graycrait

I've had a Gen 4 G19 it worked well. I swapped out the dual recoil system with a single Gen 3 recoil rod and the aftermarket reduction fitting for the nose of the slide. Why? Because I could. The gun worked fine either way, as well as my other 6 9mm Glocks. Like a dummie I traded it for something I had to have, now I am wishing I had the Gen 4 G19 back.

I always thought that shooting one of those would be neat. For better pics you might want to try to take some outside using sunlight and maybe shade. Radom VIS 35 P35(p) F.B. Radom VIS model 35 - TheFirearmsForum.Com Radom VIS 35 / P-35(p)

I'm all jacked up. Somehow I got the Geneva and Hague Conventions confused, and the fact that the US has not ratified Protocols I or II of the Geneva Convention. The Hague Convention of 1899, Declaration III, prohibits the use in warfare of bullets that easily expand or flatten in the body.[3] This is often incorrectly believed to be prohibited in the Geneva Conventions, but it significantly predates those conventions, and is in fact a continuance of the St. Petersburg Declaration of 1868, which banned exploding projectiles of less than 400 grams, as well as weapons designed to aggravate injured soldiers or make their death inevitable. NATO members do not use small arms ammunition that is prohibited by the Hague Convention.

If they went to JHP and ignored the "geneva convention" which I believe we are still not signatories but mererly followers of, they would find, I suspect, that 9mm is good enough. If they stick with ball then wound cavitation and channeling seems to become the most relevant issues, not just merely shoot one to take 3 out of the fight. Which then begs the presumption that maybe 9mm ball doesn't take 3 out of the fight, but .40 ball will. Is there overwhelming evidence (and I doubt there is) that .40 ball is a quantum leap over .355 ball strictly as military ordnance? Who uses .40 ball whose date could be analyzed to provide proof positive that .40 is as good as .45 and so much better than 9mm ball? Pistols with a shot at replacing the M9 - Army News | News from Afghanistan & Iraq - Army Times / The Army has a new pistol in its sights. After 25 years of action, the M9 is on its way out as officials are confident they can give soldiers a better pistol at a better price. The goal is to replace all 239,000 M9s and the concealable M11s. "The M9 is at the end of its lifecycle," said Maj. Art Thomas, small arms branch chief at the Maneuver Center of Excellence at Fort Benning, Ga. "It is an old weapon. We can do a lot better with what technology can provide us now." Lethality is among the M9's several "limitations," said Daryl Easlick, project officer for close effects. The requirement for a new pistol calls for "an increase in permanent wound channel," which suggests something more powerful than a 9mm may be on the horizon. Other limitations the new pistol must overcome include: . The slide-mounted safety. When solders rack the slide to alleviate a jam or stovepipe in the M9, they often inadvertently engage the safety - and won't realize this until they reacquire and squeeze the trigger. . The open-slide design, which allow contaminants and dirt into the system. . The lack of a modular grip, integrated rail and night-sight capabilities. . The inability to suppress. . Limited service life - replacement should have a service life of at least 25,000 rounds. Service life is a key issue, Easlick said, noting that the M9 is only required to fire 5,000 rounds. "We are looking for a threshold capability ... in the magnitude of five times better than that," he said. Beretta insists that the M9's numbers are well beyond 5,000 rounds. Two-thirds of all M9s fire 5,000 rounds with one or no malfunctions, said Gabriele de Plano, Beretta's vice president of military sales and marketing. Slides have 35,000-round durability, frames last for 30,000 rounds and locking blocks for 22,000. The average reliability of all M9s is 17,500 rounds without a stoppage. Related reading Love it or hate it: troops sound off on M9 During one test conducted under Army supervision, 12 M9 pistols shot 168,000 rounds without a malfunction. But that is not the norm. Easlick said an M9 is tempo-dependent, and its service life is "exponentially" dropped when it is used as an offensive handgun and in intense combat training. To get the changes it desires, the Army adopted the Air Force's Modular Handgun System proposal, which had been approved by the Joint Requirements Oversight Council but lost steam in recent years. The Army plan has jumped through most hoops and is at Army Headquarters awaiting approval. Of course, there is the reality of diminishing defense dollars. But Thomas said all participants are "working diligently" to create a budget-friendly fielding and funding plan. While timelines remain to be seen, the Army in a June 30 omnibus reprogramming request placed procurement in fiscal 2014. Your next pistol Officials are not allowed to discuss the selection process while requirements are being written. But Thomas did say the next pistol would be a commercial, off-the-shelf product. Narrowing the field is not especially hard. The soldier requirements division must first consider existing programs of record. If another government agency has a pistol program that meets or exceeds the Army's requirements, that is the one you will get. There are some strong contenders in that category, and they are not limited to the .45 caliber and 9mm varieties. The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms in 2010 made a big switch to the .40 caliber, and many military leaders would like to do the same. Smith and Wesson's .40 cal M&P nudged the Glock 22 and 27 in the ATF competition. Scores were so close that both received a part of the $80 million contract - and prime standing as the Army enters its search. "It's kind of hard to beat the Smith and Wesson M&P right now," said one industry insider from a competing company, who spoke on the condition of anonymity. "It is a polymer gun with high-capacity steel magazines. It has a positive safety and ambidextrous controls ... they simply came out of the gate with the right gun." Other companies with existing government contracts and weapons that meet Army requirements include: . Beretta. The company in 2010 launched the 92A1 9mm and 96A1 .40 S&W pistols. They include increased capacity magazines, removable front sights, an accessory rail, captive recoil spring assembly, frame recoil buffer and sand-resistant magazines. The Army would need no transitional training if it chose the 9mm, and parts compatibility is 90 percent. Beretta's next-generation Px4 family of pistols has polymer frames, modular grips and a rotary barrel system similar to a bolt-action rifle. The Px4 Storm Special Duty .45 ACP, which had been submitted for the now-defunct Joint Combat Pistol program, includes a long barrel for suppressor mounting. . Sig Sauer. Many Navy SEALs carry the company's P226, and the Coast Guard has adopted the P229. The industry insider called the Sig a "workhorse," but said the P229 is an unlikely selection because it is double-action only and has no positive safety. The .40 caliber P250 probably has little to no chance. The pistol had 58 stoppages, 13 of which were gun-induced, during the ATF competition. Smith & Wesson had 16 shooter-induced stoppages and Glock had seven, and neither had gun-induced stoppages. . Heckler & Koch. The HK P2000 is lauded by the Border Patrol. They love its modular grips, dual slide release levers and mounting rails that easily accommodate a variety of lights, lasers and accessories. . Glock. A longtime favorite among many special operators, the latest variants include modular grips and shorter trigger distances. The recoil spring also has been replaced with a dual recoil spring assembly to reduce recoil and increase life cycle. But the venerable Glock does have its detractors, the industry insider said - primarily because the pistol lacks an external safety. In addition, there is no metal-on-metal contact in the magazine catch-recess area, causing magazines to wear out faster and sometimes drop out of the gun. . Colt and Springfield. Both companies are competing to replace the Marine Corps' M45 Close Quarter Battle Pistol. If the winner becomes a program of record before the Army opens its selection process, then it would be in the running. But Colt's variant is a single-action, cocked and locked pistol, which is not popular with many folks in Big Army.

Sooooo.... does anyone have any idea what the top 5 choices might be? I retired from the Army 12+ years ago but I see and talk to a lot of young GIs nearly every day, so I am interested. I was one of those who transitioned from my rust prone 1911 to the M9, so this interests me from a "just what the insiders may be thinking" aspect.

I like .22 pistols and have had quite a few and have a few right now. I have owned an ISSC M22. Essentially the action in the ISSC M22 is the same as those found in the Walther P22 and new S&W M&P .22 pistol. I had one of the first M22s on the market and had an issue with it which was cleared up quickly by the gun's return trip to the importer. When it comes to value, reliability, durability, accuracy and availability of reasonably priced upgrades here is how I rate .22 semi autos that are priced in the sub $500.00 category. I have owned at least one of each below, some multiple copies (up to 10 in some cases) and have worked on several of some types for friends. 1. Ruger MKI, II or III - they all work well, put a crisp trigger on them and they shoot way better than most of us. 2. Buckmark - Good solid shooter, aftermarket not as deep as for Ruger, but nice guns nonetheless 3. S&W 22A - Not the best looking, priced good, and work well, underrated IMHO 4. Discontinued S&W 422/622/2206 - I love these pistols, but you need to buy aftermarket firing pins for these, which are avail 5. Walther P22 - a fun plinker that most find ergonomically pleasant to hold, especially the ladies. A good training gun or if pressed a self-defense pistol for those with damaged, weak, or arthritic hands also. Iknow several folks who have suppressors on their P22s. 6. Advantage Arms Glock .22 Conversion. It works but only weighs 8oz. With a Glock lower weighing in the 4oz range this makes for an extremely light pistol, almost too light. 7. ISSC M22 - it ain't a Glock and it ain't a P22. 8. Phoenix Arms HP22 - look to Youtube for advice on this one and you will have a blast with these. 9. Sig Mosquito - I know some really like this gun and it has a great feel. I have completely disassembled two of these to find out why these particular two had such heavy gritty triggers (apparently some have acceptable triggers). If you have trouble with your Mosquito there is a guy on Rimfirecentral.com who knows a lot about these.

Ruger

Jeeeez.... The 1911 is nice weapon if properly put together, maintained and trained with. The only guy I know who uses one as a 24/7 duty weapon is the best handgun shooter I have ever met. He is very good with the 1911 and says he especially likes it when he issues Federal warrants. However, he tells me he thinks the G19 is the finest fighting handgun ever made bar none. So there is the conundrum. Therefore it appears to me, and through many other experiences, that there should be no naysayers towards either gun. I think just be pleased that the Glock "guy" is as ardent a gunonwer/carrier as the 1911 "guy" and vice versa. In the big picture both camps should be supporting one another against the anti's and only like tight-knit brothers and sisters, goodnaturedly rib each other about our favorite bullet launchers. Divisions can be created by the anti's on many levels.

p.s. If I wasn't hankering after some other non-glock guns right now the 30 is at the top of my need to have next Glock list. In the meantime, I agree with TNWGR, and think the 36 is a teeny bit more practical than the 30. The only thing that bothers me is that the 30 has the reputation of being very very accurate. I don't know if that is proven or just internet rumor. Regardless that "accuracy" rep the G30 has bugs me enough to make me want one. The last G30 I shot, I handed over to my wife to shoot and she shot it better than she shoots her 26 or one of our G19s. Go figure....

Two things, to keep the vertical extension more rigid (what the Glock Armorer course instructor said today) or to keep the vertical extension centered on the firing pin safety plunger. In either case it appears to me more of a "cosmetic" fix for bureacrats than practical. But it is inexpensive and must keep someone happy.

I was wondering if any folks own one of these convertibles and can tell me how accurate they are with .357/.38SPL and especially how accurate with 9mm? I am thinking about learning about tuning a Ruger Single Action and this convertible seems to make sense if I can get at least some accuracy with cheap 9mm. I figure the 6.5" would be the one to get - and could hunt with it in .357. Ruger® New Model Blackhawk® Convertible Single-Action Revolver Models Thanks, Craig in Clarksville

kesava, Don't hesitate on the RIA 9mm. I have shot three, and owned two, all worked great and were a lot of fun. I got a near NIB 17L for one of my RIA 5" 9mm 1911s right on the range.

One of my friends is on an extended vacation and gave me 3 Sig 220 SAOs and 1 X-Five Tactical SAO to shoot. The 220s were fun and comfortable. But when I got to the X-Five - Wow! It shot easier than the 3 9mm 1911s I have had and (I shudder when I say this) allowed me to shoot faster with more accuracy than my Glock 17L. Like the 17L the X-Five is too large for practical purposes other than a house gun but now I am thinking I have to try a 226. Anyone have 226's then went back to G19s for carry? Craig in Clarksville

I was having a glass or two of vino the other night, several hours after handling a fella's custom & personalized Ed Brown 1911. That was a nice pistol, the action so smooth and yet positive; then looked over at one of my not so purty Glocks. I gingerly (don't want to spill) sat my glass of cheap dry red wine down and thought: "I wonder if I can stir something up?"

I've shot a lot of 1911s and owned 10 or 12. I've shot a lot of Glocks, owned around 20. I've owned 1911s in .38 Super, 9mm and .45ACP. I've owned Glocks in 9mm and .45 ACP and shot Glocks in .40S&W. I may have shot a Glock or two in .357Sig and .45GAP but don't recall those. With all the hulla ba loo over which is best, and the endless back biting between advocates of both camps I don't see why the 1911 adherents just don't acknowldge the 1911 is a nice shooting platform but has been overcome by requirements, innovation and technology. Granted, a decently tuned and maintained 1911 is an effective self defense weapon if used by an experienced 1911 shooter. I understand that a handfitted Ed Brown, Wilson, Nighthawk, or whoever custom maker 1911 is a nice shooting gun. Heck, I also understand that a Sig P210, Sig X-Five or Sphinx are nice 9mms for the money too. Just because - I carry a very nice older S&W Mdl 10 one day a week, but am darn sure that I have a polymer NY reload in my left pocket when I carry that 6-shot wheelgun. Recnetly I gave up my last 1911 for a Glock 36. I occasionally like to shoot .45ACP and if I shoot it or carry a .45ACP launcher I want combat reliability, the Glock 36 gives me that confidence without caring about if my gun gets scratched or if I have to toss my gun across a parking lot to my partner and then wondering if it will work once it skitters across the asphalt to my friend. I know a Glock will work in that scenario, not so much the 1911 or the S&W Mdl 10. If I had a climate controlled storage vault or shot with a rubber mat at my feet using a $300.00 holster and gloves, then a nice 1911 might seem "useful." However, I drive a 12 yr old car, live off a meager pension, show up at the range with a burlap bag of guns, and shoot like my life depends on it. That makes me a Glockster. My "1911":

I got one of these today. Fiddled with the trigger pull adjustment screw and didn't get it as low as I had hoped, but out of the box the trigger has a pretty nice break for an inexpensive .22. These new Marlins have something called the Pro-Fire trigger. The Pro-Fire is very similar to the Savage Accu-trigger. I plan on using this XT-22 as an airgun scoped Colibra rifle. Craig

Sean, If you can find them butt fed tube Mossbergs are fine guns in semi-auto, nice wood too.Look for the 151 and 51 series, pretty old but not that uncommon. Again, the older Remington ADL 552s are the semi-autos you should conside while the 572s are the pumps. The pump is the one that will let you shoot anything including Colibras. The 552s will allow you to shoot everything but Colibras. Another even older Remington that runs nice in semi-auto is the 550-1, the 552 predecessor. Craig

Semi Auto .22 short review: Most Versatile: 10/22, huge aftermarket, entire websites practically dedicated to the gun: rimfirecentral.com. I have had a dozen or so, in various forms with aftermarket up the ying yang. Best money to be spent on a 10/22 is a barrel and bolt job by: Connecticut Precision Chambering - Ruger 10/22 Most fun stock semi-auto: Remington 552: that gun will shoot virtually any .22 ammo except Aguilla Colibras or Super Colibras. It will even shoot Aguilla 60 grain SSS. You can load a tube full of shorts, longs, long rifles, standard velocity, hyper velocity, etc., and watch them string vertically. Find an older ADL model. The new ones only come in the pretty expensive BDL variant. Cheapest best: Marlin 60. Keep it clean and don't take it too far apart. Use gunscrubber, dental picks and stiff Birchwood Casey cleaning doubled ended brushes. They can be finicky as to what ammo they like. Remington 597: Yawn...It works. Bolt .22s: This is a more difficult subject. Mag feds generally limit you to .22LR while bolt or pump action tube feds allow S,L,LRs. Why is this important in today's market where so many decent .22LR cartridges abound in such a wide variety of bullet weights and velocity? 20 grain Aguilla Colibras are very quiet out of a rifle and most pumps and bolt action tube feds will allow at least Super Colibras to clear the bore and many will allow the Colibras. Colibras are about 375fps and Super Colibras around 500fps. Best bang for the buck: Marlin. Marlin has now come out in both tube and mag fed bolt .22 with their XT-22 models with the Pro-Fire trigger. These guns are very reasonably priced and I should be getting my new tube fed XT-22 this week. The Pro-Fire is similar to the Accu-Trigger by Savage. Why not just get a Savage? I like the price of the Marlins, as well as Marlin barrels and the fact I can get a tube fed to cycle Colibras. I have a feeling that the new Marlin XT-22 will shoot way beyond its sale price. Marlin Model XT-22 Coolest and cost more: Savage. Savage has two mag feds on the same action with Accu-triggers. One is a fluted bull barrel affair on target stock and the other is a neat little 16" threaded barrel on a light synthetic stock. Mark II FV-SR Mark II TRR-SR S&W M&P 22: This is an AR-like .22 that is really neat and instead of trying to make a 10/22 into a tacti-cool rifle just buy the S&W. M&P15-22<br>.22 LR - Smith & Wesson Best shooting in a practical price range: CZ 452 American with a Yo-Dave trigger kit. Trigger Kit Installation Instructions - Yodave Products From here you start climbing the price curve pretty steeply.

The first Hi Point 9mm I shot a friend got for 75.00 used from some "dude." I bought 500 rds of Russian ammo. We had two mags and a 12 pack in rural Stewart County. We loaded those mags as fast as we could. Shot 500 rds in an M9 target at center mass 15 meters, both of us retired Army. Never a bobble and when we were done we lookd at each other and said, "S....!!!!!!" Then I got a Hi Pont 9mm carbine, shot it and was talked out of it. Got another carbine and was talked out if it. Due to a volunteer job I have I have chopped up more Hi Points than most people in TN would have a chance too. I would rather chop up a S&W or Colt. The HI Points are a b.... to cut up and are hard on the chop saw blade. I don't want to buy one but I would love to shoot a .45 Hi Point pistol, then pound tent pegs with it.

I just started watching this fella's videos a couple of weeks ago. His Dragon's Breath video is also worth a good chuckle. "Professional Russian," that in itself is pretty funny.

Apples to oranges to grapefruit comparisons abound here. G26 is a tad over 19oz, PM9 is 14+ and DB is 11+, so the G26 compared to the PM9 is about like comparing the PM9 to DB9. DB and PM9 are proven BUGs while the DB9, given time, may be a true pocket gun. All three slide into slightly different niches.

Kahrs are nicely made pistols but I have a personal issue with the way the trigger is attached to the pivot pin and how my damaged index/trigger finger works in that gun. I've either owned or shot most of the usual Kahr suspects at one time or another. I particulary like the MK9. Then I compare the MK9's or even the PM9's weight against a Glock 26 and say I really don't see the big deal. Displaced volume is quite different with the Kahr's quite a bit less, but then the 26 is very easy to shoot very well and very fast.

Took the DB9 to the range yesterday. I ran several mags of 115grain SV Hornady Critical Defense and RWS 124 grain SV. Worked fine but is a fire breathing dragon to control. One handed shooting is best with elbow locked. Accurate enough for a SYA pistol. I also got to handle a two-tone Kimber Solo on Thursday. It is a bit wider than the DB9 and just a hair heavier. It is wonderfully smooth and well executed pistol. It feels good in the hand and makes me wonder if it is a "dragon" like the DB9 or the KT PF9? The owner told me he was having some kind of magazine issue with the Kimber. I can't recall what it was exactly. After having a couple of KT PF9s and the DB9 and getting to handle the Solo I'm thinking that once a 9mm pistol hits a certain size it starts to get in a more or less "useless" range if fast accurate follow-up shots are needed. I classify them as belly guns, but in my mind a nice +38 spl Airweight is possibly more practical.

Doesn't matter except for personal feel. If you don't like the dual recoil system several companies make a fitting that goes in the slide to reduce the recoil rod hole size thereby allowing you to use a single guide rod. Just to be slightly less "fiddly" I would go with a Gen 3. I'm not fond of the dual recoil system if the single recoil spring works fine. Less parts are better for me. I've currently got 2 Gen 3 19s and "had" a Gen 4. The one thing I really like about the Gen 4 is the mag release design.