Firingline

I read with great interest your review of three .380 caliber pistols, in particular your critique of the Walther PPK. In the May 2008 issue, you positively gushed over the Walther PPK 32 ACP. After reading your May 2008 issue I ran (not walked) to my local gun store and bought a Walther PPK/S chambered in .380 instead of the 32 ACP because I wanted more power in a concealable. My brother has the 32 ACP PPK/S model. Everything we both read was that the 32 and 380 were 'virtually indistinguishable' except for the caliber. Imagine my surprise when the June 2008 issue was far less complimentary about the 380 than the 32 despite their being nearly physically identical. True, my right hand-thumb metacarpal ached (see photo at right) from the recoil as you describe in the June 2008 review. I also had to adjust my typical 45 ACP 'Ayoob' grip by lowering my hand and hooking my pinky finger under the thumbrest on the magazine to avoid two things: (1) my right thumb interfering with the decocker; (2) 'biting' me between the thumb and forefinger. On the other hand (no pun intended), I find this classic pistol to be as accurate as you describe and have already pumped over 500 rounds through it using three different Walther original magazines (note to users: break in the magazines, they tend to 'double feed' when new). I appreciate the craftsmanship and fit/finish probably more than your testers do. I am aware of the serrations on the decocker, but mine aren’t nearly as abrasive as the ones you describe on the PPK.

You denigrated the revered Remington 870 for the folding stock and its brutality to the shooter. It is all true, and so very unnecessary. I have been building home defense and tactical 870s for decades that are easy to handle and considerably less expensive than the $505 that model retails for. You can get a basic Parkerized synthetic-stocked 870 used for $150 to $200, trade the field barrel for an 18-inch Cylinder bore at your local shop or cut it down, add a $30 extended mag tube and a speed-load pistol-grip buttstock for $60, and you can handle anything short of an accidental no-knock-warrant home invasion. For the home I add a high-intensity flashlight under the mag tube. Just be aware of the mirror locations in your home and don’t blind yourself. If you want a folding stock, I would ask, 'What for?' A shotgun is no place for such a thing. If you need to aim, you use a stock. If you need to shorten the reach, you slide the butt under your arm, hold the pistol grip, and point-shoot at close ranges.

You denigrated the revered Remington 870 for the folding stock and its brutality to the shooter. It is all true, and so very unnecessary. I have been building home defense and tactical 870s for decades that are easy to handle and considerably less expensive than the $505 that model retails for. You can get a basic Parkerized synthetic-stocked 870 used for $150 to $200, trade the field barrel for an 18-inch Cylinder bore at your local shop or cut it down, add a $30 extended mag tube and a speed-load pistol-grip buttstock for $60, and you can handle anything short of an accidental no-knock-warrant home invasion. For the home I add a high-intensity flashlight under the mag tube. Just be aware of the mirror locations in your home and don’t blind yourself. If you want a folding stock, I would ask, 'What for?' A shotgun is no place for such a thing. If you need to aim, you use a stock. If you need to shorten the reach, you slide the butt under your arm, hold the pistol grip, and point-shoot at close ranges.

Some thoughts on the new 327 Federal cartridge. I read the recent article on the Ruger SP101 chambered for the new cartridge. I noticed the bullet diameter is 0.312 inch and the case length is about 1.2 inches. This sounds a lot like the 30-caliber carbine with a rim. After all, the 30’s bullet diameter is only .04 inch smaller and shoots a 110-grain bullet at around 1400 fps from a handgun. I love shooting my Ruger Blackhawk in that caliber. I realize the Blackhawk has a longer barrel. Out of a rifle barrel, the 30 Carbine is doing about 2000 fps. I’ll bet the 327 Federal would do about the same.

Some thoughts on the new 327 Federal cartridge. I read the recent article on the Ruger SP101 chambered for the new cartridge. I noticed the bullet diameter is 0.312 inch and the case length is about 1.2 inches. This sounds a lot like the 30-caliber carbine with a rim. After all, the 30’s bullet diameter is only .04 inch smaller and shoots a 110-grain bullet at around 1400 fps from a handgun. I love shooting my Ruger Blackhawk in that caliber. I realize the Blackhawk has a longer barrel. Out of a rifle barrel, the 30 Carbine is doing about 2000 fps. I’ll bet the 327 Federal would do about the same.

There is a specific reason why, two years ago, I selected a Beretta U22 over all of the other .22 pistols on the market. I’m left-handed, and the Beretta had an ambidextrous safety. I once had a Ruger MK1 target, and it did shoot beautifully, but it’s right-hand-only lever made it difficult for me to carry as a field gun. Your article was all too similar to other gun magazine articles—not one mention of the Beretta’s south-paw user friendliness and not a single reference to the other guns’ omission of an ambidextrous safety. You do the same thing when you review a bolt-action. You don’t tell the reader if the rifle is offered in a left-hand variant. 17% of us care about that.

There is a specific reason why, two years ago, I selected a Beretta U22 over all of the other .22 pistols on the market. I’m left-handed, and the Beretta had an ambidextrous safety. I once had a Ruger MK1 target, and it did shoot beautifully, but it’s right-hand-only lever made it difficult for me to carry as a field gun. Your article was all too similar to other gun magazine articles—not one mention of the Beretta’s south-paw user friendliness and not a single reference to the other guns’ omission of an ambidextrous safety. You do the same thing when you review a bolt-action. You don’t tell the reader if the rifle is offered in a left-hand variant. 17% of us care about that.

While I really enjoy your magazine, I believe you missed a bet when you failed to include the S&W 1911 pistol in your testing. Late last year, I purchased my SW1911 complete with the under-rail, which allowed me to attach a night light (or perhaps later a laser sight). At the local outdoor range and at a distance of 25 yards, I am consistently able to put eight rounds of MagTech 230-grain roundnose bullets within a 10-inch circle. Admittedly, these results are not achieved in the same 'timed' rapid-action manner as your testing, but I am extremely pleased with the results. I used a self-defense stance with arms out straight and elbows 'locked' and level with my master eye (which happens to be my left even though I’m right-handed).

While I really enjoy your magazine, I believe you missed a bet when you failed to include the S&W 1911 pistol in your testing. Late last year, I purchased my SW1911 complete with the under-rail, which allowed me to attach a night light (or perhaps later a laser sight). At the local outdoor range and at a distance of 25 yards, I am consistently able to put eight rounds of MagTech 230-grain roundnose bullets within a 10-inch circle. Admittedly, these results are not achieved in the same 'timed' rapid-action manner as your testing, but I am extremely pleased with the results. I used a self-defense stance with arms out straight and elbows 'locked' and level with my master eye (which happens to be my left even though I’m right-handed).

I am an appreciative subscriber of your quality publication. Due to the rising cost of ammunition, I am looking to get into reloading—9mm, .45 ACP and .223. Due to time constraints and volume, a progressive reloader seems to make the most sense. Starting from scratch, there are several items of equipment to buy. Would you have a list or any info regarding what might be 'Grade A' equipment for one starting a reloading operation?

If you had a class for 'Weapons Designed by a Committee of Lawyers,' I’d second the nomination of the Phoenix HP22A. In the 'fire' position, you can’t remove the magazine. In the 'safe' position, you can’t rack the slide nor drop the hammer. Under stress, I hope one possesses all of one’s cognitive and psychomotor skills, because you’ll need them all to make this weapon function after a failure. We teach clearing drills for fail to fire, fail to feed, stove-pipes and dual feeds. With the trusty Phoenix, (different model, same safeties), we’ve been there and it ain’t pretty! Maybe if we’d had the manual to study, we could have looked less like a beagle

I liked your article regarding the CDL versus BDL, but it is too bad you could not find an "actual" BDL in the .350 Rem. Mag. The rifle you used appears to be a Remington Model 700 Classic. Although the BDL and the Classic are basically the same thing as far as the action, barrel, and sights go, the stock design and finish are different. I realize it is easier to call the Classic "a BDL without the fore-end cap," than it is to explain that you could not find an "actual" BDL in very good condition in a caliber that would have worked for the specific test you ran. Also, the explanation of the differences, no matter how slight they are, may have wasted print space. Nonetheless, good article