AK and could pay loony tunes prices have already bought. AK's and AR's are available and slowly but surely prices might be trending slowly down. Unless you are desperate it might be wise to wait this out.

Anyway there is the video to give some advice to folks really trying to get set up today without paying stupid prices.

Food and Fitness

Too many folks are doing a lot of reading and blogging and discussing but not enough DOING.

Food and fitness are the two primary areas people tend to fail in at the most basic level. For goodness sake do something to improve your situation.

Food is easy. We could go at it from a lot of angles but at the most basic level just buy a little bit more of the stuff you regularly eat on each shopping trip. I am talking about shelf stable stuff like dried pasta and sauce, beans, rice, pancake mix, Bisquick, peanut butter and jelly and various canned goods. We will touch on money later but if you can't manage to squeeze five or ten bucks of extra stuff into the budget per shopping trip I recommend looking at your life. If you have some more money and want to stash away some canned staples or emergency food then all the better. I care less how you do it so long as you are doing it. The point is simply that you need to be putting back food in case something happens that disrupts the supply chain.

Fitness is something way too many folks miss. I split off my fitness efforts into another blog because folks would rather talk about other things here. How folks think the world is going to collapse and they are going to be doing all this stuff but lack of fitness will not come into play baffles me. There are way more situations where you will need fitness than cool rifles and emergency food. Sort of like food getting started in any way is a good thing. Eat a bit better and do more exercise. Lift and run or do crossfit, man aerobics or whatever. Heck just go for walks. Doing anything will improve your situation.

In the context we are talking about finances are not that hard either. Avoid debt for obvious reasons. Do some thinking and educate yourself about what is happening and historical comparisons. The Modern Survival Manual: Surviving the Economic Collapse by FerFal is a bit pricey but has some great info. It's writer has actually lived through an economic collapse which is a lot more than most other folks can say. 
If you have some money that isn't doing anything right now you might want to think about what to do with it. Putting a portion of it into precious metals and emergency food could be a good way to go. 

It is easy to put too much money into firearms.  Most guys who are into preparedness like guns and it's easy to get canalized into stuff one likes. However if you are objectively short on .38 ammo for the nightstand revolver or buckshot for the scatter gun then do something about it. I like a lot of ammo but even the tightest budget will let you put back at least a couple hundred rounds per gun with a bit of dedication and some planning.


Get out and do something! Exercise and stash some food. Look at your money situation and if you need it some ammo. The bottom line is that unless your butt and gut are getting smaller and the pantry is getting filled you are not actually becoming more prepared. A little bit of knowledge put into action is a whole lot better than a bunch of knowledge which you do nothing with.

From Around The Web

Teotwawki Blog did an excellent Snub Nose Gear Roundup.

A journalist was not treated very nicely when he asked if Mayor Bloomberg was giving up his armed security. The classic elitist liberal position that chosen ones deserve the best protection the public purse will buy but us peasants can dial and die. Bet they aren't packing neutered 7 round mags either.

Assault Weapons ban does not have the votes to pass the senate. Next step is to protect our right to be full people unlike New Yorkers who are 7/30ths as important as chosen ones. After that we tell them to keep away from law abiding citizens right to buy and sell their private property with other law abiding citizens. Enforcing the gun laws we have would be a good start.

The lost art of cut shells.

Detroit edges closer to bankruptcy.

About every centerfire rifle in existence is just waiting to be redefined as a cop killer.

What Did You Do To Prepare This Week?

I got a new heater. Also picked up a bunch of accessories I have been wanting. A Safariland paddle holster that will accomodate a Glock with a TLR-1. If I like using the light on my Glock down the road a nicer setup will be acquired. A stainless steel guide rod and a Lone Wolf 3.5 pound trigger connector round things out on the Glock front.

Got a set of boot grips for the new heater as well as an en cheapo holster (till I figure out what I want), and some speed loaders. Tossed some more speed loaders and speed strips into the order just because.

Lastly I picked up a Costa Leg Rig. Pretty sure that on a rigger belt is going to be my answer to the 'battle belt'.

Picked up a few odds and ends at the grocery store. Looking at making a decent sized order this week.

Well that is what we have been up to. What did you do to prepare this week?

Five For Sure

I like this saying. Would argue that a Glock 19 (and its S&W MP and XD contemporaries) is 15 for sure but this package is smaller and a lot lighter. It is a catchy saying all the same.

TEOTWAWKI Blog Talks Snubby .38's

TEOTWAWKI Blog's post The Snub Nosed Revolver is an excellent post that directly relates to our recent talk on Small Revolver Choices.

Small Revolver Choices- SW Airweight .38?

We talked before about whether I should get a revolver or a little semi auto.

Anyway I decided to go with a little revolver. There were a lot of different considerations involved in this.

The Kel Tech 9mm is at least temporarily rejected. If one comes up at a deal and it is from a person I know (that will say if the gun sucks or not) maybe but for now I think not. There are a whole flock of new subcompact single stack 9mm's but I want to see how they fare and let some kinks get worked out.

There were a variety of options but I quickly narrowed it down to a Ruger SP 101 .357 mag or a Smith and Wesson .38/.357. Lots of other companies (Taurus, Charter Arms, etc all) make decent revolvers but I am looking for something that I'm not going to have issues with or want to replace in 2 or 3 years.

After some consideration the role I am looking to fill is a carry piece smaller than a Glock 19. This will give me some options and since I will be in Arizona through the summer that is important. I do think the steel framed models are probably more durable over the very long term. However since subcompact revolvers tend to be guns that get carried a lot and not have crazy round counts so to me the issue is negligible. Also this is another consideration in buying a quality revolver. My concern about the SP 101 is that despite being small it is heavy enough to be problematic for my intended use of summer or casual carry.  Also I tend to want to go lighter for a carry gun which makes the air weight smiths a good option.

[Eventually this little revolver will be paired with a stainless steel .357 or some variety. A Ruger GP 100 4" would be nice but a 3" SP 101 might just be the ticket.]

Alexander Wolfe of TEOTWAWKI Blog noted you do not get a lot from the .357 cartridge (vs the .38 special) in a snubby and there are probably shoot-ability issues in lighter guns. I would be inclined to go with a .357 mag and load .38's just to have the chamber capacity if it ever came up. So I got to looking. Around here SW stainless .357 mag's of the small variety are semi rare and in the air weight flavor they might as well be made of unobtainable and have diamonds for night sights. Nice guns but way more coin than I want to spend.

Anyway the combination of my preferences, budget and availability makes me think a Smith and Wesson Airweight .38 special as the best available option. Thoughts?

EDC Contest #11 Alexander Wolfe

Hey Folks, I am pleased to bring another entry for our EDC Contest. First we will quickly recap what is going on. The broad strokes are this. I want to share and discuss the stuff we carry around every day AKA EDC. Taking pictures of our stuff and talking about it is my goal.

The prizes will be as follows:
1st Place: 3 Sport Berkey Water Bottles donated by LPC Survival ($69 value)
2nd Place: 1 Blackhawk Holster donated by LuckyGunner.com ($50 value)
3rd Place:  1 Snare-Vival-Trap cough garote cough donated by Camping Survival ($17 value)

Wildcard: This one goes to whoever I want to give it to for whatever reason I feel like. It will be a grab bag donated by yours truly. The exact makeup is TBD depending on what I have lying around  and may include books, gear, medical stuff or even a couple silver dimes. ($30+  value)

Check out the details and my example post here. 
Onto Entry #11 by Alexander Wolfe of TEOTWAWKI Blog which is an excellent blog I read daily.

Ryan -

I humbly submit my own personal daily equipment, nothing too flashy and definitely all carried on a daily basis. Backed up with a daily carry bag and vehicle kits.

Contents are:

Smith & Wesson 642 with S&W grips and a Tyler-T Grip. I've found this combination quite good for concealment purposes and controllable when shooting. While the Smith isn't an ideal weapon, it is easy enough to conceal in a wide range of clothes and carry methods--pretty much anywhere, any time--and gives 5-for-sure rounds of respectable .38 Spl. A decent enough compromise, especially given my low risk lifestyle. I will eventually pick up one of the new pocket 9s and see how they fare, though.

The holster is an el-cheapo Uncle Mikes, which is actually the most comfortable holster I've owned. Snubby is worn AIWB at about 1:30, and the padded nylon helps with comfort (as does the shape of the revolver's grip vs. an auto). The Uncle Mike's holster can work as a pocket holster and removes easily enough if needed, too.

Spare ammunition is carried in a Safariland Comp I, which works much better than the more common HKS loaders, and is lower profile to boot. I will add another speedloader and speedstrips often, but the single Comp I is daily carry stuff. More ammunition and heavier firepower in the vehicles, if needed.

Flashlight is a well worn Surefire E1B. The tail cap wore out this past year and was replaced with a tail cap for an E1E, which Surefire was kind enough to send my way free of charge. The best part of this light is the pocket clip--best pocket clip around, amigos. Surefire has a big upgrade coming for the E1B this year - 200 lumens! - and this one will get relegated to a backup. This rides IWB at about 11 o'clock.

Knife is a Spyderco P'Kal, carried more for defensive purposes than utility, but it will open up boxes fine, too. The wave feature is excellent, and the P'Kal's grip shape allows it to be used effectively in the reverse/edge-in grip I favor for the kind of up-close-and-desperate work this would be used for. Worn high in my right front pocket.

Pen is a Lamy 3-function pen - two pens and a mechanical pencil. Quite nice. Rides in a shirt breast pocket.

Key chain take offs are a Leatherman PS4 with the pliers swapped out in favor of full-sized scissors and a Fenix LD01. Both on McGizmo clips.

Watch is a Citizen Eco-Drive I received as a present. Solar powered, which is kind of cool. I've been wearing it for a year now and it doesn't look thrashed, which is more than I can say for many watches I've owned.

The rest of the stuff rides in my wallet (an Eagle Creek) - Bogota lock tools, water purification tablets, a micro usb drive, BFE Labs Ultralight Kit knife and a home made sheath. The wallet also has plenty of spare cash and cards if I need to buy my way out of a problem.

Not pictured is my iPhone 5 - used to take the picture - and a pair of reading glasses.

 -End-

Revolver or Pistol? Kel Tech PF 9?

Over the past couple years I have been generally selling guns. Part of it is getting rid of .40SW and .45acp to simplify my logistics. The other part is to get to the right place. Not necessarily MORE guns but THE RIGHT guns.  I built a nice AR named Project AR Upgrade not very long ago.

 I sold a full sized .357 magnum today. A fine gun but  I have shot it like 5 times in almost 10 years. Those were the times I took EVERYTHING out to shoot. Anyway it is down the river and the gun fund is up $400.

After doing some looking the Ruger GP 100 4" that will eventually replace the old guy as my big wheel gun costs more that the gun budget currently has. Also more to the point I don't see that gun getting much use in the near future. Maybe down the road when the kids are older and I am out in the woods more but that is awhile off.

That leaves me with 2 niches that could be filled. A snubby revolver or a compact single stack 9mm. A stainless snubby .357 seems like a decent option. I would either get a Ruger or a Smith. Might have to add some more cash to the deal but not a ton. The option of a single stack 9mm appeals to me a lot as it would fill a solid role as a carry gun slightly smaller than a Glock 19.

The Kel Tech PF 9 comes up as a very affordable option that is the right size for what I want. Nutnfancy seems to really like them. I have however heard some issues but am unsure how much of that are armchair forum commando's. I don't care about accuracy or trigger pull much, it is a little carry gun. Also I am not too concerned about being able to put a gazillion rounds through it as that's not the niche for this gun. However reliability/ feeding does concern me.

So questions:

1) Should I get a small stainless .357mag or a small single stack 9mm?

There is the consideration that I will probably need to spend more like $450 to get a .357 like I'm looking for while for the cash I have could buy a Kel Tech PF 9, some spare mags, a holster and a couple hundred rounds of ammo.

2) What have been your personal experiences with the Kel Tech PF 9, good, bad or even ugly?


Input is appreciated

A Discussion of Revolvers

The last time revolvers were mentioned here things got about as unpleasant as they have in a long time. I had planned to write this post in the days following that one but didn't feel like dealing with any drama. The funny and ironic thing about this is that I like revolvers. In fact we have more .38/.357 revolvers than any other single type of gun.

Revolvers are well what they are. Very arguably the revolver market has been static for a long time. Aside from fluff and finishes there hasn't been anything new that was meaningful (and caught on) for a long time. Like decades. Typically revolvers hold 5-7 rounds and have barrels between 2 and 6 inches. There are numerous calibers but for defensive purposes zeroing in on .38/.357 and briefely touching .44 mag is probably sufficient.

The two biggest disadvantages revolvers have are that they do not hold a lot of bullets and are slow to reload. Unfortunately the second issue seriously compounds the first. As to their advantages wheel guns are unbiquous, easy to use, affordable and more tolerant of varied ammunition than auto's. The reason I say revolvers are easier to use is that the failure drill is to pull the trigger again. If the gun doesn't shoot a second time it is empty (either you shot it that way or forgot to load it) or broken beyond immediate repair. Now in fairness revolvers can and do break and auto's are typically easier to repair.

Comparing revolvers to auto's in terms of a defensive tool is sort of pointless. Auto's hold considerably more ammunition and reload faster. That being said revolver folks will argue some points they believe make the wheel gun superior. I don't feel like arguing but must observe that you don't see many folks who carry a gun for a living with wheel guns these days.

Arguing that a revolver is equal to or better than an automatic is the wrong argument anyway. The real question is if revolvers are good enough to defend ones self with. For goodness sake don't say that revolvers were good enough for years and use that as your sole point. Swords were good enough for years too but you don't see many of them these days with good reason. As to this more important question I suppose the answer is probably. Then again you are probably fine without a gun anyway.

The answer to this question is probably. You would have to be in the more unlikely end of the already unlikely violent conflict spectrum for the difference between an auto and a wheel gun to matter. If that happened and you had a wheel gun, well that would be bad but is statistically unlikely.

If your primary concern is a single goblin with an edged or blunt weapon, or maybe a gun, attacking you.

As to snubbies in particular as the snubby didn't seem to need it's own post. The same issues above both good and bad are present with snubbies except they have the additional disadvantage that they are a very difficult gun to shoot. For most folks they are probably good to across the room distances. Note that I did not say they are mechanically inaccurate but that most folks can't hit squat with them. This is more of an issue because they don't hold a lot of bullets, most hold 5. A tech 9 is not accurate but they hold a lot of bullets so, if you do not care about collateral damage, the odds of getting a hit are decent.

[If anybody has a bunch of money to take snubby .38's to a bunch of ranges with free amo for people to shoot and keep track of the ammo it would be interesting. I suspect few people would do well past about 10 meters and almost none would hit squat at 20. Considering these are ideal conditions and that stress and movement deteriorate accuracy considerably it could easily mean not hitting squat. ]

To touch briefly on caliber .38 special is perfectly adequate and .357 magnum is an oldie but a goodie. Bigger guns like .44's have power to spare though they are typically big enough be difficult to conceal without a vest (which screams gun unless you have a big camera around your neck) or coat and in terms of defensive use outside of the isolated hinterboonies fall in the 'left in the truck' category.

One of the biggest things working against the snubby is that concealable semi automatic pistols have come a long way in the last 20 years. Between the slightly larger than snubby slew of quality compact pistols from Glock, S&W, Springfield, HK and pretty much every other major manufacturer manufacturer and the new much smaller than snubby .380's like the KelTech, and all it's knock offs as well as the S&W Bodyguard the nitche of the snubby could be questioned. One might argue it is literally surrounded by better options. They do however have one unique advantage. You can load the same caliber of ammo in a snubby .38/.357 for carry and a big .357 for house and field use. For somebody who really wants to keep it simple in terms of logistics that is a benefit.

Personally I have a snubby .38 (and the wife has another which is a whole different discussion). This gun was purchased when I realized the full sized handguns I owned weren't getting carried much. I could slip it into an IWB holster and it vanished under a loose shirt. This gun got shelved for carry when I bought a Glock 19. I laid the snubby on top of the Glock 19 and while the snubby was smaller it was just by a tiny bit. The .38 was wider though the bigger grip (due to the mag) of the Glock printed a little bit more. I decided very quickly that having 3x more bullets in a much easier to shoot package was worth a tiny bit of printing.

While it is unlikely that the difference between a snubby .38 and a Glock 19 will ever matter for me I would rather be safe then sorry. It isn't much more gun to carry for the huge difference in capabilities. Within reason there is always a trade off between more or less gun so finding your own happy spot is important. A Glock 19 is something I will carry regularly.

There is still a soft spot in my heart for revolvers. I like collecting and shooting them. For practical use I especially like them for the great outdoors. A gun that you can affordably plink with as well as kill mountain lions, black bear and snakes is a nice thing to have. Also they are cheap. Unless you are married to the newest tacticool (kinda ironic for wheelguns anyway) models it is easy to get good guns priced in the mid 300's (or was a 3 years back anyway). Revolvers are nice for a gun to stash here or there because of their affordable price. I can't afford to have a Glock back in the PNW, another stashed at a 'campsite' and a third someplace else in addition to the guns I normally use. For the price of a new AR or many models of semi automatic pistol I could do this with good used .38/.357 revolvers.

Anyway those are my thoughts on that. Flame on.

Edited to include: Commander Zero's post on Revolvers at Cheaper than Dirt is also worth reading.

Blah, Life and Sickness

Well I have pneumonia. It wasn't a huge suprise as I have had a wickedly nasty cough for almost 3 weeks. It has been sort of a weird thing because aside from a wicked cough (with the caviate that I have done next to nothing physically straining since being sick) and being kind of physically and mentally tired all the time but overall I pretty decent. Turns out it is kind of an odd strain so it was hard to diagnose but eventually they figured it out. So now I am on some drugs to treat it and they seem to be working.

When I had double pneumonia back in Fall 2010 our medical folks were moderately concerned I was going to die. I was the sickest I have been in my entire life. I was barely coherant and weak as could be. Maybe I am somehow weak in the lungs or something. Who knows. Anyway.

As to the recent video and talk about 1911's and the comment on snubbies that seems to have gotten folks all bent out of shape. I have a post basically written in my head that will explain my opinions on a lot of background and conceptual stuff but just don't feel like writing it today. I am mentally just too tired to bother. My desire to argue is minimal and my desire to argue with people who aren't talking about actual facts or data is nonexistent.

I am coming to wonder if guns are a topic that cannot be talked about rationally. If I even mention that a gun is anything less than absolutely perfect folks get seriously bent out of shape. It sort of makes sense why gun rags write that every gun is just completely awesome. Then again it sort of makes sense that I think their reviews and articles are complete shite and I haven't bought a gun rag in years.

I may have called a good time to buy a couple days back but last night I finally bought PM's. Silver was at about $28.09 and Gold at about $1570. They had been slipping back up and it seemed like a good time. Who knows anyway. Tomorrow I am probably going to go bike shopping. Not sure I will get anything but I do want to see what is available here in the $300-400 price range.

For awhile I was listening to the news online at work. I listened to some Dave Ramsey too but I think I am good for that once a week or month at the most. I love his stuff but it is aweful repetetive. Over the last couple days I have stopped that and started listening to rock music instead. I read or at least skim the drudge every day and if I have time check out the BBC but music lets me drone out and be productive which is a good thing. Also the news has been making me mad lately and music gets me going so the decision is easy.

Anyway I hope you all have a good day and maybe I will put together something more on point tomorrow.

Later,

quote of the day

"The definition of an optimist is a guy with a speed strip and a snubby."
-James Yeager

I got to thinking about this one. I don't disagree with it but would like to add a caveat. I would say that a person who carries a speed strip and a snubby is an optimist in a group full of people who carry guns. Then again a guy who carries a compact handgun is arguably more optimistic than one who carries a full service sized piece as most folks shoot bigger handguns better, packing 1 mag is more optimistic than 2, we could go deeper into this rabbit hole but why.

A handgun you will carry is more useful than one which will live in a safe, nightstand or glove box. Mr Snubby .38 is far more prepared for a violent encounter than somebody who keeps a bigger gun in a glove box, nightstand or safe.

1911's Suck?

 The recent 1911's suck video by James Yeager seems worth talking about. In case you missed it here is the video:

For the sake of intellectual honesty and to have a little Devils Advocate fun I am going to say things 1911 lovers will not like. Anyway here we go. 

The reasons people buy 1911's often have a lot more to do with their history, lineage, machismo factor and fact that the mighty Jeff Cooper carried one than anything about the actual gun itself.

1911's are big, heavy, don't hold a lot of bullets, are not lefty/ambi friendly and have controls that are difficult for many people to use well.

If you look at the 1911 honestly they probably (which I say just because doing a comparison would be a hassle) get bested as a defensive/ service weapon by modern handguns like those made by Glock, Springfield (XD), S&W MP, etc all in any honest test.

To be completely blunt if the 1911 was designed today it would probably never be made and certainly would not become popular. 

Sorry 1911 lovers, it really isn't anything personal and everything I said is true. You wouldn't be fuming right now if it wasn't. End Devils Advocate fun.

Moving forward I think 1911 reliability issues and failures can be attributed to a few distinct categories. I will discuss them in no particular order.

Age- A gun made in 1917 that still has all original parts might reasonably have some issues. I once went to the range with a buddy who brought an old family heirloom 1911. It was a neat old gun of WWI vintage. After about 50 rounds the barrel bushing broke and the slide flew off into the dirt with the recoil spring and plug going all over the place. We picked up the parts and he got a new bushing. Not a huge deal really, metal fatigues, springs weaken, etc over long periods of time. A lot of these real old guns probably need a little TLC and just need to be retired as safe queens.

Manufacturers- So many people have made 1911's and most of them sucked at it. I stick with popular manufacturers and common models for a very good reason, they are far more likely to work well than no name or the fly by night guys.

Any yahoo master gunsmith can slap some plug and play parts together in his mom's basement custom shop and try to sell it for big money. On the opposite end of the cost spectrum the super cheapo ones often have issues too. Expecting a $350 no name 1911 to function like a Springfield, Colt or Kimber is probably is just not realistic. While some deals are better than others you generally get about what you pay for.

[DIY- The plug and play factor of 1911 parts has also lead to a lot of people trying to be gunsmiths and slapping a bunch of random parts together with predictably poor results. If you or your buddy screw with a gun and it stops working the fault doesn't lie with the gun. Also if you buy a used 1911 the guy who owned it a decade ago may have tried this and left the gun messed up.]

Maintenance- 1911's and in particular custom/ target models which we will discuss later are more picky about maintenance than a lot of modern service type handguns like Glocks and XD's. As Larry Vickers said "[i]f ... you treat your pistols like we all treat our lawnmowers then don’t get a 1911 – use a Glock."

Tolerances and "Target models"- As noted in the video the old WWII era 1911's had significant tolerances, such that they would often rattle if shaken. However they also shoot reliably. There is a very direct relationship between tolerances, accuracy and weapon malfunctions. Tighter tolerances make for more accurate guns but they also mean that guns are more likely to malfunction.

Over the last 30 years or so a lot of 1911 manufacturers have tried to cash in on the "target" designation. They made the guns more accurate by tightening up the tolerances significantly which is easy with modern manufacturing techniques. This allowed them to make the gun  significantly more accurate and add 30-60% to the price. However many of these guns are equally accurate and jamtastic. Even the really expensive "target" type guns can be "picky" or only "like" one brand of ammo or have "unexplained feeding issues". As Tam noted awhile back it is interesting that a $1,200 gun is "picky" or has "unexplained feeding issues" but a $200 gun that does the exact same things is a jamomatic piece of junk. My personal advice is to keep the "target" models for competition/ ranges and to carry a service gun with it's significantly higher reliability and amply capable accuracy.

Those 4 areas are where I think most 1911 issues come from. One could argue that they are really not that hard to mitigate. Simply using a modern 1911 made by a major manufacturer and doing reasonable maintenance on it will go a long way.

My general observation is that standard models from major manufacturers like Springfield and Colt function like the service pistol the 1911 was designed to be. In other words they are reasonably reliable and accurate enough to be a viable defensive weapon. I haven't found them unduely maintenance intensive but I take pretty good care of guns anyway.

For the sake of full disclosure I own a Springfield Mil Spec 1911. I have used it for concealed carry and home defense and would not hesitate to do so again. I do not have anything bad to say about it. However I am trying to sell it which shows where my money is really going. I don't really do anything with it these days and it is complicating my logistics. Also by selling it I can get another Glock 9mm.

As to the bottom line. In my opinion if you like 1911's and are able/ willing to mitigate their weak points I do not see why a 1911 can't serve you well. Just because they aren't the highest tech and most low maintenance/ reliable gun out there doesn't mean they aren't good enough.

Thoughts? This should be fun.