Updated thinking on air rifles for training.

(Okay, so all this week I have been just giddy with the success of last weekend's introductory gunhandling sessions with Feral Daughters One and Two, which culminated not only in reliable hits with the Airsoft 1911 from about five yards, and also not only with exemplary attention to safety and basic handling, including load and reload...but also with conspicuous smiles.  More on this effort later;  for now, that's the context of my starting to think again about the broader context of airgunnery for training.)

I wanted to set down a couple more thoughts about the use of precision pellet guns for training, as the landscape has evolved a bit since I last did that.  I've now been freshly reminded of the viability of using appropriate Airsoft replicas for true gunhandling, and really for any training in which the gunhandling is more important than great precision in marksmanship...but in the end, there will also remain a need for low-cost, high-volume training using something more precise.

Previously, I've written on the Scout-Rod concept, and I'm still keen on making this happen.  The problem of course is that even aside from the ridiculous "safety" on the otherwise-excellent Benjamin Marauder base gun, there would still appear to be much custom work to do to get it up and running in full form, and of course along with the base gun, that's expensive.  But then I noticed the Diana Stormrider, which seems more promising in several ways, especially with the ability to add an additional barrelband for the possibility of a true Scout Scope setup without extensive gunsmithing.

And then today, I happened to notice both the Diana Trail Scout, and also the Diana Mauser K98 repeater.  Both of these are at the very least, interesting options!

The Trail Scout is clearly a derivative of the Stormrider, with the same bolt and breechblock, magazine, trigger and safety group, sight setup, and presumably it would accept the same second barrelband, if possibly requiring some stock inletting.  The Trail Scout seems to be about half the cost of the Stormrider, runs on CO2 instead of HPA, and currently only comes in synthetic stock garb.  Would CO2 be the way to go?  It sure might.  The Stormrider produces velocities, in .177" caliber, high enough that you can (maybe) start to lose some precision, and it seems to get about 20 good shots on a fill, with attendant blast for the not-strictly-necessary oomph.  The CO2 gun advertises much more sedate velocities, and 100 shots on a fill, using three standard powerlets.  Presuming the CO2 powerplant is as accurate a platform as HPA, this lower cost option might be a great training tool!  (Hell, might need to have both...)

The K98 Mauser replica was also a pleasant surprise.  I'd seen Tom Gaylord cover the single-shot version of this rifle before, and hadn't paid it much attention because I've already got a wonderful trainer for single shots in the Air Venturi Bronco.  But this one is a repeater...and hmm, look at that bolt!

I'm pretty sure that is the closest I've seen to a full-size rifle bolt on a non-Airsoft airgun.  No, it's not going to duplicate a real Mauser bolt in travel or even in feel, but it is so much closer than anything else I've seen, at least in a precision, rifled pellet gun, that it immediately becomes a serious contender for a precision trainer.  It's not cheap, by comparison to other HPA alternatives like the Stormrider, and it will have some of its own flaws--for starters, a true scout scope is going to require true custom work, the "safety" is a...let's call it comically primitive crossbolt in the trigger itself (good gawd, people!), and it probably will fit the same 20-shots-per-fill, 200-bar fill pressure, 20-foot-pound envelope as the Stormrider.  But hmm...that bolt, plus the onboard sights, the friendly stock (for shortening and mounting a Ching Sling), and what appears to be an overall excellent base platform...well, I now need to meet one, and am glad that the option exists!

Finally, I'm also curious to dig a little more into what SIG has been doing with EBR-pattern, semiauto rifled pellet guns.  This seems a distinct "third", in terms of training importance (where "first" would imply Airsoft blowback replicas capable of precision gunhandling and gross marksmanship, and "second" would imply rifled pellet guns capable of gross gunhandling and precision marksmanship), but those lines are of course at least a little blurry.  But still, to have the ability for some real rifled-pellet precision, in a semiauto*, AR(-ish) pattern carbine, would seem to be quite useful, and certainly worth the initial investment for inexpensive trigger time.

Anyway, SIG seems to have some options in their MCX and MPX rifles, and boy, I'd love to meet those too, to get an idea of what they're like.  (Tom has covered both an MCX variant and an MPX variant, and I'll cogitate further on the idea.)


______________________
* In the pistol realm, I already went through this thinking a bit ago, though I don't seem to have written about it specifically yet;  the core idea is to come up with a faithful replica of a "semiauto" design that can shoot rifled pellets rather than Airsoft or steel BBs--to be able to work on precision, across multiple shots.  Pistols are difficult for this, at least for 1911 lovers like me:  no pistol design I've yet seen seems to have been able to combine both rifled-pellet feeding, and a single-action trigger.  However, what is available--and what I would argue is viable enough for the concept--are a few designs employing a small internal rotary magazine, against a "double-action" style trigger (technically, this is really a CO2-powerplant revolver, in the guise of an auto pistol), and no blowback.  It's by no means perfect--I'd want the blowback and reciprocating slide if I could get it, and of course I'd want the option of a 1911 design as well--but then I stopped and considered the S&W M&P 45 variant simply on its own terms...and I think it's worth pursuing.  Whether or not the 1911 might be a preferred platform, this still captures a good base gun to train on (the M&P is well-established) and the long trigger is a good exemplar of striker-fired pistols like my own beloved Kahr.  I figure:  use it for precision singles and doubles;  the long trigger roll is the focus of the exercise here, and requires the same sort of sight-settling focus that blowback provides, without needing the actual blowback.  No, it won't combine with authentic reloads or clearance drills, but it is pretty clearly the best option for precision work in a pistol that is anywhere close to ergonomically authentic to a design you'd want to train for.

Fun shop trip!

Yeeps, but it's been a while since I've been able to do the fun shop thing.  Got a chance to spend a short bit of time in the Sportsman's Warehouse in Soldotna, with the family up in town for a geocaching picnic...and on the whole, what I saw was pretty encouraging.

First and foremost, there was .22 ammo.  Both the sales guys seemed to confirm that it wasn't just an illusion, but a real sense of palpable relief and recovery from The Extended Stoopid of the last too many freakin' years.  Prices haven't quite dropped to what they were before, but that could mostly be explained by inflation, and hell, it was there!  Bricks too, although packaging is just different than it used to be, when a brick was a brick was 500 rounds on the nose, in ten 50-round boxes.  Today, I saw packaging in 200, 300, 400, and 1400 round quantities, at rational if not entirely reasonable prices:  okay, I'll take it.

Primers were available too, by the thousand, and simply priced a little higher than I'd think appropriate.  Component bullets much more available, and ammo in general looked healthy all around.  There were even a few boxes of 16-gauge shotshells, although nothing in the buck and slug formats.

Okay, so recovery is arriving, in a location which is usually last to see the national trends.  Long may it ride.

In guns, I was happy to get a chance to meet my first .45 caliber S&W Shield.  Very nice piece;  precious little larger than the .40, and boasting a 6+1 capacity flush mag (to the XD-S's 5+1 flush mag) that was luxuriously comfortable in the hand.  Today, the trigger on the Shield was much superior to the trigger on the XD-S, but I've seen enough examples of each to know that either could come either way--so I should shop around, when the time comes.  

And boy, I do like both guns.  I seem to be warming to the Shield more and more with time, but I've not lost any fervor for the XD-S either.  In an ideal world I'd have copies of each, and would see which one would prove more likely to get the call in true daily use.  :-)

They had a CZ 527 as well, in 7.62x39;  still love everything about that rifle but the stinkin' backward safety.  (Ergonomics, people!)  Of interest, that 527 also comes chambered in 6.5 Grendel now, for those who like that format.  (Every ten years or so, I go through a mental exercise that explores the viability of nonstandard cartridges, such as the Grendel, or the .35 Whelen, etc.--and after a delightful bout of number crunching, every time I seem to (re-)conclude that yes, some of these rounds do seem to offer something over their standard-fare stablemates...but the advantage is so slight, and specialized, that overall it doesn't seem to be worth the effort unless one has money to burn and simply wants to do it because he can.  I can support that idea fully of course, but honestly, there is not a whole lot that a .35-caliber 250 at 2400 is going to do, that a .308-caliber 220 or 240 cannot.  Keep the '06, load up the heavies when called for, and otherwise rejoice in the extra choice and occasional surplus quantities of the standard round.)

Took another look at the .22 rimfire Ruger American rifle.   I'd forgotten that I liked this the first time I saw one, and here again today I was pretty impressed with it as a platform.  The safety in particular (tang) seems to be well designed, and I think it looks like a good entry for a quality .22 trainer.  Will cogitate on that one further.

Finally, in addition to the Shield, I wanted to re-acquaint myself with the M&P service pistol's ergonomics;  in that regard I got to see one of the "2.0" designs, and was impressed.  I am not a fan of double-stack designs, but they are pretty ubiquitous, and this one is one of the very most comfortable I have ever run across.    The 2.0 in particular also had the manual safety on it and man, it felt very, very natural, positive and comfortable.  So, I think that by now I can conclude that the M&P platform is going to be the right choice to go to, to build an across-the-board stable of guns to work with for all sorts of training.  By which I mean, it would be fantastic if I could use, in the same holster for the 9mm/40S&W sized pistol, all of the following:

• Airsoft M&P model with blowback
• BB M&P model with blowback
• M&P .22 rimfire model
• M&P 9mm or .40 model

Similarly, in an open-bottom holster rig designed for the .45-caliber M&P, I could envision:

• Rifled pellet M&P45 airgun
• .45ACP M&P45 pistol
• .460 Rowland conversion on M&P45 pistol

I do wish the airgun and Airsoft world would get on board with more slim-line pistol options such as the ASG Bersa BP9CC--by which I mean S&W Shield or SA XD-S, of course--but for now the best option is to go with 1911s in full size and the Bersa in compact...we'll see.

And finally, I did note that they didn't have any Benjamin Discovery airguns any more--but there were a lot more Gamo-Eff-Pee-Ess options for the credulous.  What a shame!  That Discovery was, is, pure genius, and I still need to acquire a few to put ideas into play.

Anyway, wanted to record a few notes--a pleasant discovery that things seem to be looking better for the nonce.  Yes, more of that, please!

See, now this is an intelligent contribution to the safety discussion.

I don't regularly follow John Farnam these days, but he remains a valuable observer on tactics, technique and attitude, in much the way that I recall Mas Ayoob used to be.  And so I just ran across this post from Farnam, on the use of the rifle's manual safety, specifically within the context of the hot range.

It's worth reading, and considering.  Unlike anonymous commenters who try to suggest that Onlier Operatorer types are somehow above Cooper's safety rules,  Farnam has documentable street cred, and a known capacity as an analyst.

And so:

Most modern pistols (Glock, XD, M&P, SIG320, Walther PPQ, H&K VP9, FNS, Ruger AA) don’t have manual safeties, yet we still routinely move with them in our hands during training exercises, relying mostly upon a strong “register” position of the trigger-finger to prevent NDs. Still, we don’t prevent them all, no matter how careful we try to be!

Can we do the same with our rifles, or do we insist students keep the manual safety in the “on” position except when in the process of firing intentionally?

My answer to that question is:

Yes!

I accept it either way, but I teach the former.

Of course, I tell students that I want the manual safety “on” when the rifle is slung, and I want them to check it frequently. Scant argument there.

However, when the rifle is in their hands, the position of the manual safety becomes optional.

The whole article is worth reading;  one of Farnam's particular eloquences is his ongoing defense of the hot range (as ultimately safer than the cold range), and you get a lot of it here.

This discussion of the rifle safety is interesting.  For a rifle with a truly ergonomic safety, like the Steyr Scout's tang-mounted roll switch, I don't really think I could be any faster one way or the other, as with a 1911 pistol.  Many other boltgun safeties are nearly as good as that (e.g., M700, M70, Sako).  But most "battle rifle" and "battle carbine" safeties I've met are not ergonomic to engage;  one has to shift hand positions to do it, and that does take time.

And there is this:  I suspect that Farnam's point is both in acknowledging a measurable raw speed value, and also in the attitude surrounding the use of the manual safety.  We should remember that one can observe all Four Rules with a cocked and unlocked piece;  none of the Rules makes any mention of a manual safety anywhere.  Presentation of the piece for firing always, always includes disengaging the weapon's manual safeties, if it has any.  For any drill that has the student randomly in and out of his sights, this doesn't need to change:  whether or not he re-engages a safety in between, every time the gun comes up to fire, that safety gets wiped off.

So, the discussion of when to re-engage any manual safety becomes intentionally decoupled from the discussion of when to dis-engage...and that does seem like an important observation to make.  There is no need to use a manual safety as any sort of bolster to Rule Three, and in fact it might be too easy to rely on it, however slightly, as a separate "proof" of a safe condition.

If it's really the attitude, and not the hardware--as we all love to say--then Farnam makes a good point here.  I'm happy for the reminder.

This item may indeed be of interest.

I've never really considered the idea of a 9mm 1911 before (what, exactly, would the point of that be?), but since the arrival of Browning's magnificent little 1911-22 for small hands, my thinking has evolved a bit.  And so when I got wind of Springfield Armory's new full-slide, full-grip EMP 9mm pistol, I thought it might be a good idea to get a peek to see if it might be something interesting.

Got an unexpected chance to meet one in person this weekend, and dang, it is.

The point of the EMP, originally, was to scale the 1911 down slightly, to 9mm dimensions--most importantly, in the grip length and width dimensions.  I never paid much attention to it at first, because for me, it's not enough smaller than a slim-lined .45ACP model to make an appreciable difference in size, and all other things being equal I'll always take .45 over 9.  And I admit I've never been a fan of super-stubby 1911s anyway, in any caliber.  (I've long preferred the "Commander slide, LW Officer's frame" arrangement as the best balance between size, weight, and shootability.)

But looking at it with different eyes now, I see much to like.  It absolutely is smaller in the hand, and for smaller hands that is going to make a big difference.  It is all 1911 in operation, and with SA's reputation I'd expect it to run as well as anything out there.  It's a 10+1 9mm of moderate weight, and may well make a splendid training or working gun for whoever's hand it fits.  It's spendy (street price as I saw it was $1050), but then again it already has everything on it you'd want to put on a working gun.  9mm is cheaper to run than .45, and if you can arrange the right loads, it seems to be "enough" for defensive use, even if some of us simply like to use more.  (Hell, the real reason I favor larger calibers isn't because I doubt the 9x19 at its best.  It's because of the worst-case ammo supply scenario:  I know that any old thing I can stuff into a .45 or even .40, that will make the gun work, will do decently well.  That's never been true of the 9.)

Anyway, I'm starting to visualize a set of training guns for people that would employ the 1911 platform, but be sized for hands appropriately.  At the bottom end of the scale is the Browning 1911-22 or 1911-380, at the full-sized end is the slim-lined and then the standard 1911...and dang if in the middle isn't this slightly reduced frame that just may have a solid niche to occupy.

Now, if I could just figure out how to solve the financial problems and start putting all these dang ideas to work!  :-)

Another fun shop installment.

Worked a fun shop visit in to our business today, and wanted to document a few observations.

Mossberg MVP boltgun

This one wasn't the "scout" model that I still hope to meet some day, but it was the same turnbolt action on which the "scout" model is based, and I'm happy to have learned what I did.  As expected, extraction is (very small) sliding-plate and ejection is boltface plunger, so boo, but other than that, it was actually pretty nice.  Loading/ejection port access is actually not as restrictive as I would have guessed, even with the Weaver rail straddling the receiver rings.  Bolt operated smoothly, with a convenient bolt stop and friendly cocking effort.  The safety was ergonomic and pleasantly positive;  I'd prefer that it lock the bolt as well as prevent discharge, but that seems a minor point.  I'm not a fan of "open" rear sights on rifles, but this one was well-done, and hey, kudos that the rifle has them at all, in an age that seems to automatically presume conventionally mounted moonscopes. 

I'm happy to say that the trigger is no joke.  No, it's not a Savage Accu-Trigger, much less a Mannlicher Scout or Blaser R93 trigger, but it's good enough that you'll not need to improve it.  Presuming the rifle runs reliably and durably, it seems like a reasonable platform, and I look forward to seeing the "scout" trim, both the glassed and glassless models.

Mossberg 464 levergun

Now having met this piece in person, it seems to be just exactly what I figured it might be, and I think I may need to add one to my stable some day.  It feels just a hair long with the fancy flash hider, but it balances like a '94 levergun, which is always a win.  I'm happy to say that the fore-end is slimmer than I was fearing, and the rail segments seem to be integral with the fore-end composite.  Presumably they can be either replaced with a separate fore-end, or simply cut off, if like me you prefer keeping things as compact as possible.  (I might keep the bottom one for a sling attachment point, although it does seem rather grandiose for that simple purpose....)

The tang safety works, and is a welcome addition to a levergun which is to serve "serious social purposes" as well as traditional hunting ones.  (I could tolerate Condition Zero in an urban levergun if necessary, but would prefer Condition One if I could get it.  The tang safety makes that possible.)  The sights are excellent, but again as on the bolt, why bother with an "open" rear sight when the 464's receiver has a beautifully placed rearward ring in just the right place for a compact ghost-ring aperture?  I simply do not understand why anyone would prefer open sights to an aperture:  the latter is superior in every way that matters.  (And then, of course, the top of the fore-end could get its own rail space for forward mounting of "scout" glass or dot sights.)

The buttstock is exactly what it should be, and the quick adjustments are very nice to have.  An excellent feature for working with noobs, especially the smaller-statured.  Action seems smooth enough, and presuming it runs--it's a '94, and should work well.

The trigger...is rough.  Nearly painful, actually.  Consider all the bad press you've heard about levergun triggers before;  that's because of triggers like this one.  Okay, so it needs work. Theoretically, with a '94 action, gunsmiths should know how to do that--and the effort would be worth it.  With a crisp trigger in the 3-4 pound range, this seems a seriously useful rifle.  As a 6+1 in .30/30, it really is a full-blown rifle, limited mostly by the range limitations of iron sights, not horsepower.  I still think it would also be worth offering as an intentional carbine, chambered in .45 Colt, .44 Magnum, or even .357 Magnum, with a 9- or 10-round capacity.  Again, within the limitations of iron sights, these revolver rounds have surprising reach, and more thump than I'd have guessed.  And if we ever sort out The Great And Pointless Rimfire Shortage, there is the idea of this levergun as a 14-round .22...

Browning 1911-22 pistol

Wanted to check this fit in the 6yo's hand today.  Glad I did.  She can get a good grip, with thumb on safety and no H-gripping, and the pad of her trigger finger is within a quarter-inch of right on.  Essentially, she's ready, ergonomically.  She's also strong enough to rack the slide, properly.  Squee!

Great.  Now I just need to get the whole "earn a living" problem sorted out, and find some .22 ammo, and add this lovely little piece to the stable.  

Ruger LCP pistol

6yo very sweetly requested to see an LCP accoutered in pink camo, and an LC9 in solid purple.  Very well then!  She learned a little about ergonomics when she tried to rack the wee slide on the LCP, against the DAO hammer, but this gun fit her hand nicely if she consciously took a high grip.

The LCP seems okay.  .380 doesn't thrill me, but with the right ammo and the right attitude, I'd sure use one over throwing rocks.  It doesn't seem that much smaller, to me, than the Diamondback DB9, which I still see here and there, and I'd take the DB9 in a heartbeat for the pocket gun role.

Ruger LC9 pistol

I was a little less impressed with the LC9.  In 6yo's hand, trigger reach was much too far, and sizewise, the piece seems right in there with the Kimber Solo, DB9, Kahr, G43, etc., designs, all of which have better ergonomics.  Well, now I know!  :-)

Kimber Solo pistol

Dang if I don't continue to like this little pistol, even though I've heard some unflattering things about it here and there--that I haven't fully vetted one way or the other.  Trigger, at least on this sample, was really excellent, with a somewhat long but positive reset, and despite the diminutive size, controls and ergonomics are very nice.  Sights are excellent.  The manual safety design in particular seems outstanding, and perfectly intuitive to 1911 aficionados.  It seems to be right on the cusp between true "pocket pistol" (such as DB9, DB380, LCP, etc.) and "subcompact" (such as Kahrs, G43, S&W Shield, etc.) and with a lightweight frame, would become my instant first choice in a 9mm pistol.  (It's not exactly heavy, even with a steel frame, but its weight does exclude it from the sub-one-pound class.  Suffice it to say that if I were to choose a 9mm based on weight and size alone, it would be the DB9, and if I were to choose the best shooting subcompact--suitably small but still requiring a holster for support--I'd probably go to the Solo.)

Kimber Micro 380 pistol

This was unexpected.  Got to see Kimber's mini-1911 in .380 ACP;  more than anything it seems to be exactly the sort of update to the Colt Mustang that I always hoped for before the Browning 1911-22 and 1911-380 came along.  It's small.  It's 1911ish, but with pivoting trigger, slightly different safety lever, and the full-on Kimber treatment.  Looks promising in many ways, but again, .380 does not thrill me, and there is now the 1911-380, which may be the superior choice for most uses.  

Will keep an eye out, and look again as .380 options become more immediate for up-and-coming kids.  :-)

S&W Shield pistol

The "what mood will Shield be in today?" effect continues.  I continue to like the general ergonomics, and the price point is actually pretty compelling too.  But today, this one's trigger had horrible backlash and a mushy, very un-positive reset.  Hm.

Still, I like the piece in general.  The safety still works every time, despite its diminutive appearance.  Grip comfort is conspicuous.  It has a reputation for running without fuss.

S&W M&P pistol

I wanted to renew my acquaintance with a standard M&P pistol frame, mostly because I am intending to go this route with airguns.  (A separate topic for another post;  suffice it to say that I needed a core design among the polymer-framed, striker-fired, doublestack guns to go with, and the S&W is getting the nod based on several factors, including ubiquity of models across the spectrum of pellet guns, BB guns, and Airsoft guns of multiple powerplants.)

After a few minutes in the hands, I think it's the right choice.  The M&P frame is pretty comfortable, for a double-stack, and otherwise ergonomics are plenty good enough.  Trigger on this one was surprisingly good;  perhaps a bit heavier than ideal, but with a very nice, positive reset, and without the noticeable backlash problem of the Shield.  

I'll be posting more about M&Ps as the airgunnery experiment unfolds.  Given that I don't like doublestack designs as a rule--on simple account that they feel like two-by-fours in the hand--M&P is definitely one of the friendlier ones.

Springfield Armory XD-S pistol

Picked up one of these again, just to compare it on the same day with Shield.  Glad I did, too:  it confirmed that I really like this pistol.  Ergonomics suggest a much bigger gun, but XD-S is slim and compact.  This one's trigger was crisp (for a striker gun), reasonably light, and with a notably positive, short reset.  I still think that the XD-S "4.0" is the logical heir to the Colt Lightweight Commander, for the working man's general purpose pistol.  Now having seen probably a dozen examples each of XD-S and Shield, I think I'd always opt for XD-S first, for my own purposes.

Colt Commander CO2 BB pistol

Saw this in blister pack on the way out of the gun section.  I hadn't come to look at airguns today, but it caught my eye, and I'm considering this piece as a possible training/education tool anyway.  It's a reasonably faithful 1911 reproduction, powered by a CO2 12-gram cartridge contained in the detachable magazine (which also houses the BBs), and is developing a decent reputation for accuracy ("accuracy" being something you have to adjust your thinking to, with smoothbore round-ball shooters like 'BB guns' and Airsoft guns).  The gun does "blowback" on firing, which is good in a trainer to disrupt your sight picture, and in general the manual of arms is nearly straight 1911 firearm.  It's really only missing a ducktail grip safety among the most common updates, and with the minimal blowback of a CO2 BB pistol, I suspect it won't be the problem it is with a .45 ACP anyway.

So there it was, and I took a second to look at it.  It is indeed "full metal", as weighty as a steel 1911, with good sights, functional safety, and in general looks well-built.  I look forward to trying one out, especially with some of the new low-ricochet plated BBs that have become available.  

Until next time, then.  Much cogitation to do.  :-)

Fun shop research.

Got a few minutes today to stop in at a local fun shop;  a few items seemed worth recording here.

Benjamin P-Rod airgun.

I had remembered that this place had carried a P-Rod before;  since this "pistol" uses the same bolt mechanism as the M-Rod rifle I've been considering for the Scout-Rod concept, I thought I'd put it to shoulder with that in mind. 

Yeah, that bolt throw is really short.  I was hoping it wouldn't feel that much so, but it does.  That's just not going to be an honorable trainer for a real turnbolt centerfire.  I suspect there's still a lot of value in the "Scout airgun" concept, but I may want/need to modify my thinking a bit on it.  Boltwork is important.  (Maybe when--if--my financial ship comes in and I can fully go at a new custom project, I'll try to convince someone like Tom Gaylord, or a Dennis Quackenbush, or some other innovator in the airgun space, to work with me on a concept piece.  I still think that some sort of slow-indexing cam is a worthwhile pursuit, to get a faithful bolt function.)

Conceivably the not-fully-optimized airgun could be thought of more as an adjunct piece to a carefully plan, that includes both live- and dry-fire of the centerfire Scout, live-fire airgun focused on singles, and/or live-fire rimfire.  After all, so much useful work can be done dry, with a manual repeater, and of course that would be the very bolt to practice on...  okay, set cogitate mode on.

I do still want me a P-Rod, though.  The carbine length is nice, and with the right sighting arrangement it should be a nice workhorse.  Downside:  the dang stock is too long, and doesn't lend itself well to shortening;  there is an AR stock adapter available but believe it or not the shortest LOP is still too long.  (I suspect there's a good answer available, but haven't found it yet.)

Benjamin Discovery airgun.

This air rifle is what I think I'd go to, if asked to put together a "classroom set" of noob training guns.  Since they had one, I thought I'd look at it in that context.

Yeah, okay, I really am on to something here:  the Disco is impressive.  It looks heavier and bigger than it really is, and should prove most useful for working with the small-statured.  Stock is workable wood, which means shortening LOP and adding Ching sling studs will be simple.  It shoulders naturally, and in this age of insistence on carbine-style vertical pistol grips it actually feels like an honest-to-goodness rifle.  Safety is indeed acceptably located--would be better at front of trigger guard rather than rear, but it will do.  Rear sight seems plenty good for an open sight, but of course I'll discard that and put a ghost-ring on instead, and probably replace the front with a solid square post.

The bolt seems solid enough. but the action is not "positive".  As a reliable teaching rifle, it is probably perfect.  I'd love to see positive clicks and snaps, but that is really just preference talking.

I like the Disco more and more the more I learn about it.  It may not have the repeating mechanism or the sound-suppression of the Marauder, but its safety is vastly superior to its upscale brother, and it is both lighter and shorter besides.  It's quite possible that the route I will take may not to go to the Marauder at all, but rather to have a custom Disco with sound suppression.  Will think further.

Kel-Tec KSG shotgun.

Ah, the storied and famed KSG.  And now I've met one in person. 

It is indeed luxuriously short.  (Muzzle blast must be impressive to the shooter.)  Short enough that I admit I have, somewhat surprisingly, a visceral hesitation to it.  Sure, it's probably irrational, but I can't deny that it's there.  Sight radius will necessarily be limited.  The forward sling stud would necessarily be right there at the muzzle.  And I believe the horror stories about shot hands after shearing off vertical foregrips during chambering.  (I'm not a vertical-foregrip kinda guy in the first place, but still.  This is a pump shotgun, after all;  one works the action briskly, and the idea that your hand winds up right out there at the end of the stroke is somewhat sobering.  One might reasonably observe that the pistol is even shorter, but the pistol's chambering stroke is away from the muzzle, not toward it.)

And yet there is much to like about the piece.  It is, if nothing else, ingenious.  Controls seem reasonably sized, positive, and easy to reach.  14 rounds of 12-gauge in a package this compact is impressive to my "size efficiency" aesthetic.  It doesn't feel nearly as heavy as it really is. 

So, jury's still out.  But I'm glad it's here.

Glock G43 9mm.

I happened to notice one of the new Glock G43 single-stack 9mm pistols in the rack, and of course had to see that.  No, I've never been a Glock guy, but really, that has been mostly because of two very specific personal reasons:  1) they just feel like two-by-fours in my hand, and 2) the trigger has always caused my trigger finger to nearly go completely to sleep over the course of 20 shots or so.  (I first noticed that on my ex-wife's G23 a lot of years ago, and every Glock I've shot since then does the same thing.  I really wanted to like that G23, but I kinda need to retain sensitivity in my trigger finger, ya know?)

Anyway, the G43 does indeed dispense with the "feels like a two-by-four" problem, and that makes me happy.  It's not the thinnest of the breed, and it won't displace my interest in Kahr, Shield, XD-S, and Solo, but it is certainly of the breed, and that will probably make it the Glock I'll go to when I want to get serious about Glock-fu.  The rest of the gun was...Glock.  Which means it seems well-built, simple, logical, and probably runs like a top.

Counter-jockeys.

Le sigh.  I think I've run into this particular counter-jockey before;  he'll make you work to avoid having to tell him how full of shit he is about...oh hell, a lot.  His ignorance about airguns is nearly weapons-quality, and he shows no sign of being really interested in learning otherwise.  His gunhandling was awful, as was his attention;  he didn't even seem to notice me repositioning myself nearly constantly whenever he was handling something.

He insisted I look at a PX4 Beretta for how "comfortable" and "safe" it was;  I said upfront I could guarantee I wouldn't like it, and that my safety was between my ears.  Fat in the hand, DA/SA fire control, decocking slide mounted safety, and size inefficient.  I'm sure it runs fine, and some might like it, but after hearing me working over the G43 and discussing what it was about that piece which interested me, one would think he could manage a little less tone-deafness than this.

Perhaps I should have made it a point to make a point, but honestly it's frustrating that one should have to do that, and given the reasonably clear signals he ignored in the first place, I'm not sure it would have made much difference anyway.

The fun shop...should be, damn it.  But sometimes, research can be painful.

A metaphysical lament. When those who say they get it, don't.

As I was writing this, I had already been thinking about making it into a post of its own, because the topic seemed to be worth it. The following was inspired by one of Mama's insightful comments, and once Blogger told me it was too long to be a comment, it was reasonably easy to say, "okay, Blogger, fine...I'll make it into its own post."

As a "contextual continuity clue": the following relates to several posts I've got here at Rifleman Savant, in which something relating to a Jeff Cooper topic--scout rifles, Ching slings, gunhandling technique, etc.--struck me as so far off the mark of what Cooper actually said or intended, that I felt the need to vent about it. Mama's comment got me thinking about that, and I responded as follows:

Maybe it's just a normal phenomenon that accompanies middle age, but I am really starting to grasp the wistful frustration that I so often read as a younger man (without really understanding) in Jeff Cooper's work. Or, maybe it is a natural outgrowth of a long-cultivated appreciation of deliberate design. (And really, I suspect strongly those two things are quite related.) But whatever the reason, it seems like the "...how often they do very badly at it" observation comes frequently in recent years.

I'm certainly not without my own history of jumping in to something before fully understanding it, but I like to think that I am learning that it always--always, without exception--fails to achieve full value, or at least full synergistic value. Probably these days I go too far the other way, where the biggest risk is in missing the window of time for which the whole idea has currency.

With something like this [a "scout rifle" missing critical features or implementing others badly], or like my recent lament about misunderstanding the technique of the speed sling, I wonder if the bigger problem is less the people whose well-intentioned exuberance carries them into a place they do not understand, and more the problem of chest-thumpery among those who purport to know, but don't. How do the consciously ignorant know that they are not following the unconsciously or willfully ignorant?

The position I'm in myself is a real challenge, in this regard. Anent the observations and teachings of Jeff Cooper, I tend to minimize how much I actually know, since 1) it's kinda my personality in general (I like being underestimated), and 2) I don't have a CV of "official" credentials that say I know what I know. But know it I do, both because I have long paid really close attention to matters of design and the history of design, and because I have tested nearly all of it myself and understand why it works from that perspective. And so when something misses the mark, it jumps out at me like nails on chalkboard, and I can both quote chapter and verse, and then defend it extemporaneously.

But who am I, really, to speak with authority on it in the first place? I only met Col. Cooper, in person, once. I have never "been in a gunfight" (and am quite happy about that, no joke). I'm no sort of master marksman, nor particularly fast. I've never got into formal competition, and I get quite a bit less trigger time than it would require to impress a good number of people. And so I try, at least, to minimize my own authority, because I can't really argue that I have it. Shooting, for good or ill, seems to carry an expectation that "experience" equals "analysis".

On the flip side, I am reminded of how much I really do know, and at what level of explication and depth, pretty much every time I engage with someone else, even those with years of shooting experience. I couldn't even tell you the number of people I've met who know simply astonishing minutiae about how to wrest a tenth of an inch of group size from their precision fitted boltgun, at exactly 100 yards, from a bench--who have no idea how to use their own body, much less a shooting sling, to shoot from an unsupported field position with any stability; or how to zero their rifle to optimize a "maximum point-blank range" for what they will be most likely to encounter in the field; or how to manage their ammunition supply without looking at it; or even how to run the bolt from the shoulder... It's a little better for pistolcraft, but not a lot. There's been a depressing resurgence in the concept of unsighted pistol fire, usually declaring loudly a complete non-understanding of the flash sight picture. The "high-speed, low-drag" tactards have convinced far too many that "two to the chest, one to the head" is nothing but a speed drill, rather than the observation-and-problem-solving technique that it is. The "cold range" mentality, as understandable as it can seem, continues to retard any general improvement in safe field gunhandling. And so on.

It's hard to say simply that people need to be more observant, although that seems like an obvious part of the solution. "Try it yourself, before you believe or disbelieve" would seem to be another obvious one, as would "go to the source, after you hear it second-hand". But a really substantial part of the problem is also those who stand up and loudly say "Lookit me, I know!", and then don't. When it comes to things that Cooper taught (both the gold and the stuff that really does need re-thinking), I usually know, immediately, when someone is wrong. But does that make me right? I struggle with that, but I also don't want to see such an immense reservoir of knowledge and history simply forgotten, or worse, revisioned by people who didn't really understand it in the first place.

Sorry. Metaphysical lament.

Well dang, if that ain't comfy.

And by "that", I mean this:

Never mind the nearly full-tactard amusement of the website's marketing (just because they seem to take themselves way too seriously doesn't mean they don't have some good stuff);  I have been meaning to try out this variation on the holster-shirt idea for a while, and boy, am I glad I did.  (I still have a couple of Greg Kramer's first-generation holster shirts, which are still technically holding together, but which are no longer...ideal.)

The one thing it ain't is fast, but it's not really meant to be, either.  This is not a rig for speed, but rather for the First Rule of Gunfighting*--and for that, it's pretty choice.  Thus far I am impressed.

The holster pockets themselves are cavernous--you could probably fit a 4" N-frame in there if you really wanted to--and the "built-in harness" does seem to distribute weight very effectively.  I suspect there is a practical upper limit on weight, but it's going to be much, much more forgiving than what I have used before.   (And I, for one, am not going to be toting heavy iron this way anyway.)

Interestingly, once the piece is in there, it sits more forward of the body's fore-aft midline than I was expecting--but it didn't seem to negatively affect either concealment or comfort.  (The Kramer design put the gun directly on the midline, below the armpit.)  And, somewhat to my surprise, the pocket completely closes over both a Centennial J and a Kahr CW40.  The hand can still snake in there, defeat the two little Velcro patches, and obtain a proper fistful of Oh No You Don't in pretty short order, but until then it is actually completely covered.  I rather like this idea, actually;  I see this both as a true deep-cover garment and something for athletic movement.  (It's intended to be reasonably tight-fitting, and should work well in that latter regard.)

I'm really pleased as well at how well the Kahr carried, compared to the J.  You don't really notice the slightly greater weight and butt length (unlike on the Kramer), and the pistol's flat profile is quite nice against the body.  With this rig, there will not be a need to carry the revolver because the pistol won't hide well enough, and I'll always choose the slick-handling Kahr over the snubby if given the choice. This is additionally encouraging for those moments when the full Bat-Belt either just doesn't make sense (e.g., kayaking, rock climbing, tumbling or sports, etc.), or for when it is simply inconvenient or non-ideal (e.g., shopping for pants, long drives, cycling, etc.).

Testing will continue, but at least for a decent dose of sweaty yard work, this thing is comfy, and promises to be pretty useful in general.  At some point, I also have it planned to try out the CCW Breakaways concept, which is another way of extending the shirt-tucked-in wardrobe, but I'm happy to say this one may be well worth the outlay.

Which is to say that once I'm no longer broke, I'll probably want another one.  :-)



_____________________
* Which is, of course, "Have a gun".

Notes from the Fun Shop at Wild West.

Spent the last couple days in Anchorage at a conference, and while up there got a chance to stop in at Wild West Guns.  I'm hopeful that this can become my "local" go-to shop for 'smithy work and specialty items;  today's visit was a productive one.

I admit I do still love the idea of the Co-Pilot takedown rifle, although I've little need for one, having built up my own Marlin long before I learned of Jim West's variation on the theme.  The takedown feature would be really nice, but the rest of the concept is still simply outstanding.  (I am not aware of any combination that combines true kerflättenböomer power with such a compact, ergonomic, and pleasant-to-shoot platform as the short-barrelled .45/70 Marlin with ghost-ring sights.)  Still, there's just something about handling one of the WWG guns...and so of course I had to do that.  :-)

But the real treat was getting to meet a Blaser R8 for the first time.  For years I'd read Jeff Cooper fawn over the R93, and when I first saw one I remember being suitably impressed myself.  That was a long time ago, and I've learned a great deal since then--and the R8 is an update on the R93.  Today I noticed the Blaser a bit by accident;  the counter-jockeyette was trying to help a left-handed customer with a left-handed rifle, and after fumbling a bit she wondered aloud if it was "one of those 'pull-straight-back'" bolts.  Having heard that, I took a look and noticed it was a Blaser, said "Ooh, yes it is" with confidence, and he was on his way.  Turns out there was a right-handed R8 in .375 H&H on the rack as well, and I got to see with my own hands.

Wow.

It's not just that it's beautifully crafted and commensurately expensive.  I have seen plenty of $3000+ rifles that did not impress me at all.  Yes, the Blaser is one of those "fine German craftsmanship" experiences in general, but what really compels about the R8 (and the R93 before it) is the design.  The straight-pull bolt is an absolute sensual joy to run at speed, and the trigger is simply otherworldly.  (The trigger design is very unusual in that there is no sear;  you have to feel it to believe it, right out of the box.)  On these two features alone, I'm not sure the R8 has an equal anywhere, and for a non-fighting rifle (I'm thinking general hunting here) it's arguably the pinnacle of the art.

It's not perfect, though.  Magazines are not only low in capacity (three for magnum case heads and four for standards), but they cannot effectively be extended or modified, either--or even replaced.  What the R8 does to improve on the R93 is that it makes the entire fire-control system quickly removeable--which is great in one way, but it highlights the fact that the trigger group and magazine are bound together.  I don't imagine that people are going to carry spare magazine/trigger groups for "a magazine change" in the way I understand that concept.  Sure, being able to pop out the trigger group/magazine will make it easier to load and unload the magazine, but it still seems like a step backwards from the detachable box magazine system that works so well in other designs.  (The R93, by contrast, has a fixed trigger group and a fixed, "blind" magazine--so the R8 truly is an improvement.)

Extraction and ejection are both my least-favorite possible designs--plunger ejection and a sliding plate, push-feed extractor.  It's not that I've heard of failures in Blasers, but 100+ years of history still suggests that controlled-feed, claw extractors and inertial ejection are simply more robust in heavy use.  Maybe I'm just looking for nits to pick;  recall that even the Steyr Scout uses a plunger ejector and push-feed.  (Still...if the Blaser straight-pull action could be wedded to a traditional detachable magazine box, and somehow use controlled-feed and inertial ejection...well, one could argue we'd have the perfect rifle action.  Yeah, I do think about these things.  :-)

Anyway, I was tickled nearly witless to run across it, and confirm again just how awesome the trigger and bolt-flick really are.  In his last years, Jeff Cooper loved to write that the three most significant pinnacles of rifle design of the 20th Century were the Steyr Scout, the Wild West Co-Pilot takedown, and the R93 Blaser.

I understand.  I get it.  And I can hardly disagree.


___________________________

Also, while on the way into town, the fam stopped in at the new Cabela's, and I got to meet an item I hadn't seen before there, as well.  However, in general, the store struck me as having a more impressive appearance than content choice;  at least in the gun section, it looked like there was a great deal more on the shelves than there actually was when I started looking closely.  As well, the phenomenon of having lots of stock of what are presumably the most popular models was noticeable, which contributed to the sense of not having nearly as much variety as I would have expected.  (By contrast, the Sportsman's Warehouses in ANC and in Soldotna seem to have conspicuously more choices to look at.  Interesting.)

Anyway, I can now say that I have met a Walther PPS firearm...and frankly, at least based on one  sample, I was not as impressed with it as I wanted to be.  (I was hoping, from the simple spring-piston Airsoft iteration that I actually quite like, that I might find the firearm to be friendly.)  The trigger was meh, the weight seemed distributed a bit awkwardly, the magazine release did not seem accessible, and the grip on the slide seemed more slippery than ergonomic.  I'll look at a few more iterations of course before cementing the opinion, but with others in this space like the Kahr, the Shield, the XD-S and the Kimber Solo, I don't think one has to compromise to this degree.  Bummer;  I was hoping to be more positive about another contender in this space.

More positive was having my 6yo with me, and taking another look at a Browning 1911-22 in her growing hand.  She's so close to there...and with the "Black Label" trim available--including with pink accents--I'm convinced this is the learning gun I want to go with. 

Now this is the way for a small hand to be introduced to the pistol.

With the 'smithy at Wild West explicitly confident that a trigger job is possible, it's now just a matter of affording the piece and that critical mod, a few magazines, and basic leather.  And, of course, acquiring .22LR, which is hardly a trivial matter. 

Still, these are just problems to be solved.

Another 'target of opportunity' fun shop visit.

We were up the road in Soldotna today for a prenatal visit (Wilmethlet V3.0 is due in May) and I had occasion to take the 6yo up to the newly-relocated gun counter, at which we ran into the one counter-fella on the Peninsula that I've actually grown to like (the guy who introduced me to the Walther PPQ).

I was happy to confirm that my daughter is ergonomically fully ready for the Chipmunk-sized rifle.  She let me know that she'd like the pink one, which, if that design is the way we go (this was the Savage edition, with the no-joke Accu-Trigger), I'll probably be happy to indulge. 

Also met my first Rossi Trifecta, a simple break-top that comes with three interchangeable barrels:  .22LR, 20 gauge, and .243 Winchester.  Cost is just three bills, which seems like a great value.  This stock was still a little long for the munchkin, but it won't be for too much longer.  I find myself intrigued by this design, and I liked what I saw today.  The safety is a little weird, but more in the realm of unusual than truly non-ergonomic or counterproductive--and it is positive.  Had I the funds to spend on a real project, it would be interesting to see where one could take this design, in terms of optimizing sights, ammo cuffs and shooting sling.

In handguns, they didn't have a Browning 1911-22 to look at (I'm almost certain at this point that I'll go to one of the "Black Label" editions when the time comes), but they did have a SIG P938, and that one is only slightly too large for the kid's hand--she could just barely get her fingertip onto the trigger face, with the gun properly aligned with her forearm.  (Interestingly, her thumb was nearly perfect on the safety.)  Then we tried looking at a Ruger LCR in her hand, and I was a bit surprised to see how much too big that one is.  Perhaps a lot of it is the rubber grip, sized for adult hands rather than for minimum bulk (I'll re-check her at home on my Boot-Grip J frame just to see), but at any rate she could barely fingertip the trigger on the LCR as well.  Okay, data point!

I also happened to note a few Ruger Gunsite Scout magazines behind the glass, offered for seventy bucks a pop!  Jeez Louise, I admit I was not expecting that degree of owch.


Which reminds me:  I am still hopeful to get back my completed 03 Springfield.  Not too long ago now, I confirmed with the smith that built it, that they still have not made the video about it that they want to, and that he would be happy to agitate to get it on the front burner now that everyone is mostly caught up from SHOT.  Ah, patience.  So I happened to check on Gunsmoke's YouTube channel last night, and noticed that they do have a new video out...which is a segment of Rich talking with Janelle Cooper and Lindy Cooper Wisdom at SHOT. 

...And I've got no problem being in line behind that.  No problem at all.  (Jeff Cooper referred to Janelle as "The Countess", and she is indeed an impressive personality.  Not for nothing does my second daughter have Janelle for a middle name.  :-) 

A pleasant fun shop surprise.

Had an unexpectedly pleasant chat with a counter-fella at one of my "local" fun shops, and got a chance to do a little more side-by-side comparison of a few defensive pistols.  Some interesting data points, plus a real surprise I wasn't expecting from a piece I hadn't met before now.

I've written here before about being impressed by the Springfield XD-S 4.0 as the logical heir to the Colt Commander.  I still stand by that idea on the whole, but I have to admit that a S&W Shield in .40 seems to stand right there with the XD-S 3.3 in .45, as an EDC pistol.  It's comfy in the hand, and dang if that thumb safety doesn't continue to work every time I try it out, despite always looking and feeling "too small".

I also got to compare the single-stack XD-S against double-stack XD-Ms in both .40 and .45, and essentially confirmed what I'd concluded last time I handled those guns:  as double-stacks go they are among the most comfortable I've met--but I still don't much care for double-stack guns.

Trigger comparisons were very interesting, especially now having met a sufficient handful of examples of each model.  Both among XD pistols and Shields, it seems that the quality of both trigger pull and reset can be highly variable in individual samples, and when the time finally comes for me to acquire one for myself, I will probably just shop triggers.  (That may yet be a while, of course, both with my being freshly unemployed and having used up a great deal of gun karma on the Gunsmoke projects.  And to be honest, my humble little Kahr CW40 already serves this functional need;  has done so admirably for nearly a decade now.)  At their best, all can be very good;  at their worst they are still better than revolver triggers, and most seem to be distinctly in between.

All this is mostly confirmation of previous meetings, of course.  It's good to see the consistencies stack up, and I now think I can discuss these pieces with a bit more confidence when noobs ask me questions.  Fortunately, there is much of interest to discuss between the XD-S and Shield options.

Then, I had occasion to pick up a Walther PPQ, which I had not met before. 

It's not in the same category as the XD-S / Shield / Kahr;  Walther's entry in that space is the PPS, which I've not met in firearm form yet.  (I do have a spring-piston Airsoft replica PPS, and frankly I've been pretty impressed with it thus far--I hope to meet the firearm soon.)  The PPQ is a full-sized pistol in 9mm and .40, and most dimensions and stats seem pretty standard and even humdrum.

In the hand, though, that grip is uniquely comfortable.  It is far and away the most comfortable double-stack grip I have ever picked up.  I'll be interested to see if I have the same experience next time;  I was not expecting it to be that nice.  Most of the rest of it seemed to be as I'd expect from a brand like Walther, and I suspect it will run as well as anything else in its class.  On the downside, I'm not a fan of the overtly trapezoidal slide (a slab-sided slide is easier to manipulate) and I positively dislike large slide stops. 

Then I tried the trigger. 

Really?  Whoa, that was nice!  Will it do that again?  Then I tried the reset, and nearly fell over.  The fella behind the counter started giggling knowingly, having seen my expression after running the test. "I see you noticed," he said.  "Hell yeah I noticed.  Jeez, is that for real?"  I asked, racking the slide over and over again to prove to myself I hadn't hallucinated it.  At least on this example, yeah, it's for real.

This is a striker-fired pistol, but I swear that trigger felt nearly like a 1911 in its release and reset.  Not a match 1911 maybe, but certainly a good street gun.  Like no other striker-fired gun I've seen, tuned or otherwise.  Sure, I realize maybe it's just this one example, but it sure got my attention, and you can be certain that I'll check out every PPQ I can find for a while, to see if it's inherent to the design.  If it is, then at the price I saw this gun at, that is one hell of a value in a full-sized pistol.

I'd kinda written Walther off years ago, on account of not liking their fire-control systems, but between the promise of the PPS and this first introduction to the PPQ, I think I may have to rethink that.

Excellent!

Dude, more squee.

Wasn't expecting this so soon, but today a gift from my folks arrived, a Caldwell "Ballistic Precision" chronograph. 

Well then, excellent!  With a little luck I'll both get zeroed and be able to do a preliminary test on both chrono and TalonP, this weekend.

UPDATE:  Grr.   I couldn't get anything at all to record today;  the unit kept failing consistently on the stop screen.  I may have to do an exchange.

UPDATE 2 (12/1):  Well, credit Battenfeld Technologies for a positive customer service experience.  It seems that I may have acquired an earlier edition of this model, wherein this problem is not unknown.  A later-edition replacement has been promised as soon as they can get it out the door.  Stay tuned!

Not quite what I intended...

(MamaLiberty, this one is kinda for you, given the "so what are you wearing right now?" conversation from comments a few days ago.)

I can now confirm personally that the Kahr CW40 suffers nearly nothing from a ten-minute total immersion in 40-degree seawater;  one small bloom of orange surface rust just inside the muzzle came off easily 12h later with a cleaning, and shows no signs of return yet.  Nor does a Safepacker "un-holster" suffer from the same fate;  it launders normally and should now be salt-free once again.

The gun's owner, by contrast, was much grumpier about the whole episode, mostly because he lost his new eyeglasses, and because he held up the kayaking group, with an unexpected roll in choppy water.  (Apparently he felt the need to prove his noob cred in grand style.)

Of related interest:  the kayak guide was understandably worried about the possibility of hypothermia, but fortunately the Wiggy jacket performed exactly as advertised, and to my considerable satisfaction the cold simply was not an issue.  I suspect he figured out that I was exhibiting absolutely no signs, and was far more irritated than scared or compromised.  I wrung myself out and was back in the water in what was probably less than half an hour.  (I suspect he would have been far more freaked about the contents of the Safepacker, had he been even remotely aware of them.  :-)

Helluva first-kayak-trip, really.  Other than the loss of the glasses and the irritation of being caught off balance by an admittedly rough-conditions day, I'd say it was all win:  lessons thoroughly learned and home in one piece!

Notes from the fun shop.

Just documenting a couple of things for future reference.  (There will probably be more on most of this at some point.)  Some erranding with the girls today in Soldotna yielded some useful intel.

To wit:

• Holy freakin' cow.  It's here.  (Browning's 1911-22 in modern trim.)
• I actually found five boxes of 16 gauge buckshot on the shelf today.  Which means that I bought five boxes of 16 gauge buckshot today.
• .22 availability is still stupid.  Stoopid.  (Are regular people even buying .22s any more, with no way to feed them?)
• Availability of other ammo and components actually seems to be improving.  It's ridiculously expensive, sure, but it's there.
• Got a chance to meet an XD-S 4", in person.  This one had a distinctly sweeter trigger than the one I met the other day (another data point), and more importantly I got to look at the extension magazine.  In short:  I was impressed.  I'll keep looking every time I see one, but the "new Commander" appellation seems to be very appropriate for the Springfield.

More later, of course.  Deadlining in other areas, and playing Mr. Mom for a week, I do have to put off the fun of writing this all up properly.  (Maybe it'll be after neighbor C. and I get some range time together.  Another find today was a stash of Buffalo Bore ammo for his 460 Rowland 1911...I can be an enabler sometimes...  :-)

There will be more on this.

A jaw-hit-floor moment today while erranding in Soldotna with the girls.  I was not expecting to meet one of these:

Click to embiggen The Awesome.

To be more accurate, I didn't even know these existed yet.  Apparently they do.  (Look closely, sports fans.  That's a Browning 1911-22, in modern trim.  And they even offer it in "Commander" length, too.)

No, of course it's not perfect.  The worst news is that the lawyerphobes put a friggin' magazine disconnect in it.  The trigger on this sample was...rough.  And of course, what's the point of  even buying a .22 these days, when ammo is nearly as expensive as reloaded 9mm--or would be, if normal humans could find any.

Still...triggers can be improved...stupid gizmos can be ignored...and at least in theory the ridiculous hoarder-caused drought will end someday...  And I held this in my hands, today;  it's here, now.

Not only that, but I had my five-year-old with me, and in placing her hand on it properly, I suspect it will actually start to fit her hand within a year's time.  Wow!

There will be more on this, but it'll take me a bit to get around to writing it.  This is just the initial squee working itself out.

Squee!

Did a direct compare of Shield and XDS...

...and results were a bit surprising.

At least for the two examples I happened to pick up, both trigger pull quality and reset quality favored the Shield.  I had remembered both a crisper trigger and shorter reset when I first met an XDS, but not so on this one.  (I may now make it a point to try out every one I see, just to have a sense of how variable each one can be.)

The Shield's trigger is indeed the partial-cocking striker-fire variety, and I was impressed.  At least on this example, it was superb--it reminded me very much of the impression I'd got the first time I saw an XDS.  :-)

Other variables went back and forth.  The trigger guard on the XDS is better for gloves than the Shield's...  The Shield actually felt slightly slimmer in the grip than the XDS, but recall that the Shield's magazines have a slight stagger that make them noticeably thicker than the XDS' true single-column tubes...  There's the whole 6+1 .40 versus 5+1 .45 comparison...  The Shield has the potential for a manual safety, but without a 1911-esque thumb extension, I might actually prefer the sans-lever model...  The XDS is very slightly smaller in height when both guns use their short magazines, but it's very much taller when the long magazines are used...

Really, it's kind of a wash, with all things considered.

And if I'm honest, I can also compare both the Springfield and the Smith to my Kahr CW40, which is 6+1 .40, 0.94" wide, 4.6" tall and 6.3" long (read:  effectively the same), and realize that its only real disadvantage is the revolver-length reset, which frankly only matters to me because of the (potential) glove problem.  The Kahr's trigger pull quality is better than either of the other pistols, it's lighter, and its grip frame is one length, rather than "extensible" by a longer magazine that also tries to replace grip space.  The grip is also large enough to get the whole hand on comfortably.

All duly noted.  I suspect that one would be well-served by any of these three choices.

I admit I'm still intrigued by the idea of the XDS 4 playing the role of LW Commander, with the ability to suddenly become a subcompact in grip profile, as a newbie's first and most-flexible piece.  .45ACP is pretty forgiving for a general purpose cartridge--moreso than .40--and in the end that might what sways a recommendation.

Looking forward to my first range experience with either of these newer designs.  :-)

Okay, I admit, I find this significant.

Recently, quite by accident, I ran across my first reference to the new Springfield XD-S 4-inch .45.

My first thought wasn't all that kind.  "Wait, they took an outstanding tiny .45 and made it bigger?  WTF?

But then my brain said "Hang on a moment, and take a fresh look at what we have here."  A 7+1 .45ACP, 5.4" high, 7" long with 4" barrel, 24.5 ounces, and only 0.9" wide.  Excellent ergonomics.  Quality short-reset trigger.  Good sights.  Multiple passive safety systems designed around the opening (safe) and closing (bang) of the human hand.

That's essentially a Colt Commander, in dimensions and concept.  (!!!)

And the promise goes farther.  The trigger guard is conspicuously more glove-friendly than the 1911's is.  The overall length is at least half an inch shorter than the Commander's, for those who rely on the length of the cover garment for concealment, but barrel length is still a service-length 4".  It's several ounces lighter than even the aluminum-framed 1911s.  It's flatter even than my deliberately "slim-lined" 1911 frames.  There are interchangeable backstraps to adjust for different hand sizes.  With a two-sided magazine release and no manual thumb safety, the gun itself is ambi-friendly right out of the box.  The feed system was designed from the beginning for high-performance hollowpoints.  Takedown is simpler.  And simply by changing magazines, the gun changes from 7+1 and 5.4" high, to 5+1 and 4.4" high, which makes a huge difference for concealed carry.

And it's cheaper than a good Commander.  Even before considering the idea of two-guns-in-one for the price of a magazine change.

Well now.  That does seem significant.

Cons?  Well, I admit I'm still a little leery of the idea of using the magazine as a grip length extender.  I would think that this must somehow affect the practice of magazine changes, but I have not run such a gun to see how it holds up in actual use, and who knows, maybe it's not a problem at all.  As well, as nice as the XD-S trigger is...it's just not the same as a good 1911, because nothing else is.

But really, that's about it. 

The more I think about it, the more it seems to me that this might be the way to go for someone starting out.  A single gun that could serve both as a full-sized service sidearm and a very viable concealment piece (with one full-sized reload, one would have 13 rounds available).  Provided it runs (and I'll assume that with Springfield's reputation, it will), it's like a modernized Colt Lightweight Commander, but with some useful extras, and less expensive to boot.  The trigger is good enough to do nearly anything you'd want to do with such a weapon, and up here at least the glove-friendly trigger guard is not a trivial consideration.

And for someone who can afford a second piece as well, having both an XD-S 4" and the shorter XD-S 3.3" (for those times when another 3/4" shorter would make a difference), sharing the same magazines and leather, would represent quite an efficient overall system to cover all the bases.

Now I need to try one, to find out.  If the concept is viable, I'd want to recommend with confidence, and that would seem to be an important recommendation for noobs, who do tend to ask.

__________________
While I'm daydreaming, I do wonder how viable the XD-S system might be to a .460 Rowland conversion, which would add mid-level .44 Magnum power to the same platform.  :-)

Perhaps I'll just start calling her "Blue" now.

One of the completed projects I was able to pick up at Gunsmoke Guns in Denver, on our recent trip Outside, was my Browning P35 (the "Hi-Power" as some insist).  Among the work to be done, I requested she be blued.  So imagine my amusement when she came back...blue.

Hi there!

Hee.  Well, I'm sure it's a fine, modern finish, and I don't anticipate getting any further work done, so we'll leave it.  Hell, it'll be something to talk about, especially since this piece is perfect for a "barbecue gun". 

It's good to have her back;  The P35 was the very first gun I ever lusted after, and the very first gun I bought.  If I'm going to carry a full-sized 9x19mm, this is the one.  And when I work with noobs, this is the one gun that everyone loves.  As you might imagine, the work done (trigger/hammer, upgraded sights, extended safety, and ducktail tang) turns a great base gun into a pure joy to shoot.

Click to embiggenate.

So, cool!  Now I'm looking forward to getting some range time with my neighbor;  we've got several things we'd like to wring out, and I can now add my P35 to the mix.  With age I seem to grow more and more fond of bestowing names on things, and I think I may just start calling her "Blue".

Met a S&W Shield for the first time today...

...and impressions were a bit mixed.  To be fair, I did not get to try the trigger, and I can't call any opinion fully considered until I've had a chance to do that.  (The counter-jockey actually responded to my customary request to try the trigger with "I'd rather you didn't", which actually took me a bit by surprise.  I'm pretty rough on most gun-counter types, and with reason, but to their credit, most of them at least recognize that dry-fire does at least no harm to a centerfire, and also that someone who explicitly asks permission is probably not going to then freak you out with something unexpected.  Buncha savages in this town.)

The gun is dimensionally impressive, right in there with the Kahrs for slimness, and the grip frame is quite comfortable.  I don't particularly like the currently trendy magazine-extension-serves-as-the-bottom-of-the-grip-frame approach (just give me a short grip frame and call it done), but this one seems somewhat less offensive than other designs.  Oddly enough, despite the slim grip, the magazine seems to have a slight flare below the feed lips--certainly not a double-column, but there is at least some staggering in there.  Ergonomics of the slide, magazine release, and slide stop seemed perfectly acceptable.  Springs were reasonable.  Sights were good.  Knowing Smith & Wesson, I'm sure it shoots well and is durable enough.

The safety lever was annoying, because it is present but not foolproof.  Now keep in mind, I like the idea of a manual safety, both for weapon retention and as a safety for me.  (Even on a striker-fired pistol that doesn't "need" one.)  I must admit, as I tested it there on the floor, it never failed to come off for me.  But it is really tiny, and doesn't like to swipe on easily.  For a 1911 guy, accustomed to positive snap! sounds and readily-available extended levers that fall very positively under the thumb, the Smith's safety just doesn't instill confidence.  (The Kimber Solo, by contrast, has an excellent safety design.)  Were I to invest in the platform, I would absolutely find a way to extend the lever just enough for positive engagement both ways.  (And with that, we might really have something here.)

And of course I'll have to find another example on which I can examine the trigger, for pull quality, reset length and quality, etc.  I'll admit I'm a bit leery of the hinged (Sigma style) trigger, but people seem to agree it doesn't seem to pose a breakage problem in actual use.  As far as pull quality goes, I expect it will probably be pretty good--hell, most of the examples of this breed seem to have triggers better than the "revolver smooth" that I grew up with.

Will have to see.  With an improved safety and confirmation of a good trigger, the piece might well get serious consideration as a competitor to the Kahr or the XD-S.

Five weeks Outside...

...can actually have a rejuvenating effect, even while being both physically and metaphysically exhausting. 

We got back home today, with selves and stuff intact.  (Not a given in the age of Teh Stoopid, so I'm calling it a win.)  We started with a week in Montana visiting my folks, then two in Minnesota visiting the outlaws and getting a sister-in-law married off, and finished with two in Colorado visiting friends and running various errands of impressively variable magnitude.

I don't miss commercial air travel;  not one bit.  An entire industry hijacked by people so scared of their own shadows that the very concept of usefulness is seen as a threat to the universe only they have convinced themselves that we all live in.  Jeez, those people are aggravating, and of course far more dangerous than anything they claim to be protecting us from.  (By complete contrast, air travel within Alaska is very nearly civilized, but that is a topic for another time.)

But of course most of that nonsense can be willfully ignored when necessary, and the trip was mostly high points.  Excellent visits with friends and family, a few important administrative matters, musicking with D. (truly the single thing I miss most about life in Colorado), and even some useful gunnie things.

On this trip I picked up the deer rifle that my wife's grandfather told me he wanted me to have before he passed away a couple of years ago.  Based on just a couple of never-detailed conversations with him, I'd figured this would turn out to be a Winchester 94, but to my complete surprise, instead it is a Remington 760 in .300 Savage!  Now it has truly been a long time since I've seen a slide-action rifle, and entirely aside from the honor of his specifying me as its caretaker, I get more tickled by the day that this is now in my stable.  Once I get some range time I'll be sure to post further here.

I was also able to pick up a couple of completed projects from Gunsmoke in Denver.  (Unfortunately, the '03 Springfield Scout is not yet done, nor is the slimline 4" LW 1911, but in talking directly to Rich Wyatt this time, we'll see if we can't get those "expedited" and complete by the time I need to speak at a conference in July.  Fingers crossed!)  One of these is my own grandfather's old shotgun, which I had done up as a defensive/general purpose piece.  It's an old Ithaca M37 in--get this--16 gauge.  The work, as I've come to expect from Gunsmoke, is beautiful, and ammo availability aside (not a trivial consideration), I'll be happy to use this as my primary "serious" scattergun.

The other completed project was the Browning Hi-Power, functionally dolled up with a ducktail tang, improved sights and safety, and a most amusingly blue (not blued...blue) finish, which will make for good photos when range day comes.  I don't lean on 9mm much any more, but if you do this is a great piece to have.  Invariably, people that I work with love this gun when they see it in action.

Anyway, more details to come...when they come.  In the meantime, I'm back and actually quite full of ideas.  We'll see how that manifests itself here. Posting had been really light for a while anyway, what with trying to lay low and take a break from all the stoopid for a time, and I'm going to try and continue that practice as much as possible. 

Good to be home.