Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 16, 2019 0:28:02 GMT
A friend inherited a Colt 1903 .32 but he refuses to part with it (with good cause for sure). The old guns do pop up in shooting condition and fair prices. The remakes pricier than the run of the mill shooters. There are buckets of the rimmed .32 revolvers out there but no retail ammo. The Taurus stuff seems infinitely affordable, as are a lot of the Armcor/Rock Island offerings. The Taurus PT92 can be had for a couple of hundred used and about double brand new. In some points a better pistol than the Beretta but the Beretta feels nicer to me. Then in finding the CZ compact in the shop tugged at me like my sweet 16 at the prom in my teen years. Would it be a lasting affair? There are dozens of alternatives and favorites, so it seems. My last serious handgun was a Colt 1860 Army kit built beauty. There was something Zen about the whole BP experience for me but my cartridge rifles and Mossberg 12 had always meant pistols just an "extra" I just never really got into. I got quite good with the Mossberg 24" "musket" with sights, Federal pumpkins and Brenneke loads. The Mossberg 500 and successors offer endless combinations and while alloy receivers, they have been in service for eons and quite affordable. #4 buck to 000, shoot more once  #4 and slugs is what I kept loaded during the dark city years.
|
|
|
Post by Jordan Williams on Jan 16, 2019 1:26:20 GMT
You might have a problem with feral cattle someday. You can never tell. Over Christmas break I was helping my father administer vaccines to calves with pink eye. A tranquilizer gun was used experimentally to see if it could be a useful alternative to roping the calves, but unfortunately a previously tranquilized had turned over on a hill despite being propped up on a large rock, bloated, and died with its face eaten partially off by crows, before it had died. Moral of the story - use a tranq rifle to take out any unruly feral cattle, just make sure to prop them up with rocks or something. Unless you like steak and jerky 
|
|
|
Post by Jordan Williams on Jan 16, 2019 1:59:12 GMT
The one I shot actually failed to cycle a round, and didn't fire on 2 occasions, within about 1 and a half magazines. It was also really inaccurate. I wouldn't want to trust my life to this pistol at all. Not being able to afford another 100-150 dollars for a good gun is a question of storing away more money until you can make that purchase. I understand being strapped on a budget, but man this gun will perform super bad and that extra money you save will just go right into practicing to be accurate with the thing. The first handgun I ever shot was a Colt 1911 Government in the Army. It jammed on the first round. Dropped the mag out on the second, and failed to eject 10 out of 50. Does that mean the Colt Government is a bad gun? That one was. If your Hi-Point failed to fire, did you return it for warranty work? I'm neither defending nor opposing the Hi-Points, I'm simply pointing out that there are people who really can't afford anything else. And yes, they are ugly as sin and probably won't last 10,000 rounds, but it's better than nothing at all. Certainly better than a Bryco .22 It wasn't my hi point, so taking any corrective action isn't an option. Was your issue pistol a newly made item? A civilian pistol made for self defense, no matter how cheap, should not be made unreliable or skimp on material. My experience with the hi point c9 is one, and entirely anecdotal. Me posting that was just me posting my own experience in reply to the c9 being quoted as being reliable. I wouldn't say that the car anology is fit for comparing spending 120 or so on a hi point to spending 200 to 300 on a revolver that doesn't have a reputation for being a very bad gun with the only redeeming quality of being "It works". In any case, the point of my post wasn't to start a sort of argument about the hi point, just me being disappointed with its performance.
|
|
|
Post by RufusScorpius on Jan 16, 2019 2:15:47 GMT
Nope, absolutely no argument intended whatsoever. I was simply pointing out that I think people expect FAR too much from a bottom price item. It's the same with knives, guns, whatever. How often do you see people comparing a $10 knife to a $200 knife, then saying the $10 is no good because it's not as good as the $200 one? I simply don't think that's a good comparison.
I am a manufacturing engineer. That is what I do. I know exactly what the difference is between the cost point of a $150 gun and a $400 one. It isn't in the materials, but in the details of the construction, where the costs are being shaved to meet a price point. So a bottom priced gun generally uses the same materials as the higher prices, but they don't have as many production steps to ensure good fit, finish, and function.
Earlier the Armscor M200 series revolvers were mentioned, and they are exactly what I am talking about here. They are excellent in materials, poor in execution, BUT, if you take the gun apart, polish all the parts and reassemble to ensure good fit, they are EXCELLENT guns. Some people are willing to put in the time and effort to do the finish work, others feel they should have a cash and carry deal and NOT need to do any finish work. But I say, if they did the finish work at the factory, you would have to pay another $150-200 for the gun, and it won't be cheap anymore. Those that think a $180 Armscor should be just as good out of the box as a $1,200 Colt Python are trying to delude themselves. You get what you pay for.
So in the case of the Hi-Point, they are $150 guns, not $400 guns. You get your full $150 value out of them. I you want $400 worth of gun performance, the you should look to buy a $400 gun.
And the 1911 I was using was some old Vietnam era warbird issued to me out of the armory same as every other mil-spec weapon given to a soldier to fight with. So it was a good 15 to 20 years old at the time, perhaps a bit more. But it made me not like the 1911's a first because it was so unreliable. Later on I shot a good one and that was a different story. I liked it so much it was my choice of sidearm along with an M3 Grease gun when we went into Panama in '89 .
|
|
|
Post by Croccifixio on Jan 16, 2019 4:54:06 GMT
Well, the fact is, people today are much bigger and stronger than they ever were. A .357 is the absolute minimum for self-defense and even then, only if it has a four-inch barrel. Same with deer rifles. Anything less than a .300 magnum is pointless. I have to respectfully disagree there. .357 has serious over penetration issues and takes real strength and training to control, particularly with a 4” barrel. There is absolutely nothing wrong with modern 9x19 para for self defense. I would go as far as to say it’s really the best overall self defense pistol round due to its stopping power with modern loads, it’s ease of control, and it’s ability to easily cut through light to heavy vegetation, which is the venerable.45 ACPs big flaw. There is a reason why 9mm replaced .45 and .38, and why .357 was never standard issue in any police or military units. As for people being healthier than they were before that’s true but the argument that it makes them statistically significantly more resistant to weaker bullets is biologically unsound. Its true that it’s easier for a body hit to strike vital areas of a smaller person than a larger one though. But wasn't 357 the standard for law enforcement post-war? And, the flaw of 45 was mostly penetration through hard objects like car doors (hence the brief heyday of the 38 Super, before the 357). Modern loads have done a lot to make 9mm a good self-defense round, but I think the advantages it has are a bit overblown (and just to clarify a bit, I carry a 9). The speed by which DGUs occur (as opposed to law enforcement encounters), and the shots fired until the threat leaves/is stopped - while not fully analyzed by statisticians - seem to suggest that capacity is not all that important. In this case, if a threat will most likely be stopped by 3-5 shots, I would prefer a more powerful round than a 9. Arguably, the accuracy of the first shot is the most important, and that makes all calibers equally accurate. For law enforcement, I would definitely prefer an 18-22 round 9mm handgun. For self-defense use, I wouldn't mind a 5-shot 357 with a 3-inch barrel. It makes little difference to me than a 7-shot 9mm (though I will be switching to an 11-shot 9mm soon). I think the biggest issue of the magnum is really the price of ammo (which makes the 9mm super attractive), more than anything.
|
|
|
Post by bluetrain on Jan 16, 2019 11:33:12 GMT
No. Although the .357 was widely used, the .38 special was more commonly used. Before WWI, I think .32 revolvers were even more common and also the .38 S&W/.38 Colt New Police. Until the Model 19 came along, the .357 was only chambered in large frame revolvers. More policemen probably would have rather carried a smaller, lighter revolver. These days, even small frame revolvers are chambered in .357.
I don't think the .45 ACP has a flaw. Some state police forces as well as the RCMP carried Colt New Service revolvers chambered in .45 Colt and were probably very happy with the round. The Texas Rangers carried .45 autos but that was unusual, the problem being that in spite of automatic pistols being used by most armies since before WWI, a lot of people still didn't trust pistols. They were 'jamamatics." The .45 auto didn't really become all that popular with civilians, aside from NRA bullseye shooters, until Jeff Cooper declared that a pistol designed in 1911 was the ultimate handgun, no matter what, even with full metal jacket ammunition. Hollow point ammunition was not widely available until probably the 1960s (for handguns), even though some had been introduced before WWI.
These days, we have higher expectations, if not standards, than formerly. Automatic pistols used in WWII, as well as revolvers, all used full metal jacket ammunition, chiefly to ensure reliable functioning. Although they were widely issued, more so in some armies than in others, they were still secondary weapons. They are a policeman's primary weapon, of course, although most policemen do not regularly engage in gunfights.
Two final things: All is for nothing if 1) you don't hit what you're shooting at and 2) you shoot yourself. It's all about safety.
|
|
|
Post by Cosmoline on Jan 16, 2019 18:29:15 GMT
So much of it comes down to hand shape and personal preferences. My least favorite firearm to shoot was the first moden Ruger SRH .454 Cas. The recoil was incredibly painful and eventually sprained my fingers badly enough to keep me off the range for a month. On top of which it was a brick and a half and carried very badly on the trail.
But Makarovs and Nagants? I fricking love those. I want to trade my Walther PP for a Mak actually.
|
|
|
Post by rjodorizzi on Jan 16, 2019 18:46:07 GMT
I'm also not a fan of the Ruger .454 snub. I just don't get the point. I shot 3 rounds and said "no thank you" to the friend who was letting me take a couple of shots.
I love me a big ol' .44 or .357 SA. But for semi-autos I'll take my 1911, fits me like a glove!
|
|
|
Post by dchisenh on Jan 16, 2019 18:53:29 GMT
 Behold the hi-point 9MM. Shot one this evening in and was disgusted, It wasn't even fun to shoot in terms of things that go bang. Burn that abomination! So, so many better 9mm semi's out there. There is no excuse for that to exist.
|
|
|
Post by bluetrain on Jan 16, 2019 19:37:50 GMT
Coincidentally, a Hi-Point was mentioned in a newspaper article today as having been found in a car along with some drugs and a child in the back seat within reach of everything. The man was arrested and charged with several crimes. This was downtown Washington "about eight blocks from the White House," totally irrelevant information. After all, the White House has a fence around it.
|
|
|
Post by MOK on Jan 16, 2019 19:47:47 GMT
Coincidentally, a Hi-Point was mentioned in a newspaper article today as having been found in a car along with some drugs and a child in the back seat within reach of everything. The man was arrested and charged with several crimes. This was downtown Washington "about eight blocks from the White House," totally irrelevant information. After all, the White House has a fence around it. And eight blocks around there means, what, a mile? Two miles? Far beyond handgun reach, at any rate. 
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 16, 2019 20:40:59 GMT
Coincidentally, a Hi-Point was mentioned in a newspaper article today as having been found in a car along with some drugs and a child in the back seat within reach of everything. The man was arrested and charged with several crimes. This was downtown Washington "about eight blocks from the White House," totally irrelevant information. After all, the White House has a fence around it. And eight blocks around there means, what, a mile? Two miles? Far beyond handgun reach, at any rate.  1/4-1/2 mile
|
|
|
Post by bluetrain on Jan 16, 2019 23:05:29 GMT
Eight blocks is a long ways on foot. My wife and I got married about eight blocks from the White House, just off Washington Circle, across from where my wife was born.
|
|
tonystark
Member
“I told you, I don’t want to join your super secret boy band!”
Posts: 816
|
Post by tonystark on Jan 17, 2019 3:34:25 GMT
Hi Points are NOT reliable. AGREED!!!
|
|
|
Post by pellius on Jan 17, 2019 5:37:47 GMT
Kel-Tec P-11: Might not be the least fun to shoot, but you’ll have to check the slo-mo replay to be sure.
Reasonable capacity. Reasonably concealable. Reasonably reliable. Reasonably priced. Reasonably available accessories. Barks here bites there. Will keel.
I’m thankful to have one. I carry it frequently when I can’t conceal a Glock.
It is *zero* fun to shoot.
|
|
seth
Member
Just Peachy
Posts: 905
|
Post by seth on Feb 13, 2019 23:50:19 GMT
I got one 16 years ago when they went on sale for less than $100. I agree with Hickock45 "they work well as a boat anchor, but they also shoot most of the time." I think a used glock, M&P, XD, Ruger etc. is a better investment.
|
|
|
Post by howler on Feb 14, 2019 2:36:45 GMT
Kel-Tec P-11: Might not be the least fun to shoot, but you’ll have to check the slo-mo replay to be sure. Reasonable capacity. Reasonably concealable. Reasonably reliable. Reasonably priced. Reasonably available accessories. Barks here bites there. Will keel. I’m thankful to have one. I carry it frequently when I can’t conceal a Glock. It is *zero* fun to shoot. Poor mans Sig P365. Same capacity but 4oz lighter, yet a tad thicker.
|
|
harrybeck
Member
Enter your message here...
Posts: 999
|
Post by harrybeck on Feb 14, 2019 3:25:26 GMT
Nah, the p3at.
But really, the boys antitank rifle.
|
|
|
Post by howler on Feb 14, 2019 3:58:28 GMT
Nah, the p3at. But really, the boys antitank rifle. Talk about a "mouse" gun, the 1st gen p3at is under 7oz.  A true pocket handgun, and the only real advantage of rocking .380acp over 9mm (assuming no physical infirmity).
|
|
harrybeck
Member
Enter your message here...
Posts: 999
|
Post by harrybeck on Feb 14, 2019 4:05:09 GMT
Yup, I used to know the head gunsmith so I got goodies like p11 40 and 357 sig conversion kitsch and such
|
|