The 147-grain 9mm Speer bullet next to a 124-grain cast roundnose bullet. Cool, huh?
Well, ol’ Gresh sure stirred up a hornet’s nest with that flat track blog yesterday. We nearly ran out of bandwidth!
On to a more metric subject: 9mm ammo.
I started the PRK 10-day cooling off period (you know, the People’s Republik of Kalifornia) for my new SIG P226 a couple of days ago. Let me tell you, if anybody thinks they are going to outlaw guns in California, they need to think again. I had to wait an hour and a half at our local Turner’s Sporting Goods store just to start the process. There were five guys working the gun counter and customers were lined up five deep. There were a ton of folks buying and picking up guns. Trying to outlaw guns in America is a nonstarter, even here in looney leftwing California.
This man had some of the best comments ever. “They know so much that just isn’t so” ranks high on my list.
Okay, enough of the rant about my friends who know so much that just isn’t so, to borrow a phrase from one of the greats, and on to the subject of this blog: Getting ready for the 9mm accuracy load development program I spoke about a few days ago. Like I said earlier, my standard 9mm accuracy load for years has been 5.0 grains of Unique behind a 125-grain cast bullet, but as part of my New Year’s resolutions I am moving in two directions simultaneously: I’m expanding my horizons in the 9mm world and I’m reducing my waistline. The waistline story can wait for another day; today’s topic is the loads I’m crafting for inclusion in the 9mm Comparo.
I’m going to evaluate three or four different 9mm handguns and several different loads, and I’ve started reloading the ammo for that. The first four loads I’ve already crafted are with two different bullets I haven’t tried before: The 147-grain Speer truncated metal jacket bullet, and the 115-grain Armscor FMJ bullet. The 147-grain Speer bullets are really cool looking. If they shoot half as good as they look I’ll be driving tacks with my new SIG!
A box of Speer 147-grain TMJ bullets. These are long bullets compared to what I normally shoot. They do look good.One of the 147-grain Speers ready for seating in a charged 9mm case.Another angle. Some of you folks get it. Stuff like this is beautiful. I mean, look at it: Polished brass, Unique propellant, and full metal jacket, heavy-for-caliber bullets. Life is good, folks. These loads are at 3.9 grains and 4.4 grains.
Seating the bullets is always cool, too. It’s where it all comes together.
On the way up, Rockchucker style……and on the way down. A new cartridge is born!
The finished rounds look great. Now the question is: Are they accurate? We’ll see. This is the first time I’ve tried a bullet this heavy in a 9mm.
You can’t think about the time you spend reloading ammo compared to the cost of factory 9mm ammo. It would be too depressing. We do it for the sheer enjoyment of making something. We’re recyclers. Maybe that’s why RCBS reloading gear is green. Al Gore and Ms. Thunberg have nothing on us!
I seated the Speer bullets to the recommended depth for an overall cartridge length of 1.120 inches. I’m trying a couple of different propellant charges. I can experiment with seating depth to find the best accuracy later if this combo shows promise.
I know. It’s an obsession. But it’s fun.
But wait: There’s more! I also picked up another bullet I had not tried yet, the Armscor 115 FMJ (full metal jacket) roundnose bullets. They are cool, too, and they were only $10 for a bag of 100 pills.
Armscor is the same company that makes Rock Island Armory guns, like my Compact 1911.
I’ve shot brass-jacketed FMJ bullets before, but that was in my .45 when I bought bulk Remington ammo just to get the brass cases (you know, so I could shoot them up and reload them later). These are good looking bullets, too.
Brass jacketed Armscor 9mm bullets. We’ll see how these do. I like the look..
The charges listed in my loading manuals for a 115-grain jacketed bullet with Unique propellant seemed to hover around a max of 5.5 grains with a minimum of 4.8 grains, so I prepped two loads, one at 5.4 grains and one at 5.0 grains.
5.4 grains of Unique in primed 9mm cases. You can’t load too much more; this charge nearly takes up the entire case volume. With the bullets seated, this will become what we call a compressed load. Unique is what is known as a flake powder…the individual grains are tiny flakes of propellant.
Here’s a cool shot of the finished Armscor load. I like the way these look. It’s like being the Lone Ranger, but with gold instead of silver bullets. Hi Yo SIG, away! (Cue in the William Tell Overture.)
Ready for accuracy testing. This, too, is nice looking ammunition.
If you are not a reloader yet, you might want to think about getting into it. To me, reloading is as much fun as shooting. And if you want to learn how to do it, take a look at our series on reloading .45 ACP ammo on the Tales of the Gun page!
The Gatling Gun, a book that tells the story of the original Gatling guns, their transition to modern gun systems, and several of the weapons platforms currently using Gatlings. It has been one of my most successful books ever. The Gatling Gun was picked up as the Book of the Month by the Military Book Club shortly after its publication and that made for a very healthy sales spike (and that was okay by me). It seems that every job I had after finishing college had something to do with Gatlings. I was on the Vulcan gun system in the Army. I was on the F-16 design team, an aircraft that flew with a 20mm Gatling. I worked on the Phalanx Close-In Weapon System at General Dynamics here in California. I was the Director of Engineering in the company that manufactured 30mm A-10 ammo. There’s more, but you get the idea.
Writing The Gatling Gun was a hell of a lot of fun, including visits to the Connecticut State Library (where the original Gatling and Colt archives, and many of the early Gatling guns, are stored). I handled original documents prepared by Samuel Colt and Dr. Gatling (and in the process, I became a licensed State of Connecticut historian). It was a hoot.
Of all the modern Gatling-equipped weapons of war, the most powerful is the A-10 Warthog, an aircraft armed with the mighty 30mm GAU-8/A Avenger cannon. Working for Aerojet, the company that manufactured the A-10’s 30mm ammunition, was one of the best jobs I ever had.
Today’s blog includes The Gatling Gun chapter on the A-10. I think you’ll enjoy it.
Chapter 11: The A-10 Thunderbolt Story
As the column of Soviet armored vehicles rolled across the open Eastern European plain, the lumbering sound of diesel engines and clanking treads drowned out all else. Russian infantrymen struggled to keep up, shouting to (but not hearing) each other. Suddenly, a roar different than that emanating from the tanks engulfed everything. It sounded like a powerful internal combustion engine (perhaps that of a race car) running at full throttle. The infantrymen started dropping as the tanks slowed to a stop. From the rear of the column, and working toward the front at an incredible rate, the ground erupted all around in 10-meter-wide explosions. Three of the tanks burst into flames, one blowing its turret off the hull. Black smoke was everywhere. An A-10 passed overhead, its 30mm Avenger gun continuing to roar, throwing out high-velocity depleted uranium penetrators and a 20-foot-long muzzle flash. The aircraft swung low as it passed the column. One of the infantrymen not killed in the first pass realized that the devilish craft was circling for another pass, and in addition to feeling raw terror, he suddenly felt very ill.
Of all the Gatling-gun-equipped aircraft flying today, one of the most intriguing is the A-10 Thunderbolt II. Nicknamed the Warthog by the crews who fly it, the A-10 is the first airplane designed from the ground up around a Gatling gun. It carries the most powerful Gatling gun ever built.
The Close Air Support Problem
The need for the Thunderbolt II and its very specialized mission was recognized during the conflicts in Korea and Vietnam. In these conflicts, U.S. aircraft were the best in the world for air-to-air combat. In the Korean War, these superb fighters included the F-86 Sabre, F-84 Thunderjet, F-80 Shooting Star, and F9F Panther. The F-4 Phantom, the F-111, the F-8, the A-7, and several others saw action in the Vietnam War. Vietnam-era tactical aircraft included such features as supersonic speeds, terrain-following radar, computer-assisted weapon delivery systems, and even such things as exotic as wings with adjustable sweep angles. One problem with these aircraft, however, was that they were designed primarily for air-to-air combat. This made them less than ideal for close-air-support missions (which support ground troops by engaging enemy ground targets). Having been designed for air-to-air combat, they had to be fast and maneuverable, and capable of flying at high altitudes. This placed constraints on the amount and kinds of ordnance that could be carried. Their high speed also meant the airplanes had a high stall speed, which detracted from accurately delivering ground fire.
In the close-air-support role, where the pilot would be required to engage ground targets in close proximity to friendly troops, inaccurate delivery systems were unacceptable. Most of the aircraft that flew in Vietnam were designed with late 1950s and early 1960s technology. During that era, vulnerability to small-arms ground fire was not recognized as a key design parameter. Unfortunately, this is precisely the environment in which close-air support aircraft must operate. In the Vietnam War, more U.S. aircraft were downed by small-arms fire than by any other means. There is even a confirmed case of an F-4 Phantom being shot down by a single rifle bullet.
The A-10 Warthog firing its 30mm Avenger cannon. This aircraft was actually designed around its powerful Gatling cannon. Each 30mm round has more muzzle energy than a World War II 75mm Howitzer!
The most significant drawback of existing close-air-support aircraft (i.e., those used in the close-air-support role prior to the advent of the A-10) was that they were ineffective against tanks. With enemy armor being one of the main threats to NATO forces in the European theater, military planners recognized that an aircraft with new capabilities was required.
The A-X Requirements
The close-air-support deficiencies the United States had observed during the Korean and Vietnam conflicts defined the need for the A-X aircraft in the mid-1960s (A-X stands for “Attack Experimental”). The air force initially envisioned a turbo-prop aircraft. The idea was that a current-technology version of the World War II Thunderbolt would best satisfy the requirements (note that World War II vintage Thunderbolts were used in a close-air-support role in Vietnam). The A-X specification was based primarily on deficiencies in existing aircraft. One of the requirements was an extremely accurate ordnance delivery system, because friendly ground troops could be within yards of the enemy. A high payload was also needed. As explained earlier, most existing tactical aircraft had been designed to maximize either maneuverability, speed, altitude, or some combination of these parameters. Payload had necessarily suffered.
The A-X aircraft also had to be able to remain in the air near the target for long periods of time, which is referred to as “loiter capability.” Existing tactical aircraft had been designed to operate at high altitudes. When flying at the low altitudes associated with close-air-support missions, they consumed excessive amounts of fuel. This translated to short loiter capabilities, which detracted from the effectiveness of close-air-support missions.
The air force also stipulated that the new A-X aircraft needed to have good “survivability” characteristics, meaning it should be relatively invulnerable to small-arms fire from the ground. To ensure that the aircraft met this requirement, the air force specified armor protection, redundant flight-control systems, and fire-suppression equipment.
The Armor Threat
The main requirement for the A-X aircraft, however, was that it be able to contribute significantly to the NATO defense of Eastern Europe, and that meant it had to be able to defeat tanks. (The Soviet Union and its Warsaw Pact allies had tens of thousands of tanks deployed along the East-European frontier. In any European combat scenario, the United States and the nations of Western Europe would have had to be able to defeat these tanks.)
To meet this threat, the United States developed (and continues to develop) many antitank weapons. These include shoulder-fired antitank weapons, large-caliber recoilless rifles, aircraft-delivered missiles and bombs, smart munitions, and several other systems. No U.S. aircraft, however, carried a gun system capable of defeating Soviet tanks.
The Flyoff Competition
In 1967 the U.S. Air Force solicited proposals from twenty-one companies to build a prototype A-X aircraft. After evaluating all of the proposals, it selected Northrop and Fairchild Republic as contenders to enter the final phase of the competition. As part of a new procurement policy, it funded both companies to develop aircraft meeting the A-X specifications. After Northrop and Fairchild finished building the prototypes, the air force conducted extensive tests prior to making a decision. During the competition, Northrop teamed with Ford Aerospace and Communications Company. Ford built the gun used in the Northrop aircraft, which was designated the A-9. Unfortunately for both Northrop and Ford, the Ford gun experienced many problems during the test program, including blowing up on at least one occasion. The antitank gun was the primary weapon for the A-X aircraft, and because the Ford gun (which was also based on the Gatling principle) performed poorly, the outlook for the Northrop A-9 was bleak.
A tank struck by GAU-8/A ammunition from the A-10 Thunderbolt. The GAU-8/A ammunition includes a mix of high explosive and depleted uranium projectiles.
Fairchild Republic teamed with the General Electric Armament Division to build the A-10. The A-10 carried a new 30mm version of the Gatling gun named the “Avenger,” which was based on the older 20mm Vulcan but was much more powerful. When General Electric became involved with the A-X program, it had nearly twenty years of development and production history with Gatling guns of various configurations. This experience was apparent during the test program, and the 30mm Avenger performed superbly. The A-10 rapidly demonstrated that it was a superior aircraft. The prototype flyoff competition ended in late 1972, and the A-10 was selected for a planned production run of 600 aircraft.
The A-10 Thunderbolt II
The A-10 Thunderbolt II is unlike any aircraft in the U.S. inventory. It is quite unconventional in appearance when compared to other tactical jet aircraft, and for good reason. One notably different aspect of the A-10 is its unswept wings. The stubby wings are straight to allow flying at the very low speeds required for the close-air-support role. Another striking difference is the location of the engines, which are mounted high above the rear fuselage. There are two reasons for this. One is better protection from enemy small-arms fire. Another is that the rear fuselage masks the engines’ heat signature, providing better protection from heat-seeking missiles.
The GAU-8/A 30mm Gatling gun. The size and power of the Avenger cannon are obvious in this photograph.
The A-10 has many other unique features that are not as readily apparent. One is a high degree of component and subassembly interchangeability. To the maximum extent possible, left and right components of the aircraft are identical, which considerably reduces the number of spare parts needed to support it. The interchangeable components include the engines, landing gear, rudders, and many parts of the wings and tail. The landing gear design is also unique in that when it is retracted, the main and nose wheels protrude slightly beyond the outline of the fuselage. This permits the A-10 to make emergency gear-up landings without damage. The A-10 is designed to survive small-arms fire. Control cables and hydraulic lines are routed so that one projectile could not inflict enough damage to make the aircraft unflyable. Another survivability feature is the cockpit design. The lower portion is surrounded by lightweight titanium armor to protect the pilot. The A-10 payload is quite impressive. In addition to 30mm ammunition, the A-10 can carry missiles, bombs, cluster bombs, and other munitions, for a total of up to 18,500 pounds of ordnance. This is approximately equal to the weight of the aircraft and is about double the payload of other aircraft used in the close-air-support role. Yet the A-10’s most intriguing feature is undoubtedly its 30mm Avenger Gatling gun.
The World’s Most Powerful Gatling Gun
The heart of the A-10 is its 30mm gun. The military designation for this gun is the GAU-8/A (the GAU is pronounced “gow,” and is an acronym for Gun, Automatic, Utility), and the A-10 was literally designed around it.
The GAU-8/A is a seven-barreled 30mm Gatling gun that weighs approximately 3,900 pounds fully loaded (or about 20 percent of the total aircraft weight). The gun is hydraulically driven and is fed through a double helix drum and ammunition feed system similar to that of the 20mm Vulcan (more on the feed and storage system later).
One way to appreciate the power of this gun system is to consider it in relation to the A-10. The gun is mounted to place the firing barrel on the exact centerline of the aircraft, and for good reason. When firing at the maximum rate of 4,200 RPM (it can also fire at a reduced rate of 2,100 RPM), the GAU-8/A generates about 19,000 pounds of recoil. To put this in perspective, consider the power of the A-10’s two fan turbine engines. Each of these generates about 9,000 pounds of thrust. When both engines are at full throttle, they generate a combined thrust of 18,000 pounds, which is less than the recoil of the GAU-8/A. In other words, when firing at maximum rate, more recoil force is generated by the GAU-8/A than by both of the engines operating at full throttle! The effect is quite noticeable, as the gun actually slows the A-10 when it is firing.
The A-10’s Avenger Gatling fires when each barrel when it is aligned with the centerline of the aircraft, which is why the cannon is offset to the aircraft’s left side.
The high recoil of the GAU-8/A gun is also the reason the firing barrel is along the aircraft centerline. If it were not, the A-10 would turn away from the target each time the gun fired. Aircraft carrying the 20mm Vulcan in an off-centerline position are also susceptible to this phenomenon, but the recoil of the 20mm gun is small enough to allow for compensation by offsetting the rudder a few degrees. This is normally programed into the flight-control computer and requires no action by the pilot. That approach would not work on the A-10, though. The GAU-8/A gun simply generates too much recoil.
The GAU-8/A Gun System
The GAU-8/A Gun System is made up of four subsystems: the gun, the ammunition feed and storage subsystem, the drive subsystem, and the electrical control subsystem. Specifications for the GAU-8/A gun system are presented in Table 11-1 and explained below.
The GAU-8/A gun is a seven-barrel Gatling-based automatic cannon (see the illustrations above). The gun subsystem consists of the following nine major components:
Rotor assembly. The rotor assembly is made up of the forward rotor (which accepts the barrels and is geared to the gun drive shaft) and the mid-rotor (to which the bolt guide tracks are mounted). The rotor assembly operates in the same manner and provides the same functions as that of other Gatling guns.
Housing. The housing serves as the basic frame of the GAU-8/A and provides a mount for many of the gun components (including the lubricator, ammunition transfer unit, solenoid assembly, firing cam,
rotor, and other components). It also contains the elliptical cam path that drives the bolts back and forth.
Barrels. The GAU-8/A has seven barrels. Each is 93.1 inches long and has 20-groove right-hand constant twist rifling (unlike the 20mm Vulcan, which uses a gain twist rifling pattern).
Bolts. Seven bolts are used on the GAU-8/A. They are similar to those used on the 20mm Vulcan, except they are much larger and use a percussion (instead of an electrical) firing system.
Transfer unit. The transfer unit is mounted to the right side of the housing. It feeds ammunition into the gun and accepts fired and unfired cases from it.
The GAU-8/A cannon and ammunition. This seven-barreled Gatling gun fires several types of 30mm ammunition. The ammunition has an aluminum cartridge case, nylon rotating bands (to increase projectile velocity and decrease barrel wear), and (in the tank-busting role) a depleted uranium penetrator warhead.
Lubricator. The lubricator is mounted on the upper rear portion of the housing. It contains a reservoir of lubricant, and each time the gun fires a small quantity is injected onto the bolt tracks.
Solenoid assembly. The solenoid assembly is also mounted on the housing and is used to withdraw the firing pin safety when the firing signal is sent to the gun.
Mid-barrel support and clamp. The mid-barrel support and clamp provides the forward mounting point for the GAU-8/A. It also locks the barrels in position within the rotor.
Muzzle clamp. The muzzle clamp provides structural support for the cannon and maintains concentricity of the barrel cluster.
Ammunition Feed and Storage Subsystem
The ammunition feed and storage subsystem is used to store and convey live and spent rounds (empty cartridges are not ejected out of the A-10). The nine major components of the subsystem are as follows:
Ammunition storage drum. The ammunition storage drum is similar in concept to the drum used for the 20mm Vulcan. It consists of an inner and outer drum, two scoop-disk assemblies, two drum-cover assemblies, and two spacer rings. The inner drum has a double-helix that forces the rounds forward or backward when the inner drum is rotated. Ammunition passes through the drum-cover assemblies for loading, unloading, firing, and returning fired cartridge cases to the drum.
Entrance unit. The entrance unit is mounted on the rear drum-cover assembly. It receives fired cases from the conveyor elements (explained below) and passes them into the ammunition storage drum.
Exit unit. The exit unit is similar in concept to the entrance unit. It mounts on the front of the ammunition storage drum and is used to feed live rounds into the conveyor elements.
Ammunition chuting. The ammunition chuting provides a path for the conveyor elements that carry ammunition to and from the GAU-8/A gun.
Conveyor turnaround unit. The conveyor turnaround unit feeds live rounds into the gun transfer unit (explained in the description of the gun subsystem). The conveyor turnaround unit also accepts spent rounds from the gun transfer unit and places them in conveyor elements for return to the ammunition storage drum.
Ammunition conveyor elements. The ammunition conveyor elements are linked together to form an endless belt that travels to and from the gun through the ammunition chuting. Each element carries one round of ammunition going to the gun and one spent case or unfired round when returning to the ammunition storage drum.
Drum drive unit. Mounted on the drum exit cover, the drum drive unit drives the ammunition storage drum.
Equalizer. The equalizer is mounted on the ammunition chuting approximately midway between the ammunition storage drum and the GAU-8/A gun subsystem. It equalizes the tension between the feed and return ammunition conveyor elements.
Loading access unit. The loading access unit is used to load ammunition into the storage drum. It is accessible through a panel on the left side of the A-10 (just forward of the wing).
Drive Subsystem
The drive subsystem is a hydraulic drive assembly consisting of the following major components.
Hydraulic drive motors. Two identical hydraulic drive motors provide power for the GAU-8/A gun and the ammunition feed and storage system.
Accessory drive gearbox. The accessory drive gearbox is driven by the hydraulic drive motors. It provides output torque for the gun and drum drive shafts.
Gun drive shaft. The gun drive shaft provides power to the GAU-8/A gun subsystem.
Drum drive shaft. The drum drive shaft provides power to the ammunition feed and storage subsystem.
Electronic Control Subsystem
The electronic control subsystem consists of the electronic control unit. This “black box” contains the circuitry that controls all GAU-8/A logic functions.
System Operation
When the A-10 pilot engages a target, the first step is to bring the armament control system to a state of operational readiness. Once this is done, the pilot must get the target in the Heads Up Display screen,
commonly referred to as the HUD. The HUD is a transparent screen mounted directly in the pilot’s line of sight. A small pipper (or bright spot) is projected onto the screen, and the pilot maneuvers the airplane (and consequently, the GAU-8/A gun) until the pipper is directly on the target. This allows the pilot to engage the target without having to divert his vision. This capability is critically important in a close-air-support aircraft, which must fly at low altitudes.
When the pilot wants to fire the GAU-8/A gun, he presses the control-column-mounted trigger. The trigger sends a signal to the electronic control assembly, which subsequently sends a signal to two solenoids mounted on the hydraulic drive assembly. When these solenoids open, aircraft hydraulic pressure is applied to the two hydraulic drive motors, and the gun, ammunition storage drum, and chuting begin to move. One-tenth of a second later, the electronic control assembly sends another signal to the firing solenoid assembly, which is mounted on the gun housing. This solenoid withdraws the safing sector from the firing cam path in the gun housing, which allows ammunition to begin the classic seven-step Gatling firing sequence. Each round fires as it reaches the firing point.
When the trigger is released, the electronic control assembly sends a reverse signal to the hydraulic drive assembly. The hydraulic drive motors reverse and rapidly decelerate the gun system. The gun system cycles in a reverse direction until all rounds are cleared from the cannon. This is done to prevent a cook-off (the inadvertent firing of a round due to absorption of residual gun heat), which could occur if a live round remained in one of the GAU-8/A’s chambers.
The 30mm Family of Ammunition
The success story behind the 30mm family of ammunition used in the A-10 is as intriguing as the story behind the A-10 and the GAU-8/A. When the air force began the A-X program, the intent was to manufacture the 30mm ammunition in government arsenals. In the past, the government usually bought ammunition components from several suppliers and then did the loading, assembly, and packing operations in a government load plant. In the early 1970s, the government estimated that the cost of each 30mm round would be about $75.
Aerojet Ordnance Company and Honeywell, Inc. (two munitions manufacturers) convinced the government that it would be best to allow private industry to manufacture the complete round. Under this procurement concept, GAU-8/A ammunition production has been enormously successful. Private industry was able to deliver high-quality ammunition at about $6 per round instead of the $75 the government originally planned to spend. To date, more than 80 million rounds have been procured. The 30mm family of ammunition consists of three different rounds, as explained below:
Target practice. The target practice (TP) cartridge is used for training.
Essentially a slug, the projectile has an aluminum nose and steel body.
High-explosive incendiary. The high-explosive incendiary (HEI) cartridge fires an explosive warhead with a point-detonating fuze. The projectile body is made of steel and contains .124 pounds of a high
explosive and incendiary mix.
Armor-piercing incendiary tracer. The armor-piercing incendiary tracer (APIT) cartridge fires what is probably the most intriguing of the 30mm projectiles. The APIT projectile has a depleted uranium
penetrator sheathed in an aluminum sabot. The depleted uranium penetrator has two functions. Because depleted uranium is a very dense metal, it defeats enemy armor through kinetic energy alone (the combination of high velocity and mass allow it to break through armor). Depleted uranium is also pyrophoric, meaning it burns with intense heat after it breaks up. These two characteristics make it extremely effective against enemy tanks. The rear of the projectile contains a pyrotechnic fumer, which reduces aerodynamic drag and allows it to maintain high velocities.
The normal GAU-8/A combat mix of ammunition consists of one HEI round for every five APIT rounds (TP ammunition is used solely for target practice and is not usually mixed with HEI or APIT ammunition). All types of 30mm GAU-8/A ammunition use aluminum cartridge cases (to conserve weight) and either plastic or copper projectile bands (to engage the rifling in the GAU-8/A gun barrels). The projectile bands permit higher muzzle velocity and reduced barrel wear.
The A-10 Bottom Line
All things considered, the GAU-8/A 30mm Gatling gun is one of the most interesting and successful applications of ground-attack aircraft ever developed. The GAU-8/A gun system is the most powerful Gatling gun ever built. The extremely lethal 30mm family of ammunition is an amazing procurement success story. The A-10, the GAU-8/A, and the 30mm family of ammunition still make up an important part of the U.S. national defense and will continue to for quite some time.
So there you have it: Chapter 11 of The Gatling Gun. There are 15 chapters in The Gatling Gun touching on all of the early Gatlings, their Civil War and Indian war deployments, the transition to modern high-rate-of-fire gun systems after World War II, and contemporary Gatling systems like the A-10 Warthog. If you liked our chapter about the A-10, you might enjoy the rest of The Gatling Gun.
This has been a fun year, and a fun year to be a blogger. When we started ExhaustNotes 18 months ago, we had no idea we’d get the loyal following we have, the number of hits we’re getting, and the number of comments we would receive from you, our amazing readers. In the past 18 months, we’ve published 572 blog posts (this is Blog No. 572), we’ve had something north of 200,000 page visits, and we’ve received 2,481 approved blog comments. We actually had quite a few more comments, but the spam comments are filtered out and we’re not counting those. And you spammers out there, thanks for all the biblical excerpts, the website optimization offers, the hairstyle stuff (seriously, you think Gresh or I need hairstyle products?), and the offers to manufacture stuff in and buy chotchkas from China. You guys keep it coming, and our filters will keep bouncing it. Hope springs eternal, I guess.
Our most commented upon post last year? It was Joe Gresh’s blog on Bonnier and the demise of Motorcyclist magazine, which really raked in some zingers. Nobody makes the written word come alive like Joe does, and that includes his opening line in that blog: The distance from being read in the crapper and actually being in the crapper is a short one. According to Dealer News, Motorcyclist magazine crossed that span this week.
Other ExNotes blogs that drew comments big time are our blogs on what constitutes the perfect bike, what the motorcycle industry needs to do to grow the market, dream bikes, and of course, the gun stuff. Keep your thoughts coming, folks. It’s what we enjoy the most.
Our most frequently visited blog post last year? Far and away, it was our piece on Mini 14 Marksmanship. Somehow that post got picked up by a service that suggests sites to people when they open their cell phones, and we were getting in excess of 10,000 hits a day for a few days on that one. Go figure. There must be a lot of people out there who want to shoot their Mini 14 rifles better. Glad to be of help, folks.
We’ve stepped on a few toes along the way. Some folks got their noses bent out of shape because we do gun stuff. Hey, let us know if you want your money back. One guy went away all butthurt because Google ads popped up mentioning President Trump and mortgage deals that I guess our President helped along. Hey, whatever. We don’t control the popups, and the Internet’s artificial intelligence does funny things with what it reads on the blog…I mentioned using my Casio’s backlight to help find my way to the latrine at night, and since that blog I’ve been getting an unending stream (no pun intended) of prostate treatment popups. I may click on a few of them. When you get your artificially-inseminated Google-driven popups, we’d like you to click on them, too. It makes money flow. To us. It’s what keeps us on the air, you know.
We did a lot of travel this year, but not as many motorcycle trips as we wanted. The Royal Enfields we took through Baja were fun, and we had a great story on that ride published in Motorcycle Classics. I really enjoyed riding and writing about the Genuine G400c. Joe did a great series on his Yamaha EnduroFest adventure, and he’s had articles published in Motorcycle.com. Joe did another series on motorized bicycles and it was a hoot.
Joe and I both did shorter moto trips this past year, and we both want to get more riding in next year. Gresh and I are going to do a moto trip to Baja in 2020, and we may get to visit with Baja John in Bahia de Los Angeles (that dude likes Baja so much he moved there). On any of the Mexico trips, we for sure will be insured with BajaBound Insurance, the best insurance there is for travel in Mexico. More good travel stuff? We published Destinations, a compendium of the travel stories appearing in Motorcycle Classics magazine, and it’s doing very well (thank you).
More plans? Gresh will be pouring more concrete, and I’ll be spending more time at the West End Gun Club. Joe is planning to maybe pick up the Zed resurrection again, and I’m pretty sure he’ll get that bike on the road within the next 12 months. We’ve got the upcoming 9mm comparo I mentioned yesterday, and for sure more gun articles. Good buddy Gonzo asked us to ride in the 2020 Three Flags Classic, and I’d like to make a go of that one this coming year (I was disappointed in myself for not riding that great event in 2019, but the circumstances just weren’t right). I think I’m going to write Tales of the Gun as a book and offer it for sale here on ExNotes, and maybe Joe Gresh will do the same with his collection of moto articles (and when he does, you can bet I’ll buy the first copy). We’ll be doing more product reviews, including movie and book reviews. I’m going to get on my bicycle more, and we may have some info on electric bicycles, too. You’ll read all about it right here.
So it’s a wrap for 2019. Susie bought a bottle of Gentleman Jack for me, and I’m going to pour a shot and watch 2020 roll in later tonight. To all of you, our best wishes for a happy and healthy 2020. Ride safe, ride often, and keep your powder dry.
Want to subscribe to our blog for free and never miss any of our motorcycle, travel, gun, bicycle, product review, and other blogs? We’ll never give your email address to anyone else, and you’ll never miss any of our stories! Sign up here:
I’ve been lusting over the SIG P226 Scorpion for some time now, and after a little bit of brushing up on my negotiation tactics, I pulled the trigger (figuratively speaking) on one this morning.
I like the looks of the SIG, I like that it is an alloy-framed handgun (I’m not a big fan of the plastic guns), and I like that it is a SIG. Good buddy TJ told me he believes these are the finest handguns available today, and he’s a guy who knows handguns. The US Army recently made their sidearm decision and it’s SIG. That’s a strong endorsement, I think.
I bought my SIG Scorpion at Turner’s, the gun will be in the store this Thursday, and that’s when I get to start the PRK (Peoples Republik of Kalifornia) 10-day waiting period.
My tried and trusty Model 59, the gun that got me hooked on 5.0 grains of Unique and a 125-grain cast roundnose bullet.
I’ve got a boatload of 9mm ammunition reloaded and ready to go, but that got me to thinking: What load might work best in the new SIG? I’d found in the past that 5.0 grains of Unique and a 125-grain cast roundnose bullet provided great accuracy in my Model 59, but then I got lazy and I stuck with that as my standard 9mm load in everything. I’ll be the first guy to tell you that to find the best load in any gun, you need to experiment and develop a load specifically for that gun. I have a couple of other 9mm pistols (a Springfield Armory 1911 and the Model 659 Smith and Wesson that I’ve blogged about before), and I’ve simply used my 5.0-grain Unique/125-grain cast roundnose in all of them. Is there a better load for each of these handguns?
The 659 with my 125 grain cast roundnose reloads.The Springfield 9mm 1911. It seems to like the 5.0 grain Unique/125-grain roundnose load, too.
So here’s what’s coming up: I’m going to do a load development comparo for the 659, the 1911, and the P226 to see where the accuracy lives for each gun. I’m thinking Unique, Bullseye, Power Pistol, the 147 grain Speer, the 125 gr cast RN Missouri, and maybe a 115 full metal jacket or hollowpoint bullet. I’m looking for inputs, so if you have a favored load for your 9mm handgun, let me know and I may throw it into the mix, too. Please add your suggestions to the Comments section here. I’ll keep you posted.
We’re thinking about another book, one that would include all of our Tales of the Gun stories and much more. What do you think? Let us know if you think you might have an interest in this new book to help us assess the market. In the meantime, you can see our other titles here.
10 shots at 50 feet with the Rock Island Armory Compact 1911. The secret sauce is a 185-grain cast SWC bullet, 5.0 grains of Bullseye propellant, a CCI 300 primer, and a 1.174-inch overall cartridge length.
I’ve been working lately on developing an accurate load for my Rock Island Compact 1911 with light target bullets, and I found one that works. One of my good buddies gave me a little over a thousand 185-grain semi-wadcutter bullets, and I found a great load for my Rock Island pistol. It’s the one I shot the targets with you see above.
The 185-grain cast lead SWC bullets used for the target above. The caramel-colored band around the bullet’s periphery is bullet lube, which prevents barrel leading and further enhances accuracy.
A bit of background info first: “SWC” (or semi-wadcutter) refers to the bullet configuration. A wadcutter bullet is one that is flat across the face of the bullet, and it is a typical target configuration for revolvers. What this means is that the bullet cuts a clean, circular hole through the target (much like a hole punch), making it easier to score. A semi-wadcutter bullet has a shoulder at the face of the bullet, but it also has a truncated cone of lesser diameter on the bullet face (it’s a “semi” wadcutter). It cuts a relatively clean hole, and it’s a bit more aerodynamic.
Loading .45 ACP ammo. It’s what I did this weekend, and I have 600 rounds ready to go.Finished ammo, ready to go. This ammo is custom tailored to my Rock Island Compact. It’s the most accurate load I’ve found in the Compact 1911. Every gun is different, and every gun needs a load tailored to it for best accuracy. This load is not particularly accurate in my full-sized Colt 1911, but it sure shoots well in the Compact Rock.
A semi-wadcutter bullet feeds easier in a semi-automatic handgun than would a wadcutter bullet, but you can still have problems with a semi-wadcutter in an automatic when the round enters the chamber. That’s not a concern in a revolver because you load the cartridges by hand (you do the chambering of each round manually when you load a revolver). It’s a potential issue in a semi-automatic handgun, though, because the cartridge has to ride up the ramp in the frame and feed into the chamber each time you fire the weapon, and a semi-wadcutter’s shoulder can cause the gun to jam. Generally speaking, for semi-autos roundnose bullet configurations feed the most reliably because the bullet tip guides the round into the chamber. Sometimes semi-autos work well right out of the box with semi-wadcutter bullets, and sometimes they don’t. If you want to make sure a semi-auto will feed reliably with a semi-wadcutter or a hollow point bullet, you have an expert gunsmith who knows what he’s doing polish the gun’s feed ramp, and throat and polish the entrance to the chamber. That’s what I had done on my Rock Island Compact by good buddy TJ, and my gun will feed anything.
Throated and polished, my Rock Island Compact is extremely reliable with any kind of bullet. You can read more about the way TJ customized my 1911 here.
During my load development effort, I tried these 185-grain cast SWC bullets with 4.5, 4.7, 5.0, and 5.3 grains of Bullseye, and 5.0 grains of Bullseye is the sweet spot. The other loads were also accurate, but the 5.0-grain load is the most accurate. The 5.3-grain load is accurate, too, but the recoil at that charge was a bit much for me. As mentioned in the first photo’s caption, cartridge overall length was 1.174 inches, and I used CCI 300 primers. A word to the wise on this: The load you see here is one I developed and it shoots well in my handgun. You should develop your own load. Always consult a reloading manual when you do so, and always start at the lower end of the propellant spectrum and carefully work up a load tailored to your firearm.
Folks tell me I need to buy a chronograph to measure bullet velocity, but hell, I don’t care how fast the thing is going, and I seriously doubt it would make a difference to any target. What I’m looking for is reliable function and accuracy, and with this load, I have it. A chronograph is one more thing I’d have to cart out to the range and screw around with once I got there, and I don’t want the hassle. But if you need to know, my Lyman Cast Bullet Reloading Guide tells me the velocity with this powder charge should be a little over 900 feet per second. That’s close enough for government work, I think.
The next step for the Rock, for me, is to add a set of Pachmayr checkered rubber grips. I have those on my full size 1911 and I like them a lot. That’s coming up, and I think the Pachmayr grip will further improve the Compact. I ordered a set today and when they arrive, you’ll read all about it right here.
You know, I like my Rock Island Compact. I’m on the range with it every week and I put a lot of lead through that short 3.5-inch barrel. It’s fun to shoot, it’s accurate, and it carries well. It’s become one of my all time favorite guns.
Want to read more on the Rock Island Compact 1911? Check out our other reports here:
I posted a series of blogs on my Ruger No. 1 in .257 Weatherby and the loads I was developing for it a few months ago, and I told you about the stock cracking on my rifle. That held things up for a while.
The original stock on my .257 Weatherby Ruger No. 1 cracked on the top and the bottom, just aft of the tang. I can repair this stock and use it, but Ruger provided a new stock on the warranty. Ruger customer service is top notch.
Ruger Customer Service
I was disappointed about the stock fracture, but the wizards at Ruger did a good job in selecting a piece of wood of comparable quality, figure, and tone. I also asked Ruger to return the defective stock to me after they installed the new one, and they did. And they didn’t charge me anything to put a new stock on the rifle (it was a warranty repair). Ruger sent photos of three stocks they had selected that were a good match for the forearm, and they allowed me to pick the one I wanted. More good news is that I believe the stocked crack can be repaired. I’m going to do that and maybe put it back on this rifle. Or maybe I’ll just have it as a spare.
Tang Relief
I believe the reason the original stock cracked is that the wood around the receiver tang had not been properly fitted (there should be a little clearance to prevent the tang from acting like a wedge to split the wood). I asked Ruger to make sure the new stock had some clearance behind the tang, and they did. They actually went a little overboard in my opinion, but that’s preferable to having no relief.
At my request, Ruger relieved the new stock to provide clearance between the receiver’s tang and the wood.
More good news is that I now have a load that reaches into the upper stratosphere of what the .257 Weatherby cartridge can do, and it does so with high velocity and great accuracy.
The New Ruger No. 1 Stock
First, allow me to show you the new lumber on the Ruger No. 1:
The new stock on my Ruger No. 1. Notice how well the stock matches the forearm.The left side of my new stock. It’s Circassian walnut.And the right side. The original stock had horizontal stripes, which I wanted Ruger to duplicate. They did a good job. They showed photographs of three stocks to me; this is the one I selected.
Here are a couple more shots to show the new stock, one in the gun rack and another on my workbench when I was cleaning the rifle:
Another view of the new stock. I love pretty wood. I selected this No. 1 because of the wood, and when the stock cracked, I was afraid that the replacement would not be as nice. But it was.And one more view. The rifle on the left is an unissued, unfired 1956 M44 Polish Mosin-Nagant. The one on the right is another Ruger No. 1, this one chambered in .300 Weatherby. Ruger has in the past offered the Ruger No. 1 in .257 Weatherby, .270 Weatherby, and .300 Weatherby, along with many other non-Weatherby chamberings. There are still a few new .257 Weatherby Rugers out there. They are destined to be collectibles.
A Mississippi Dave .257 Weatherby Load
I’d like to take credit for discovering the load on my own, but I can’t do that. My good buddy Mississippi Dave, who knows more about the .257 Weatherby cartridge than anybody I know, turned me on to Barnes solid bullets and H1000 propellant powder as the keys to success with this cartridge, and he was spot on in his guidance. Here are my results, all at 100 yards:
Those are great results, and 70.5 grains of H1000 is the load I am going to use with the Barnes bullets. I think I could have done even better, but conditions were less than ideal when I was shooting that day. There were a lot of guys on the range the day I was out there, including a couple of Rambo wannabees on either side of me with assault rifles and muzzle brakes shooting rapid fire. I know that’s what caused that third group with 70.5 grains of H1000 to open up to over an inch. I think the No. 1 could be a half-minute-of-angle rifle with this load. And this load in my rifle (the Ruger has a 28-inch barrel, 2 inches longer than normal) is probably attaining velocities well over 3700 feet per second. That’s smoking.
One quick additional comment on the above loads: These are loads that work in my rifle. Your mileage may vary. Always consult a reloading manual when you develop a load, and always start at the bottom of the propellant range and slowly work up. Barnes publishes their recommended reloading data, and you can go to their website to download that information.
Barnes Bullets
The high velocities mentioned above are only possible with Barnes’ solid copper bullets. Jacketed bullets (lead core bullets shrouded in a copper jacket, which is normally how bullets are constructed) would break up in flight at these higher velocities, and for me, they did (see the earlier .257 Weatherby blogs).
The bullets Mississippi Dave recommended. And wow, they worked superbly well.The Barnes bullets are solid copper. That’s all you can use if you hunt in California. The concern is that if you wound an animal and it later dies, it might be subsequently consumed by a California Condor, and if it had a lead bullet in it, the Condor might die of lead poisoning. I can’t make this stuff up, folks. Our politicians really believe this could happen.
.257 Weatherby Lessons Learned
I’ve learned a lot, with help from Mississippi Dave, about reloading the .257 Weatherby cartridge. You have to use solids (the monolithic Barnes bullets) to realize the full velocity potential of the .257 Weatherby. The .257 Roy can be extremely accurate, and at its upper-range velocities, higher velocities means more accuracy. Cup and core (conventional jacketed) bullets will work in the .257 Weatherby, but only at lower velocities, and if you’re going to do that, you’re not really using the .257 Roy the way it is intended to be used. Bore cleanliness is critical on these rifles, and because of the huge powder charges and high projectile velocities, the bore fouls quickly. When you reload for this cartridge, you not only need to full-length resize the cartridge case, you need to go in another 90 degrees on the resizing die after it contacts the shell holder in order to get the round to chamber. The best powders for this cartridge are the slow burning ones. H1000, in particular, works well in my rifle.
Earlier .257 Weatherby Blog Posts
The .257 Weatherby sage has been a long one but it is a story with a happy ending. If you’d like to read our earlier blogs on this magnificent cartridge, here they are:
If you enjoyed this blog and you want to see more, you can read our other Tales of the Gun stories here. And if you don’t want to miss anything from us, sign up for our automatic email blog notifications here:
I went to the range yesterday with two rifles, a Mosin-Nagant 91/30 and an M1 Garand. The Mosin was the Soviet Infantry’s standard rifle during World War II (it’s been around in various forms since 1891), and it’s one I’ve always enjoyed shooting. The Garand is a US weapon developed in the 1930s and first used by our troops in World War II. It is a semi-automatic rifle, which gave us a tremendous advantage over the enemy forces we fought (their rifles were bolt action).
My Mosin-Nagant 91/30. I refinished the stock, glass bedded the action, and developed a load shown in the photo below. This rifle is superbly accurate.
I enjoy getting out to the range, and yesterday was a beautiful day. Sunny, cold, and not too windy. I shot on the 100-yard range, first with the Mosin and my standard load for that rifle.
There are only four holes, but the one just below the “10” is actually two shots. This rifle is so accurate it is almost boring.
After five shots, I put the Mosin away. It’s almost too easy with that rifle. I had a good target, I thought I would get a photo for the blog, and I was eager to try the Garand.
My Garand is kluge rifle assembled with parts from a series of mismatched manufacturers. The receiver is a CAI (considered to be of inferior quality to the ones made by the standard US suppliers Winchester, Harrington and Richardson, and Springfield Arsenal), the trigger group is from Beretta, and the barrel is a 1955 RSC (presumed to be Italian). I’ll state up front I don’t know a lot about Garands, and the reasons I bought this one (my first and only Garand) is I liked the finish, the price seemed right, and the money was burning a hole in my pocket that day.
My mutt Garand. I enjoy shooting this rifle. There’s a lot going on with each shot, and it’s powerful.
Shooting the Garand well has been a challenge for me. I like shooting with iron sights, but I’m a post-and-slot guy. I haven’t had a ton of experience with aperture sights, and that’s taking some getting used to. Then there’s the issue of a decent load. I’ve been playing with different loads for the Garand, and I found three loads that work well. On my last outing, I had a few shots that were low left on the target outside the bullseye, and one of our readers asked if those shots were either the first or last shots from each clip. I didn’t know at the time because I shot each en bloc clip of 8 rounds without looking at the target after each shot.
My objective yesterday was to answer the above question, and sure enough, I did. My shots grouped well except for the first shot from each clip. I shot three clips (for a total of 24 rounds), and in each clip, the first shot hit low left.
My Garand’s performance at 100 yards. There are 24 shots on this target. The rifle groups well with this load, but the first shot from each en bloc clip of 8 rounds goes low and to the left.
The challenge now is to determine the reason why that first shot from each clip is going low. I posted the target you see above in a Garand group asking for input on why the first round from each clip went low, and as you might guess, the answers were all over the map. Most responses served only to illustrate that people don’t read very well, but a few were informative. A couple said their rifles behaved the same way and it was predictable enough (as is the case with mine) to allow for simply aiming high right for the first shot from each clip to put all 8 rounds in the black. One response suggested that the bolt may not be closing fully, as the first round is chambered by manually releasing the op rod, while all subsequent rounds are chambered when the action is cycled by the gun gases. I think that guy is on to something, and that will be where my future focus is going to be. If you have any ideas, I’d sure like to hear them. Leave a comment if you have the answer, and thanks in advance for any inputs.
US Army Captain Colin D. MacManus, Rutgers University ’63.
Captain Colin D. MacManus, a US Army Infantry officer and an Airborne Ranger, graduated from Rutgers University in 1963. He was killed in action in Vietnam in February 1967. A synopsis of his Silver Star citation follows:
Captain (Infantry) Colin David MacManus, United States Army, was awarded the Silver Star (Posthumously) for conspicuous gallantry and intrepidity in connection with military operations against the enemy while serving with Company C, 1st Battalion, 22d Infantry Regiment, 4th Infantry Division, in the Republic of Vietnam.
The New Jersey Vietnam Veterans’ Memorial Foundation assembled this tribute to Captain MacManus:
Colin D. MacManus was born on August 29, 1941 to Mrs. Barbara MacManus in Elizabeth, NJ. He lived in New York and Quincy, MA before moving to Newark, NJ. He graduated from South Side High School in 1959. He attended Rutgers University and graduated in 1963 with a bachelor’s degree in sociology and an award as a distinguished military student. While he was an undergraduate, he was a member of the university’s track team, and Scabbard and Blade, an ROTC honor society.
Following graduation, the captain attended Paratroop and Ranger schools at Fort Benning, Georgia. He was then stationed with the 3rd Armored Division “Spearheaders” in Frankfurt, Germany. While there, his mother explained, Captain MacManus led the rifle team representing the United States at the 1965 Central Treaty Organization games in Istanbul, Turkey. The squad finished second in the contest and received special honors from the U.S. commander.
In a February 22, 1967 article from the Newark Evening News his brother, John, stated “Colin was always very proud of the work he was doing. When we tried to sway him from volunteering from combat duty, he simply said that he had the training necessary to do the job–the type of training ‘those young boys’ with fear written on their faces didn’t have.”
MacManus was planning to marry Linda Neeson, the secretary of his commanding officer in Germany. The couple postponed their plans when he received his orders to report to Vietnam.
He entered the US Army from Newark, NJ and attained the rank of Captain (CAPT). MacManus was killed in action on February 16, 1967 at the age of 25. He was serving with C Company, 1st Battalion, 22 Infantry, 4th Infantry Division.
Captain McManus’s mother stated that her son wrote in his last letter that he was going out in the boondocks and had just reached his goal of being named a company commander, and that he would be unable to write for a while. His mother said that he never mentioned the fighting at all. He received a full military funeral.
There is a memorial at Rutgers University in New Brunswick, NJ dedicated to the graduates who were killed or missing in action from the Vietnam War. MacManus’ name is listed among those killed in action.
To commemorate his life, each year the MacManus family awarded a Colt .45 Auto to the graduating senior who held his Rutgers Corps of Cadets assignment. In 1973, that was me. I never had the honor of meeting Captain MacManus (he graduated before I started my engineering studies at Rutgers), but I felt like I knew him through the Rutgers Reserve Officers Training Corps. We all knew of Captain MacManus. I met the MacManus family when I graduated in 1973, and his brother John (the same one mentioned above) presented the 1911 to me. It was a Series 70 Government Model Colt (the US Army sidearm back then), and receiving that award was a very big deal. It was a big deal to me in 1973, and it’s still a big deal to me today.
My first handgun: The Colin D. MacManus 1911 and a couple of 5-shot, 25-yard hand held groups I fired with it. I had it accurized in the 1970s, and it is still a tack driver.
That 1911 was the very first centerfire handgun I ever owned. US Army Sergeant Major Emory L. Hickman taught me how to shoot my .45 while I was a grad student at Rutgers (you can read about that here). I had a gunsmith accurize the 1911 a few years later when I lived in Fort Worth, and I still shoot the MacManus .45 on a regular basis. I most recently had my good buddy TJ (of TJ’s Custom Guns) go through it to make sure everything is in good working order (and it is). The MacManus 1911 and I go way back. It means a lot to me.
Somewhere along the way during the last 46 years, the MacManus Award fell by the wayside, and when I heard about that, it just felt wrong. So I called the ROTC detachment at Rutgers and spoke to the Professor of Military Science (the commander there). Colonel Cortez agreed: The MacManus Award is something that needs to continue. I did a bit of sleuthing online, one thing led to another, and last night I had a nice conversation with a young man from the MacManus family (I spoke with Colin D. MacManus, who was named after his uncle). We’re going to revive the Captain MacManus Award, and I’ll keep you posted on the status of our efforts right here on the Exhaust Notes blog.
Our good buddy Art has another gun story for us, this time about owning a 1911 .45 auto in the UK. The 1911 is one of my all time favorite firearms. I enjoyed reading Art’s story and I’m sure you will, too.
On March 10th, 1984, 39 years after its manufacture, the Colt 1911A1 with serial number 2322134 became all mine, along with a mere 150 FMJ rounds and a bottle of Hoppe’s No. 9 (ah, that sweet aroma). My new addition cost me the grand sum of £150 ($192) for the gun, the total bill being £183.65 ($236) for the ammo and cleaner.
The Southern Armoury at 171 New Kent Road in southeast London was a small, nondescript shop tucked in between others. Far from salubrious, the battered front door and dirty shutters belied the fact that its owner, Tom Collins, would stock some very obscure ammo and classic guns from the bellicose Victorian era right up to the latest in firearms. To keep it all low key and to prevent wannabees and Walter Mittys, his drudgey shop window would uninvitedly be filled with airguns, pellets, targets and old shotguns. This small, honest-to-God shop was always busy with a throng of two-or-three deep patiently waiting people. Tom and his wife used to live upstairs from the shop which had an old clock outside that everyone used as a marker point. It held good time and was too high to be vandalized or stolen.
Whenever I used to ring up and ask for the price of something, Tom would think for a second and mumble “about £20.” I would then offer to send him a check for “about £20” which would have him scuttling away for the proper price. It never failed.
Tom had a penchant for the most obscure adverts via the shooting press. We’d all stand around discussing this at the shooting club and wonder what the hell had gotten into him for producing some seriously mercurial stuff, sometimes involving cartoon balloon texts, barrels of black powder, an old sailing vessel and a circus elephant.
The other aspect also open for frequent and frivolous discussion was Tom’s toupee, which seemed to have a life of its own. Ill-fitting would not even begin to describe it. At first it looked like his head was nursing a few semi-comatose gray squirrels, such was the thing’s mobility when perched on top of his head. We swore that it would stay in one spot every time he turned his head, and we’d place silent bets where the parting would be from one day to the next. It was doubtful that Tom knew which was the front or rear.
The quality of Tom’s math was suspect and as he refused to use a calculator, quite a few clients walked out of his shop having been undercharged. Some of these actually bought from him again, hoping he’d make the same mistake.
One of my shooting club members, Bob Wade, gave me a handwritten note about the serial numbers range of all the contracted 1911A1 manufacturers. Mine was about 6000 away from the last Colt batch in 1945. My gun was nothing special, although the slide and frame numbers were matched, it seemed that most of the other parts weren’t. Not that it mattered much. The original grips were discarded for some Pachmayrs and my clunker shot well. I don’t think I ever bought more ammo for it. Another club member reloaded for me but the solid lead bullets he had were never supposed to be used in an auto and just wouldn’t cycle properly. The guy was also known for not taking a double load too seriously, so I never asked him again. When he later died in a scuba diving accident and the facts of his miscalculations became known to us, none of us were surprised.
My wife and I took a long weekend in Yorkshire and my .45 with two full mags came with me just in case there was an opportunity for some unofficial target shooting. This came in the shape of a little ensconced lay-by at the side of a quiet country road with 12′ high sloping chalk walls. As I was busy examining my shot placements on a small discarded gas canister, the crunching of gravel alerted me to see a very curious cyclist who arrived out of nowhere and was wondering where the hell those shots had come from. He took off when he saw me and so did we – in the opposite direction. My only visual memories exist in saving four distorted slugs out of the chalk.
In 1987 the Southern Armoury closed its doors for good. Tom and his wife were getting old and tired, and it would only be a few years later that Tom hung up his toupee for good, leaving behind a plethora of old memories that the old dogs like myself are only too fond of recollecting. The old clock is no longer there and the last time I drove past there, the shop had sacrilegiously become a hairdresser.
Although I sold my Colt around 1990, the new owner must have been one of the 40,000 pistol shooters who had to say farewell to their belongings during the 1997 pistol ban. My old .45 is probably part of a manhole cover somewhere in China where its American spirit continues to be part of the old guard who will never retire or capitulate.
I think all of us with a few miles under our belt have a story or two about a favorite old gunstore, a favorite old gunstore proprietor, or a favorite old gun. Mine cover places like Barney’s in El Paso, the Rutgers gun shop in Highland Park, Treptow’s in Milltown, Starkey’s (another El Paso shop), and more. They’re mostly all gone today, but wow…the memories.
Do you have a favorite memory? Hey, drop us a line in the Comments section, or maybe even write a guest blog for us (send it to us at info@ExhaustNotes.us). We love hearing from our readers. And Art, thanks for another great tale!
The M1 Garand on the bench at the West End Gun Club.
A couple of weeks ago I wrote about new bullets I had purchased for the Garand. They are Speer 168-grain Target Match bullets, and they’re designed to go head-to-head with the benchmark bullet in this arena, the Sierra 168-grain jacketed boat tail hollow point bullet. As you will recall, I talked to the Speer engineer and he recommended bumping the IMR 4064 propellant charge up from what I had tried previously and seating the bullets out a little further.
Speer 168-grain jacketed hollow point boat tail bullets.
I only had 20 Speer bullets left from the box of 100 I initially purchased and Phillips, my local dealer, didn’t have any more. I also had a couple of boxes of 178-grain Hornady AMAX bullets in my stash and my Hornady reloading manual had a Garand-specific load for these, so I loaded some of them for testing in the Garand as well. You can’t just use any .30 06 load for the Garand; the loads have to be specific for the Garand. If you go outside of what’s recommended for these rifles, you can damage the rifle.
Reloaded .30 06 ammunition with Hornady’s 178 grain AMAX bullets. I was concerned about the plastic tips hitting the feed ramp, but I need not have been. These bullets performed well.
It was windy out at the West End Gun Club this past weekend, so I don’t know if my results were the result of the load, or the wind, my shooting abilities, or all of the above. Take my results as an indication of what might work, not the ultimate authoritative conclusion on either bullet’s inherent accuracy. And as regards my propellant charges, work from your own manual. You will want to develop your own loads, starting at the bottom of the range and working up.
My testing for this session was limited. I had two loads for each bullet (both the Hornady and the Speer bullets), and all were with IMR 4064 propellant. I did all of my testing from the bench at 100 yards.
For the 178-grain Hornady AMAX bullets, I used 45.0 and 46.4 grains of IMR 4064, and a cartridge overall length of 3.240 inches. This load came right out of the Hornady reloading manual. For the 168-grain Speer bullets bullets, I used 47.0 and 48.0 grains of IMR 4064, and a cartridge overall length of 3.295 inches (as recommended by Speer). All loads were with Remington brass and CCI 200 primers. I trimmed the brass to 2.500 inches. This was the 6th firing of these cases in the Garand with these cases.
I reloaded and fired a total of 40 rounds for this test. I reload for the Garand in multiples of eight cartridges (because that’s what the en bloc clip holds), and like I said above, I only had 20 of the Speer bullets left. So bear with me (this is going to get a little complicated). I had one clip of eight rounds with the 168-grain Speers at 47.0 grains of IMR 4064, and one clip of eight rounds with the 168-grain Speers at 48.0 grains of IMR 4064. Then I did another clip of eight with the 178-grain Hornady bullets at 45.0 grains of IMR 4064, and a fourth clip of eight with the 178-grain Hornady bullets at 46.4 grains of IMR 4064. That left four of the Speer 168-grain bullets, so I loaded those four with 47.0 grains of IMR 4064, and then I loaded another four rounds with the Hornady 178-grain bullets and 45.0 grains of IMR 4064. Yep, you read that right. That en bloc clip had two different loads in it.
I had a concern that the plastic tips on the Hornady 178-grain AMAX bullets might be damaged sliding up the Garand’s feed ramp, but that didn’t occur. At the seating depth Hornady recommended, the bullets are pointed into the chamber and the tips never touched the feed ramp.
None of the 40 cartridges exhibited any pressure signs. There were no flattened primers, no excessive muzzle blast, no case ruptures, no extraction issues, or anything of that nature. Everything fed and ejected normally.
I fired the mixed clip of Hornady and Speer bullets first, and surprisingly, it was my best group of the day (it was also the only group I fired where there was a lull in the wind that morning). The first four shots were with the Hornady bullets, and of these, only one was just outside the bullseye (it might have been the first round fired from the cold, oiled barrel). All the remaining seven rounds shot into a pretty tight group, with six of the seven in the 10 ring. The bottom line based on this one group to me was that either load (the 178-grain Hornady load at 45.0 grains of 4064, and the 168-grain Speer load at 47.0 grains of 4064) were awesome, and both shot to the same point of impact.
The next group up was the 168-grain Speers with 47.0 grains of IMR 4064. I couldn’t duplicate my prior results as shown in the above photo. Six shots were in the black, two were out, and of these two, one was down in the 6 ring. It could have been the wind, or it could have been me. Most likely it was me (the wind wasn’t blowing down).
Then I fired the clip of eight with the Speer 168-grain bullets and 48.0 grains of IMR 4064. Five shots were in the black and three were outside, with one low at 7:00 in the 6 ring again.
It was on to the Hornady 178-grain bullets, first at 45.0 grains of IMR 4064. Five shots were in the black, one was in the 8 ring at 9:00, one was in the 7 ring at 10:00, and again, I had one shot go low in the 6 ring at 7:00. The group was biased to the left. That was probably the wind.
And finally, I shot the Hornady 178-grain bullets at 46.4 grains of IMR 4064. 6 were in the black, 1 was in the 8 ring at 9:00, and yet again, 1 was in the 6 ring at 7:00. These were a little more tightly clustered favoring the left side of the bullseye, consistent with the wind pushing the shots to one side (the wind at the West End Gun Club always blows northeast to southwest, pushing the shots to the left).
The bottom line is that any of loads could be good, but that first clip of mixed bullets was (for a guy at my low talent level) phenomenal. The wind no doubt distorted my results (along with my lack of consistency shooting the Garand). I have 180 of the Hornady bullets left, and I’m going to load them at 45.0 grains of IMR 4064. I’ll buy more of the 168 gr Speer bullets because they did well, too, and I’ll load them at 47.0 grains. I’m just not that good to say with certainty which load is best; the variability in group size you see here is probably more me than anything else.
The Speer bullets are the least expensive of the three brands I’ve tried in the Garand at $25/100. Next up are the Hornady AMAX bullets at $32/100. The Sierra 168-grain MatchKing bullets (not tested yesterday, as I had used all of them previously) are the most expensive at $37/100. If there’s a difference in performance between the bullets, I’m not good enough to see it. I have 180 of the Hornady bullets left, and I’m going to load them at 45.0 grains of IMR 4064 later today. I’ll buy more of the 168-grain Speer bullets because they did well, too, and I’ll load them with 47.0 grains of IMR 4064.
So which bullet works best in the Garand? Any of these are better than I am, and for a guy like me, evaluating accuracy at 100 yards with iron sights is subjective at best (my old eyes ain’t what they used to be). But I’m having fun, and I love shooting my Garand.
Read more on the Garand (and many more) rifles and handguns here.
, a book that tells the story of the original Gatling guns, their transition to modern gun systems, and several of the weapons platforms currently using Gatlings. It has been one of my most successful books ever. 
Our most commented upon post last year? It was Joe Gresh’s 
We’ve stepped on a few toes along the way. Some folks got their noses bent out of shape because 
We did a lot of travel this year, but not as many motorcycle trips as we wanted. The Royal Enfields we took through Baja were fun, and we had a 
