Jump to content
Practically Shooting

BarryinIN

Members
  • Content Count

    1,500
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

BarryinIN last won the day on March 25

BarryinIN had the most liked content!

1 Follower

About BarryinIN

  • Rank
    Advanced Member

Profile Information

  • Location
    Indiana
  • Interests
    Making Mac & cheese, changing channel to SpongeBob, etc. Load some ammo and bending Kydex as time allows

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. This coming weekend. I’ll be there. Anything anyone want looked at or asked about?
  2. I use Ranger-T 127 grain in 9mm. Ranger can be a pain to find sometimes, but worth it I think.
  3. They change all the time. In .45, I use CCI 230 grain Gold Dot, and have boxes bought not all that far apart with three slightly different cavities in the bullets. I asked about it, and that’s basically the answer I got: They change all the time. OK then.
  4. I’ve been messing with this thing some. It takes some tinkering, but it also seems to respond to the tinkering. I can’t say the same for all the .22s I’ve been fooling with lately. In our club’s youth program, we are starting to shoot outside with .22s after a winter of air rifle. This is the first year we’ve ventured outside with them. Since the two .22 matches held at our club are silhouette and BR-50, that’s what we are working them up to. Coming up with suitable BR rifles wasn’t much trouble. Between us instructors we have rifles for that after pooling our resources. We thought getting them into silhouette rifles would be the easy part. It hasn’t been. Our problem is since the kids have to shoot silhouette from standing, we have to have something light enough they can handle but accurate enough for the game. The size and weight part eliminates most of the rifles we instructors have. Accuracy is always helpful, but naturally requirements for silhouette aren’t all that tight compared to BR so we could loosen up the standards quite a bit. We weren’t too worried about having suitable silhouette rifles. The club has some Savages of various types, and they happen to be what I call medium-sized. Not small rifles really, but on the small side for most adults. None of our kids are big, so they were almost perfect. We assumed once we moved the scopes from the airguns to these, we’d be set. We were stuck leaving the scopes on the air rifles until we finished there. Monday, we moved the scopes to the .22s to see what we had to work with. We needed them ready to go Thursday evening. The results? Panic ensued. We had already decided that having the kids adjust scopes for each target and distance was asking for trouble, so we’d designate a rifle for each target distance, zero it accordingly, and leave it alone The kids can rotate from rifle to rifle. That would require at least four rifles- one for each target/distance- and four is exactly what we had. Spares would be nice, but we didn’t have them. This would also allow us to use the most accurate rifle on the farthest targets. If we had a particularly crummy rifle, we could designate it the chicken rifle. The next one better could be a pig rifle, etc. We thought this would give us even more wiggle room in the accuracy standards, but three of the four weren’t capable of even the chicken. At least the one we ended up with was good for the ram at 100. So the scrambling began. All had wood stocks and they must’ve shrunk over time because all their stock screws were loose. They have thin bottom metal, so you can’t give them much torque, which means you can’t play around with that much to see if it helps. Nobody has shot these rifles in years, yet the barrels were filthy. Lead deposits crusted the muzzles. Adding insult to injury, our scopes blocked off the ejection ports so single loading was almost impossible and we’d have to shoot from the magazines...which distorted the ammo in feeding. The frustrating part was none of the tricks the two of us knew helped. The rifles just wouldn’t respond. After running around this week tuning, adjusting, and testing these rifles, we got another one usable, but only for chickens. Now we had two. My buddy in this fiasco did some stock swapping to lighten up an accurate Savage he has to give us three rifles. Now we get to where this ramble applies to the Ruger American Rimfire. There was also a Ruger American rifle in the club safe. We broke it out and scoped it before finding out it belongs to a board member (why it was there, we don’t know) but he said we could use it. Unlike the Savages, I don’t think this one had seen any use at all. I think there is a curse on that safe since it couldn’t shoot very well either and we had to give up on it. I know it’s only been a small sampling, but the stories I read and hear that you have a 50-50 chance at getting a good shooting one with these Rugers is looking true. Our situation caused me to get to work on my Ruger American Rimfire. If we could get it shooting well enough, it might have to be the fourth rifle. This one actually responded to tuning. The big helps were action screw torquing and adding shims between the barrel and stock. Two in-lbs of action screw torque change was enough to change things. FWIW, it likes them light: 18 in-lbs front and 16 rear. The lighter trigger spring I ordered helped a lot. Shooting the other Ruger at the same time really drove that home. I doubt the seller has more than three cents in each spring, so while it hurt to pay $10 for it, I sure got more than that in improvement from it. We are going to use it, along with two of my rifles that may or may not prove to be too heavy for the kids. After all our trouble, we delayed silhouette a week and shot only BR last night. So... my impulse-purchase, unimpressively-built, cheap-as-dirt Ruger may not have rescued us, but it is giving us a cushion. There is one big thing that kept sticking out. I had three different scopes on this Ruger this week as we shuffled things around. Not three examples of the same scope, but three different brands. Each one needed a LOT of up elevation to zero. Once, I tried it at 100 yards and ran out of elevation about three inches below point of aim. It has standard 3/8” grooves and is drilled and tapped. I was using the grooves each time. On this one at least, either the scope groove machining or the barrel install is a little off. I might buy some bases and use the tapped holes just to see if that eliminates it.
  5. Fixed it. Got a 457 American.
  6. I guess I’m an owner now. I was out searching for a CZ Saturday when I saw one of these in the used rack at my regular shop. He shot me a price of $200, and I said why not. I still have him looking for a CZ Our county 4-H club has one of these and I like it pretty well. It gave us a full-size rifle for the HS-age kids, has decent sights, and I don’t think it cost any more than the single shots we have. It can take the tough life of going in and out of a crowded safe, being hauled to and from the range, and getting slobbered on by kids, and doing this all summer long. It’s a great rifle for us. I’d never taken that one out of the stock and examined it. I almost wish I hadn’t done that with mine now. This is one cheap rifle. Wow. Well, it doesn't have to be mechanically beautiful inside to shoot well. I never have put the 4-H Ruger to paper to see how it really does. Being basically a safe gun handling program rather than a marksmanship one, accuracy requirements aren’t too high there. In practical accuracy terms, I think it shoots great. Aim at that plate, press the trigger, pop-ting. We've got one on loan to the Youth Program at the gun club to see what we think. Two of us have shot it for groups a little bit. We like it generally, but accuracy-wise, its one of those frustrating rifles that shows you a little promise then yanks it away. We’ve both shot some nice 4-shot groups. Always one flyer. Occasionally it will give us three in a group, and two out. Those two will be touching, in their own little group. Usually it’s four and one. We change ammo, technique, and we’ll swap places at the bench, but it does the same. There are some things we’d try if it were ours, but we’ve avoided the tools so far. From what what I read online, you get a roughly 50-50 chance of getting a good shooter. Maybe after using this frustrating one, I’ve helped my odds. Until skimming through the earlier posts here, I forgot about that one that fed so hard from the magazine. Now that I’ve had one out of the stock, I have a theory about that. I said it was a cheap rifle. One reason I say that is from how it’s bedded in the stock. The stock has two blocks of mystery metal (aluminum...maybe?) that I guess you’d call bedding blocks. They drop into their own recess in the stock, action screws run up through them and into the action. The action is seated in these blocks. I guess it works. The potential problem I see is these blocks aren’t fastened into the stock in any way. They just drop in. Neither of mine fit tight in their recess, but the rear one is particularly loose. Since the rear one contains the magazine catch, I think that guy’s rifle may have been assembled with the block a little out of line, which caused the magazine to be misaligned. Needless to say, I wonder what it does to accuracy too. If it doesn’t shoot well, I’ll just loosen the action screws, shake the bedding blocks around, and try again.
  7. Well, never mind. I went to pick it up and it wasn’t the right model. It wasn’t really close, either. I ordered a CZ 455 American with a standard weight barrel. A CZ 455 Standard is what came. I am not a CZ wizard, but I’m not completely ignorant of them either, and I had no clue what a Standard was. It seems to be a cheaper version (birch stock) of the Lux, with the “European” or “Bavarian” style humped stock Different from the American in stock shape, stock material, and with iron sights. Other than that, it was exactly the same. It was in .22LR, and it was a CZ! They checked, and no Americans were available. Not surprising since they replaced the 455 with the 457 at the end of the year I was hoping I caught one Debit card reloaded.
  8. These CZs are like erector sets. You can swap barrels, stocks, and calibers in seconds so it’s kind of silly to have more than one or maybe two. But you gotta do what you gotta do. The project ideas are limitless Whistlepig makes lightweight barrels for these (and 10/22s, and 77/22s, and...) with a steel rifled sleeve in an aluminum outer heavy “barrel”. I have one in a 10/22 bullpup and it’s very accurate. It is tempting to get a barrel and plastic stock to see how light and accurate I can make one. A few companies make chassis stock systems so you can get as crazy as you want as a .22 precision trainer. Lilja’s 3-groove drop-in barrel tempts me. CZ has their own Precision Trainer with a Manners stock, but hey, why stop there!
  9. Every year will be easier to remember. My problem is I was unaware of this situation in 2017 and 2018. I’m already behind.
  10. Well, that’s odd. I ordered my second CZ 455 on Friday (March 1)- an American .22 with the standard (not varmint) barrel. I came on here to find this post and see when I got my other one, and there it is: Three years ago to the day. I didn't plan that. I will be make a note of it, though. Maybe March 1 will be CZ Day from now on.
  11. The Ruger revolver I’m most interested in now is the GP100 in 10mm. The 3” Wiley Clapp model to be specific. Any revolver larger than L-frame/GP-size is getting a bit too unwieldy for me. I’d rather stop at K-frame size, but I know it just isn’t possible for some things. Redhawks and N-frames are nice, but big. The GP 10mm’s holes are about as big as I expect to see in that size gun without going to a five-shot cylinder*. A 3” six-shot medium (large medium) revolver that still throws a bullet diameter starting with a “4”? Yeah, there’s some appeal there to me. *I already have a S&W 69 .44 Mag and a 696 .44 Spl for the five shot category.
  12. I might hurt some feelings here. Every time Colt announces a new gun, I see and hear screams of “Bring back the Python!” Colt’s recent introduction of the new King Cobra brought on another wave of it. At least half the comments I’d see online had nothing to do with the King Cobra, but were about how Colt needed to bring back the Python, how this is exciting because it is one step closer, blah, blah, blah. I’m going to have to disagree. I don’t see how a Python return could possibly go well for Colt. I also don’t see a return of the Python making anyone happy. I should say now that while I don’t think it’s the ultimate revolver like some, I don’t dislike the Python either. I’ve had two, one I never fired. Unlike a lot of people, I don’t get all misty eyed over the name, but nor do I hear the name and immediately bark out “facts” such as “they won’t stay in time”. For all those who say Colt should bring it back, I wonder what they would be willing to pay. I don’t they'd pay as much as Colt would ask. The Cobra retails for $699. Real world pricing seems to run well into the 600s. The new King Cobra has an MSRP of $899. If the Python returned and listed at less than $1500, I’d be shocked. I’d truly expect closer to $1800. Even if they could do it so it took $1500 “street price” to buy a new Python, how many would buy? Gunbroker Python prices are all over the place A common number seems to be $2800, but those have no bids Several with active bids are in the $1200 range. I haven’t seen any in gun shops recently, but hear of them selling for around $1500, and that sounds about right based on what I see on Gunbroker. I’m referring to 6” blued, which I’ve always assumed was the most common variation. That’s what I saw the most, and it’s what both mine were. It’s probably what Colt would start with if they did bring it back. So if Colt brings the Python back, they will be competing against original Pythons. I just don’t see that working out well for Colt. They couldn’t possibly make them well enough to make people happy. All these people screaming for its return are wistful for old ones. Legends are tough things to compete against. Why buy a new one when an original- the one they really want- costs the same? I think those wanting the Python back don’t miss the Python. They miss being able to walk into a gun shop and buy one if they had the money That’s not the same. When the opportunity was there, people were hardly buying them. It may be hard to accept, but they never were that big a seller. The last year Colt sold Pythons as a regular production item was 1999. At that time, I don’t remember seeing any new ones on the shelf and hadn’t for a long time. Revolvers were dead, and few shops had the cushion to tie that much money up in a single gun that would sit there for a long time. There were 40 years’ worth of used ones out there also, and most of those had never seen much use, of any at all. In 1998, I sold my last one on consignment. It was like new, and I had $350 on it. This, BTW, is what used Glocks were running at the time. It was in a high traffic shop, and sat there for months at that price. Revolvers have bounced back some in recent years, but not that much. Demand has increased for Pythons now because they aren’t being made. Reintroducing them now to take advantage of that would have to be done carefully, and Colt isn’t very good at that. Colt would have to do some hard studying on WHAT to offer. They could turn something out that was Python-esque, like one of their current revolvers with a rib , but I don’t see as anything but guaranteed failure. Duplicating the originals would be so expensive I don’t see it being successful either. Some say it would be impossible, because the employees who were masters at fitting revolvers are gone. That they are gone may be true, but surely others can be trained. How long that will take and at what cost may be more than Colt can manage. You can’t build guns for practice, working up to good ones. It can be done, but I don’t see them being able to do this and sell it for under $2000. Plus, there is the legend to overcome. Right or wrong, whatever Colt turns out won’t be good enough...even if it is. A $2,000 New Python will have to be something pretty special. I don’t think they could hit my $1500 estimate and make it look like they shut down the production line yesterday. Something would have to change. Either it would look the same externally but with different lockwork, or they would have to go easy on exterior finish. Maybe compromising on both. I’d say going with different internals would be the way to go, giving them a path to a smooth action with less work, and still looking good outside. Whatever they do, people will be unhappy. And thats the thing. People will not be happy, whatever they do. If I ran Colt, I’d not attempt a revival. It’s gone, and the legend grows everyday. You would only be competing with that, and you can’t. My plan would be not to try to recreate the Python but to take the closest thing I have, which looks to be the new King Cobra, and make a new model based off it, and call it something else. Call it the SuperCobra or use a variation of a trademark they already have, like Colt Master or something. Give it some practical niceties like clear adjustable sights. Make grips that look and feel good (if they can do both, it would be a Colt first!) . Give it something to set it apart visually, like the (otherwise useless) vent rib barrel. Finish it well. Offer it in blued, maybe. Fit the action parts better than typical production, but don’t go crazy with it. If you can match a S&W K/L/N frame, go with it. Then make a “fightin’ version”. If going with the Master name, give it a Novak rear sight, bead blast it before finishing, and call it the Combat Master. In other words, a slightly nicer version of what they just announced. Make what is essentially a Colt ripoff of the Ruger Wiley Clapp guns and people will buy more of them than any new Python , and it will be easier, less costly, and a lot less risky. People will cry for Pythons, but they always will unless Colt can give them that, and as I keep saying, I don’t think they can. This would give them a “Premium Revolver” they can point to, and do it with a LOT less effort. But I digress. I like to dream. Just because I think a Colt reintroduction of the Python would be a failure on many counts, I’ll make a prediction now. We will see it this time next year. Two years tops.
  13. And the new King Cobra has an MSRP of $899.
  14. That’s what I went into the shop to get that day, but he made me a deal I couldn’t refuse on the 2.0. Otherwise, yes, for the price, everyone should be sticking away an M&P or two or three. Even if the type doesn’t interest them, it’s one of those things we’ll regret later if we don’t.
×
×
  • Create New...