Joe Berk

The 9mm Comparo: Cast Bullet Loads

Bottom line first: The SIG P226 Scorpion can get ‘er done! This is a phenomenal handgun, one of the best I’ve ever shot.

This is Part I of the promised 9mm comparo, and after thinking about it for a bit, I thought I would focus on the cast bullet loads in the first installment, and then move on to the jacketed bullet loads in the next one (that will come a little later). There are a lot of ways I could have organized the comparo; this one made the most sense to me. There’s a lot of information here and I didn’t want it to be overwhelming. It also involves a lot of shooting (about a half day’s worth with just the cast bullets), and I wanted to clean the pistols after shooting the cast bullet loads before moving on to the jacketed loads.

I used three 9mm handguns for this test: A former police-issue Model 659 Smith and Wesson, a Springfield Armory 1911 Target, and a SIG P226 Scorpion. Let’s start with a few words about each.

Keep us in clover…please click on the popup ads!

The 659 S&W is a gun that’s been featured on the ExNotes blog before. It’s a police department trade-in that was manufactured in the 1980s. My good buddy Tom gave me a great deal on it, I refinished the brushed stainless steel slide and frame, I fixed the decocker (it wasn’t dropping the hammer when the safety was actuated), and I’ve been shooting it a lot in the last few months. My gun has Pachmayr checkered rubber grips (which I like a lot). It is a heavy gun at 40 ounces, mostly because it has a steel frame (many 9mm handguns have a polymer or aluminum frame).

The 659 Smith and Wesson. It’s a solid service pistol, one that was used widely when police agencies in the US switched from revolvers to autos 40 years ago.

I like the 659. Like I said above, it’s heavy (but that means it’s steady) and it seems to shoot everything well. What do I not like about it? It needs to be kept clean behind the extractor, or it will sometimes fail to fully extract and eject a fired cartridge. That’s due to the nature of the extractor, which is a hinged arm. When grit or powder reside gets behind the aft portion of the extractor, it can’t pivot and it doesn’t pull the cartridge all the way out so that it can be ejected. I think the squared-off trigger guard is goofy. I never wrap my left hand around the front of the trigger guard and I prefer the look of a rounded trigger guard. Like most double-action/single-action semi-auto handguns, this 659 has the Joe Biden trigger (it’s kind of creepy). The front sight is unfinished stainless steel, so it is hard to see on the target (I paint the front sight on my 659 flat black so I can get a good sight picture). The Pachmayr grips add to the 659’s bulky grip design, but they also allow a secure hold.

That’s a lot of bitching, I suppose, especially when it’s directed at a handgun I enjoy shooting enormously. None of the above would keep me from buying a 659 (and none of the above kept me from buying this one). I like my 659. If you get an opportunity to buy one and the price is right for you, take it from a guy who knows: You won’t regret pulling the trigger (literally and figuratively) on a used Model 659. That’s if you can even find one. The police departments have all traded them in, Smith and Wesson stopped making these guns decades ago, and the supply is drying up.

The next one up is a Springfield Armory Target model 9mm 1911. As handguns go, it doesn’t get any better than the 1911 (or so I thought up until this test, but more on that later), and having a 1911 chambered in 9mm seems to me to be a good idea.

Springfield Armory changed the name on this gun. It used to be called the “Loaded” model (as in loaded with all the options, including target sights and hand fitting here in the US), but they later changed the name to the Target model. That’s good. “Loaded” makes it sound like the gun is a stoner (i.e., a doper, not the weapons designer).

I’ve had my 9mm 1911 for about 5 years (I bought it new from my good buddy Brian at Bullet Barn Guns). I knew it was accurate, but I had not really played with it that much to find out what loads it liked best.

The Springfield Armory 1911 Target Model, with adjustable sights, a 5-inch barrel, and all stainless steel construction.

There’s not too much to dislike about the Springfield Armory 1911. Springfield makes a quality gun. The fit and finish on mine are superb. One thing I’ve noticed is that it has a tight chamber, and ammo loaded on a progressive reloader is prone to sometimes jam if the cartridge isn’t perfect (unlike the 659, which feeds anything). That doesn’t bother me because I load everything on a single-stage RCBS Rockchucker these days. I don’t need the speed of a progressive reloader, and my ammo quality and accuracy are better when I load on a single-stage press. The trigger on my 1911 is superb, as is the case on nearly every 1911 I’ve ever shot. I think that as 1911s go, Springfield Armory is one of the best. I’ve owned and shot several of them. They are accurate and they hold up well. Fit and finish are top drawer, too, on every Springfield Armory 1911 I’ve ever seen. It’s just a beautiful 1911.

The third handgun for this test series is my recently-acquired SIG P226 Scorpion. This is the first SIG I’ve ever owned. I’d heard so many good things about SIG handguns (and in particular, their accuracy) that I thought I would take the plunge and buy one. I bought mine at Turner’s here in southern California.

So how do I like the SIG? In a word, it’s awesome. I like the look of the Cerakote finish and the SIG grips, and gun just feels right in my hand. The grips fit like a glove, and the grip texture works. It is one seriously good-looking and good-handling handgun.

SIG’s P226 Scorpion. It has a Cerakote finish and an aluminum frame. This is a good-looking handgun, I think.

The SIG is the only pistol used in this test that does not have adjustable sights. The SIG literature told me they offer sights of different heights, and the rear sight can be drifted left or right in its dovetail, but none of that was necessary on my gun. My SIG shoots exactly to its point of aim at 50 feet (take a look at that target at the top of this blog again).

Speaking of sights, the SIG has what is evidently a fairly expensive set of Tritium sights that glow in the dark (I think they are about a hundred bucks if you buy them separately). The glow is not like the lume of a watch dial; instead, they have something else going on that makes them light up at night. You can see that in this photo I took in the dark:

There’s the sights. Where’s the target? Normally, you’d get the front and rear sights aligned; that is not the case in this photo. The only point of this photo is that the SIG glows in the dark.

I think the Tritium sights are kind of a Gee-Whiz deal, and I don’t think I need them. I’m an old guy and I shoot targets when I can see what I’m shooting at. If I was a lot younger and I was running around in a white Ferrari with Miami Vice music playing while chasing bad guys at night, maybe Tritium sights would do it for me. But even under those conditions, it would still be dark and I wouldn’t be able to see my target. I think the Tritium sights are gimmicky, and the little lenses (or whatever they are) for the Tritium inserts are distracting. Plain black sights work best for me. Your mileage may vary.

So, on to the main attraction: The 9mm loads and how they performed in each of the three handguns. I loaded everything for this first 9mm test series with a bullet I’ve known and loved for 50 years, and that’s the 124-grain cast roundnose. My particular flavor these days are the pills from Missouri Bullets. At $33 for a box of 500, they are inexpensive and the quality is good. A roundnose configuration bullet feeds well in just about any gun. Yeah, I know there are other cast bullet configurations and other cast bullet weights. I’ve always had my best results with the 124-grain bullets, though, and that’s what I used for this test.

124-grain cast roundnose bullets from the Missouri Bullet Company. They are relatively inexpensive and they shoot well.

I tested with four different propellants: Bullseye, Unique, 231, and Power Pistol. For the 231 and Power Pistol loads, I loaded near the lower end of the recommended charge range for one test set, and I loaded another test set near the upper end of the recommended charge range. With Unique, they were all loaded with 5.0 grains, which is a max charge in most reloading manuals. I had a bunch of these already loaded, and I knew from a past life that this was an accurate load. I tried one load with Bullseye, too. I had a box of 50 loaded and I grabbed those as I headed to the range a few days ago. I used Remington small pistol primers for everything, and I used several different brands of brass, but I used the same kind of brass for each load. Cartridge overall length was 1.112 inches for all loads.

All loads were handheld at a distance of 50 feet. I shot two 5-shot groups with each load. I didn’t use a machine rest or a chronograph because I have neither. I shot from the bench, resting my arms (but not the gun) on the bench. Yes, a lot of the variability you see in the chart below is due to me. Hey, I’m what you get. My intent was to get an idea what worked best in each of these guns, and I think I succeeded.

That’s the background. Here are the results:

Clearly, the SIG is the most accurate of the three handguns. What I’d read and heard about SIG’s performance is true. Some of the SIG groups were amazing, putting 5-shots into under an inch at 50 feet. That’s about as good as I’ve ever done.

While the SIG was accurate with Winchester’s 231 propellant, the gun didn’t like it. On both of the 3.4 grain loads, the slide went forward after the last round (it didn’t lock open), and it did it again on one of the 3.9 grain magazines. While the 231 loads had enough poop to cycle the action, it wasn’t running the slide far enough back to lock open on the last round. This powder also did that on one of the Springfield Armory 1911 tests. Interestingly, the Smith and Wesson 659 worked okay with both the upper and lower 231 loads. These were light loads (I could see the slide moving back and forth with each shot, and it popped the brass out right next to the gun). My testing got me far enough along to decide Winchester 231 is not for me as a 9mm propellant.

The SIG really liked Power Pistol propellant, and from an accuracy perspective it performed similarly at both the low (5.0 grain) and high (5.5 grain) levels. There was perceptibly more recoil (but no pressure signs) with 5.5 grains of Power Pistol, so my load for the SIG with this bullet will be 5.0 grains. The SIG also did well with 5.0 grains of Unique. That’s a good thing, as I have a bunch of ammo loaded with this recipe. As I mentioned above, I found 5.0 grains of Unique did well in accuracy testing a long time ago, and it’s good to see this test supports those earlier findings. The 5.0 grains of Unique load also did very well in the Springfield 1911 (it was the Springfield’s most accurate load). With this load, the Springfield is as accurate as the SIG. But the SIG did well with all loads; the Springfield was pickier.

The 659 is a great gun, but from an accuracy perspective it can’t run with the big dogs. That’s okay; it’s still fun to shoot and I plan to continue shooting it a lot. And it only cost about a third what the others cost. Like I said earlier, if you get a chance to pick up a 659, don’t let it get away.

But that SIG. Wow!

So there you have it. Next up? I want to see how these same three pistols shoot jacketed bullets. Stay tuned.

One last comment…it’s time for the warnings and disclaimers. These are my loads in my guns. You should always consult a reloading manual published by one of the major sources (Hornady, Speer, Sierra, Lyman, Winchester, Alliant, you get the idea) and rely on the load data published there. Start low and work your way up, watching for any pressure signs along the way.

Help us keep the lights on: Please click on the popup ads!

See more Tales of the Gun here!

Don’t pay exorbitant range fees for targets. Buy online and get targets delivered to your door like we do!

Looking for great deals on reloading equipment? Here you go!

Don’t miss a single ExNotes blog post!

Want to read a similar jacketed bullet test series with the same three 9mm handguns? It’s right here!

CSC Offers New Electric Bicycle Line

CSC recently announced that it is bringing a new line of electric bicycles to America, and as they have done with their motorcycles, their dealerless path-to-market is allowing them to do so at prices well below any of their competitors. I’ve seen and ridden the CSC ebikes, and they are a lot of fun. Here’s the CSC press release that came out yesterday.

CSC Motorcycles, renowned for its exceptional customer service, brings its smart sourcing and innovative delivery model to electric bicycles with the new FT750-26 and FT750-20. Both fat-tire bikes are specced out with quality components and desirable features that deliver unmatched value in the e-bike marketplace. Delivered to your door for only $1,688.

“I became frustrated when I was shopping for an electric-assist bicycle, trying to sort through the cheap junk and the expensive stuff that costs more than our motorcycles,” explained Steve Seidner, CSC’s president. “After doing extensive research, I was able to source the exact componentry to build an e-bike that is the perfect balance of quality and value.”

The FT750 is built around a lightweight aluminum chassis rather than heavier steel frames, and it uses a battery pack that fits integrally into the frame’s downtube for an ultra-clean appearance compared to the tacked-on battery of lesser competitors. The battery uses high-quality Samsung lithium cells to deliver 653 watt-hours of energy, enough to help power the bike for 25 to 40+ miles, depending on the amount of pedal assistance provided by its rider.

The lockable battery pack sends its energy to an intelligent brushless controller and then to a first-rate Bafang motor mounted in the rear-wheel hub that delivers a healthy 750 watts of power. Pedal-assist rates can be adjusted to five levels, while a thumb-operated throttle can power the FT750 to 20 mph (max speed for Class 2 electric bikes) without even pedaling. Adding pedal power can boost maximum speed above 25 mph.

Like the Samsung battery, Bafang motor, and 6061 aluminum frame, the rest of the FT750’s components are also premium quality. Some bicycle brands use primitive cable-actuated brakes, while CSC chooses Shimano hydraulic brakes biting on huge 180mm stainless steel discs for superb control.

The esteemed Shimano brand is also found on the 7-speed Freewheel gear set and Tourney derailleur that provides adaptable gear ratios to tackle everything from steep hills to urban road speeds. The Shimano index shifter clearly displays which gear is selected. A dual-sided front sprocket guard ensures the chain remains on track even when ridden over rough terrain.

Rider comfort is aided by a front suspension with 3.94 inches (100mm) of bump-absorbing travel, able to be fine-tuned with 8 levels of damping adjustment plus a lockout setting, as well as spring-preload adjustability. Fat Kenda Juggernaut tires look brawny and provide additional bump absorption.

Lightweight aluminum is also used for key components such as the pedals and crank, wheel rims, and tapered handlebar. Instrumentation is via a 2.6 x 3.8-inch LCD display that monitors speed, pedal-assist rate, battery charge, trip information and even ambient temperature.

Thoughtful convenience and safety items are part of the FT750 package. LED headlights and taillights enhance rider conspicuity, as does a handlebar-mounted bell. A handy USB port is provided to power electronic devices, and a water bottle holder enables riders to stay hydrated. A protective cage is fitted over the derailleur to prevent drivetrain damage, and frame tabs are ready to mount rear fenders or racks.

In addition to the FT750-26, CSC offers a version with 20-inch wheels (FT750-20) that reduces the step-over and seat heights but retains all of the features of its bigger brother. CSC’s electric bicycle lineup will be growing in the coming months, and a range of convenience and comfort accessories will soon follow.

The FT750’s modest $1,688 price is due to CSC’s innovative business model of selling direct to consumers, and the price includes free shipping anywhere in the contiguous 48 U.S. states. CSC’s bikes include a 12-month warranty backed by a company dedicated to outstanding customer service.

The FT750s are available in Gloss White or Matte Black and are simply ordered via CSC-ebike.com.

Like I said above, I’ve ridden these bikes and they are pretty cool. You can set up the drive system so that the bike acts just like a regular bicycle with no power assist, or you can dial in a pedal assist system at up to five different levels. What that means is that when you pedal, you get an extra boost from the electric motor. I really like it.

RIP, Jim Lehrer

Jim Lehrer passed away yesterday. He had a good run, I guess. At 85, he got his money’s worth and he lived a full life. But I still mourn his passing. He came from a time when people served their country, and he was a real reporter…the kind that provided news, not propaganda. There aren’t too many of those around any more. Maybe none.

I heard Jim Lehrer speak at Harvard once. He was the commencement speaker and his message struck a nerve with me. There might have been 2000 people in the crowd. At a time when we were fully committed in both Afghanistan and Iraq, he asked the crowd how many people knew someone who was actually serving in the military. Maybe 100 hands went up. Then Mr. Lehrer asked another question: How many people had been personally affected by the war? Not a single hand went up. This was a rarified crowd. Knowing more than a few of the folks in this group, I knew many of them perceived themselves to be foreign policy, military strategy, and political experts (you know, like everyone on Facebook these days). But not a single one had any skin in the game. Mr. Lehrer had just demonstrated that (very politely, of course).

Lehrer went on to speak about his service as a second lieutenant in the US Marine Corps. This was a man with opinions I wanted to hear. He had served, and he had my respect. His recommendation? That we all do some kind of national public service in our early years. It need not be in the military. It could be the Peace Corps, or maybe teaching in the public school system. Or maybe public health. But it should be something, some form of national service. I could not agree more.

Lehrer said in the commencement address that he was a better man as a result of his Marine Corps service, and that some form of shared public service would make all of us better. Jim Lehrer, we are a better people as a result of your presence among us. Rest in peace, Sir.

A .22 Hornet Ruger No. 3!

I’ve written about the Hornet before (and I’ll give you a link to that past blog at the end of this one). The point of today’s writeup? It’s about accuracy and a few different loads for the Hornet in my single-shot No. 3 Ruger. I like the idea of a single-shot rifle and I love the .22 Hornet cartridge. The .22 Hornet was the world’s first centerfire .22 cartridge, and in its day, it was a real hot rod. Velocities range between 2400 and 2900 feet per second (sometimes a little more, depending on the load). Recoil and muzzle blast are nearly nonexistent compared to other centerfire cartridges, and it’s a fun cartridge to shoot.

A Ruger No. 3 in .22 Hornet. It has a period-correct inexpensive Bushnell 4X scope, which is good enough for me. My rifle is in near-new condition.

The idea for this blog started when I saw three boxes of Speer 33-grain hollow point bullets a couple a few weeks ago at my reloading supply depot. They were inexpensive (just $10 a box), so I bought all three. I hadn’t tried the light Speer bullets and I wanted to see how they compared to an old favorite, the 45-grain Sierra Hornet bullet. I also wanted to try a propellant that I had purchased previously (Lil Gun) and compare it to my favorite Hornet propellant (Winchester 296). And my good buddy Tom recently gave me a bunch of old .22 Hornet ammo that I shot up on a prior outing, so I had a good supply of Hornet brass. It all came together a week or two ago, and the result was a hundred rounds of reloaded .22 Hornet ammo in various load configurations.

The Sierra 45-grain jacketed soft point bullet on the left, and the Speer 33-grain jacketed hollow point bullet on the right.

The Ruger No. 3 was the low-alternative to the fancier Ruger No. 1 back in the day. The No. 1 had more figured walnut (in the 1970s, and maybe today, too), the No. 1 rifles with iron sights had fancier sights and a cool quarter rib, the No. 1 stock had a pistol grip and a rubber recoil pad, and the No. 1 had hand-cut checkering. The No. 3 was a simpler gun, with plain walnut, an aluminum (later plastic) buttplate, no checkering, and a less-fancy iron sight setup. In the 1970s, the No. 3 suggested retail price was $165, and you could buy them brand new all day long for $139. The No. 1 retail price was $265, and those could similarly be had for $239. Oh, how times have changed. New No. 1 Rugers sell for something like $1500 today, and Ruger stopped making the No. 3 altogether. It’s likely (in my opinion) that at some point in the not too distant future, Ruger will drop the No. 1, too. That’s okay; it will make mine more valuable. Not that I’m planning to sell anything. It just feels better knowing the value is going up.

Ruger manufactured the No .3 from 1973 to 1986. The very first one was chambered in .45 70 (a classic cartridge, to be sure), and then Ruger added two more classics: The .22 Hornet and the .30-40 Krag. Ruger built the rifle you see in this blog in 1978. Ruger No. 3 rifles can still be found on the used gun market, but these days they go for about the same price as a used No. 1, which is usually somewhere between $800 and $1000. Supply and demand, you know…they aren’t making any more No. 3 Rugers.

The Ruger No. 3 falling block action, with the lever open and the block in the retracted (or lowered) position.

The Ruger’s action is called a falling block because, well, it is. When you open the trigger guard/lever, the breechblock drops (it’s the silver thing you see in front of the trigger in the photo above), and that allows inserting a round in the chamber.

Ruger uses a distinctive font on its No. 1 and No. 3 rollmarks. This one is cool.

The .22 Hornet is a cute round. These are loaded with 45-grain Sierra jacketed softpoint bullets.

A sense of scale: .22 Hornet rounds next to a couple of .30 30 cartridges.

Another sense-of-scale photo. From left to right, that’s a .416 Rigby cartridge with a 350-grain cast Montana bullet, a .300 Weatherby Magnum with a 180-grain jacketed softpoint bullet, a .45 ACP with a 230-grain jacketed roundnose bullet, a .357 Magnum with a 158-grain plated bullet, a .22 Hornet with a 45-grain jacketed softpoint bullet, another .22 Hornet with a 33-grain jacketed hollowpoint bullet, and a .22 Long Rifle with a 40-grain plated bullet.

The Hornet is fun to shoot, but it’s one of those cartridges that is tricky to reload (a couple of others are .30 Carbine and 9mm; they are challenging to reload for other reasons). Hornet brass is very thin (so you can’t reload it too many times and it’s easy to deform it when seating the bullet). It’s hard to get the bullets started straight during the seating operation, and the whole reloading process just takes a lot more finesse than does reloading most other cartridges. Everything is tiny. That being said, though, I like reloading Hornet ammo, especially when good groups are the result.

So how did it go? Not bad, I think. Here are the results:

My testing wasn’t exhaustive, and I only shot at 50 yards on this outing. I tried a few new things with these tests. As mentioned above, the Lil Gun propellant and 33-grain Speer bullets were two of the variables, and both did well. I’d previously read that some shooters had better results using small pistol primers instead of small rifle primers, so tried that and it seems to be the case for me, too. The theory is that small rifle primers, combined with the Hornet’s small case capacity, may blow the bullet out of the case before the powder can get a good burn going. I don’t know if that’s the case or not, but the small pistol primers worked well for me.

The next steps for me will be to shoot these loads at 100 yards to see how the rifle does at that range. The scope on my rifle is an inexpensive Bushnell straight 4X and it’s quite a bit more clear at 100 yards (it’s just a little bit out of focus at 50 yards). We’ll see how that goes, and I’ll publish the results here. Stay tuned, my friends.

You can read more Tales of the Gun stories here!

Help us keep the lights on: Click on those popup ads!

A St. Francis Dam Followup

Susie and I were up in the Santa Clarita area last week and we thought we would attempt to find the St. Francis Dam site. A quick Google search brought us to a map, we took a right off I-5 at the 126, and we soon found ourselves on San Francisquito Canyon Road. Wow, after a bit of the burbs it grew rural real fast. I know great roads, and folks, this is one. San Francisquito Canyon Road is an awesome set of twisties, one I plan to return to soon on my motorcycle.

An amazing road, San Francisquito Canyon Road was, and there was a lot more of it. I’ll be back, and I’ll be back on two wheels.

We were only traveled a few miles when we came upon a large art deco building (an LA Department of Water and Power plant). We had arrived.

LA DWP’s Plant 2, an art deco hydroelectric generation facility on San Francisquito Road. The three huge pipes behind it carry water from the California aqueduct system.

The DWP building was magnificent, and when we parked, we found this plaque:

There you have it: The story, the plaque, and the location. We had arrived. Everything was behind a chain link fence, but it was still very cool. I’m going to guess the concrete behind the plaque is from the St. Francis dam. We were standing where the wall of water released by the dam had passed.

A timeline of events leading up to the St. Francis Dam disaster of 1928.

As the plaque said, we were a mile and a half from where the actual dam had stood, so we continued north on San Francisquito Canyon Road. The building (the one in the photo above) is a replacement…the original power plant was swept away when the dam collapsed. I would think so; when the dam collapsed it released a 10-story tall 12 1/2 billion gallons of water.

We didn’t see the actual dam; the Internet told us it was a 5-minute hike east of the road (you can’t drive to it), and according to what we read, there’s not much of the dam left. We drove north a little further and saw the dirt road leading to the site, but there was a gate and it was closed. Maybe next time.

I was very intrigued by San Francisquito Canyon Road, and I wanted to know where it went. I found this satellite photo map on Google:

The bottom arrow points to LA DWP Plant 2, the building you see in the photo at the top of this blog. The upper arrow points to our turnaround point. The site I found on the Internet said you can park there and hike to the actual dam site. The distance from one arrow to the other is about a mile and a half. The other roads shown in this photo are all dirt.

From the map, I could see that continuing north on San Francisquito Canyon Road would brings us to Elizabeth Lake Road, and from there it’s Lake Hughes Road south to get back to Interstate 5 near Castaic. The little bit we did on San Francisquito Canyon Road showed it to be a great road. I had ridden Elizabeth Lake Road on previous motorcycle rides (without realizing how close I was to the St. Francis Dam disaster site). On the map, Lake Hughes Road appears to be even twistier than San Francisquito Canyon Road, and it looks like it would be a great ride.

My planned motorcycle ride: East at CA 126 off I-5, northeast on San Francisquito road to Elizabeth Lake Road, and then south on Lake Hughes Road. It’s going to be a good one.

I’m going to return to this area on my motorcycle and do the ride you see above. It’s going to be great, and you’ll read about it right here.

Stay tuned!

The $3.4M Mustang…

Well, it’s over…the auction for the Mustang used in the Steve McQueen movie Bullitt, the very car used in what is unquestionably the greatest chase scene ever filmed. It set a new record for American muscle car sales. I saw both Mustangs used in Bullitt at a Warner Brothers event celebrating the life of Bud Ekins (that story is here), and they were undeniably cool.

The Bullitt Mustang. Yeah, it was cool. I shot this photo in 2007.

My good buddy and friend-since-grade-school Ralph predicted the Bullitt Mustang would go for over three million dollars, and he was right. Surprisingly, that’s not the highest price ever paid at auction for an American car. A Duesenberg sold for something around $22 million a while back. That’s a bit more than what Gresh and I make on the ExNotes blog. Quite a bit more, actually.

I saw Bullitt when it first played back in the day (it was released in 1968), and I’ve probably watched it a dozen times since. My good buddy Richie and I drove into New Brunswick to see it at the RKO State movie theatre and it was electrifying. The closest thing I’d ever seen to a chase scene that dramatic was the motorcycle chase in The Great Escape, and what do you know, Bud Ekins and Steve McQueen did the honors in that one, too.

A cherry ’70 Vette…

Good buddy Kirk was at our favorite Mexican restaurant a few days ago and he graciously consented to a photo or two of his 1970 Corvette. It’s an awesome car.

I love old Vettes, and I think the C3 body style is one of the best. I also like the C1, the C2, the C4, the C5, and well, you get the idea. I like Corvettes.

Kirk’s Vette is from one of the lowest production years ever for the Corvette. Chevy went to the C3 body style in 1968, and Kirk told me that the ’68 and ’69 model years had so many problems that the car hit a sales trough in 1970. Today, that translates into increased rarity for the ’70 model and increased demand. Kirk’s car has the 350-cubic-inch motor and a three-speed Turbo Hydramatic transmission. It’s incredibly cool and I love the look of a silver Corvette.

The Corvette you see above is 50 years old this year. At that age, it could have its own midlife crisis, which is kind of funny as buying a Corvette is usually the result of guys having a midlife crisis. I had a silver Corvette that I kept for 14 years (I sold it a couple of years ago). It was a great car and I sometimes think about getting another one. Folks would always ask me if it was my midlife crisis car, and I always told them I sure hoped so. I bought it when I was 53 years old and I would like going for another 53 years.

The 2020 MacManus 1911

Stainless steel barrel, Parkerized finish, fixed sights, checkered wood grips, arched mainspring housing…the Springfield Armory Mil Spec 1911 gets the nod for the 2020 Colin D. MacManus Award to be presented later this year to a graduating cadet in the Rutgers University Reserve Officers Training Corps. We reviewed the offerings from several 1911 manufacturers and I have personal experience with the .45 autos from many of them. The Springfield Armory Mil Spec 1911 is the clear winner from several perspectives, not the least of which are accuracy, reliability, and close adherence to the US Army 1911 configuration. I own a Springfield 1911, and three of my good buddies bought this exact model. One of them is my friend Greg, and I’ve seen his gun shoot one-hole, 5-shot groups at 50 feet. With any handgun, that’s as good as it gets.

The MacManus .45 shipped yesterday from the Springfield Armory factory, and it is on its way (through a New Jersey FFL, of course) to its new owner. We’ll write about that when it happens, so stay tuned!

Click here for the story on the Colin D. MacManus Award.

Click here for more cool stuff on the 1911 and other great handguns.

Subscribe to ExNotes and keep up with all the good stories!

Jay Leno

Susie and I saw Jay Leno this weekend at the Cerritos Center for the Performing Arts and he was great. The 90-minute show felt like it passed in a heartbeat, and I guess that’s the sign of greatness. I laughed so hard my sides hurt.

I’ve seen Jay Leno in person several times at motorcycle events over the last few years, and I was surprised when writing this blog at how many photos I had. He’s a regular at the Rock Store on Sunday mornings, and it was at the Rock Store where I first saw him in person. He had arrived on his Y2K Huey-helicopter-jet-engine motorcycle before I did, and I didn’t realize he was there until I heard the characteristic whine of the Huey engine when he fired up his bike to leave. It was pretty cool.

Jay Leno on his jet-powered Y2K motorcycle at the Rock Store.

Another shot of Jay Leno on his Y2K. I didn’t realize it when I grabbed this quick photo, but I caught my own image in Jay’s faceshield.

On another occasion, good buddy Marty and I were at a Hansen Dam Britbike bike get-together. Most of the folks had already left for the classic bike run through the mountains when I saw this very classic vintage Excelsior enter the parking lot. I was focused on the bike, as I could see it was unrestored but still in very good condition.

An unrestored but pristine Excelsior Four. It was an impressive motorcycle.

I was snapping photos while the rider was still on the machine, with no idea who he was. When the helmet came off, though, there was Jay Leno. For a few minutes, it was just him and me. “Hi,” I said. I can be very articulate sometimes.

“Hi back,” Jay responded, and then the standup started, from a world famous comedian sitting on a nearly-80-year-old motorcycle. “It’s a ’36 Excelsior. I got a call from a 92-year-old guy in Vegas getting a divorce and he needed to raise cash,” Jay said.

“Really?” Like I said, I have a way with words. Leno just smiled and shook his head. It’s not often people can fool me, but if it’s going to happen, I guess if it’s Jay Leno it’s okay.

Jay Leno. Up close and personal at Hansen Dam. That motorcycle was unrestored.

On another occasion, good buddy Marty and I rode to an event celebrating the life of Bud Ekins, the guy who brought Steve McQueen into the motorcycle world and went on to become one of Hollywood’s greatest stunt drivers. Jay Leno was one of the speakers at this event (it was at Warner Brothers Studios), and I was able to get another photo.

Jay Leno speaking at Warner Brothers Studios. The guy on the left is Harvey Weinstein.

Here’s one last photo, and it’s another one at the Rock Store. When Jay Leno arrives, he’s always by himself and he’s immediately mobbed by folks wanting autographs and photos. That’s lasts for 15 minutes or so, Jay is always gracious, and then the crowd leaves to let him just poke around, looking at the bikes and making small talk like everyone else. What always impressed me was that Jay Leno is completely unpretentious. He’s just one of the guys. My good buddy Dave Walker and I had ridden to the Rock Store on our Harleys when Jay happened by, and I asked him if I could get a photo with Dave. Jay was on it in a New York minute, I probably took 20 photos, and Mr. Leno kept up a running banter the entire time.

After Jay left the Rock Store that day, I’m sure he spent the next several days telling folks he met Dave Walker.

I’ve seen Jay Leno a few other times when I didn’t grab photos, and he’s always the same nice guy, and he’s always good for a laugh. He is exactly the guy we used to see every night on the Tonight show. At the Love Run one year, he was the emcee and he asked if anyone had seen his buddy. “He’s wearing a Harley T-shirt, he has gray hair and a beard, and he’s got a pot belly…”

Jay is still out there and he’s still doing standup. And he’s still funny. If you ever get a chance to see him, take it. The guy does a great show, and it’s not an act. He’s the real deal.

Book Review: Unleashing Engineering Creativity

Can you do that? Review a book that you wrote? Hey, Gresh and I write the blog. Why am I even asking?

The book is Unleashing Engineering Creativity, and it came about as the result of a course I teach on engineering creativity. The cover photo you see above popped up on my Facebook feed yesterday (there’s old Zuckerberg, thinking of me again). So I shared the picture, and somebody made a comment that they didn’t understand the photos.

Okay, here’s the deal. Paul Mauser is widely credited as the guy who invented the bolt action rifle, and as he told the story, the idea came to him when he observed a simple gate latch (like you see on the book cover above). That led to a long line of Mauser and other bolt action rifles (but Mauser was the first). The one in the photo above is a Modelo 1909 Argentino Mauser, arguably the best version ever of the famed Model 98 Mauser (I have one and it is phenomenally accurate). The gate latch? That came from Lowe’s. I bought it to shoot the above photo.

You might think that engineers sit around in white lab coats and think deep thoughts when they need to invent something. It actually doesn’t work that way. No engineer worth a damn sits around very much, and when we have to invent things on demand, we’re usually not very good at it. In most companies, engineers just spitball it. You know, what we euphemistically call brainstorming (it’s no accident that the initials are so appropriate; it’s not a very effective way to come up with new designs).

The bad news is that we (as human beings) are at our most creative when we’re about 5 years old, and we lose much of our natural creativity (over 90%, according to the experts) by the time we finish high school. More bad news is that our creativity continues to erode after that. Bad news indeed, but the good news is that there are a bunch of great techniques we can use to get our creativity back.

One such technique is called TRIZ. It’s an acronym for a bunch of Russian words I can’t pronounce, but basically it means we define the problem we are trying to solve and then we look into other areas in other fields to see how they solved the problem. Like Paul Mauser did when he invented the bolt action rifle. TRIZ is a little more complicated that, but you get the idea.

Unleashing Engineering Creativity has 17 different approaches for improving creativity. It’s an expensive book, but if you’re looking to make the next technological breakthrough, the book’s cost is trivial. Like I always tell people: Don’t wait for the movie. I suppose I could do a YouTube video on some of the concepts. Maybe later. That YooHoo review still needs doing.