So, I choked with a 204 out of 300 at Washington's Birthday.
I did much better at the 2011 Legacy match at Rio. This was a 50 shot match, all shot at 200 yards. I shot a 412-2x out of 500 possible. That's a personal best at 82%, and I'm pretty happy about that.
I ran this match with my 1:9 twist AR-15, shooting factory Prvi Partizan 75gr match ammo. No keyholing, so my 1:9 can stabilize 75gr ammo.
Things learned:
1. I shoot seated MUCH better with an AR than an M14. The extra height to the sights, and the extra vertical distance on the grip due to the pistol grip, help me with my long body from the seated position. My seated was my best component yesterday, and I got away with a 94-2x on it.
2. I think I've picked up on something with standing. I'm eager to try again. I did a 72 on my standing this weekend, which is certainly not spectacular. I had 1 miss. But, towards the end, I realized I could control a component of my natural point of aim with my support arm, based upon my wrist's angle at the delta-ring (I support the AR's barrel with a reversed hand grip at the delta-ring for standing). Rotating my wrist helps "settle" the rifle in the direction I want to go.
3. Buttstock tension into the shoulder pocket is really important from prone. When I shot slowfire prone, I noticed that my 7-ring hits were all happening when I'd slack off on pulling the buttstock into the pocket. When I'd tighten back up and pull with the pistol-grip straight back into my shoulder firmly, my shots would tighten back up into the 10 and 9 rings. Tight-tension into the pocket = hits in the 10-ring. Light-tension into the pocket = hits in the 7-ring, down 2MOA.
Monday, March 14, 2011
Monday, February 21, 2011
Washington's Birthday CHOKE!
204-1x out of 300.
[hangs head in shame]
That's 68%, whereas my last two matches have been 80%.
I think I got bit by a lack of environmental knowledge. We went directly from standing to rapid prone with no sighters. I was shooting low, by about 3-4 MOA. Part-way through my rapid prone my spotter team-mate told me I was hitting low. I adjusted hold from 6-o'clock on target to center of target for 3MOA increase. That moved me from the 5/6 ring area to the 7 ring. I dropped off-target with 1 shot, scoring 1 miss. Part way through that string the sun peaked out. "Lights up, sights up!" When the light gets significantly brighter, you tend to drop your shots 2 MOA on target. So, my 3MOA sight hold adjustment got mostly negated by the increase in light.
So, I now know I lose about 3-4 MOA when going from standing to prone.
And I'll remember to compensate for increased light (or a decrease in light by dropping my sights 2MOA when the sun is obscured by a cloud).
Not happy with that score. But, there's always next year.
[hangs head in shame]
That's 68%, whereas my last two matches have been 80%.
I think I got bit by a lack of environmental knowledge. We went directly from standing to rapid prone with no sighters. I was shooting low, by about 3-4 MOA. Part-way through my rapid prone my spotter team-mate told me I was hitting low. I adjusted hold from 6-o'clock on target to center of target for 3MOA increase. That moved me from the 5/6 ring area to the 7 ring. I dropped off-target with 1 shot, scoring 1 miss. Part way through that string the sun peaked out. "Lights up, sights up!" When the light gets significantly brighter, you tend to drop your shots 2 MOA on target. So, my 3MOA sight hold adjustment got mostly negated by the increase in light.
So, I now know I lose about 3-4 MOA when going from standing to prone.
And I'll remember to compensate for increased light (or a decrease in light by dropping my sights 2MOA when the sun is obscured by a cloud).
Not happy with that score. But, there's always next year.
Monday, February 7, 2011
Who Says Nickel-Plated Brass Isn't Any Good?
So, previously in January I wrote about a need for new brass. I ended up ordering 500pcs of Remington nickel-plated new brass.
I went out Sunday morning to test my loads.
Load:
New Remington nickel-plated brass
168gr Hornady A-Max bullet
CCI #34 primer
IMR 4895 powder
2.790 OAL
Lee FCD, moderate crimp
Case trim length: 1.990
I found a LOT of case weight variation. 164.0 to 167.5. I'm not certain if that's because it's Remington brass rather than something with a higher reputation for consistency (Nosler, Norma, etc) or due to the nickel plating that could introduce greater variation. I grouped the cases into similar-weighted (+/- 0.2gr from a center standard) lots of 5 for each powder charge below:
Powder charges:
5 rounds 39.5gr
5 rounds 40.0gr
5 rounds 40.5gr
5 rounds 41.0gr
5 rounds 41.5gr
I did confirm the weight of each powder charge, though I allowed for a variance of +/- 0.1gr rather than trickling for a perfect target weight.
I didn't weigh the bullets.
Discard farthest "flier" from each 5 round group. All fliers were called as sight picture was brought into question. Measure group with 4 best confident shots. Shooting position was improvised prone rest on top of range bag and padding. Target was 100 yards. Groups measured with a tape measure since I'm too lazy to go hunt down my micrometer right now.
39.5 group: 1.875"
40.0 group: 2.375"
40.5 group: 1.125"
41.0 group: 0.5"
41.5 group: 1.625"
Pretty clear what it likes. I've never found a sub-MOA group before. Nifty. I've never shot a sub-MOA group before, even with a scoped rifle. Yeah, it was from an improvised field rest, but it still wasn't some stupid caldwell lead sled from a concrete bench.
And... did I mention I trimmed all my new brass for this load development (25 pieces) in about 4 minutes? I love my new Giraud trimmer.
I'm happy with the nickel-plated brass. It's not nicked/dinged on extraction so far, whereas new brass will pick up a nice gouge on the side of the case as the extractor flings the case against the front of the op-rod. These cases are tough enough to escape unscathed. Extraction groove on the case also has no visible deformity, whereas a typical Federal brass case will have a visible scratch or dent on the rim from even the first firing. After 4 firings, the rim becomes difficult to seat into a reloading shell holder due to the scratches in the extractor groove. We'll see how these hold up over time.
Thursday, January 27, 2011
The Nutnfancy Project (TNP)
I've stumbled across this fella who goes by "Nutnfancy" and has a long-running series of videos on YouTube.
I found his stuff while doing research for a .22 "tactical" rifle.
Gotta say, I like a lot of his reviews. He doesn't seem afraid of saying "this thing right here sucks!" In particular, his candid disavowal of the FNP-45 and the FNX series of pistols due to magazine design caught me as thorough and honest.
In particular, I like his methodology of weapons testing. Take the thing out and run-n-gun it! See if you can make it malfunction. Don't just jerk around with Caldwell bench rests, shooting for sub MOA groups. Tell me about the ergonomic fumbles and foibles as you're engaging a mix of steel and paper targets. Put 50-100 rounds through it in a minute or two and warm it up properly.
And, those of you who read my blog who already have your firearms situation squared away, you might like his ideas on techniques and gear to carry magazines, and holsters, and slings... as well as knife reviews, outdoors gear reviews and just philosophy videos.
Check him out on YouTube: http://youtube.com/user/nutnfancy.
I found his stuff while doing research for a .22 "tactical" rifle.
Gotta say, I like a lot of his reviews. He doesn't seem afraid of saying "this thing right here sucks!" In particular, his candid disavowal of the FNP-45 and the FNX series of pistols due to magazine design caught me as thorough and honest.
In particular, I like his methodology of weapons testing. Take the thing out and run-n-gun it! See if you can make it malfunction. Don't just jerk around with Caldwell bench rests, shooting for sub MOA groups. Tell me about the ergonomic fumbles and foibles as you're engaging a mix of steel and paper targets. Put 50-100 rounds through it in a minute or two and warm it up properly.
And, those of you who read my blog who already have your firearms situation squared away, you might like his ideas on techniques and gear to carry magazines, and holsters, and slings... as well as knife reviews, outdoors gear reviews and just philosophy videos.
Check him out on YouTube: http://youtube.com/user/nutnfancy.
Monday, January 24, 2011
Rimfire steel pistol match
I had very mixed feelings about the rimfire steel pistol match I was looking forward to in earlier posts. I went and participated in it yesterday.
A lot of new shooters were there. I love new shooters. I am constantly looking for new shooters to mentor. I teach them proper technique for best accuracy, and then I teach them how to sacrifice technique for speed (to the best of my own limited skills) if it's necessary to do so.
However, in my opinion a timed steel match is not the place to go if you don't know the manual of arms of your gun or don't have the strength to run the bolt on a .22 pistol.
I was particularly irked by the notion that a person can show up with an absolutely filthy gun where the bolt on a Ruger MkIII acts like it's been lubed with a 50/50 mix of peanut butter and elephant snot. They shoot and get malfunctions. They can restart the stage for a failure to feed, failure to eject or failure to fire. You do the math and find out how many times that particular type of gun can manage to get 10 shots off with 0 failures.
Other irksome discoveries were new shooters who didn't know how to turn on their red dot sight on their ninja-ized Ruger MkIII, new shooters who came with 1 magazine and had a 50 round course of fire until their turn was done, and new shooters who need to be told a dozen times inside of 3 minutes to keep their finger off the trigger while loading.
I love new shooters. But new shooters belong with a coach, in a low pressure environment, where they can learn proper fundamentals and gun handling skills. Not at novice-to-intermediate events where people are looking to move to another stage of marksmanship.
A lot of what I saw would have people kicked off the range at other events. Too many muzzle sweeps, too many fingers on triggers.
I left after two stages. I left because the pace was so accursedly slow and there were too many of the new shooters in line in front of me, and because I was cold and didn't wear appropriate clothing, and because I was moderately worried for my safety.
That being said, I did learn a little bit in my short stint there. I started to REALLY get a feel for that fine window that comes after recoil but before conscious recovery, where you can settle the front sight on the target and squeeze again, getting 5-6-7 shots off a second. I experienced just a hint of that feeling, and I think the shot timer over my shoulder helped me to focus on it, along with the steel giving auditory feedback of acceptable accuracy.
I need to run more, but I think I'm going to build my own steel setup for rimfire rather than going back to this rimfire match. I want to experience more of that link between the front sight and the trigger. It was enlightening and I think the Buckmark is going to end up being a great tool to explore it in greater detail.
A lot of new shooters were there. I love new shooters. I am constantly looking for new shooters to mentor. I teach them proper technique for best accuracy, and then I teach them how to sacrifice technique for speed (to the best of my own limited skills) if it's necessary to do so.
However, in my opinion a timed steel match is not the place to go if you don't know the manual of arms of your gun or don't have the strength to run the bolt on a .22 pistol.
I was particularly irked by the notion that a person can show up with an absolutely filthy gun where the bolt on a Ruger MkIII acts like it's been lubed with a 50/50 mix of peanut butter and elephant snot. They shoot and get malfunctions. They can restart the stage for a failure to feed, failure to eject or failure to fire. You do the math and find out how many times that particular type of gun can manage to get 10 shots off with 0 failures.
Other irksome discoveries were new shooters who didn't know how to turn on their red dot sight on their ninja-ized Ruger MkIII, new shooters who came with 1 magazine and had a 50 round course of fire until their turn was done, and new shooters who need to be told a dozen times inside of 3 minutes to keep their finger off the trigger while loading.
I love new shooters. But new shooters belong with a coach, in a low pressure environment, where they can learn proper fundamentals and gun handling skills. Not at novice-to-intermediate events where people are looking to move to another stage of marksmanship.
A lot of what I saw would have people kicked off the range at other events. Too many muzzle sweeps, too many fingers on triggers.
I left after two stages. I left because the pace was so accursedly slow and there were too many of the new shooters in line in front of me, and because I was cold and didn't wear appropriate clothing, and because I was moderately worried for my safety.
That being said, I did learn a little bit in my short stint there. I started to REALLY get a feel for that fine window that comes after recoil but before conscious recovery, where you can settle the front sight on the target and squeeze again, getting 5-6-7 shots off a second. I experienced just a hint of that feeling, and I think the shot timer over my shoulder helped me to focus on it, along with the steel giving auditory feedback of acceptable accuracy.
I need to run more, but I think I'm going to build my own steel setup for rimfire rather than going back to this rimfire match. I want to experience more of that link between the front sight and the trigger. It was enlightening and I think the Buckmark is going to end up being a great tool to explore it in greater detail.
Friday, January 14, 2011
That's it. Militarize the Border. Marines, RFN!
http://www.elpasotimes.com/ci_17087113?source=most_viewed
That's 1 of 2 possible things:
1. An act of War.
2. An act of International Terrorism.
I don't care which you call it.
I want some bloodthirsty, rampaging Devil Dogs down there YESTERDAY.
That's 1 of 2 possible things:
1. An act of War.
2. An act of International Terrorism.
I don't care which you call it.
I want some bloodthirsty, rampaging Devil Dogs down there YESTERDAY.
Monday, January 10, 2011
New Brass
One of the points of frustration I've been dealing with for rifle shooting has been quality of reloads. In particular for .308 Winchester. I've been fighting some extreme velocity variation that manifested itself in a very embarrassing way at a match, with one round falling about 6-8 feet short of the target at 500 yards and slamming into the concrete berm that shields the pit crew.
That particular problem was due to my case trimmer having an oversized case mouth pilot. I've learned that I have to resize after trimming in order to get ideal case neck tension.
Last match, I shot a 176-3x from slow prone, and once I got dialed in to my zero I was ringing 9, 10 and X hits with only the rare 8. I lost out with about 8 or so rounds while I tried to "dial in" from the 7 ring. Lowest score I got on any one shot was a 7, but I walked almost all the way around the bull before finally finding the center. I could have had 10 more points if I started zeroed or at least closer to it.
However, my brass is all part of this batch of Federal once-fired stuff that gets soft easily. Then there's 100 rounds each of various other headstamps. I've got brass in so many varied stages of firing (once fired, three times fired, four times fired, Winchester, Remington, Federal, MagTech, Lake City, etc) that I can't predict how the lot will shoot.
I've been in need of some new brass for awhile, so today I ordered 500ct of Remington nickel-plated brass. The nickel will make my brass easier to distinguish from other competitors, and the lot of 500 will allow me to shoot new virgin brass at the next 8 or 9 competitions before I have to start shooting once-fired brass. It's my hope that the nickel coating will better protect brass from dings during extraction and give me extended brass life. It's about a $20 premium over standard brass in lots of 500 so it wasn't too painful as an experiment. If I get one more loading out of them than standard brass then they'll be worth it.
And the lot of 500 will make it easy to work with:
-the same headstamp
-the same firing
-in lots of cases in the same weight
That particular problem was due to my case trimmer having an oversized case mouth pilot. I've learned that I have to resize after trimming in order to get ideal case neck tension.
Last match, I shot a 176-3x from slow prone, and once I got dialed in to my zero I was ringing 9, 10 and X hits with only the rare 8. I lost out with about 8 or so rounds while I tried to "dial in" from the 7 ring. Lowest score I got on any one shot was a 7, but I walked almost all the way around the bull before finally finding the center. I could have had 10 more points if I started zeroed or at least closer to it.
However, my brass is all part of this batch of Federal once-fired stuff that gets soft easily. Then there's 100 rounds each of various other headstamps. I've got brass in so many varied stages of firing (once fired, three times fired, four times fired, Winchester, Remington, Federal, MagTech, Lake City, etc) that I can't predict how the lot will shoot.
I've been in need of some new brass for awhile, so today I ordered 500ct of Remington nickel-plated brass. The nickel will make my brass easier to distinguish from other competitors, and the lot of 500 will allow me to shoot new virgin brass at the next 8 or 9 competitions before I have to start shooting once-fired brass. It's my hope that the nickel coating will better protect brass from dings during extraction and give me extended brass life. It's about a $20 premium over standard brass in lots of 500 so it wasn't too painful as an experiment. If I get one more loading out of them than standard brass then they'll be worth it.
And the lot of 500 will make it easy to work with:
-the same headstamp
-the same firing
-in lots of cases in the same weight
Sunday, January 9, 2011
January: 2 down, 1 to go
OK, I'm already 2 for 3 for January shooting events.
I did Steel last week with a time of 119.24 seconds. There's a 10 second penalty for doing 3 hits on one target rather than a 2+1 combo (5 seconds per miss).
I learned: Don't go with multiple batches of reloads. I have two different types of 124gr LRN bullets. I know that one batch hits lower than the other. I suspect it's because one bullet is significantly shorter than the other despite being the same weight. This results in more case capacity and lower pressures on ignition. Probably lower velocity is causing the lower impact. Or less recoil somehow due to the lower pressure causing less muzzle rise, or something. But one set does hit lower than the other. Part of why I had that 10 second penalty was due to this. The 2+1 was in a vertical arrangement. I put 3 on the "1" target that was below the "2" target.
So, I've spent the last week loading up about 1000 rounds of pistol ammo, all 100% identical.
I imagine that some of my other misses can be attributed to my mixed loads too. At this point I'm good for 6 or 7 sessions. Maybe as many as 9 if my accuracy is high enough... each night requires 96 hits, typically. I tend to shoot about 125 rounds a night.
And, I did High Power today. This was a 50 round match with 20 slow prone, 10 rapid prone, 10 rapid seated and 10 slow standing. I did a 176-3x, 80, 80 and 66 for a total of 402-3x.
No misses, so that's good. I've had bad results with standing the last few times out, flubbing up 1 or 2 shots with misses. My rapid prone was well centered, but low. 2 minutes higher and it could easily have been a 92 or higher, with a couple more X's. I muscled the seated too much. I tried cross legged and couldn't find a good NPOA from there, and I went open legged instead. Even then, I was muscling my support hand upwards. Need to rediscover how to control seated elevation. I was all over with it. 2 10's, 2 9's, 2 8's, 2 7's, 2 6's.
Standing, I'm lucky if I can hold 12MOA. More dryfire practice. A must.
All in all, I'm pleased with the 402-3x score. And the slow prone score. And that I've concretely identified places to improve. with 3-4 months off of shooting rifle in a disciplined manner, it's better than I had anticipated. I also think it's a personal best for this format of match.
I did Steel last week with a time of 119.24 seconds. There's a 10 second penalty for doing 3 hits on one target rather than a 2+1 combo (5 seconds per miss).
I learned: Don't go with multiple batches of reloads. I have two different types of 124gr LRN bullets. I know that one batch hits lower than the other. I suspect it's because one bullet is significantly shorter than the other despite being the same weight. This results in more case capacity and lower pressures on ignition. Probably lower velocity is causing the lower impact. Or less recoil somehow due to the lower pressure causing less muzzle rise, or something. But one set does hit lower than the other. Part of why I had that 10 second penalty was due to this. The 2+1 was in a vertical arrangement. I put 3 on the "1" target that was below the "2" target.
So, I've spent the last week loading up about 1000 rounds of pistol ammo, all 100% identical.
I imagine that some of my other misses can be attributed to my mixed loads too. At this point I'm good for 6 or 7 sessions. Maybe as many as 9 if my accuracy is high enough... each night requires 96 hits, typically. I tend to shoot about 125 rounds a night.
And, I did High Power today. This was a 50 round match with 20 slow prone, 10 rapid prone, 10 rapid seated and 10 slow standing. I did a 176-3x, 80, 80 and 66 for a total of 402-3x.
No misses, so that's good. I've had bad results with standing the last few times out, flubbing up 1 or 2 shots with misses. My rapid prone was well centered, but low. 2 minutes higher and it could easily have been a 92 or higher, with a couple more X's. I muscled the seated too much. I tried cross legged and couldn't find a good NPOA from there, and I went open legged instead. Even then, I was muscling my support hand upwards. Need to rediscover how to control seated elevation. I was all over with it. 2 10's, 2 9's, 2 8's, 2 7's, 2 6's.
Standing, I'm lucky if I can hold 12MOA. More dryfire practice. A must.
All in all, I'm pleased with the 402-3x score. And the slow prone score. And that I've concretely identified places to improve. with 3-4 months off of shooting rifle in a disciplined manner, it's better than I had anticipated. I also think it's a personal best for this format of match.
Tuesday, January 4, 2011
Shooting Resolutions
I've made some New Year's resolutions related to shooting:
1. Shoot centerfire pistol with a purpose at least once a month. Steel match, a class or some sort of competition.
2. Shoot centerfire rifle with a purpose at least once a month. High Power, a class, or perhaps a 3-gun match.
3. Shoot rimfire pistol at Rio Salado's rimfire steel matches once a month until there is nothing more for me to learn from the experience. I bought a Browning Buckmark pistol, a decent holster and 5 magazines to facilitate this.
4. Shoot rimfire rifle at Rio Salado's Tuesday Tactical Rifle matches once a month. Start off with my Marlin 795 with Williams peep/fiber optic sights, but consider the purchase of a more "tactical" .22 rifle once I learn more.
This is a LOT of shooting. That's about a brick of .22 a month, 150 rounds of pistol and 50-100 rounds of rifle ammo. 1800 rounds of pistol ammo a year (~$150 or so if 9mm reloads), $240 worth of rimfire ammo, and $400 worth of .308 ammo.
I've added all these events to my Outlook calendar on my computer. Fortunately, the rimfire rifle and centerfire steel matches happen on the same nights. This is still a 3-day per month commitment at a minimum.
Putting it to print right now, to help keep myself honest in regards to it.
1. Shoot centerfire pistol with a purpose at least once a month. Steel match, a class or some sort of competition.
2. Shoot centerfire rifle with a purpose at least once a month. High Power, a class, or perhaps a 3-gun match.
3. Shoot rimfire pistol at Rio Salado's rimfire steel matches once a month until there is nothing more for me to learn from the experience. I bought a Browning Buckmark pistol, a decent holster and 5 magazines to facilitate this.
4. Shoot rimfire rifle at Rio Salado's Tuesday Tactical Rifle matches once a month. Start off with my Marlin 795 with Williams peep/fiber optic sights, but consider the purchase of a more "tactical" .22 rifle once I learn more.
This is a LOT of shooting. That's about a brick of .22 a month, 150 rounds of pistol and 50-100 rounds of rifle ammo. 1800 rounds of pistol ammo a year (~$150 or so if 9mm reloads), $240 worth of rimfire ammo, and $400 worth of .308 ammo.
I've added all these events to my Outlook calendar on my computer. Fortunately, the rimfire rifle and centerfire steel matches happen on the same nights. This is still a 3-day per month commitment at a minimum.
Putting it to print right now, to help keep myself honest in regards to it.
Wednesday, December 22, 2010
Handgun Grip Angle: Practice, dummy!
I've recently come to the conclusion that, with few exceptions, handgun grip angle and so called "ergonomics" are just about the most pointless thing to consider when shopping for a pistol.
Why?
For two reasons.
1. The new shooter. If this is truly a new shooter, then he or she has little or no fundamentals to draw upon. His evaluation of a grip angle may be done while gripping a pistol incorrectly. We've all seen the actors in cop procedural shows that grasp handguns way too low on the grip, or even those actors that think it's good practice to put your thumb directly behind the slide of a striker-operated semiautomatic. These are over-dramatized examples of improper grip... but if you don't know how you're supposed to hold a gun then how on Earth do you suppose you're going to know if it fits right when you are holding it?
2. The serial gun buyer. The guy who is looking for the "perfect gun." The guy who spends $500-$1000 on a gun and runs it for half a dozen range trips before getting bored with it (or blaming supposed deficiencies of the gun for less than optimal results downrange), then spends another $500-$1000 on another gun, and another half a dozen range trips with that one. This guy doesn't have 10k rounds through any 1 of his guns, and any one of his guns is barely past the break-in period before he's drooling over the counter at the gun store again. This guy listens to the Glock "grip hump" bashing, all the praise for the 1911 grip angle, but probably couldn't tell you what gun was in his hand if you blindfolded him and tested him... with his own handguns.
I've seen phenomenal Glock shooters.
I've seen phenomenal 1911 shooters.
I've seen phenomenal CZ/Witness shooters.
I've seen phenomenal revolver shooters.
I'm worse than the people in any of the above 4 categories that I'm citing. Heck, the revolver shooter I see regularly at the steel matches outshoots my times, using his revolver, and me using my XD.
I guarantee that there is a common thread with all those shooters above: They all have tens or hundreds of thousands of rounds through the same gun or at least the same platform. They all took classes using those same guns (though now they are the people that TEACH the classes). And they spend more time practicing draws and magazine changes than they do learning about the latest Glock or 1911 blessing/curse/fad.
After tens of thousands (or even a few thousand, depending on practice techniques) of rounds, it doesn't matter if you're shooting a Glock with "an unnatural grip angle" or a 1911 that "feels like St. John Browning poured its blue steel goodness into your hand and it molded to your form..." You'll have an instinctual feel for where your thumbs and hand webbing are supposed to have contact with your pistol. You'll instinctively know how that relates to your sights, and how your hand should feel for presentation of the top of the slide to your eyes for targeting.
What matters, then, for gun shopping?
Access to control surfaces. Slide release, magazine release, safeties, decockers, the ability to clear a jam quickly. Do you have to release a positive grip on the pistol to accomplish any of these tasks? If so, you need to consider a different platform.
I've watched my complaints about my XD vanish, one by one, for each thousand additional rounds I put through it. I used to have a pretty strong dislike for this pistol, and even had apprehension about putting it back on my hip. It's been up for sale twice with no takers.
Now, I just don't care what pistol I carry. I could just as soon trade my XD for a 1911, a Glock, a Browning Hi Power, or a Beretta 92. As long as I can run a few hundred or a thousand rounds through it to learn it intimately, it doesn't matter.
Why?
For two reasons.
1. The new shooter. If this is truly a new shooter, then he or she has little or no fundamentals to draw upon. His evaluation of a grip angle may be done while gripping a pistol incorrectly. We've all seen the actors in cop procedural shows that grasp handguns way too low on the grip, or even those actors that think it's good practice to put your thumb directly behind the slide of a striker-operated semiautomatic. These are over-dramatized examples of improper grip... but if you don't know how you're supposed to hold a gun then how on Earth do you suppose you're going to know if it fits right when you are holding it?
2. The serial gun buyer. The guy who is looking for the "perfect gun." The guy who spends $500-$1000 on a gun and runs it for half a dozen range trips before getting bored with it (or blaming supposed deficiencies of the gun for less than optimal results downrange), then spends another $500-$1000 on another gun, and another half a dozen range trips with that one. This guy doesn't have 10k rounds through any 1 of his guns, and any one of his guns is barely past the break-in period before he's drooling over the counter at the gun store again. This guy listens to the Glock "grip hump" bashing, all the praise for the 1911 grip angle, but probably couldn't tell you what gun was in his hand if you blindfolded him and tested him... with his own handguns.
I've seen phenomenal Glock shooters.
I've seen phenomenal 1911 shooters.
I've seen phenomenal CZ/Witness shooters.
I've seen phenomenal revolver shooters.
I'm worse than the people in any of the above 4 categories that I'm citing. Heck, the revolver shooter I see regularly at the steel matches outshoots my times, using his revolver, and me using my XD.
I guarantee that there is a common thread with all those shooters above: They all have tens or hundreds of thousands of rounds through the same gun or at least the same platform. They all took classes using those same guns (though now they are the people that TEACH the classes). And they spend more time practicing draws and magazine changes than they do learning about the latest Glock or 1911 blessing/curse/fad.
After tens of thousands (or even a few thousand, depending on practice techniques) of rounds, it doesn't matter if you're shooting a Glock with "an unnatural grip angle" or a 1911 that "feels like St. John Browning poured its blue steel goodness into your hand and it molded to your form..." You'll have an instinctual feel for where your thumbs and hand webbing are supposed to have contact with your pistol. You'll instinctively know how that relates to your sights, and how your hand should feel for presentation of the top of the slide to your eyes for targeting.
What matters, then, for gun shopping?
Access to control surfaces. Slide release, magazine release, safeties, decockers, the ability to clear a jam quickly. Do you have to release a positive grip on the pistol to accomplish any of these tasks? If so, you need to consider a different platform.
I've watched my complaints about my XD vanish, one by one, for each thousand additional rounds I put through it. I used to have a pretty strong dislike for this pistol, and even had apprehension about putting it back on my hip. It's been up for sale twice with no takers.
Now, I just don't care what pistol I carry. I could just as soon trade my XD for a 1911, a Glock, a Browning Hi Power, or a Beretta 92. As long as I can run a few hundred or a thousand rounds through it to learn it intimately, it doesn't matter.
Friday, August 13, 2010
The Southpaw Conundrum
Been practicing magazine changes this week, after being so close to the 100 second barrier last week at TNS that it hurt! Mag changes appear to be my slowest point to work on for now.
As a stinkin' southpaw, to operate the safety on my current preferred pistol (a CZ-75B in 9mm), I have to shift my grip slightly so that my index/trigger finger can scrunch back to the mag release, push the release, insert a new magazine with the right hand, re-shift my grip back around, drop the slide release (if locked back), then re-address the trigger.
I need to eliminate those two grip shifts. They cost me at least 10 seconds throughout the course of the TNS match on all 4 stages and the several mag changes required.
I pulled the Springfield XD9 out of the safe in response to this. There's a lot of things I don't like about the XD product line: In general, I dislike striker pistols. I dislike trigger-dinguses. There's something not quite "right" about the contour of the grip on the left side of the grip safety, it grinds against the index finger metacarpal uncomfortably in a way that a CZ or 1911 does not do.
However, it DOES have an ambidextrous magazine release.
I've been practicing using my left thumb to release mags. Almost no grip shift and as I practice, the shift becomes smaller and smaller. Less attention to detail with my left hand, so I can focus on moving my right hand more quickly to the belt for a fresh magazine.
I need to find a suitable way to rig a 1911 with an ambi mag release (looking into the Smith & Alexander ambi mag release), as well as a CZ. Or, I need to find a new pet 9mm platform with ambi mag release controls and all the features I like of the CZ-75 series. Fabrique-Nationale's FNX-9 looks like a potential contender. Not sure what else is out on the market.
In the meantime, though, the XD9 is back on my hip and on rotation for TNS.
As a stinkin' southpaw, to operate the safety on my current preferred pistol (a CZ-75B in 9mm), I have to shift my grip slightly so that my index/trigger finger can scrunch back to the mag release, push the release, insert a new magazine with the right hand, re-shift my grip back around, drop the slide release (if locked back), then re-address the trigger.
I need to eliminate those two grip shifts. They cost me at least 10 seconds throughout the course of the TNS match on all 4 stages and the several mag changes required.
I pulled the Springfield XD9 out of the safe in response to this. There's a lot of things I don't like about the XD product line: In general, I dislike striker pistols. I dislike trigger-dinguses. There's something not quite "right" about the contour of the grip on the left side of the grip safety, it grinds against the index finger metacarpal uncomfortably in a way that a CZ or 1911 does not do.
However, it DOES have an ambidextrous magazine release.
I've been practicing using my left thumb to release mags. Almost no grip shift and as I practice, the shift becomes smaller and smaller. Less attention to detail with my left hand, so I can focus on moving my right hand more quickly to the belt for a fresh magazine.
I need to find a suitable way to rig a 1911 with an ambi mag release (looking into the Smith & Alexander ambi mag release), as well as a CZ. Or, I need to find a new pet 9mm platform with ambi mag release controls and all the features I like of the CZ-75 series. Fabrique-Nationale's FNX-9 looks like a potential contender. Not sure what else is out on the market.
In the meantime, though, the XD9 is back on my hip and on rotation for TNS.
Tuesday, August 3, 2010
Back to Steel
I went back to steel 2 weeks ago. Ran the CZ-75 with Winchester WWB factory 115gr FMJ ammo. Got done in 112.71. This week, I took some cheap reloads (mixed brass, CCI small primers, 122gr LRNFP bullet) that I cooked up. I was worried about them because I hadn't had time to shoot them at the range prior to coming out, to see if they might not work properly.
No need to worry. 100% reliability. They shot cleaner than the WWB. I cleaned the gun tonight (two weeks ago, as well), there was just a smidge of carbon blowback inside the slide and at the barrel's ramp. Leading down bore was gone after 15-20 passes with a bronze brush wet with Hoppes. Very quick and easy cleaning.
Time tonight was 104.09.
I did some light 'smithing work on the CZ, too. I replaced the factory front sight with a fiber optic one. Mounted the slide in my drill press and drilled out the necessary hole in the replacement front sight post. 100% successful, no problems encountered at all. POI = POA still.
I need some heavier CZ magazines, though: Even with the drop-free mag brake, completely empty mags don't always drop free. Gonna have to find a few mags with extended base-pads that are heavy enough to fall free. I guess it's okay if they take a few more rounds, too.
Shooting the CZ in "Limited" division, loading mags to 16rd capacity, holstered with safety on and single action first shot. If I were to shoot in "Production," I would have to limit myself to 10rds in the mags and first shot would have to be DA. At least, that's how I understand it. Still trying to fully figure out the divisions.
No need to worry. 100% reliability. They shot cleaner than the WWB. I cleaned the gun tonight (two weeks ago, as well), there was just a smidge of carbon blowback inside the slide and at the barrel's ramp. Leading down bore was gone after 15-20 passes with a bronze brush wet with Hoppes. Very quick and easy cleaning.
Time tonight was 104.09.
I did some light 'smithing work on the CZ, too. I replaced the factory front sight with a fiber optic one. Mounted the slide in my drill press and drilled out the necessary hole in the replacement front sight post. 100% successful, no problems encountered at all. POI = POA still.
I need some heavier CZ magazines, though: Even with the drop-free mag brake, completely empty mags don't always drop free. Gonna have to find a few mags with extended base-pads that are heavy enough to fall free. I guess it's okay if they take a few more rounds, too.
Shooting the CZ in "Limited" division, loading mags to 16rd capacity, holstered with safety on and single action first shot. If I were to shoot in "Production," I would have to limit myself to 10rds in the mags and first shot would have to be DA. At least, that's how I understand it. Still trying to fully figure out the divisions.
Sunday, June 6, 2010
3rd Time High Power
So, I shot my 3rd match.
357-2x out of 500. This match used three different targets: 200 yards for standing/seated, then 300 reduced for prone and 600 reduced for slowfire prone. Much like the Legacy match that was my first match.
Standing was awful. 49-1x. Seated improved, from improved control of my front leg elevation via my trigger-foot under my supporting leg. 84-0x. Rapid prone suffered from a change in ammo, to a box that was left out in sunlight and a different batch of bullets with different OAL. Center of group shifted 3 MOA down and left, and the group blew out from my customary 3-4 MOA to almost 6 MOA in size. Score on rapid prone was 62-0x. Slowfire prone was 162-1x. Took some doing to get myself back onto a proper zero after the fiasco with the alternate ammo.
Lessons learned:
- Don't change ammo through the match. Use the same load recipe or retail manufacturer.
- Don't leave ammo in the sun. It can contribute to variable points of impact of otherwise consistent ammo.
- The M14 does seem harder to shoot standing than the AR-15. I really need to work on standing, more.
Goals:
- More standing practice. Rimfire at 6MOA increased squares to begin with, then transition to centerfire using the targets we bought as a group.
- Reloading discipline. Same brass with same bullet with same powder charge with same primer, to the same OAL, and take enough of that one load to complete the match.
357-2x out of 500. This match used three different targets: 200 yards for standing/seated, then 300 reduced for prone and 600 reduced for slowfire prone. Much like the Legacy match that was my first match.
Standing was awful. 49-1x. Seated improved, from improved control of my front leg elevation via my trigger-foot under my supporting leg. 84-0x. Rapid prone suffered from a change in ammo, to a box that was left out in sunlight and a different batch of bullets with different OAL. Center of group shifted 3 MOA down and left, and the group blew out from my customary 3-4 MOA to almost 6 MOA in size. Score on rapid prone was 62-0x. Slowfire prone was 162-1x. Took some doing to get myself back onto a proper zero after the fiasco with the alternate ammo.
Lessons learned:
- Don't change ammo through the match. Use the same load recipe or retail manufacturer.
- Don't leave ammo in the sun. It can contribute to variable points of impact of otherwise consistent ammo.
- The M14 does seem harder to shoot standing than the AR-15. I really need to work on standing, more.
Goals:
- More standing practice. Rimfire at 6MOA increased squares to begin with, then transition to centerfire using the targets we bought as a group.
- Reloading discipline. Same brass with same bullet with same powder charge with same primer, to the same OAL, and take enough of that one load to complete the match.
Thursday, June 3, 2010
2nd time High Power
So, I shot a CMP match at the Buckeye Joe Foss range a few weeks ago. This time I shot a 411-4x out of 500, and used my M14 rifle.
Interestingly, as my body position transitioned from horizontal (prone) to vertical (standing), my groups got worse. Part of this was probably due to the gusting winds that I estimate exceeded 15mph and pushed the muzzle sideways... but I also think some of it is inherently due to the different designs of these rifles.
The AR has sights that are very high above the bore. This lends itself to very upright shooting positions without canting the upper torso, and the pistol grip gives improved control over the horizontal twist of the gun in wind. At least, that's my working theory right now.
I'll test that theory sometime later this summer, and take both rifles out for some testing during the windy monsoon season here.
Anyways, I'm happy to see my scores climb 44 points from one time to the next. The breakdown was disappointing to me, though: 184, 96, 77, 54. The standing just murdered me, and I had 3 shots escape the bull entirely, though still on paper just outside the 5 ring to the bottom left (the wind was coming from my left and I would push into it, only to have it let off as I squeezed the trigger).
I'm thinking that in high wind, I need to "squeeze" less and firmly pull, more quickly. From standing, at least.
Seated was quite blatantly a lack of practice on my part. Bad NPOA, stringing my shots down and left. More seated dry-fire practice is in order.
Shooting another match in Payson this weekend, so I think I can add another 30+ points. Haven't decided if I'll shoot the AR-15 with the new NM 0.050 front sight post, or the M14 again. Probably the M14, but we'll see.
Interestingly, as my body position transitioned from horizontal (prone) to vertical (standing), my groups got worse. Part of this was probably due to the gusting winds that I estimate exceeded 15mph and pushed the muzzle sideways... but I also think some of it is inherently due to the different designs of these rifles.
The AR has sights that are very high above the bore. This lends itself to very upright shooting positions without canting the upper torso, and the pistol grip gives improved control over the horizontal twist of the gun in wind. At least, that's my working theory right now.
I'll test that theory sometime later this summer, and take both rifles out for some testing during the windy monsoon season here.
Anyways, I'm happy to see my scores climb 44 points from one time to the next. The breakdown was disappointing to me, though: 184, 96, 77, 54. The standing just murdered me, and I had 3 shots escape the bull entirely, though still on paper just outside the 5 ring to the bottom left (the wind was coming from my left and I would push into it, only to have it let off as I squeezed the trigger).
I'm thinking that in high wind, I need to "squeeze" less and firmly pull, more quickly. From standing, at least.
Seated was quite blatantly a lack of practice on my part. Bad NPOA, stringing my shots down and left. More seated dry-fire practice is in order.
Shooting another match in Payson this weekend, so I think I can add another 30+ points. Haven't decided if I'll shoot the AR-15 with the new NM 0.050 front sight post, or the M14 again. Probably the M14, but we'll see.
Tuesday, March 23, 2010
First Time High Power
I was expecting to shoot better, being involved with the Appleseed Project as an instructor for about 2 years.
I shot a 367-1x out of a possible 500. Rifle was my franken-AR, here:
Cavalry Arms Mk-II lower with Del-Ton A2 1:9 twist upper, Hogue free-float handguard and home-brew front sling swivel. USGI cotton sling.
I tried to run the course with a Center-Of-Mass (COM) hold on the target. I typically try to shoot all my rifles with a COM sight picture, since I feel that a 6 o'clock hold is dependent on angular hold-under rather than absolute distance hold-under. If you hold 3 minutes low at 200 yards, that's 6 inches. If you hold 3 minutes low at 500 yards, that's 15 inches. An NRA bull is always 6 minutes of angle, so at 200 yards it is 12 inches, while at 500 yards it is 30 inches. If you shoot with a 3MOA hold-under, your POI will always be 3MOA high... which is 6 inches at 200 yards and 15 inches at 500 yards. Your sight picture changes on a "real" target, as a result of that. A 20" human torso (a threat) will require a belly-button hold at 200 yards, and a mid-thigh hold at 500. (Obviously sight adjustments come into play here, too).
So, I've decided next time I will bow to the game, and shoot a 6 o'clock hold.
I also noticed that I have a hard time differentiating the front sight from the target, even though I focus on the front sight. I need more contrast between the two, and I need the front sight to be smaller. So, I ordered a 0.050" match front sight and I also will blacken my front sight with a match or lighter for higher contrast in the future.
Next, I will be shooting some inexpensive 55gr reloads in the future for 200y reduced courses of fire. The 55's shoot better than the retail 62gr ammo I shot last weekend... vertical stringing was less. More consistent case length, powder measurement and crimp strength resulted in more consistent velocity, I think.
Finally, I will be going back to my Turner synthetic 1907-style sling. I definitely noticed some heart-pulse in my sight picture with the GI cotton sling, when looped up. I was even using a padded cloth shooting jacket. I see less of that with the 1907 sling due to the loop/keeper arrangement.
I was hoping to break 400 this last weekend, but I'll just have to break 400 next time out.
I shot a 367-1x out of a possible 500. Rifle was my franken-AR, here:
Cavalry Arms Mk-II lower with Del-Ton A2 1:9 twist upper, Hogue free-float handguard and home-brew front sling swivel. USGI cotton sling.
I tried to run the course with a Center-Of-Mass (COM) hold on the target. I typically try to shoot all my rifles with a COM sight picture, since I feel that a 6 o'clock hold is dependent on angular hold-under rather than absolute distance hold-under. If you hold 3 minutes low at 200 yards, that's 6 inches. If you hold 3 minutes low at 500 yards, that's 15 inches. An NRA bull is always 6 minutes of angle, so at 200 yards it is 12 inches, while at 500 yards it is 30 inches. If you shoot with a 3MOA hold-under, your POI will always be 3MOA high... which is 6 inches at 200 yards and 15 inches at 500 yards. Your sight picture changes on a "real" target, as a result of that. A 20" human torso (a threat) will require a belly-button hold at 200 yards, and a mid-thigh hold at 500. (Obviously sight adjustments come into play here, too).
So, I've decided next time I will bow to the game, and shoot a 6 o'clock hold.
I also noticed that I have a hard time differentiating the front sight from the target, even though I focus on the front sight. I need more contrast between the two, and I need the front sight to be smaller. So, I ordered a 0.050" match front sight and I also will blacken my front sight with a match or lighter for higher contrast in the future.
Next, I will be shooting some inexpensive 55gr reloads in the future for 200y reduced courses of fire. The 55's shoot better than the retail 62gr ammo I shot last weekend... vertical stringing was less. More consistent case length, powder measurement and crimp strength resulted in more consistent velocity, I think.
Finally, I will be going back to my Turner synthetic 1907-style sling. I definitely noticed some heart-pulse in my sight picture with the GI cotton sling, when looped up. I was even using a padded cloth shooting jacket. I see less of that with the 1907 sling due to the loop/keeper arrangement.
I was hoping to break 400 this last weekend, but I'll just have to break 400 next time out.
Friday, February 5, 2010
Obama's Budget Deficit: This cannot stand.
The annual budget of the United States has been about $2.9 trillion dollars (that's the 2008 numbers I could find).
According to the Treasury department, our payments on the interest every fiscal year has never been larger than $400 billion dollars (usually down towards $300 billion), until 2006 with Bush's Medicare drug benefit and the increased costs of the Afghanistan campaign.
http://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/reports/ir/ir_expense.htm
2007 saw us have $429 billion in deficit-related interest spending.
2008 saw us have $451 billion.
2009 saw us have $383 billion.
So far, in FY 2010, we have paid $164 billion in 4 months (October 2009 to Jan 2010). Simply multiplying by 3, we get $492 billion. However, that is too naive a final number.
Obama is proposing a $3.8 trillion dollar budget. That's an additional $900 billion of debt over the $2.9 trillion dollar budget that we didn't have in 2008.
That's $900 billion on the national debt, not the deficit. The interest payment on that, at perhaps 3%, is $27 billion dollars.
That's more than the entire budget of NASA, in debt obligation. NASA has less than $20 billion for its operating budget.
So, if Obama gets his budget, or even close to it, we will breach the $500 billion debt obligation threshold in our budget.
That makes the deficit payments (and really just the INTEREST payments on the deficit) a larger line item on the annual budget than the Department of Defense. The DoD operates with $481 billion dollars.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/rewrite/budget/fy2008/defense.html
This cannot stand. The center will not hold.
The interest component of our nation's annual budget will be the second largest item on our budget.
With DoD at $500 billion, the interest at $500 billion and Social Security at $650 billion (http://www.socialsecurity.gov/budget/FactCard2009.pdf), that's $1.65 trillion out of $2.9 trillion of the Bush underfunded budget. When we start to consider what it means to borrow $500 billion to $1 trillion dollars a year and adding that to our existing interest payments as a component of the budget, it quickly becomes apparent that this cannot stand.
Adding insult to injury is the well documented tradition in Washington to fund projects and NEVER de-fund them. If the budget for one year is $3.9 trillion, then it will be at least $3.9 trillion forever more. That's a trillion of borrowing every year. And an additional $30 billion of interest (at 3%) tacked onto last year's interest bill. And, whatever capital payment might be in place against the actual working debt.
Fight, people. Take this up with Congress, with the President. With your governor and state legislature. Beware any deficits in any budgets. We are on such a financial precipice that our country is in jeopardy. Drunk-spending Washington will not stop.
According to the Treasury department, our payments on the interest every fiscal year has never been larger than $400 billion dollars (usually down towards $300 billion), until 2006 with Bush's Medicare drug benefit and the increased costs of the Afghanistan campaign.
http://www.treasurydirect.gov/govt/reports/ir/ir_expense.htm
2007 saw us have $429 billion in deficit-related interest spending.
2008 saw us have $451 billion.
2009 saw us have $383 billion.
So far, in FY 2010, we have paid $164 billion in 4 months (October 2009 to Jan 2010). Simply multiplying by 3, we get $492 billion. However, that is too naive a final number.
Obama is proposing a $3.8 trillion dollar budget. That's an additional $900 billion of debt over the $2.9 trillion dollar budget that we didn't have in 2008.
That's $900 billion on the national debt, not the deficit. The interest payment on that, at perhaps 3%, is $27 billion dollars.
That's more than the entire budget of NASA, in debt obligation. NASA has less than $20 billion for its operating budget.
So, if Obama gets his budget, or even close to it, we will breach the $500 billion debt obligation threshold in our budget.
That makes the deficit payments (and really just the INTEREST payments on the deficit) a larger line item on the annual budget than the Department of Defense. The DoD operates with $481 billion dollars.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/rewrite/budget/fy2008/defense.html
This cannot stand. The center will not hold.
The interest component of our nation's annual budget will be the second largest item on our budget.
With DoD at $500 billion, the interest at $500 billion and Social Security at $650 billion (http://www.socialsecurity.gov/budget/FactCard2009.pdf), that's $1.65 trillion out of $2.9 trillion of the Bush underfunded budget. When we start to consider what it means to borrow $500 billion to $1 trillion dollars a year and adding that to our existing interest payments as a component of the budget, it quickly becomes apparent that this cannot stand.
Adding insult to injury is the well documented tradition in Washington to fund projects and NEVER de-fund them. If the budget for one year is $3.9 trillion, then it will be at least $3.9 trillion forever more. That's a trillion of borrowing every year. And an additional $30 billion of interest (at 3%) tacked onto last year's interest bill. And, whatever capital payment might be in place against the actual working debt.
Fight, people. Take this up with Congress, with the President. With your governor and state legislature. Beware any deficits in any budgets. We are on such a financial precipice that our country is in jeopardy. Drunk-spending Washington will not stop.
Wednesday, January 13, 2010
Success
Well, sort of.
All my rounds fed successfully, without any cleaning of the firearm between stages. No failures except for one I caused by myself: I thought I fully inserted a mag and it ran for 7 out of 8 rounds, but it turns out it didn't secure itself on the mag catch. I guess it's a testament to Wilson 47D magazines if they can feed my gun without being fully seated.
124.28, despite about 10 seconds of fussing with the one mag problem.
Next week, the 9mm's. Starting with the XD9 since I have a decent kydex holster for it. Need to get one for the CZ-75, still.
All my rounds fed successfully, without any cleaning of the firearm between stages. No failures except for one I caused by myself: I thought I fully inserted a mag and it ran for 7 out of 8 rounds, but it turns out it didn't secure itself on the mag catch. I guess it's a testament to Wilson 47D magazines if they can feed my gun without being fully seated.
124.28, despite about 10 seconds of fussing with the one mag problem.
Next week, the 9mm's. Starting with the XD9 since I have a decent kydex holster for it. Need to get one for the CZ-75, still.
Tuesday, January 12, 2010
Progressing at Steel
Last week I improved to 121.24 seconds, and ran flawless for 3 out of 4 stages as far as reliability was concerned. I was all set to break 100 seconds, actually.
Then I shot the last stage and came across some rounds that turned out to be too large in crimp diameter, measuring 0.474" across at the mouth. Grr. Argh.
So... this week I went through 200 rounds that I made on my Dillon Square Deal B, and hand-chambered them in my Colt Government 1991 barrel (removed the barrel from the slide to do this quickly and easily). Of those 200 rounds, 182 seem to chamber reliably.
I have those 182 rounds set aside. I will run them in my 5 known good magazines (3 wilsons and 2 ACT's). In theory, I should run a flawless night, and hopefully clear 100 seconds tonight.
In theory. :-)
I also cleaned the lube-sludge that oozes out when loading .45 with lead bullets, so the chamber should stay cleaner longer. I'll also run the bore snake through it once between the 2nd and 3rd stages, just as a preventative maintenance issue.
Then I shot the last stage and came across some rounds that turned out to be too large in crimp diameter, measuring 0.474" across at the mouth. Grr. Argh.
So... this week I went through 200 rounds that I made on my Dillon Square Deal B, and hand-chambered them in my Colt Government 1991 barrel (removed the barrel from the slide to do this quickly and easily). Of those 200 rounds, 182 seem to chamber reliably.
I have those 182 rounds set aside. I will run them in my 5 known good magazines (3 wilsons and 2 ACT's). In theory, I should run a flawless night, and hopefully clear 100 seconds tonight.
In theory. :-)
I also cleaned the lube-sludge that oozes out when loading .45 with lead bullets, so the chamber should stay cleaner longer. I'll also run the bore snake through it once between the 2nd and 3rd stages, just as a preventative maintenance issue.
Tuesday, January 5, 2010
More Steel
Well, I'm finally shooting halfway decently at the steel matches.
Last time I went, I ran the course in 142.32, right-smack in the middle of the pack of D-rank shooters. All the Grand Master shooters are still running the same courses in about 45 seconds with the tricked out race guns in the space-man holsters.
I had one gear issue that appears to be caused by my lead roundnose reloads. I wasn't flaring the case quite enough and I was getting wax/lead residue on the case mouth, affecting headspace. I changed my press to flare the case a bit more, and I went out and tested the results this last weekend. The cartridges look cleaner and function just fine.
So, that should save me about 10 seconds hopefully. Put me closer to the top of D-class if my reloads work properly tonight with no malfunctions.
Also got a really good pointer last time: To build speed, I need to assume that my shot is good and bring the gun down out of recoil and onto the next target immediately. Right now, I am bringing it down out of recoil and preserving sight picture onto the previous target, like I do with rifle shooting. I'll try that tonight.
So tonight will be my Colt 1991 government pistol.
Last time I went, I ran the course in 142.32, right-smack in the middle of the pack of D-rank shooters. All the Grand Master shooters are still running the same courses in about 45 seconds with the tricked out race guns in the space-man holsters.
I had one gear issue that appears to be caused by my lead roundnose reloads. I wasn't flaring the case quite enough and I was getting wax/lead residue on the case mouth, affecting headspace. I changed my press to flare the case a bit more, and I went out and tested the results this last weekend. The cartridges look cleaner and function just fine.
So, that should save me about 10 seconds hopefully. Put me closer to the top of D-class if my reloads work properly tonight with no malfunctions.
Also got a really good pointer last time: To build speed, I need to assume that my shot is good and bring the gun down out of recoil and onto the next target immediately. Right now, I am bringing it down out of recoil and preserving sight picture onto the previous target, like I do with rifle shooting. I'll try that tonight.
So tonight will be my Colt 1991 government pistol.
Wednesday, December 2, 2009
Steel guns: Updated
So, I've updated the gear a bit.
1911 platform: I have 2 Wilson and 2 ACT 8rd magazines, and I'm going to test both of them to see which performs best in both my 1911's. Ordered a quad mag carrier from Blade-Tech, should arrive this week or next. Taking forever to get here. Once a mag platform is chosen, I'll pick up half a dozen of that type. Personally, I'm rooting for the ACT magazines. They're half the price of the Wilsons. The 1991 has the Ed Brown safety installed. I did it myself and it works great. Very educational experience. Still need to get off my duff and begin experimenting with making 1911 grips. I need some wood grips, cut to accomodate the ambi safety notch on the right side.
.44 Redhawk: Got the correct moonclips from TK Custom, but realized after my first shoot that I only have 60 rounds staged up in my 10 moonclips. I probably should have about 150 staged up in my range bag, ready to go. I don't want to moon/demoon between stages. Gonna have to order another 20 moonclips.
Smith K-frame: Got the gun, been out shooting it, really like it. Ordered a kydex holster from Blade-Tech for it, should arrive with the quad mag carrier. Have 3 HKS-10 speedloaders as well as an Uncle Mike's dual speedloader carrier, but I probably need at least 2 more, probably 3 more. Gonna familiarize more with this gun and let the Redhawk gather dust in the safe until I'm a deadeye with DA .38 shooting and can rapidly operate the speedloaders.
CZ-75: Up to 5 magazines how, and also ordered a dual mag carrier from Blade-Tech along with the other stuff. However: I only have my IWB holster for this gun. Need a decent OWB holster. I'll keep working the 1911 and K-frame until then.
And... I drank the blue kool-aid. Got a Dillon Square Deal B. I still refuse to run a progressive for rifle rounds, but if I'm gonna shoot 100+ rounds a week from handgun, then I can't replenish that supply on a single stage. Ain't gonna happen. I don't have the time at 50-75 rounds per hour. Once all my gear is "tested" and approved functional, I intend to predominantly run the CZ-75 since 9mm cast bullets are by far cheaper than anything else I shoot, followed by .38 boolits. I've got SDB dies for .45acp, 9mm and .38/.357.
So, all my half-completed platforms are getting closer to being complete.
1911 platform: I have 2 Wilson and 2 ACT 8rd magazines, and I'm going to test both of them to see which performs best in both my 1911's. Ordered a quad mag carrier from Blade-Tech, should arrive this week or next. Taking forever to get here. Once a mag platform is chosen, I'll pick up half a dozen of that type. Personally, I'm rooting for the ACT magazines. They're half the price of the Wilsons. The 1991 has the Ed Brown safety installed. I did it myself and it works great. Very educational experience. Still need to get off my duff and begin experimenting with making 1911 grips. I need some wood grips, cut to accomodate the ambi safety notch on the right side.
.44 Redhawk: Got the correct moonclips from TK Custom, but realized after my first shoot that I only have 60 rounds staged up in my 10 moonclips. I probably should have about 150 staged up in my range bag, ready to go. I don't want to moon/demoon between stages. Gonna have to order another 20 moonclips.
Smith K-frame: Got the gun, been out shooting it, really like it. Ordered a kydex holster from Blade-Tech for it, should arrive with the quad mag carrier. Have 3 HKS-10 speedloaders as well as an Uncle Mike's dual speedloader carrier, but I probably need at least 2 more, probably 3 more. Gonna familiarize more with this gun and let the Redhawk gather dust in the safe until I'm a deadeye with DA .38 shooting and can rapidly operate the speedloaders.
CZ-75: Up to 5 magazines how, and also ordered a dual mag carrier from Blade-Tech along with the other stuff. However: I only have my IWB holster for this gun. Need a decent OWB holster. I'll keep working the 1911 and K-frame until then.
And... I drank the blue kool-aid. Got a Dillon Square Deal B. I still refuse to run a progressive for rifle rounds, but if I'm gonna shoot 100+ rounds a week from handgun, then I can't replenish that supply on a single stage. Ain't gonna happen. I don't have the time at 50-75 rounds per hour. Once all my gear is "tested" and approved functional, I intend to predominantly run the CZ-75 since 9mm cast bullets are by far cheaper than anything else I shoot, followed by .38 boolits. I've got SDB dies for .45acp, 9mm and .38/.357.
So, all my half-completed platforms are getting closer to being complete.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)