Uncategorized

In the 1950s, some revolvers were expressly designed and marketed for police detectives to conceal carry, though shooters had been cutting down the barrels of full-size revolvers to make them more concealable since Sam Colt was alive. Small, compact revolvers were called snubnose revolvers and have been and continue to be a staple defense weapon. They can be small and snag-free for easy concealment, and they can be drawn smoothly from pockets, purses, and ankle and belt holsters, among other conceal-carry modes. Of the more concealable types of snubnose revolvers, some are DAO (double action only), wherein the revolver is only able to fire with a double-action pull of the trigger. There is no hammer to thumb back and fire the revolver single action, and no hammer spur to snag and impede a draw.Rugers LCR has helped create a new interest in these compact five-shooters, so we wanted to see how a good, old S&W with comparable features - a Model 42 - would compare. If the LCR is the iPhone generations revolver, then the Model 42 would be the gun for those who grew up using rotary-dial telephones.

We recently had the good fortune to have three interesting 9mm polymer-frame handguns come our way. Two of them are new to these pages, the Walther PPX M1 No. 2790025, $450; and the Kriss Sphinx SDP Compact, $1295. This marks the first time weve ever tested a Sphinx of any sort, and the PPX is a new model. They were joined in this shootfest by a handgun weve tested two times previously, the CZ USA CZ 75 P-07 Duty, $528, but in a new variation, the No. 91178, which has tall sights and a threaded barrel to accommodate a suppressor. Those seemingly minor changes to what has been a Grade B gun improved it in our eyes, even if we werent going to fit it with a can.This trio had a lot in common. They were very close in overall length, if you discount the CZs longer barrel. The CZ and the Sphinx are obviously related in bloodline, with the Sphinx being fairly described as a legal, but much higher end, copy of the CZ 75. Walthers product has the most market-savvy approach, coming in many hundreds of dollars below the Swiss-made Sphinx and at least a few tens of dollars, maybe more, below the CZ. There are differences, too, with the Walther being a DAO action and the Sphinx and CZ being DA/SA, and the CZ being convertible to SA operation as well. But because of the Walthers excellent trigger, it didnt give up as much as you might think to the second-shot single actions.But when the smoke cleared, our team said we had three above-average products that we probably would not purchase; therefore, we cant recommend that you purchase them either. You may disagree; because in the stats and descriptions below, you may see silk where we saw sows ear.

We recently had the good fortune to have three interesting 9mm polymer-frame handguns come our way. Two of them are new to these pages, the Walther PPX M1 No. 2790025, $450; and the Kriss Sphinx SDP Compact, $1295. This marks the first time weve ever tested a Sphinx of any sort, and the PPX is a new model. They were joined in this shootfest by a handgun weve tested two times previously, the CZ USA CZ 75 P-07 Duty, $528, but in a new variation, the No. 91178, which has tall sights and a threaded barrel to accommodate a suppressor. Those seemingly minor changes to what has been a Grade B gun improved it in our eyes, even if we werent going to fit it with a can.This trio had a lot in common. They were very close in overall length, if you discount the CZs longer barrel. The CZ and the Sphinx are obviously related in bloodline, with the Sphinx being fairly described as a legal, but much higher end, copy of the CZ 75. Walthers product has the most market-savvy approach, coming in many hundreds of dollars below the Swiss-made Sphinx and at least a few tens of dollars, maybe more, below the CZ. There are differences, too, with the Walther being a DAO action and the Sphinx and CZ being DA/SA, and the CZ being convertible to SA operation as well. But because of the Walthers excellent trigger, it didnt give up as much as you might think to the second-shot single actions.But when the smoke cleared, our team said we had three above-average products that we probably would not purchase; therefore, we cant recommend that you purchase them either. You may disagree; because in the stats and descriptions below, you may see silk where we saw sows ear.

In the September 2013 issue we tested three of the AR-15 rifle types, and found some limitations among them. For example, we replaced the horrid trigger in the Bushmaster Carbon-15 with one of the excellent Geissele (pronounced GUYS-lee) SSA-E triggers. That trigger was such a revelation we immediately wanted to replace the triggers in the other two with the aftermarket ones on hand, but waited until now to try them.

We had on hand a Timney 668-S trigger that was supposed to give a 3-pound break. We had another Geissele trigger, the Hi-Speed National Match, to try. Besides triggers, we had two different types of butt stocks by Magpul. These were the easily-changed MOE, a mil-spec item that gives you several benefits; and the UBR stock, which requires some gunsmithing to install because you have to replace the original stock extension with Magpul's.

We also had other items from Magpul that we were glad to see. These were an add-on set of "iron" sights that were designed to clamp onto Picatinny rails. We had a front and rear, the so-called MBUS set, but none of our rifles had a forward rail, so we could not try the front sight. Two of the rifles had forward sights, and we were thus able to test the aperture rear sight on them.

We had a final item, which some shooters seem to like a whole lot. That's the costly Slide Fire mechanism, which permits rapid-fire shooting of any of the AR-type rifles. With all these parts in front of us, we got busy with the original three AR-15s, which were the Rock River Arms LAR-15, the ArmaLite M15, and the Bushmaster Carbon-15. Rather than try all the parts on all the rifles, we put them where they seemed most appropriate, or as in the case of one of the stocks, the only place they'd fit. Here's what we found.

Unlike the conflicts with bad guys depicted on television and in the movies, a home owner in a self-defense situation will rarely fire more than one or two shots. In most cases, the owner of a firearm specifically designed to stop the threat of an intruder will never fire even one shot in their home because they will never be put in such a position.

With the caveat that there might be a slight possibility of a zombie apocalypse or another type of breakdown of society, most self-defense shotgun owners are simply looking for a little peace of mind and a lot of confidence that their firearm will perform in a capable manner when and if it is required.

Nevertheless, it is also a fact that self-defense shotguns have been and continue to be a very popular item in the firearms market. Models from basic slide-actions that have been slightly modified from their field version counterparts to highly adapted tools designed to meet the extreme needs of law enforcement and military users are among the available offerings.

At a reader's request, we selected several new models of self-defense shotguns that carry low to moderate price tags and pitted them against one of the popular veteran self-defense shotguns to see how they would perform. The 12-gauge pumpguns in our test included the Benelli Super Nova Tactical No. 29155 pump-action 12 Gauge, $559, which has been a self-defense staple for years, and the recently introduced Stevens Model 320 Home Defense No. 19495, $270; the CZ Model 612 Home Defense No. 06520, $290; and the CZ Model 612 HC-P No. 06510, $349.

All of the short-barreled pump-action shotguns are designed for a specific need and purpose — self defense — and do not easily lend themselves to other uses, such as hunting in the field or busting clay targets.

As one veteran gunsmith in our group noted: "Most of these shotguns will not have a box of shells fired through them in a year and a lot won't have more than a half-dozen boxes shot in them during a lifetime."

With this truism in mind, we limited our field testing of the four shotguns to firing at paper targets on the range and did not attempt any evaluation of how the shotguns would handle clay targets or birds in the air. These self-defense firearms are designed to be fired more like a rifle than a scattergun, so it would be unfair to judge them on the qualities found in high-dollar, better-balanced firearms that have a place in the field and on clay-target ranges.

Sticking with the types of ammunition that would handle most self-defense situations, we put the four shotguns through patterning and performance tests with a variety of shotgun shells. The ammo selection in our shooting bag included Remington ShurShot Heavy Dove 2.75-inch loads packing 1.125 ounces of No. 6 shot with an average muzzle velocity of 1,255 fps; Federal Power-Shok 2.75-inch loads with 27 pellets of No. 4 buckshot and an average muzzle velocity of 1,325 fps; and Winchester Super-X 2.75-inch 1-ounce rifled hollowpoint slugs with an average muzzle velocity of 1,600 fps.

When putting patterns on paper, we utilized the recently introduced Birchwood Casey Eze-Scorer 12x18-inch Transtar Blue and BC27 Green Silhouette Targets and the 23x35-inch Bad Guy, all on non-reactive paper. The targets, set at ranges of no more than 20 feet (typical of a home-defense situation), allowed us to realistically and effectively evaluate the performance of the test shotguns. We fired the Federal Power-Shot No. 4 buckshot at two targets, first at the Birchwood Casey Bad Guy set downrange at 20 feet and then at the Birchwood Casey Transtar Blue or BC27 Green Silhouettes about 10 feet to the side of the Bad Guy. The Remington ShurShot No. 6 shot was fired at the chest and head area of the Bad Guy targets, followed by a Winchester Super-X slug as a head shot.

It should be noted that all of the ammunition fired in the short-barreled shotguns produced quite a punch on both ends. These are not the type of firearms designed for extensive time on the firing range unless the shooter is immune from recoil. For the sake of our shoulders, a few rounds fired with each variety of ammunition were all that we deemed necessary for our evaluation. Here are the test results:

Among the most-popular concealed-carry handguns is the 9mm compact pistol. From the immensely popular mini Glocks to the Sig P290, there are quite a few pistols of this type in service. Thats not hard to understand why: in the same frame size, the 9mm is more powerful than the 380 ACP, and when compared to a similarly sized wheelgun, most 9mms offer more shots than a 38 Special. But many carriers who like the portability of a small 9mm pistol with a lot of shots worry how the 9mm compacts terminal ballistics compare to the same rounds shot out of a full-size gun.Oddly, thats less of an issue for 38 Special loads. Most makers design their 38 Special loads for use in snubnose revolvers - there arent a lot of 4-inch-barrel 38s in concealed-carry use. However, in the case of the 9mm Luger cartridge, many of the expanding-bullet loads with the best reputations were designed as service loads for use in full-size 9mm pistols with 4- to 5-inch barrels. Because the 9mm relies upon velocity to instigate bullet expansion, a significant loss of velocity may be ruinous to a bullets performance. The issue is important because the once-obscure German service-pistol cartridge is now the most popular semi-automatic carry-pistol caliber in America.The 9mm jacketed bullet load offers excellent penetration against web gear and heavy clothing, but commercial FMJ loads seem to exhibit icepick-like effect when used against motivated felons. Such a felon bent on causing human misery and suffering must be personally impressed by the ballistics of a cartridge. Some believe that the 9mm with nonexpanding bullets is effective in stopping a fight with one well-placed shot about half of the time. This 50% figure is challenged by the now-decades-old PoliceMarksmans Association study, which gave 9mm hardball a more realistic rating, in our opinion - 25%. The 9mm also showed the least likelihood of a hit per each shot fired. Poor hit probability and poor ballistics are a recipe for disaster. Practicing hard and carrying effective ammunition is a foundation for effective defense.A number of 9mm loads available today have good reputations. Some have been qualified in police service and others in lab testing. Often, police agencies demand more penetration than most of us really need, and with good reason. Unless you are facing felons behind cover or in vehicles, then a bullet with more expansion and less penetration may give better results. Many of the inherent difficulties in getting the 9mm to perform well are compounded by a short barrel that doesnt give a full powder burn. A bullet designed to expand well at 1200 fps may not reach its design threshold at 1100 fps and may not expand much or at all. After all, the bullet would be too frangible if it expanded at a lower velocity than its original design.In developing this report, we ran across several authorities with differing opinions.

When comparing handguns for Gun Tests, there is a bottom line. That bottom line is reliability and acceptable accuracy. If the pistol isn't accurate enough for personal defense, or if the piece isn't reliable, then it doesn't earn a passing grade. That is the baseline. Next, we look for above-average accuracy as a tie breaker. The next consideration is handling. When it comes to a personal-defense handgun then, the heft, balance, feel, and how these factors interact to allow the handgun to come to target quickly are very important. Anyone can make a handle feel like a 2-by-4, but only true craftsmen understand the subtleties of grip design and how to make a gun feel right. But with a bit of careful design and a study of ergonomics, you might just find a shape that fits most hands well. The rub is, this may be difficult when the shooter also demands a magazine capacity of 13 rounds or more. This makes designing a handgun with comfortable hand size more difficult.

We say all this as an introduction to a second test of handguns from Turkish companies to follow up on our July match up. TriStar Sporting Arms imports the Canik 55-made T-100 No. 85110 9mm Luger, which sells for $439. Stoeger itself makes the Cougar 8000F No. 31700 9mm Luger, $449, in Turkey. The companies did not design either of these handguns, but they are producing them, and the pistols are built upon proven patterns. Just the same, there is much to recommend in either handgun and much that differs as well.

The differences in opinions among the raters were interesting as well, and in some cases profound. Our rater with the most military experience is a military intelligence officer who often sees the big picture. According to him, the pistols are tactically equal. There isn't anything that could be done with one compact high-capacity 9mm that couldn't be done with the other pistol. There is some merit in that supposition. Just the same, he came to lean toward the Cougar because it was most like his issue Beretta. Another rater who prefers the 1911 handgun for most uses found the CZ 75 system in the T-100 favorable. He felt that the Cougar was more technical than tactical. And so it went. One pistol is possibly better suited to all around service or as a belt pistol, while another may be better suited for concealed carry.

Another question might be how each compares to the original they are copied from. How does the Stoeger Cougar compare to the Beretta Cougar, now out of production? Well, if you like the Cougar, it is either the used market or the Stoeger. If you like the CZ 75, there is the original and many clones or copies. So, we had many questions to answer. And with all due respect to our military rater, though the pistols are tactically equal, the differences in handling and favored features are substantial. The opinions of experienced raters are particularly valuable in this case. This isn't simply a comparison of two Turkish-produced pistols, but rather a significant look into double-action and selective double-action pistols.

In front of us this month are three of the black rifles, AR-15s by Rock River Arms, ArmaLite, and Bushmaster. There are - or were - many types of this rifle available, and there are also many aftermarket accessories available. In addition to the three guns, we were provided with some clever accessories to try on them. These include triggers by Timney and Geissele, some alternative stocks by Magpul, some iron-type sights by the same company, a very fine 20-round magazine that we used in all our testing, and one of the rapid-fire Slide-Fire stocks. We will give a detailed report on these rifles using some of these accessories in a separate later report. For this report, we take a look at the rifles pretty much as they came to us.The specific guns were the Rock River Arms LAR-15 Tactical CAR A4 AR1201X ($1065), ArmaLite M15A4 Carbine No. 15A4CBA2K ($1031), and the Bushmaster Carbon 15 SuperLight ORC No. 90689 ($845), all in caliber 5.56 NATO. None had a top handle. All had the numbered-notch Picatinny rail. The Rock River and ArmaLite had front sights, but no rear. The Bushmaster Carbon 15 had no sights whatsoever, but came with a Chinese-made electronic red-dot sight. All three had the collapsible M4-type stock, and all three had 1:9-inch twist, 16-inch barrels.We decided to first shoot all three rifles with a 36x Weaver CT36 Micro-Trac target scope with central dot, and then see if each rifle needed, say, a better trigger or a tighter stock. The Weaver scope was mounted in a proprietary base that was adapted to Picatinny rails and secured by two hefty screws to which we could put adequate torque. We shot the rifles at 100 yards using just two types of ammo. This was Black Hills 68-grain Heavy Match HP, and Russian TCW ball (55-grain FMJ) ammo, representing some of the finest and some of the least costly 5.56 ammo (formerly) available for these rifles. All other types of 5.56 or 223 ammo would, we thought, fall between these two extremes. Some might be better and some worse, but with todays limited supplies, we thought these two ammo types would give a good look at what you can expect from these three rifles. Along the way, we found good reasons to try one of the replacement triggers, and were glad to have had it on hand. Heres what we found on the rifles.

Starting in 2001, the IDF (Israel Defense Force) began testing the Tavor TAR-21 (Tavor Assault Rifle, 21st Century). In 2003 it had a larger roll out, and most Israeli soldiers were receiving at least minimal training on the platform. By 2009, the Tavor had officially replaced M16-style rifles in the tiny countrys defense armory. Now the Tavor, as a semi-auto civilian rifle, is available for sale in the USA. The manufacturer, Israel Weapon Industries (IWI), has opened up a U.S. branch (IWI US) and is manufacturing and assembling the gun in this country. We were able to get our hands on the popular new IWI Tavor SAR-21 in 5.56 NATO. It will accept any standard AR-15/M16 magazine, and the Tavor is available in black or flat dark earth with an MSRP of $1999. The owner of our loaner test gun paid $1850 for his in April 2013.The Tavor had a 16.5-inch barrel and an overall length of 26.2 inches, which gives the operator the ability to maneuver quickly and shoot with the accuracy of a longer rifle. It weighed just 10.2 pounds with a 30-round magazine and an EOTech XPS2-2 Holographic Weapon Sight aboard. Along with the gun, IWI included a belt pouch that contained four cleaning-rod extensions, a squeeze bottle for gun lube, a bore brush, a chamber brush, a general cleaning brush, a large brush for cleaning the inside of the receiver, and a windage/elevation adjustment tool for the front sight. Also, there were a pair of QD swivel studs, a IWI branded magazine, and the owners manual.The Tavor was ripe with awesome features, starting with the design of the gun. Every piece of polymer on the gun was ergonomically designed and felt great, our shooters said. There are optional conversion kits that would allow the gun to shoot either 9mm Luger or 5.45x39mm. It is 100% ambidextrous with a separate kit, which contains optional left-handed bolts. Sights include built-in back up irons with a tritium-tipped front post.The barrel on our test gun was chrome-lined and fitted with a standard flash suppressor. The hammer-forged CrMoV (chrome-moly-vanadium) tube had six grooves and a 1:7 right-hand twist. The charging handle was non-reciprocating. A Picatinny rail ran along the top of the gun, which was great for mounting optics. It also comes with an rail on the right side of the gun. The body of the gun was completely made of one solid piece of polymer. The safety was mounted right on the pistol grip. The magazine release was ambidextrous and a little on the large side, we thought. When we first started testing, we were pretty sure that the location and size were going to cause a problem for some shooters, but, ultimately, we did not have a single issue loading or unloading magazines from the gun.The take-apart process was surprisingly easy. Depress a pin on the back side of the gun near the buttstock, and the stock folds down 90 degrees, whereafter you can remove the bolt assembly from the gun.

The S&W Bodyguard is a DAO (Double Action Only) semi-auto pistol that is familiar to our readers and testers. As we did with the Ruger LCP-LM, SIG Sauer P238 Tactical Laser, and Walther PK380 with Laser in the February 2013 issue, we tested the Bodyguard for accuracy at 15 yards with open sights but were more focused on using the laser. We tested each concealable pistols ability to quickly activate its supplied laser and allow the shooter fire the pistol using only the laser as the aiming device. Similar to the last test, we used the same ammo and D-1 tombstone-style targets. We also need to note again that there is a reason for the laser warning label on the Bodyguard. It employs a red Class IIIa laser that should not be pointed in eyes, as permanent eye damage can result. Also laser beams reflect off surfaces like TV/computer screens, mirrors, glass, etc. Make sure you test the laser of an unloaded weapon to experience how the laser reacts on certain surfaces.

With all of the political focus on guns, and specifically semiauto AR-style rifles, shooting enthusiasts have been trying to get their hands on products that are durable enough to last through any of the troubles that might be coming. For this task, the AK-47 platform may be the best place to start. Known for durability and reliability, the AK-47 has been tagged "the rifle of the revolution." If you have ever seen a movie that has bad guys in it, you have probably seen them carrying a AK-47. There are videos all over the internet of people doing crazy things with their AKs, such as shooting them in pools, firing so many rounds through them at a fast enough pace to set the front end on fire, burying them and pulling them out of the ground and firing them, and the list goes on and on.

[IMGCAP(1)]

We picked out two vastly different AK-style rifles for a head-to-head Gun Tests showdown: The WASR-10 imported by Century International Arms and the 556 Russian (556R) made by Sig Sauer. At first glance, the Century International Arms WASR-10 7.62x39mm, $900 (online pricing from GanderMountain.com), looks like a classic AK design, but it has some refinements American shooters will prefer. The WASR-10 is a post-ban version of the AKM rifle. WASR stands for Wassenaar Arrangement Semiautomatic Rifle. The name comes from a Dutch town where the international agreement on exportation of small arms was born. As manufactured in Romania, the 7.62x39 mm GP WASR-10 accepts single-column 10-round magazines. At the Century International Arms factory, the rifles are modified to conform with Title 18, Chapter 44, Section 922(r) of the United States Code. After arriving in the U.S., the rifles are disassembled, the magazine wells are machined out to accept double-stack magazines, and the requisite number of U.S.-made parts are installed for BATF compliance. With enough domestic parts included to make it "officially" U.S. made, the rifle can have a pistol grip and accept high-capacity magazines. The added U.S. parts are: 1) gas piston, 2) trigger, 3) hammer, 4) disconnector, 5) buttstock, and 6) pistol grip. Some units also have Tapco plastic folding or collapsible stocks. Beginning in 2007, Century International Arms has installed the Tapco Intrafuse AK G2 trigger group to eliminate trigger slap. These rifles come supplied with two 30-round magazines and a bayonet lug.

In contrast, the mostly polymer 556R looks like something out of a science-fiction movie. The Sig 556R is a revised version of the original rifle chambered in 7.62x39mm, most commonly referred to as the Gen 1. While there was never an official recall announced by Sig, the company will stand by the Gen 1 gun and make the corrections needed to get the gun up to par. One of the ways that you know whether you have a Gen 1 or a Gen 2 is that the Gen 2 has a steel-reinforced magazine shelf. One of the Gen 1's problems was that metal magazines commonly used with AK-47s would wear down this shelf over time and cause the magazine not to sit correctly, or in some cases not even stay seated in the magazine well. Another issue that a lot of users reported were failures to eject. If you compare the size of the ejection port on the Gen 1 next to a Gen 2, you will notice that the Gen 2 has a much wider opening, allowing shells to eject without catching and causing a problem. The final issue on Gen 1s that owners reported were failures to fire. To solve this in the Gen 2s, Sig apparently increased the hammer-spring strength to make sure the harder primers in Russian ammo would ignite.

The good news is this: when Sig fixes a problem, they really fix it. The Sig 556R that we used in this test has all of the modifications already made, and it is just as reliable as every other AK out there, we believe. With its hefty price tag (going for nearly $3000 in some listings early in 2013), we wanted to see if the Sig was worth the money, or if the handy shooter is better off buying a less expensive model like the WASR-10 and making his own adjustments as time and necessity require and money allows. Here's what we thought of the two rifles compared point by point:

We were able to get our hands on two mighty popular guns for this test, a couple of the potent 40-caliber mid-size pistols that we also compare to the two forties we tested in the March 2013 issue. This time we look at the Glock 23 Gen 4 (MSRP $650) and the Taurus 24/7 G2C (MSRP $555). We tested with the same ammo types, Remington 155-grain JHP, Black Hills 165-grain JHP, and American Eagle 180-grain FMC with its truncated-cone design.Both of these guns came with loading helpers. We didnt need one with the Glock unless we wanted to fully load the magazines. Commonly in our practice sessions, we load only five or ten for safety reasons, and these were easy to get into the Glocks 13-round magazine using only our fingers. The Taurus needed the mag loaders help for nearly all its rounds, having a magazine spring that was about twice as stout as that of the Glock. Of course, there were many other areas of comparison we considered, which we relate below: