Pondering a big bore pistol for hiking

[zxcvbob]

Also if someone was going to carry a 44 mag into the woods that would have at least shot it enough to be familiar with it. Well one would hope.

I don't disagree with shot placement at all.

Sometime drink several cups of coffee, do some physical activity that raises your normal heartbeat by double for several minutes, do not slow down and then try to hit a paper plate at 21 feet with your familiar gun.

The fall bullseye pistol league has started, and instead of shooting my .22 target pistol or my S&W .38, I'm shooting my Ruger Security Six this season because that's what I carry -- I haven't practiced all summer, and if I'm gonna carry the thing I ought to be able to shoot it.  Two weeks in and my scores are terrible, but getting better.  Almost all are hitting the paper anyway.  The light is dim and I'm using iron sights; that's part of it, but I am shooting target wadcutters right now and still flinching a little    That, and no "muscle memory."  Squeezing the trigger slowly as soon as the sights come on target instead of waiting for the sight picture to be perfect (then jerking the trigger or heeling the gun) helps, when I can force myself to do that.

My goal is by the end of the season to be shooting .38 +P service loads, shooting double action, and keep all of them in the circles -- would be nice if they were all in the black, but I'll be happy if all 30 shots are in the 6-ring even tho' that's a poor score.

I wonder if I should cut back on the coffee on Tuesdays?

[Matthew Carberry]

Most of the large mammals I have killed have been at 30 yards or less. Easily within handgun range with practice. Only really long distance kills I have had have been out in the western states. Most of the timber I hunt you can can't get a clean shot off farther than that because of the thick brush. I have shot a few whitetail deer at 150-200 yards with my MZL or slug gun, but those have been really rare opportunities for me.

You are saying use the gun you are comfortable withI can't disagree with that in practice. I'm saying use enough gun (and be proficient with it) Eastern US black bears are not as big as Alaskan black bears but they are fat and well fed, fat bears don't bleed out very well, dense fat can cause 9mm hollow points to expand before they reach vitals, 9mm fmj may not penetrate heavy bone, such as the skull.

I've had 250g MZL bullets explode hitting bone in a deer, this really pissed me off two years ago when I lost a really nice B&C buck because the bullet failed to break/penetrate the front shoulder. I found this out the following year when I shot a button buck in the chest and the bullet exploded on the ribs and just knocked the deer down, I ended up killing the deer with my knife because I didn't reload the MZL, very stupid on my part because it could of kicked the *expletive deleted* out of me and cut me bad with its hooves. I have also switched from those bullets to Barnes solid coppers.

I'm glad we agree. :)

Go to Buffalo Bore's website and look at their hard cast lead offerings in each caliber. I'm expressly not talking about defensive hollowpoints (people-style, though those are fine for cats and wolves) nor FMJs which are both just soft lead under the fairly soft jackets.

I'm talking heavy, hard bullets made to punch deep holes through layers of fat, muscle and skull bones. Two boxes of 20 rounds at a buck or so a round, one to test and one to carry in their carry gun in the woods, and the average, "might run into a predator, probably won't" casual hiker/regular CCer is going to be much better off than spending hundreds on a gun they'll carry a few times a year and almost certainly not put a lot of practice in with.

[Balog]

Yes, Rex Applegate. You may feel WWII was some ancient time long long ago in a galaxy far far away and all, but Applegate and the men he trained used those skills to kill a lot of people and win a lot of fights. 1911's are antiques too, newer isn't always better. Knives are sooooo old, they must just be totally useless in a fight.

That said, answer me this. Vital area on a bad guy is X big. Sighted fire, hitting it takes N seconds. Unsighted takes N-0.5. Both are equally reliable. Why is unsighted worse?

It's all tools in the toolbox. Red dots are great, even if you don't want them for 600 yard shots and ghost ring sights are almost as good.

[Boomhauer]

And in Applegate's time sights, particuarly pistol sights, were small and crude. Look at original BHP and 1911 GI style sights. Damn near nothing, and usable only with a good deal of light. We acknowledge that what he was teaching at the time worked for what they had but there are better methods these days. Jeff Cooper started the revolution and it continues to this day. The modern shooting method provides aimed fire with excellent speed.

Today we have far better sights. We also have far better fighting methods when it comes to handguns, and much greater variety of excellent handguns suited for such use. No longer do we hold the pistol one handed nor do we shoot in a crouch, leaning forward, with a hand over our heart to "protect it". That was a shooting method from that era, too.

[roo_ster]

And in Applegate's time sights, particuarly pistol sights, were small and crude. Look at original BHP and 1911 GI style sights. Damn near nothing, and usable only with a good deal of light. We acknowledge that what he was teaching at the time worked for what they had but there are better methods these days. Jeff Cooper started the revolution and it continues to this day. The modern shooting method provides aimed fire with excellent speed.

Today we have far better sights. We also have far better fighting methods when it comes to handguns, and much greater variety of excellent handguns suited for such use. No longer do we hold the pistol one handed nor do we shoot in a crouch, leaning forward, with a hand over our heart to "protect it". That was a shooting method from that era, too.

Did you mention Jeff Cooper?

    It’s an axiom that hitting your target is your main concern, and the best way to hit is to use your sights, but circumstances do arise in which the need for speed is so great, and the range so short, that you must hit by pointing alone, without seeing your gun at all.

    Pointer fire is not as hard to learn as sighting, once you realize it’s range limitations. using the 1911 auto-pistol I have found that I can teach the average infantryman to stay on a silhouette at 10 yards – using pointer fire in two shot bursts – more easily that I can get him into that 25 yard bullseye using slow fire and sights.

    Of course this sort of shooting is strictly a way of obtaining body hits at essentially indoor ranges ( 30 feet and under) …. But up close pointer fire can be murderously effective, and it’s mastery is often the difference between life and death.

I own several of JC's books and consider them a very useful resource.  Yes, The Modern Technique is his baby and I subscribe to it for the most part.  But it is not named The Only Technique.

Then there is low-light shooting, where irons are of less or no use unless you have tritium night sights.  At such times, knowing where your gun will hit might come in handy.  (Unless we can assume all goblin encounters will be as well-lighted as a typical range at noon time.)  I would also note that my distance vision has not deteriorated much over time, but the light I need to resolve my irons is greater than it used to be. 

Handguns can be effective from 0m as bludgeoning weapons out to 100m with some practice.  Assuming all shots will be in the sweet spot for standing two handed aimed fire is as big an assumption that all hand-to-hand encounters will be in accord with the rules set out by the Marquis of Queensbury.

I also practice aimed and point shooting off-hand, practice the manual of arms as if one or the other hand were out of commission, shoot from some goofy-looking positions (flat on back, rolled on side, kneeling, moving, facing away from the target, etc).  Yes, I can look awfully undignified at times.  Also, kinda humbling to see my effective range contract given sub-optimal conditions.  (Yes, I was anal enough a few years back to build a radar plot showing the range I could hit a small target relative to my angle to the target.  Maybe that is why I am an "anal"-yst.)

[charby]

I'm glad we agree. :)

Go to Buffalo Bore's website and look at their hard cast lead offerings in each caliber. I'm expressly not talking about defensive hollowpoints (people-style, though those are fine for cats and wolves) nor FMJs which are both just soft lead under the fairly soft jackets.

A lot of those are not safe in all modern firearms. Not disagreeing with you on the choice of bullet but I'd be pretty scared to run 9mm+p+ in my XD.

[brimic]

Paradigm shift time!
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/bigfoot-existence-backed-dna-video-report-article-1.1473883

>357s and .40 short and weaks might be ok for kitty cats and fuzzy wuzzy black bears.
I'm going with .44 magnum or BIGGER!

[roo_ster]

A lot of those are not safe in all modern firearms. Not disagreeing with you on the choice of bullet but I'd be pretty scared to run 9mm+p+ in my XD.

Given that the XD is offered in .357Sig, I am not sure you have much to worry about.  Perhaps the recoil & firing pin springs differ in 9mm vs .40S&W vs .357Sig, but I bet they are all available for purchase.

Huh, looks like the factory recoil spring for 9mm, .40, and .357 is the same in the 5" bbl version: 17lb
http://www.gunsprings.com/Semi-Auto%20Pistols/SPRINGFIELD/XD%205%20INCH/cID1/mID60/dID271

Well, here's why ^^^.  A little something about 9mm, .357Sig, and the HS2000/XD:
http://www.xdtalk.com/forums/ammo-can/29449-9mm-vs-9mm-p-vs-357-sig.html

The more you look, the more you learn, and I learned something today.  Woo-hoo!

[fifth_column]

I glued a hair curler to the top of my pistol and glued a piece of corner molding to the side of it for point shooting help...

The guy put a lot of time into doing something a laser does much better . . . .

[charby]

Given that the XD is offered in .357Sig, I am not sure you have much to worry about.  Perhaps the recoil & firing pin springs differ in 9mm vs .40S&W vs .357Sig, but I bet they are all available for purchase.

Huh, looks like the factory recoil spring for 9mm, .40, and .357 is the same in the 5" bbl version: 17lb
http://www.gunsprings.com/Semi-Auto%20Pistols/SPRINGFIELD/XD%205%20INCH/cID1/mID60/dID271

Well, here's why ^^^.  A little something about 9mm, .357Sig, and the HS2000/XD:
http://www.xdtalk.com/forums/ammo-can/29449-9mm-vs-9mm-p-vs-357-sig.html

The more you look, the more you learn, and I learned something today.  Woo-hoo!

I got a 4" XD, I got mine before they offered the 5" in a stainless slide. I got mine within a year of the XD being released. I also think the instruction manual said not to shoot +p+ ammo.

[Balog]

And in Applegate's time sights, particuarly pistol sights, were small and crude. Look at original BHP and 1911 GI style sights. Damn near nothing, and usable only with a good deal of light. We acknowledge that what he was teaching at the time worked for what they had but there are better methods these days. Jeff Cooper started the revolution and it continues to this day. The modern shooting method provides aimed fire with excellent speed.

Today we have far better sights. We also have far better fighting methods when it comes to handguns, and much greater variety of excellent handguns suited for such use. No longer do we hold the pistol one handed nor do we shoot in a crouch, leaning forward, with a hand over our heart to "protect it". That was a shooting method from that era, too.

So because some other people from that era did stupid things, all knowledge from that era is useless? Interesting.

I'll ask it again. If Method 1 allows you to get reliable hits on target in N seconds, and Method 2 allows you to get hits within the same accuracy bounds but in N - 0.5 seconds, how is Method 2 sub-optimal? Aside from having been started too long ago for your tastes?

[Matthew Carberry]

I got a 4" XD, I got mine before they offered the 5" in a stainless slide. I got mine within a year of the XD being released. I also think the instruction manual said not to shoot +p+ ammo.

The instruction manual in most pistols says to not shoot cast lead bullets or reloads either.  

The Buffalo Bore round has been around a while and has been tested by the manufacturer in the Glock 19 and Browning HP, the former a 4" barrel and neither known for being overbuilt, without any notice of "Ruger only" like some of his .44 Magnum loads.  

The XD 4" also comes in .40 S&W and .357 Sig as well and those pressures are not out of line with +p+.

Not directly pertinent but the .460 Rowland conversion for the XD .45 is a drop-in rechambered barrel with compensator and a heavier recoil spring, the gun otherwise remains the same and that is a fairly big pressure change/recoil impulse itself.

In any event, not being comfortable shooting a given type of factory-loaded ammunition is a personal choice, it doesn't impact what others might choose to do given their other calculations of risk.  Particularly when the whole idea is that the "woods round" would be carried infrequently and probably shot less.

Anyway, we can probably call our discussion well-fleshed out and amiably concluded at this point if you like.  

I don't want to sound all strident, in point of fact I spent the last year going over the "what to do for a woods gun" question myself.  I trimmed down to .45 in the 1911 platform as my regular carry gun a while ago and would borrow my buddy's 629 for the field.  I figured I should stick with what I know, since I barely get enough practice in with the carry guns (the "all the time" on stress training was hyperbole, more like "consistently infrequently" ).

So, I decided to go with always having a mag of .45 +P hardcast handy for "around town" and the .460 for real woods or knowing I'm going by salmon streams and such in town when the bears are out.

[charby]

The instruction manual in most pistols says to not shoot cast lead bullets or reloads either.  

The Buffalo Bore round has been around a while and has been tested by the manufacturer in the Glock 19 and Browning HP, the former a 4" barrel and neither known for being overbuilt, without any notice of "Ruger only" like some of his .44 Magnum loads.  

The XD 4" also comes in .40 S&W and .357 Sig as well and those pressures are not out of line with +p+.

Not directly pertinent but the .460 Rowland conversion for the XD .45 is a drop-in rechambered barrel with compensator and a heavier recoil spring, the gun otherwise remains the same and that is a fairly big pressure change/recoil impulse itself.

In any event, not being comfortable shooting a given type of factory-loaded ammunition is a personal choice, it doesn't impact what others might choose to do given their other calculations of risk.  Particularly when the whole idea is that the "woods round" would be carried infrequently and probably shot less.

Anyway, we can probably call our discussion well-fleshed out and amiably concluded at this point if you like.  

I don't want to sound all strident, in point of fact I spent the last year going over the "what to do for a woods gun" question myself.  I trimmed down to .45 in the 1911 platform as my regular carry gun a while ago and would borrow my buddy's 629 for the field.  I figured I should stick with what I know, since I barely get enough practice in with the carry guns (the "all the time" on stress training was hyperbole, more like "consistently infrequently" ).

So, I decided to go with always having a mag of .45 +P hardcast handy for "around town" and the .460 for real woods or knowing I'm going by salmon streams and such in town when the bears are out.

What do you want to debate about next?

[Matthew Carberry]

What do you want to debate about next?

Something less controversial...  Vatican 2?

[charby]

Something less controversial...  Vatican 2?

I was thinking 9mm vs 45 acp. :)

[Boomhauer]

So because some other people from that era did stupid things, all knowledge from that era is useless? Interesting.

I didn't say that and you damn well know it but I do so love how you like to draw conclusions like that.

[MillCreek]

I was thinking 9mm vs 45 acp. :)

No, no, that is too simple.  Gun oil vs. gun grease?

[mtnbkr]

No, no, that is too simple.  Gun oil vs. gun grease?

Gun lube vs non-gun-lube.

I know...






CORNBREAD

 

Chris

[lupinus]

CORNBREAD

 

Chris

*expletive deleted*it just got real

[roo_ster]

*expletive deleted* just got real

What is the controversy?   

Everyone who knows cornbread knows that Jiffy Cornbread mix covers all cornbread needs.

[lupinus]

What is the controversy?   

Everyone who knows cornbread knows that Jiffy Cornbread mix covers all cornbread needs.

*twitch*

[charby]

Gun lube vs non-gun-lube.

I know...






CORNBREAD

 

Chris

no WD-40 vs 3 in 1 oil. :)

[Balog]

I didn't say that and you damn well know it but I do so love how you like to draw conclusions like that.

You were denigrating a method because of its age, and then threw in a remark about an unrelated technique also in use at the time. It was a silly attempt to discredit one thing because of its proximity to another. Don't get all bent out of shape when I point out your logical fallacies.

[lee n. field]

I was thinking 9mm vs 45 acp. :)

<wookiesuit>.40!   .40!</wookiesuit>

[RevDisk]

I honestly did not expect an 8 page thread. So...

Best 4 inch .44 revolver?