Dick Williams

Subtle Improvement

Posted on May 23, 2010 by Dick Williams| Leave a comment

Published in ”Shooting Illustrated” August 2009

Bill Wilson is no stranger to the shooting world. His CQB pistol graced the cover of Shooting Illustrated’s November 2005 issue and was the subject of a full length feature entitled “The Perfect IDPA Pistol.”

Given IDPA’s emphasis on designing match scenarios that might duplicate potential real life street encounters, it was not surprising that much of my evaluation focused on CCW requirements in addition to match rules. Upon completion of the article, I purchased the CQB from Wilson, and it became the number one gun on my CCW permit. Until now, I did not expect to find an all-steel 1911 that I would prefer for street carry.

Wilson Combat recently created the Bill Wilson Carry Gun, and as you might expect when one is introducing the next generation of a great handgun, the new carry pistol is not vastly different from the successful CQB. That said the minor changes are truly worthwhile and quickly appreciated. Overall dimensions remain the same; a slide shortened from a standard 1911 to accommodate a 4.1 inch barrel, and a frame reduced in height to 5.25 inches overall (with the 7 shot magazine installed.) Like the CQB, the new model handles both the 7-round magazine (recommended for concealed carry) and slightly extended 8-round magazines that are easily concealed in spare carriers without revealing any unusual lumps or bulges. Internal configuration, cuts and polishing is essentially the same on both guns which accounts for the superb accuracy and reliability of a Wilson 1911.

The first 15 rounds through the Wilson were a mix of bullet styles and weights. Functioning was perfect and, at the group at 15 yards offhand, indicate that whatever ammo is fed to the new gun, it will reliably handle any threats to its owners life and well being.

Most noticeable and having the greatest impact on my shooting the new gun is the modified Ed Brown bobtail on the shorter grip frame. Normally this rounding of the base is only done on full-size 1911. On the smaller frame, the curvature is not as severe, but the change is dramatic in terms of comfort during firing, and the more magazines fired in a range session, the more you’ll appreciate the increased comfort. Because of the bobtail treatment, the base had to be modified slightly making the gun feel a bit smaller, but shot-to-shot recovery didn’t seem to be compromised. The rounded edge of the back strap is fully checkered just as it is on the CQB, but there is no longer a distinct edge to create abrasions on your palm. A couple of years ago when I first acquired the CQB, I spent some time at Thunder Ranch and ended up applying bandages on the second day and changing guns on the third day. In a recent trip to Gunsite with the Carry Gun I was able to comfortably complete the week long class without having to apply any patches to my palm. For me, the bobtail is much more important on a downsized 1911 because the sharp edge of the backstrap doesn’t extend below the palm swell, but rather is driven into the meaty part of the hand by the recoil of each round. Given that steel is harder than flesh, can you say “Ouch!”

The other “comfort” revision is the G10 grips. These feature radial lines instead of checkering with the edges of each line slightly rounded. Tactile control is still excellent, but long term abrasion in an extended class is reduced. Call me a sissy if you like, but I like those grips. The single thumb safety lever, set up for right handed shooters, is smaller on the new carry gun. I think it’s a good idea if you can reduce the size of a component on a CCW weapon without compromising performance, and over the 5 day-class, I did not notice any difficulties in operation when presenting the gun from concealed carry. The slide stop pin has also been shortened with the frame countersunk on the right side. This change does two things. One, it will allow the use of Crimson Trace grips with no interference from a protruding pin. Second, you may need to modify your disassembly technique slightly when you clean the gun. There are also serrations on top of the new gun’s slide for the purpose of reducing glare. Firing both the old CQB and the new pistol in the bright Arizona sunlight I did not notice any difference in glare from either gun, but most of our outdoor shooting was during morning hours with the sun behind us. Still, I would rate this as a worth while addition on a carry gun.

The new gun has several relief cuts that strike me as being well thought out and useful. The front half inch or so of the slide has been reduced in width. It may not save much weight, but depending on how you execute a press check, you might find the new configuration helpful in grasping the slide with the support hand. There’s also a relief cut in the front strap just behind the trigger guard. Perhaps it let’s you get your hand in higher and tighter into the grip, but it’s so small that I really couldn’t notice a functional difference between the two guns either when holding or firing. The final relief cut is in the left grip panel behind the mag release button, and this did have some tangible benefits. I’ve never been able to drop a magazine on a 1911 without shifting my shooting hand grip simply because I don’t have particularly long fingers/thumbs. With Wilson’s new carry gun, I still have to rotate a bit, but it’s noticeably less movement than is required on the CQB, much more comfortable to execute, and much quicker to recover. This is the kind of change whose value will depend on your individual dimensions and operating technique for an evaluation, but even with only a partial improvement, I like the change.

The last change noticed was the “U” shaped notch in the fixed rear sight. I believe the purpose of this is to make sight acquisition a bit faster in a life-threatening situation. Perhaps it did, but I couldn’t tell. In fact, the entire time on the line I didn’t notice the difference. Sight pictures on both guns are extremely similar simply because you don’t see the bottom of the notch where it’s rounded. Neither could I detect any difference in the amount of light visible on both sides of the front blade, even when shooting slowly. The only thing that struck me as slightly different was that the first 15 shots fired offhand with three different Black Hills loadings at 15 yards seemed to have more of a lateral spread than usual. I know Wilson pistols shoot one-hole groups in the hands of testers at the factory shooting from a rest, and while I didn’t expect exactly the same results, I felt the vertical spread (about 1 ½ inches) was more representative than the horizontal spread of something like 2 ½ inches. As stated, when I got into the class, both worked superbly. For the record, I was wearing corrective lenses and I’m quite new to “U” notch rear sights.

I can’t fault the Wilson’s reliability. By being abusive, I was able to cause malfunctions, but it was only by breaking all the rules. After firing 2 to 3 boxes of ammo (without first cleaning the gun,) I put the gun away dirty and un-oiled for two weeks before going to Gunsite. Again without cleaning or lubricating, I shot the gun for two days of class. When the gun failed to go into battery, some oil cured the problem until late in the third day when the same failures reoccurred. Additional lubrication continued to cure the problem but for shorter periods of time. As the instructions state, clean the gun and it will (and did) work flawlessly. The only “failure” not attributed to my atrocious behavior was on the third day when the “Wilson” escutcheon in the left grip panel fell off. A call to John May in Arkansas revealed that this was one of those occasions where the least expensive adhesive worked the best and the expensive glue failed. Problem fixed forever.

I’ve succumbed to the Siren calls again. No, I’m not buying a new carry gun because my existing CQB is tied to my CCW permit by serial number, and changing things like this is California would be a nightmare. But I am having my CQB remodeled to the new Wilson Carry Gun. It’s that good.

→ Leave a comment

Posted in Wilson Combat, concealed carry

Tagged handgun, 1911, concealed carry, Wilson Combat, Ed Brown bobtail, G10 grips

Ruger’s New Light, Compact Revolver

Posted on March 16, 2010 by Dick Williams| Leave a comment

Published in “Shooting Illustrated“ September 2009

Photos by Lloyd Hill

When polymer was introduced in guns, it was a revolutionary change. Now Ruger’s found it a home on wheelguns — in the all new LCR.

In this fast paced age of self-loading pistols and high capacity magazines, it seems I’m not the only one who believes there is a place for the compact, light-weight revolver. Rather than reviewing all the rationale for this deep-seated opinion that I have presented over the years, I’ll simply state one overwhelmingly simple argument: Ruger just went into production on exactly this type of handgun.

The company calls it the LCR, and the small revolver is an interesting blend of features and materials from the world of handguns that I don’t recall seeing on a snub-nosed “pocket pistol” before. First, the grip frame, which Ruger literature refers to as the fire control system housing, is made of a modern polymer. More accurately it’s a long-fiber, glass-filled polymer that the press release says helps reduce recoil. I suspect the slightly oversized rubber Hogue grips contribute equally to the reduction in felt recoil, but the end result that all of the +P ammo tested was quite comfortable to shoot over the course of several cylinders. But I’m getting ahead of myself.

The frame is made of 7000 series aluminum forging, as are parts of aircraft, and has a black, hard coating developed by Ruger. The aluminum provides rigid support for the barrel and cylinder and lighter overall weight for comfort in concealed carry, while the special coating contributes protection from the elements and handling abuse. The cylinder is made of 400 series stainless steel to contain the pressures of 38 Special +P loads, features a target grey finish, and has an unusual configuration. The rear third of the cylinder that houses the locking latch cuts is full diameter while the front two thirds has long, sweeping flutes like the Colt Model 1862 Police black powder pistol. Despite being separated by a century and a half in time, both guns are 5 shot revolvers. Perhaps irrelevant, but really cool!

The author found the trigger pull extremely smooth, thanks to Ruger's "friction-reducing cam fire control system."

Want some more high tech, super modern material in your snubbie? The LCR has some titanium components in the cylinder’s front latching system and what Ruger refers to as an “optimized spring tension” design and an “enhanced lockup geometry.” All three of these should contribute to an extended life digesting +P ammo with minimal wear of gun parts. The trigger pull on the little revolver is as smooth and consistent as I’ve seen on an unmodified factory snub nose. Ruger credits this to a “friction-reducing cam fire control system that results in a non-sticking, smooth trigger pull” on the DAO trigger. I would simply say the trigger is superb!

I mentioned the Hogue rubber grips that seemed larger than on other short barrel revolvers I’ve tried. Although only long enough to allow gripping by the two middle fingers on the shooting hand, they seem slightly wider and softer than normal thus helping reduce felt recoil generated in the 13.5 ounce revolver. In fact, the grips may be a bit too large for someone with very small hands. No problem. The grip frame of the new Ruger is a narrow “stump” that allows grips of any shape since there is no fixed front or back strap. The rubber (or other material) grips may be any shape you prefer because they are attached to the frame by one screw located in the bottom of the frame’s stump. Another clever design feature, particularly in a small gun like the LCR.

The Ruger’s sights are almost typical for a snub nose revolver in that they consist of a fixed front ramp and square notch rear. The “almost” is because the ramp front

The front sight is serrated at its back to reduce glare and can be replaced with aftermarket versions. The U-notch rear sight is cut into the aluminum frame, but to minimize the chances of deformation it's protected by a polymer shell.

sight is replaceable held in place by a pin. Want to try something else, go for it. There’s no need to try welding something on the aluminum frame surrounding the steel barrel. Also, the rear notch width is cut into the aluminum frame, not the polymer grip frame. The aluminum edges of the rear notch are protected by the polymer frame, so they won’t be subject to deformation by any bumps or drops. Both front and rear blade and notch are wide giving ample visibility and a good sight picture in bright light. In daylight, against a lightly colored target, sight picture was easily acquired and crystal clear. Under dwindling light, or against a dark target, you might consider other options. The large X-S dot sight system is highly visible and quite popular on guns meant for self-defense. Additionally, I believe Ruger is offering guns with the Crimson Trace laser grips, or you can simply contact Laser Grips to order a set of these grips after acquiring your LCR. Suggested retail for standard LCR is $525, whereas the laser grips take the gun’s price to $792.

I made two trips to Gunsite while working with the new Ruger. The LCR I used was the standard model with factory sights. I actually ran the little gun through part of the Close Quarters Pistol class, a new event that deals with the real world possibilities of people who want to do you harm and are willing to do anything to insure you’re unable to shoot them. (More on this class in a later issue.) Besides me, a number of shooters had a chance to try the little revolver using various loads from Hornady’s new 110 grain FTX Critical Defense 38 Special +P ammo up through 158 grain lead bullet handloads. Absolutely no one had the slightest problem with felt recoil. Everyone who had fired revolvers before were impressed with the trigger pull. A couple of shooters who had never fired anything except semi-autos were surprised at the length (but not particularly the weight) of the double action trigger pull. My impromptu test group included one senior Gunsite Range Master who is a retired police officer and has carried a two-inch revolver most of his adult life. Shooting outdoors on the square ranges in daylight, all shooters felt the sights were fine. Head shots at typical self defense ranges out to 10 yards were easily made. Beyond 10 yards, individual shooting skills became a major factor. I followed friend and fellow scribe Rich Grassi as he took the LCR through Gunsite’s Scrambler, a course where one engaged steel targets from Pepper popper size up through The Incredible Hulk, and from ranges of 50 to 80 yards. Out of 8 targets engaged, only one escaped serious harm from a cylinder full of ammo, and most were hit on either the first or second shot. This is not something any shooter could do, but then it’s not something just any 2” revolver could do either. In the mano a mano drill which involves whacking two steel round plates, performing a reload, and then knocking down a split popper, Rich did not win based on the clock, but neither did he leave any targets standing, and he had to go back for a second hit on one of the plates before it fell.

I didn’t have any belt holsters for a 2” revolver, but I did have 3 pocket holsters since that is my preferred CCW technique. The leather Mitch Rosen that is form fitted for my Model 442 would not accommodate the Ruger, but the rigid Safariland and collapsible Uncle Mikes both fit. I used the rigid Safariland because being able to re-holster smoothly and efficiently (meaning with one hand and without looking) is a part of the Gunsite methodology. Even starting with my shooting hand in the pocket, I wasn’t making desired times for putting rounds on target. But I did go through the drills a few times and my targets were pretty good even if my speed wasn’t. Finally the instructors allowed me to start the drills with gun in hand in the low guard position under the supposition that I had been alert enough to read the scenario and get prepared. I got a lot faster after that and, except for the reloads, I was no longer the “cog in the wheel” that held up the class.

Reloads are worth a comment since they are perhaps the biggest weakness in using a revolver for self defense. While it would be nice to drape a pair of Pancho Villa style cartridge bandoliers over your shoulders, consider that this might suggest to others that you are carrying a firearm, thus defeating the “concealed” portion of your CCW agreement. On the other hand, finding loose cartridges in your pockets and loading them one at a time makes for a long period of vulnerability in a gunfight. I tried two “speed” techniques at Gunsite both of which worked pretty well. The HKS speedloaders have been around for quite a while including models for 5-shot revolvers. These lock 5 rounds in a circle, and when all five rounds are partially inserted into the cylinder, a quick rotation on the knob allows all 5 to drop fully into their respective chambers. You’ll gain speed on the actual reload with a little practice, and finding the speedloader in your pocket is much faster and easier than finding 5 individual rounds. I also tried the Tuff QuickStrips, a rubber strip that holds 6 cartridges in line. When you’ve dumped the empties from your 38, insert 1 or 2 cartridges at a time partially into the cylinder and then peel the strip away from the rims allowing both rounds to drop into their respective chambers. Repeat until all chambers are loaded. This isn’t as fast a reload as the HKS, but the flat strips hold all the cartridges needed for a reload, carry flatter in your pockets than the round HKS, and can be found as fast as the HKS speedloader. The speed strips also allow you to “top off” the gun by reloading a single round or two as opposed to running the gun dry to replace all 5 rounds. Having an extra round in the strip could prove useful and takes up no real additional space in your pocket. Both QuickStrips and HKS speedloaders are good systems. Selection of one over the other may be based more upon how bulky your clothing is rather than a slight increase in reloading speed.

At first glance the LCR may appear a bit odd due to things like the joining line between the polymer grip housing and the aluminum frame, and the different cylinder shape and finish. Not to worry. I’m almost certain you’ll warm to the gun’s appearance over time. But to speed up the love process, take the LCR out for a shooting session. Once you’ve reacquainted yourself with the Ruger concept of rugged guns at good guy prices, I’m certain romance will blossom quickly.

→ Leave a comment

Posted in Gunsite, Ruger, Self-Defense, concealed carry, pocket pistols

Tagged +P ammo, Close Quarters Pistol class, pocket pistols, Rich Grassi, snub-nosed

Ruger’s 50-Year Commemorative Super Blackhawk

Posted on March 11, 2010 by Dick Williams| Leave a comment

Published “Shooting Illustrated” July 2009

For those who have enjoyed a lifelong love affair with handguns, there lingers the memory of “the one that got away.”

Despite its elegance and beauty, the Commemorative Super Blackhawk is as ready, willing and able to accompany its new owner to the game fields as the origianl version was 50 years ago.

For those of us who have enjoyed a life-long love affair with handguns, there lingers the memory of “the one that got away.” We are haunted by that brief lapse in judgment where we allowed a treasure to slip from our grasp because we were lured by the siren call of a new love not yet owned. For most of us, there is probably more than just one of these lost loves, but there is always that one unforgettable handgun we can’t quite erase from our memories. For me, that handgun was an early Ruger Super Blackhawk 44 Magnum with the new 7 ½ inch barrel and that incredibly beautiful blue finish that made me wince slightly every time I slid the gun in and out of its leather holster. I had purchased the gun used in one of those early package deals (with 44 rounds left in the original box of ammo,) and apparently the original owner had installed a set of stag horn grips before even firing the gun. It was a spectacular handgun and the pride of my possessions! Alas, within a year of acquiring it I was leaving the armed forces and moving west with a wife, two little girls, and no job. When a friend of mine offered $35 over retail for it, I did what all responsible young fathers do in that situation; I took the money and prayed for a future solution.

Fast forward four decades, and I am delighted to report that someone at Ruger has responded. While you might initially think they’re delinquent in waiting this long, that’s not so. Since their response comes in the form of a 50-year Commemorative of the Super Blackhawk, obviously this handgun could not be released before the year 2009. In the intervening years, Ruger has filled my life with a number of irresistible offerings, so it’s not like I had nothing to enjoy during those intervening years. But lets’ take a closer look at this return to yesteryear.

Beautifully grained rosewood grips and gold bands around the cylinder.

When I first saw the Commemorative, (I think it was in Ruger’s booth at the Dallas Safari Club in January,) it was the brightly polished blue finish that immediately caught my eye. I couldn’t remember seeing a production Ruger that looked like this since that original SBH escaped my clutches long ago. Except for the glossy steel finish on the sides of the hammer and the less reflective blue/black coloration of the rear sight, this luxurious blue finish covers the entire external surface of the gun. It’s as spectacular as my first one! The next two eye-catchers (and I’m not sure which one was noticed first,) are the gold bands around the cylinder and the smooth, beautifully grained rosewood grips. The gold bands are quite narrow, perhaps 1/16 inch wide, making them tastefully subdued but distinctly noticeable. (My apologies if I sound like a wine taster. I’m not, but this gun does generate some serious emotion.) The rosewood grips (with Ruger logo of course,) are elegantly simple and compliment the deep blue finish nicely. My initial thoughts were to possibly replace them with staghorn simply to recover the look of my lost Super Blackhawk, but the more I looked at the current grips, the less interested I became in changing anything. As a treasure, this gun stands on its own.

The last visual impact came from the gold lettering on the top of the Ruger barrel. In large letters that ran from just behind the front

Gold lettering on top of the barrel.

sight base to the front of the frame’s top strap it said simply, “50^THANNIVERARY SUPER BLACKHAWK – 2009.” I know that many of us have criticized Ruger over years past for the biblically long legal liability warning printed in small letters on all their modern guns about reading their instruction manual and washing your hands before meals. But before you work yourself up unnecessarily, consider this. The message here is extremely significant, and it’s delivered in gold. This is the 44 Magnum we’re talking about, and Ruger is acknowledging with the gold-filled date on the barrel that their luxury entry into the 44 Magnum market occurred 3 years after their competition and Ruger’s initial modification of their smaller frame flattop. I mean even the stone tablets with the Ten Commandments weren’t inlaid with gold! Sorry if I went a bit too far there, but as I said, this is a gun that generates emotion.

One might think that I would be reluctant to shoot this handgun, in which case, one would be incredibly wrong. I could not wait to venture a field with this recreation from my lost youth, (or young manhood,) and the instant I received a call from Doug Roth at Camp 5 Outfitters, it was Go Time! If you don’t know Camp 5, located near Paso Robles, California, you’re missing out on some great potential hunting adventures. Doug offers guided hunts on several species including deer, elk and turkey during their relatively short seasons in the spring/fall. Even better, he offers wild boar hunts year round, because California has no closed season on pigs. Good eating, good fun, great outing, and best of all, Doug can get handgunners in close on wild boar. With his fearless Jack Russel Terrier hunting companion Moose, few pigs fatally hit are ever lost. Hey, I’d spend two days at Camp 5 just to watch Moose work his magic. But in this case, I had both Moose and a recreation of a lost love with me, and while the three of us hadn’t hunted together before, I had hunted with both Moose and other 44 Magnums. It seemed like an unbeatable threesome.

The hunt location made it unnecessary to test numerous loads in search of the Commemorative’s favorite dish. Camp 5 is located in a portion of California where lead-free ammunition has been dictated for hunting. I had a couple boxes of Corbon and Federal 44 Mag ammo loaded with 225 grain Barnes bullets. Considering the lighter weight bullets reminded me of the only reservation I’d ever had about the square shape of the original Super Blackhawk’s trigger guard. That square back edge sometimes rapped my knuckle when firing full power loads with the heavier bullet weights. Admittedly that was more of an issue when shooting silhouettes with a one-hand grip from the creedmore position, and while it was not a crippling event, it was irritating in 40- or 80-round matches. Happily, using a solid two-handed grip, my knuckle remained untouched when firing the 225 grain loads in the new gun.

It required about 5 rounds to dial in the Ruger shooting from the rock-solid shooting bench/table that Doug has built near the Camp 5 guest cabin. Then, dropping to the ground in front of the bench and resting my back against a brace with my arms across my knees in my absolutely favorite field shooting position, a couple of confirmation shots ended up touching each other in the bottom of the small orange aiming point stuck on the 25-yard target. With a bit of a swagger, I left the range for two marvelous days of pig hunting.

While wind direction changes and fading light terminated some of our stalks, Doug was able to get the other hunters inside 25 yards on more than one occasion. I’m slightly ashamed to admit that on my stalk, I stretched my range beyond what was prudent considering I was hunting with a new gun and ammunition combination that I had fired less than 10 times. We followed the blood trail for perhaps 300 yards up a steep hill and through some heavy cover until it ended before giving it up with approaching darkness. Although a bit ashamed, I’m not discouraged. I miss just like everyone else, and on this occasion, it was clearly due to “pilot error.” I know the Commemorative Super Blackhawk and I will hunt together again albeit with some additional range time together between now and then. I was foolish enough to surrender this gun once; it won’t happen again.

→ Leave a comment

Posted in Ruger, Ruger Super Redhawk, ammo

Tagged .44 Magnum, Camp 5, Ruger Super Blackhawk

Arma Lite’s AR-24

Posted on March 8, 2010 by Dick Williams| Leave a comment

Published “Shooting Illustrated” July 2007

ArmaLite enters the pistol market with a pair of high-caparity 9 mm semi-autos manufactured by the Turkish firm Sarsilmaz. The full-size AR-24 takes a 15-round magazine and has a 4.67-inch barrel, while the compact AR-24K holds 13 rounds in its shortened grip frame and features a 3.89-inch barrel.

The thought of reviewing another wide-body 9 mm pistol will normally evoke a yawn from most gun writers. Getting a look at ArmaLite’s new AR-24 pistols, however, was different for two reasons. First, the guns are offered by ArmaLite, creator of the AR-15 rifle. Second, I had heard good things about the quality firearms coming from Turkey but had yet to get a close look at any of them. The AR-24 pistols are manufactured by Sarsilmaz, and please do not ask me how to pronounce that. Sarsilmaz has been in the gun business for more than 100 years, making numerous firearms for the Turkish military.

The AR-24 is a steel, locked-breech 9 mm semi-auto basically derived from the CZ-75 pistol. It utilizes double-stack magazines and can be fired both single and double action. If the gun is carried in the hammer-down position, the first shot is fired double action with all subsequent shots being single action. It can also be carried cocked-and-locked, in which case all shots, including the first, are fired single action. The thumb safety is located on the left side of the slide and locks the trigger in both hammer-down and cocked-and-locked mode. When the right hand grasps the gun in the normal shooting position, the thumb safety can be reached, if not easily operated, by the thumb. Hand size and finger length largely determine how easily the AR-24 controls can be manipulated. I had to move my hand in order to reach and release the slide-stop lever as well.

Checkering on the backstrap of the AR-24 enhances grip; vertical serrations perform that role on the AR-24K. Though the compact's grip frame is abbreviated, the pistol fills the hand nicety thanks to the extended bumper on the magazine.

There are two models in ArmaLite’s pistol line, the full-size AR-24 and the compact AR-24K. The finish on both guns is quite good, and if I sound surprised, it’s only because I was expecting something more like that on a military firearm. Both are black, which I think is cool looking and appropriate for a commercial pistol with a military history. All flat surfaces are smooth, and the pistols’ parts are nicely fitted with no ugly joints or mismatched edges. The backstrap and frontstrap of the AR-24 are checkered, while those of the AR-24K have vertical serrations approximately 1.2 inches long. Grips on the full-size gun are rubber, while early production versions of the compact feature ones made from wood. ArmaLite now offers the AR-24K with rubber grips, which are available at no charge to replace the original wood grips. Admittedly the 9 mm’s recoil isn’t difficult to manage, but the checkering on the grips does enhance the shooter’s hold, particularly when hands get sweaty.

Each pistol employs the white-dot sight system with the front blade dovetailed into the slide. Loosening the vertical screw in the front sight base allows the blade to be drifted left or right for windage adjustments. The dovetail cuts in the slide are rather elegant with the edges gently curved to engulf the base of the blade. Rear sights are also dovetail-mounted and are available on both pistols in fixed or fully adjustable configurations. The appearance of the sight systems and quality of installation are impressive, particularly the adjustable rear sight. Both guns utilize a modified Commander-style hammer, one of only two features on the guns the appearance of which I don’t like. It just seems coarse compared to the pistols’ overall high quality.

The backstrap on each pistol has a large beavertail that overhangs the web of the shooting hand. I can’t imagine anyone suffering slide bite unless the shooter has the physical characteristics of a Sasquatch. The guns also have guide rods and external extractors, and while these are not my favorite features on a semi-auto, I can’t criticize them since the pistols cycled flawlessly with all ammo fired. At the rear of the slide on both models there are vertical grasping serrations that run for approximately 1 inch and assist the shooter when racking the slide. For those familiar with a 1911 or any semi-auto with a slide of uniform width that fits outside the frame’s rails, racking the AR-24′s slide may feel a bit awkward because it’s thinner and presents an uneven gripping surface. But the AR-24 is a 9 mm handgun with a 9 mm spring, so it doesn’t take a vise-like grip to do the job. On the plus side, the rails run the entire length of the slide as opposed to the partial-length rails on a 1911. The AR-24 slide is supported no matter what its position on the frame.

Although the length of the AR-24K frame is the same as that of the full-size gun, the slide and barrel are shorter. The height of the grip frame is distinctly shorter on the compact, but an extended magazine lip makes the

Based on the CZ-75 platform, the AR-24 pistols are designed so their slides fit inside full-length frame rails. Front sight blades are solidly mounted in dovetail slots and have vertical screws that allow them to be adjusted for windage.

frontstrap feel about the same and helps control the gun. There is no magazine extension to mate with the compact’s backstrap, however, which makes it feel much shorter than the one on the standard AR-24.

Magazine capacity is 15 rounds for the AR-24 and 13 rounds for the AR-24K. The task of loading most double-stack magazines ranges from difficult to downright unpleasant, and these were no exception. A red, plastic follower in every magazine eliminates the chance of mistaking an empty for a loaded one. The magazines performed admirably in both pistols and contributed to the guns’ perfect function with a variety of ammo. Large magazine release buttons were easy to operate. Ejection of empty magazines was positive every time the button was pressed, and magazines dropped smoothly from the frame.

The only real knock I can put on the AR-24 goes back to the basic design of the CZ-75. In double-action firing mode, it’s a long reach to the trigger—almost 3 inches from the backstrap. Shooters with small- to medium-size hands usually either can’t get enough finger on the trigger to properly fire the first shot or they cheat by rotating their shooting hand around to the right. While this hand shift works in terms of making the gun go bang, it misaligns the pistol and pushes shots wide of the target. Subsequent shots in single-action mode either feel very awkward or necessitate reacquiring a proper shooting grip. I think the design of the trigger guard contributes to some of the trigger-pull difficulty. The back of the trigger guard has a very short radius, making it severely rounded. In order to clear the guard when it is pulled to the rear, the trigger has to duplicate that shape. Its curvature forces the trigger finger up toward the pivot point, where you lose the mechanical advantage you would get from a longer lever arm. The double-action trigger pull for my sample AR-24 was 11 pounds, 4 ounces, with the single-action pull being 5 pounds, 11 ounces. The AR-24K registered a lighter 10 pounds, 11 ounces in double-action mode and 5 pounds, 1 ounce with single-action firing. That’s quite manageable for a defensive handgun if you can reach the trigger with your hand in the proper shooting position.

I tested the pistols’ accuracy at an indoor range, shooting offhand at 50 feet. The lighting wasn’t as good as outdoors, but much better than most real-life, self-defense shooting scenarios. Neither the white dots nor the black rear notch were particularly clear. It was not precise, slow-fire shooting, nor was it Steel Challenge warp speed. When the sights were somewhere in the bullseye area, I mashed the trigger. Despite the AR-24K’s smoother trigger pull, I got better groups from the standard-size gun. The smallest five-shot group for the AR-24 was l 1/4 inches with Black Hills 115-grain jacketed-hollow-point +P ammo. The largest group from the full-size pistol was 2 5/8 inches with Black Hills 124-grain jacketed-hollow-point +P, the same ammo that produced the AR-24K’s smallest group of 1 3/4 inches. Gold Dot 115-and 124-grain jacketed-hollow-point loads gave l 5/8 inches and 1 3/4 inches respectively in the AR-24. These were the only groups less than 2 inches, but again I wasn’t in my Olympic shooting mode. Perhaps a more representative indicator was a string of 10 shots of five different loads in the AR-24. Seven of these were nicely centered in the bullseye and spanned less than 1 1/2 inches, while the three remaining shots went left and opened the group to 3 1/4 inches. That’s way better than combat accuracy from a gun I had never shot before this outing.

Except for the long reach to the trigger and its shape, I liked the ergonomics of the pistols. The grip frames are nicely rounded with no irritating edges and fill the hand quite comfortably. With the magazine extension, the compact is almost as comfortable as the standard model except for the shorter backstrap. In fact, the difference in weight between the AR-24 and AR-24K is less than 2 ounces with the full-size gun slightly more than 1/2 inch longer. One of the rangemasters at the Prado Olympic Shooting Range preferred the AR-24K, while my preference was for the standard-size pistol. Despite having hands smaller than mine, he also seemed quite able to operate the AR-24, but then he has considerably more IDPA match experience than I do. Obviously, 15-round magazines make the full-size pistol more useful. I’m not comfortable trying to carry any wide-body autoloader concealed, but given the AR-24′s tough steel construction and 100-percent reliability along with its excellent ergonomics, I think it would make a great self-defense gun where concealment isn’t an issue. It might be even better in .45 caliber.

→ Leave a comment

Posted in Arma Lite

Tagged 9 mm, AR-24 pistol, white dot sight system

Portable .44 Magnums

Posted on February 22, 2010 by Dick Williams| Leave a comment

Published in “Shooting Illustrated” June 2007

Buffalo Bore's 340-grain +P+ . 44 Magnum loads have an overall cartridge length of 1.752 inches, but they pose no problem for the Ruger Super Redhawk Alaskan's cylinder. The Hogue Tamer Monogrip completely surrounds the grip frame in soft rubber, which makes shooting even these powerhouse loads in the 2 1/2-inch snubbie bearable.

In the shooting world, “magnum” means a cartridge or firearm larger than normal in size, performance or both. When Smith & Wesson introduced the .44 Magnum in the mid-’50s, the company housed the cartridge in its existing N-frame revolver. While the round’s performance exceeded that of existing handgun cartridges, the gun’s size was neither unmanageable nor intimidating—until you fired it for the first time. Ruger’s original .44 Magnum was a bulked-up Flattop single-action revolver. The frame size was slightly larger than we were accustomed to, but the grip remained rather small. This seemed like a good idea—again until you touched off your first full-power round.

Over the years, Smith & Wesson made some internal and external changes in its .44 Magnum handguns but has continued to chamber the cartridge in the double-action N-frame revolver. Shortly after its introduction, Ruger dropped the Flattop .44 Magnum (until its reintroduction as a commemorative edition in 2005) and began producing some larger-framed .44 Magnum revolvers, in both single- and double-action versions. We were offered two single actions, the Super Blackhawk and the Bis-ley, and two double actions, the Redhawk and Super Redhawk.

The frame sizes on these Rugers were larger than on the original Flattop, and barrel lengths were either longer or comparable to earlier guns. The idea was to make the new revolvers more durable to handle a continuous diet of full-house magnum loads, and to make them more controllable and comfortable when fired by less-experienced handgunners. An additional benefit was the increased cylinder length allowed the use of heavier, longer bullets for large, dangerous game.

There’s been a slight reversal of the trend lately. Downsized options are now available for those who want a big-bore handgun for self-defense rather than hunting. Ruger is offering both its Redhawk and Super Redhawk with shorter barrels that make them easier to carry. This is not an attempt to produce a .44 Magnum that would compete with handguns designed for concealed carry, although both guns, particularly the stubby Super Redhawk Alaskan, can be easily covered by a jacket should the user venture from wilderness to civilization. And the .44 Magnum is certainly an adequate, if slightly overpowered, cartridge for self-defense. Ruger’s real target audience is the backpacker or woods wanderer who might venture into country inhabited by predators larger and tougher than man, and who understand that dialing 911 is a useless gesture.

Some similarities between the Redhawk and Super Redhawk are apparent. Their cylinders are the same, but the Super Redhawk’s frame extends 1 3/4 inches farther forward than the Redhawk’s. The breech end of the Super Redhawk’s barrel has a couple extra inches of frame wrapped around it, which makes it look much beefier when viewed from the business end. Both guns have adjustable rear sights with a white outline surrounding the notch. Front sights are black, ramped blades, but the Super Redhawk’s is all black, while the Redhawk’s has a red insert. The Redhawk’s front blade is pinned through the integral barrel rib, but the Super Redhawk’s blade is silver-soldered into a slot in the top of the frame. Normally the Redhawk is equipped with either a 5 1/2 or 7 1/2 inch barrel, and the Super Redhawk features a 7 1/2 or 9-inch barrel. The new Redhawk has a 4-inch barrel, while the Super Redhawk’s barrel has been cut to 27; inches, or flush with the front edge of the extended frame. I’ve always thought the standard Super Redhawk looked ugly with its barrel sticking out of the stretched frame, but the snub-nose Alaskan is built like a small Abrams tank and is almost as impressive.

The muzzle of the Alaskan (left) is flush with the front of the distinctive, extended frame that characterizes the Super Redhawk. Despite the short barrel, alt that metal in the frame gives the little thumper a weight of 41 ounces.

Grips are considerably different on the two guns, mainly because their grip frames are not the same. The Redhawk grip frame looks like we expect a grip frame to look—the frontstrap and backstrap determine the final size and shape of the handle. In contrast, the Super Redhawk has an undersized “stub” handle that allows the use of whatever size and shape grip you like. Hogue finger-groove grips are on both guns, but the grips on the Alaskan surround the back of the grip frame and provide a cushioning effect between gun and hand when fired. There is also a softer piece of blue rubber inside the top of the grip that cushions the web of the shooting hand from the classic “thump of the hump” administered by the recoil of heavy loads in a double-action revolver. The Redhawk’s grips expose the steel backstrap but generously fill the space between frontstrap and trigger guard. They also extend below the grip frame providing a comfortable resting place for the last finger of the shooting hand. I didn’t find the felt recoil of either gun objectionable, but the Super Redhawk was more comfortable when hot loads with bullets weighing 300 grains or more were fired. If you have very large hands, you might prefer the larger grips of the Redhawk.

Shooting the compact .44 Magnums from Ruger was fun, but I need to be clear about limitations. For me, a 4-inch barrel is about the minimum length I can hunt with using an iron-sighted belt gun, and I prefer 5 or even 6 inches. Besides the issue of sight radius, my eyes just aren’t what they used to be. Given that, I would be comfortable hunting with the 4-inch Redhawk at ranges up to about 50 yards, but only if I’m wearing some sort of shooting glasses with corrective lenses. It’s much easier for me to hunt with a scoped pistol, and in fact that’s now mandatory for me during the low-light conditions of early morning or late afternoon.

The packing ability of a 4-inch barrel meets the versatility of the .44 Magnum in Ruger's latest addition to the Redhawk family. With a beefy frame and an elongated cylinder, the revolver can handle a variety of ammunition for hunting or defending against large and dangerous game, including Buffalo Bore's 340-grain cast +P+ stomper and Cor-Bon's 225-grain DPX load.

However, I became infatuated with the short-barreled Alaskan. I liked almost everything about it, including its smaller grips, minimal felt recoil, handy length and remarkably smooth double-action trigger. And while I would rate it as an excellent defensive big-bore revolver, I wouldn’t take it hunting as my primary handgun. Firing at a 40-yard target, I could not keep all my shots in the black. I could pretty well keep them on the paper, within a 9-inch circle, shooting offhand, but I felt I was just barely on the ragged edge of acceptable marksmanship. Restricting my effective hunting range to less than 40 yards isn’t something I would want to do. That said, the Alaskan would be my first choice for a carry gun if I were fishing or just hiking through bear country, like maybe Alaska. The .44 Magnum with heavier bullets is a major defensive load against big critters, and I felt absolutely confident in my ability to use the little Super Redhawk at close range with no concern for the recoil generated by the more powerful loads. Carried on the belt in a lightweight nylon holster, this stainless steel powerhouse would be the perfect companion for an extended foray in fair weather or foul.

I would, however, make one modification to the Alaskan. With .44-caliber bullets ranging from 240 to 300-plus grains, I used up much of the rear sight’s elevation adjustment capability at the 40-yard range. When the gun was on, the rear sight assembly rode quite high in its notch in the topstrap. There was no danger of the elevation adjustment screw popping out of the sight assembly since there were at least another three revolutions available before the threads disengaged. When the screw was that far out, though, the tension applied to the assembly by the two coil springs was not consistent, and the sight moved so easily that it did not seem like precise adjustments were either achievable or maintainable. It’s not that big a deal considering the ranges at which the gun would most likely be used, plus a fix is incredibly simple. I would have a competent smithy file a little off the top of the front blade so the rear sight doesn’t have to be dramatically elevated to properly sight-in the gun.

Fact is, both revolvers would make excellent trail guns. The Redhawk’s extra 1 1/2 inches of barrel gave me some additional range, while the Alaskan’s shorter barrel and smaller grips made it more comfortable and portable. With both Rugers chambered in .44 Magnum, the odds are you can find ammo almost anywhere. You may still have to let Brother Bruin have your salmon, but with either of these guns on your hip, your retreat will be much more orderly and confident.

→ Leave a comment

Posted in Ruger, Smith & Wesson, concealed carry

Tagged .44 Magnum, Super Redhawk, Super Blackhawk, Bisley, cylinder length, Redhawk, short barreled Alaskan

Three-Part Plan

Posted on February 12, 2010 by Dick Williams| Leave a comment

Published in “Shooting Illustrated” June 2007

At the age of seven it became apparent that I was destined for a lifelong love affair with firearms. There would be other even greater loves in my life, but my interest in guns has never faltered and remains a dominant force these many decades later. For almost that entire time, my focus has been on recreational rather than tactical uses of guns. Unfortunately, the world is not as safe or friendly a place as it used to be. As a younger man. I kept a loaded handgun in the house, but unless there was some kind of civil disturbance or unrest underway, I rarely risked breaking the law by carrying a handgun in my vehicle. Today, many citizens believe quick access to a self-defense firearm is nothing more than good, common sense.

In the mid-’80s, Florida enacted the greatest piece of firearms legislation since the Second Amendment. That state made it crystal clear that no one could deny an honest citizen the right to carry a concealed weapon. Many states followed Florida’s lead with similar laws, including those recognizing concealed-carry permits from other states. The majority of states now have “shall issue” laws, while others that have not passed such legislation still have provisions for their citizens to be granted concealed-carry permits.

It may come as a surprise to many shooters to know that in California it is still possible to obtain a concealed-carry permit, depending on where you live in the state. This apparent contradiction of California’s anti-gun law reputation exists because permit approval is left to the discretion of the applicant’s senior local law enforcement official. If you live in Los Angeles or San Francisco, don’t bother applying. Those bastions of personal security and welfare simply don’t grant permits to average citizens. But in many communities and counties, permits are issued to citizens who have presented a viable reason to carry, attended mandatory training and passed the required tests. It’s not as good as a “shall issue” environment, but it’s far better than a “won’t issue” state.

Fortunately, I live in a California county whose sheriff ran for office promising to make concealed-carry permits available to us common folk, and to date he has kept that promise. I’ve submitted an application for a concealed-carry permit, and in the process have encountered the kind of dilemma a gun writer dreams of. California allows a maximum of three guns to be listed on the permit, and the bearer of it is prohibited from carrying any gun not listed. For years I have avoided the classic “if I could only have one gun” dialog. But if I were allowed to choose three guns, maybe I could get through the exercise and generate only a minimal amount of hate mail.

Proven design and a record of superb stopping power gives the Wilson Combat CQB in .45 ACP high credentials as a primary concealed-carry pistol. A slightly shorter 4-inch barrel makes it easier to carry than the standard 5-inch barrel of a full-size 1911.

Concealed Considerations

An immediate thought was to pick the “best” gun and follow that up by choosing two almost identical guns for backup. This would ensure I always had the optimum gun available regardless of possible downtime for such mundane things as repairs or modifications to the primary firearm. There would be no retraining on handling procedures when switching guns, and I could use the same accessory gear no matter what gun I carried. I mulled this strategy over for some time because it made a great deal of sense and offered a solution with the utmost simplicity. It also defined the type of firearm I would carry, because if there would only be one kind of gun, it would be the one with which I am most familiar and proficient. That meant I would have three 1911s in various configurations and sizes, which wouldn’t be a bad thing. But ultimately I discarded this approach, thinking that since this would be a concealed-carry gun. there would be situations and dress codes that might suggest a different firearm in order to maximize concealment and carrying comfort.

This change in approach made it easier to choose the type of gun that would be number two on the license. With some kind of 1911 as number one. the second choice would be a pocket pistol of the utmost simplicity. It could be carried anywhere on my person for a reasonable period of time without fear of discharge and would function with absolute reliability simply by pulling the trigger and if there was a failure to fire, another pull of the trigger would be all that was required. You’ve probably guessed that I’m talking about a small-frame revolver, with only the model and caliber to be determined.

My thoughts on the third gun didn’t start to gel until I took one of the training classes that California mandates in order to obtain the permit. My instructor was Bill Murphy, an active-duty California police officer and head of the SureFire Institute’s low-light training program. He did not tell the students what gun they should carry, but he strongly advised our alternate guns function the same way as the primary firearm with which we trained. Murphy’s key message was that during moments of stress we do not rise to new levels of performance, rather we revert to our basic training. If you trained with a Glock or Springfield Armory XD. for example, and had to deal with an emergency using a gun with an external safety, you would probably forget to deactivate the safety and try to fire just by pulling the trigger, because that was how you had trained. Such an error, however short lived, could prove fatal. It became clear my third gun would have to be a 1911. but probably tailored to different circumstances than my primary.

Number 1 Gun

More than a year ago. I wrote an article on Wilson Combat’s CQB entitled “The Perfect IDPA Pistol” (November 2005) in which I stated the CQB would make an excellent concealed-carry handgun. The CQB became my pick for the first and primary handgun on my concealed-carry permit, and while no man ever needs to defend his choice of a Wilson Combat pistol for his self-defense gun. I will review some of my thinking during the original evaluation.

This pistol was absolutely reliable, first shot, every shot, regardless of the ammo I used. Its barrel is 4 inches long, and it’s 5.4 inches high, making it easier to hide than a full-size 1911. However, since the gun is steel it is not unpleasant to shoot serious self-defense loads.

The CQB has excellent, fixed Combat Pyramid sights with tritium inserts, and all sharp edges have been rounded and smoothed. Its trigger is a crisp and repeatable 4 1/2 pounds. Though the colors are not particularly important, the Armor-Tuff finish does protect the OD green frame and black slide from corrosion. The feed ramp is polished, the barrel is throated, the frontstrap and flat main spring housing are checkered, and the magazine well is beveled. There is a high-ride beavertail grip safety and an extended tactical ejector.

Wilson offers two magazine sizes, a feature I particularly like. The standard seven-round magazine fits almost flush, while the eight-round spare magazine extends slightly below the grip frame. This allows concealed carry of the gun with eight rounds (seven in the magazine and one up the spout), and provides eight more in each tucked-away backup magazine.

While shooting three Black Hills .45 ACP jacketed hollow point loads (185, 200 and 230 grains), the lighter bullets printed dead-on at 25 yards and the 230-grain slugs hit about an inch left. I’d call that street-ready.

Backup Made Better

Smith and Wesson Model 442 and Model 340PD

Smith & Wesson's Model 442 (right) weighs just 3 ounces more than the company's Model 340PD and is nearly half the price of the top-tier .357 Magnum. The author plowed that savings into an XS Big Dot front sight, along with some refinements and an action job from Cylinder 8 Slide.

Nothing is as inherently reliable as a revolver, and while I normally prefer the large-frame magnums, concealed carry dictates something smaller. Since this was to be the go-in-any-pocket gun. and therefore would not be supported by a belt or other type of body harness, lightweight was the order of the day. Smith & Wesson makes some very light snub-nose revolvers, and then it makes some insanely light snub-nose revolvers. I say “insanely light” because when you touch off a full-house .357 Magnum in an 12-ounce scandium-frame revolver, you’ll start thinking only an insane person would do such a thing. In a moment of stress you might not immediately notice how painful the recoil is. but you will during practice sessions. Even if you minimize your practice. California requires that permit holders shoot 75 rounds through each handgun listed on the permit. I’m a big believer in handgun practice, so selecting the revolver and caliber required some serious thought.

Since this was a pocket gun. I wanted a hammerless model. The Smith & Wesson website shows two interesting candidates. One is the top-of-the-line Model 340PD. a scandium-frame .357 Magnum weighing 12 ounces. The other is the Model 442, an aluminum-frame .38 Special weighing 15 ounces. That’s not much difference in weight, but you can feel it when holding the gun in your hand or in your pocket. I’m not sure if the extra few ounces would make a difference in firing .357 Magnum loads, since the slightly heavier gun is rated for .38 +P. not .357. The real noticeable difference is in the price, with the scandium .357 retailing for several hundred dollars more than the aluminum .38. I made a decision and sent the Model 442 off to Bill Laughridge at Cylinder & Slide to work his magic.

The fixed sights on a snub-nose revolver are rudimentary at best. Even with the red insert in the front blade of the Model 340PD. I could barely see the sights in daylight. I couldn”t see anything in low light. The first change Laughridge made was to install an XS Sight Systems Big Dot Tritium front sight on the Model 442. Given the minimal space at the rear of the topstrap and shallow trough that was the rear sight. Laughridge rounded out the channel so the Big Dot nestled nicely into the enlarged half-moon notch. Without my shooting glasses nothing was clearly in focus, but I could see the large white ball in daylight and the glowing tritium in darkness. I wasn’t ready to take the little gun squirrel hunting, but I was definitely a force to be reckoned with even in low-light conditions.

Laughridge added some other nice touches that should prove useful, such as chamfering the rear edges of the cylinder’s chambers, polishing the trigger and tuning the action. My first thought in looking at the finished Model 442 was the vertical face of the front sight would be prone to catch the tight edge of the front trouser pocket during the draw. While true, I think this is a non-issue since it only happens in small pockets on tight pants like jeans, and when the pocket is that small and tight. I have trouble getting the gun and my hand in and out of the pocket. With more realistic clothing it is fine, and besides, ramped front sight blades frequently have serrations that can snag clothing as well. Eliminating the front sight would alleviate the problem, but in a situation warranting the use of a concealable firearm. 1 want to see something at the front end of that barrel.

Smith and Wessson Model 442 in .38 Special

When wearing a holster just isn't practical. Smith & Wesson's Model 442 in .38 Special is an effective alternative to going unarmed. Its simple operation and reliability, combined with the shrouded hammer and light weight, allow it to be carried unobtrusively in a coat or cargo pants pocket.

Last But Not Least

Picking the third gun was even more difficult than the second. I decided it would be another semi-auto, and based upon Murphy’s Law (the good one learned in class), it would have to be a 1911. However. I wanted something a little smaller than the CQB for slightly-easier concealment and a little lighter for more comfort during prolonged carry. This meant I needed a pistol with a shorter barrel than the one on the Wilson and an alloy rather than steel frame.

I recently spent some time with a pair of little 1911s from Kimber and Springfield Armory and was very impressed with the offerings of both companies. In the March 2007 issue

I reviewed Kimber’s Aegis and Springfield Armory’s EMP, both in 9 mm. Ordinarily I would have selected a .45-caliber micro compact for my third concealed-carry gun. but those pistols opened my mind to the world of mini-nines. They are easier to shoot than a comparably sized .45. Since they’re 1911s, all the controls are the same. If I suffered some kind of injury that forced me to shoot with the weak hand, I would do much better with a 9 mm than a .45. Finally, if I found myself in a life-threatening situation, the outcome of which depended on one of the women in my family picking up my carry gun. I think our safety would be better served by a more manageable, less intimidating 9 mm.

Springfield Armory's Enhanced Micro Pistol (EMP) in 9 mm takes the final spot on the author's California concealed-carry permit. The ability to carry as many as 27 rounds of 9 mm ammunition should make him relatively comfortable when venturing into the urban wilderness.

For now. I plan to list the Springfield Armory EMP as the third gun on my permit. The differences between the EMP and Aegis are small, but the EMP does have an ambidextrous safety, making it easier to operate with the weak hand. Its magazine carries one more round than the Aegis (nine versus eight), and its frame is slightly shorter.

I’m familiar with the arguments regarding stopping power of the .45 versus that of 9 mm. which is why the .45-caliber CQB is my primary gun. Likewise, the .38 Special gives up something to the .357 Magnum, but as always, measuring or calculating stopping power requires a hit rather than just a very loud miss. Perhaps a heavier weight .357 Magnum snubbie might be better for the number two gun, allowing me to use .38 Special loads for practice while carrying magnum loads on the streets.

During the next year. I may change my mind about what guns I want on my concealed-carry permit, and the good news is that for a few bucks and a short qualification session using the new gun, firearms listed on an individual’s permit can be changed in California. What I am comfortable with is the XS sight on the front end of that little barrel. In fact I might put an XS sight on the third gun. and as long as I don’t change firearms, this would not require any modifications to my permit. As always, more low-light practice sessions are in order, particularly since cockroaches rarely come out to dine in bright light.

Another Option

S ince I started this project. Smith & Wesson introduced a new snub-nose revolver that has some of the custom touches Cylinder & Slide made to my Model 442. It’s the Model M&P 340, and at a weight halfway between my two prior options (13.3 ounces) it’s worth a look. Meanwhile, if any of you aging warriors with dimming vision have a snub nose on which you might someday bet your life, you might want to give Bill Laughridge at Cylinder & Slide a call.

Cylinder & Slide

245 East 4th Street Fremont, NE 68026 (402) 721-4277 www.cylinder-slide.com

Smith & Wesson

2100 Roosevelt Avenue Springfield, MA 01104 (413) 781-8300 www.smith-wesson.com

Springfield Armory

420 West Main Street Geneseo,1161254 (800) 680-6866 www.springfield-armory.com

Wilson Combat & Scattergun Technologies

2234 C.R. 719 Berryville, AR 72616 (800) 955-4856 www.wilsoncombat.com

→ Leave a comment

Posted in Customizing, Kimber, Smith & Wesson, Springfield Armory, Wilson Combat

Tagged concealed carry, .45ACP, Combat Pyramid sights

Pocket Protectors

Posted on February 11, 2010 by Dick Williams| Leave a comment

Published in “Shooting Illustrated” June 2007

Pocket handguns are not a new concept. Even in the cap-and-ball era there were small revolvers designated as pocket pistols. Looking at these guns, two things are immediately obvious: First, fast reloads were not an option, and second, pockets were apparently much larger in those days. Many of these pistols were simply single shots with no pretense of offering any follow-up capability for the user.

During the latter half of the 19th century, when self-contained cartridges were replacing caps and balls. Smith & Wesson and other manufacturers made some very small revolvers that were the forerunners of today”s snub-nose revolvers. As we rolled into the 20th century, several companies such as Colt, and I believe Savage, offered some compact semiautomatic pistols for those choosing not to announce they carried a handgun. But the epitome of old-time pocket pistols for most Americans was the two-shot derringer with over-and-under barrels. Hollywood made these hideout guns famous in numerous Westerns, and even today, cowboy action shoots frequently feature a special event for them. If you’re willing to settle for just two shots to resolve hostilities, the old-style derringer with its flat outline and compact size offers advantages unsurpassed by many of today’s concealed-carry handguns. However, besides being limited to two shots, these derringers are single-action pistols requiring the shooter to manually cock the hammer each time before firing. They not only lack firepower, they are much slower into action than double-action revolvers.

In the 1930s, many people utilized 2-inch-barreled revolvers. Colts and Smith & Wessons filled the hands of cops, bootleggers and private eyes on the movie screens. Initially, the short barrel was the only real attempt to downsize these revolvers for hideout duty, with nothing being done to reduce frame size and further facilitate pocket carry. Both companies had six-shot revolvers with external hammers, and while the cops were sometimes shown with holsters, I don’t ever recall seeing a bad guy draw a short revolver from leather. While longer barreled revolvers were occasionally carried tucked in the waistband, snubbies emerged from a pocket or were sometimes fired from within. At that time, the nylon pocket holster had not yet been invented, and while a few really clever guys might have utilized a couple pieces of leather inside the pocket to protect their clothes and facilitate getting the gun into action, I doubt this was the case since clothes then were made of heavier material like wool, and fashions seemed to dictate a more casual look.

Smith & Wesson reduced both capacity—five rounds instead of six—and frame size in its J-frame revolvers. Although more concealable, heavy loads are also more difficult to control.

Smith & Wesson’s J-frame revolver reduced both frame size and capacity, giving the savvy shooter a smaller pocket pistol that carried five rounds instead of six. The smaller grip frame further helped conceal the pistol but at the expense of making the gun more difficult to control when shooting the standard 158-grain .38 Special police loads of that era. Subsequent development of more sophisticated self-defense ammunition helped alleviate this problem, but at the time the downsized frame was a decision that proved to be brilliant over the next several decades. With a couple additional refinements, the five-shot J-frame-size revolver is the pocket pistol of choice for millions today, doing double-duty as the primary self-defense gun in many homes.

One of the other favorite handguns during the early 20th century was the Colt 1911. You couldn’t classify it as a pocket pistol, but its flat profile made it more comfortable to carry tucked into a waistband or belt than a revolver. Colt picked up on this market and began producing the Commander. With a slightly shorter barrel and an alloy frame, it was lighter in weight and less bulky than its all-steel big brother, and knowledgeable gunnies capitalized on its virtues. Some cursed the Commander, claiming its alloy frame wouldn’t take the abuse of continuous full-power loads. Perhaps someone destroyed a Commander in prolonged firing under a controlled and monitored test program, but I don’t remember reading about it. Several clever gunsmiths recognized the advantages of customized 1911s and began chopping them to make them more concealable. Ultimately, manufacturers jumped on the bandwagon, and the result is an array of incredibly compact and durable 1911s with 3-inch barrels and lightweight frames made of exotic metals.

Late in the 20th century, a couple of major developments occurred in the handgun world that would bring about a new class of pocket pistols. One was the semi-auto that accepted double-stack magazines, and the other was the use of lightweight polymer frames. Beretta‘s winning of the U.S. military handgun contract cemented the high-capacity pistol’s place in the market, while Glock revolutionized handgun design with high-tech materials. Other companies started manufacturing both wide-body and synthetic-frame pistols, and many produced downsized guns intended for the pocket. While some of these have been quite successful in terms of sales, none are as well suited for pocket carry as the compact revolver, at least in this old dog’s opinion. With that thought, let’s start by looking at the revolver pocket pistols available on today’s market.

Spinning Wheels

Smith & Wesson has long been the master of the small revolvers, and its current offerings have never been better. The top of the company’s line is superb. I’m talking about its scandium wheelguns that reduce weight to 12 ounces while still providing the power of .357 Magnum loads. In my mind. Smith & Wesson’s quintessential pocket pistol is the Model 340PD, a 12-ounce masterpiece with a 2-inch barrel and an internal hammer. With no hammer to cock, it can only be fired double-action, which is the proper technique with a close-quarters, self-defense revolver. It can be fired from within a jacket pocket with minimal chance of malfunctioning. This technique is not recommended, nor is it suitable for achieving pinpoint accuracy, but for hostile encounters occurring at touchy-feely distances, it’s something that could save your life. If you draw the revolver before firing—the recommended technique— the hammerless design minimizes the possibility of snagging the pistol on pocket edges or linings. A compromise between hammerless guns, or rather those with internal hammers, and guns with external hammers are Smith & Wesson’s Model 638 (an alloy-frame .38 Special +P) and Model 649 (a steel-frame .357 Magnum), both of which have a small, rounded portion of the hammer protruding through a slot in the top of the frame. The company calls this the “Bodyguard” frame, and it minimizes the possibility of snagging the hammer during the draw, but still allows the revolver to be cocked single-action to make a precise shot.

The downside of scandium revolvers is their cost, which is nearly double that of a similar alloy-frame gun and saves only 3 ounces in weight (12 ounces versus 15 ounces). Stepping up to a comparable pistol in steel takes the weight from 15 ounces to 23 ounces but does reduce felt recoil. Smith & Wesson’s Model 60 has been around for decades and was. in fact, the company’s first stainless steel pistol. The version available today can handle full-power .357 Magnum loads, and housed in a pocket holster that masks telltale bulges, the 2-inch workhorse is still an outstanding pocket pistol. When shooting full-house .357 Magnums, none of these small revolvers offer a pleasant experience, but practice ammo can be tailored to your tolerance for any of these. In addition, some of the .38 Special self-defense loads on the market are designed for settling serious social disputes.

Taurus has stepped into the pocket pistol void created when Colt ceased production of its double-action revolvers. Like Smith & Wesson, Taurus offers a variety of pocket pistols in both steel and alloy so the weight of a gun with a 2-inch barrel ranges from just under 16 ounces to 25 ounces. While the majority of the company’s sales in this style of revolver are .38 Special and .357 Magnum, it also makes a pocket pistol in .32 H&R Magnum. The latter handgun with its 2-inch barrel weighs less than 20 ounces and holds six rounds. Although the .32 H&R Magnum is considered by many to be too small for self-defense, it is not to be trifled with and it offers a degree of parity to those with the kinds of injuries or infirmities that prevent them from mastering the .38 or .357. On the upper end of power. Taurus offers a 2′/2-inch-barreled Model 415 chambered for .41 Magnum in its Tracker series of revolvers. This big boy holds five shots and weighs 30 ounces. It tends to exceed available dimensions of the pockets on most street clothes, but if you have a bulky jacket and can carry the weight, go for it. Amongst learned pistoleros. a .41 Magnum round, even modestly loaded, provokes very little debate on stopping power. A couple of other interesting Taurus options include factory porting and some soft grip materials to tame recoil. Nowhere on my list of things to do is there an entry for tiring a ported revolver from inside my pocket, but porting is certainly an appreciated accessory during range sessions. For those who prefer to compromise with a shrouded hammer design. Taurus makes the Model 651 and Model 851.

Charter Arms, which has been in and out of the market, is back with a couple of unique ideas. It now makes a left-handed revolver—chambered in .38 Special +P—called the Undercover Southpaw. This mirror-image gun holds five rounds, has a 2-inch barrel and weighs 12 ounces. It has an all-aluminum, one-piece frame with a three-point cylinder lockup system. Righties need not panic. The revolver can be fired with either hand, but the cylinder-release latch is on the right side of the frame. The cylinder swings out on the right side so a left-handed shooter can hold onto the gun with his shooting hand while reloading with his support hand. This doesn’t seem like a big deal, unless you’re left-handed.

Demonstrating a rather clever bit of marketing nomenclature. Charter Arms has named its snub-nose .32 H&R Magnum the Undercoverette. It has a regular hammer and 2-inch barrel, holds five shots and weighs 19 ounces. An Off Duty model, while competing in weight with the Smith & Wesson scandium revolvers at 12 ounces, will handle .38 Special +P but not .357 Magnum. And Charter Arms would not be Charter Arms without its trademark Bulldog revolver. This is a very serious self-defense handgun that holds five rounds of .44 Special, has a 2/.-inch barrel and weighs 22 ounces. There are a variety of excellent hollow-point loads for the .44 Special today, making the Bulldog rival the 1911 in everything except round capacity and reloading speed. Welcome back Charter Arms.

Secretive Semis

That brings us to the semi-automatic handguns. Over the last five years. Shooting Illustrated has done a number of articles on 1911s, including some on the ultra-compact .45 and 9 mm pistols. Considering the incredible popularity of the 1911, one would have to consider the small versions as pocket pistol candidates. But as much as I love these guns. I would not select one as my first choice for pocket carry. Having a cocked-and-locked 1911 with its short trigger pull loose in my pocket, particularly a trouser pocket, would make me very nervous. Even a pocket holster doesn’t seem to offer enough constraint given the typical body movements one generates in a normal day. In fact, the thought of any semi-auto with a short trigger pull in my pocket gives me chills. That said, there are some 1 would consider for pocket carry.

Last June. I reviewed in my “Handguns” column a couple of polymer-frame pistols from Kahr and was particularly impressed with the CW9. I’ve always liked the steel-frame Kahr pistols, but they are rather heavy for the pocket. The polymer CW9. however, weighs less than 16 ounces, putting it in the class of alloy-frame revolvers. Even lighter and more suited for pocket carry is the company’s PM9 with a 3-inch barrel and an overall length of 5.3 inches. That’s more than an inch shorter than Smith & Wesson’s 340PD. The PM9′s standard magazine that sits flush with the bottom of the grip frame holds six rounds of 9 mm and keeps the height of the semi-auto to just 4 inches, but the gun also comes with a seven-round extended magazine for those having a little more room in their pockets and the need for someplace to rest their pinky during firing.

Width is an important factor to consider when you are looking for a pistol to carry in your pocket, and with a slide that is a slim .9 inch wide, the PM9 rides nicely in its hiding place without being bulky. The PM9′s steel slide has several near-vertical serrations that facilitate manual slide operation, but the edges are relatively smooth to minimize the possibility of snagging the gun while drawing it from the pocket. Like the rest of the pistols in the Kahr lineup, the PM9 is double action only and utilizes the locked-breech design with an internal striker and no external safety. It keeps the pistol streamlined and makes it fast to fire—just pull the trigger—but there is no second-strike capability. If your first round fails to fire, you’ll have to manually rack the slide to cock the action. Molded, rather aggressive checkering on the frontstrap and backstrap along with stippling on the grip sides help hold the pistol still in the pocket while offering good control during firing, but since these surfaces are covered by the shooting hand during the draw, there is little resistance when removing the gun. The PM9 is a potent little pistol that will fit comfortably in almost any pocket.

The Kel-Tec P-32's small size makes it an ideal candidate for pocket carry. Although some consider its .32 ACP chambering less than ideal for self defense, the little powerhouse holds seven rounds and weighs just 6.6 ounces.

Kel-Tec makes some interesting and very economical handguns that offer great potential as pocket pistols. Featuring a steel slide and barrel, an aluminum frame and polymer grips, the locked-breech. double-action-only PF-9 weighs slightly less than 13 ounces, is chambered for 9 mm and has a magazine capacity of seven rounds. Kel-Tec’s P-l 1 is made like the PF-9. but weighs 14 ounces and holds 10 rounds of 9 mm. Both have 3.1-inch barrels. The PF-9 is less than 1 ounce heavier than the scandium-frame Smith & Wesson and the P-l 1 weighs an ounce less than the alloy-frame Smiths. If you have tiny pockets. Kel-Tec makesan 8.3-ounce pistol that holds six rounds of .380 ACP and a 6.6-ounce pistol that holds seven rounds of .32 ACP. While neither of these calibers are near the top of the list of self-defense handgun cartridges, the P-3AT and P-32 housing them are certainly in the proper size range for a pocket pistol and may offer as much power as some shooters can handle. If concealment is one of your primary goals. Kel-Tec deserves a good look before making your decision.

Taurus has a line of semi-autos called the Millennium Pro that bears consideration. Available chamberings go from .32 ACP up to .45 ACP with all the in-between cartridges you would expect. Weight doesn’t vary much with the .380 ACP hitting the scales at less than 19 ounces, and the .45 ACP at 22 ounces. Capacity of all guns is high due to their double-stack magazines, but you pay for the firepower in increased size that may take the guns beyond pocket dimensions.

At least one candidate in the guns I have mentioned should fill your need for a pocket pistol. I apologize if I’ve missed any of your favorite handguns, and if you find your solution somewhere else, my feelings won’t be hurt. The important things are to stay safe and to take care of yourself and your loved ones, and the means to do it can fit right in your pocket.

→ Leave a comment

Posted in pocket pistols

Tagged bodyguard frame, concealed carry, derringer, j-frame, Kahr PM9, Milennium Pro, Model 340PD, Model 415, pocket pistols, scandium wheelguns, small revolvers, Undercover Southpaw

Para Enters the GAP

Posted on February 9, 2010 by Dick Williams| Leave a comment

Published in “Shooting Illustrated”, May 2007

It’s a simple formula: If you want to increase the number of rounds carried in a pistol, you must increase the size of the magazine. Unless you have a pistol like a Broomhandle Mauser, you’ll also have to increase the size of the grip frame that houses the magazine. Shrinking the size of the ammunition allows a reduction in grip size, but that normally requires a reduction in bullet diameter, and many of us adhere to the principle that big bullets stop hostile behavior faster than smaller ones. To be more specific, you can’t make .45-caliber pistols smaller than those in 9 mm or .40 caliber, given the same frame size and barrel length. If your hands are too small to control a high-capacity .45, you’ll have to settle for a handgun of lesser caliber.

A .45-caliber hole in the muzzle of the Para-Ordnance CCO GAP belies its shortened grip frame. Chambered in .45 GAP, the pistol comfortably puts big-bore firepower into smaller hands.

Though the .45 GAP case is about .1 inch shorter than that of the .45 ACP, the stubby cartridge gives up little in ballistic performance. The muzzle velocity of the Federal Low Recoil 185-grain Hydra-Shok .45 GAP load (left) is listed as 1,090 feet per second, while the cartridge pushes a Winchester WinClean 230-grain brass-enclosed-base bullet to 875 feet per second.

About four years ago, Glock bent the rules when it introduced a .45-caliber pistol with a smaller grip size. Glock simply shortened the .45 ACP case by about .1 inch, and the result was a cartridge that could still shoot standard .45-caliber bullets weighing from 185 to 230 grains but fit in grip frames originally designed for a 9 mm. The new cartridge was called the .45 GAP, which stands for Glock Automatic Pistol. Federal developed and produced the first ammunition for the new cartridge, and Winchester started manufacturing loads the next year. For marketing purposes as much as anything else—and so no one could say the .45 GAP was inferior to the .45 ACP—both ammo companies worked hard to duplicate the old cartridge’s ballistics in the shorter case and pretty much succeeded. Since the laws of physics do not allow for any free lunches, there is an enhanced recoil impulse to get this performance from the smaller case, but it’s not enough to bother anyone accustomed to shooting the .45 ACP. The resulting Glock 37 did have a smaller grip, which in turn offered more control to shooters with smaller hands.

Para-Ordnance apparently believes the cartridge will sell, or at least that it has enough merit that a Para pistol chambered in .45 GAP will sell. The company’s initial model strikes me as being an excellent candidate for the stumpy .45 for a couple of reasons. First, it is built on Para’s Light Double Action (LDA) platform. Without dwelling on all the LDA features, it is a double-action-only 1911 that requires just a slightly longer reach from the backstrap to the trigger than do standard-size 1911s. Because of that, folks with small- to medium-sized hands or short fingers should realize even greater benefits from the shortened grip frame of the .45 GAP pistol. The LDA trigger needs a longer pull than a single-action 1911, but not nearly as long as a double-action revolver. Additionally, stock Para LDAs have a much smoother and lighter pull than out-of-the-box double-action revolvers, so with the shortened grip frame and proper trigger reset, follow-up shots should be greatly facilitated for shooters with tiny paws.

Para offers the .45 GAP in its Companion Carry Option (CCO). It’s an all-steel gun with a single-stack magazine that holds seven rounds. With one in the pipe, that’s eight rounds of full-power, .45-caliber ammo in a downsized pistol.

The barrel is 3 1/2 inches long. A three-dot sight system consists of a semi-fixed rear and a blade front dovetailed into the slide. A screw in the top of the rear sight can be loosened to provide windage adjustment. The CCO GAP has the flush hammer typical of Para LDA pistols, but it also features a bobbed beavertail safety, which is a big advantage in a gun that may be carried inside clothing. Two other very appropriate features are the grooves on the frontstrap and the bumper pads on the two magazines furnished with the pistol. The frontstrap grooves are like shallow half moons that help control the gun in rapid fire but, when held lightly, still permit the shooter to change his grip. Para calls these Grip-tor grasping grooves. The Griptor grooves, a checkered backstrap and the slight grip extension provided by the bumper pads combine to enhance the shooter’s grip of the gun and make recoil quite manageable.

Almost all testing with the CCO GAP was done with Winchester’s 230-grain full-metal-jacket loads. That’s partly because it was most of the .45 GAP ammo I had available, but also because I thought a 230-grain bullet would provide more of an apples-to-apples comparison with .45 ACP performance and controllability. I did fire a few rounds of Federal’s 185-grain jacketed hollow points to check reliability of the gun. In truth, if I were carrying a .45 GAP for self-protection, it would be loaded with 185-grain jacketed hollow points for maximum performance. Reliability with both loads was 100 percent, but before saddling up with jacketed hollow points for the streets, I would spend more time with this ammo for familiarity and total confidence.

I managed some range time with Barry Dueck, a former Marine and nationally ranked IPSC multi-gun shooter. Prior to our day on the range, he hadn’t spent much time with Para’s LDA pistols. A serious competitor, his first test was to run the gun against the clock. Specifically, he checked split times of the CCO GAP versus a single-action 1911 he uses in competition. The splits ran about .02 second slower for the LDA than for the standard 1911 during the first couple of runs. As he warmed up, split times on both guns came down, although the difference between the two guns still remained about the same.

None of Dueck’s shots wandered outside a 4-inch-diameter circle in the middle of his target. He concluded that with additional range time, he could compete with an LDA, and he did not notice any adverse effects associated with the reduced grip size and slightly higher recoil impulse of the .45 GAP cartridge. More importantly, with absolutely no prompting on my part, he said that the smaller frame LDA gun in an honest .45 caliber would be outstanding for inside-the-waistband carry.

The CCO GAP is a double-action-only pistol, but the LDA mechanism keeps the distance from the backstrap to the trigger nearly as short as that of a single-action 1911. Shooters don't need big mitts to easily reach the trigger.

I also put the CCO GAP in the hands of former Navy gunner Alena Gomez. This young lady is a fan of the 1911 and owns a couple ranging in size from a scandium-frame Smith & Wesson to a long-slide Springfield in .460 Rowland. She enjoys shooting them and has no trouble controlling the full-size 1911s, even in a rapid-fire string. Gomez stands a towering 5-foot-nothing and has extremely small hands. The idea was to see whether she could comfortably reach the LDA’s controls. She was completely taken with Para’s LDA trigger and felt very much in control of the pistol.

I should note that both Dueck and Gomez went through their drills starting with the Para already in hand. As a high-level competitor, I would expect Dueck to suffer a slight loss in speed learning to draw a gun with a different grip-to-trigger configuration, even though it’s still a 1911. I’d also expect him to overcome that difference very quickly. I doubt Gomez, as a recreational shooter and someone who is in the process of obtaining a concealed carry permit, would have any more problems mastering a Para LDA carried concealed versus a standard 1911.

It’s still not clear whether the .45 GAP will survive in today’s competitive market. Its closest rival, the .45 ACP, is the most successful defensive cartridge in history, at least with regard to long-term survivability. Are there enough people with tiny hands concerned about self-defense to make the cartridge a commercial success? Would they prefer a small-frame LDA pistol to other candidates? I don’t know the answers to these questions, but Para-Ordnance has created a dandy pistol to address these issues. Anyone who fails to try the CCO GAP may miss a potential favorite self-defense handgun.

Para-Ordnance

980 Tapscott Road

Scarborough, Ontario, Canada M1X1C3

(416) 297-7855 (416) 297-7855 (416) 297-7855 (416) 297-7855

www.paraord.com

→ Leave a comment

Posted in Uncategorized

Tagged .45 caliber pistol, .45 GAP, 9mm, Alena Gomez, Barry Dueck, Companion Carry Option (CCO), double-action, Federal, Glock, LDA, self-protection, Winchester

Big Game Basics

Posted on February 6, 2010 by Dick Williams| Leave a comment

Pulblished in “Shooting Illstrated” April 2007

O ne of the hazards associated with describing anything as “basic” is the preconceived notion that it implies marginal suitability or even substandard quality. Very few of us ask a realtor to simply show us a basic house or tell a car salesman we want only a basic car. But many of the basic handguns on today’s market are exceptional products. Just look at the expensive custom guns you and your buddies own. Under all of those special touches there probably lies a Ruger or Smith & Wesson, or perhaps even a Freedom Arms revolver. Once we buy a gun, we tend to accessorize to suit our tastes or tailor the gun to more closely match our needs. Let’s establish some parameters and look at a few of the superb basic handguns available today that are more than adequate for big-game hunting.

: In its basic form right from the Ruger factory, the Super Blackhawk in .44 Magnum is a solid handgun for big-game hunting. The author prefers the version with a 5′/2-ineh barrel, because it offers the best compromise of velocity, portability and handling characteristics that moke accurate bullet placement easier.

Perhaps a good starting point is deciding which cartridges are suitable for big game. I know the .357 Magnum has taken big game, such as deer and feral hogs, and while I’ve used this caliber myself on both species, the animals’ deaths weren’t nearly as quick and humane as they should have been. In my opinion, big-game calibers start with the number “4,” and if necessary, I could spend the rest of my days happily hunting with the basic .41 and .44 Magnums. Using proper bullets, I’m not sure any animal could tell the difference between hits with the .41 Magnum versus the .44 Magnum. An advantage for the .44 is the incredible availability of ammunition, even in small-town general stores and hunting locations overseas. The .44 is also available with heavier bullets, although these more specialized loads may not be found just anywhere. The .41 dishes out a tad less recoil, partly because it usually shoots lighter bullets and partly because there’s a bit more weight to the gun. Standard bullets for the .41 Magnum are 210 grains, while the classic .44 Magnum load is 240 grains. With heavy, cast bullets, .41 Magnum loads feature slugs up around 265 grains and the .44 Magnum tops 300 grains. Stuffed with these heavyweights, both calibers provide great penetration.

To me, a basic big-game handgun has iron sights and is carried in a belt holster. I also believe a basic handgun is one I can effectively shoot offhand if necessary. I’ll take a rest whenever one is available, but I’m not passing up a reasonable standing shot if one is presented, and I can shoot iron sights much better offhand than any gun with a scope. My preference is for barrels from 4 3/4 to 6 inches in length, but I recognize one could make an argument for anything from 4 to 7 1/2 inches. I would have stipulated 5 to 6 inches, except the Ruger and Freedom Arms single actions have barrels that extend just to the end of the ejector housing. Perhaps my tighter tolerances are a function of advancing age, but it seems I can stretch my effective shooting range a bit using a 5-inch barrel rather than a 4-inch one. I’m certainly more comfortable with the sight picture offered by factory sights on a longer barrel. On the upper end, a 6-inch barrel in a belt holster still makes it easy for me to take a seat while still-hunting without jamming the muzzle into the dirt. Access and comfort in a four-wheel drive, ATV or on a horse is greatly enhanced with a short holster, and as I get older, I spend more time letting something else do the walking.

Gun selection for the .41 Magnum is a bit more limited than for the .44 Magnum, which is not to say it is terribly restricted. Ruger offers the eternal Blackhawk in two barrel lengths. The short barrel touches my lower boundary of 4 3/4 inches, and while the other just misses my upper limit with its 61/2-inch tube, I’ll grant this gun a waiver. Both are six-shooters that represent exceptional guns for the money and will still be running when your grandkids inherit them. For me, the short barrel packs more comfortably, while the extended sight radius of the longer barrel makes it easier to shoot. Velocity difference between the two barrel lengths shouldn’t be a concern, or you would be looking for a more specialized hunting handgun.

Freedom Arms offers the .41 Magnum in two different frame sizes, and there are differences in the capabilities of the two guns. Both are single-action five-shooters. The Model 83 in .41 Magnum has the same large frame and exacting tolerances as the company’s .454 Casull version, which means you can maximize the .41′s performance beyond other guns. Barrel lengths include both 4 3/4 and 6 inches, as well as shorter and longer tubes beyond my definition of basic, The cylinder and frame of the Model 97 are not sized to accommodate long, heavy bullets, but the smaller gun is a joy to carry and is quite manageable with standard factory loads of 210-grain jacketed hollow points. While the Model 97 may lack the size of its big brother, manufacturing tolerances are just as tight and ensure maximum accuracy.

Smith & Wesson offers some excellent double-action .41 Magnum revolvers that, although just outside my barrel-length parameters, may be perfect for you. There is a scandium framed 4-inch model that is as light as you’ll find in a .41 Magnum, and it’s called, oddly enough, the Model 357.

While the .44 Magnum (right) Is widely popular □mong handgunners pursuing big game, the .41 Magnum deserves credit for being an effective cartridge as well. However, hunters traveling far from home should keep in mind that .44 Magnum ammunition is generally easier to find in local gunshops.

The classic Model 57 has returned with a 4-inch barrel and blued finish. It’s the same size as the Model 357, but with its steel frame and classic adjustable sights, it’s more comfortable to shoot.

I would guess no hunting handgun is more common than the .44 Magnum, and the number of guns chambered for this caliber reflects its popularity. Freedom Arms doesn’t chamber the Model 97 in .44 Magnum, but it does offer the Model 83 in .44 Magnum with the same barrel lengths as the .41 Magnum. The Model 83 digests the heaviest factory loads with aplomb, and I’ve never seen a Freedom Arms revolver shoot loose from firing large quantities of full-power ammo. Ruger makes both single- and double-action revolvers in

.44 Magnum. The single actions are built on the Super Blackhawk frame, which is slightly larger than the Blackhawk and features the distinctive, flattened hammer spur. One of my favorites is the elegantly simple Super Blackhawk with 5 1/2-inch barrel, and if I ever get into that “one gun for survival” argument, this would be a candidate. The incredibly strong, stainless steel Ruger Redhawk has been available over the years in a 5 1/2-inch barrel, and while the gun will digest any load, I have trouble managing the recoil with the small, wooden grip panels standard on the gun. Stepping up to Pachmayr rubber grips helps, but the overall grip becomes a bit large for my hand. But this revolver, and the new .44 Magnum Redhawk with a 4-inch barrel, are definitely worth considering.

Smith & Wesson continues its love affair with the .44 Magnum offering its N-frame revolvers in barrel lengths from 4 to 8 3/8inches. The 5- and 6-inch .44 Magnums meet all my criteria. In fact, the 5-inch Model 625 and Model 629 Classic would be my other candidates for the “one gun” argument. The 5-inch barrel offers a crisp, clean sight picture and superb balance for offhand shooting. Their double-action triggers and, to a lesser degree, faster reloading capability may not be factors in hunting, but shooters who have mastered the double-action technique might prefer these guns. For the old-and-slow cadre of shooters like me, I’ll simply say their single-action trigger pulls can’t be beat for precision shooting.

I haven’t mentioned Taurus revolvers simply because I haven’t hunted with any of the company’s .41 or .44 Magnums, but I have hunted with a Raging Bull double-action revolver chambered in .480 Ruger and loved it. I’ve also shot two titanium Tracker revolvers in .41 Magnum and .44 Magnum, and have high praise for both. Their light weight, crisp, black sights, soft rubber grips and factory porting systems make them excellent candidates for a big-bore belt gun. However, I didn’t shoot them as well offhand as some of the other candidates, and that’s a big factor with me.

Finally, let me emphasize again how important it is to practice shooting offhand. Besides the obvious fact that you may miss an opportunity trying to find a rest when one isn’t available, you will be pleased with the increased shooting skills and confidence that comes with your growing ability to stand on your hind legs and shoot like a man.

→ Leave a comment

Posted in Freedom Arms, Ruger, Smith & Wesson

Tagged .44 Magnum, revolver, Freedom Arms, Ruger, .357 Magnum, Smith & Wesson Performance Center, Model 97, bullets, basic handguns, .41 Magnum, big game, iron sites, barrel length, Model 83, Blackhawk, Model 57, Taurus

Compact Nines

Posted on February 5, 2010 by Dick Williams| Leave a comment

Published in “Shooting Illustrated” March 2007

It’s become trendy in recent years to trash any defensive handgun with a bore diameter less than .4 inch. Slogans abound, but one of my favorites is, “Friends don’t let friends carry mouse guns.”

It would be interesting to find a genuine ghost whisperer to interview a few of the people on the receiving end of a properly placed 9 mm. I’d be very surprised if any of those folks would categorize it as a mouse gun.

Admittedly, discussions of defensive handguns and calibers usually focus on their ability to produce one-shot stops. The argument for a defensive handgun with a bore diameter of at least .4 inch stems from the basic premise that big bores are more effective stoppers than small ones. Without debating this premise, which ignores the excellent one-shot stop record of the .357 Magnum, it only holds true if the defender is able to properly place his or her shots. I would suggest that a miss with a .45-caliber handgun has less chance of stopping an assailant than a torso hit with a 9 mm.

In many cases, a criminal has been stopped by the mere presence of a handgun with no shots being fired. I’m not sure whether these occasions involved big- or small-bore handguns, but I do believe a potential victim’s demonstrated confidence when holding a handgun has a big influence on an aggressor’s decision whether to stop or press the attack.

The confidence level of most citizens relates directly to their proficiency. Since 9 mm handguns are usually mastered more quickly than big bores, particularly when training and practice sessions are minimal, confidence begins to show earlier. This is especially true for a person of small stature or with small hands.

Early attempts to popularize the 9 mm for self-defense focused on large handguns with high-capacity magazines—an approach driven by the police market and its use of external-carry pistols. When Florida opened up its concealed-carry policies and started a nationwide trend, smaller guns began receiving more attention. But the double-stack frames of the high-capacity nines, while readily available, weren’t the optimum approach.

A few companies offered some slimmer, single-stack guns, but these candidates didn’t possess the inherently desirable characteristics of the classic 1911. Now two major American companies, Kimber and Springfield, are making downsized 1911s in 9 mm, and while both guns are distinctly 1911, there are some noteworthy differences. Unlike many of the new handguns I have the opportunity to evaluate, both guns had some run time in the hands of a professional trainer and a couple of new shooters.

Above: The EMP magazines had base pads and held one more round than the Aegis II, but the Aegis II had checkering on the frontstrap. While features varied, reliability of both was flawless, and shooters may have a difficult time choosing one over the other

We’ll look at Springfield’s EMP first. EMP stands for Enhanced Micro Pistol, which is a bit of an understatement when you look at the major changes Springfield has made to its regular micro pistols. While the EMPs sport a 3-inch barrel like the company’s .45 ACP Micro model, its slide has been shortened, which required shortening a number of other components like the firing pin, firing pin spring and extractor.

Knowing they were onto a good thing, Springfield’s engineers shortened and narrowed the frame—the single most important component in the interface between shooter and handgun. This required shortening the trigger bow, the end result being what Springfield refers to as a short-action 1911. While this was a substantial re-engineering effort, it made excellent sense when building a gun around a cartridge smaller than the .45 ACP.

Springfield had already successfully built a 1911 around the .45 GAP cartridge, which simplified the 9 mm project. The difference in frame sizes between the EMP and a standard 1911 is obvious when looking at the base of the frames with the magazines removed.

Springfield spared no expense in optimizing the EMP for concealed carry. All the sharp edges were radiused and fixed sights with tritium inserts have been dovetailed into the stainless steel slide. The frame is a blackened, anodized alloy with a beavertail grip safety and ambidextrous thumb safeties. Thin, cocobolo grips are checkered and have the attractive Springfield logo. The magazine holds nine rounds and has a small bumper pad extension providing plenty of room for the pinky finger on the shooting hand, even for those with larger paws. Overall it’s an extremely handsome, practical concealed-carry pistol.

Springfield includes a molded holster and magazine carrier with every EMP. That makes the package ready to go as a concealed-carry pistol, right off the shelf.

Kimber took a slightly different approach, perhaps because it had not downsized a 1911 frame for the .45 GAP. Rather than changing the basic frame and slide dimensions, the company took a 3-inch barrel/ slide and shorter frame, like those used on its Ultra Carry models, and installed the minimum-size components that would still make a fully reliable gun.

The result is Kimber’s 9 mm Aegis II, a two-tone gun like the EMP but with some slightly different touches. First, the Aegis II has reversed colors, a blackened stainless steel slide and an anodized aluminum-alloy frame with a brushed finish. Unlike the EMP’s rounded hammer, the Aegis II has a bobbed hammer that does not extend beyond the back of the slide in the down position.

While both guns have serrations on their backstraps, only the Aegis II has a checkered frontstrap for better grip control. At the rear of the slide, there are four, wide vertical cuts on the Aegis II and nine thin serrations slanted rearward on the EMP. The Aegis II has a single thumb safety for right-handed shooters and has been dehorned for concealed-carry market.

I’ve always liked the extra purchase provided by checkering on the frontstrap of 1911s, but given the minimum recoil of the 9 mm, it would not be a necessity for me on either of these guns. I also like the wider slide serrations on the Aegis II but can’t personally justify a need for a bobbed hammer. I believe in having ambidextrous safeties for “just in case” scenarios, but I wouldn’t get into any serious arguments regarding their necessity on a concealed-carry pistol.

The wood grips on the Aegis II are remarkably thin, and when combined with the slightly longer grip frame, they feel a bit narrower and slightly longer than those on the EMP. The bases of the Kimber magazines have been drilled for bumper pads, although they are not provided, so the magazines fit flush with the bottom of the frame. With the 9 mm’s minimal recoil, the lack of a definitive home for the pinky finger does not pose a control problem. The Aegis II magazine holds eight rounds.

The difference in frame sizes may not be great, but the grip frame circumference of the Springfield EMP (left) has been shortened. On the other hand, the Aegis II has slightly thinner grip panels, allowing both pistols to handle and feel very similar.

Like the compact .45 ACPs, the mini 9 mms utilize double recoil springs and a guide rod. For someone as clumsy as I am, disassembling and cleaning these guns is akin to learning to juggle sharp objects, but these features are regarded as necessary on compact 1911s, and I am getting more proficient.The reliability summary for both guns is simple: no failures in either gun with any ammo. I was helping a friend who had invited some family and friends for a day at the range. Attendees included a mother and two sons who had never fired handguns before. In loading one of the compact nines, the oldest boy did not release the slide but rather eased it forward, resulting in the slide not going fully into battery. A light push on the back of the slide resolved the problem, and when the correct loading technique was demonstrated, it never happened again. This was the only problem encountered during any of the range sessions with both guns. Interestingly, the hand sizes of the mother and sons varied from small on the youngest boy to medium on the mother to rather large on the teenager. All were quite comfortable shooting the small-frame nines, and while their combined experience was quite limited, their shooting was much better than I expected and their verbal inputs were honest and reflected no personal agendas.

As a Gunsite instructor, II Ling New spends i | a lot of time on the range. Although she usually uses full-size, double-stack handguns In her classes, she found the 9 mm Springfield EMP to her liking.

At the other end of the expertise spectrum was Gunsite Academy instructor II Ling New. At something over 5 feet tall, New does not have large hands, and while she regularly utilizes full-size, double-stack pistols in her classes, she liked both compact nines and the enhanced controllability the smaller caliber provided in rapid fire. She preferred the smoother, shallow slide serrations of the EMP. Recognizing the enhanced control offered by the checkering on the frontstrap of the Kimber, she felt it was more than needed on the lower recoiling 9 mm, particularly in an extended practice or training scenario.

I did get some personal time with the compacts and was quite impressed. The usual snappy recoil of mini .45s is absent with the nines, and recovery time is much improved. Ammo fired included lots of Black Hills full metal jacket along with some Winchester and Federal jacketed hollow points.

Perhaps the best summary I can give is to say that I rate these guns so highly both have become candidates for the final gun on my concealed-carry license when it’s issued. Deciding which one will require more range time with both guns before making such an important decision. But that’s another story.

→ Leave a comment

Posted in Uncategorized

Tagged 1911, 9 mm, compact nines, concealed carry, EMP Enhanced Micro Pistol, Gunsite, Il Ling New, Kimber, Springfield

Subtle Improvement

Bill Wilson is no stranger to the shooting world. His CQB pistol graced the cover of Shooting Illustrated’s November 2005 issue and was the subject of a full length feature entitled “The Perfect IDPA Pistol.”

Ruger’s New Light, Compact Revolver

When polymer was introduced in guns, it was a revolutionary change. Now Ruger’s found it a home on wheelguns — in the all new LCR.

Ruger’s 50-Year Commemorative Super Blackhawk

For those who have enjoyed a lifelong love affair with handguns, there lingers the memory of “the one that got away.”

Arma Lite’s AR-24

Portable .44 Magnums

Three-Part Plan

Pocket Protectors

Para Enters the GAP

Big Game Basics

Compact Nines

Recent Comments

Pages