Category Archives: Thoughts

Reviews, Thoughts

A Quick PSA about the Vortex Defender MRDS

Leave a comment

I’ll make this post short. I bought a Vortex Defender MRDS to replace a Romeo0 on my backup P365X carry gun. It came, I took it out of the package, and put in a battery to function-test it before I did anything permanent.

It has a TERRIBLE refresh rate at anything other than max brightness. Like, I could cant the optic up and down at a very moderate rate and see a trail of red dots with substantial gaps between them. I have literally never seen this problem before, including on some really cheap optics. I am not sure what caused Vortex to make this design decision, but it was a terrible idea. Unfortunately, higher brightness levels caused substantial halo with the red dot as well. (On the plus side, it got very bright.)

I returned it. The 507K is still the RMSc footprint optic to beat. I thought everything else about the Defender seemed pretty solid, but those were deal killers for me. Keep in mind that this is coming from a guy running two UH1s, two Razor LPVOs, and two Razor RDSs. I am perfectly happy buying Vortex. But the Defender… not so much.

Research, Thoughts

Making your own PVS-14-style irises

Leave a comment

After messing around with night vision a bit, I discovered that the amount of light you let in makes a huge difference in your ability to see detail at varying distances in different light conditions. There are a couple ways of dealing with this:

  • Flip-up lens cap systems, such as the Phokus Hoplite or the improved Butler Creek setups (sometimes involving 3D printed components)
  • Irises

My RNVG came with a flip-up system with a 3D printed “shutter”. It works well enough, but is not up to hard use. It’s also the wrong color, which offends my aesthetic sensibilities. I knew in my heart that I wanted an iris system. The problem with irises is that the go-to Matbock Tarsier Eclipses are hugely expensive – as in $250 each. While I’m not afraid of spending money when it’s called for, $500 for a couple irises seemed a bridge too far, especially when there had been some complaints that they were so tight that adjustment frequently adjusted focus. If I were using these in a duty context, sure, I’d buy the Matbock solution and then expense it to my unit.

However, with the power of the internet, I discovered there was a far cheaper way of approaching this problem. Here’s the recipe I used:

If you’re in a hurry, you can get the same irises off Amazon for 50% more, but if you use my recipe, it’s ~$50 for each tube. Besides the much more acceptable cost, one thing I really liked about this solution was how I had more finely-grained control over light, and how the sacrificial lens was screwed in (vs sandwiched in my previous setup). The amount of force needed to turn the diaphragm was also just right, and did not affect focus. They also look super cool, and if they get damaged, it’s a LOT less money that I’m out. I was quite impressed with the amount of thread engagement that each piece of this solution also had – the iris and lens are not going to be coming off by accident.

Thoughts

Sometimes you do beat those odds

Leave a comment

As mentioned in passing in other posts, I bought a Smith & Wesson R8 revolver about a year ago that I have basically been using for messing around with OSR and low-light shooting. Reloading 357 Magnum (at 38 Special pressures) is a good excuse to use leftover powder that I am uninterested in stocking longterm (Bullseye, Unique, etc.). Nothing wrong with that, but as any reloader can tell you, swapping out calibers on a progressive press is typically an annoying affair. I also find that 9mm moonclips typically work much better than 357/38 moonclips due to cartridge length. You can see where this is going: I like the R8 in 357 Magnum, but I’d like it a lot better if it were in 9mm.

Continue reading Sometimes you do beat those odds →
Thoughts

What is a 2011 vs a double-stack 1911?

Leave a comment

Words have meanings, and the 2011 vs double-stack 1911 terminology is extremely confusing to many people… hence a lot of misuse. With a number of new entries coming into the market, I thought a refresher would be in order.

A double-stack 1911 is literally just that: a 1911 with a wider grip, and no other structural changes. Examples of these include the Para P18, BUL M-5, and RIA TAC HC. This necessitates certain parts differences (trigger bow being a big one), but the parts differences may vary from model to model; for example, Para P18s use different grip panels to hide the trigger box near the grip safety, vs the BUL M-5 which has a very specific grip safety with wings.

2011 is a registered trademark of Staccato (nee STI), but it is the generally accepted term for a 1911-like pistol that has a steel module with rails and a pair of grip bushing as its serialized part. The key word here is modular; the grip can be changed out separately, and is often polymer. Examples of these include the Staccato P, BUL SAS II, and Springfield Armory Prodigy. There may be certain parts incompatibilities (BULs use different grips and magazines) between them, but they usually use about the same parts you’d see in double-stack 1911s. One key thing to understand is that not all 2011s are double-stack. The Cosaint COS11 and Staccato R are 2011s that use single-stack 1911 magazines.

So… now you know. Don’t say 2011 when you’re look at that RIA, and don’t say double-stack 1911 when you’re looking at a Staccato P. 🙂

Thoughts

An Ode to the P320, and a Journey of Pistols

Leave a comment

My first centerfire handgun was a 9mm Sig P226R with the DAK trigger system. The DAK trigger is not really as horrible as some people make it out to be – for a bedroom safe gun, it provides some margin for sleepy bump in the night wake-ups – but I will say that it’s also not the trigger I’d want to be shooting USPSA with. It’s a long pull, with a heavy (albeit shorter) reset.

I bought a whole bunch of Israeli handguns after that. They were cheap surplus, they functioned pretty well (after a spring change, sometimes), and they did have a cool factor associated with them. I even bought a S&W SW9VE, which was my first ever striker-fired handgun. The SW9VE isn’t the garbage everyone thinks it is, especially after you get a trigger job done to it, but I have to admit that it was average at best, and would be mediocre by any of today’s standards.

But just before MD’s AWB came into effect, I bought a Glock 17 gen 3. I had no intention whatsoever of using this pistol as a pistol – I actually paid the FFL at the time to register it as an SBR so I could mess around with pistol chassises. Frankly, I am still looking for one that I think measures up. But what I also discovered was that the Glock 17 was not a terrible gun. It was simple, reliable, had a much better trigger than my SW9VE, and magazines were not as wallet-busting as the SW9VE magazines. This, along with a bit of Blade-Tech gear, was my entry into the world of training and action shooting. I took a holster draw class, and I was hooked from then on.

After that, I got heavily into Glocks and Polymer80 pistols. Doubly so when I took a class with Modern Samurai Project and found out how much more I enjoyed shooting optics-equipped pistols. I procured a couple of Glock 34s and shot them in Production and SSP, while a pair of optics-equipped slides kept me going in Carry Optics. It worked out well!

However, I found myself starting to wonder if there was more I could do with striker-fired guns. The Glock platform just seemed to have a performance ceiling, and while more skill always beats better gear, better gear can help you better use what skill you have. This was happening about when Sig released the P320 X5 Legion. Looking at it, it checked all the boxes – heavier, better trigger, modular, and with a very substantial aftermarket. When a local person advertised theirs at a reasonable price, I went for it. It was everything I was hoping it would be, right out of the box. I bought a second one a few months later, and then recently a third (AXG Scorpion) and fourth (FCU build on a TXG grip and full-sized slide with threaded barrel).

What I love about the P320s is that they give me options without much compromise. AXG grip with threaded barrel upper? No problem. Threaded barrel upper on an X5 polymer grip? Just an FCU swap away. If I decide I really want to go with a compact-style or even subcompact-style grip, it’s $50-$60 to make that happen if I don’t already have one. All of them are optics-ready. All of them take the same magazines (size limitations not withstanding). Sig is only the manufacturer that seems to be doing modular pistols “right”, despite any number of them (Ruger American, IWI Masada, etc.) being nominally available. This is the sort of thing that makes me gravitate towards the P365 now that Maryland has opened the gates to concealed carry by normal folk – one gun could be like four different ones with slide and frame swaps.

I’m not making a play that the P320X5L is the end-all be-all of Carry Optics and Production division handguns. It’s not. It has a lot of really good competition from the Shadow 2 OR, Walther Q5 Match SF, Beretta 92X Performance, and so on. I shoot (Bul) 2011s from time to time when I can get away with SAO guns. But, from the perspective of “here is a handgun that I cannot hit the limits of, yet”, the P320 X5 Legion has been very good to me. If Sig ever brought back modular hammer-fired guns ala the P250, but with fantastic DA/SA triggers, I’d certainly love to add a couple of those FCUs and slides to my inventory.

Thoughts

SASP Equipment Series: PCCs

Leave a comment

Continuing on with my series of SASP equipment articles, let’s talk PCC.

PCCs are a nice transition gun for athletes who started on rimfire rifles, but want to move into a new division as they get older. They are heavier and have a bit more recoil, but are generally not too overpowering even for 10-12 year-olds.

Read on for some thoughts.

Continue reading SASP Equipment Series: PCCs →
Thoughts

SASP Equipment Series: Rimfire Rifles

2 Comments

As I’ve alluded to in other articles, I’m spending an inordinate amount of time these days coaching an SASP team. We did great at Nationals – much better than I expected – but a lot of work went into it to get the team there.

I would say one of the biggest responsibilities for an SASP coach is guiding athletes to what equipment is going to give them the most (legal) advantage at matches. While I don’t think equipment is the end-all, be-all, I do think it will help give athletes a noticeable performance advantage. Good example: one young woman on the team who was already a fantastic shooter swapped to fiber optic sights and a better trigger, and she turned in better times on several stages. Those equipment changes didn’t make her any better or worse, but they sure helped enable faster splits across transitions. (She wound up placing third in women’s iron sight competition at Nationals, which is awesome!!!).

One critique I have of the SASP organization is that there is precious little out there in terms of writing about how to equip athletes… and I am going to try to help fill the gap. While it is tempting to simply go “use what the RFRI/O Steel Challenge folks use!”, not all of those choices work well for young adults who are not fully physically mature quite yet. Read on for some thoughts.

Continue reading SASP Equipment Series: Rimfire Rifles →