Good buddy Paul recently sent to me a video about the powder charges used by US Navy battleships. The USS New Jersey was featured in the video, and it reminded of my visit to a sister ship, the USS Alabama. I wrote a Destinations piece for Motorcycle Classics magazine ten years ago, and I thought you might enjoy seeing it (along with photos that did not appear in the MC article).
The coastal plains along Alabama’s southern edge are flat and the line of sight extends to the horizon. Ride east on Interstate 10 out of Mobile and you can see her distinctive, bristling profile from a great distance. One can only imagine the fear she induced in our enemies as she emerged from the mist on the high seas.
She, of course, is the USS Alabama. She’s docked at Battleship Memorial Park, just east of Mobile on I-10 where Alabama’s coast meets the Gulf of Mexico. To call the USS Alabama impressive would be a massive understatement. This magnificent old warship is a study in superlatives and in contrasts. Taller than a 20-story building, longer than two football fields, and capable of firing projectiles weighing nearly as much as a Z-06 Corvette at targets more than 20 miles away, the USS Alabama projected America’s power on the open oceans and inland during World War II. The “Lucky A” (she lost not a single crewmember to enemy fire while earning nine Battle Stars) sailed just under a quarter of a million miles in combat conditions and saw action in both the Atlantic and the Pacific theatres. When she passed through the Panama Canal, the 680-foot, 44,500-ton Lucky A had just 11 inches of clearance on each side.
After World War II the USS Alabama was retired from active service. In 1962 the Navy announced plans to scrap this magnificent ship due to the high costs of keeping her in mothballs, but the good citizens of Alabama would have none of that. Alabama kids raised nearly $100,000 in nickels, dimes, and quarters, and corporate sponsors coughed up another $1,000,000 to bring the ship from Puget Sound to Mobile.
The USS Alabama is in amazing condition; indeed, it looks as if the ship could go to war today. Being aboard is like being in a movie (Steven Seagal used it for the 1992 movie, Under Siege). It is an amazing experience eliciting a strong combination of pride and patriotism.
The USS Alabama is a floating artillery base. With armor more than a foot thick above the water line it’s amazing she could float at all, but the old girl could top 32 mph and she had a range of 15,000 nautical miles. When she stopped at the pumps, the USS Alabama took on 7,000 tons of fuel (a cool 2 million gallons).
The guns are what impressed me most. The ship bristles with armament. The Alabama’s 16-inchers dominate everything. Approaching the ship highlights the big guns and when you get closer, they are stunning. Try to imagine nine 16-inch guns, three per turret, firing at our enemies (it must have terrifying). The ship boasts twenty 5-inch guns (two in each of the ship’s 10 smaller turrets). There are another 12 mounts with 48 40mm cannon. And just to make sure, the Alabama has another 52 20mm anti-aircraft cannon. If you’ve been keeping track, that’s 129 guns.
The USS Alabama is only part of the treasure included in Battlefield Memorial Park. The park includes the USS Drum (a World War II submarine), numerous armored vehicles, and an impressive aircraft collection spanning 70 years of military aviation (including a B-52 bomber, numerous fighters, the top-secret SR-71 reconnaissance aircraft, and assorted other planes). The USS Alabama could touch 32 mph on the high seas; the SR-71 cruised at 3,000 mph. The USS Alabama weighs a bit more than 720 million pounds; the SR-71 was built from lightweight titanium. As I stated earlier, the Park and its exhibits are a study in superlatives and contrasts.
Battleship Memorial Park is just east of Mobile on Interstate 10. You can’t miss it (the USS Alabama is visible for miles from either direction, even at night). Admission is only $15 and take my word for it, it’s the most bang for the buck you’ll ever get.
The Skinny
What: Battleship Memorial Park, 2703 Battleship Parkway, Mobile, AL 36602. An outstanding collection of land, air, and sea military vehicles, with the USS Alabama being the main attraction.
How to Get There: Interstate 10 from either the east or the west. From anywhere else, just head south until you hit Interstate 10 and point your front wheel toward Mobile.
Best Kept Secret: There have been seven US Navy ships named Alabama reaching back to before the Civil War. Today, a US Navy nuclear submarine sails under that same proud name.
Avoid: Missing Mobile. It’s a beautiful town, and its Gulf Coast location makes for great seafood and great hospitality.
I had a great day on the range last week with my friends and I did a lot of shooting, including trigger time with the .243 Ruger No. 1 and the .458 Win Mag No. 1 that I wrote about yesterday. I found another load that worked well with the .243 using the 55-grain Nosler bullet. It’s weird; the .243 No. 1 really likes the welterweight Nosler bullet. With all other bullets, it’s mediocre to terrible. But the .243 is a story for another blog. Today’s blog is an interesting follow up on the .458 Win Mag No. 1 story.
Garmin’s new chronograph.
One of the guys (good buddy Russ) had the new Garmin chronograph. They are $600 and way easier to use than the old ones. You just set it on the bench and turn it on. There are no external wires, no ballistic screens, and no other stuff. It can download to your iPhone if you want it to.
I asked Russ if he would chronograph my .458 Win Mag load and he did. As a bit of background, my .458 Win Mag reduced load consists of 28 grains of SR 4759 propellant and the Remington 405-grain jacketed softpoint bullet. I’ve used this load for decades. I found it in an old Speer manual.
Reloaded .458 Winchester Magnum ammunition. It’s a fun cartridge to reload.
With Russ’s Garmin chronograph on my bench, I fired three or four shots. My friends and I were amazed at their consistency. Those first few shots were all right about 1100 feet per second, with an extreme spread of maybe 20 feet per second.
Then I thought I’d get cute. With this particular load, there’s a lot of unused volume in the cartridge case. I tilted a round up to settle the powder near the primer, thinking this would reduce shot-to-shot variability even more. That shot, however, had a perceptibly lighter report and it only registered 600 feet per second on the Garmin chronograph. I checked the rifle after I fired that round to make sure the bullet had cleared the bore, and it had. One of the guys commented that the 600-foot-per-second round sounded different. I picked up on that, too. Convinced that the bore was clear, I fired a few more rounds. They were all right around 1100 feet per second again.
As I walked downrange to the 50-yard target, I could see on ragged whole in the black bullseye as I approached it. I was thinking that even though the velocity was down sharply on that one slow round, it still grouped with the rest of the shots at 50 yards. Then I looked at the target more closely.
Oops! The red arrow points to a low velocity impact.
I don’t know what happened on that one 600-foot-per-second round. It could be that the powder settled in a manner that let the primer shoot over it, so when it lit off, the propellant generated less pressure. I always check all the rounds when I reload them (before seating the bullets), and I remember that the powder levels all looked good. It could be that the primer hole was obstructed by a piece of corn cob media from the brass cleaning operation, although I’m pretty good about clearing those, too, after vibratory cleaning. The round wasn’t a hangfire (there was no pause between the trigger tripping and the discharge); it just sounded lighter.
We all thought this was interesting. To me, it was interesting enough that I decided I’m going to buy a Garmin chronograph. I’ve resisted doing so in the past for several reasons:
My primary interest in load development is accuracy. I have zero interest in maximizing velocity. I just want small groups on paper. If a load does that, I’m a happy camper. I literally don’t care what the velocity is.
I’ve never been a big believer in developing a load to minimize the extreme spread or to minimize the standard deviation (the standard deviation is a measure of parameter variability). I remember from my days at Aerojet Ordnance (we made 25mm and 30mm ammo for the Hughes chain gun and the A-10 aircraft) that there was not strong correlation between standard deviation and accuracy. There are several variables that go into accuracy; standard deviation (or extreme spread) is but one of them.
Prior to the Garmin, the other guys I’ve seen using chronographs on the range were always screwing around with them, mostly trying to get them to work or attending to the screens when the wind blew them over. One friend told me it sometimes took an hour and a half to get his chronograph set up. I didn’t like having to wait on those folks, and I didn’t want to be one of those guys holding up everyone else.
My experience with the .458 last week, though, made me rethink this issue. I’m going to purchase the Garmin , and in another month or two, the gun stories you see on these pages will include velocity (and velocity variation) information. There are a few ExNotes gun stories to be published (ones that are already in the queue) that do not include this info, but at some point beyond their publication, Garmin chronograph results will be part of the data presented. Stay tuned.
About 20 years ago I bought a .458 Ruger No. 1, but until recently, I had not shot it.
I first saw a .458 No. 1 when I was in the Army at Fort Bliss, Texas. Bob Starkey (who owned Starkey’s Guns in El Paso) had one, and that rifle was stunning. I had just bought a .45 70 No. 1 from Bob and I didn’t have the funds to buy the .458. But man, I sure wanted it.
Bob Starkey’s personal .458 Win Mag was a custom rifle built on a 1903 Springfield action. I asked Bob what firing it was like. “Well,” he said, “you’re glad when it’s over.” Call me a glutton for punishment, but I immediately knew two things:
I had to have a .458, and
Someday I would.
I’ve since owned several .458 Win Mags, including a Winchester Model 70 African (long gone), a Browning Safari Grade (it was a beautiful rifle based on a Mauser action; I’m sorry I let that one go), a Remington 798 (also based on a Mauser action), and my Ruger Model 77 Circassian. Every one of those .458 rifles was surprisingly accurate. If you reload and you’ve ever thought of buying a .458, trust me on this: Take the plunge. With cast or jacketed bullets and light loads, .458 Winchester Magnum rifles are very easy to shoot.
Back to the main attraction: My .458 No. 1. Technically, the Ruger .458 No. 1 is called a Ruger No. 1H. The H designates what Ruger calls their Tropical rifle; I’m guessing the Tropical’s heavier barrel means the H stands for heavy. The .458 No. 1 is big, it is heavy, and it just looks like it means business. You might say it’s the Norton Scrambler of elephant guns.
When I saw this No. 1 advertised on the Gunbroker.com auction site, it pushed all the buttons for me. It was a .458, it had beautiful walnut, it had the older red recoil pad (a desirable feature), it had the 200th year inscription, and it had the early Ruger No. 1 checkering pattern.
Every once in a while over the last two decades I’d haul the .458 out of the safe to admire it, but I had never fired it. I was thinking about that a couple of weeks ago, and I decided my failure to get the No. 1 on the range was a character flaw I needed to correct.
With my light .458 Win Mag reloads, the No. 1 grouped about 12 inches above the point of aim at 50 yards. When I examined the rifle more closely, I saw that the rear sight was abnormally tall compared to the rear sights on my other No. 1 Rugers, and it was already in its lowest setting. Evidently the previous owner discovered the same thing (i.e., the rifle shoots high), he took the rear sight all the way down, and then he sold it when it still shot too high. Lucky for me.
My first thought was that the forearm was exerting undue upward pressure on the barrel. I loosened the screw securing the forearm to address this and tried firing it again, but it made no difference. It wasn’t the forearm that was causing the rifle to shoot high.
I realized I needed either a lower rear sight or a taller front sight. The rear sight was already bottomed out, so I couldn’t go any lower with it. I think Ruger put the taller rear sight on the .458 to compensate for the recoil with factory ammo. I have some 500-grain factory ammo so I could fire a few rounds and find out, but I don’t want to beat myself up. The heavier and faster factory ammo bullets get out of the barrel faster than my lighter and slower loads. With factory ammo the muzzle doesn’t rise as much before the bullet exits the bore, so with factory ammo the rear sight has to be taller to raise the point of impact. At least that’s what I think is going on. The bottom line is the factory ammo shoots lower than my lighter, slower loads.
The factory .458 load is a 500-grain bullet with a muzzle velocity of 2000 feet per second. Those loads are designed to DRT an elephant (DRT stands for “Dead Right There”). My needs are different: I want a load that makes small groups in paper targets while drawing ooohs and ahs from everyone on the range (you know, because I am shooting small groups with a .458 Win Mag). Doing so with lighter loads on paper targets keeps both me and Dumbo happy.
If you are reading this and thinking I was obsessing about this situation, you would be correct. I don’t know why, but when a gun is misbehaving I tend to get tunnel vision. I continued to look at the rear sight and started thinking. I knew I needed it to be lower by about a tenth of an inch, so I thought perhaps instead of using a sight picture where the front bead was concentric with the U in the rear sight blade, I could rest the bottom of the front sight’s gold bead lower in the rear sight. I fired five shots with a normal sight picture and then another five with my “lower in the rear sight” concept, and son of a gun, the two groups were right on top of each other. Both were still about a foot above the point of aim (which was 6:00 on the bullseye). What they say about peep sights is true, I guess. Your eye will naturally center the front sight as you squeeze the trigger.
Out there on the range, I kept thinking about this as I stared at the rear sight. It was a nice day and I was the only guy out there. An idea hit me. The rear sight blade is removable (it’s held in place by two screws that loosen to move the blade up or down), and the rear sight leaf (to which the blade attaches) has a much wider and deeper U. Could I remove the blade altogether and use the wider and lower U of the rear sight frame as the rear sight notch?
I had my gunsmith’s tool kit with me and I took the two tiny screws out (the smallest screwdriver in the kit did the trick). I was sweating bullets (pardon the pun) about dropping either of those screws (I knew if I did I’d never find them), but the screwdriver blade is magnetized and it held onto them. With the sight blade removed, I fired five rounds, and voilà, I was in the black. I fired another five, and they went right on top of the first five. The group size, with open sights at 50 yards from a .458 Win Mag, wasn’t too bad. In fact, it was essentially identical to the group size with the rear sight blade in place.
I knew I needed to lower the rear sight, but by how much? The Ruger’s sight radius is 17 inches (the distance from the front sight to the rear sight), and the distance to the target (on which the group was about 12 inches high) was 50 yards. Remember when your junior high school teacher told you that algebra would come in handy someday and you didn’t believe him? Well, today was that day for me. Here’s how it shakes out:
(distance rear sight must be lowered)/(sight radius) =
(12 inches)/(5o yards)
Solving for the distance the rear sight must be lowered (let’s call it x), we have:
x = (12 inches)*(17 inches)/(50 yards*36 inches/yard) = 0.1133 inches
My first thought was to call the Williams Gun Sight company because I assumed Williams made the sights for Ruger. I’ve worked with Williams before and I knew they have excellent customer service. When I called them, I learned that they didn’t make the sights for my Ruger. The guy who took my call had a reference document and he told me that in the early No. 1 days, Marble made the sights. I called Marble, but I struck out there, too. The Marble’s sight base is different than the Ruger’s. While all this was going on, I examined the rear sight more closely and I saw a small Lyman stamp on it. So I contacted Lyman. Their guy told me they haven’t made sights for the Ruger No. 1 in decades.
At that point in my quest to find a lower rear sight, I was up to Strike 3 or maybe Strike 4, so I called Ruger directly. The pleasant young lady I spoke with at Ruger told me they could not sell me a lower replacement sight for my .458 No. 1; they can only sell what originally came on the rifle. So I told them I wanted a replacement rear sight for my .30 06 No. 1 (it has a much lower rear sight). I had to give them a serial number for my .30 06 (which I did), and they were happy to go with that. Ruger charged me $20 for the replacement.
After a week’s wait, I had my lower rear sight from Ruger. I drifted the old rear sight out with a brass punch and I installed the new one. The distance from the top of the old (tall) sight to the sight base is 0.505 inches. The distance from the top of the new (lower) sight to its base is 0.392 inches. Subtracting one from the other (i.e., 0.505 inches – 0.392 inches), I found the new rear sight was exactly 0.113 inches lower than the old rear sight. My calculation was that the rear sight needed to be lower 0.1133 inches lower. The fact that my calculation is almost exactly equal to how much lower the new rear sight is has to be coincidental. I just love it when things work out. Mathematically, that is. You might be wondering how the new rear sight worked out on the range. Quite well, thank you.
The first three shots through the .458 Winchester Magnum Ruger No. 1 with the new rear sight at 50 yards, without making any sight adjustments. I simply drifted the rear sight into the No. 1’s quarter rib and centered it by eye. All three shots would be scored in the X-ring.
You know, if I had mounted a scope all the above would have gone away. The scope would probably have enough adjustment range to compensate for the rifle shooting high. But a scope seems somehow out of place on an elephant gun, and I like shooting with open sights. I’ve read a lot of comments from older guys describing how they need a scope to cope with their aging eyes. I’m certainly an older guy with the inevitable attendant vision degradation, but I’ve gone the opposite way. I find shooting with open sights makes me feel younger, and getting tight groups with open sights is its own reward. I first learned to shoot a rifle using open sights, and doing so again makes me feel like a kid.
Next up will be trying a few shots at 100 yards. Stay tuned.
Sue and I visited the Nixon Library in Yorba Linda (one of our favorite So Cal destinations) to hear Fox News’ Jesse Watters speak a couple of days ago. I’ll post a blog about that in a few days. On the way home, we stopped at a motorcycle dealership in Brea, California. Normally, I avoid motorcycle dealerships for a lot of reasons (as outlined in 5000 Miles At 8000 RPM), but I used to have my 1200 Daytona serviced at So Cal Motorcycles and I thought I’d stop in for a visit. So Cal Motorcycles is a multi-brand dealership selling Ducati, Triumph, Royal Enfield, and Suzuki. I stopped with the intention of looking at the Enfields, but I also spent some time in the Triumph showroom. This blog focuses on the Enfields; I’ll post another one on the Triumphs in the near future.
As you probably know, I ride a Royal Enfield 650cc Interceptor. Joe Gresh and I tested two Enfields in Baja a few years ago. You can see those bikes at the Paralelo 28 military post in the photo above (we were about 500 miles south of the border when I took that shot). Our conclusion was that the 650cc Interceptor was a marvelous machine (I liked it so much I bought one), but the 500cc Bullet needed muey attention before it would meet our low bar for approval. That was a few years ago, though, and that’s why we visited So Cal Motorcycles.
As soon as we parked, I noticed several Enfields parked outside. I had not seen their new singles up close and personal yet. The model line has become a bit confusing for me. It used to just the Bullet (their single), then they added the Interceptor (the 650cc twin), and my 15-kilobyte mind could handle that. Now they have several different versions of the 650 twin and a whole bunch of singles in 350cc, 411cc, and maybe other displacements. I won’t try to explain the entire model line here, mostly because I don’t feel like expending calories trying to wrap my mind around it all. I just wanted to see the bikes and take a few photos. I did that, and I have to tell you: Royal Enfields are still great looking motorcycles. Check out the 350cc Meteor singles below:
The Meteor 350 is the bike you see at the top of this blog and the two you see immediately above. The price on Enfields has always been attractive; on the Meteor it is even more so. So Cal Enfield had a 2023 leftover Meteor and the price on it was especially attractive.
Next up were the Himalayan models, Enfield’s ADV bikes.
The Himalayan has a 411cc single cylinder engine. The colors are attractive. I didn’t see any with luggage, but I know panniers and top case are available. I saw a guy riding one of these one time when I was returning from northern California on Interstate 5. I was cruising along at 77mph; I think the Himalayan was running about 70mph. Enfield’s spec sheets puts the horsepower at 25. I guess that’s enough. My RX3 had 24.8 horsepower, and it took me all over the western US, Mexico, Colombia, and China.
As an aside, a bunch of folks (including Royal Enfield) are offering trips through India (and the Himalayan Mountains) on Royal Enfield motorcycles. I’m tempted. I’ve always wanted to visit that part of the world, and the thought of doing it on a motorcycle is appealing. The photo ops would be amazing, and I’d get another book out of it, I think. Ah, maybe someday. Maybe I should write a letter to Enfield and ask them to sponsor me.
Enfield’s Classic line looked good, too. At just under $800, the freight and setup fees are ridiculous and larcenous (they were lower than what I’ve seen other dealers charging, though). Motorcycle dealers’ posted freight and setup charges are often nothing more than a suggested negotiating starting point, but it’s still annoying to see this kind of imaginative exaggeration. I wrote about this common dealer misrepresentation in 5000 Miles At 8000 RPM.
So Cal Enfield had what apparently is a 650 twin anniversary model. It was a used bike with an asking price of $15,999. Hope springs eternal, I suppose.
Like most motorcycle companies, Royal Enfield has a clothing line. I saw a sweatshirt I thought I might want until I looked at the price. It was $88. I put it back on the rack. I don’t think I would ever pay $88 for a sweatshirt.
I enjoyed viewing the Enfield line at So Cal Motorcycles. My negative comments about freight and setup (and $88 sweatshirts) notwithstanding, I believe So Cal Motorcycles is a reputable dealer. When I rode Triumphs, I sometimes had So Cal service my bikes, and they always did a good job. Unlike my experience at other dealers, I never had to bring my bikes back because they botched the job. If I was in the market for another Enfield, this would be the place I would go.
Interestingly, Sue and I were the only people in So Cal’s Enfield room. The Ducati room was similarly empty (other than lots of outrageously expensive red motorcycles). Maybe we just hit a lull when we were there. The Triumph showroom, on the other hand, was hopping. I’ll talk more about that in a near-term future blog. Stay tuned.
I’ll bet you thought you were looking at a Gold Wing when you opened this blog.
Wow, the world is full of surprises. On my first foray into the Chinese motorcycle industry (a trip to Zongshen’s giant manufacturing campus in Chongqing), I was blown away by the size and sophistication of that company. Since then, I’ve been to China many times (including a visit to the Canton Fair, China’s significant motorcycle industry trade show). I thought I’d seen it all, and then I found this email from good buddy Fan in my inbox:
Hi Joe:
How are you, friend?
I’d like to share a news to you, of course it’s still about motorcycles/
A motorcycle exhibition was held in Beijing from May 17th to 20th.
Most of the products were still unremarkable to me, but one motorcycle sparked interest. This is a cruiser developed by Great Wall Motors, a Chinese automobile company. Its appearance may remind you of the Honda Gold Wing. At first, I thought this was another simple imitation of another motorcycle, but when I understood its structure and parameters, I found that it was not that simple. This cruiser is named SOUO and is equipped with a 2000cc engine with 8 cylinders, while the Honda Gold Wing is 1600cc with 6 cylinders only.
The price of this motorcycle has not yet been announced, but it is said that it will start accepting reservations in August. I guess the retail price should be 250,000 yuan, about 35,000 US dollars.
For your reference.
Best regards!
Fan
Whoa! 2000cc! Eight cylinders! An 8-speed dual clutch transmission! Talk about overkill!
I wonder what it weighs.
I tried to find what SOUO translates to in English, but it doesn’t translate to anything. What I found online is that SOUO is an acronym (you know, an abbreviation that forms a word). SOUO means “Search Own, Unlimited Outlook.”
This is a huge step in the Chinese motorcycle world. How Great Wall Motors markets the bike will be interesting to watch. I would think one of their principal markets has to be the United States (where else could it be?), but I have to wonder how many they think they are going to sell. Assuming the motorcycle could meet U.S. Department of Transportation and EPA emissions requirements (it most likely would, as the bikes I assisted in guiding through U.S. certification requirements all did), and assuming someone steps up to pay the roughly $50K associated with going through the certification process, how many people are willing to drop $35K on a new Chinese motorcycle? That’s more than what a new Gold Wing, a new BMW, or a new Harley costs. It’s a steep sales hill and it will require a significant marketing effort. I think the issues are the small size of the target market, the target market’s willingness to go with a new and unproven Chinese product (instead of a Gold Wing, a BMW, or a Harley), the price, and questions about Chinese motorcycle reliability and parts availability.
No one has asked for my advice on this, but that’s never slowed me down before. Here’s what I’d do:
Lower the price dramatically to bring new folks to the table. The RX3’s initial price was a scant $2895 and none of the other manufacturers could touch that price. CSC didn’t make money on those bikes, but we more than made up for that with future sales, accessory sales, and building a loyal customer base.
Do something similar to what we did at CSC to convince people the RX3 was a superbly reliable motorcycle. CSC sponsored a series of adventure tours to demonstrate the RX3’s reliability. Zongshen sponsored the 5000-mile Western America Adventure ride, and CSC sponsored a series of Baja rides. These events served us well. With the SOUO motorcycle, I’d think they might consider working a deal with the Southern California Motorcycle Club and the Iron Butt Association and run several of their bikes in their events, to include a Four Corners Ride (a ride that hits all four geographic corners of the U.S.), the Three Flags Ride (a rally from Mexico through the U.S. to Canada), and an Iron Butt ride (a run that covers 11,000 miles in 11 days). On top of that, I’d offer a 10-year warranty, kind of like Hyundai did with its cars.
Bring in a huge spare parts inventory and brag about it. Folks will naturally worry about spares. Bring in enough to build complete bikes and let everyone know it. It’s what CSC did and it blew away any concerns about parts availability.
Build a U.S. manufacturing facility. Boy, this could get complicated fast. But Great Wall Motors needs to address the U.S. disdain for Chinese products and the ongoing U.S./China trade war. Doing so is above my pay grade, but I would think making this bike in America would get around a lot of issues.
Go balls out on a product placement campaign. The U.S. motorcycle market for big touring machines is primarily old guys, and we are dying off. One way to attract new blood is to get the bike featured in movies and streaming TV shows. You know, like BMW and Triumph have done in the Bond and Mission Impossible franchises. (“Balls out” is not an obscene anatomical reference to moving at great speed; the phrase actually comes from the old mechanical centrifugal governors used on steam and internal combustion engines.)
This motorcycle is an interesting development. I don’t think we’ll see SOUO motorcycles here in the U.S. any time soon, but I’d sure like to. In the meantime, here are a few more photos.
If I had a dime for every article and Internet post comparing the 9mm to the .45 ACP cartridge (and the guns that shoot them) I could probably pay cash for a new Ferrari. That said, I make no apologies for this being another one. In this case (and for this article), one of the variables I have sort of eliminated is the gun. Both are Springfield Target model 1911 autos in stainless steel. They’re the two pistols you see in the photo above.
Here’s a macro photo of the 9mm cartridge (designed in 1901; also known as the 9×19 and the 9mm Luger) and the .45 ACP cartridge (designed in 1904). Both of the rounds shown below are my reloads, which I prefer over factory ammo for many reasons. We’ve written a lot about reloading both cartridges, and you can find those articles here.
I like these kinds of photos. The photo shows the 9mm cartridge (arguably the most popular handgun cartridge in the world) and the .45 ACP.
For this comparison, I used the Springfield Armory magazines that came with of the two 1911s. Here’s what the ammo looks like in the magazines.
Loaded .45 ACP and 9mm magazines. The .45 mag holds 7 rounds; the 9mm mag holds 9 rounds. I’ve read that the average number of shots fired in an armed confrontation (not counting military actions) is less than two.
The Springfield target guns have nice features, including click adjustable rear sights, dovetailed and pinned front sights, ambidextrous safeties, target triggers, skeletonized hammers, and more. I didn’t like the two-piece guide rods that came with both guns (you need a tool to unscrew the two-piece guide rods for takedown). Another two-piece guide rod issue is that they constantly unscrew. I immediately replaced those in both guns with one-piece guide rods.
A few of the features included on these Springfield 1911 target models are skeletonized hammers (a useless feature, in my opinion), a click adjustable rear sight (a very useful feature), an extended grip safety (another useless feature), and an ambidextrous thumb safety (yet another useless feature). I prefer wraparound Pachmayr-style rubber grips, but the Springfield Armory exotic wood checkered grips look cool.The Springfield Target model front sights are dovetailed and pinned to the slide. The one on my 9mm still came loose when the retaining pin backed out. The .45 front sight has stayed put. You can see the one-piece guide rod below the barrel; it’s a feature I added to both 1911s.
What has been a disappointment on the .45 Springfield was that the stainless steel was not properly passivated (it came this way from the factory). The gun exhibited minor corrosion in a few spots after a while, which is unacceptable for a stainless steel firearm. It’s the only stainless steel gun I’ve ever owned that did this. The corrosion comes right off with a bronze bristle brush and the steel beneath it then looks pristine, but you shouldn’t have to do this with a stainless steel firearm, much less one purchased new.
My 9mm 1911 had a problem with its front sight. The pin securing it in place backed out under recoil. I contacted Springfield about that and they sent an oversized pin. It similarly backed out. I applied Loctite to the pin and very lightly peened the edges at the top of its hole in the front sight, and that seems to have fixed the problem.
Neither of the above issues should have been present. I’ve purchased three new Springfield Armory firearms over the years and every one of them has had an issue. My Springfield M1A rifle had two issues: The magazines were extremely tight going into the receiver, and the ejected .308 cartridge cases were striking and damaging the stock. I sent the rifle back to Springfield. Springfield fixed the magazine fit issue (that fix worked) and they attempted to address the cartridges impacting the stock (that fix did not work). The cartridge cases still hit the stock after being ejected (even after Springfield did a ham-fisted job removing wood in the impact area), so I put electrician’s tape on the stock where the spent cases impact before I take it to the range. The rifle is quite accurate, but damn, you shouldn’t have to deal with issues like this on a new gun. I believe these things speak to a generally sad state of affairs in Springfield’s quality assurance and process control. But I’m going off track a bit. Let’s get back to the topic of this article, and that’s the two 1911 Springfields.
Corrosion on the Springfield Armory .45 ACP 1911. I believe the stainless steel was improperly passivated. I removed the tarnish/oxidation with a bronze brush and it has stayed off.My .45 reloads. I’ve been shooting this same recipe for more than 50 years. It works, so why mess with it? .45 ACP brass can be reloaded many, many times (and this brass has been).
In my most recent outing with both 1911s, the .45 was significantly more accurate. I believe that to generally be the case when comparing the .45 ACP and 9mm Luger cartridges, and this range day was no exception. The 9mm load I used was a 124-grain Xtreme plated roundnose bullet over 5.5 grains of Accurate No. 5 propellant. The .45 ACP load was a 230-grain Missouri cast roundnose bullet over 5.6 grains of Unique propellant (an accuracy load that always works for me). I shot the targets shown below on the 50-foot West End Gun Club handgun range using a two-hand hold supported by a rest beneath my hands.
The 9mm 1911 grouped just over 2 inches, which is typical for this load. This same handgun has done much better with other loads, which is outlined in earlier blogs on 9mm cast bullet loads and 9mm jacketed bullets loads.
The 9mm grouped okay, but not great. I’ve shot other loads in this handgun that were much more accurate, but I didn’t have any of those loads in the ammo locker the day I went to the range. If you would like to know about this, you can read about my 9mm ammo development efforts with the 9mm 1911 (and other handguns) using cast bullets and jacketed bullets.
Groups with the Springfield Armory .45 ACP 1911. Point of aim was at 6:00 on each target. Shooter fatigue is what opened up the last group.
The .45 1911 grouped very well. It’s a funny thing: The 9mm 1911 has way less recoil than the .45 and the trigger on my 9mm 1911 has been tuned to perfection by good buddy TJ (you can read about that here), but I shoot better with a .45 (and I always have). The .45 1911 barks like a Rottweiler and it kicks like a mule, but the thing is just flat accurate.
So there you have it: Another take on the rehashed ad infinitum 9mm versus .45 ACP argument. If you have an opinion, please weigh in with a comment or two below.
If you would like to read a bit more about how to shoot a handgun well, that story is here.
No, I’m not talking about the SIG Alerts we get here in California when there’s a traffic jam on our freeways. This is about a sale at SARCO, a preferred military surplus outlet, on SIG police department trade-ins. When police departments upgrade to different weapons, they sometimes sell their older handguns. That’s what’s happening here. What makes this sale special, in my opinion, is that the trade-in guns are 9mm SIG P226 sidearms. You follow the blog, and you know that I consider the SIG P226 to be the world’s finest handgun. With a SARCO price on the P226 at just over $700, I think it’s a great deal.
My SIG P226. I consider it to be the world’s finest handgun.
I’ve never seen SIG P226 police trade-in guns for sale. It’s a hell of an opportunity to pick up a great handgun at a bargain price. I once owned a Smith and Wesson Model 659 police trade-in and it confirmed what I thought about police sidearms. They are carried a lot and shot very little. That means there might be some cosmetic shortfalls (holster wear, etc.), but the guns’ internals are probably in superb shape.
A Smith and Wesson Model 659 police trade in that was a lot of fun. Like most police sidearms, it was carried a lot and shot little.
I’ve purchased military surplus equipment through SARCO before (in my case it was a replacement gas cylinder for my M1 Garand, which fixed my rifle’s cycling issue). SARCO is a reputable outfit.
SARCO’s SIG P320 police trade-in pistols.
SARCO is also selling SIG P320 police trade-ins. I don’t have any experience with that model, so I can’t tell you anything about it (other than that it’s SIG, so it’s probably good). The SARCO price on the SIG P320 police trade-in is only $425; that’s a superb deal.
What might be fun is to pick up either handgun from SARCO and send it to good buddy TJ (at TJ’s Custom Gunworks) for a full cosmetics and action job. That would be fun. If you have ever entertained any thoughts about picking up a SIG or a custom pistol, this might worth looking into.
Good buddy Bob Orabona, a fellow rider and shooter, sent in this story about his encounter with one of the Doobie Brothers. I think you’ll enjoy it.
By Bob Orabona
My best Doobie Brothers story ever goes like this. It was around December of 1979. Here in Los Angeles we had a motorcycle toy run that was huge. About 10,000 to 13,000 motorcycles would go from Griffith Park to Pasadena. What a roar!!
Well, that year the organizers decided that in addition to the toy run they would put on a “Veterans Christmas Run” that would be a much smaller affair but the same general idea. You show up at a location on your bike with gifts for the Vets who are in the West LA Veterans Hospital and do a run.
My riding bud at that time was Russ Bromley and we made plans to attend. The morning of I showed up at his pad and he and his girl Sue and I rode off to the Harley dealer in Marina Del Rey. That was the starting point.
After a while we got the ride up and about 300 bikes left the dealership headed to the West LA Vets Hospital. When we got there they had a stage set up in the parking lot and a collection point for all the gifts. The run was very well supported by sponsors and Harley Davidson was there with their traveling museum and several other groups with various types of displays. Hugh Heffner sent over about 8 “Bunnies” to help colllect and distribute the gifts. A band was playing and it was a great scene with a really positive vibe.
After the band stopped playing there was an emcee telling us how much stuff was collected, etc., etc., and then he introduced an official from Harley. The Harley guy told the crowd that Harley wanted to do something really special at this run, so they were going to introduce their newest model for the first time anywhere. It was called the “Sturgis” and it was notable for being the first belt drive Harley.
At the appropriate moment, and after sufficent build up, about 10 of the new bikes came riding into the lot and were put on display. The crowd surged forward and oooed and aahhed over them. I didn’t go with them because I don’t like crowds and I was probably very hung over which was my natural state of being on Sunday mornings in those days (that’s a whole other story best left for another time).
I waited for the crowd to disperse and finally went over and was examining the bikes. I latched on to a factory rep who was the only one still hanging with the bikes and started to ask him a bunch of questions. How long does the belt last? How do you change it? What if it breaks on the road?
Well, this guy was right with it and knew just about all the answers to all my questions. I had noticed while looking at the bike he was sitting on that above the tank emblem someone had painted on “The Doobie Bros.” When I ran out of tech questions I just happened to casually ask him “Hey, how come it says “The Doobie Bros” on your tank?”
Thats when the “factory rep” looked at me and said “Uh, I’m Patrick Simmons and I play guitar for them.” Duh!!!!!! I thought he looked kinda familiar.
Wow, talk about exclusivity: It just doesn’t get any better than this. That rocking chair you see in the photo above? It’s from the Sam Maloof shop and the lead time is about 6 years. Order it today, and 72 months from now, you would be able to rock out in it. I’ll tell you more a little further down in this blog, but first, we have to start with the Sam Maloof story.
Dubbed “The Hemingway of Hardwood” by People magazine, Sam Maloof (1916-2009) was an artist in the world of furniture making. Jimmy Carter and Ronald Reagan sat on rocking chairs crafted by Maloof, and his work is on display in the Smithsonian, New York’s Metropolitan Museum of Art, the Los Angeles County Museum of Art, and the Philadelphia Museum of Art (to name but a few). His home and workshop are now a museum, too, and the best news is that it is a very short motorcycle ride from my home. Although I’ve been in California for close to 50 years, I only recently visited the Sam and Alfreda Maloof Foundation for Arts and Crafts. It was impressive. Don’t do what I did and wait 50 years to go see it. Go now. It’s a 5 1/2 acre slice of heaven, and if you enjoy viewing true artistry in wood, you’ll love it. I sure did.
Our tour of the Sam and Alfreda Maloof Foundation included the Maloof home, the gallery, several landscaped acres sprinkled with contemporary outdoor art, and a peek into the shop (which still produces museum quality wood furniture). It’s easy to get to. From the 10 or 210 freeways in southern California, exit either Vineyard (off the 10) or Carnelian (off the 210) and go north (Vineyard becomes Carnelian as you head north). Just follow the road until you can’t go any further and look right. You’ll have arrived.
We toured the original Maloof home and the craftsmanship built into the place is impressive. I was able to grab several photos, and my Nikon and it’s 16-35mm wide angle zoom did what it is supposed to do.
A woodworker’s paradise. Artistly in wood is everywhere in the Maloof home. Check out the spiral staircase.The Maloof home contains tables and chairs exhibiting a blend of artistry and functionality. Maloof used an oil finish on his furniture. I’ve used the same on rifle stocks. It brings out the wood’s natural beauty and can be easily repaired if scratched.A Maloof rocking chair. Maloof preferred to work in walnut.A bedroom in the Maloof home. If you order a Maloof chair or other furniture, there’s a six year lead time. The only exceptions are baby rockers, which you see in the center of this photo. If you need a baby rocker, your kid won’t fit six years later, so the shop stops all other projects and focuses on completing your baby rocker.A Maloof table and chairs. Notice that the side chairs are joined together. We saw one that sat three at a dinner table. That doesn’t seem practical to me, but hey, no one is waiting six years for anything I make.One of many beautiful rooms in the Maloof home.
The Maloof estate consists of several building and gardens mentioned above. The Maloof shop continues to build custom furniture in the Sam Maloof style.
A glimpse into the wood shop.
We next visited the gallery, which is where I saw the rocking chair that is at the top of this blog. I like to think I appreciate fancy wood, and that chair had my attention. I asked a docent if it was English walnut, but I was way off. It’s a wood called Ziricote, and it comes from Belize. I’d never seen anything like it. As mentioned earlier, Sam Maloof preferred to work in walnut, and I understand that. Highly figured walnut is, well, art before anything is done to it. But that Ziricote. Wow!
This is a chair that belongs in a well stocked custom gun room. It would fit in well.
As it turns out, when I asked about the wood I was speaking with a very pleasant woman name Joanne, and that rocking chair was hers. Joanne’s husband Mike worked with Sam Maloof and he is continuing the tradition, along with his son. Mike made that chair for Joanne as a birthday gift. That, my friends, is one fine gift.
The figure almost looks fake, but it’s real.Lumber that is exceptional from any angle.I can’t remember what I bought Sue for her 60th birthday.
After seeing the home and the gallery, Sue and I walked through the gardens. The grounds were impressive and the outside art was, too.
A real flower in the Maloof gardens.
An egg as tall as me. It would be a hoot to have an Easter egg hunt in the Maloof gardens.This piece is presented as an alternative take on Mr. Rushmore.Made of natural materials, this piece looks like a skeleton from the movie, “Alien.”Everywhere you go in California these days, someone has their hand out.Sue grabbed a photo of me as I was photographing the Maloof grounds artwork.
The next morning, I found myself thinking about that Ziricote rocking chair. Man, I would love to have one of those. So I called the shop and asked about it. Yep, there’s that 6-year lead time issue I mentioned above, but that wasn’t the obstacle for me. To duplicate the Ziricote rocker, it would take a cool $28,000. I could cheap out and get one in finely figured walnut; that would drop the price to $22,500. It’s tempting, and as you know, I am a sucker for fine walnut. Maybe if you guys clicked on more of those popup ads…
Here’s another fascinating custom revolver that showed up in our Uberti Facebook page. It’s from good buddy Steve, who sent additional photos and is allowing us to use the story here on ExNotes. Here’s what Steve shared with me:
I have an original Paterson in its original configuration of .36 caliber (I mean an original Uberti Paterson, of course). I searched for years for a way to buy a conversion cylinder for it. I stumbled across this and could not pass it up.
A little history on this one…the way it was converted was the gunsmith milled down a Harrington and Richardson .22 barrel and sleeved it into the Paterson barrel. Then he used standard .22 Magnum sleeves in the cylinder The loading ramp was milled such that it pins the base of the round in, so there was no need for a loading gate.
The barrel and frame are actually the original blue steel. The gunsmith dip stripped the parts then meticulously polished them to a bright shine. I just keep it well oiled.
Steve, your .22 Magnum Paterson is a great looking gun. Thanks for allowing us to share it here. For our ExNotes readers, the Paterson was the original Colt revolver patented by Samuel Colt in 1836. The revolvers are called Patersons because they were manufactured in Paterson, New Jersey. Colt built these and then went bankrupt and shut the gun business down. He unsuccessfully pursued other business interests and then was contacted by Captain Samuel Walker of the Texas Rangers, who had used Colt Patersons against the Comanches to great effect. Captain Walker told Samuel Colt about that and how he thought the revolver was a very effective weapon, and the two Sams (Colt and Walker) designed the 1847 Colt Walker, which we’ve written about before.
If you’re wondering why Steve’s Uberti Colt Paterson replica appears to have no trigger, it’s because the trigger retracts into the frame. It extends when the revolver is cocked. That design was eliminated on the Colt Walkers, which had what we now view as a normal trigger and trigger guard. The Paterson did not have the loading lever common to later Colt blackpowder revolvers, which greatly slows the Paterson loading process.
Uberti no longer lists the Paterson in its menu of reproductions (I’ve already checked, as posting this blog whet my appetite for a Paterson reproduction). Pietta (another reproduction revolver Italian manufacturer) does, but they show the Paterson as out of stock. These replicas sell for big bucks when they come on the market (typically for something in the $750 to $1000 range), but that’s trivial to what an original Colt Paterson would bring. Those have fetched a million bucks.
Another bit of trivia…you may think you’ve never seen Paterson, New Jersey, but if you watched The Sopranos (an HBO crime drama TV series currently available on MAX and set in New Jersey), you’ve probably seen Paterson a few times and not known it. There are at least a couple of Sopranos scenes at the falls in Paterson (one in which Mikey Palmici throws a guy off a bridge, and another where Hesh threatens to do the same). Ah, New Jersey…I’ve never been to Paterson, but the next time I’m back in the Garden State I’m going to hit some of the spots featured on The Sopranos. When I do, I’ll post it here on ExNotes.
