Author Topic: Looking to get a Handgun  (Read 1069 times)

Offline lazs2

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 24886
Looking to get a Handgun
« Reply #30 on: February 09, 2004, 03:10:05 PM »
I know a guy who will put together a witness conversion in .357 sig for ya.

lazs

Offline hyena426

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1756
Looking to get a Handgun
« Reply #31 on: February 09, 2004, 03:21:04 PM »
Quote
Do Not ever buy a glock.
well,,i dont like glock my self,,i jsut dont like how they feal,,feal cheap,,but!! you want reliablity you wont be able to beat the glock,,this from a combat handguns mag

Written by Chuck Taylor

On four occasions since 1990, I've written articles about a continuing evaluation I've been conducting to ascertain the longevity of the Glock Model 17 9mm pistol. The first of these, appearing in the February, 1993, issue of Combat Handguns, contained my findings as to the weapon's performance and durability after 33.000 rounds fired. At this juncture, I stated:

"I carried it in the rain, snow, dust and mud. I carried it when the temperatures were over 100 degrees and when they were 40 below.

"I presented the gun more than 10.000 times from it's plastic slide holster, speed loaded it 2.000 times, performed over 5.000 tactical loads, shot it weak-handed in excess of 2,500 times and field-stripped it 250 times.

"From the beginning, I resolved to grind it into the dirt, abuse it like no gun I ever had."

"Why? To find out the truth about Glocks, for once and for all...

"And I succeeded in doing just that. In a 30-month period, I fired 33.000 rounds, all factory loads, of every imaginable type made-- and it ate them all, almost without a single malfunction. I say 'almost' because on the 32,994th round, I finally had one-- a failure to feed! And this in spite of the fact that I cleaned the gun every 10.000 rounds whether it need it or not!

"100 rounds short of the 5.000th shot, both factory-provided magazines ceased to hold the slide open after the last shot, although they both continued to function normally otherwise. At round number 11.000 a second set did the same and was replaced by another.

"By the 500th holster presentation, the left side of the front site was so badly worn that a proper site picture was no longer possible. It was subsequently replaced with a steel version.

"By round number 16.000, I could see steel through the finish-- but it never did rust, although it was exposed repeatedly to rain, snow, perspiration and even blood.

"The trigger pull, originally 5.5 pounds, got smoother and a bit lighter, but it never did double or demonstrate a glitch of any kind.

"And after all this, it still shoots into 3 inches at 25 meters, not much different than when it was new."
Impressed, to say the least, I was still determined to see the test though to the point where the gun failed. So, although the piece had passed the 33.000-round mark without significant negative results or breakage, I continued the test.

The months went by and the test continued. By the end of the summer, 1993, the gun had shot 50.000 rounds without a hitch. Among my additional observations published in Glock Autopistols 1995, were these:

"And now, after 50.000 rounds, nothing has really changed. It still:

"Functions reliably. In fact, not a single additional stoppage has occurred.

"Prints inside the 9-ring of a 25-meter pistol target, exactly as it did when it was new.

"Shows no additional finish wear.
"Exhibits no bore corrosion.


"Clearly, the Glock M-17 is a heck of a pistol and, as a survival instrument, is well worthy of our consideration. It is well-designed, well-made and capable of surviving a wide variety of environmental conditions. It will feed the entire spectrum of bullet shapes and functions reliably with virtually all power levels of 9mm ammunition. In addition, it resists corrosion magnificently and its design causes minimal wear on working parts, giving it an unbelievable long service life.
"Ugly? Maybe, maybe not! It depends on what's important to you-- cosmetics, or function. Regardless, it's my opinion that the Glock 17 is not only a winner, but may well be the world's best 9mm pistol. Obviously, only time will tell, but in the meantime, I've got 25.000 more rounds of 9mm ammunition to run through it to find out."


25.000 more
And the test continued. By February, 1995, the 25.000 rounds were expended, bringing the total to an unbelievable 75.000! Yet, the gun was still going strong, showing no indications whatsoever of impending failure. I replaced nothing-- no springs, firing pins, connectors or any other parts. In fact, viewed from the broad perspective, the gun had actually outlived it's magazines-- six two-mag sets at that point.
Truthfully, I had run out of things to do to the gun. Short of running over it with a car or freezing it into a solid block of ice-- both which I regarded as silly, since they fail to mirror real-world conditions and therefore prove nothing-- I had repeatedly exposed the gun to everything. In the July, 1995, issue of Combat Handguns and Summer, 1995, issue of Glockster, I said:


"After more than 70.000 holster presentations, I can detect no additional finish wear from that which appeared by 20.000 presentations.

"The bore is still without corrosion or excessive wear; the piece still shoots inside the 9-ring of a 25-meter pistol target, using the offhand Weaver Stance. In fact, to determine if any deterioration of intrinsic accuracy had occured, I fired it from 35 meters in a Ransom Rest-- the worst groups were 2 inches!

"As an example of its practical accuracy capability, I offer the following. With the test gun, I was able to perform the following:

1. "Reliably get center-hits on a 18 x 30-inch steel silhouette target at 75 meters, knocking down five such silhouettes in under ten seconds.
2. "Take a whitetail deer with a single shot behind the shoulder at a laser-measured 70 meters.

3. "Successfully pass the ASAA Handgun Combat Master test with it, presenting it from concealed carry, shooting a score of at least 383 out of a possible 400."

My other observations at that time included:

"Internal parts exhibited no real wear or deterioration.

"The polycarbonate frame, though it had at one spot worn smooth from holster contact, appeared intact and without discernible deterioration.

"After more than 50.000 speed loads and an equal number of tactical loads, the magazine well was scarred somewhat but still serviceable.

"While the 56,103rd round blew a primer, the gun was undamaged. The resulting stoppage, a Type 3 (Feedway) was quickly cleared and the weapon returned to service.

"The trigger remained at 5.1 pounds, a reduction from it's original poundage of only 0.4 pounds. It was still smooth and had a crisp let-off.

"It was discovered that magazine service life could be dramatically increased by loading only 15, rather than the rated 17, rounds of ammunition. If a 'Plus-Two' floorplate is utilized, then-- and only then-- should a full 17 rounds be loaded. This prevents the follower spring from being fully compressed, thus causing it to soften and finally 'set', as the expression goes.

"The Trijicon (tritium) sights installed early in the test were still completely serviceable."

It looked like the test was over. The pistol had survived an incredible 75.000 rounds and was completely intact. I had my desired data-base-- the Glock M-17 was irrefutably a terrific pistol. In fact, I was so impressed that I concluded my article in Combat Handguns with this statement:

"Pretty, it ain't, especially after all it's been through. On the other hand, beauty is said to be in the eye of the beholder, and to me, the Glock is a tool, not an objet d'art. This being the case, we must view it differently-- function, not aesthetics, is the prime criteria. Viewed from this perspective, there can be no doubt that the Glock M-17 looks mighty good indeed."

Well, I just couldn't leave it alone. My curiosity about just how long the gun could survive continued to be intense. So, from my stores, I broke out an additional 25.000 rounds of assorted 9mm ammo and continued the test.

And now, the fall of 1995, after having fired a total of 100.000 rounds of virtually all kinds of ammunition...

Nothing has changed! The gun looks the same, feels the same, functions the same as it did before. I've done everything within reason to this gun. I've carried it all over the world, quite literally in every environmental condition known to man-- the steaming jungles of Latin America, the windblown deserts of the southwestern U.S., the 40-below zero tundra of Alaska in the winter.

And it worked-- every time. In fact, since I discovered that loading 15, rather than the rated 17, rounds into the magazine prevented the follower spring from softening, I haven't had a single malfunction. Both magazines used in this last 25.000 portion of my test remain strong and completely serviceable. And, by way of confirmation, I replaced the old springs in the magazines that failed during the test with new ones from Glock, and they, too, function perfectly.

I am especially impressed by the lack of apparent finish wear, even after over 100.000 holster presentations. The gun looks exactly as it did at 20.000! I've actually worn out several holsters, finally selecting the M-D Labs "Thunderbolt" (which I codesigned with M-D honcho Kevin McClung) and matching mag carrier as the best. It's super-fast, yet secure and highly concealable, and being made of Kydex, it's by far the toughest rig now in existence.


i dont like glock my self,,but thats a impressive number of rounds with out damage to the gun,,100,000 wow

Offline Stoned Gecko

  • Copper Member
  • **
  • Posts: 177
Looking to get a Handgun
« Reply #32 on: February 09, 2004, 09:10:00 PM »
I've shot Glock 9mm and .45, both regular and compensated, and liked them a lot. I'm shot a Sig 9mm (don't know what the model is), and hated it every bit ... the thing jammed on every 3rd bullet, and that's without the rapid fire. My suggestion is go to the range, rent a couple of guns, and see what you like the best.

Offline lasersailor184

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8938
Looking to get a Handgun
« Reply #33 on: February 09, 2004, 09:29:54 PM »
The thing about glocks is that you either have a good one, or a bad one.



And there's no apparent difference until the moment it breaks.



This applies to a lot of other guns too.  It's just that the glock has a lot more that break.
Punishr - N.D.M. Back in the air.
8.) Lasersailor 73 "Will lead the impending revolution from his keyboard"

Offline Capt. Pork

  • Parolee
  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1216
Looking to get a Handgun
« Reply #34 on: February 09, 2004, 09:32:44 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Stoned Gecko
I've shot Glock 9mm and .45, both regular and compensated, and liked them a lot. I'm shot a Sig 9mm (don't know what the model is), and hated it every bit ... the thing jammed on every 3rd bullet, and that's without the rapid fire. My suggestion is go to the range, rent a couple of guns, and see what you like the best.


That's odd, and very possibly a fault in the ammo. Sigs are some of the best handguns there are, in my opinion. My dad owns a p229 and the thing is a work of art. Tight tolerances, well-balanced, accurate and solid as a brick. They're expensive, of course, but they're worth it.

Offline hyena426

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1756
Looking to get a Handgun
« Reply #35 on: February 09, 2004, 09:39:24 PM »
im happy with most handguns,,only lorson makes a some what cheap and fall apart automatic i seen,,berreta,,ruger,,colt,,glock,,sig,,all make very nice handguns that you would be happy with



http://www.magnumresearch.com/BFR.asp <~~now this is a powerfull hand gun,matter of fact the most powerfull production handgun made,,45/70 goverment round,,ouch:)
« Last Edit: February 10, 2004, 12:54:35 AM by hyena426 »

Offline Wolf14

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 858
Looking to get a Handgun
« Reply #36 on: February 09, 2004, 10:15:13 PM »
My pistol of choice is the .45 H&K USP. Also chambered for 9mm and .40.



http://www.hk-usa.com/pages/civilian/handguns/usp.html

Offline lord dolf vader

  • Parolee
  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1528
Looking to get a Handgun
« Reply #37 on: February 10, 2004, 12:29:20 PM »
i have read that 38 super can be handloaded to a hair of .357 power is 357 sig similar ?

and anyone own a 10mm can it be loaded down to .40 ballistics?

how much recoil did you feel out of the 10mm. enough to shake you up or just alot.

from all i have seen 10mm is the best on paper as a all around cartrige (price excluded). just dont know about the recoil seems everyone mentions it in reviews.

Offline Munkii

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 552
Looking to get a Handgun
« Reply #38 on: February 10, 2004, 05:06:29 PM »
Well I test fired 3 guns yesterday, a Baretta 92F, a Taurus .40, and a Glock 17.  I must say the .40 had a larger kick than I expected at first, but my groupings were pretty close.  I liked the 9mm better though, it had a decent recoil, but enough of a punch in the target that it would probably work for killing the only thing I've ever shot with a pistol, turtles.

I've decided on 9mm, but now to figure out which gun. :)

(I had 5 1st place medals for JROTC marksman competitions from high school, but I had horrible target placement at 50yards with the pistols, they were grouped close, just way off center. I could consistantly hit at least 1 bullseye and 2 or 3 out of 5 shots in the inner ring on the targets at 100 yards with a pellet rifle in high school.)

Offline mrblack

  • Parolee
  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2191
Looking to get a Handgun
« Reply #39 on: February 10, 2004, 05:08:42 PM »
I believe in the 45 ACP .
Big bullett make big hole pretty simple there.

Offline jigsaw

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1050
Looking to get a Handgun
« Reply #40 on: February 11, 2004, 03:56:54 AM »
After all the talk about the "E" model Glocks, I had to go back and check mine. It's a "B". Haven't heard anything bad about that series, but if anyone else has, feel free to spill it.

Stopped by the gun store today on my way home to see what they had in a model easier to carry. Looked at a Taurus, Cole(?) (not a colt), another one that I can't recall but looked like a direct copy of a Glock, and a Walther PPKS. Out of the bunch, the Walther kept drawing my attention. The smaller Glocks just felt clunky. If I have time this weekend, I'm going to go out and rent a few to see how they feel.

Offline mrblack

  • Parolee
  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2191
Looking to get a Handgun
« Reply #41 on: February 11, 2004, 04:18:33 AM »
The walther ppks is a fine weapon.
had one in the 380cal and loved it .
it never jammed no matter how fouled it became.
Great little gun.

Offline WilldCrd

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2565
      • http://www.wildaces.org
Looking to get a Handgun
« Reply #42 on: February 11, 2004, 06:33:35 AM »
AK47- when you absolutly, positivly gotta kill everybody in the room....accept no substitutes:aok
Crap now I gotta redo my cool sig.....crap!!! I cant remeber how to do it all !!!!!

Offline lazs2

  • Radioactive Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 24886
Looking to get a Handgun
« Reply #43 on: February 11, 2004, 08:02:38 AM »
I have a ppk in stainless.   Nice gun.  Mine is in 32 since it has one round more than the .380 and I believe the .32 is more accurate.   I use hydrashoks in it.

lazs

Offline Vermillion

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4012
Looking to get a Handgun
« Reply #44 on: February 11, 2004, 01:34:59 PM »
I nevered owned one, but I really liked the feel of the Sig P238, (think thats the number) which is basically a slightly redesigned  PPK.  It was pretty expensive though.