|
Post by demonnachos on Apr 26, 2016 21:30:00 GMT
This is about the maximum achievable level of 'Murica I think one can reach:
|
|
|
Post by Canuovea on Apr 26, 2016 21:45:14 GMT
Uh, that's one hell of a shoulder massage.
|
|
|
Post by wordweaver3 on Apr 26, 2016 21:51:04 GMT
Brought the Rossi 92 home today, but I couldn't help swinging by the range and tossing some lead through it. It shoots well enough at the 20 yards that the pistol range offered, but I wasn't fond of the rear sight. I kinda knew I wouldn't be. I'm thinking I'll go with a tang sight on it. Really take advantage of that long sight radius that the 24 inch barrel offers. I looked up the price on the sight and it's a little over 130 bucks and shouldn't require any gunsmithing. The recoil is light with .357 Mag and nearly nonexistent with .38 Special. The short carbine cycles fast and smoothly with either cartridge. Very easy and fun to bang away the whole 12 round tube, though the smooth steel buttplate made it want to slide down my arm a little bit with each lever. Maybe I'll take it to someone and have them grind in some checkering.
|
|
|
Post by demonnachos on Apr 26, 2016 22:00:00 GMT
That is an odd spot for a rear sight.
|
|
|
Post by wordweaver3 on Apr 26, 2016 22:25:22 GMT
Yeah, I just noticed it's exactly where your hand goes. That's not gonna work for me. Maybe I'll go with something like this It uses the spot where the safety switch goes to mount. I'm guessing it also gives you a visual cue that the safety is on if you can't see through the peep.
|
|
|
Post by Horsie on Apr 27, 2016 7:59:45 GMT
I just want a big .45LC if I'm going to buy a reproduction of an old American revolver.
I do like receiver mounted peep sights, that's what I have on my Marlin. Would that style allow you to adjust it for elevation, or would you have to change out the front sight to zero it?
|
|
|
Post by wordweaver3 on Apr 27, 2016 10:16:59 GMT
I just want a big .45LC if I'm going to buy a reproduction of an old American revolver. Nothing wrong with a .45LC , it is an iconic round that conjures up images of mom, apple pie, and John Wayne, but if I got a cowboy era pistol I'd want .38 simply so it rolls the same ammo as my new 92. That way I don't have to carry an additional ammo type around with me if I ever do some cowboy action shooting. Which is kinda like cosplay with live ammo. I think I'd love it. The receiver mounted peep wouldn't have much ability to make adjustments, at least not that one pictured. I'd have to change front sights from what I have. A side mounted Williams peep would have elevation and windage adjustments, but it would probably need a taller front sight unless I'm planning on sighting it in at 200+ yards. Which I don't. And that brings me back to the tang sight. It will place the sight right where I want the web of my thumb when I grip the rifle, plus it will slow down follow up shots. On the other hand it will give me the longest sight radius possible and I won't have to knock off the front site unless I want to (though I'll probably have to take off the rear sight). It also doesn't require me to damage the gun at all so if it turns out I hate it I can just take it off. What's more a receiver mounted peep would disqualify the rifle for Cowboy Action Shooting since it's not period correct, but the tang sight is. Plus tang sights look fuckin cool as hell.
|
|
|
Post by Horsie on Apr 27, 2016 15:17:58 GMT
I'm already carry around enough different calibres that adding one more probably wouldn't hurt, I'm terrible for doing that.
I guess you could use a different grip, keep your thumb on the right side of the stock? It wouldn't be natural, and it would take some getting used to, but it looks like that'd be the only way to have something approaching a comfortable grip.
|
|
|
Post by wordweaver3 on Apr 27, 2016 18:08:55 GMT
Yeah, I think that's how it's done. You use your left hand to keep the rifle tightly in place on your shoulder and you don't have to grip it hard with your shooting hand. So your thumb just stays on the side.
It's amazing how many different types of ammo you can accumulate. Part of the reason I wanted a .38 special/.357 mag rifle is because I already have so much .38 special and .357 mag. So buying the rifle was offset by all the ammo I didn't have to buy.
|
|
|
Post by Horsie on Apr 28, 2016 7:56:43 GMT
I think I've got about 15 or 16 different cartridge types downstairs, divided between something like 28 firearms.
|
|
|
Post by wordweaver3 on Apr 30, 2016 8:18:22 GMT
I'm always talking about the new guns I get, but I rarely speak of the old ones. The one's that got me hooked on shooting and collecting firearms in the first place. Let's talk about my very first firearm. A weapon that manages to be both humble and iconic at the same time. The Glenfield (Marlin) Model 60. This rifle was manufactured in 1972. It has the coveted "squirrel stock" which I believe was discontinued in the mid 70s. It has an 18 round magazine which was discontinued in 1986 due to the New Jersey "Assault Weapons Ban" which banned any magazine with more than 15 rounds. Yes, this is an assault weapon in New Jersey. Rather than manufacture different rifles for different parts of the country Marlin simply reduced all rifles to 15 rounds. Because of the longer magazine mine has a 22 inch barrel instead of the standard 19 inch, giving it a slight accuracy and power boost. When I was 10 years old I purchased this rifle from someone at my father's work for 30 bucks. I got the rifle, 200 rounds of ammo, and a really awful Tasco scope. I didn't really care how terrible the scope was. I had a rifle now. My dad had taken me shooting before, but I always had to shoot his guns. Now I had one that was all mine. Despite the scope's terrible field of view, the set up did prove to be very accurate when I could find my target in it. At 25 yards it could put an entire magazine in a space you could cover with a dime. Not only was the gun accurate, but I also found it to be amazingly reliable. It happily chewed up the cheapest ammunition I could find with very few, if any, failures. This is doubly impressive since as a child I very rarely cleaned the gun. In my mid teens I decided to upgrade the scope and bought a Bushnell 3x9 variable scope from Kmart (don't laugh, this scope was underwater during a flood a few years back and it still works perfectly). The increased field of view really opened up the possibilities, now I could actually hunt with the thing, though I rarely did. Mostly the rifle spent it's time as a plinker and a hiking companion.
|
|
|
Post by demonnachos on Apr 30, 2016 8:38:23 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Horsie on Apr 30, 2016 21:00:51 GMT
I have a soft spot for .22cals, they're just so much fun. Oddly enough, I've never owned a semi-auto .22cal rifle, though I've considered buying one occasionally. I impulse bought another pistol today, I stopped to buy ammo and saw an H&R 199 Sportsman; That's not the pistol I bought, I still have to wait for the registration to be transferred before I can pick it up. It's single-action only, has a ridiculously light trigger, and it's a top-break, I love top-break revolvers. Not sure how well it'll shoot, but I paid the equivalent of $150US, so I couldn't really say no. I'll have to check the serial number when I get it, but from what I've read since getting home it seems like it's an earlier pistol. The best part of that article is when they say that the A-10 was developed specifically as a ground support aircraft, but because the F-35 can't operate as effectively in that role they'll change the way missions are planned to accommodate that. I'm not sure how important the A-10 is to US ground operations, and how much changing of planning would be needed to accommodate the F-35, but it just seems a little odd to say that they'll change the way things are done to accommodate the tool, not the other way around.
|
|
|
Post by demonnachos on May 1, 2016 3:49:34 GMT
I had a lot of problems getting the .22 semi-auto rifle I had to cycle properly, even after being cleaned. It may have just been rubbish though.
The A-10 is simply a frame for a big gun to be mounted to. It is a tough and surprisingly nimble beast with no equal in the ground-attack role. The pen-pushers are the ones trying to get their pet project onto the field, a pet project with over a decade of utter failures. I mean, you can't replace this:
|
|
|
Post by Horsie on May 1, 2016 4:12:57 GMT
The only semi-auto .22cal I've owned is my Beretta 70, and that doesn't seem to have problems with anything. I think I even got it to cycle with subsonic ammunition.
I guess the idea is that the A-10s in service are getting old, and so upkeep is getting more difficult and costly, and there are concerns about having older aircraft in service. I can kind of understand that, the military here has been using the same helicopters since Kennedy was shot. At the same time, it seems like the biggest reason why this F-35 project is being pushed as a replacement is to combine several roles into one aircraft to reduce costs, and probably reduce the number of aircraft needed.
|
|