This is my intrigued face.Originally Posted by JonInWA
This is my intrigued face.
Ditto. I confess to never having heard of that modification, although I can see where it would actually work.
At any rate, those pesky particles (burned, unburned, granules, whatever) can really cause a headache.
I had some work their way inside the frame of a J frame, between the bolt face and recoil shield, causing sticky opening... exactly like when the ejector rod is backing out, gunk under the star, etc.
I almost went nuts trying to isolate it, with no joy. I had about concluded that either the center pin or front locking lug had worn "short", but this takes MANY thousands of cycles to occur and the revolver hadn't been shot that much. When I detail-stripped the piece to check for that, I found several flakes/particles where noted previously; in a place I'd never seen any before on any of the hundreds of revolvers I'd beat on.
In the spirit of full disclosure, I eventually realized it was my own doing. I had been experimenting with several different powders, working toward a bunny fart load to ease the pain of practicing with The Beast (M-360PD Ti-Scan feather weight). Hodgdon TiteGroup wasn't burning worth a darn at those low levels, and leaving lots of gradueax (Cajun-speak for gunk) in odd places. I was using a steel M-49 for the test mule, and I finally figured out the cause when I tried those same loads in The Beast; with duplicate results.
You live, and learn...
.
I recall reading in some of the '80s-'90s gun rags (Ayoob?) about custom relief cuts under the ejector star for this reason.
It was 1992, where Ayoob was writing an article about Chris Peters and his work-the article that led me to linking up with him some six years later. I'll try to get an image up of the modified ejector in the next day or so, everybody.
Best, Jon
Please do.
.
When I saw the "at night" part of the title thread I though about night sights. My carry pistol wears NS, my carry revolver does not. The revo is a fixed sight S&W so NS wouldn't be impossible I guess but rather expensive I would think.
The original post reminded me of the alley scene - and all those dogs - in End of Watch. "This sucks!"
Guess I'll chime in too. I own semi auto pistols and revolvers. My favorite handguns that I own are revolvers. I've often taken them into the 'Great Outdoors' and have good memories associated with them. I look upon my pistols as just tools. (Well, there are some 1911s in the 'collection' and they are enjoyed for themselves as much as the revolvers.) They both have their advantages depending on the particular circumstances. In broad, general terms when it comes to hunting and raw power the advantage goes to revolvers. When it comes to round capacity and speed of reload, the advantage goes to semi auto pistols. The user will have to determine if he is more likely to run into multiple threats or an extremely tough & powerful threat. For most people the latter is nothing more than a speculation on the too often started 'grizzly bear defense' internet threads. Even powerful revolvers pale in comparison to a rifle for such circumstances. Bear spray, situational awareness, and good sense are probably the best tools you can have. (Yes, I've seen grizzlies in the wild in both Montana and Alaska. They were off in the distance and posed no threat.)
One aspect that may not get enough attention IMHO is the matter of muzzle blast. My ear doc tells me that everyone is different in terms of their sensitivity to loud noises. I found this out a few years back when hunting waterfowl. My stocking cap must have interfered with the seal on my electronic ear muffs, because there was a 'cotton in the ears' feeling after several hours of hunting. The ear doc tested me & determined that I had experienced some high frequency hearing loss from that one event. None of my hunting buddies experienced this problem and most of them weren't wearing any hearing protection at all while shooting their shotguns. Everyone is different. That said, when working around the farm or when up in the mountains I often like to carry a double action revolver chambered in 45 Colt. I can carry a potent load that's within the SAAMI specs of 14,000 psi. I also like a 44 Special revolver which takes the SAAMI specs to 15,500 psi. In comparison, the SAAMI specs for the 9mm & the 40 S&W are 35,000 psi, with +P loads running higher. (I agree with an article I read awhile back . . I think it was by Brian Pearce in Handloader magazine. The 45 Colt revolver makes a very good working gun outdoors where you may be called upon to actually use it quickly for all sorts of tasks, including taking down an animal.) In more crowded urban settings I'm more likely to carry a pistol however. Their capacity and reload speed may be a deciding important factor. Eventually needing a hearing aid may be the price I would have to pay to save my life or my loved ones in those circumstances. (Though being partially deaf likely isn't good for anyone facing future self defense situations.)
I think it likely that the OP would be just fine with his GP100 firing 38 Specials for the dog situation. In my experience, most animals run off as fast as possible when people shoot at them. We have a lot of coyotes around our area - they often show up in the yard - and just yelling at them sends them on a gallop. On the other hand, if the GP100 was the OP's only handgun, the nod would go to a semi auto pistol. Not so much for the dog threat IMO as potential two legged threats. The pistol has the advantage there.
P.S. - - - handloads.com lists the standard 38 Special load at 17,000 psi and +P loads at 20,000 psi
Last edited by SamAdams; 01-19-2014 at 01:48 PM. Reason: PS added
When Ruger still cared enough to send us the very best, GP100 sixguns had grunge grooves under the extactor star, from the factory. I have two of these, though only the first one one has many round through it. (I acquired the second one only recently, well after the dirty anmo went away.) It was never affected by my employer's 1980s-1990s filthy .38 training ammo, whereas just about all of my other revolvers were subject to binding cylinders if I did not do a pass or two with the ever-present toothbrush every few reloads.
I do, however, appreciate this information, as I have more revolvers that may be candidates for this treatment.
Oher thoughts:
The S&W Model 242 is the perfect bag/purse gun. It fills the hand well, for shooting purposes, but does not add substantial weight to a bag. My wife calls hers the "Buffalo Gun" because of its hump. She prefers to wear flat autos, but likes a revolver for the bag.
The 125-grain .357 Magnum JHP, in its full-pressure loads, produces a hole, through an opponent, that tends to make one have faith in this load for a very long time. Instant Hole. To China. Garden hose. Not the little weeping dimple that oozes blood. Loaded with hot 125-grain Federal, Remington, or Speer Gold Dots in the above-mentioned GP100 with grunge grooves, I never felt undergunned.
I fully agree with those who say the rear of a striker-fired auto's slide complicates concealment. A G19 does, indeed, fit in the same size envelope as an SP101, or a J-frame with slightly oversized grips, but on my skinny frame, I have to dress around a G19, but can conceal several snubbies rather easily. If I have to dress around a G19, I may well choose to just carry the G17, which conceals about as well, and be done with it. I use Uncle Mike's boot grips on my J-snub, and it disappears into a pocket, though to be clear, I very rarely leave the house with a pocketed gun as my only gun.
I can carry a quite large revolver AIWB, and it is better-concealed than a G19, and amazingly comfortable. My AIWB-suited revolver rigs, however, are older ones that collapse when the weapon is not filling them, so I now rarely use them. Thankfully, a Glock produces a square bulge, that most folks will probably think is a mobile phone or such gadget, and being a peace officer, while in Texas, I have no statutory obligation to conceal.
I started handgunning in 1982 or 1983 with a 1911. I learned to appreciate DA revolvers in 1983 and 1984, at the police academy, and have used both autos and revolvers since. Each fulfills some purposes very well. I do not see what much of the fuss is about. With arthritis settling into my right thumb and wrist, however, I do very much appreciate the orthopedic aspects of a G17, while the larger in-gun ammo capacity could be handy in this time of local hold-up thugs tending run around in groups of three and more. I do not want to be executed after they find my ID or badge; my Plan A is to act explosively if caught in a robbery scenario.
Last edited by Rex G; 01-19-2014 at 11:45 PM.
Rex,
I'm right there with you on the arthritis at 58. In my youth, I had a trigger finger broken twice, the last time at the knuckle, along with a broken wrist. It's getting to the point that it bothers me most days. A couple of hours of DA work with my preferred DA/SA SIGs is becoming a multi-day remembrance. As I age, it will likely drive me totally back to Glocks for serious guns. Headed to the range today and will be working with my 2nd gen 19 and my old 17.
Stay Safe.
Ken
Reply With Quote