Guns – Page 4 – The ExhaustNotes Blog

Product Review: Tipton Universal Bore Guide Kit

By Joe Berk

No matter how much I scrub a bore with patches and solvent, I can’t get all the copper fouling out. For that, I need to turn to a bore brush, and the general rule of thumb seems to be one complete back and forth stroke for each round fired. 50 rounds fired (which I sometimes will do), and it’s 50 back and forth strokes with a bore brush. The copper literally has to be scraped out of the barrel.

The problem with this, of course, is that a new bore brush takes a lot of force to drive through the bore, and in doing so, the cleaning rod I’m pushing it with flexes if it is not supported while the bore brush is in the bore. That can cause the rod to bear on the chamber entrance or the leade in the chamber, and that can damage the chamber.

The Tipton Universal Bore Guide Kit is a contraption that allows you to protect a bolt action rifle’s chamber from the cleaning rod. An added benefit is that it prevents solvent or oil from dripping into the action. The concept is good; the execution is slightly flawed for some firearms in my opinion. That said, I’ll continue to use it on my bolt action rifles.

Here’s how the Tipton Universal Bore Guide Kit comes to you:

The packaged Tipton Universal Bore Guide Kit as delivered from Amazon.

The pieces include a tube, an end piece with a slot for adding solvent, a sleeve that includes a combination bolt/set screw, an optional bore guide for an AR-15, and three different rubber funnels (for lack of a better word) based on the caliber.

The Tipton Universal Bore Guide Kit components.

In the photo above, the bore funnel is the red rubber piece on the left end of tube. Its purpose is to align the tube to the barrel. The two red rubber pieces above the tube in the photo above are for different size bores. The brass piece above the tube is the combination set screw/bolt (its use will become clear in another photo below). The stubby black at the top right of the photo above is the AR-15 chamber adaptor. The red rubber piece on the right in the photo above is guide that guides the cleaning rod into the tube. You’ll notice an elliptical cutout in it. The elliptical cutout’s purpose is to allow you to add solvent or oil to the cleaning patch at that point. The idea is to not insert a cleaning rod into the rifle with a solvent or oil soaked patch. This is to prevent the solvent or oil from dripping into the action as the cleaning rod and patch are inserted into the gun.

The Tipton Universal Bore Guide Kit rubber tip that inserts into the chamber mouth.

The Tipton Universal Bore Guide Kit sleeve and “bolt” that also functions as a set screw.

The Tipton Universal Bore Guide Kit inserted into my Ruger GSR.

The Tipton Universal Bore Guide Kit, with the “bolt” down in the GSR.

Inserting a cleaning rod and bore brush into the Tipton Universal Bore Guide Kit.

There are some things I did not like about the Tipton Universal Bore Guide Kit.

- The first is that the red rubber guide fits into the chamber will not withdraw from the action when the Tipton Universal Bore Guide Kit is pulled out. The rubber chamber guide hangs up on the rear of the action. It’s not a big deal. I just pulled on the tube, the guide falls off, and I reinstalled it. I only needed to do this when I was finished using the Tipton Universal Bore Guide Kit and I wanted to remove the thing.
- The feature that allows you to add solvent through a port in the rear red rubber guide is something I didn’t need for applying the solvent. I just dipped the cleaning rod tip (with patch) into the solvent bottle and ran it through the bore. The same is true with the oiled patch after I’m done cleaning. That extra port solves a solvent or oil application problem that doesn’t exist. But it sure came in handy when I encountered the next problem.
- The Tipton Universal Bore Guide Kit doesn’t work with a long action and a 26-inch barrel as the kit is configured. I tried working a new bore brush through my .30 06 Mark V Weatherby, and the cleaning rod handle butted up against the rubber guide at the Tipton bore guide’s rear end with the tip of the bore brush just showing at the end of the muzzle. That was a real “uh oh” moment. There’s no way to back the bore brush out (especially when the brush is new). The bore brush, the bore brush rod, and the Tipton were locked in place. That’s when the opening in the rear guide came in handy. I was able to grasp the cleaning rod with a pair of needlenosed pliers and turn it about an eighth of a turn at a time (my cleaning rod handle allows the rod to rotate, a feature intended to prevent the cleaning rod from unscrewing). Then I’d release the pliers’ grip, move it around the section of cleaning rod visible through the red rubber rear guide, and turn the rod another eighth of a turn. I did this for several minutes until I could get the rod unscrewed from the bore brush, and after that, I put an extension on the rod. It was a real pan in the ass. I’ll cut the length of the Tipton bore guide down to prevent this from occurring again. I feel the Tipton’s bore guide instructions should have a warning about this.

The above notwithstanding, I think the Tipton Universal Bore Guide Kit is still a good purchase. It seems to work well, and it prevents cleaning rod flex when running a tight-fitting bore brush through a rifle barrel, so it does what I want it to do. I paid $13.01 for mine when I bought it on Amazon. For $13, it’s a decent deal.

The Ruger .308 GSR story is here!

More product reviews are here.

Don’t forget: Visit our advertisers!

A Mark V ’06

By Joe Berk

I had my .30 06 Weatherby out last weekend. It was the first time I fired this rifle in maybe 35 years. I bought it at the Weatherby plant in South Gate, California, back when they used to let you in the warehouse to select the wood you wanted.

Fancy walnut and deep, deep bluing. I think I paid something around $300 for this rifle, new, in the 1980s. I’ll never sell it.

When I first shot this rifle in the mid-1980s, it didn’t group very well with my favorite .30 06 load (a 130-grain Hornady jacketed softpoint bullet and a max load of IMR 4320). That was the load I used in my Ruger No. 1 chasing jackrabbits in west Texas. Other things intervened to capture my attention, and I never got around to finding a load for this rifle.

Fast forward several decades, and for this outing I grabbed what was available in the ammo locker: A box of 168-grain Speer jacketed hollow point boat tail bullets (my Garand load), another box with Remington 180-grain jacketed soft point bullets (which are unfortunately no longer available), and a third box with 150-grain Hornady jacketed soft point bullets and 48.0 grains of IMR 4320 (which is also no longer available). What I learned on this most recent outing is that my Weatherby really likes the 180-grain Remington bullets and 48.0 grains of IMR 4064. It did acceptably well (for hunting purposes) with the other two loads, but that 180-grain Remington bullet and IMR 4064 is what answers the mail for me. It’s one of the places where accuracy lives in this rifle.

Before I left the house, I ran an oiled patch down the bore because as I said above the rifle hadn’t been shot in literally decades. When I first set up on the range, the rifle was throwing shots all over the place for the first few rounds. Then, either I or the rifle (or both of us) settled down and the Weatherby started grouping. Most of the other groups were in the 1.2-inch to 2.1-inch range (which is good enough for hunting deer and pigs), but the rifle really liked that 180-grain load. I’m talking sub-minute-of-angle. I couldn’t do this with every group, but it tells me the rifle will do its job (if I do mine).

When assessing a hunting rifle’s accuracy, I typically shoot 3-shot groups at 100 yards off the bench. Some folks like to shoot 5-shot groups, but it’s pretty hard to get the animals to sit still for 5 shots.

Two shots through the same hole, and one a half inch away. I wish I could do this every time. The rifle is way more accurate than I am.

I was pleased with how the rifle performed, and I’ll probably start bringing it to the range more often.

A 12X, fixed-power Leupold scope with target knob adjustments and a sunshade. This is a nice setup.

I originally set up the 12X Leupold scope and this rifle for shooting in the standing position, so the scope sits high on the rifle. When I bought the rifle, I thought I would shoot metallic silhouette with it, but I never did. With the scope as high as it is, it was awkward shooting from the bench. That probably had something to do with the other groups opening up a bit, but I’m not complaining.

I wish Remington still sold bullets separately, but hey, life goes on. I have two boxes of the Remington bullets left, and when they’re gone, they’re gone. I also have a couple of boxes of Speer 180-grain jacketed bullets, and when I’ve run through my stash of Remington 180 bullets, I’ll try the Speers next. Speer still makes those. There are a few other loads I’m going to try, too. I’ll keep you posted.

Never miss an ExNotes blog:

Don’t forget: Visit our advertisers!

A Tale of Two Mosins

By Joe Berk

When I first saw Mosin-Nagant military surplus rifles for sale in a Big 5 sporting goods store years ago, I dismissed them as junk. Wow, was that ever a mistake. I’ve previously written about being smitten with these Russian rifles, and my appreciation for them continues unabated. Back in the day, you could pick them up for $79. That was after the Soviet Union collapsed and the Russians were sending Mosins over here by the boatload to raise cash. Then, during the Obama administration, the flow of these rifles to the US stopped. Today, a Mosin will set you back $300 or more (and it’s mostly more). I recognized the inherent quality and probable appreciation after shooting the first one I bought. I knew Mosin prices would climb and I picked up several. My two favorites are the ones you see in the photo above.

I use the first Mosin I ever bought (the one on top in the above photo) for shooting jacketed bullets. It has a bore that looks like a sewer pipe, but it is accurate. Here’s a recent 100-yard target.

There are 20 shots on this 100-yard target. The two that went low? Chalk it up to operator error.

I don’t use surplus 7.62x54R ammo in my Mosin-Nagant rifles. Surplus ammo used to be cheap and readily available, but not anymore. Even when surplus ammo was around, I didn’t use it because the primers were corrosive. I shoot only my reloads in the Mosins. Just about any 150-grain, .312 diameter jacketed bullet works well with 43.7 grains of IMR 4320 propellant. That powder is no longer available, but I have a stash. When I use it up, I’ll probably switch to Varget or IMR 4064 (both powders are said to work well in the 7.62x54R cartridge).

My Mosin-Nagant jacketed bullet load. It’s very accurate.

The other rifle Mosin you see above (the one on the bottom) is a beautiful hex receiver with a bore that appears to be brand new. When I fired it with jacketed bullets, it grouped very well, but it also shot very high with the rear sight in its lowest setting. I thought I would have to find a taller front sight, but I tried a few cast bullets and to my surprise, the rifle shot to point of aim at 50 yards. When I tried my cast bullet load at 100 yards, it was a scosh low. I went up one click on the rear sight and it was perfect.

My first 5 shots at 100 yards went low, wo I went up one click and put nearly all the rest in the 10-ring. Cast bullets can be very accurate.

My cast load for the Mosin is a 200-grain bullet sized to 0.313 inches over 18.0 grains of SR 4759. Like the IMR 4320 propellant mentioned above, SR 4759 is a discontinued powder, and like my situation with IMR 4320, I also have a stash of SR 4759. When I run out of it, there are other powders that work well with cast bullets. I’m looking forward to developing a new load with them. The load you see here sets a high bar, but I’m sure I can find a load that will match it.

I hadn’t shot cast bullets in my Mosin in a while. It didn’t matter; the rifle still shoots this load superbly well.

With both the Mosin-Nagant rifles you see above, I’ve refinished the stocks with several coats of TruOil (I sanded the stocks as little as possible to preserve the original cartouches). I’ve also glass bedded the actions and cleaned up the triggers. Both rifles are fun to shoot and both are superbly accurate.

If you would like to read more on our Mosin adventures, you can do so here:

Never miss an ExNotes blog:

Don’t forget: Visit our advertisers!

The USS Alabama

By Joe Berk

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.

Never miss an ExNotes blog:

Don’t forget: Visit our advertisers!

A .458 Win Mag Follow Up

By Joe Berk

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.

The Garmin chronograph. — 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.

A low velocity impact at 50 yards. — 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.

Never miss an ExNotes blog:

Don’t forget: Visit our advertisers!

A .458 Win Mag No. 1

By Joe Berk

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.

Never miss an ExNotes blog:

Don’t forget: Visit our advertisers!

A Tale of Two 1911s

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.

Never miss an ExNotes blog:

Don’t forget: Visit our advertisers!

SIG Alert

By Joe Berk

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.

Never miss an ExNotes blog:

Don’t forget: Visit our advertisers!

A Four-Screw Navy Arms Repro Colt 1860 Army: Part 2

By Joe Cota

When I got home yesterday from a routine 10-year colonoscopy exam (the prep was the worst part), I took a short nap, later in the evening the little lady went outside for something and brought in a package that had been sitting unguarded on my front doorstep probably since mid-morning. To make matters worse, it had been shipped it in a clearly marked ASUS Workbook computer box, complete with carry handle!

I opened the package today and the gun far exceeded my expectations! Man, this piece is so very cool. The Navy Arms box is complete with some minor scuffing. All the paperwork is present as near as I can tell.

Here are two pages from the catalog. You can click on the two images below to see larger versions that make reading the print easier.

There is also a color catalog. My gun is letter C in the catalog photo which proclaims it to be “one of the finest muzzle loading pistols in the Navy Arm line.” After handling the gun, I believe them. Oddly, nothing in the package I’ve seen in my brief review indicates that this gun was manufactured by Uberti, but the Uberti crest stamped inconspicuously on the frame tells me that it was.

The AB stamp on the gun translates to a 1976 date of manufacture. Totally unexpected by me, the frame, hammer, and loading lever are all beautifully case color hardened steel. Oh, man the photos don’t do any justice to the vibrant colors! The barrel is a highly polished deep blue having a mirror-like finish. The brass trigger guard is a little dull, but not tarnished at all after spending the past 48 years in its oiled plastic bag time capulsule. Oh, and that super fine ocean battle scene either engraved or rolled onto the cylinder is simply immaculate! The walnut stocks deep grain really showcases this piece.

Well, I have to catch up on my office work today, so I am just put everything back in the Navy Arms box for now. Maybe I’ll have some time over the coming weekend to clean it up and put on a fresh coat of oil. Until then I imagine there will be a considerable amount of daydreaming about this piece going on upstairs.

For now, enjoy these updated photos. The gun still hasn’t been cleaned. I Can’t wait to shoot it. Yeah, I know, I know. There may be a few folks who say the gun has survived 48 years without being fired and should stay that way. Well, it probably had been proof fired in Italy at the factory, but there is no evidence of it except for the factory proof markings. My thinking is that this isn’t an original Colt 1860 Army and I paid only a couple beans for it including shipping, so why not wake it up from its long hibernation and have a blast?

We forwarded Joe’s photos and request for info to my good buddy Paul, who is our resident blackpowder firearms guru. Here’s what Paul had to say:

Those two extra screws are for a shoulder stock. You remove those screws and put the shoulder stock on then secure the stock with those screws. That gun is desirable because of that feature. If he had the shoulder stock it would be worth three or more times what the gun alone is worth. That gun looks like new – I wish I owned it! Not too many people purchased a shoulder stock for those guns that’s why you don’t see them often and when you do they cost BIG MONEY.

There were a few different styles being sold back in the ’60s & ’70s. I looked on YouTube for some questions that I had and found that some of the shoulder stocks did not need to remove those screws. The stock only used those screws to pivot the stock attachment area on, then the claw would grip a notch in the bottom of the grip frame. Some guns would be cut under the recoil shield on both sides of the shield for the front of the shoulder stock to hook under so they did not need those screws. Have a look on YouTube to get a better picture of what I am referring to. By the way it looks like a great gun!

Good inputs, Paul, and thanks very much for the explanation!

More Tales of the Gun!

Never miss an ExNotes blog:

Don’t forget: Visit our advertisers!

A Four-Screw Navy Arms Repro Colt 1860 Army: Part 1

By Joe Cota

What is it supposed to be a copy of?

My “new” in the box never fired Colt 1860 Army clone was imported by Navy Arms some 45 or so years ago. It hasn’t arrived yet but should be in the mail any day now.

After purchasing it, I was looking more carefully at the photos and I am a bit perplexed. It definitely had four screws. The barrel is stamped “Model 1860 Army Cal 44.” This one appears to be by Uberti.

I had never heard of a four screw Colt 1860 Army before, but I had seen online photos of what I believe was described as a four screw Colt 1861 Navy.

These are the only photos I have for now and they are not really all that clear. The guy says it’s still covered in packing grease and he’s only had it out of the plastic bag twice in the 40-some years since he bought it, including last week to take these photos. It looks like it might have some sort of cylinder engraving, but wouldn’t that be a Navy and not the Army model?

Does anyone know what we have here? Did Navy Arms import a lot of these four screw early Army versions, or more of the standard three screw guns? Was this gun made by Gregoreli & Uberti, Uberti, or is it something else?

Were these guns good shooters? I’m not expecting too much out of it as I know it won’t be anywhere near as nice as my Uberti 1858 New Army (which is shown above), but heck, it was almost free. I never pass up the opportunity to buy interesting and unique guns at bargain prices.

Stay tuned for Part 2 when I finally see what it is I bought.

Never miss an ExNotes blog: