Firingline

Just got the February 2010 issue of GT and noted that my subscription is now 10 years old—the first one in my continuous collection is the February 2000 issue. I know each issue has a page of previously tested firearms, but that’s a lot of fine print to pore through for these 80-year-old eyes. How about saving me that research and telling me if you have tested the Beretta Cheetah in 380 and in what issue I might find it? I want one of them, but won’t buy it without knowing what Gun Tetsts testers think of it.

I have always been fascinated with the M1 Carbine, and before I knew about the CMP program, I bought a Kahr Arms Carbine in December 2004. I have shot probably 2000 rounds through the rifle, and it is flawless today. I should mention that the new carbine from Kahr Arms (Auto Ordnance) has significant changes from my 2004 model. My M1 has a bayonet lug; it also has a ventilated hand guard, it has the lever safety and the cast trigger assembly. It also has the round bolt. So I guess the earlier M1 carbines made by Auto Ordnance were closer to the Inland carbine. I had heard that the Auto Ordnance carbine was manufactured in Korea using substandard materials. I wrote Auto Ordnance and was assured that the rifle was manufactured to military specifications, and all the parts were to those specifications also. I believe that you should have used one of the earlier Auto Ordnance carbines in your test as you did with the Underwood, Inland, and the rebuilt models from Fulton, and that way you would have given it an A rating also.

I have always been fascinated with the M1 Carbine, and before I knew about the CMP program, I bought a Kahr Arms Carbine in December 2004. I have shot probably 2000 rounds through the rifle, and it is flawless today. I should mention that the new carbine from Kahr Arms (Auto Ordnance) has significant changes from my 2004 model. My M1 has a bayonet lug; it also has a ventilated hand guard, it has the lever safety and the cast trigger assembly. It also has the round bolt. So I guess the earlier M1 carbines made by Auto Ordnance were closer to the Inland carbine. I had heard that the Auto Ordnance carbine was manufactured in Korea using substandard materials. I wrote Auto Ordnance and was assured that the rifle was manufactured to military specifications, and all the parts were to those specifications also. I believe that you should have used one of the earlier Auto Ordnance carbines in your test as you did with the Underwood, Inland, and the rebuilt models from Fulton, and that way you would have given it an A rating also.

I just got my December issue of GT and had to sit down and read it. I agree with your findings, especially about the CMP-2 Inland. I got mine about a year ago through CMP, and it’s a winner. The only thing I’d suggest is that when you buy a used M-1 Carbine from anyone, go immediately to Numrich Gunparts Corp. and order a new gas piston, castle nut and wrench. You’d be surprised at the noticeable difference in performance this small change makes. I was told by an old armorer years ago that the gas piston is made of a softer alloy than the gas cylinder, so that it wears first and the cylinder lasts longer. As these weapons are used, over time the gas piston wears and develops blow by. A new gas piston and castle nut improves performance noticeably.

I just got my December issue of GT and had to sit down and read it. I agree with your findings, especially about the CMP-2 Inland. I got mine about a year ago through CMP, and it’s a winner. The only thing I’d suggest is that when you buy a used M-1 Carbine from anyone, go immediately to Numrich Gunparts Corp. and order a new gas piston, castle nut and wrench. You’d be surprised at the noticeable difference in performance this small change makes. I was told by an old armorer years ago that the gas piston is made of a softer alloy than the gas cylinder, so that it wears first and the cylinder lasts longer. As these weapons are used, over time the gas piston wears and develops blow by. A new gas piston and castle nut improves performance noticeably.

Regarding Joe Meyer’s letter about extractor failures in the Springfield XD/XDM, I obtained a 40-cal. XDM in February and used it to shoot Practical pistol all this season. I estimate I’ve put about 3,000 rounds through it with a total of two failures to feed, both apparently ammo-related and both quickly cleared. I cannot speak for any other XD/XDM owners, but I would say that any rumors of extractor failure with these pistols are just that, rumors.

Regarding Joe Meyer’s letter about extractor failures in the Springfield XD/XDM, I obtained a 40-cal. XDM in February and used it to shoot Practical pistol all this season. I estimate I’ve put about 3,000 rounds through it with a total of two failures to feed, both apparently ammo-related and both quickly cleared. I cannot speak for any other XD/XDM owners, but I would say that any rumors of extractor failure with these pistols are just that, rumors.

I’ve already read this issue cover to cover. Again this month I found articles that I will refer to again and again (even my wife knows the Gun Tests filing system I use). When I teach CCW classes (mostly to military members) I get a lot of questions about specific guns for self-defense. If I haven’t used the specific firearm and you don’t have a review on-line, I generally suggest another firearm that you recommend or that I have used extensively. I received three such calls this weekend (we had a gun show in town), and two of the three resulted in firearms purchases and happy new owners. The third call was for a firearm I wouldn’t recommend (based on your tests), so the individual didn’t buy one. He was initially disappointed because he’d read good things in other publications about the same model. I read every gun magazine I can get my hands on, and I asked him how many negative reviews he’d read in the source he was quoting. After a short pause he’s decided to stay on the lookout for a model your publication recommended. I say play the odds, they usually pay off.

I’ve already read this issue cover to cover. Again this month I found articles that I will refer to again and again (even my wife knows the Gun Tests filing system I use). When I teach CCW classes (mostly to military members) I get a lot of questions about specific guns for self-defense. If I haven’t used the specific firearm and you don’t have a review on-line, I generally suggest another firearm that you recommend or that I have used extensively. I received three such calls this weekend (we had a gun show in town), and two of the three resulted in firearms purchases and happy new owners. The third call was for a firearm I wouldn’t recommend (based on your tests), so the individual didn’t buy one. He was initially disappointed because he’d read good things in other publications about the same model. I read every gun magazine I can get my hands on, and I asked him how many negative reviews he’d read in the source he was quoting. After a short pause he’s decided to stay on the lookout for a model your publication recommended. I say play the odds, they usually pay off.

Thanks for your tests of the Judge. We bought the stainless 3-inch-barrel model about two years ago and are very pleased with its performance. My wife carries the Judge on our ranch for self-defense against snakes (very effective with the 410 shotshells). We, too, had difficulty finding a holster until we noticed Grassburr Leather Works (www.grassburr.com) at a Dallas/Fort Worth area gunshow. We purchased a high-quality leather fully-lined holster for the Judge from them at a very reasonable price. Thanks for a great magazine. I get to read it twice—once to myself and again to my wife, who enjoys me reading to her, especially about firearms.

Thanks for your tests of the Judge. We bought the stainless 3-inch-barrel model about two years ago and are very pleased with its performance. My wife carries the Judge on our ranch for self-defense against snakes (very effective with the 410 shotshells). We, too, had difficulty finding a holster until we noticed Grassburr Leather Works (www.grassburr.com) at a Dallas/Fort Worth area gunshow. We purchased a high-quality leather fully-lined holster for the Judge from them at a very reasonable price. Thanks for a great magazine. I get to read it twice—once to myself and again to my wife, who enjoys me reading to her, especially about firearms.

After receiving several issues of Gun Tests, I am very happy with the articles. The tests are very thorough, and as a lefty I like that you usually include info on how the gun functioned for left-handed people. However I am somewhat disappointed with what guns are chosen for tests, particularly among semi-auto pistols. It seems that there is always at least one evaluation for 45s in every issue. I would have thought that 40-cal and 9mm reviews would be more prevalent. I have to wonder, are so many 45 cals tested because that’s what the readers want, or because the staff is infatuated with 45s.