Over at DefRev, they note the Army’s comparison of XM8,
Mk16 SCAR-L, HK416, and M4 Carbine.

Update: Here’s The Army Times on the tests:

The M4 carbine, the weapon soldiers depend on in combat, finished last in a recent “extreme dust test” to demonstrate the M4’s reliability compared to three newer carbines.

Weapons officials at the Army Test and Evaluation Command at Aberdeen Proving Ground, Md., exposed Colt Defense LLC’s M4, along with the Heckler & Koch XM8, FNH USA’s Special Operations Forces Combat Assault Rifle and the H&K 416 to sandstorm conditions from late September to late November, firing 6,000 rounds through each test weapon.

When the test was completed, ATEC officials found that the M4 performed “significantly worse” than the other three weapons, sources told Army Times.

Officials tested 10 each of the four carbine models, firing a total of 60,000 rounds per model. Here’s how they ranked, according to the total number of times each model stopped firing:

• XM8: 127 stoppages.

• MK16 SCAR Light: 226 stoppages.

• 416: 233 stoppages.

• M4: 882 stoppages.

Seen Les Jones’ joint. Unsurprisingly, a Glock won. But there were far more Glocks in the competition than 1911s.

It’s like a death match of pro-gun v. anti-gun.

Update: Link seems to be having issues.

Context.

I’ve linked before to silencertests.com. Now, there is SilencerResearch.com. I’m still trying to decide which suppressor I want. Three candidates:

Gem-Tech Trinity. Pro: Designed to be a single solution to three areas (subguns, handgun and rimfire). Has many different mounting systems for many different applications. Con: pricey at $525 not counting mounting solutions. Not the quietest 9mm can. And the different mounting systems are all pricey too. I’ve seen no info on its performance with rimfire calibers.

AAC Evolution 9. Pro: Supposedly, the quietest 9MM suppressor around. Has built in device for use on recalcitrant (i.e., Browning style or non-fixed) barrels. Con: Even more pricey (at $795). Not designed for a subgun and needs a special gizmo to work on fixed barrels.

Gemtech Outback: Pro: Least expensive ($325). Super quiet. Con: It’s only for 22 calibers. It’s a con but, honestly, I’d probably put more 22 through it than anything else.

Any advice? Decisions, decisions.

By a score of $750, Aquafina wins.

Conversely, hats off to IBM repair service. It went like this:

Monday: I call. They tell me a box is on the way
Tuesday: Get box. Ship it
Wednesday: They get box. Call me with damage assessment
Thursday: I should get my laptop back

Excellent service.

Some asked so here’s a pic. Not for squeamish. Despite what some said, no alcohol was involved . . . well, until after.

Read the rest of this entry »

Full swing, glanced off of a spike. I’ll let you guess how that went. Let’s just say: You ever seen a hot dog come out of the microwave?

God damn, that hurts.

Update: Hard to type. I have pics but don’t want anyone to lose their lunch. Broke the tip of the bone clean off. Probably lose the nail.

There’s a real battle brewing over the better caliber: The 6.5 Grendel v. the 6.8 SPC. I could do a death match but Tam and Colt CCO done did it. Says Tam:

In other words, 6.5 is already shaping up to play Mac to the SPC’s IBM.

Says the Coltster:

“Betamaxed” describes in one word just about how I see the future of the 6.5 catridge, with the parallel that the Betamax itself was actually ‘better’ then VHS, as the 6.5 is the more accurate, at least potentially. Likewise, 6.5 has the “Holy Damn, that’s expensive” sticker shock to go along with it. Your average consumer sees a $900 6.5 Grendel upper, and buys a 6.8×43 SPC.

Well, that and ammo availability are major factors. Sure, your 6.5 Grendel will shoot the tits off a gnat. But the 6.8 is compatible with mil-spec uppers and I can find ammo for it. And it comes in at about half the price.

With the warmer weather, young men’s fancy turns to pocket guns.

My carry gun is generally a Glock 30. Sometimes, it’s a Sig P229. Both are fine pistols that function flawlessly. But, with the warm weather, they’re sometimes not practical. They can both be carried by me in my usual attire, which is typically shorts/pants and an untucked pull over shirt. However, the weather now dictates no jacket, so they’re hard to carry concealed when wearing what I’d consider business casual (khaki pants and a tucked button down shirt). I’m not one to wear the uber-tactical shoot me first vests so my thoughts have turned to pocket guns (AKA Mouseguns). That is to say, I want something that, when dressed for some sort of social outing that requires more than jeans and a T-Shirt, a pistol that I can stick in the pocket when I stop to get gas.

That said, I’ve narrowed my choices down to a small auto-loader or a snubby revolver. Notably, The KEL-TEC P-3AT or a S&W J-Frame. Both of these come highly recommended, it would seem. So, my quick and dirty death match of two things I do not own:

By a score of 4 to 4, I call it a tie. Convince me which one I should get.

Arguably, the two most popular holographic sights on the market are the Aimpoint Comp and the EOTech. Here’s the Aimpoint:

Here’s the EOTech:

Price: The EOTech can be had from about $175 (if you get the Bushnell version which lacks some bells and whistles) to $400. The Aimpoint can be had starting at $329 up to $450. The EOTech comes with a mount. With the Aimpoint, plan on dropping another $80 to $150 on a mount. Advantage: EOTech.

Battery life: EOTech from 200 to 1,100 hours. Aimpoint: 12,000 to 50,000 hours. Advantage: Aimpoint.

Ergonomics: The Aimpoint’s controls are twist knobs. The EOTech is push-button friendly. The Aimpoint is more like a rifle scope in feel whereas the EOTech is like a fighter jet targeting system. Advantage: Draw.

Reticle: Aimpoint has a 2 or 4 MOA red dot. The EOTech has a 1 MOA dot inside a 65 MOA circle. The circle can be used for a SWAG of range finding since it’s about the size of a man at 100 yards. Also, the large circle is adequate for close applications. Advantage: EOTech.

Glass Breakage: If you break the glass on your Aimpoint, game over. The EOTech will function when the glass is broken. Advantage: EOTech.

Cowitness: Both will cowitness on an AR-15. Only the Aimpoint will cowitness on an AK, if you use an UltiMAK mount. The EOTech with its built in mount sits too high for cowitnessing on the AK. Advantage, Aimpoint because cowitnessing on an AK is huge.

Night vision compatible, brightness, clarity: both come in night vision models, have brightness controls and are crystal clear. Advantage: Draw.

Environment: The Aimpoint functions at lower temperatures than the EOTech. The Aimpoint is submersible to five meters. The EOTech is supposedly waterproof (not sure how that’s defined). Advantage: Draw.

Flash: The Aimpoint dot can be seen from the other side as it projects a dot from the rear. There is a kill flash made for it. The EOTech does not project a light signature. Advantage: EOTech.

Adjustments: EOTech 0.5 MOA per click. Aimpoint 1 MOA per click. Advantage: EOTech.

By a score of 5 -2 - 3, SayUncle calls it for the EOTech. But it’s a close 5 - 2 -3.

There’s some good discussion in my AR vs. AK death match post. Read them. I am disappointed that it didn’t become the flame-war that I thought it would.

Also, the original thread from a while back has excellent comments too.

I may have to do a Glock v. 1911 Death Match soon!

Update: The original thread I brought this up on is here. Make sure you read the comments for a good discussion.

Les’ post on asking gun questions of Sean Penn reminded me that I planned on doing an AK vs. AR analysis. Here it is:

By a score of 5-2-2, I call it for the AR-15. Let the flaming begin!