Friday, April 06, 2007

You think it's bad here?

If you think your state legislature is Down On Guns, check out the website of a Pennsylvania Republican Representitive: Samuel E. Rohrer, 128th Legislative District:

(H/T - Geek With A .45)

Recently, I’ve been hearing from many sportsmen and other Second Amendment rights advocates who are rightfully concerned about the deluge of gun control bills being introduced in the Democrat-controlled state House.
As the Republican Chairman of the House Game and Fisheries Committee, I am committed to defeating any proposal that further infringes on a law-abiding person’s right to bear arms while doing nothing to keep guns out of the hands of criminals.

How You Can Help
Take a minute to sign my anti-gun control petition available at my Web site or at my district office.

We need to stand together in the fight against legislation like House Bill 760, which:
  • Creates a statewide registry of guns.
  • Requires gun owners to renew their registration annually and pay $10 per gun per year.
  • Requires gun owners to be fingerprinted, undergo a background check and carry a registration card – with the owner’s photograph – with the gun at all times.
Other Gun-Control Issues
We are also facing proposals that would allow for municipal preemption of state firearm laws, limit handgun purchases to one per month and require mandatory reporting within 24 hours of lost or stolen firearms and notice of multiple purchases.
Let's talk about Pennsylvania "House Bill 760":
  1. The author of the bill calls it the "Firearm Registration Act". Well, at least he is open about the intent of the bill. Those of us who have followed the ugly action of California Attorney General Bil Locklear's follow-up to "registration" understand that it's the necessary pre-cursor act to Confiscation.
  2. Registration will include all personal information of the applicant, including name, address, telephone number, date of birth, age and sex, and Social Security Number of the applicant.
  3. Registration will include the fingerprints of the applicant, plus a background check.
  4. Annual re-registration for firearms owners.
  5. Registration will incur a ten dollar ($10.00) per firearm fee to the Pennsylvania State Police, which body is assigned the requirement to administer the registration process.
  6. Per-firearm registration includes "the name of the manufacturer, the caliber or gauge, the model, type and serial number of each firearm to be registered".
  7. The registration process also includes "Two photographs taken within 30 days immediately prior to the date of filing the application equivalent to passport size showing the full face, head and shoulders of the applicant in a clear and distinguishing manner."
  8. There is no Eighth Point. Sure, there's a lot of verbiage about 'antique weapons (constructed prior to 1848) and "LEO Exceptions", and even a provision for tourists and other folks 'just passing through" Pennsylvania, but it's all smoke and mirrors.

Given my current firearms inventory, if this bill was made law in a State where I was Resident, it would cost me several hundred dollars per year with no advancement in the security of ... anything. It would just cost me a lot of money, and cause me to reconsider if I really needed to keep Uncle Doug's .30-40 Krag that I've never fired, and I which I keep only because it is a Family Heirloom. Also that 1903-A3 Match rifle that I've never fired, and the 1894 .30-30
Winchester that I have just because it kept my family fed during the Depression (before I was born.)

This bill is hereby established as the prototype "Gun Registration" act for the United States of America.

Yes, this is the same "United States of America' which, in the second amendment to its Constitution (the "Bill of Rights"), mentions the phrase "... shall not be infringed".

The bill is nothing more or less than what it purports to be ... firearms registration.

As such, I find myself in a "Duh!" state.

As in ... "Hey, you guys are trying to formalize firearms registration. That's unconstitutional. What part of 'shall not be infringed' do you not understand?' "

If *_I_* lived in Pennsylvania, I would be up in arms (pardon the pun) about this kind of nasty, stupid, needless (I'm trying to avoid the word 'egregious', can you tell?) legislation which obviously has a single objective: forcing me to reconsider ownership of perfectly innocent guns which I already have, so I would concentrate my firearms collection with the guns I currently use.

Because that's where this bill is going, you know. It's the Camel's Nose Under The Tent" ... the "Slippery Slope" ... the "Rock Soup" of Firearms Confiscation.

Don't let these bastards fox you, Pennsylvanians! They don't want to make your state safe against criminals ... this bill doesn't even include the phony verbiage about "do it for the children" or whatever. It's too stark, too blatant for pretension.

They just want to take your guns away from you.

All of the guns, from all of the people. Destroyed, 'decommissioned', disintegrated, disposed as if they were trash.

That's where this bill is going.

Pennsylvania, if you let this one slip through your fingertips because of ennui or lethargy ... you have no-one to blame but yourselves when you discover that you have watched your last firearm go through the shredder.

Then you can sit at home, and wait for the Yobs (imported from England) as they come through the windows of your home with their baseball-bats and their Butcher Knives and their firearms that you don't own because you're an Honest Man ... but they have the guns because they don't care a fig about firearms laws.

And if you defend your home, Pennsylvania will throw you in jail for Firearms Laws violations, just as they did in England.

Remington Sale - Part 2

The word about the sale of Remington to Cerebus Capital Management is beginning to trickle down ... slowly.

There's a thread on "The High Road" which offers some more information.

That information is, admittedly, third-hand.

Although I am reluctant to do so, in my hunger for more information I am thrown back on today's expanded article from The Shooting Wire [subscription here] to expand the free access of data.

Note that I'm not reluctant to cite The Shooting Wire; I'm just reluctant to take advantage of their Industry Insider status. Unfortunately they do not provide either links to source data or a link to a place where I can request permission to quote from them. I rely on current copyright law which (generally) allows quotes for the purpose of comment on the posts. I take this opportunity to point out that all comments from The Shooting Wire are available only because they have generously declined to protest my quotes.

Or this blog hasn't breached their attention horizon, which is probably more likely.

Finally, I'm concerned that this information is also possibly 'third-hand' and at least 'second-hand' (derived from an unquoted source).

To continue quoting from The Shooting Wire:

With yesterday's announcement that Cerebus Capital Management, L.P. had finalized the deal to acquire Remington Arms, a company best known for owning airlines (Air Canada), car rental companies (Alamo and National), a bus manufacturer (Bluebird), and banks and lending institutions in Germany, Israel and Japan became an instant player in the firearms industry.

With their acquisition of Bushmaster, Cerebus already was firmly ensconced in the "black rifle" industry. By acquiring Remington, they have a significant presence in every area of the firearms industry - except handguns.

Some industry figures are already whispering likely candidates to fill what one wag calls "the final space in the Cerebus gun safe".

The deal itself doesn't really take Remington in a new ownership direction. Remington was already owned by two New York private equity firms, Bruckmann, Rosser, Sherrill & Company, and Clayton Dubilier & Rice. Clayton Dubilier bought Remington's assets from DuPont in 1993 for $300 million. The Wilmington, Delaware-based chemical company purchased a 60 percent stake in the gunmaker in 1933 and acquired the remaining shares in 1980.
The question that immediately comes to mind is whether the Cerebus group will consider a bid on Colt's civilian division. This would give them the 'Full Monty" in the sense that they will lock in both long-gun and handgun manufacture.

Also, I'm grateful to The Shooting Wire for having performed the acquisition history of Remington Repeating Firearms company.

Considering the imperative to get this information out to the folks who are interested (you!), I haven't yet fully researched the citations included in the quote.

However, a search of Claytton Dubilier & Rice provides only a list (wait for it, if you click on the link ... it takes a minute to load) of recent acquisitions.

A search on Bruckmann, Rosser, Sherrill & Company ("BBS:) yields even less immediate information. Sorry. Research at the 'holding company' level is typically unrewarding without more time and effort than is realistic within the imperatives mentioned above. I offer those links as a starting point for anyone who is inclined to advance the research phase of reporting.

However, a 2nd level search of the above link provides the following information:

Remington Arms Company, Inc.
Initial Investment: February 2003
Remington, headquartered in Madison, N.C., designs, produces and sells sporting goods products for the hunting and shooting sports markets, as well as military, government and law enforcement markets. Founded in 1816 in upstate New York, the Company is one of the nation’s oldest continuously operating manufacturers. The Company had revenues in 2005 of approximately $410 million and distributes its products throughout the U.S. and in over 55 foreign countries.

Given that Cerebus acquired Remington for $370 million, and BRS paid $300 million for it four years, under the impression that it had 'revenues of approximately $410' , there is probably a very good reason why BRS was willing to take a ten percent hit on the transaction.

Maybe it wasn't really making $410 a year in revenues? Or maybe ...

We can only hope there is a better reason why Cerebus is willing to pay a third of a billiion dollars (the difference between the $410 milion 'revenues' and the 2007 sell price of $370) to acquire a company which BRS apparently found ... disenchanting.

Or maybe they considered the $70 million difference between the 2003 purchase price of $300 million and the 2007 sell price of $370 to be profit, assuming they had made no investments in the meantime.

I think I'm getting a Sick Headache.
You have the figures, you do the math.

(I'm wrapping my head in duct tape, lest it explode and make a mess on my computer screen.)

We can only hope it's not a raid, which would result in the demise of the Remington brand-name.

Thursday, April 05, 2007

The Simple Life

Slow, sweet Power Point presentation with good music and pretty pictures.

2.25mb download.

You'll go through it faster the second pass.

You'll go through it slower, the third time.


Remington Has Been Sold!

According to a "Special Bulletin from The Outdoor and Shooting Wires [subscribe here],

Remington Arms Company, Inc. one of the nation's oldest continually-operating firearms companies, is being acquired by an affiliate of Cereberus Capital Management, L.P. The $370 million dollar acquisition includes the assumption of all of Remington Arms Company, Inc.'s liabilities and product lines.

Shooting and Outdoor Wire goes on to explain:

The acquisition gives Cereberus two gun companies, Remington Arms and Bushmaster. Sources familiar with both companies say Remington will quickly add an AR-style rifle platform to complement their M24SWS Sniper Weapon System while Bushmaster will likely add signature branded ammunition and products.

There's nothing new about this. On January 19, 2006, I wrote about the demise of Winchester. Winchester still makes ammunition, but judging by their website there's no effort to produce Winchester firearms. That much is real, and proven. Yep, they're just an ammo-manufacturer, now.

So, what American Firearms Company is still making guns?

Let me see, we talked about Colt the other day. Rumor was they had been sold. As far as we can tell, this is nothing more than rumor. Oh, it's not that they're not up for sale (at least, they're actively looking for a buyer.) It's just that nobody wants to buy their Civilian Firearms Division. Why? Word is, they're asking for too much money. Rumors have been advanced that they were approached by both STI and Taurus. So far.

Colt is apparently still making firearms. So far. But they sure are desparate to get out of the civilian-fireams market. Not desperate enough, though, to price half the company sufficiently to attract legitimate buyers. So far.

How about Smith & Wesson?

According to Wikipedia, the folks (Tompkins, PLC) who owned S&W during the egregious Clinton Gun Ban fiasco in 2000 sold out to Saf-T-Hammer in 2001 for little more than the cost of the machinery and an agreement to pay their outstanding bills.

As far as I know, Dan Wesson is still in business ... except after Dan died (1996), his family sold the company to Bob Serva and is now doing business as CZ-USA.

Let's see, we still have Ruger.

According to available sources (notably Wikipedia ... a dubious source but good for a first-reference) "Sturm Ruger" is "... the largest American firarms manufacturere".

This in spite of "The Ruger Letter".
I'll let Wikipedia explain that:

After a spate of high profile shootings and incidences with the Ruger Mini 14 rifle, along with a number of unsavory associations the Mini 14 had gained with militias and extremist movements during the late 1970s and early 1980s, William B. Ruger expressed a highly unpopular position (amongst firearms owners, users and enthusiasts) by stating his personal views on the "sporting" nature of certain firearms.

In his letter to members of the House and Senate on 30 March 1989, Mr. Ruger stated in that which has come to be known as "The Ruger Letter":

"The best way to address the firepower concern is therefore not to try to outlaw or license many millions of older and perfectly legitimate firearms (which would be a licensing effort of staggering proportions) but to prohibit the possession of high capacity magazines. By a simple, complete, and unequivocal ban on large capacity magazines, all the difficulty of defining "assault rifles" and "semi-automatic rifles" is eliminated. The large capacity magazine itself, separate or attached to the firearm, becomes the prohibited item. A single amendment to Federal firearms laws could prohibit their possession or sale and would effectively implement these objectives."

In addition to the furor amongst hunters, sportsmen and shooters caused by "The Ruger Letter", Mr. Ruger made additional comments during an interview with NBCs Tom Brokaw that angered 2nd Amendment proponents even further, by saying that "no honest man needs more than 10 rounds in any gun…" and "I never meant for simple civilians to have my 20 and 30 round magazines…"

This is actually a very interesting insight on Firearms Manufacturers' Marketting Strategy, when you read the entire entry. I encourage you to go to the link and do so.

As far as I know, Ruger is still an entirely American company.

Glock, of course, is still doing a lot of business out of Gaston (* see comments, or note below). But they're also foreign-owned. The started out 'foreign owned', and altough they set up a manufacturing plant in America, they are still Austrian Owned.

I note that the Wikipedia article references Dean Speir's "KB!" article, which references my own "KaBoom!" article (referring to "... the tendencies of nervous, high-strung or over-stressed pistols to blow up during shooting."
Glock doesn't care. That company is a lot healthier than most Firearms Manufactureres in America.

Which brings us down to the 'smaller' manufacturers, who might as well be said to cater to 'niche markets' (albeit very profitably), such as STI and SV

I'm not going to dwell on the history of STI and SV here, although they should be the subject of future articles. For now, let's just accept that both of these thriving American Firearms Manufacturers started out making pistols designed for IPSC competition, and at least STI has branched out to serving Military and LEO applications.

Scroll through this article and you will see a lot of familiar logos. Reflect, if you will, on how well they typify American industry, culture and history. Then consider that they have almost all been either sold to foreign companies, or are for sale.

Scarey, ain't it?

* UPDATE: The Next Day
I have been reminded by reader comments that Glock's American manufacturing facility is located in Smyrna, Georgia. "Gaston" is the first name of the man who invented the Glock pistol. The mistake is retained to provide continuity between the text and the comments, and to demonstrate that writers get dorky after they work more than a couple of hours on a single article.
Jerry The Geek

Tuesday, April 03, 2007

1911 Flash!

Oh Wow!

STI has apparently commissioned somebody (somebody who knows what they are doing) to create a Flash Animation of a 1911 firing.

This is too kewl.

Even more, there's a similar Flash Animation of a Glock Firing.
Guess what? It doesn't go "KaBOOM!"

The 1911 thingie courtesy of (naturally)
The Glock thingie courtesy of Sniper World.

H/T Xavier Thoughts, in "How Does It Work?"

There's no such thing as "Bad Publicity"

Two weeks ago I wrote about an article that appeared in the website of the Brady Campaign To Prevent Gun Violence (here-after "The Brady Bunch" and, despite their renaming of the organization, remains all about '' --- The Organization Formerly Known As Handgun Control, Inc.).

The reason I visited the Brady Bunch website is because I think it's a good idea to keep track of those organizations who have the intention and goal to deprive me, personally, of my civil rights.

The reason I wrote about this article was because of the literally hundreds of negative, but generally avoiding ad homonym attacks, comments submitted by gun owners.

My article attracted some minor attention (according to my readership statistics) and a few comments. Surprisingly, one of the comments was from "Zach", who is in fact Zach Ragbourn, Assistant Director (Communications) of The Brady Bunch. (See Below)

Well, I don't know how they got my blog address. I certainly didn't contribute to the comments on their website but I did cite their URL.

Do you suppose they keep track of websites who link to their website?

Sure they do. We all want to know who's reading our 'stuff', but more important we want to know who is proliferating it.

Website Proliferation?

Remember the Bell Television Hour in the 50's? They had a special which demonstrated a Nuclear "Chain Reaction". They set a thousand mousetraps on a table and balanced a ping-pong ball on the bail of each mousetrap. Then they threw one more ping-pong ball into the middle of the array, and we all watched in awe as the bouncing balls set of mouse trap after mouse trap until they were (almost) all set off.

Chain Reaction. That's what happens when websites link to each other. The result is that readership increases in the "Level Zero" website. ("Level Zero" is a 'bio safety' technical term used to designate "the original source of contamination" -- no connection intended between The Brady Bunch and the term "contamination".)

By mentioning The Brady Bunch in a blog article, I have perhaps increased their readership. Okay, not by much. Just a little bit. Well, if not for gun owners, who else would read them? And considering the miniscule percentage of the American population who are NOT gun-owners but care enough to read them, who else would care enough to comment?

I'm completely opposed to their goals and deplore their persuasive techniques, but I'm not concerned about encouraging more people to read their website.

So when I received an email from Zach last Friday, it didn't take me too long to get past the knee-jerk reaction of "Hey, so now I'm a flak for The Brady Bunch? I think not!"

However, I had better things to do, which is why it has taken me four days to get around to sharing Zach's invitation with you.

I know you and your readers are interested in gun rights, so I thought I'd alert you to Sarah Brady's guest entry on today's Brady Blog. Today is the anniversary of the Reagan/Brady shooting, and also the anniversary of our Campaign Against Illegal Guns.

Some of your readers are probably aware of Sarah's post already, since I think The High Road and maybe one or two other sites have probably pointed it out. It's a good chance to have Sarah answer your questions directly, so I thought you might be interested in taking a look:
[article link here]

As was the case of the previous article, there are literally HUNDREDS of comments ... mostly from pro-gun readers. Again, I probably won't read all of them before I publish this. I certainly won't add my own comments, because almost anything I could think of to say has been said. In fact, it looked like a cow-tipping in a piranha tank.

If you want to go there and read that, then I think you should.

Gun Control is a touchy subject, and the commenters there seem to be not only opinionated but well read, thoughtful, and generally respectful. It's worth mentioning that Sarah "La Sarah" Brady is the author, and the occasion is the 30th anniversary of the shooting of Jim Brady by Hinkley in an assassination attempt on President Ronald Reagan.

It's also worth mentioning that the shooting was a tragedy, and should never have happened. It's a failure of society in every sense, and the consequences to then-White House Press Secretary Jim Brady is the sort of thing which no-one would have wished for nor have wished upon our worse enemy ... of which Jim and Sarah Brady are decidedly not.

I do not agree with the politics, goals, aspirations, or tactics of the Bradys or their organization. I believe that they are working toward a goal with firm conviction, and while I think they are wrong and misguided I acknowledge that their beliefs are not a negative reflection on their character.

The tactics of The Brady Bunch -- -- I deplore. I believe the word "duplicitous" is not too strong because ... well, go read the comments and make up your own mind.

There is something fundamentally wrong with the thinking of people who make it their life's work to undermine the civil rights of law-abiding fellow citizens.

Dundee IPSC Videos - March, 2007

Just a little club match, means nothing at all.

But there are a lot of good stages, and some interesting videos.

You can see all of the match videos here.

And this particular video, a 20mb file featuring the Texas Star, can be downloaded here.

Or, you can just click on the YouTube version. Low-resolution, but it loads fast. I figure YouTube generates 1-2mb files, within the filesize I usually submit.

Monday, April 02, 2007

B29 and X1

Immelmans, Loops, Negative-G Loops, Barrel Rolls, Honors Passes, Take-offs and landings ...

Oh My!

B29 launches an X1 Rocket Plan and goes on to perform incredible in-air stunts.

All in 1/10 Scale.

As they say: "You know he didn't build this on his kitchen table".

H/T The Hobo Brasser

Just For Fun.  

Guest Blog: Current Oregon Gun-Control Bills

By now those of us who are paying attention have realized that the anti-gun factions are in full attack mode. Their perception is with the Democrats in charge they are not likely to find a better time to renew their attempts to outlaw guns. For the uninitiated, the way they see to accomplish this is to chip away. Take away one small right after another until they are all gone. A couple of examples: one national and one local to Oregon. On the national level; there is an attempt to resurrect the Clinton/Brady gun ban. H.R. 1022: Assault Weapons Ban and Law Enforcement Protection Act of 2007.. On the state level here in Oregon there are several bad laws being considered in our legislature. The worst is SB 1012. This bill mandates a full time range officer along with some other draconian measures which would put small gun clubs out of business.

You get the idea. It is time for everyone to get behind the NRA. Now I know some of you don’t like the NRA for various reasons. But let me ask you this. Are you a Democrat? A Republican? Are you happy with everything your party does all the time? If not, did you quit the party? Did you stop voting? Or do you grit your teeth and vote for the least offensive candidate? Well view the NRA the same way and join. They are our best resource for preserving our 2nd amendment rights.

Yes there are other organizations, but I know from personal experience in politics they are not anywhere as effective. Nor are they feared in both Washington and your state capitol as much as the NRA. One state senator in Oregon is persistently anti-gun, however, she will not go straight up against the NRA anymore. She knows she is a target, so she tries to keep a low profile on the anti-gun issue.

Look hard at the other alternative organizations who claim to be alternatives to the NRA. There are three basic types of organization. One is the one-man operation. This type solicits contributions and attempts lobbying, but much of the money goes to pay the one man’s salary. Another type is the special purpose organization which purports to protect one kind of right, like say hunting. The last type is the stealth organization who actually is anti-gun putting out a subtle message contrary to the truth about guns and gun owners. None of these is as effective as the NRA.

Many of you will learn about the latest attempts to curtail our second amendment rights thru venues like this. Others like myself learned about them thru email alerts from the NRA. When an email arrives it contains all the pertinent info you will need to learn about the legislation and the names and addresses, including emails, of who to contact. The latest one for Oregon even included a suggested email message.

So get involved, join the fight, and join the NRA. Remember they may be after our “assault“ rifles today, but they will be after your trap gun or your .22 plinker tomorrow.

Mark O'Shea

"Gun Control is What IPSC is All About!"

Sunday, April 01, 2007

20th Annual Media Research Center's DIS-honors Awards

Media Research Center's 20th Anniversary Gala

I wait for this every year. And every year, I am not disappointed. Is it a coincidence that it falls on April Fools' Eve?

I think not!

There's little that I can add. Go, read the awards, enjoy them in the best Politically Conservative tradition!

Heck, I haven't even read them yet, and I just KNOW it's going to be worth the effort.

Sometimes I just can't turn off The Evil Twin

(Click on the image for the full-size)

... And it IS April Fool's Day!

Les and The Race Gun

I've been working with Les for a couple of years now, ever since I transferred from the Oregon University System to Oregon State University during a re-organization at The Office.

Les has always been both an Alpha Geek with Banner and Oracle applications, and very friendly as a co-worker. When I have technical problems at work, I often find Les is a good source of advice and support.

In turn, he has always shown a candid interest in That Thing We Do .... competitive pistol shooting.

Since SWMBO was out of town this weekend, there was no IPSC match scheduled, and also because I had to work up a new .38 Super load using 115gr. HP bullets from Montana Gold instead of my usual 115gr FMJ bullet, I found I had an almost free weekend with nothing to do but go to the range.

Gee, tough choice.

So I invited Les to go to the range with me. We could both shoot the STI Open Gun ("The Race Gun"), and give the new load a workout. More, I have a small handful of pistols which haven't been used in a while and they needed some attention, too.

Sunday afternoon (a bright, sunny day that just cries out for some Range Time) I packed up the Kimber Custom in .45acp, the STI Edge in 10mm, the Mech Tech to go with the Kimber, the compensated STI Tru-Bore with a C-More Electronic Dot Sight, and a Ruger Blackhawk "New Model" single-action revolver in .41 Magnum.

I met Les at the Albany rifle & Pistol Club range at 1:30pm. We appropriated Bay 5 for our very own and started packing guns, range-bags, ammo cans and targets from the Damned Old Ford to the counter on the bay.

After we went through a brief talk about Range Safety, I decanted the guns.

NOTE: If you just want to see the video, skip down to the bottom of the article!

First choice was The Beloved Kimber. You gotta start with the rough, and work your way up to the sleek, so I set up a practice mini-popper and a single IPSC target downrange and did a short demonstration on gunhandling with live ammo.

Then it was Les's turn. He had no problem hitting the ten-meter IPSC target, but the mini-popper was safe from him. "No problem", I said. "I can't hit it either." Then I demonstrated that I couldn't hit it for the first four shots, and somehow managed to nail it the last six shots of the 10-round magazine.

we spent a few minutes talking about Sight Alignment, using 140mm and 170mm single-stack .45 magazines as make-shift representations of rear sight/front sight alignment and aiming point. Les took the Kimber back to the IPSC target, and did a fair job of search-and-destroy on the A-zone.

Then I dragged out the STI Edge in 10mm, compared and contrasted the two cartridges, and let him shoot some short-loaded magazines, finally working up to the full 20-round 140mm magazine of 200gr LTC (Lead Truncated Cone) bullets. I asked him if he could feel any difference, and he admitted that he could not. Even though I was shooting 230gr LRN (Lead Round Nose) bullets in the Kimber, I have to admit that the perceived recoil and muzzle flip is very similar to the same, even accounting for the Extended Dust Cover of the STI Edge.

My personal opinion?

They're very similar to shoot, but HEY! The STI Edge gives you 20 rounds in a magazine while the Single-Stack Kimber only gives you 8 to 10 rounds, depending on your magazine choice. The Edge has the edge in competition. (No apologies for gratuitous puns here!)

We played with the double-tap concept for a while, as I explained the concept of fitting your double-tap to the tuning of the gun. As Les was getting 0.60+ second split times it wasn't a major problem ... and that's as it should be. I did demonstrate a 0.25 sec. and a 0.33 sec. split time just to show that the bullet placement depends on the tuning of the gun and the load, but he was (correctly) working for the sighted shot every time instead of pushing for a true double-tap.

Yes, the slide on the Edge was slow enough that the 0.25 sec. resulted in a 'high' 2nd shot, and the 0.33 sec. split time resulted in a 'low' 2nd shot. If I could see the sights well enough that I was still using this pistol in competition, I would have to practice more to get the shots in line with myprefered 0.18 sec. split time. And yes, I know your split times are MUCH faster.

In between shooting the Kimber and the STI Edge, I dragged out my Mech Tech and quickly assembled it with the Kimber. Les shot the nasty mini-popper with it and got 7 out of 8 hits very quickly. The more he shot, the faster he went and he didn't lose any stage time after he got the feel of it. That's a powerful argument for the advantage of the Electronic Dot Sight.

(The Mech Tech mounted a PDP-1 tube-sight, and it works just fine for both Les and for me.)

Moving on, we finally got to the meat of the nut when I dragged out the STI Tru-Bore (Prototype) and shot some of the new ammunition at the mini-popper. I wasn't as much concerned with hitting the popper as I was checking the new load.

To digress, I ran out of 115gr MG FMJ bullets and was forced (due to availability of the one, and not the other) to change to 115gr MG HP bullets. Some people swear on the HP as being more accurate, but I'm not accurate enough to appreciate the difference.

However, I AM cheap enough to appreciate the higher price tag on the HP bullets. My understanding is that my supplier, "Big Dawg", had 13 cases of the HP and couldn't affor d to restock the FMJ until he got rid of it. I bought a case (partly because I want to help Big Dawn, mostlyl because I was down to my last 100 FMJ and was desperate!) and in return Dawg gave me a break on the price.

But that means I had to work up a new load.

Comparison of the old FMJ with the new HP bullet showed only a couple thousandths of an inch difference. I cranked down the seating die on the Dillon 650 loading press until that difference was obviated in the Over All Length, and pumped out a couple hundred rounds Saturday Night.

Somehow, between the change in the bullet and having to replace my last bent decapping pin, my sizing die doesn't quite manage to resize the case as well as previously. Ninty percent of the loaded rounds failed to pass the Chamber Gauge. No problem for my, my .38 super chamber is as welcoming and accomodating as a crib-hookers .... uh, I mean, it's very accomodating to oversize ammunition. But I will have to work on the sizing die adjustment, because SWMBO's STI Tru-Bore is as tight as a ... uh ... as tight as factory specs. Uh, so, uh, that means I have more work to do on the load.

Moving right along, I know that I need to work on the sizing, but I was concerned about pressure levels AND overall length. Turns out, the cartridges loaded with the new bullet exhibited some cratering, but going back to the baseline FMJ with the ammunition I loaded last month, there was also some cratering there. I suspect that it was due to the warmer weather (I have no idea how I'm going to justify this to someone who really knows about this stuff!) but it wasn't excessive so I'm going to ignore it for now.

Whew! Did I get away with that?

So, the new load is acceptable although arguably a little 'hot'. At least I didn't have primer smearing problems. If I resolve the case circumference problem (so SWMBO can shoot it in her STI) I should be okay.

More important for the moment (and a much-appreciated end to the digression), the new load feeds reliably from the magazine to the chamber, and it seems safe to shoot.

So I had Les load up a short-stack of .38 super/HP and go downrange with the mini-popper.

Les had experiences problems getting hits with the small (4") plate at medium ranges. So did I. But we were shooting iron sights, and we're both half-blind in one eye and can't see for shit out of the other. I scruplously neglected to keep track of my hit/miss count, but my best guess is thea Les (who hasn't shot a pistol for 20 years)and I (who have been shooting 3 or 4 times a week for the past 24 years) performed equally well when using Iron Sights.

Talk about The Blind Leading The Blind!

After Less shot the 25-round magazine at the mini-popper, he shot six rounds from the Ruger Blackhawk "New Model" single-action revolver. Didnt' hit anything but Dirt. Well, I wouldn't have done any better. But at least Les learned why we say "Lean into it a little .. lean forward from the waist".

There are few guns better than the .45 magnum Single Action Revolver to teach you why it's important to do that.

(NB: The full-size (15mb) version of the video is available here.)