Come fellow firearm owners, we must chat.

If 9mm was such a great caliber, we would have had a new Pope a long time ago. Man up and get a .45.

John Browning said that every flaw of the 1911 was corrected in his Hi-Power. The .45 is a great cartridge but they are not for everyone.

There's people who insist DPMS are crap, but most of those people have never actually owned one.

DPMS had poor quality control in the early '90's but they've tightened that up significantly. Again, I'm biased towards them because not only are they in my home state but I have a friend who works there. Incidentally, there probably isn't going to be much of a difference between any of the AR manufacturers in a year or two. Bushmaster, DPMS, Remington, Marlin, and Cobb have been recently acquired by a large investment firm.

ranalin wrote:
doubtingthomas396 wrote:

You might consider a revolver for something different. They tend to kick harder than automatics because the only thing absorbing recoil is you, but they're certainly fun to shoot. Don't fall for Dirty Harry syndrome, however. You'll notice that in just about every gun shop you visit, there will be a large selection of lightly used 44 revolvers. There's a reason for that.

But those are so fun to shoot! It almost feels like you dont have to actually hit your targets just get close to them is good enough

On a serious note. This is something i've been meaning to check into, but what are the laws for gun ownership. I inherited all my dad's guns. I've yet to register them or anything. I dont even keep them with me. They're at moms and on holidays it's been a tradition to bring ammo and we'll all go out and shoot them and then break them down to clean. I'm also looking into buying some new ones. So should i register my dad's guns at the same time i buy my new ones?

As carry guns, they're great. Nothing more intimidating than a barrel the thug could see himself falling into. As recreational shooting, not so much.

Unless you remember that Dirty Harry was actually shooting wadcutters (I forget which movie-- it's the one with the vigilante cop that isn't Dirty Harry-- but he explicitly says he's using light loads) then it becomes more fun.

I won't answer the question in any detail, because I don't want Thin_J to hate me, but I will say that it depends on the state you live in. A summary of Tennessee's laws are here. It looks like you don't need to do anything with regards to registration, unless you plan on concealed carry.

Reaper81 wrote:
If 9mm was such a great caliber, we would have had a new Pope a long time ago. Man up and get a .45.

John Browning said that every flaw of the 1911 was corrected in his Hi-Power. The .45 is a great cartridge but they are not for everyone.

There's people who insist DPMS are crap, but most of those people have never actually owned one.

DPMS had poor quality control in the early '90's but they've tightened that up significantly. Again, I'm biased towards them because not only are they in my home state but I have a friend who works there. Incidentally, there probably isn't going to be much of a difference between any of the AR manufacturers in a year or two. Bushmaster, DPMS, Remington, Marlin, and Cobb have been recently acquired by a large investment firm.

Old man Moses was senile by then. Seriously, though, I have owned the HP and loved it. It was, in fact, my first handgun. An old Nazi HP with the eagle stamps all over it that cost me $299 back in 1988. I put over 20k rounds through it before it finally gave up the ghost. I sold it to a collector for parts at the Chantilly gun show last year for $300.

That said, there is a good reason why most police jurisdictions have gone to less anemic calibers.

DPMS may have had their issues, but they were nothing compared to Olympic's or Charles Daly's.

doubtingthomas396 wrote:

I won't answer the question in any detail, because I don't want Thin_J to hate me, but I will say that it depends on the state you live in. A summary of Tennessee's laws are here. It looks like you don't need to do anything with regards to registration, unless you plan on concealed carry.

Thanks

Wasn't trying to derail, just thought i'd ask an informed group.

I'll go back on my initial disclaimer and say basic questions about what general gun ownership laws are should be fine. I just don't want the thread to end up in P&C. I want a nice civil discussion amongst gun owners. Not a who should have what or shouldn't based on personal opinion style pissing contest. I've seen a few of those (and I admit, been involved in one or two, not my proudest moments) and I don't want this to be one. That's all the thread intro was about.

Reaper, have you heard anything about the Bushmaster gas piston conversion kit? The idea of a much cleaner AR-15 sounds great, but a competing kit had quality control and reliability issues and the designs don't look to be very different at all. Just curious. I can't find any reviews of their kit anywhere. I was tempted by a SIG 556 the day I bought the AR, but the $400 price difference and the fact that the SIG was used threw me in the other direction.

The guys in the gun shop I was in did recommend a Browning as a solid budget gun if I was really worried about pricing. I'm not sure if their definition of "budget" fits mine though, since MSRP on the Hi-Power models I see is about $250 higher than the Glock I bought at minimum.

Thin_J wrote:

I'll go back on my initial disclaimer and say basic questions about what general gun ownership laws are should be fine. I just don't want the thread to end up in P&C. I want a nice civil discussion amongst gun owners. Not a who should have what or shouldn't based on personal opinion style pissing contest. I've seen a few of those (and I admit, been involved in one or two, not my proudest moments) and I don't want this to be one. That's all the thread intro was about.

Reaper, have you heard anything about the Bushmaster gas piston conversion kit? The idea of a much cleaner AR-15 sounds great, but a competing kit had quality control and reliability issues and the designs don't look to be very different at all. Just curious. I can't find any reviews of their kit anywhere. I was tempted by a SIG 556 the day I bought the AR, but the $400 price difference and the fact that the SIG was used threw me in the other direction.

The guys in the gun shop I was in did recommend a Browning as a solid budget gun if I was really worried about pricing. I'm not sure if their definition of "budget" fits mine though, since MSRP on the Hi-Power models I see is about $250 higher than the Glock I bought at minimum.

The piston drive AR 15 retrofit upper was, I believe, originally an HK invention and provides a tremendous improvement in extreme condition reliability. The biggest complaint about the AR 15/M 16 has been that direct gas impingement creates problems with reliability. The Bushmaster attempt at it is pretty similar in concept.

If you're looking for a recreational rifle, direct gas impingement will not be an issue. Heck, even if it is an SD gun, you'll have no issues with it either. It's really only an issue if you plan to be 30 consecutive days sweating in the waddy with nothing but your buttstock cleaning kit and a pack of condoms. Since most of us here are not going in that direction, I can't imagine it being a huge issue. I say stay with the standard AR15. You'll always find a ready and competent gunsmith and aftermarket parts are everywhere.

If you're worried about pricing and you want a fantastic retro gun like the browning, I would STRONGLY recommend the CZ75. Old world craftsmenship with modern machines. You can't get a better retro gun for the money.

It's really only an issue if you plan to be 30 consecutive days sweating in the waddy with nothing but your buttstock cleaning kit and a pack of condoms.

QFMFT. Gas pistons are probably the practical future of kinetic energy weapons for the military. Nobody else needs that kind of a system and certainly not at the prices you'll pay.

That said, there is a good reason why most police jurisdictions have gone to less anemic calibers.

I understand the limitations of the 9mm. The MP5 is probably the best 9mm platform in the world. That said, I feel much better about law enforcement with an AR or carbine than any pistol or SMG.

Reaper81 wrote:
It's really only an issue if you plan to be 30 consecutive days sweating in the waddy with nothing but your buttstock cleaning kit and a pack of condoms.

QFMFT. Gas pistons are probably the practical future of kinetic energy weapons for the military. Nobody else needs that kind of a system and certainly not at the prices you'll pay.

That said, there is a good reason why most police jurisdictions have gone to less anemic calibers.

I understand the limitations of the 9mm. The MP5 is probably the best 9mm platform in the world. That said, I feel much better about law enforcement with an AR or carbine than any pistol or SMG.

The reason why 9mm works for the MP5 is because it's a SMG. The idea is to put multiple rounds in the BG and do that quickly. It is a bit more difficult to do that with a .45 SMG since the recoil of chain-fired shots is often difficult to control.

I'm with you on the law enforcement with carbines or SMG's myself, but there are certain limitations to that as well. Keep in mind that the vast majority of LEO's in this country spend the vast majority of their time in their vehicles. Getting in and out of a vehicle with a pistol on isn't a big deal and walking to a suspect vehicle with a pistol on your belt isn't interpreted necessarily as an escalating act. Things are very different when long guns are involved.

I'm a big fan of gas pistons. I actually counseled my friend to go with a Robarms instead of the AR15 when he told me he was spending a lot of time in Iraq (contractor). That said, it is hard to do better than the AR15 as a tackdriving sporting rifle.

Thin_J wrote:

Yeah.. that's pretty much it I know, but I don't have access to a 1911 anywhere and they're expensive.

They can be expensive. The customized tricked out ones certainly are. Not every 1911 has to be like that. There does seem to be a trend, though, in the big name 1911 manufacturers dropping their budget models in favor of higher-priced ones. Used to be you could get a nice Kimber or Springfield 1911 for $600. Now I'm having trouble finding one for less than a grand. Even Para-Ordnance prices the base P14 at $900. Bah. Can anyone recommend him a nice 1911 maker that hasn't been taken by custom fever?

I see Taurus has a PT1911 model in the low $700s.

What you need to do is make some local gun owner friends. Then you can borrow and try things out.

Thin_J wrote:

None of the ranges here rent either so I'm kind of stuck really. To be honest if I really want to try another caliber I know I should just get another Glock. When I was in the store checking things out the Glock stuff was the only pistol that had a grip that was quite thick enough to fill my hands. I have some fairly big paws compared to most people and the big thick grip on the Glocks feels pretty freakin good to hold compared to the thinner stuff the competition puts out.

If you want something to fill big hands, you might look into double-stack .45s, like an HK or Para-Ordnance.

Thin_J wrote:

What about you? What are your weapons of choice for a range visit?

Shamefully, it's been over a year since I've been. Typically I re-familiarize myself with my Para-Ordnance P16.40 and my Marlin 30AS in .30-30. Sometimes I bring out my Ruger Mini-14 or the Mossberg and shred some paper.

doubtingthomas396 wrote:

Unless you remember that Dirty Harry was actually shooting wadcutters (I forget which movie-- it's the one with the vigilante cop that isn't Dirty Harry-- but he explicitly says he's using light loads) then it becomes more fun.

In Magnum Force, he mentions that he's shooting .44 Specials. It's not clear if he just means for the target practice sessions or all the time.

The real problem with the .44 Magnum is that the ammo is expensive. Even for .44 Specials, you're paying around twice as much as for a box of 9mm or .45 ACP. Or at least, that was the situation 10 years ago. With the price of copper being what it is these days, it's probably gotten even worse.

The local gun store at the time stocked two types of .44 ammo: anemic Special loads and scorching Fiocchi magnum loads at 1000 ft-lbs of muzzle energy. Probably ideal for hunting in a carbine and actually somewhat pleasant in a gas operated Desert Eagle (a guy at the range let me borrow his once). Not so pleasant in a revolver. With some searching I tracked down Cor-bon's mild magnums. Problem was, of course, that while .44 Magnum ammo is expensive, Cor-bon's was even more so.

These days, in the era of the .454 Casull, the .460 S&W, the .480 Ruger, and the .500 S&W, the the old .44 Magnum is a pussy cat.

Good info guys. Very much appreciated. I'll have a look into the CZ pistol lineup too. I do like the moderately unique look of the CZ75 series, and the 75 B looks nice and affordable in .40 S&W.

Quintin_Stone wrote:

There does seem to be a trend, though, in the big name 1911 manufacturers dropping their budget models in favor of higher-priced ones. Used to be you could get a nice Kimber or Springfield 1911 for $600. Now I'm having trouble finding one for less than a grand. Even Para-Ordnance prices the base P14 at $900. Bah. Can anyone recommend him a nice 1911 maker that hasn't been taken by custom fever?

Eh, I had something else here but I was wrong. The Kimbers seem to start out around $800. Springfield has the GI that I *think* comes in around $600 and seems to be generally regarded as more reliable anyway. Maybe I'll get a chance to put a few rounds through one at some point. I'm bound to run into someone at the range that has one eventually that's willing to give me a few shots.

Thin_J wrote:

Good info guys. Very much appreciated. I'll have a look into the CZ pistol lineup too. I do like the moderately unique look of the CZ75 series, and the 75 B looks nice and affordable in .40 S&W.

Quintin_Stone wrote:

There does seem to be a trend, though, in the big name 1911 manufacturers dropping their budget models in favor of higher-priced ones. Used to be you could get a nice Kimber or Springfield 1911 for $600. Now I'm having trouble finding one for less than a grand. Even Para-Ordnance prices the base P14 at $900. Bah. Can anyone recommend him a nice 1911 maker that hasn't been taken by custom fever?

Actually the Kimber Custom II is right in the low $600 range and I believe the Springfield GI is right there too. They all seem to have an option right around the $600 pricepoint, at least with a couple of exceptions like Les Baer. But I find varying info about those models. The general consensus seems to err on the side of the Springfield being more generally reliable after a lot of shooting and across different types of ammo. Hopefully I'll find a way to try one out around the time I'm ready for the next handgun purchase.

There isn't a whole lot of mechanical difference between one 1911 and another. Reliability is generally an issue of operator care/error. My Colt 1991A1 (not a typo) is plenty reliable and decently accurate. The Kimber Custom II I rented for a law enforcement shoot in Minneapolis was good enough to snag me 5th place out of a field of 40+ LEO's. As long as you use nothing but ball ammo, you'll generally be okay. If you want to go hollow points or SD ammo, I recommend you stay away from the 1911 design.

One major advantage/disadvantage you'll have with the CZ75 is the fact that it utilizes an all steel frame and slide. It is a hand fitted slide as well which makes it tremendously accurate for such an inexpensive pistol. The advantage is that it is heavy enough to drastically reduce recoil (more mass = less felt recoil). The disadvantage is that weak wristed panty wastes will complain about the weight. It also makes for an outstanding blunt force object. Plus, it's nice having the personal pistol of Saddam Hussein.

Paleocon wrote:

One major advantage/disadvantage you'll have with the CZ75 is the fact that it utilizes an all steel frame and slide. It is a hand fitted slide as well which makes it tremendously accurate for such an inexpensive pistol. The advantage is that it is heavy enough to drastically reduce recoil (more mass = less felt recoil). The disadvantage is that weak wristed panty wastes will complain about the weight.

I have no issues with a heavier pistol. Actually a little more weight sounds kinda nice. I like the Glock more with a full mag than I do as it starts to empty out

Getting in and out of a vehicle with a pistol on isn't a big deal and walking to a suspect vehicle with a pistol on your belt isn't interpreted necessarily as an escalating act.

Two very excellent points.

Paleocon wrote:

The reason why 9mm works for the MP5 is because it's a SMG. The idea is to put multiple rounds in the BG and do that quickly. It is a bit more difficult to do that with a .45 SMG since the recoil of chain-fired shots is often difficult to control.

But OH! Would it be GLORIOUS!

Oh, wait. They did it once. And, sure enough, it was.

I believe the bigger reason they moved away from it was capacity (though I could be wrong about that). A hundred rounds of 9mm weighs a lot less than 100 rounds of .45 ACP. Plus, putting five rounds of 45 ACP into a target is quite literally overkill.

Quintin_Stone wrote:

In Magnum Force, he mentions that he's shooting .44 Specials. It's not clear if he just means for the target practice sessions or all the time.

The real problem with the .44 Magnum is that the ammo is expensive. Even for .44 Specials, you're paying around twice as much as for a box of 9mm or .45 ACP. Or at least, that was the situation 10 years ago. With the price of copper being what it is these days, it's probably gotten even worse.

I haven't been to the range in over a year, and I haven't had to buy ammunition for five years (I buy it in case lots from Cheaper than Dirt and I'm a frugal shooter-- usually only about a hundred rounds per trip to the range)

I don't know what a box of .223 Federal boattail goes for nowadays, but I'm sure it ain't pretty.

If you're worried about cost, you can always roll your own. I bought a used shotgun reloading kit when I took up trap shooting (which is great fun, if you've never tried it). Haven't used it yet, because like I said I buy my ammunition in bulk and haven't been shooting in too darn long, but it's there when I want it.

Or you could just stick with .22. Last time I bought some I got a brick of 550 rounds for less than 10 bucks at Walmart.

Quintin_Stone wrote:

These days, in the era of the .454 Casull, the .460 S&W, the .480 Ruger, and the .500 S&W, the the old .44 Magnum is a pussy cat. ;)

Ah, the .454 Casull. Now there's a gun. I've seen video of people shooting that thing. Simply marvelous.

I wouldn't want to shoot one, mind you, but marvelous to watch.

doubtingthomas396 wrote:
Paleocon wrote:

The reason why 9mm works for the MP5 is because it's a SMG. The idea is to put multiple rounds in the BG and do that quickly. It is a bit more difficult to do that with a .45 SMG since the recoil of chain-fired shots is often difficult to control.

But OH! Would it be GLORIOUS!

Oh, wait. They did it once. And, sure enough, it was.

I believe the bigger reason they moved away from it was capacity (though I could be wrong about that). A hundred rounds of 9mm weighs a lot less than 100 rounds of .45 ACP. Plus, putting five rounds of 45 ACP into a target is quite literally overkill.

Then they did it again.

It's more a matter of weight versus controllability. The Thompson weighed up to around 11 pounds loaded, which mitigated the recoil of the .45's kick. Who these days is going to want to carry around a 11 lb SMG? The M4 weighs around half of that.

Hey, if you want an MP5 with some kick, try and track down the now-discontinued MP5/10.

Thin_J wrote:
Paleocon wrote:

One major advantage/disadvantage you'll have with the CZ75 is the fact that it utilizes an all steel frame and slide. It is a hand fitted slide as well which makes it tremendously accurate for such an inexpensive pistol. The advantage is that it is heavy enough to drastically reduce recoil (more mass = less felt recoil). The disadvantage is that weak wristed panty wastes will complain about the weight.

I have no issues with a heavier pistol. Actually a little more weight sounds kinda nice. I like the Glock more with a full mag than I do as it starts to empty out :P

If weight is not an issue, I can't emphasize the value you'll find in the CZ. Go to a shop that carries them and work the slide. There is absolutely no play in the side either in or out of battery. The double dovetail they use for the frame to slide fit is just all kinds of marvelous. Most modern semi autos have all kinds of slop until the slide hits full battery (largely relying on the barrel bushing or pressure on the barrel to provide accuracy. the CZ has that engineered through the entire cycle. All this for under $500 AND it has the nicest stock trigger I've felt outside of a Sig (at twice the price).

Certainly weight was also a serious contributing factor to the decision to go with 9mm. Just like it was to go from 7.62 NATO to 5.56. Ironically, combat loads haven't gotten any lower historically. Soldiers are just expected to carry more crap.

Paleocon wrote:

If you're having problems with the recoil of a 9mm and want a man gun, I would strongly recommend the FN Five Seven. The ammo is a little pricey, but the approach is really the coming thing. Very little recoil, huge mag capacity, and incredibly high terminal energy. Add to that a pancake flat trajectory out to about 150 meters, and the ability to defeat class IIIa body armor and you have a HECK of a SD gun.

And just to think about it, they totally gimped it in Counter-Strike!

Speaking of M14: that obnoxious S.A.S. drop-out in Rambo 4 -- was it an M14 that he carried?

Speaking of M14: that obnoxious S.A.S. drop-out in Rambo 4 -- was it an M14 that he carried?

It was a shotgun.

Yeah, definitely a shotgun.

Shot groupings with the Glock improved this evening. Depending on my cohorts at the time there may or may not be photos later of us ventilating things.

Shot groupings with the Glock improved this evening. Depending on my cohorts at the time there may or may not be photos later of us ventilating things.

I really need to work on my shooting with DAO, i can't do it well for the life of me, I keep it in the 7ish range, but I should be doing a lot better. Do you shoot any Da/Sa or just the "glock" action?

Fedaykin98 wrote:

For the .22 fans out there, I grew up shooting an antique pump-action much like this one.

That's all I've ever shot. Only times I shoot is at my uncles farm, and there is just picking off varmints from the back of his truck while checking on cows.
I plan to get a Remington 300 short action in something small, maybe a .223.

MaverickDago wrote:
Shot groupings with the Glock improved this evening. Depending on my cohorts at the time there may or may not be photos later of us ventilating things.

I really need to work on my shooting with DAO, i can't do it well for the life of me, I keep it in the 7ish range, but I should be doing a lot better. Do you shoot any Da/Sa or just the "glock" action?

I'm the only one in our group that has a pistol and at the moment the Glock is all I have.

boogle wrote:

I plan to get a Remington 300 short action in something small, maybe a .223.

Do uh.. do you mean Remington 700? I don't think there is a Remington 300.

Here's my stuff

IMAGE(http://i96.photobucket.com/albums/l164/t-rowan/someweirddude.jpg)

trowan wrote:

Here's my stuff

IMAGE(http://i96.photobucket.com/albums/l164/t-rowan/someweirddude.jpg)

I hate you.

Hate you, Trowan.

And what you really should be hating is the game itself, not this particular player.

omg! thanks for that! My boss rolled by right when I opened the page! C-P IT GOES! She looked at me strangely and then walked on.

Wow. Just couldn't allow a thread to continue on topic could we.

I have a gun wishlist of sorts that I keep adding to (attempt to drag thread kicking and screaming back on topic). I don't have it with me, so I'll try to recreate what I can from memory.

Springfield 1903
M1 Garand
Stainless Ruger Vaquero in .45 Colt, 4 5/8" barrel
2" or 3" barrel .357 revolver

Hmm, that's too short. There must be quite a few I'm not remembering.

So, for someone who has never fired a gun in their lives, what would be the best way to go about doing so? Should I try to find a nearby shooting range that rents guns? Do I need to have some sort of permit/license to do so (most likely a state-by-state thing). I could probably just call up my uncle and he'd figure out how to get me shooting one of his guns, but that would require me talking to/bonding with the uncle I don't really like all that much.