Zell959

Idealogically speaking, I would get it because I believe it is my right as a law abiding citizen to have an effective means of self defense outside the home. Realistically speaking, my real life benefits from a CCW [in the hard to imagine scenario where it someday becomes possible in NJ] would likely be limited to the freedom to get out from under the heavy regulations regarding travel with a firearm. I say that because I believe my employer would prohibbit us from even having firearms in our vehicles [corporate parking garage is only available parking], much less in the office. I'm pretty sure it's probably banned right now, but doing so isn't even legal at present, so there isn't much point in them bringing it up.

Very good job in aggregate. One small monday-morning-quarterback note, which I add with no disrespect intended. Since you've got the shotgun locked at night, have you given any thought to keeping shells loaded in it? It sounds like the need to get it ready was an additional [and understandable] source of stress. I'm also sort of assuming that you arrived as the approach of loading only 3 shells for time reasons. Again, really good job that shows very good awareness after having been awoken by a stressful unknown situation.

I have no personal experience with this scope, but it is among the Vortex models I was considering buying at one point. Here are two links I accrued during that reasearch phase. They both seemed, to me, more credible than your average gun-rag review, but you can certainly evaluate them for yourself. They don't specifically discuss this particular scope, but might has some relevance to the PST line in general. http://www.snipercentral.com/viperpst.phtml http://opticsthoughts.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=92:mid-range-tactical-part-1&catid=4:rifle-scope-reviews&Itemid=4

Personally, I'd only buy it if it was significantly cheaper than a normal one...and I'd probably cover the zombie logo with electrical tape. I liked all the zombie stuff, I honestly did. It's just gotten over the top, for me, at this point.

More people owning guns means that anti-gun agendas will become more & more of a political liability, as the number of individuals they directly affect & anger is growning at a rate that anti-gunners can't match. There will always be areas that remain backwards, but overall public support of gun control seems to be erroding more & more each day, likely because more & more have purchased a firearm and have some skin in the game.

I've been having similar doubts when trying to shop around for a 90two holster. Not sure if the changes to the 92fs dimensions are enough to effect holster compatibility and I'm worried I'll end up spending $60-$90 on a holster that it ends up not fitting into.

I use to really enjoy the zombie stuff, but it's really jumped the shark at this point.

True, but one affects the other. A high-profile military contract is sometimes all the marketing they need to see a significant spike in higher-margin civilian sales. I think Barret sees a lot of profit from civilian sales because they make weapons that have earned them military contracts. Being a recognized maker of firearms that meet the standards of the military generates more credibility & demand for their products than an advertising campaign ever could.

He did. Could of just been an oversight or he could of found your e-mail address hard to read on the sheet. Luckily it looks like he's also uploaded them already. Check them out here: http://www.nepaidpascores.net/somerset/2012-03-18.htm

Thanks for the heads up. Just ordered three 92fs mags.

Fun match as always. I'm proud to say that I had zero points down on all three non-threats I took out . Anyway, hope to see everyone again next month. (Pre-reg link is already open btw)

Just to throw in another interesting link before the discussion breaks down too badly, here's a pretty cool site where winchester lets you compare gel-testing results for various caliber offerings of their Ranger ammunition: EDIT: Can't get it working right as just a clickable link. URL is winchester.com/SiteCollectionDocuments/flash-SWFs/law_bullit.swf, but with www. in front

With the development of the 10mm having come up, now seems like a good time to offer up this link for anyone who's never had the chance to read it: Handgun Wounding Factors and Effectiveness by FBI Special Agent Urey W. Patrick

The ironic part is I literally agree with every single word of it. I just didn't laugh...and that offended me

Must we bog down a light-hearted thread with politics? I mean, is there suppose to be humor in there? I don't even see a punchline. "No wonder we are a country in debt.".......and?

It absolutely can. The ranges he's giving are sort of rough, and to say only as heavy 62gr for 1:9 is selling it short. It's also worth mentioning that the ability to stabalize a projectile with a certain amount of spin is actually a function of bullet length, not what it weights. Since weight is usually a pretty good approximation of how long a bullet is, bullet weight is usually a pretty good indicator to go off of. If you were able to find a relatively short bullet design that weighed 75gr, you'd likely have a pretty decent chance of stabalizing it out of a 1:9 barrel. It might not be the most accurate variety of ammo for that barrel, but it wouldn't be guaranteed to keyhole either. I use to have a Stag Arms model 2 upper in 1:9 and I never experienced keyholing with 75gr rounds. Now, it liked 68-69gr reloads better, but the 75's I tried were never a disaester. The 1:7 twist ratio was originally a standard that emerged out of a US military need to allow 14.5" M4 barrels to stabalize a particular variety of tracer round that was notably longer than standard 5.56 ammunition. I.E. 1:7 was the solution needed to fire a particularly long round out of a relatively short barrel and it may not necessarily need to be quite that fast to stabalize the kinds of "heaver" rounds we usually have in mind as civilian shooters. One other means that "slower" twist barrels will often overachieve is a longer barrel. For reasons that exceed my understanding of aerodynamics, projectile spin is less of an issue at higher velocities, so a bullet rotating at 1:9 but exiting the muzzle faster than a bullet rotating at 1:7 can apparently achieve comparable stability in its trajectory. As an example of this, my buddy has a Colt target rifle with a 20" barrel. It's 1:9 twist, but he has no issues with stability when he tries out my 77gr sierra reloads & 75gr sierra reloads. Now, it still seems to shoot tighter groups with 69s, but I wouldn't categorize his results with my heavier bullets as anything less than 'decent', which wouldn't be possible if the bullets were becoming unstable at any point. Now, it's worth mentioning that this was only 100 yards and might not be the case at 200/300/etc. I guess my point is just, don't shy away from really testing out what a given barrel can shoot based just on the "average" performance range of 1:X barrels. For the majority of civilian shooters with barrels in the 16"+ range and no 80gr tracer rounds in their ammo can, I'm inclined to consider the twist ratio decision a matter of deciding what kind of bullet you want your rifle to shoot "best" instead of what your rifle won't be able to shoot at all

Only bullets I'm shooting right now are 75gr hornady and 77gr Sierra. We are talking ar 15. Fitting into standard magazines is no problem

1:8 is a pretty good compromise on twist ratio that tends to give you the best of both worlds. Only downside is that you're generally talking about a stainless steel barrel, as 1:8 doesn't seem to be offered in chrome lined barrels for some reason. If you decide you want to go with a chrome lined barrel, you're back to 1:9 or 1:7. For me, the 1:7 is the better fit because it has the flexibility of letting me shoot 75-77gr rounds and I don't see much need to have a barrel that is 'optimized' for 55gr bullets because all of the rounds I shoot in that weight are inexpensive surplus & steel rounds that I don't really expect to be accurate in the first place [regardless of the barrel they're shot through]. However, I can see some instances where someone might want 1:9. For example, if you're looking to do some varmint hunting and need the rifle to shoot lightweight varmint bullets with a high degree of accuracy, the 1:9-1:12s might actually be a better fit for your needs.

Nice. What barrel profile is that & what does it weight in total at present?

Appreciate the suggestions gentlemen. I wasn't too specific in laying out my criteria, but one thing I'm looking for with this optic would be the ability to have a lower 1/3rd cowitness over a fixed front sight. I had looked at the RMR, but decided against it when I wasn't able to find a tall enough mount to make it a lower 1/3. I did find some mounting options that would give it an abolute co-witness, but I don't think I'd really care for that.

So, I'm currently researching my optic choice for a lightweight upper and, based on info I've gathered so far, it looks like the Aimpoint H-1 is presently in a class of it's own, unless I'm missing something. Aimpoint H1 w/o mount: 3.0 oz Larue lightweight H1 mound: 1.7 oz Total: 4.7 oz Aimpoint Pro w/integrated mound: 11.6 oz Eotech XPS3 w/built in mount: 8 oz Trijicon RX30: 8.2 oz I realize matters of ounces seem like they wouldn't matter than much in aggregate, but I'm just curious if there is anything else on the market that comes close to the weight of the H1, as it seems to weigh less than 40% of the competing optics [that I thought to compare it with]

+1 I started out a litte TOO light on my first .38 special loads and they were an absolute mess to shoot. Unburned powerder going all over the place, my hands, entc. Not fun to shoot. Brought the charge up and my reloads instantly started shooting cleaner than factory ammo.