Firingline

In response to Bob Campbell’s reply in the November issue concerning the availability of the 380 Hornady Critical Defense load for testing, as a new reader to Gun Tests I am a little confused. I was under the impression that Gun Tests evaluated products to inform its readers of the best product on the market at the time of that particular testing. If so, how could you evaluate 380 ammo without including the Hornady Critical Defense load? With the popularly of the 380 for concealed carry, should not the test of the 380 be postponed until you had the best ammo to evaluate?

I carried the Model 36 S&W for three decades as both an on- and off-duty gun. I bobbed the hammer early on and had an occasional failure to fire with some practice ammo. I had the department armorer advise me that bobbing the hammer reduced the weight of the hammer, thus reducing the strike force of the hammer, causing light strikes on older or less-sensitive-primer ammo. I had him replace my bobbed hammer with a factory replacement bobbed hammer, and the problem ended. He told me the factory replacement bobbed hammer was the same weight as the original-issue unbobbed hammer, therefore the impact energy to the primer was always sufficient to reliably ignite the rounds.

A double rifle for $5500? It can't be very good, we thought, when our neighbor phoned us to tell us he had just bought an Italian Sabatti Model 92 Deluxe rifle, new from Cabela's for that price, in caliber 450/400.

The cartridge is an excellent one for double rifles. It's known as the 450/400 3-inch or the 400 Jeffery. There is also a 3.25-inch version that was originally a blackpowder cartridge, but the 3-inch version was never factory loaded with black powder. It is one of the lower-pressure British cartridges, along with the 470 and 360 No. 2, and thus is an excellent choice for a double rifle, especially if it's to be used in extreme heat. The cartridge was one of the more popular all-around cartridges for hunting use when it was introduced in 1902. Its popularity suffered when the 375 H&H Magnum came along a few years later, but the 400 Jeff throws a heavier bullet, 400 grains versus 300, and some hunters prefer that.

We went to look at our neighbor's rifle, and then arranged to shoot it. What follows are our impressions and observations of what we now consider to be a bargain.

I carried the Model 36 S&W for three decades as both an on- and off-duty gun. I bobbed the hammer early on and had an occasional failure to fire with some practice ammo. I had the department armorer advise me that bobbing the hammer reduced the weight of the hammer, thus reducing the strike force of the hammer, causing light strikes on older or less-sensitive-primer ammo. I had him replace my bobbed hammer with a factory replacement bobbed hammer, and the problem ended. He told me the factory replacement bobbed hammer was the same weight as the original-issue unbobbed hammer, therefore the impact energy to the primer was always sufficient to reliably ignite the rounds.

I carried the Model 36 S&W for three decades as both an on- and off-duty gun. I bobbed the hammer early on and had an occasional failure to fire with some practice ammo. I had the department armorer advise me that bobbing the hammer reduced the weight of the hammer, thus reducing the strike force of the hammer, causing light strikes on older or less-sensitive-primer ammo. I had him replace my bobbed hammer with a factory replacement bobbed hammer, and the problem ended. He told me the factory replacement bobbed hammer was the same weight as the original-issue unbobbed hammer, therefore the impact energy to the primer was always sufficient to reliably ignite the rounds.

I would like to comment on red-dot optical sights for firearms. For my competitive shooting and hunting, I have always purchased top quality and the most expensive optics I could afford. I wanted to advise my fellow Gun Tests readers about my experience with a made-in-China clone of the excellent Burris FastFire red dot sight. The clones of the Burris FastFire optical sights actually work fairly well in use, but they have no on-off switch like the Burris FastFire unit. When you put the plastic protective cover on the sight, this is supposed to turn the unit off. But in my experience, the sights eat batteries like a fat boy eats a bag of potato chips.

I would like to comment on red-dot optical sights for firearms. For my competitive shooting and hunting, I have always purchased top quality and the most expensive optics I could afford. I wanted to advise my fellow Gun Tests readers about my experience with a made-in-China clone of the excellent Burris FastFire red dot sight. The clones of the Burris FastFire optical sights actually work fairly well in use, but they have no on-off switch like the Burris FastFire unit. When you put the plastic protective cover on the sight, this is supposed to turn the unit off. But in my experience, the sights eat batteries like a fat boy eats a bag of potato chips.

I subscribe to no less than six gun-related magazines. Although I read and enjoy every letter to the editor and editorial column enough to justify the subscription price, I rarely read more than one article from any of them. Don’t get me wrong, I skim them all, but most articles just don’t fit my use or taste. The August 2010/Vol. XXII, No. 8 issue of Gun Tests magazine was an exception.The 9mm compact article was the very best article I’ve read in a year. You guys picked three solid pistols and one that I’d call a sleeper (the Ruger). Your testers were thorough and fair and didn’t nitpick much. Having owned and/or shot three of the four, I know how hard it is to find enough fault with this group to call a winner and a loser.

I subscribe to no less than six gun-related magazines. Although I read and enjoy every letter to the editor and editorial column enough to justify the subscription price, I rarely read more than one article from any of them. Don’t get me wrong, I skim them all, but most articles just don’t fit my use or taste. The August 2010/Vol. XXII, No. 8 issue of Gun Tests magazine was an exception.The 9mm compact article was the very best article I’ve read in a year. You guys picked three solid pistols and one that I’d call a sleeper (the Ruger). Your testers were thorough and fair and didn’t nitpick much. Having owned and/or shot three of the four, I know how hard it is to find enough fault with this group to call a winner and a loser.

Your recent test of rifles in this chambering parallels my observations, for the most part. Noticed while reading the review that troubles were experienced with some ammunition in various rifles. Your article alludes to light primer strikes, producing failure-to-fire situations. I also use the Yugo SKS, Romanian WASR, CZ 527, and DPMS chambered in this cartridge. Similar experiences occurred with light primer strikes in some rifles among various lots of Wolf ammunition. At first, just thought it was faulty ammunition, until several cartridges were disassembled. Following that, I determined the light firing-pin strikes were not the problem, but rather faulty engineering on the manufacturers’ part. Whether this was done purposely could be debated, but it does seem strange that U.S.– manufactured ammunition had no troubles, but foreign-manufactured ammo, especially Wolf, there was a problem of seemingly light primer strikes.

Your recent test of rifles in this chambering parallels my observations, for the most part. Noticed while reading the review that troubles were experienced with some ammunition in various rifles. Your article alludes to light primer strikes, producing failure-to-fire situations. I also use the Yugo SKS, Romanian WASR, CZ 527, and DPMS chambered in this cartridge. Similar experiences occurred with light primer strikes in some rifles among various lots of Wolf ammunition. At first, just thought it was faulty ammunition, until several cartridges were disassembled. Following that, I determined the light firing-pin strikes were not the problem, but rather faulty engineering on the manufacturers’ part. Whether this was done purposely could be debated, but it does seem strange that U.S.– manufactured ammunition had no troubles, but foreign-manufactured ammo, especially Wolf, there was a problem of seemingly light primer strikes.

Your recent test of rifles in this chambering parallels my observations, for the most part. Noticed while reading the review that troubles were experienced with some ammunition in various rifles. Your article alludes to light primer strikes, producing failure-to-fire situations. I also use the Yugo SKS, Romanian WASR, CZ 527, and DPMS chambered in this cartridge. Similar experiences occurred with light primer strikes in some rifles among various lots of Wolf ammunition. At first, just thought it was faulty ammunition, until several cartridges were disassembled. Following that, I determined the light firing-pin strikes were not the problem, but rather faulty engineering on the manufacturers’ part. Whether this was done purposely could be debated, but it does seem strange that U.S.– manufactured ammunition had no troubles, but foreign-manufactured ammo, especially Wolf, there was a problem of seemingly light primer strikes.