Kimber-piece of junk!

I'm waiting on the new trigger to come in for my Savage .17, hoping to tighten up the groups considerable.

Dang eyes are too old for iron sight handgunning anymore, a nice, steady benchrest and some Optical Enhancement are more my speed now...

Anyway.. took it to my CWP class. I only owned that gun and a cheap .380 .. also pawn shop special.. bryco.. jennings.. something like that... horribly cheap loking chromed semi auto.

I figured the .45 had a longer barell and would be more accurate.. so i took it.

Our instructor paired 'testers' up into semi private classes. He'd schedule 2 people at a time, for a 2-3 hour class, which included range time.

The guy I was with had a 1911, or an expensive clone. It had every 'trick' in the book. If there was a shop smith service for it.. he'd already had it done.. custom scroll work.. engraving, fluting, relief cuts for weight reduction, trigger and hammer job, custom adjustable sites with trit inserts.. etc... the works. I'm sure this gun and the associated work must have represented 2-3 large$... I was immediatly embarrised. My 150$ gun and boxes of UMC cartridges, wich I carried in a green army milsurp ammo can. had the gun wrapped in a scrap piece of flannel.

After discussion and written test, the instructor asked to inspect each gun, he did the basics, chamberd and ejected a few rounds, removed and reinserted clip.. etc.. checked safety, handed it back, and asked each of us, in turn to do the same. He made very little commens.. I think he said something like 'nice gun' to the other guy, and I think I got ' nice and sturdy looking'.. I know he was trying to be nice.

In any event... at the range, we shot about 60 rounds. Basically in groups of 5, some slow, some rapid, some atlong, medium, and point blank range.

In the end.. I think 5 shots from the other guy made it on paper. Every single one of mine was accounted for on the silouette targets we were shooting out. I actually almost only got 59 out of 60, as one of my shots passed thru a previous shots hole.. however on close inspection of the target, it was seen that the hole was egged and had 2 shots thru it.. so he gave me credit.. but said on a police training range, they may not have.

In any case, after that, I was handed my paperwork and was able to walk. the other guy was going to get some more range time before getting his paperwork. As I left, the instructor said that if he ever came to visit, he'd make sure he 'called' first.

How much a gun costs does not directly, automatically convey as to how it shoots...

Soundguy

You should have asked the guy with the tricked out pistol to switch with you and shot a few dozen more. Maybe you would have put 60 on the paper with his handgun and he would have put 5 on the paper with yours. As it is, you're only assuming that the difference was with the pistols.

I used to go to an indoor range in Tacoma (owned by the gunshop that got in trouble for improper or missing paperwork on the sale of the rifle used by the D.C. sniper, Malvo, if he was the adult.) I saw lots of city types, both yuppies and scary looking thugs who might have been getting in some practice for upcoming drive-by shootings. One thing most of them had in common was owning expensive semi-auto handguns that they couldn't hit a target with. Hand me a pistol with a terrible trigger pull and junk sights, a Chinese Tokarev or a CZ-52 straight from the arsenal, and I'll shoot tight groups with it as soon as I can establish the point of aim. The difference between me and Jimmi the Gangbanger is that I'm serious about being able to hit what I shoot at, I was shooting before his daddy was born, and I've put 150-200,000 more rounds downrange than all the bullets he'll ever shoot in his life.

Since this is way too long already, I might as well add this. I used to take a guilty pleasure in showing the novices what loud was all about at an indoor range. I'd fire the hottest .357 Magnum loads I had out of a revolver with a ported barrel, holding it as far forward of the side panels as I could without attracting attention. .44 Magnum revolvers and 12 gauge shotguns (which were allowed at that range---for an extra fee) may have had more absolute volume but to my mind, there's nothing quite as jarring as the report of a ported or short barrelled .357 revolver. Good, clean, American fun.

All the best, Stan

Ditto on the gun vs the shooter. Even with bad sights.. once you put a ref shot down range, and as long as the ammo is similar.. you should be able to group shots with some accuracy too. ( also assuming no mechanical problems / defects with the firearm )

A buddy and myself hit a range years back with a couple SKS that we had just taken out of cosmolene and muslin wrap. Cleaned them up and took them out to a 300yd range. We set up a traingular target with 1' sides. Loaded a stripper clip full of 10 rounds. My buddy took the first shot. Hit target. I took the 2nd shot.. hit the target.

These sks had the ladder sights rear, and an adjustable front blade. We used the proper rear setting, and just 'guessed' that the front blade may have been set at the arsenal after the weapon was re-arsenaled.. and perhaps test fired.

After the 2 rounds.. we were satisfied those old ruskie rifles were good enough, and then we went on to some other toys.

Soundguy

Alas, one thing and another have come up to sharply curtail my consumption of gunpowder over the last 4-5 years, but when I was shooting regularly, I had more fun with folks that would tell me "You couldn't hit a barn with that if you were standing inside it...", referring to my Model 66 2" S&W.

Where upon I'd fire a standard 30 round 25 yard course of fire with a total score usually between 270 and 280...

Darn right it's hard to do, and yep, you gotta fire a LOT of rounds to get that competent and STAY that way, but what the hey, Uncle Sam was paying for the ammo and my time!

No jambs, 5 shots, and enough power. I keep it stocked with hydra shocks. though I do have some plus-P for it .. I typically don't let her 'carry' it with those.. nor have more than a couple plus-P ever left the barell... I personally usually carry a sig saur p-230 ( .380 ) also loaded with hydrashocks, during summer months, and during winter, carry either a smith 38 with a bobbed hammer, or a .45 of some sort.

For extremely light clothing carry, I have a kel-tec in .32a that has a 'wallet' holster. fits perfectly in the back pocket and looks like a wallet with no 'print'. Not much power.. but would deffinately be a deterrent, or dog stopper, if ever needed.

Soundguy

I agree with everything you've said. I have plenty of experience being in the position of being the guy with the cheap gun(s)and cheap or no accessories. It wasn't so bad showing up at the range with my handguns wrapped in towels in a backpack when I was 21 years old. Later, I took a sort of perverse pride in it, especially when I could take my firearms out, hang up some homemade 8-1/2" X 11" targets and proceed to chew the centers out of them. Made me feel like I had my priorities straight.

I do have one suggestion, though. I don't know any of your circumstances so maybe you have good reasons, but it seems to me that when your wife carries her .38 is exactly the time it should be loaded with +P's. It's not going to be of much concern that she might be stressing the frame of the revolver if she's saving her life with it. A .38 Spl revolver with a 2" barrel and regular pressure loads is already approaching the "better than nothing" category. Granted, guns are used for self defense without being fired several thousand times more frequently than they are fired in self defense. But to carry a weapon for self protection is already taking a position against very long odds, so you might as well go the rest of the distance and be armed with something that will settle the issue if you do have to fire it. If she can manage to carry a .38 Spl revolver then she can upgrade its effectiveness with no change in weight or size by carrying +P loads.

I sometimes carry a Kel-Tec .32ACP and I like it a lot. I might not try to stop a bank robbery with it (and probably not even if I had an M-16) but I certainly don't feel unarmed when I've got it in my pocket.

All the best, Stan

If load data has changed in the ? 10 ys that I looke dat it last.. I'd deffinately reconsidder.. or if new self defense ammo comes out.. I'd also reconsidder.

I used to use eldorado and black talon as my .45 carry load.. not sure what is out these days.. though i keep a small stash of the afore mentioned for uprisings and insurgencies.. etc.

Aside fromt he +p.. which i was never able to find as a hollow point.. only ball round.. any sugestions? A hollow point +p may be worth it, if she can hit on the first shot, and hold on to the gun.

Otherwise.. yes.. i agree with you.. use the best most powerful ammo you can for self defense.

Same notion on the .32 kel tec. I wouldn't go looking to be a vigilante with it.. however if a knife fight ever showed up on me in a parking lot.. I'd feel better than not having anything but tennis shoes to defend myself with....

Soundguy

I'm feeling like maybe we should continue this by e-mail---the thread is about to run off the right side of my screen.

My list of the most effective loads (by results) for a 2" .38 shows 158gr LHP+P and 125gr JHP+P by Remington, Winchester, and Federal as the top five performers. Cor-Bon 115gr JHP+P+ and Winchester 110gr JHP+P+ are much better from a 4" barrel but a 2" barrel just won't launch them fast enough to make them expand reliably.

One thing I noted, however, is that Federal Hydra-shock wasn't on either list. I don't know why not. In general, you can't go far wrong with Hydra-shock for exactly the reasons you state. My info is 10 years old, too.

All the best, Stan

I have found the gun brand discussion to be as bad as asking somebody which brand of truck or tractor they prefer, haha.

A Colt 1911? Every single one I've EVER come across is a loose fitted, rattle box that is acurate to about 3 feet! Best thing about them was that you could drag them through mud and they'd still fire. Never been around a Kimber, but have seen a few of the Russian cheapies that had the same feed problems. Still Like my Thompson .45 the best. Everyone has thier favorites!

Some were more accurate than others, trigger feel/pull varied noticably, more than a few of the magazines needed the lips adjusted to make them feed properly, but every single one of them would put every round of a standard 30 round course of fire on the paper (and most in the black) IF the operator did his/her part.

Granted, the .45 is not the easiest pistol to learn to shoot well. Proper grip and stance are vital, sight picture is critical, and for reasons I don't fully understand, people are more prone to flinch with a .45 than any other weapon I've watched folks fire.

More than once I've had my @$$ chewed when some Junior Officer handed me a weapon, told me what a loose, junky, worn out piece of crap it was (not too suprisingly, AFTER he sprayed lead all over He77's Half Acre), where upon I'd put about 10 rounds down range, go get the target, look at the 90 Day Wonder in question, and say "Gee, Sir, I don't thing there's anything wrong with the weapon..."

It was a USMC Captain and his crew that taught me (and others) the Combat Pistol course. LOTS of fun!

Also, I should probably make clear that it was my last three years in the Navy (1987-1990) NOT the last three calendar years. Also, we were some of the last active military still shooting 1911's, any body that really NEEDED to shoot (as opposed to us desk jockies that were just qualifying to wear the ribbons...) was using the Beretta 9MM by then.

We also qualified on M14's and them ragged old Mossberg 12 ga. trench guns...

I always tell folks there's a reason 9's carry so many rounds...

I think maybe the .38 that the .45ACP replaced in the Phillipines was .38 Long Colt or one of those other anemic old-timers, but I could be wrong. As far as the .45 vs the 9mm is concerned, there's really no debate as long as you're talking military ball ammo. The .45 is 27% greater in diameter, 61% larger in cross-sectional surface area. Plus, it's moving slow enough to transfer most of its energy to its target instead of having a lot left when it goes out the other side. So the military should have stuck with the 1911, or at least with the .45ACP round. But that wouldn't have gotten us what we wanted from Italy at the time, so we went a step backward with the standard issue personal sidearm.

That said, the 9mm is considerably more powerful than a .38 Spl.(.38 Spl, 9mm Luger, and .357 Magnum bullets are all about .355" diameter, so size alone is not the determining factor) and, when not restricted to ball ammunition, comes close to providing the same stopping capability, shot for shot, as the .45ACP when each is using its best HP load.

My opinion is that 9mm was a poor choice for our military round for pistol and SMG, but not such a bad choice for police forces. The real stupidity there was deciding to spend a fortune on high capacity pistols instead of keeping their perfectly good revolvers and using the money to train the officers to use them well. LAPD officers shot at those two heavily body-armored bank robbers in North Hollywood for over half an hour without being able to take them down despite the fact that the robbers had only ski masks on their heads. That isn't weapons failure.

All the best, Stan

Or, just send that junk my way.....I'd love to collect some junk like that!