Even regular readers of The Shooter’s Log can’t read or respond to all of the comments, so we have started a new weekly feature that will recap a sampling of the most active, interesting, or on occasion, randomly selected comments from the previous weeks. Feel free to respond with your two cents at the bottom of this article or by clicking the story link and adding it directly to the discussion.
Reader Comments From Previous Weeks
I must ask you Why if you want to rely on your Sig 9MM P226 or .40S&W P229 do you have those other firearms as a concealed carry option. I ONLY carry that which I would in a combat situation. When your LIFE depends on what you carry it only makes sense you carry what you would in combat which in effect you are preparing for combat. You only have one chance at survival and that chance is dependent on your equipment and your ability to effectively employs said equipment
~Force Recon Marine
Critical thinking is a big focus these days. Well, here is some critical thinking in regards to lethality. Our equipment investments are only an advantage to us If we are the only ones to have them. If the enemy has advanced body armor that we have to develop rounds and individual weapons to defeat, the enemy is doing the same for their troops. They will make that ordnance available to the smaller players of the world. In turn, we will make more advanced and heavier armor. In turn, they will devise better penetrating ammo. It may soon be coming to the point that body armor is decreasing lethality. I know that when it comes to picking up out of a hole and hauling tail to another fighting position, body armor with ESAPI and DAPS drastically reduces speed. It also inhibits ones ability to ground-and-pound in hand-to-hand combat. As well, it hinders ones abity to hastily evacuate a vehicle that has caught on fire, get to a covered/concealed position in a hurry and take up a fighting position. If rounds are going to continue to evolve in their penetrating lethality and the plausibility that a Soldier’s armor is going go be penetrated anyway, at what point do we stop wearing body armor and return mobility and lethality to the individual? Maybe that way, if a Soldier survives the war and various deployments, he or she will return with half a spine that is still able to support their upper body and allow him or her to function as a working and productive member of society free of neck and back pain from all the spinal compression that results from wearing heavy body armor for months on end.
I’ve been shooting for 61 years and have tried a lot of guns. I prefer to carry a gun that is reliable and easily concealed. Unless you plan a gun battle in a distance of 25 yards or more, I like my S&W Shield or my Springfield. Both are easy to carry in a belt or ankle holster. For bullseye competitive shooting, I always shot a S&W 6” K-38 with custom fitted grips. How’s that for dating myself?
I have a bolt action chambered in .243 as well as .308 and had an AR15 in .223. The AR is very fast handling and fast on target and the slightly heavier .308 versions are too. The .223 however does stay on target noticeably better during successive firing.
I actually find that the .243 is a generally superior cartridge to the .308. The .243 is a necked down .308 and delivers noticeably superior ballistic performance adding 100 or even 200 yards beyond the 308s effective range. Meaning the .243 is a bit more accurate at any distance than the .308 as well. Blast and recoil of the .308 and .243 are similar.
If you want to go to a cartridge heavier than .223 that still doesn’t cause recoil problems for normal infantry soldiers, the .243 would be an excellent choice. A side bonus is that facilities making .308 are very easy to modify for making .243. Going to anything bigger than the .223 does mean you really need to train soldiers how to hit what they are aiming at on single fire. Full auto on either the .308 or .243 is not easily tamed by your average soldier.
Probably the main advantage of the .223 is that you can actually keep the rifle aimed pretty much where you want it on full auto. Easily for burst and with practice on full.
Okay, first, I am a Wilson fan. Own a Tactical Carry currently, but I never carry it. But I wouldn’t call her a “safe queen” since she goes to the range regularly. Why not carry it? Too big. Living in Florida, I don’t get to wear heavy cover garments often, so my “big” gun is a S&W Shield that I feel well protected with. But I don’t carry it because it’s cheap, nor would I shy away from a more expensive gun because of the price, but the EDC X9 is still a big gun compared to the Shield so I don’t have it on my list.
That said, if I thought a Commander was an acceptable carry gun, I’d definitely have the EDC X9 on my very short list.
I think the 6.5 grendel would be a good contender. there are already ammo made by several companies, including wolf. so ammo would not be a concern. the round have more penetrating power than the 5.56 and its accurate out to 500 yards or better. there are parts available and the base receiver can still be used just change out the barrel and you’re good to go.
There is no good reason for the police/prosecutors to keep the gun for long periods because they don’t do it to themselves. In an officer involved shooting, the officer’s gun is taken into evidence. It is then taken to the lab where it is shot and the bullet and cartridge case is then placed into evidence and kept. The gun then goes to the department armorer to inspect to make sure it is within factory spec, no broken or modified parts which might make it “dangerous”. It is then returned to the officer for duty. This occurs whether it’s a department issue OR a personally owned gun that the officer is carrying. And, this usually all happens within 3 days to a week.
Have run the gamut of nearly any .38 loading in a handgun. Own 38 and 357 revolvers, like them all, Ruger brand being my fav. Interesting to see Buffalo Bore making 38-44 stuff. The 38, as well as the 9mm, has definitely experienced somewhat of a renaissance, of sorts, with the bullet improvements over the past 50 odd years. That said, as old Jeff Cooper, I believe once stated, “any caliber is fine, as long as the number starts with a 4.” Again, that was influenced, no doubt, by the lack of adequate bullet performance of the day. The wheel gun is certainly a viable choice in a self-defense arm. My choice, however, is my 10mm pistol w/180 grain Speer GDHP bullets, as loaded similar to that offered by Buffalo Bore. Out of my 3.7″ barrel, I chronograph 1250 fps, which rings up 600+ foot pounds of energy! For me, my Glock 29 is adequately controllable that I am able to get two rounds on target, @21 feet, under 2 secs from concealment. Reason for the G29?, NO manufacturer produces a ‘highly concealable,’ and reliable, pistol with the power that approaches a 41 magnum! Perhaps one might develop a pistol in 38-44? ????
Great article on a classic firearm. The 1911 will continue evolve but remain a style I prefer. I carry a Sig C3 and I live in Florida. As to getting your sidearm back after a shooting. In my county and surrounding counties if you are in the right and not charged with a crime there is no need to hold your firearm as there is no need for evidence. The state or county has no rights to your firearms and must return them at no cost to you and without the need for an attorney. I’m a retired LEO and have taken and returned many firearms in the course of my official duties. If I take your firearm I must give you a property receipt and safeguard your property returning it in the same condition I took it or I’m liable and must compensate you for damages. My .02.
I know, I know; everyone wants to say “what about … ” Seriously, how can anyone write about the Top 5 Combat Rifles without including the Lee-Enfield? It was first adopted by the British War Office in 1895 and later modified with a shorter barrel, becoming the Short Magazine Lee-Enfield, or SMLE (the barrel was shorter, not the magazine!) It was the standard-issue infantry rifle for British and commonwealth forces in both World Wars, and Korea.
One of the great features of the rifle is the very smooth bolt action – especially when compared with the awkward and clumsy Mauser’s. To be accepted into the small professional British Army before WWI, an infantryman had to be able to hit a man-size target three football fields (300 yds.) away 30 times in one minute. It was commonly known as the “mad minute.” The soldier was trained to use the thumb and index finger on the bolt knob while the middle finger was on the trigger. The record was held by an NCO at 43 shots in the minute. Today, with optical sights and a semi-automatic action, this would be a breeze, but for a bolt-action one, which had to be reloaded twice during the mad minute, and using iron sights, it was outstanding.
Another great feature that separated the SMLE from other bolt-action rifles was the 10-round detachable magazine, easily and quickly refilled by 5-round stripper clips. Actually, although not officially encouraged, many soldiers kept one extra round “up the spout” (in the receiver), allowing 11 shots before reloading – incidentally, three more rounds than the M1 Garand. Many an unfortunate enemy has heard ten rounds go off and said to himself, “now he must reload,” only to end up with a hole in his head from round #11.
Again unlike its contemporaries, the SMLE’s magazine was detachable. In theory a rifleman firing from cover could have several filled magazines next to him and reload quickly in the same way that modern rifles like the AR 15 can be. In practice this was discouraged by command.
The SMLE, outstanding in a century-old design, was still I use by Canadian Rangers as late as 2014, and is still in use by fighters in the Middle East.
But you ignored this? It should have been #1 on your list.