|
Post by wordweaver3 on May 15, 2016 7:00:34 GMT
Another thing...
It struck me as odd that you were shooting a silluette target. I kinda figured that shooting at anything that resembles a human would have been restricted.
|
|
|
Post by Horsie on May 15, 2016 15:24:56 GMT
Right. That piece of paper to the left of the hole is 8-1/2"x11", so the hole in the wood is about that size. Beyond that is a 10' thick berm, so you're shooting through a 2' concrete pipe that runs through it. The problem is that the backstop is right on the property line, the 400yd range runs right down one side of the property, and to the left through the woods is a 300yd range, so they had to make sure people couldn't possibly shoot in any of those directions or over the backstop. Plus, the federal police keep making the safety requirements for ranges even more strict. They've had to add baffles and overhanging shit on the pistol ranges so you can't see the sky when at the firing line, and all sorts of baffles on the ground as well; the idea is to prevent people from accidentally firing over the backstop (how you can do that accidentally is beyond me), and to prevent ricochets coming back at people (I don't know what could bounce off a dirt backstop and come straight back with enough speed to do anything, but this is clearly why I'm not out there certifying rifle ranges). I could have picked up a Golden Boy, but I prefer a blued finish (and the Golden Boy was going for 50% more). Going to see about getting a scope today. Mine has an 18" barrel, anything less would get the same classification as a pistol. Silhouettes are okay, but nothing that has an image of a person, so this it out; I'm not sure if these British-style targets are okay though;
|
|
|
Post by wordweaver3 on May 15, 2016 19:55:15 GMT
Ah, I think I thought that sheet of paper was a Polaroid, which would have meant everything was tiny.
I like the Golden Boy's because they tend to have better fit and finish and you just don't see much brass in modern firearms.
|
|
|
Post by Horsie on May 15, 2016 19:59:34 GMT
No, I just wanted to maintain what's left of the mystery by blocking out a sign written in my native language.
That's true. I suppose a lot of stuff these days is a little too hot for brass?
|
|
|
Post by wordweaver3 on May 15, 2016 20:07:04 GMT
They call it Brasslite, which I assume is a steel alloy with enough copper in it to give it a brass look. They make Golden Boys in larger calibers so it should be plenty strong.
|
|
|
Post by Horsie on May 15, 2016 20:21:14 GMT
Okay, I thought they only chambered it for rimfire cartridges. I'll admit, I don't know a great deal about lever-action firearms, until a little while ago I didn't have much interest in them at all.
|
|
|
Post by wordweaver3 on May 15, 2016 21:00:30 GMT
I grew up on classic western movies and shows, so I always had a fondness for them.
This stuff especially impressed me.
Really, the lever action was the assault rifle of the 19th century, but most militaries failed to recognize that at the time. This wasn't lost on the Native Americans, who considered a .38 cal rifle to be the pinnacle of weapon's technology. (Not the .45 since at the time an "Indian" couldn't legally possess a rifle with a bore over .36, which most .38 cals actually were) The rifle was perfect for use from horseback for quick strike raids and hunting alike. It's range was limited but the capacity gave them the ability to overwhelm an opponent using more powerful rolling block and falling block singles up close. Natives typically considered warfare to be something done close and intimate anyway.
|
|
|
Post by Horsie on May 15, 2016 23:03:53 GMT
And I grew up reading books and watching movies and documentaries about WW2, so I guess that had an influence on my tastes. Can't deny that that's impressive. The only significant military contract for lever-actions that I can think of is the order Russia placed in 1915 for a few hundred thousand M1895s, but that was more because they needed any rifles they could get their hands on rather than a desire to equip troops with lever guns. Looking at the way the action opens on these, I expect they got jammed up pretty easily in the trenches; I don't think most of the ones in the 1800s were made in rifle calibres, let alone full-power rifle calibres, and that was probably one of the biggest reasons why they didn't see widespread adoption. Remember, it wasn't until WW2 that anyone recognized that cartridges far less powerful than those used in standard-issue rifles were more useful, and it wasn't until some time after WW2 that less powerful cartridges became the norm.
|
|
|
Post by wordweaver3 on May 16, 2016 7:45:51 GMT
It's hard to believe that such a goofy action was created by Winchester. It's like they wanted to fuck the Russians over. It's not a Browning design, is it?
The US did occasionally purchase a few thousand lever guns for their cavalry units, and soldiers often bought them to use instead of their commissioned single.
I don't think there was a really worthwhile full power lever gun until the BLR, and by that time any military potential that a lever might have was long gone. Lever guns didn't get a significant power boost until the 94 was introduced with the .30-30, but the fast shooting lever combined with a difficult to load and smallish magazine capacity didn't really give it any military advantage. By that time full power bolt actions with stripper clips were being developed and the lever really couldn't compete even with their faster rate of fire. The military still would have considered the .30-30 underpowered at the time. Cuz for some reason you needed at least 3000 ftlbs to kill enemy soldiers.
I've always thought the lever shined best with short cartridges anyway.
|
|
|
Post by Horsie on May 16, 2016 15:29:34 GMT
Yep, it's a Browning design. I suspect the weirdness has to do with there being a box magazine,
|
|
|
Post by wordweaver3 on May 17, 2016 5:05:51 GMT
Went to the gun store today and saw this. A .357 mag Dan Wesson model 715 with a six inch barrel. For those who don't know this pistol has a removable barrel and can be converted from a 2 inch snub to a 10 inch tack driver. CZ owns the company now I think and they still produce aftermarket barrels, so getting those isn't an issue other than a rather steep price for them. The timing seemed right and the trigger was crisp. The grip felt a little big in my hand but it pointed very naturally. It was used so there was some wear and tear, the most notable was a spot of rust on the cylinder. Not entirely sure how old it is, but I'd guess 80s ish. It was 450 bucks. I didn't buy it... yet. Hope I don't regret not jumping on it, but I just bought a gun two weeks ago. I don't know if I can justify this purchase even though I'd really, really like it.
|
|
|
Post by wordweaver3 on May 17, 2016 5:25:22 GMT
Also came across a Remington Model 11 (Auto 5) for 299 bucks. It looks nearly identical to the top one here. I'm not entirely sure what that odd choke thing is on it. I think it's aftermarket, but I'm not sure. It was a very, very early Model 11 with heavy patina on it. Probably pre WWI. Felt really nice in the hand and shouldered very naturally.
|
|
|
Post by Horsie on May 17, 2016 8:03:31 GMT
I know I'd have had a hard time not walking out with that revolver, I'd probably want something like an 8" barrel for it though (10" would probably be a bit much, I expect it'd get pretty tiring trying to keep it up).
That thing is a Cutt's Compensator, they're supposed to be pretty effective at reducing recoil, but they're loud as fuck. I'd have to say that the most comfortable shotgun I've handled is the Auto-5, they're just fantastic guns.
I got the registration paperwork in for my H&R. For whatever reason it says it's a Model 999, but I'm pretty sure those are the SA/DA revolvers, mine is an SA only. Anyway, the serial number has an "S" prefix, a quick Google search says that puts the manufacture date between 1932 and 1934.
|
|
|
Post by wordweaver3 on May 17, 2016 18:03:53 GMT
Will having the wrong information on the registration pose a problem? Cuz you definitely don't have a 999.
That's older than I expected it to be.
If a recoil reducer works it's gonna be loud. What I was wondering about that compensator is how the wad doesn't get jammed up in the vented part. Cuz that's larger than the barrel and then it narrows down to the bore width again. A search around the web didn't turn that up as a problem but the consensus was that it's biggest benefit was a marked improvement in shot patterns. It also let you change chokes in an age when choke tubes were not the norm.
I'm thinking I might take my Taurus 608 in and trade it in toward that Dan Wesson. I might be able to justify the purchase if I offset it by selling one of my other guns.
I might miss the Taurus though.
|
|
|
Post by demonnachos on May 18, 2016 4:00:19 GMT
|
|