A semi-common debate is whether or not one should attach a sling to one's home defense shotgun or rifle.
Sling pros:
You might need hands free to transition to a handgun, manipulate a flashlight or light switches on the wall, open or close doors, deal with children or other family members, or operate a phone or alarm panel.
If someone manages to grapple with you while you're slung it will make it harder for them to get the gun away from you, and you'll be able to use your hands to some degree to fight.
Sling cons:
The sling has the potential of snagging on things, and it takes some small amount of time to sling the weapon on your body.
Some would say it's not needed since home defense engagements tend to be short and you would want the gun in your hands the whole time anyways.
Adds cost, since you need to buy a sling and potentially mounting hardware. This wouldn't apply if you would have bought a sling anyways for field / class use, just not for home defense.
Most slings will prevent you from easily transitioning the gun to your support side, e.g. if you wanted to go around a corner to the left.
Verdict:
Having a sling on a long gun for home defense is worthwhile. A well adjusted sling should not snag on anything and should be very quick to put on your body. The ability to use your hands without putting the gun may be tactically valuable for a number of reasons. A sling on a long gun is equivalent to a holster for a handgun, except it's even more convenient because it stays attached to the gun.
Wednesday, October 21, 2009
Thursday, October 15, 2009
AR-15 cleaning tip
AR-15 cleaning tip:
After taking the charging handle out of the receiver, lay it on your bench and turn it upside down. Use it as a tray for all the little pins and pieces from the bolt carrier group. It's very handy because everything will fit inside it, and it's the first thing that comes out when you field strip, and the last thing that goes back in when you reassemble it.
After taking the charging handle out of the receiver, lay it on your bench and turn it upside down. Use it as a tray for all the little pins and pieces from the bolt carrier group. It's very handy because everything will fit inside it, and it's the first thing that comes out when you field strip, and the last thing that goes back in when you reassemble it.
Tactical shotgun: pistol grip stock vs standard stock
Pistol grip stock vs standard stock for tactical shotgun:
Note: Pistol grip stock means a stock that comes with a pistol grip. I'm not talking about shotguns with a pistol grip only. Those are not recommended because they are generally designed to be shot from the hip, are hard to shoot accurately, and put a lot of recoil in your hand.
Pistol grip stock pros:
Many of them are collapsible M4 style stocks with adjustable length of pull, making them easier to store, and making them easily adjustable for different shooters.
Some, like the Knoxx Spec-Ops stock have recoil reduction buffers.
If you shoot AR-15 / M-16 rifles or other rifles with a pistol grip, the ergonomics are similar.
You can keep your elbows lower and tighter with a pistol grip, which is safer for going around corners without getting your elbows shot off. With a standard stock you have to have your firing arm's elbow cocked up like a chicken wing.
Standard stock pros:
With a Mossberg, it's a lot easier to manipulate the safety which is mounted at the top of the receiver. If you have a pistol grip Mossberg, you have to release your firing grip to use your thumb to manipulate the safety. I do NOT like the pistol grip on a Mossberg, it makes manipulating the safety very slow and uncomfortable.
Generally sturdier with fewer pieces to break.
You can carry the shotgun held muzzle up in your hands(with a pistol grip stock, it's very uncomfortable to carry muzzle up). Not sure how much of a pro this is since I think carrying muzzle up is a bad idea for safety reasons.
Less expensive.
You can hit someone with the buttstock easily(not that I think this is a good idea). With a pistol grip stock it's pretty much impossible.
Overall I prefer the pistol grip stock, assuming a crossbolt safety(e.g. Remington 870). If the gun has a tang mounted safety(e.g. Mossberg) then a standard stock is much preferred.
Note: Pistol grip stock means a stock that comes with a pistol grip. I'm not talking about shotguns with a pistol grip only. Those are not recommended because they are generally designed to be shot from the hip, are hard to shoot accurately, and put a lot of recoil in your hand.
Pistol grip stock pros:
Many of them are collapsible M4 style stocks with adjustable length of pull, making them easier to store, and making them easily adjustable for different shooters.
Some, like the Knoxx Spec-Ops stock have recoil reduction buffers.
If you shoot AR-15 / M-16 rifles or other rifles with a pistol grip, the ergonomics are similar.
You can keep your elbows lower and tighter with a pistol grip, which is safer for going around corners without getting your elbows shot off. With a standard stock you have to have your firing arm's elbow cocked up like a chicken wing.
Standard stock pros:
With a Mossberg, it's a lot easier to manipulate the safety which is mounted at the top of the receiver. If you have a pistol grip Mossberg, you have to release your firing grip to use your thumb to manipulate the safety. I do NOT like the pistol grip on a Mossberg, it makes manipulating the safety very slow and uncomfortable.
Generally sturdier with fewer pieces to break.
You can carry the shotgun held muzzle up in your hands(with a pistol grip stock, it's very uncomfortable to carry muzzle up). Not sure how much of a pro this is since I think carrying muzzle up is a bad idea for safety reasons.
Less expensive.
You can hit someone with the buttstock easily(not that I think this is a good idea). With a pistol grip stock it's pretty much impossible.
Overall I prefer the pistol grip stock, assuming a crossbolt safety(e.g. Remington 870). If the gun has a tang mounted safety(e.g. Mossberg) then a standard stock is much preferred.
Wednesday, October 14, 2009
Glock vs Springfield XD
This debate has been done to death, but I'll give my thoughts.
Glock pros:
Better reputation for durable finish and reliability. Note: The XD has been through some torture tests as well and is considered very durable and reliable as well. The pre-2006 XDs used an inferior "Bruniral" finish, but now uses Melonite which is basically the same as the Glock's Tenifer finish.
Glock has a wider availability of aftermarket parts including holsters, sights, etc. It's generally harder to find parts for the XD, as well as gunsmiths who know how to fix them, and most people probably just send it back to Springfield if something needs fixing.
Glocks generally weigh less than comparable XDs.
The Glock has a quite shorter trigger reset which means it's easier to shoot rapidly. Note: The XD-M has a much improved trigger reset which is supposedly even shorter than the Glock's. I haven't tried it yet.
XD pros:
It comes with a mag pouch, crappy holster and mag loading tool. The holster and loading tool are pretty useless. I found the holster to have way too tight retention even when the retention screw was totally backed out. The loading tool was awkward to use and much slower than loading by hand or using the Uplula. The mag pouch is okay, although the fact that it holds the mags in a V shape is ergonomically weird and probably not optimal.
The XD has a fully supported chamber, which means it's less likely to have a "kaboom" type issue, especially with overly hot reloads. On the other hand, the Glock's less supported chamber supposedly reduces the chance of feeding failures.
The XD's barrel has traditional rifling, while the Glock's has polygonal rifling. Shooting unjacketed lead bullets through a stock Glock barrel isn't recommended.
The XD comes with metal sights, while the Glock comes with plastic, less durable sights. Note this doesn't apply if you are going to get night sights on your Glock anyways because the night sights are metal. The XD uses metal magazines while the Glock uses plastic mags. I don't think it necessarily matters but some might say the metal mags are more durable and more likely to drop free.
The XD has a 1911-style grip angle, which many shooters prefer.
The XD grip is considered more comfortable by most people, including me. The Glock grip is a bit wider and blockier.
The XD's trigger is a little crisper and less mushy.
The XD has a significant downside: the XD's slide can only be pulled back while the grip safety is depressed. That means that certain one handed malfunction clearing maneuvers may be made more difficult. It also means that if the grip safety mechanism breaks, there's a chance that the gun could be totally locked up, possibly with a live round in the chamber.
Debatable:
The XD has a grip safety, which some people like and some don't. I like the grip safety in concept, but the issues mentioned above regarding pulling the slide back make the XD's implementation of the grip safety very unattractive, unlike on the 1911, where you can pull the slide back without depressing the grip safety.
The XD has a loaded chamber indicator and cocking indicator. Note: Newer Glocks also have a LCI, and you can tell if it's cocked because the trigger is to the rear.
Both companies generally have excellent customer service. I believe the Glock warranty is one year, but they will generally fix your gun for free at any time. The XD's warranty is lifetime. I believe neither company cares if you're the original buyer.
Note:
The XD-M, Ruger SR-9, and S&W M&P are all somewhat newer designs in the same class that are worth considering. For example, they all have adjustable backstraps and none of them require dry firing to field strip. I'm not very familiar with them, so we'll leave it at that.
Glock pros:
Better reputation for durable finish and reliability. Note: The XD has been through some torture tests as well and is considered very durable and reliable as well. The pre-2006 XDs used an inferior "Bruniral" finish, but now uses Melonite which is basically the same as the Glock's Tenifer finish.
Glock has a wider availability of aftermarket parts including holsters, sights, etc. It's generally harder to find parts for the XD, as well as gunsmiths who know how to fix them, and most people probably just send it back to Springfield if something needs fixing.
Glocks generally weigh less than comparable XDs.
The Glock has a quite shorter trigger reset which means it's easier to shoot rapidly. Note: The XD-M has a much improved trigger reset which is supposedly even shorter than the Glock's. I haven't tried it yet.
XD pros:
It comes with a mag pouch, crappy holster and mag loading tool. The holster and loading tool are pretty useless. I found the holster to have way too tight retention even when the retention screw was totally backed out. The loading tool was awkward to use and much slower than loading by hand or using the Uplula. The mag pouch is okay, although the fact that it holds the mags in a V shape is ergonomically weird and probably not optimal.
The XD has a fully supported chamber, which means it's less likely to have a "kaboom" type issue, especially with overly hot reloads. On the other hand, the Glock's less supported chamber supposedly reduces the chance of feeding failures.
The XD's barrel has traditional rifling, while the Glock's has polygonal rifling. Shooting unjacketed lead bullets through a stock Glock barrel isn't recommended.
The XD comes with metal sights, while the Glock comes with plastic, less durable sights. Note this doesn't apply if you are going to get night sights on your Glock anyways because the night sights are metal. The XD uses metal magazines while the Glock uses plastic mags. I don't think it necessarily matters but some might say the metal mags are more durable and more likely to drop free.
The XD has a 1911-style grip angle, which many shooters prefer.
The XD grip is considered more comfortable by most people, including me. The Glock grip is a bit wider and blockier.
The XD's trigger is a little crisper and less mushy.
The XD has a significant downside: the XD's slide can only be pulled back while the grip safety is depressed. That means that certain one handed malfunction clearing maneuvers may be made more difficult. It also means that if the grip safety mechanism breaks, there's a chance that the gun could be totally locked up, possibly with a live round in the chamber.
Debatable:
The XD has a grip safety, which some people like and some don't. I like the grip safety in concept, but the issues mentioned above regarding pulling the slide back make the XD's implementation of the grip safety very unattractive, unlike on the 1911, where you can pull the slide back without depressing the grip safety.
The XD has a loaded chamber indicator and cocking indicator. Note: Newer Glocks also have a LCI, and you can tell if it's cocked because the trigger is to the rear.
Both companies generally have excellent customer service. I believe the Glock warranty is one year, but they will generally fix your gun for free at any time. The XD's warranty is lifetime. I believe neither company cares if you're the original buyer.
Note:
The XD-M, Ruger SR-9, and S&W M&P are all somewhat newer designs in the same class that are worth considering. For example, they all have adjustable backstraps and none of them require dry firing to field strip. I'm not very familiar with them, so we'll leave it at that.
Viking tactics (VTAC) 2 point sling vs Vickers Combat Application Sling (VCAS) 2 point sling.
I bought a VTAC sling a while ago, and I wanted to get another one but at this time pretty much every retailer seemed to be out of stock, so I purchased a VCAS.
I got the padded VCAS with acetal adjuster(which just means the buckles are made of plastic, which seems to be pretty tough). It was 50$. I wanted to get padding because my VTAC was chafing my neck a little bit when I used it for a carbine class while wearing just a T-shirt. If you're wearing a vest or something, padding may be unnecessary, but I think it's worth it. It's also more comfortable if you're using a heavier long gun like a shotgun or a bigger rifle. A potential downside to the padding is that you can't adjust the length of the sling as much since the padded part of the sling can't be adjusted.
I like both of them pretty well and I don't regret buying either.
VTAC pros:
I feel that the quick-adjust works smoother, with a little less friction, especially in the 'tightening' direction.
The VTAC's quick-adjust portion is longer which means the quick-adjust can make more difference. The VTAC can be quick-adjusted much tighter than the VCAS can.
Depending on where you buy, but the VTAC will generally be a little less expensive than the VCAS for comparable models.
VCAS pros:
The VTAC has a tail which sort of dangles. You can tuck it into a little sleeve up to a certain point. The VCAS does not have a dangling tail. The tail on the VTAC doesn't really bother me anyways.
The VCAS uses the same pull tab for both tightening and loosening the sling. The VTAC uses 2 separate pull points, which is a little more complicated.
Debatable:
The VCAS is longer. This means that it can fit more comfortably over armor and will be more comfortable for a longer barreled gun. That said, it also means when wearing no armor, and using a shorter barrel M4-style rifle, it can feel a little loose, especially if you attach it on the receiver as opposed to at the very front and back of the gun. The VCAS is designed so that even on its tightest setting you can still shoulder and aim it. The VTAC, on its tightest setting will be held very tightly to your body, too close to shoulder it, which also makes it more secure.
Were I to buy either of them now, I would get the padded version, which really makes a difference in comfort for all day carry during a carbine class(or real world use but I wouldn't know about that).
2011 update: The more I think about it, the more I think the VCAS has an edge. The fact that you only have one pull tab makes things a lot simpler. The fact that it won't go so tight that you can't shoulder it makes it simpler, since in any given situation if you were surprised you could still shoulder the gun and fire it. Securing it very tight is not that necessary in most situations that I would personally be in. Also the dangling tail on the VTAC adds more complication and the potential that it might go somewhere it's not supposed to. I read about a few people having it go up in the mag well during reloads. The velcro keeper can mitigate that somewhat, but now you have yet another gizmo to mess around with on it.
All this being said I'm now mostly a fan of single points for ARs.
I got the padded VCAS with acetal adjuster(which just means the buckles are made of plastic, which seems to be pretty tough). It was 50$. I wanted to get padding because my VTAC was chafing my neck a little bit when I used it for a carbine class while wearing just a T-shirt. If you're wearing a vest or something, padding may be unnecessary, but I think it's worth it. It's also more comfortable if you're using a heavier long gun like a shotgun or a bigger rifle. A potential downside to the padding is that you can't adjust the length of the sling as much since the padded part of the sling can't be adjusted.
I like both of them pretty well and I don't regret buying either.
VTAC pros:
I feel that the quick-adjust works smoother, with a little less friction, especially in the 'tightening' direction.
The VTAC's quick-adjust portion is longer which means the quick-adjust can make more difference. The VTAC can be quick-adjusted much tighter than the VCAS can.
Depending on where you buy, but the VTAC will generally be a little less expensive than the VCAS for comparable models.
VCAS pros:
The VTAC has a tail which sort of dangles. You can tuck it into a little sleeve up to a certain point. The VCAS does not have a dangling tail. The tail on the VTAC doesn't really bother me anyways.
The VCAS uses the same pull tab for both tightening and loosening the sling. The VTAC uses 2 separate pull points, which is a little more complicated.
Debatable:
The VCAS is longer. This means that it can fit more comfortably over armor and will be more comfortable for a longer barreled gun. That said, it also means when wearing no armor, and using a shorter barrel M4-style rifle, it can feel a little loose, especially if you attach it on the receiver as opposed to at the very front and back of the gun. The VCAS is designed so that even on its tightest setting you can still shoulder and aim it. The VTAC, on its tightest setting will be held very tightly to your body, too close to shoulder it, which also makes it more secure.
Were I to buy either of them now, I would get the padded version, which really makes a difference in comfort for all day carry during a carbine class(or real world use but I wouldn't know about that).
2011 update: The more I think about it, the more I think the VCAS has an edge. The fact that you only have one pull tab makes things a lot simpler. The fact that it won't go so tight that you can't shoulder it makes it simpler, since in any given situation if you were surprised you could still shoulder the gun and fire it. Securing it very tight is not that necessary in most situations that I would personally be in. Also the dangling tail on the VTAC adds more complication and the potential that it might go somewhere it's not supposed to. I read about a few people having it go up in the mag well during reloads. The velcro keeper can mitigate that somewhat, but now you have yet another gizmo to mess around with on it.
All this being said I'm now mostly a fan of single points for ARs.
Thursday, October 8, 2009
Safariland 6377 holster for Sig P220R
I really like the Safariland 6377 for Sig P220R. Note that there are different models for the railed and non-railed versions of the P220. It's a belt holster that has an active retention lock. It's comparable to the Blackhawk Serpa, but it's (IMO) better because the release button is activated by the thumb rather than the trigger finger. So there's arguably a smaller chance of having a negligent discharge, and I find after a little practice, drawing is very smooth and just as fast as an open top holster with no retention.
The lock seems very secure. I tried pulling very hard on the grip of the gun but I couldn't get it to come out, or anything to break. A notable feature is that the inside of the holster is suede lined to ease wear on the gun.
The holster sits comfortably on the belt and is fairly low profile as far as outside the waistband holsters go. It
would conceal well with a jacket or vest, but not with anything less. Note: the model 6378 is the same thing but as a paddle holster rather than a belt holster. The paddle would make it stick out a little more, but may be more comfortable and presumably allows for easy on/off(I haven't actually seen it but generally paddle holsters have that option.
Thumbs up for a comfortable and secure range or open carry holster.
The lock seems very secure. I tried pulling very hard on the grip of the gun but I couldn't get it to come out, or anything to break. A notable feature is that the inside of the holster is suede lined to ease wear on the gun.
The holster sits comfortably on the belt and is fairly low profile as far as outside the waistband holsters go. It
would conceal well with a jacket or vest, but not with anything less. Note: the model 6378 is the same thing but as a paddle holster rather than a belt holster. The paddle would make it stick out a little more, but may be more comfortable and presumably allows for easy on/off(I haven't actually seen it but generally paddle holsters have that option.
Thumbs up for a comfortable and secure range or open carry holster.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)