Let's try again

....

Unhealthy Outdoorsman 9/6

As I mentioned last week, my birthday was on the 1st.  My beautiful wife took me out to a local steakhouse for dinner.  I had a steak and potatoes and it was delicious.  Felt guilty about it the whole time.

Then on Sunday my in-laws threw me a party and brought/cooked my favorite food.  I limited myself to one plate of food and one (albeit big) slice of cheesecake, and filled myself up on pineapple and grapes in between.  Everybody left the leftovers at my house.  Over the past two days I've had a couple slices of cheesecake, a couple slices of non-cheese cake, and various dishes for my meals.

I went and weighed in today and...

Lost 1 pound!

How the hell did that happen?  Idk, I was honestly expecting a gain.  I've walked about 4 miles since friday so I'm guessing thats it.  (We went to the zoo, went geocaching (see Kim's post here for an explanation, it's pretty fun) for the first time, and I went fishing briefly along the IL river today (and that's all that will be said about that fishing attempt, which is already more than it deserves).  I didn't follow my points for the past few days, just ate when I was supposed to eat and snacked on fruit/amonds in between.  Amazing what a little exercise will do.

I wonder what a lot of exercise will do....

Quest for the Holy Handgun: Glock 17

Continuing my search for the ideal first handgun, we'll be moving on to one of the most popular guns in the world: the Glock 17.

Perfection?  I guess we'll see.

If you have no idea what I'm talking about with this whole Quest dealio, you should go read this post to check out the details and what criteria I'll be focusing on.  Then, go check out the first entry into the series on the m1911 platform, found here.  Go on, I'll wait...  All caught up?  Ok, let's learn a bit about the Glock.

In 1980, the Austrian military decided to hold a competition to find a new service pistol. (They had been using Walther p38s since the end of WWII.)  Up to that point, Glock was a company that produced quality  military knives, entrenching tools, etc.; but had never produced a firearm.  Gaston Glock put together a team of legit gunmakers to hopefully bring home the lucrative contract.  

The military had 17 criteria that the prospective pistols would be judged upon.  They ranged from pretty standard (must be able to be broken down without tools in the field, must be secure from accidental discharge from 6 feet, blah blah blah) to pretty hardcore (Must not have more than 20 malfunctions within the first 10,000 rounds; must shoot 15,000 rounds, fire a special over-loaded cartridge that would produce twice the pressure of a standard round and continue to function).  

Glock made a pistol to meet all of the criteria and named it the Model 17 as it was the company's 17th patent.  The Glock 17 proceeded to whip some established-gun-maker ass in the military trials, beating out such established names as H&K, Sig Sauer (also coming soon on QHH), and Beretta among others.  

The Glock 17 was truly revolutionary in that the lower half of the pistol is plastic.  A very strong plastic polymer.  This brought all kinds of jests from those who had carried metal 1911s and revolvers all their lives, earning the names Tactical Tupperware and Plastic Fantastic.  Despite the world's skepticism, the Glock's polymer has proven itself over the past 30 years and become an oft-copied design.

The Glock was shortly adopted by the Swedish and Norwegian militaries and was invited to the trials to replace the 1911 as the American service pistol.  However, the Department of Defense demanded a change in how the gun was manufactured in an unrealistic amount of time.  If given the correct amount of time to make the changes, there is a good chance Glock would have beaten out Beretta again and our soldiers would have been carrying Glock 17s for the past 25 years. (Tangent: There've been rumblings that the DoD is looking to replace that same Beretta and Glock could have a good shot at it if they actually hold a new set of trials)

Since then Glock has produced 22 different models of pistol in all different sizes and calibers.  They've gone through four generations (1: OG Glock 2: Changed the grip so it's more grippy and some regulatory changes 3: Added an accessory rail under the gun for lights/laser/etc and added ridges for thumb/fingers 4: Allowed for adjustable grip for smaller/larger hands, changed the recoil spring so recoil was slightly softer, adjusted the front sight, which was previously known to fly off randomly while firing.) and are one of the most widely used service pistols among police and world militaries.

(As before, history paraphrased from Wikipedia.)

Alright, lets get down to business.

Reliability: Legendary.  Absolutely phenomenal.  As we saw, the tests that the Glock passed just to get it's initial contract were pretty thorough.  Since then, people have taken it upon themselves to prove the polymer pistol is more durable than any other handgun on the market.  I came across this article while researching.  The owner has a Glock and decided to put it to the test.  All in all he:

• Buried it in sand, potting soil and baby powder. (Separately, then all together.)
• Covered it in salt water (was a little rusty after that)
• Shot it (!!!) with a .22 caliber gun 10 times
• Ran it over
• Dragged it behind his truck (with a primed bullet-less case in the chamber, no misfire)
• Dropped it off his roof
• Dropped it out of an airplane (same as above, primed case, no misfire)
• Shot 15,000 rounds without cleaning.

The pistol survived it all and still thrives.  The guy uses it as a daily carry/competition gun.  This is why Glocks are the standard of reliability that others are held up to and why reliability on the 1911 was a CON.  With that kind of record, reliability has to be a HUGE PRO.

Price: A brand new Glock 17 can regularly be had at about $500.  Used for around $400.  (And I can almost guarantee the previous owner didn't shoot 15,000 rounds thru it so there's no real reason you'd HAVE to buy new.)  Out of the box, you've got a pistol that'll handle whatever you can throw at it without any modifications.  (Well, as long as you get a Generation 4.  Like I said earlier, the older generations had pretty shabby sights that were prone to fly off while firing.  If you pick up a Gen 3 or earlier, alot of places I've read have recommended the purchase of aftermarket sights ASAP.  The Gen 4 guns have the front sight screwed into place.)  

So a used Glock costs about $200 less than an entry-level 1911 (one that isn't barebones basic anyway).  Also, the Glock 17 shoots 9mm, which costs 30% less per round than the 1911's .45ACP.   30% less per round = 30% more practice rounds = Mark being a better shot.  While it's not the least expensive pistol we'll look at, price is a definite PRO.

Capacity: Remember how most 1911's ship with one or two 7 or 8 round magazines?  A new Glock 17 ships with two 17 round magazines.  Yeah, 17.  This is attributed to two things.  For one, the 9mm round is thinner than the .45ACP.  Also, the Glock uses a more modern double-stack magazine that... double-stacks the rounds.

If you can't tell which is which I don't know what to tell you.

This makes the grip of the pistol much bigger (one of the common complaints about the Glock) but obviously gives a major advantage.  Even in .45ACP versions, the Glock comes with 13 round magazines, far outpacing it's single stack competitors.

Thats not all. You can get a different floorplate for the magazine that sticks out just a little below the magazine and adds two rounds to the capacity. That's 19 rounds of 9mm. If you carry with one round in the chamber and an extra magazine you're looking at 39 rounds on your person. 

But wait, there's more: Glock made an automatic version of the Glock 17 (originally named the Glock 18) and produces 33 round magazines for it. The magazines are fully compatible with the Glock 17. While these aren't practical for most applications, it would be nice to have one loaded in the glovebox in case things go horribly wrong really fast. Also, you can carry (where legal) with the regular 17 round magazines all day and switch to the 33 round magazine at night. Snap on a flashlight/laser combo and you have a great “bump in the night” gun.

I've really gone on too long with capacity. Needless to say, it's a resounding PRO.

(EDIT: Sorry bout the different font here.  My internet kept dropping while I was writing this post and I had to write some of it in Word and paste it over.  Apparently I suck at matching fonts.)

Caliber: It's been proven time and time again that the 9mm is enough to get the job done. A lot of bad stigma the caliber gets is because our military only uses full metal jacket or “ball” ammunition because of a ridiculous treaty that our congress never actually ratified. Ball ammo doesn't expand and gets major penetration, flying through tissue with a channel only as big as the original bullet, thus bigger is always better. When you use hollow point ammo, the high speed of the round flattens it out, making it larger and transferring more energy to the target.

But let's say you think that's bullshit. Or you say “well if a 9mm hollow point is good, a .40/.45 hollow point has gotta be better right?” Well that's your decision to make. But if you don't want to go with a 9mm, Glock's got you covered. They have basically the same gun in every popular self defense caliber (.380,9mm,.40s&w,.45ACP) and some not very popular ones (10mm,.357SIG,.45GAP) for basically the same price.  (Try searching for police trade in .40s, readily available for about $350)  I would personally prefer the higher capacity but capacity being equal, 9mm just doesn't stack up to .40/.45/10mm/etc.  Caliber has to be a con for the Glock 17 specifically.  A small con to me personally but still a CON.

Carryability: Some find the Glock 17 to be a bit bulky.  That's why the Glock 19 ( slightly smaller profile, 2 less rounds) and "Baby" Glock 26 (Subcompact with 10 round mag) were developed.  The full size slide and bulky grip of the G17 make it hard for alot of people to carry it concealed.  With my stature, I don't feel it'd be an issue but the fact that it is probably the largest pistol I'll look at make carryability a CON.

Misc.:

Gen 2 Glock.  Blech.

• Looks: Fugly.  Like someone took a block of plastic, implanted a trigger, and dropped a block of metal on top.  IMO, the design has gotten sleeker/better since Gen 3 but it's still high function/low fashion.  
• History/Track Record: One of the most popular service pistols for militaries and police departments worldwide.  That's all that needs to be said.



Safe-Action Trigger.

• Simplicity: This is both a pro and con for me.  Glocks don't screw around.  There are no safety switches/buttons.  The trigger has a little nub that pokes out of the trigger.  To fire the gun the nub has to be pulled back flush with the trigger.  That means that any time you pull the trigger, the gun fires.  You have to be on your game with a Glock.  There's no safeguard to protect your life if you screw up.  This shouldn't be a problem because you should always be cognizant of the 4 rules when handling a gun but it's still intimidating to me.  On the other hand, if my life is threatened and I need to actually use the pistol, there are no buttons/switches to hang me up and possibly cost me my life.  The simplicity is a wash to me.
• Customizability: The amount of aftermarket parts available for the Glock is second only to the 1911.  You can build one from the ground up with just aftermarkets.  Sights, customer trigger jobs, grip covers, barrels, lights, lasers, you name it.  You can even buy kits to turn your Glock into a Carbine in 6 seconds.  Speaking of carbines, because the Glock 17 is so popular, you can get many carbines that accept the Glock mags.  Also, there are uppers in 9mm that take the same magazines (basically the top of a rifle, just take off the rifle caliber one and put in the one that accepts the Glock mags.)

So we got a mini-con in looks, mini-pros in customizability and track record and simplicity is a wash for me. Misc. ends up being a small PRO.

So when we add it up we have 4 PROs to 2 CONs.  And the two cons are in categories that aren't of a big concern to me personally.  I gotta admit, I started this process not giving two thoughts to the Glock system but it has alot to recommend it.  There's something about buying a pistol that you know is probably going to last a lifetime.  I mentioned the fact that Glock produces basically the same gun in different calibers earlier, that really appeals to me.  It's cool to know that if I were to outgrow the 9mm cartridge and want a .40s&w, .45ACP, or something really bizarre/awesome like a 10mm (.40s&w's pissed off big brother) that the system would be exactly the same.  Also, that double-stack magazine is awesome.  

I can definitely say that I "get it" now as far as the Glock goes.  I'd even say that the research I've done on it has put it in front of the 1911 in my eyes.  I mean, comparing a Glock 21 to a 1911:  Both shoot .45ACP.  One's magazine holds 8, the other 's holds 13.  If both guns are reliable, both more accurate than I'm going to be, etc, that capacity difference is enough to choose a Glock, right?  Theoretically anyway.  We'll have to see how everything holds up to the next couple guns under the QHH microscope.

Feel free to leave your thoughts on the Glock and how you see it.  I realize that most of my readership is used to fishing content here and may not be into guns or familiar with them. If that's you and you have questions or need me to explain anything, just let me know.  I definitely don't have all the answers but I have plenty of opinion and am happy to track down some facts for you.

F@#$in kids.

Clif and I went out to wade a super secret creek the other day in exchange for me taking him out to Jubilee a week prior.

Judging from the lack of water to wade in and Clif's apologies, the flow had changed quite a bit in the couple years since he'd been there.  Nevertheless, after hiking 1.5 miles in the mud, we came across the best looking water we'd seen yet.  Just under a railroad bridge, a beach and the river on the other side of the bank.

Things were looking good as I had a fish on momentarily and lost him and Clif pulled in a sunfish further down the bank. 

A few casts after I lost that first fish, some kids (ranging from 10-13 years old) wandered over from the beach, asked if we had caught anything and promptly started throwing rocks into the water and at the train bridge about 10 yards from me. 

"P-TANG!"  "PING!"  "SPLA-DOOOSH!"

Awesome.

As much as I wanted to say something, I remembered how much it sucked being a kid having fun and having some old d-bag yelling at me so I held my tongue.  No reason to ruin their day to improve my fishing.

Shortly after that, I broke off my grub and took the opportunity to take a seat, drink some water and witness a casting demonstration put on by Clif.  I took some video but the quality turned out horrible.  You couldn't really see the terrible things he was doing to that line.   He lucked out... this time.

I moved down the bank away from the kids, tossed my white grub between two stumps and pulled up this guy:

After breaking off at least 3 grubs on those stumps (at least I brought my own this time), I got another knock and caught his brother:

 

There was a little more fishing, a little more hiking and a little more laughing at people who when they got their ATVs stuck in the mud.  No more catching.  Still a good time.

Check out Clif's version of events here.

Unhealthy Outdoorsman 8/29/11

Quick update as I'm trying to make some changes to the blog.  I tried out Wordpress (even went as far as to import my posts from here over there) but I'm not liking the options I'm limited to without breaking out the wallet so I'm gonna focus on trying to make things better here at blogger.

Weighed in today, down 2lbs!

That's -18 total.

My birthday is Thursday (100 points to the first one to guess my age) and my in-laws are all bringing my favorite foods for birthday dinner this weekend so I'm not too hopeful for this week.  Still, I'll be super careful the rest of the week to try to make up for it.

Quest for the Holy Handgun: M1911

To start out my fact finding firearm mission, I wanted to start with the pistol that is most attractive to me initially:

The M1911.  This particular one is a Smith & Wesson.

Before going into pros/cons, let's learn a little about the history of the gun, shall we?

Back at the beginning of the 20th century, the United States was using a revolver in .38 Long Colt.  During the Phillipine-American war, we were going up against some pretty badass Filipino guerillas who used drugs to dull the sensation of pain.  Our .38 revolvers were having a hard time taking them down.  There was a lack of "knockdown power".  The bullets would wound but weren't taking our adversaries out of the fight fast enough.

This prompted the US to commission a series of trials for a new service pistol that fired a bullet preferably .45 inches in diameter, preferably with a semi-automatic action. (Semi-autos to this point hadn't really caught on with the exception of a couple models)  Colt submitted a pistol/round combination designed by John Moses Browning, which fired 6,000 rounds over two days of testing with no malfunctions. (The other design up for consideration had 37.)  When the pistol got too hot, they just dunked it in water and kept going.

The pistol was adopted in 1911 (strange coincidence with the name and all right?) and has served the US military in every major conflict since.  It was replaced by the Beretta M9 in the 1980's as the standard service pistol but is being used by various special forces groups in the Middle East today.

(History lesson paraphrased from Wikipedia.  Be careful reading it though, it's easy to get sucked into hours-long stumbling through related gun wiki entries.)

So let's take a look at the criteria I had laid out in my previous post:

• Reliability:  The 1911 is a 100 year old design.  While current gunmakers have found ways to bring the 1911 up to speed in most aspects, there is still a slight stigma of finickyness.  Take a look around some of the popular gun forums to see this stigma blown way out of proportion.  It seems fanboys of any other platform make a HUGE deal about the 1911 being fragile and very complicated to strip down.  I left a comment as such over at Huey's Gunsight, to which Huey made a post just to take my ass to school and show that there aren't THAT many more parts than a Glock when broken down.  (BTW, check out Huey's site, it's alot of quality gun content without alot of the political BS that you see on some sites.)  Even if 1911 isn't as bad as it's made out to be, there are accounts of many lower cost 1911's not being compatible with hollow-point ammunition, which is what I'd look to shoot for self-defense.  Couple that with it not being able to match the legendary reliability of a Glock or Sig and you have to count Reliability as a: CON
• Price: It's not uncommon to peruse a gun magazine or online article and see $2000+ custom 1911 pistols.  Mid-range pistols run from $700-$1200.  There are some no-frills pistols available for roughly $400 that are very functional but have been known to have some issues with hollowpoint (hereafter referred to as HP) ammunition as I pointed out earlier.  After spending ALOT of time researching the best values in 1911s, it seems the Taurus pt1911 stands out.  For $500-$600, you get a pistol that already has alot of the aftermarket upgrades that people usually spend their money on such as a polished feed ramp (allows the pistol to reliably feed HP ammo), a beavertail safety (helps keep the hammer and slide from "biting" your hand like you've seen on CSI a million times), skeletonized hammer/trigger, and quite a few others.  Still, that's a pretty good chunk of change.  And we're talking just the pistol and 2 magazines.  With my roughly $600 (imaginary right now) budget, that leaves little to no money for ammo to practice with. Since it's right at my limit for a pretty basic gun, I have to say price is another CON.

The Taurus pt1911.  From what I've seen, the best value in the 1911 market.

• Capacity: Alot of pistols nowadays ship with magazines that hold 13 (for the large .45ACP) to 17 (for the more compact 9mm) rounds.  Most 1911s ship with 7 or 8 round magazines in 45ACP.  The 1911 platform uses a different kind of magazine (called a single-stack) that makes the pistol slimmer and easier for smaller hands to grip but severely limits capacity.  You can get high capacity mags but they stick out of the bottom of the pistol and usually only increase your round count to 10.  I'm sure proponents of the .45ACP round would argue that 7 is all you need but in a pure contest of capacity, the 1911 fails.  CON
• Caliber: Not as important in my opinion as capacity but still a deciding factor.  The .45ACP cartridge was designed by John Browning to go hand in hand with the 1911.  With current defensive ammo, anything above a 9mm will generally penetrate the recommended 12" necessary to stop the fight with a good hit.  However, if two bullets will both penetrate about the same, wouldn't you want the bigger, heavier, wider bullet?  This kind of goes hand in hand with capacity, which is why I don't put much weight in caliber.  If you give up some stopping power by going with a 9mm, you get a few more shots in your magazine to make a fight-ending shot.  Still, capacity being equal, the .45ACP comes out on top in my opinion. PRO 

Comparison of some handgun cartridges.  Ignore the .50AE and 22lr unless you're expecting to gunfight  a rhino or a squirrel, respectively.

Penetration comparison of several popular self-defense handgun cartridges.  See how everything goes past the FBI-recommended 12"? 

• Carryability: As stated before, the 1911 is a very slim handgun.  If I were to carry (which once again assumes IL pulls it's head out of it's ass and legalizes CCW, AND that my employer allows CCW to make daily carry a possibility), I don't see that I'd have any problems concealing a full size 1911.  I've read many reports of guys 6'1", 6'2", etc, having no issue with it.  With my 6'5" Unhealthy Outdoorsman frame, I shouldn't have an issue.  Shouldn't have any big impact on my decision (especially till we have CCW) but it counts as a PRO 
• Misc: There are a bunch of little things that probably shouldn't have a major effect on which pistol I end up with.  However, when you put them all together, they can really turn the tide one way or another.  I'll break them down a little:
• Looks: Dammit, that pistol is sexy looking.  In my mind, when I think of a pistol, I think of the 1911.  I've seen it in every video game/tv show/movie depicting any conflict the United States has had in the past 100 years.  I also like the look of a hammer on a gun, something missing from alot of modern pistols, as it's been replaced by a hammerless striker-fired design.
• History/Track Record: I've already mentioned how many conflicts this handgun has been a part of.  It has eliminated countless Nazis/Vietcong/Terrorists/Criminals from the face of the earth and continues to do so.  There's something cool about having basically the same pistol my great-grandfather used in WWII.  Just because a world army used a pistol is no specific reason to buy one for protection (Nambu anyone?) but such a long track record definitely lends a positive recommendation. 
• Customizability: There is a HUGE market for custom parts for 1911 pistols.  Want new fancy sights you can see in the dark?  Here you go.  How about some "sweet" Punisher grips? Got 3 pages of them.  (In fact, grab a sweet compensator to go along with those sweet grips, you can pretend you're Thomas Jane at the range.)  You can get just about every part in a 1911 to make it shoot/look better.  It's nice to know you can take a gun and really make it one of a kind.  

As you can see, there are a few Miscellaneous factors that weigh in to the decision process as well for me. With what I've come up with, it all works out to a big PRO

So with it all laid out, we have 3 PROs and 3 CONs.  It's actually not as close as it seems, as reliability, price and capacity are all much more important to me than how a pistol looks and whether or not I can make my pistol like the ones that The Comedian from Watchmen uses.  

Then again...

Do you agree/disagree?  Are my pros your cons?  Am I talking out my ass in your humble opinion?  Feel free to let me know.

Coming soon in QHH: Glock 17, Sig SP2022, and one of the Ruger pistols (probably the SR9).  I wonder how they'll break down.  Let me know if you have any other suggestions under the $600 rough price limit.  I was honestly thinking the 1911 was going to fare a little better than it did but when I really break it down to what's honestly important to me, it kinda comes out in a negative light huh?  I guess we'll have to see how the others play out.

EDIT:  Check out some of the other entries:

Glock

CZ-82

SP2022

pt917c

Quest for the Holy Handgun

Sunday, my post on buying your first gun got picked up by fishnewsdaily.com (see the badge on the right) and I got a mini-boost in visitors and a few new comments. 

One such comment came from Mark who laid out a few of his favorite handguns and arguments for each.  I hadn't discussed handguns in my post, mostly because I haven't bought one.  I don't feel comfortable putting my advice out there for something I haven't experienced yet.

However, I am planning on making my next firearm purchase a handgun.  I laid out a couple of the guns I was looking at and I think it might help my decision making process to do a series of posts detailing each option and weighing the pros and cons.  I'm thinking it may help me narrow down my choices a little more than just reading countless reviews and forum posts.

The point of this post is to lay down some criteria.  The categories in which the guns will be judged and why said categories are important to me.  Here they are in current order of importance:

1. Reliability:  The number one reason I'd buy a handgun is for defense.  A pistol that doesn't go BANG and shoot lead when you pull the trigger is useless.  Period.
2. Price:  Major factor.  I just can't afford a $1000 pistol.  Just doesn't happen when you're saving for a downpayment on a house and working on commission.  I'll set a rough $600 limit but that's honestly too high as well without a few months of saving.  If only I could convice my wife I should open a credit card for guns......
3. Capacity: It would suck to get into a gunfight with a couple of crackheads and run out of rounds.  I also would like to try out some shooting sports like USPSA and it seems like the more rounds you can carry in a magazine, the better. 
4. Misc: Things that probably shouldn't matter but will probably have a say in the decision.  How the gun looks, the history of the gun or design, it's use by law enforcement and/or military, how easy it is to customize the gun and make it my own, etc.

Then there are a couple things that people factor in very much that probably won't make a huge difference to me:

1. Carryability:  We can't carry in IL so this is currently a nonissue.  Even when things turn around here and we can carry, I don't don't think it'll be a big issue.  At 6'5" and 464lbs, I'm sure I can figure something out.  (Honestly this is something I've thought about and if I got a CCW license I'd probably carry in a shoulder holster since I sit on my ass in a call center all day. That's assuming my employer would even let me carry at work.  I have totally received death threats over someone's cable going out by the way.)
2. Caliber:  Anything over 9mm will do it seems.  From everything I read, all handgun calibers suck compared to rifle/shotgun rounds for self-defense.  Once you get to a 9mm and above, it seems as though everything can get the job done.  If I were smart I'd limit myself to a 9mm to start since ammo is roughly 40% less expensive than bigger calibers. As discussed in my last gun post, cheap ammo = more practice = better marksmanship.  Noone ever claimed I was smart though.
3. New vs. Used:  Honestly, I'd probably prefer used because of the cost factor.  If a pistol meets the reliability requirement, it shouldn't matter if it is used as long as it wasn't abused.

So there you have it, I'll be putting some popular firearms under the microscope over the next few months to see if I can narrow things down a bit.  Should be fun as my interests for different models kind of ebb and flow as I read different things about them or check one out at the local Gander Mountain.  Maybe this will eliminate those temporary longings and plant the seed for a more concrete decision.

So here's where I need your input.  What guns should I look at?  What was your first handgun (or what would it be if you were to get one?)

QHH Entries so far:

m1911
Glock
CZ-82