Just back from the range with results:

265 gr. Cast Performance WFNGC, 24 gr. H110, CCI350 primer for 1579 fps 1467 fpe 11 fps AD 14 SD

300 gr. Sierra JFP, 22 gr. H110, CCI350 primer for 1407 fps 1319 fpe 10 fps AD 15 SD (Note that this load came closest to shooting point of aim at 100 yards.)

300 gr. Hornady XTP-HP, 22 gr. H110, CCI350 primer for 1431 fps 1364 fpe 22 fps AD 30 SD Note: The bullet has been seated out to the second cannelure. I'm going to try it seated to the first cannelure. It does not feed well seated to the same length overall as the Sierra bullet!

Free recoil energy of these loads is about 17.5-18 fpe.

I had another interesting experience. 4 times I looked through the aperture to see no front sight. I just picked it up off the ground and stuck it back in. You see, the factory heavily greases these AND stakes them. As the base is a tapered wedge, you can reinsert them fairly accurately and if I choose to retain it, only need to stake the one end of the dovetail. It is my OWN fault that I removed the sight earlier and pending the results of my experiments, haven't correctly reinstalled it.

Of course there was a wind from 3 o'clock this afternoon so, combined with the front sight laterally shifting to the right, my groups were somewhat larger than expected.

I got to the range this afternoon AFTER this morning's rain. Got to shoot the following...

300 gr. Hornady XTP, 21 gr. H110, CCI 350 for 1449 fps, 1358 fpe, 4 fps AD, 5 SD
300 gr. Sierra JFP, 21 gr. H110, CCI350 Unchronographed
260 gr. Cast Performance WFNGC, 10 gr. Unique, CCI300 1215 fps, 868 fpe 4 fps AD 7 SD
145 gr. RB, 2.5 gr. Bullseye, CCI300 for 287 fps, 27 fpe 47 fps AD 48 SD

I've not got a photo yet, but some of these were below aiming point at 100 yards, the 265 gr. CP WFNGC was about right on and even the aforementioned 250 gr. Hornady XTP load was a good 6+ inches lower! Who knows what's up with that. Perhaps Ben Rumson is correct about how I handle the recoil. This is with the original factory front sight.

By the way, that front sight didn't move through all that shooting! It is practically a finger press fit and it stuck right through it all. Very interesting.

In any case, I think that I can find a load that will creat significant FPE and penetration and it right on at 100 yards. The current load with the 265 gr. CP WFNGC seems to be a good general purpose load. I think that if I speed up the 300 gr. bullets they will also come up on the target.

I can't say enough about how much I like the gun despite the situation with the sights. If I can find a couple of useful loads I'll be well satisfied.

However, if YOU plan to put a Williams Foolproof, Lyman 66 or other receiver sight on a .45 Colt or .44 Mag M92, mount it as low as it will go on the receiver. You WILL need the adjustment range.

I loaded 4 new loads (and the ramp ups) to test for velocity, accuracy and compatibility with the existing sight system on the EMF 92.

The bullets used in my .45 Colt handloads to date.

300 gr. Hornady XTP, 21 gr. H110, CCI 350
300 gr. Sierra JFP, 21 gr. H110, CCI350
260 gr. Cast Performance WFNGC, 10 gr. Unique, CCI300
145 gr. RB, 2.5 gr. Bullseye, CCI300

These are photos of the cartridges. The longest is 1.684" but still functions through the M92 action.

The longest of these cartridges is the load with the Sierra at 1.684" but the XTP has a second cannelure and can be loaded out to that length. Both will probably take the max load of 22 gr. H110 which should be very similar to that load as I use it with the 300 gr. bullet in the .44 Mag.

I've yet to use H4227 and Lil'Gun, both of which should provide slightly higher velocities if the manual is correct.

Yes, I have received the new .600" (measured from bottom of dovetail) Marbles sourdough front sight but haven't installed it yet. Perhaps my reloading will negate that necessity. That would be good as the sight will require modification, a lot of grinding, to use. I'd just as soon save the sight for another project if I can.

A comparison shot of the the factory front and the Marbles replacement. The Marbles must be extensively modified as most of the sight forward of the dovetail would have to be removed to avoid the barrel band!

This brings up another subject, removing and installing front sights. In this case the base of the original front sight was tapered in thickness to wedge into place in the center. It was heavily greased in the dovetail and can almost be removed and installed by hand but didn't come out after firing many rounds of heavy reloads. This is why one removes left-to-right and installs right-to-left. Not everyone does this sort of thing but enough do that it pays to adhere to this procedure.

As the saga of my new EMF Hartford 92 .45 Colt continues I've more to report.

Yesterday I went to the range thinking that I might have solved the problem with zeroing the rompin' stompin' .45 Colt loads using H110 and the Hornady 250 gr. XTP. At 1778 fps, these are so fast that the .065" sight change made didn't do the trick. Well, now here's a puzzle, it did do the trick with the much slower 225 gr. Winchester Silvertip factory loads! It may have lowered the POI of the heavy hitters by 2" but brought the Silvertips down the entire, calculated, 11". So, what is up with that? As it is, the gun shoots high with the XTP load even at 150 yards!

In the photos below, you can see what happened on March 31st and what happened yesterday. I know that yesterday's group gave a better impression of the accuracy of the system with the various loads but it did rather raise another problem. One should note that we had a 25-30 mph quartering to cross wind! Had one gust I thought would take the roof off the shooting bench shed!

The question is, what to do? Well, one thing is to go to slower but heavier bullets OR bullets of about the same weight but slower OR lighter and faster bullets. I think that the last option is the least suitable given my intended use. It certainly isn't much good if I can't zero the system with usable ammunition at a reasonable range.

Brownell's does sell a sourdough front with the necessary height (.600") of over ½". That should also work to allow the adjustment necessary. Another thing is that the sourdough allows ½ the bead diameter in additional "height" because of how it is used to bisect the target as opposed to being placed over the target. If that doesn't work...

However, I did want to try heavier bullets and have order the Sierra and Hornady 300 gr. jacketed to try as well as the Cast Performance 260 gr. WFN. I also have the Lee Alox to lube some roundball to load over 2.5 gr. of Bullseye for a close range squirrel/rabbit load.

These are the targets from the two days.

.45 Colt Ammo

I wanted to record some of my shooting impressions concerning my new EMF Hartford 92 noted below.

Yesterday, I took it to the range along with my chronograph. The following loads were tested with the noted results.

Make	Bullet	Vel	FPE	AD	SD
CCI Blazer	200 gr. JHP	1152	590	20	29
Win Cowboy	250 gr. LFP	835	387	30	35
Win ST	225 gr. ST	946	448	18	27
Reload	250 gr. XTP	1778	1756	12	28

The reload consists of 250 gr. Hornady XTP-HP over 26 gr. H110 ignited by a CCI Magnum Large Pistol primer in new Winchester cases.


These are the cartridges I've tested so far.

After chronographing, I immediately went to the targets at 50 yards. A 3" bull was placed at 50 yards and used as the aiming point. Remember, my rear sight is all the way down as low as it will go. Somewhat surprisingly, all rounds grouped into about 4". Not so surprisingly, the center of this group was 3-4" above the POA. I then moved the target to 100 yards and mounted a 12" bull just above the 3". I fired 3 rounds using the center of the large bull as an aiming point. Neither round hit the target. I then used the lower 3" bull as an aiming point. Interestingly, a neighboring shooter said something about me not being able to hit the target. Frankly, I took offense and said, "look, it shoots high, I'll try a couple at the lower bull," and cranked off 2 more at the lower bull. The impact of both rounds can be seen in the photo, 2" apart. The load used was my reload. That did it for my reloads and I fired a mixture of the other ammo using the lower bull as the POA. ALL rounds struck 11" above that and to the right of the target. Easy enough to adjust the Williams Foolproof laterally, but there was nowhere to go for elevation. Quick reference to the Brownell's technical page on sight adjustment gave the amount of adjustment needed at .065".

I wrote Steve Young about the problem and that I proposed to modify the sight to correct the problem. I immediately got a phone call from him! He mentioned that another customer had the same problem. He thinks that the same sights are used on all guns and that they are set up for the .38/357 Magnum guns. After a good discussion the following options seemed to be on the table.

1. Modify the Williams Foolproof to allow it to go deeper the .065" necessary.
2. Get a front sight .065" higher.
3. Split the difference between the front and rear sight.
4. Send it back and drill 2 MORE holes for the sight.
5. Send it back and bend the barrel.

I rejected options 5 and 4. I do not want to bend the barrel, drill and tap 2 additional holes OR send it back.

The front sight is already an unsupported ½" tall. I don't think I want a taller front sight and don't want the hassle of changing out the front sight. A post or sourdough would give me about .020" to .025" height because the bead is used by placing it over the target and the post bisects the target. How it is used counts for something. I rejected options 2 and 3.

So, I've set myself up to modify the rear sight and after a close examination and taking the sight all the way apart and putting it back together a couple of times, started to work. First I scribed the outline of the elevator and then chucked the mount in the vise (after removing from the rifle, of course). I then went to work on it with a file. It took a couple of different files and the Dremel tool to nick out a particularly troublesome corner but I notched out the top back of the mount to give me another .065" clearance. Seems to work, now I'll be back to the range (after I load some more ammo).

Back to the ammo. All except my handloads were very mild generating only about 3-5 FPE in recoil energy despite the light weight of the rifle. Velocities are probably little different from those of the same cartridges fired in a revolver. The light loads smoked the brass cases and sometimes made it appear that I'd had a case failure by virtue of all the smoke coming from the action!

The CCI Blazer was first up and while accurate and mild to shoot (all are very mild) it didn't extract well because the rim isn't correct for use with the extractor. I can see how it would work fine in a revolver, but it was mildly irritating in the rifle.

Next was the Winchester Cowboy load. Put up in an old west appearing box, it is very mild in performance giving the lowest velocities of any factory ammunition tried.

Then, I tried the Winchester Silvertip. I thought this would be a relatively "hot" ammo as it is clear that it was made for the self-defense use of the cartridge. Just look at that huge hollowpoint!. Not so. Did give cloverleafs at 50 yards.

Then, the rip snorters, my handloads. Not only is the AD and SD of this ammo lower than any factory ammo but it cut cloverleafs at 50 yards AND can go into less than 2" at 100 yards (see target). Once I get it zeroed and fine-tuned, I think this will be pretty good ammo for my uses. 1756 FPE is nothing to sneeze at and extraction and ejection were slick and positive.

Through it all, the rifle performed as expected. SLICK! All ammo fed without problems except that I short stroked it twice for some unknown reason. The bore must be slick as well, clean up was a breeze. Brass came out with little deformation indicating a seemingly well cut chamber. Recoil should have been stout with my handloads but it wasn't at all punishing. It seemed less so than my old Winchester and Marlin 1894s in .44 Magnum. Both guns weighed more so it must be a happy coincidence of the rifle's geometry and my body shape!

With the sight now right I expect that the next range session will produce a good zero.

I have to compliment Steve Young of Steve's Gunz who called me last night to discuss my concerns. Now I know that he's in Texas but this was still at the end of a long work day for him. He's a pleasant fellow to talk to and it is clear he enjoys his work. I think it is good customer service and Steve will get my business again.

What we discussed is the mounting of the Williams Foolproof on my carbine. Steve pointed out that the CAS shooters don't use the guns at targets beyond 50 yards and the wide range of adjustment isn't necessary. He also pointed out that these are 100 yard guns. I kinda disagree on that, I think that properly loaded they should be good to 150 yards. After that trajectory DOES get to be too iffy with MY ability to judge distance. He also mounts the sights at that height so that if one wants to switch to a Lyman sight (the model # escapes me) you won't have to drill and tap two more holes, only one.

One can also alter the Williams, install a different front sight (a sourdough might be good) and play with your loads a bit.

I'm hoping to be able to use bullets in the range of 250 to 325 gr. at about 1600-1800 fps. As I told him, we'll see. I haven't had the gun long enough to really wring it out!

Rossi/EMF .45 Colt Carbine Arrives

I've finally (after ONLY 8 weeks) received my EMF Hartford M92 Winchester clone from Steve Young (aka Nate Kiowa Jones) of Steve's Gunz.



My new EMF 92 in .45 Colt

I haven't been able to get to the range, yet, but did get to shoot a few rounds and make a few observations.



The receiver, lever and hammer are all in color case.

Steve has a great program where he will sell you an EMF gun at 10% over wholesale, he does his race ready work and ships it to you for one price. In addition, I had him mount a Williams Foolproof Receiver Sight, replace the plastic follower with one of steel, and install a barrel sight dovetail blank to replace the removed rear sight. My total was $638.90 and I think worth every penny.

When I got to the local FFL to pick up the gun, the folks there commented on how slick this gun was compared to the Legacy, Navy Arms and Rossi guns that they had sold. It is slick! You can operate the lever, under load, with only your little finger. Further, it works at speed or as slowly as you can work the lever. I've yet to see just how long a cartridge it will handle but it did handle all the ammo I had on hand.

Now the ammo is an experience. I suppose that the major markets around here are for CAS shooters and those who wish to spend little money as everyone seems to have only the "cowboy" loads by various makers and CCI Blazers in the aluminum cases. There is one exception, most dealers seem to have large quantities of Winchester Silvertips which use a 200 gr. bullet. It is a good thing that I bought some 250 gr. Hornady XTPs and a couple of hundred new cases. I'm certainly not going to be able to explore the full performance range of this rifle with locally available ammunition.

The gun itself is pretty nice. While the color case is nothing as brilliant and bright as a Doug Turnbull it does have the appearance of well-worn well-cared for color case hardened metal. I don't know if that is the intent but it does give the appearance of a very well cared for rifle with faded colors. I should note that this is on this particular gun. I've seen several of the Navy Arms guns with a more intense color. Those of you who do this know that there can be variations in production guns and I don't know what process is used for the color-case on the Rossi made guns.

The metal finish of the blued steel parts seems pretty even with no dips or waves or color variation. However, even I (I've got color deficient vision) could see that the magazine tube and the barrel have a different finish. I'm not certain if the barrel simply has a higher polish but the colors and appearance is different. I did need a good natural sunlight on it to see it though. It is the magazine tube that is the odd duck as the rest of the blued steel parts seem to match.

The wood to metal fit is generally very good with only 2 exceptions. Both are where the butt meets the receiver and both are on the left side of the gun. One is where the wood stands a bit proud of the receiver boss and the other is where a bit of a chip (possibly) was taken from the wood along the tang. All the rest is very good even the buttplate which seemed to be a bugaboo on other guns I've seen from this maker (Rossi).

The wood itself is some sort of hardwood that mimics walnut but clearly isn't. Fairly unimpressive stuff, only the left side of the butt has any figure at all. I'm sure that many of Winchester's guns with the gumwood stocks looked no better than this.

I had Steve install a Williams Foolproof Receiver Sight as I thought that best for my purpose. I did consider a good fully adjustable tang peep sight but passed on that even though I'm a fan of them and just installed one on my 1906 Winchester (see below). Why? Because I thought it would get in the way and MIGHT be a hazard in high recoil situations with maximum loads. The second reason was unfounded despite the light 5 to 5¼ lb weight of this rifle. However, it would have been in the way.

This rifle is petite, so much so that when you wrap your hand around the wrist of the rifle your hand covers the whole wrist. I think that this would make a tang sight a big problem on what is a hunting rifle. Sometimes I have to control the rifle by holding by the wrist and this would be difficult indeed with the tang sight in the way.

The Williams Foolproof is a great sight and I have one on many of my rifles. It is light, strong, easily & accurately adjusted, without unnecessary protrusions to catch brush. Steve did a great job on the installation but I, in my ignorance, failed to make a specific request. That is, the sight should be mounted so that with the vertical adjustment in the lowest position the horizontal just clears the top of the receiver. It appears that this translates to having the top of the mount even with the bottom of the bevel on the receiver OR 1/8" lower than was done. Now I see why Steve mounted the sight mount even with the top of the receiver, but it doesn't give the full range of adjustment that users might find necessary. For my next rifle (I'm thinking .32-20), this is what I will have done.

For those who may not know, this is how the rifle (carbine) started.




I think that Steve did a wonderful job and I really like the gun. I hope that I'll get to wring it out including running all the ammo over the chronograph before too long.

Well, the grinding of the new tang screw went off without a hitch. I really like these little guns. Lots of fun. Helps excite you when you had great times with grandpa and one of these fine rifles.

Winchester M62A (top) and Winchester 06

 

The photo makes clear the differences in size between the 06 and 62A. The 06 is very petite compared to the 62A which feels pretty solid even for a grown man. The shorter length of pull is clear. The shorter barrel makes a noticeable difference in weight. My kids used to think it was heavy and preferred the 06. Right now the 06 is zeroed for the Aguila Colibri .22 ammo. No, it doesn't stick in the barrel.

Winchester M1906 Marbles Sight Installation

As I noted last time I'm searching for projects, mostly catch-up jobs, to do while awaiting my EMF M92 from Steve Young (aka Nate Kiowa Jones) of Steve's Gunz. The first of those projects is the Winchester M06 (aka 1906) that was my maternal grandfather's. When I got it it had just come out of 20-30 years of storage in my grandparents' attic and had a coat of fine rust over most of the exterior. However, the internals and wood were in pretty good condition and it WAS my grandfather's gun so...

Sight Installation Closeup

Well I had it bead blasted and reblued. I messed with some modern open sights for a while and then a few days ago I re-installed the #21 front sight and ordered a Marble's tang peep from MidwayUSA. AT $125 (less a nickel) it isn't inexpensive but not all that bad either. I received it today and quicker than Teddy Kennedy after bourbon and ice I had the sight on the gun.


Although I wrote the people at Marble's prior to ordering the sight so that I could be sure it would fit AND that the screws would be properly threaded I wasn't all that certain. Their response to my inquiry Will this tang sight for the Winchester 1906 work with the factory drilled and tapped mounting hole? Is a new tang screw included properly threaded for the Winchester? was Q1 - Yes Q2 - Yes, you may have to change threads. Not at all reassuring. However, all threads and hole spacing matched perfectly. The only problem was that the replacement tang screw was a bit long. No problem that, a few minutes with a grinder and it will be just fine.

This is a wonderful sight in another way. It is easy to adjust (I hope not TOO easy!). Looking through the aperture, I was quickly able to roughly zero the new sight by aligning it with the sight picture of the old open sight. The adjustments were easy to make and there was no roughness in the threads. I then removed the new/old rear sight. I hadn't done that before I took this photo (too excited).

Well, I'm bound for the basement to do some grinding on a tang screw!

New Rifle Coming

I'm going to write a bit about my .45 Colt, EMF/Rossi M92 carbine finished in blue and color-casehardened receiver. I ordered this gun from Steve Young of Steve's Gunz. Steve is going to do his "race ready" work, install a Williams Foolproof, steel follower, and barrel sight slot blank. I considered having this made into a 16" trapper or trapper with button mag but decided that it would be infinitely wiser to shoot it as manufacturered (with Steve's refinements) and then decide if I wanted to shorten the barrel, magazine or both.

The EMF rifle as shown on their website.

I've already purchased the RCBS carbide die set for this cartridge. I also bought 100 cases and 1 box of 100 Hornady 250 gr. XTP HP bullets. I plan on loading this particular lot over a hefty charge of H110 but will also do some round ball loads over Bullseye and some cast GCs over Unique and Lil'Gun.

The thing that is getting to me is the wait. It has only been about 30 days now but I feel as if it has been a year! Pretty lame for an old, well, older man! In any case it is a bear to be waiting so I've tried to distract myself.

My first thought was to find a good single-action revolver in .45 Colt that could become my big bore revolver (so that I could rid myself of the 629). That search was a bust. I'm wanting a Bisley grip on the Vaquero and would have accepted the standard grip on a New Vaquero (aka Vaquerito). I then broadened my search to include the USFA or Colt revolvers. No joy. Now, after much searching and looking at the various revolvers I've come to the conclusion that I "need" a Freedom Arms M97 and am leaning towards the fixed sight version. Still, at $1694, this is no spur of the moment purchase. I'd want the .45 Colt. Anyway, at $1694, I'd better think about this some more so I need to find some other diversion!

I have this old Winchester 06, a pump-action rifle for the .22 Short, Long and Long Rifle, made in 1924 that belonged to my maternal grandfather. Many years ago my grandmother, a virulent anti-gun person as are her 3 sisters, made Grandfather put all his guns in the attic. Well, as will happen, the roof leaked and moisture got on and near the guns and there was some rust. When I got this one, it was in bad shape and I had it bead blasted (which removed the worst of it) and re-blued. I had replaced the sights. This included the front sight (which I thought was too short for the replacement rear sight) but I discovered that it was the same height as the replacement and switched back to the original No. 21 front sight. Now, something had to be done about the rear sight.

Well, I like aperture sights (you might have noticed) and so I checked with Marble's as to the fit and threading of the mounting screws and decided to order one of their windage adjustable tang sights for the 06. Not cheap but cheaper in real dollars than they would have been when the rifle was made. Now I'm waiting for delivery of the sight but when I get it this gun will be set up just like my other grandfather's Winchester M62A (made in 1947 IIRC).

I think I might have as much as 4 more weeks to wait so... I guess I need to find another project to keep me occupied.

I was recently was asked about mounting telescopic sights, aka scopes or scope sights. I read a lot of different articles, some more than once, and some maybe 2 or 3 years after first reading them. See a lot of posts on the internet.

I have always been a cheap so-and-so and would not even buy a scope for many years. Didn't like them, didn't need them, and didn't want to spend the money. Then my attitude began to undergo a change as I got older (who's sight doesn't get worse as they get older?) and when I began to feel a need for more precision. I had a couple of .22 rifles on which I mounted a scope sight for the purpose of squirrel hunting and made some really good shots. Then I go into Contenders and they are a natural for mounting scopes easily and maintaining their easy-to-carry characteristics. While I would never want to mount a scope sight on a levergun, most of my contender barrels have one.

Because I'm a cheap so-and-so, it seemed natural that I would mount the scopes myself. Of course, I'm too cheap to get a bore collimator or bore sighter (such as this Leupold Boresighter or this Simmons Boresighter. So, I've had to use a multitude of field expedients.

It is necessary and sometimes difficult is to ensure that the reticule is not canted in relation to the gun bore. I've used levels, plumb lines, the Reticule Leveler and all sorts of other devices and field expedients to correct problems. Sometimes you have to get really creative. However, you must start with the mount which must be of the correct relationship to the bore. Sometimes even the factory will get the D&T wrong (but not that often in my experience). When that happens, some people will quickly resort to shims.

I never use shims if I can help it. Mechanically, they are another very weak link in the physical chain connecting the scope to the mount and mount to rifle. IOW, the shim can actually render the scope to rifle relationship more tenuous than is necessary. MOST (not always) of the time shims are not needed to zero the firearm. MOST scopes have the range of adjustment needed, much more than needed IN MOST CASES. There are cases where the BASE or MOUNT must be shimmed to ensure it is square to the rifle but because of the way bases attach, there isn't nearly the chance for slipping that shimming in the rings might present. If gross off-sets are needed there are rings made with inserts such as the Burris Posi-lin that obviate even a perceived need to shim and also those that provide lateral (windage) adjustment such as the Millet Angle-Locs.

For shim material I particularly don't like the use of cartridge brass because it is tapered. You can't ensure that it isn't tapered because from the head of the case to the case mouth the brass will taper in thickness. Tapered shim material does 2 bad things. One, it makes it extremely difficult to judge the degree of change you'll get when you tighten the work down onto the shim. Two, not all of the shim material will be in contact with both work surfaces which reduces the friction which holds everything in place against recoil.One shim material that is usually consistent in thickness across the shim AND cheap is the side of a soda or beer can (I'm afraid to admit how many BEER can shims I've made! ).

For my scoped guns (which are now all Contenders) I use Weaver mounts and low Weaver rings. I square the reticule using the Reticule Leveler. Weaver rings can easily torque a scope out of square and so I tighten every other ring screw ¼ turn at a time until they are all fully tightened. I might bore sight but often find it a waste of time. I go to the range. I fire one shot on the target. I secure the gun with the crosshair directly on the one bullet hole. I then adjust the sights so that the crosshair is directly over the desired POI. I then fire a single confirmation shot. I've already tested the ammo used and have the supposed ballistic performance to hand. I then shoot to confirm at 25, 50, 100 and 150 yards. I then zero for maximum point blank range. I'm not one to be changing sights of any kind and for the light loads I make up for some rifles, I adjust the load to shoot to the sights albeit at shorter ranges, say 25 yards. This system works for me. If I pay attention to detail, the "chore" goes off without a hitch.

This is not to say that other methods don't result in zeroed guns but this seems so much easier to me. I know because I've tried the method of locking the gun into a vise making sure all is square and level and then using a plumb line on which one lines up the vertical crosshair of the reticule. Too, many steps many interconnecting parts. At each connection a bit more slop or error creeps in. It can be enough to drive anyone crazy.

629 at the Range

The weather was beautiful today, 63F at 1 PM, and I took the opportunity to go to the range. Took my M629-1 and 100 rounds of the 8 gr. Unique under the Hornady 240 gr. swaged SWCHP. It was immediately apparent that the gun had been zeroed with the heavier loads (I hardly ever take this one out). Also apparent (after ONLY 3 cylinders full) was another reason I did not like these grips. I got a very healthy blister! I guess these grips just rub me the wrong way. So I got a piece of slick paper and electricians tape from my shooting box and taped over the blister and kept shooting.

Shown below is the 12" target I used. The range was 25 yards. I shot from standing one-handed (strong hand) about 60-70% of the shots fired and the rest are fired with my arms supported by the bench. Please remember that I switched from fun off-hand to supported zero and back to off-hand.



Shown is today's target and the revolver responsible. Please note that the gun is capable of good accuracy.

There are about 15 shots off the bull, almost all to the upper left of the target (which managed to be hung upside down). I "drooped" a bit and that is what causes the low hits on target. Note the several tight clusters particularly the one on the right (I'd over corrected the rear sight). I believe the gun is capable of some decent accuracy, even if I'm no longer up to the task.

I have been using 8 gr. of Unique with the Hornady bullet (HP or FP) and 9 gr. with the BullX 240 gr. SWC (of which I still have some few, the company is out of business). I don't know but that I will load all at 9 gr. of Unique. I will no longer use the heavier loads in this gun. I never need them and they are never comfortable to shoot with any of the grips I've used.

Not to dwell on that subject again, but I think that my average size hands must be a bit "un-average" in proportions as none of these grips has ever felt comfortable. In any case, I will stick to the aforementioned 9 gr. Unique under a 240 gr. lead bullet OR 22.5 gr. of H110 under the Hornady 300 gr. XTP which I use in my rifle. This later load is safe in the Ruger Super Redhawk (a friend's gun) but is too long to be usable in my revolver. Fine by me. I have a quantity of loads using 2400 but I'm going to shoot those as position practice with my carbine (a Contender).

I think you can see as well as I that I am still capable but need practice. I can tell you right now that I'm nowhere near as good as I once was because I've let my physical conditioning slide. Even though I CAN run 3 miles, I'm sucking wind at the end and my speed isn't exactly on the fast side. My weight has gone up 10 lbs and I haven't been doing any weight training. My eyesight gets a bit iffy some days, too!

Reloading Area

Sometime back, I started to write about my loading set-up and some of the circumstances with which I've had to deal and my solutions to certain problems. I also had a couple of photos of my layout. However, I was distracted by something else and didn't capture all the data. I hope to do that here, now.

I've been through a lot of different set-ups as I moved around and gone from a Lee Loader to RCBS Rockchucker. I've accumulated die sets for 26 cartridges and a lot of brass, bullets and primers (when in doubt of what to get at a gunshop and feel a need to buy something, I get primers). I've also loaded a pile of ammo, more than I expected to do, for every firearm I shoot. Well, I think it is a pile, usually about 500 rounds per and there are few duplicates indeed. This requires a storage facility and system that must also resist moisture as it is in my basement (despite the constant use of 1-2 dehumidifiers). Systematic storage also makes for a safer environment and the ability to lay your hands on what you need when you need it.

The equipment my bench must house or must be used on its surface include my tool box, 2 MEC 600 Jr presses, 1 SAECO lubricator-sizer, an RCBS Rockchucker, scale, trickler, 26 sets of loading dies, and a Lyman trimmer. I also have a supply of primers, bullets, and powder. I also have molds and casting equipment and a number of miscellaneous tools. For me, the bench has always been a cobbled together assortment of hand-me-down furniture and lumber. Seems that things still have not changed that much.

As you look at the photos you can see that I have shelves on the left of the "bench" (really a low desk type "construction") and an old child's desk (mine from 1963 or 1964!). From left to right I have component and die storage, tool box and working bench and shotshell loading setup. In the second photo you can see how I store my ammo in GI 5.56mm or .50 Cal ammo cans on a shelf designed to take either 7 of the aforementioned cans or twice that number of the .30 Cal (7.62mm) MG ammo cans. Those shelves hold much but not all of my ammunition.


My Ammo Storage Shelves


My "Bench"


My Component Storage Shelves

I think that anyone can see from the photos that I'm not bragging. It more closely approximates a rat hole and isn't in any way luxurious, but my reloading set up works and produces good ammo.

Do I NEED a New Revolver?

The recent release of the Ruger New Vaquero initiated several topics on many forums. The gun personally interests me because it is usable by my, I feel, small hands. The release of this new gun thus instigated a new round of introspective analysis concerning the use of a large bore revolver.

Currently I own a Smith & Wesson M629 4" as my large bore revolver. Chambered for the .44 Magnum, I have to admit that I've only fired some 500 full .44 Magnum loads through it most of the rest of some 2000 rounds being a load of 8 gr. Unique under the Hornady .429" swaged 240 gr. SWCHP. This load produces about 8-900 fps from my revolver and works ok. I also load 9 gr. of Unique under the BullX (now defunct) 240 gr. SWC. For some reason, these two loads produce almost identical ballistics despite the difference of 1 gr. in the powder charge.

I bought the revolver in 1985 from an officer serving in my Brigade. He needed the money and I "needed" the revolver. It came with the Pachmayr Presentation grips and there were no factory grips, box or papers. It is a 629-1 and so I think it was produced before S&W released the computer engineered guns that were supposed to have increased durability under the strain of the .44 Magnum. That's one reason that I've not used .44 Magnum loads exclusively.

The other reason is that it hasn't been that comfortable a gun to shoot, at least double action. I've used it mostly by cocking for each shot. I've never felt that my trigger finger could reach the trigger. I tried different grips. I tried different grip styles. I just never felt comfortable. Even my scoped .44 Mag Contender 10" felt more comfortable than the 629! This kept me looking for a replacement, constantly looking.

Among the guns considered were the Ruger Redhawk, Super Redhawk, Blackhawk, Bisley, Vaquero and Bisley-Vaquero. I wasn't limiting myself to the .44 Magnum cartridge either. The .45 Colt is fully as capable and just as exciting. Even the .41 Magnum was in the running. However, each had their shortcomings. Barrels too long, gun too heavy, grip uncomfortable, etc. Even the Colt Anaconda was considered but dismissed as being unnecessarily expensive. Every time I walked into a gun shop I would peruse the pistol case. The worst part (perhaps the most telling thing) is that this has gone on for nearly 20 years!

Now that's pitiful. I can't make up my mind after 20 years! Well, then here comes the New Vaquero, whoo-hoooo and boy am I excited. BUT, it will require that I sell the 629... uh, oh... can't bring myself to do that! So, last night, I get the 629 out again, pull the Pachmayr Presentation grips and install Pachmayr's open back version of the Gripper. I figured this would get my trigger finger as close as possible to the trigger. Of course I had to dry fire with the Presentation grips installed. Guess what...

Come on, guess what happened next...

Yeah, that's right, I've got plenty of reach to the trigger. So, why does this moron now find that he can shoot the gun double action? Well, I think that I rejected these grips because they expose the backstrap and are very narrow. Thus, they are punishing to shoot with full power loads. I like shooting but I'm not particularly into pain.

Now, I think this will be my large bore revolver for the forseeable future and I'll just stick with the load of 8 or 9 gr. of unique under a 240-250 gr. SWC. I have a feeling this will do me just fine, for at least the next month or so...




My S&W M629 4" .44 Remington Magnum

I've hunted out the rest of the year with no luck. First it was so cold that I was crunching my way into a stand or unable to find a good location for the deer. Today, it was so warm I imagine the deer thought they had gone to Cabo San Lucas on vacation and were headed to the shade. Skunked this year.

I think that a full year of scouting (beginning with the good old shed search in February) will not only help work off some of this years holiday joy but also be a big help for next year! Meanwhile I'll get out and shoot the muzzleloaders (especially Bess now that she can go too!) and set up for bow practice. I should not have to do all the up and down the road during hunting seasons that I had to do this year. Sadly, my father-in-law has passed now.

I also need to see if I can find a good hunting partner. Getting a little old hunting alone.