A bill passed by Texas lawmakers and sent to Gov. Greg Abbott for his consideration would ban so-called gun “buybacks”—those political stunts that have been proven not to work but are still touted by cynical local politicians as “doing something.”
House Bill 3053 would bar local governments from organizing, sponsoring, or participating in events to purchase firearms from civilians, with the intent of reducing the number of guns in circulation.
Rep. Wes Virdell, sponsor of the measure, told those in attendance at a House Committee on Homeland Security, Public Safety and Veterans Affairs meeting that the ineffectiveness of such programs has already been proven.
“While these programs are often promoted as a tool to reduce firearm violence by offering cash, gift cards or other incentives in exchange for firearms, the evidence tells a different story,” Rep. Virdell said. “The bottom line is this. Local governments are using public funds to buy back firearms that have little to no impact on public safety. It’s a misuse of taxpayer money and does not deliver the results that citizens expect or deserve.”
The Truth About Buybacks
In fact, what Rep. Virdell said about such “compensated confiscation” programs is absolutely correct. A 2021 study on the effectiveness of so-called gun “buybacks” reveals some important information that anti-gun politicians and bureaucrats probably aren’t going to want to hear.
A paper titled “Have U.S. Gun Buybacks Misfired,” authored by Toshio Ferrazares, Joseph J. Sabia, and D. Mark Anderson, and published by the National Bureau of Economic Research, concluded that such “buybacks” have no measurable impact on reducing violent crime.
Before looking at that, however, let’s first dispense with the whole notion of “buybacks.” Since the government never owned the firearms they are attempting to take possession of in the first place, “compensated confiscation” is a much better term for these proposals. Of course, that doesn’t sound quite as good on a big-city mayor’s resumé as a gun “buyback.”
“Gun buyback programs (GBPs), which use public funds to purchase civilians’ privately-owned firearms, aim to reduce gun violence,” reads the paper’s abstract. “However, little is known about their effects on firearm-related crime or deaths. Using data from the National Incident Based Reporting System, we find no evidence that GBPs reduce gun crime.”
The study further concluded: “Given our estimated null findings, with 95 percent confidence, we can rule out decreases in firearm-related crime of greater than 1.3 percent during the year following a buyback. Using data from the National Vital Statistics System, we also find no evidence that GBPs reduce suicides or homicides where a firearm was involved.”
Hopefully, the Texas bill and the effort to share the truth about gun “buybacks” will draw attention from pro-gun lawmakers in other states. If Gov. Abbott signs the measure, the new law will take effect on September 21.
As a kid, my family had this gun we passed around. It was an ancient Stevens .22-.410, and even to this day, I didn’t realize how common that story was among people my age. The Stevens .22-.410 seems to have been a popular option for many young millennials in the South. I’m a little miffed my youngest sister ended up with the Stevens .22-.410. As a total necessity to ease the anger I have at my sister for taking it, I went out and purchased a Savage Model 42.
That’s not entirely true. In fact, I just saw a Savage Model 42 for a good price and impulse-purchased it. Admittedly, my enjoyment of the Stevens .22-.410 guided me in this direction. Who doesn’t love a good combination gun? The Savage Model 42 lacks the classic wood and blued finish of the old Stevens but provides a lighter, just as handy firearm.
The Savage Model 42 is an over/under firearm that functions as both a rifle and a shotgun. This leads me to ask: if I want to cut the barrels, is it an SBR (short-barreled rifle) or an SBS (short-barreled shotgun)? Regardless, the Model 42 captures the essence of the Stevens .22-.410 in a much more modern design. It ditches the wood and replaces it with polymer furniture. The blued finish is gone, and we get a simple black finish.
Unlike the .22-.410, the Model 42 can be equipped with an optic. A base can be mounted that replaces the adjustable rifle sights. My Model 42 fires both .22LR and .410, but there are also .22 Magnum variants. I think the .22LR is the better choice for me because I have enough .22LR in bricks to build a small home.
It bears mentioning that the Model 42 is directly related to the old Stevens .22-.410. The .22-.410 eventually became the Model 24, and Savage later bought Stevens and their designs. The Model 24 then became the Model 42 when the gun entered the modern era. The Model 42 comes in both takedown varieties and solid models.
Mine is a solid model, which likely explains why I got it for such a low price point. The rigid frame, for lack of a better term, tends to be the less desirable model. The takedown version would make a great survival or pack gun due to its compact nature. The standard Model 42 is still lightweight at a little over six pounds. At 34.75 inches, the gun is small and compact and sling-ready, so it retains a bit of that handiness.
As a Working Gun
As a working gun, the Model 42 performs quite well. Its strengths are versatility and light weight. With .22LR, you can hit small game at any range that you can effectively use iron sights. With the .410 shotgun barrel, you can take medium game, and I’d be comfortable shooting hog or deer with the right buckshot load.
A .410 barrel also opens up various chambered barrel inserts. Rifled inserts allow you to shoot various calibers. You can fire 9mm, .38 Special, .32 S&W Long, and various other calibers from rifled adapters. Companies like Chaszel make a wide variety of rifled caliber adapters that make this a great gun for the enterprising scavenger. If we lean into that survival fantasy, we have a handy little gun that’s well-suited for scavenging the “bubba gun shops” along the countryside.
This gun offers many options and can excel at numerous tasks. For me, the Model 42 has been used for hunting rabbits and squirrels and a little light pest control. It’s a cheap, lightweight gun that’s easy to shoot and excels in a few specific tasks.
To the Range with the Model 42
The Model 42 has to be divided into its two separate barrels for a review, but both perform quite well. Let’s start with the .22LR barrel. The sights are very simple, open sights, but they are adjustable, and I chose to zero them for the rifle rather than the shotgun. I did that, and the accuracy isn’t bad within fifty yards.
Shooting small game like rabbits and squirrels might be tough at that range with iron sights, but I can hit a six-inch gong fairly regularly with the .22LR barrel. Since this is a hammer-fired, single-action gun, the trigger isn’t bad. The hammer doesn’t have any tactile feel or audible click when it locks in place. Since it’s a single shot, you can shoot a variety of .22 rimfire rounds, including shorts, longs, long rifle, and even specialty rounds like rat shot.
An optic might clean up the accuracy, but the stock Model 42 is accurate enough for rimfire purposes.
The .410 barrel has a cylinder bore choke and works well with buckshot and birdshot, delivering predictable patterns. For medium game hunting, I’d opt for a 3-inch .410 load that packs five 000 buckshot pellets. That’s suitable for deer hunting, and even in the lightweight shotgun, the recoil isn’t bad; it’s relatively soft shooting.
The birdshot load offers a short-range spread that makes hitting running squirrels easy and would be handy for hunting birds in a survival scenario. It also turns cottonmouths into good cottonmouths, i.e., dead ones. The .410 barrel doesn’t pattern exceptionally well, but like the .22LR barrel, it’s good enough.
Staying Ahead
The Model 42 has become my go-to for teaching kids to hunt and shoot. It’s a light and handy little gun that offers the safety of a single shot. I do lament that the length of pull is 13.87 inches, which is an adult length. It makes it a little challenging for smaller shooters, and a 12.5-inch length of pull would be perfect!
Overall, it’s not a bad gun, and it satisfies my longing for that old Stevens .22-.410. I would love to see Savage increase the size and give us a Model 410 with a .223 barrel and a 20-gauge or, preferably, a 12-gauge barrel. Until then, the Savage Model 42 will satisfy my rifle/shotgun needs.
There’s no doubt that a hatchet is an all-around excellent tool for deep woods or campsite use. It can split small logs, fell young saplings, and be your go-to tool for any unexpected needs. Now, enter the Ucon Hawk. This Ucon Hawk Hatchet from Tops Knives emulates all a hatchet has to offer. Then, elevates it to a new level. With its keen edge, non-slip, hybrid handle, and overall toughness, this Hawk makes a bold statement when firmly in hand. But how good is it really? Read on for its vast amenities that strongly back up what it boasts.
More often than not, the image of a product online doesn’t match what is received through the mail. It’s no different for bladed items. I have personally received knives, axes, tomahawks, and hatchets that looked amazing on a screen but were highly disappointing in person.
The Ucon Hawk, however, was the exact opposite. The photos online didn’t do this hatchet justice. Yes, they relayed the color and general design. However, it failed to capture this hawk’s aesthetic beauty, its craftsmanship, and the solidness of the materials. As soon as the Ucon Hawk Hatchet was unboxed (and quality leather sheath duo), I knew something special had come my way.
The Hawk in-hand
With the packaging aside, I was able to get my hands on this visually striking tool. The stickiness (in a good way) of the handle was apparent instantly. This handle was meant to stay in place within a person’s grip, and in my hand, it did just that.
The full tang construction was a welcome sight. Inferior hatchets don’t always feature this necessity, and it doesn’t take very long for them to fail under repeated use. The blade was sharp out of the box with a ridged hammer poll on its opposite side. This would be useful for pounding stakes or breaking apart material.
A nifty sheath, too
The hatchet comes with a two-piece black leather sheath, one part to cover the blade for safety and the second part for attaching the tool to your belt. I liked the addition of the belt loop portion. Too many times, a hatchet, ax, or tomahawk has a blade cover but lacks a convenient way to carry it.
The Ucon has no such issue. The placement is perfect, as the hatchet lies vertically along the outside of your thigh. During my carry through some very dense vegetation, it stayed in place and snag-free from branches or low-lying bushes.
Don’t forget about precision cuts
Aside from hacking through big jobs, as it is designated for, I wanted to see if this beast of a blade could perform more precision cuts. These included shaving tinder or chopping vegetables for dinner preparation. I choked up on the slightly curved handle and experienced exactly what was detailed about this hawk.
In its description, it offered knife-like cutting accuracy. It was as if the last four or five inches of the handle were nonexistent, and I had a true knife in my hand. The tinder shaved perfectly, and my peppers and onions were broken down into easy-to-cook pieces. You get the best of both worlds with the Ucon Hawk Hatchet. It’s the perfect amalgamation of both a hatchet and a heavy-duty cooking knife.
Scoring high marks
The Ucon Hawk would be a superb addition to a bugout bag or a useful tool in your own backyard. This tool has, without a doubt, elevated itself from just another hatchet to a top-tier chopper in all its categorized fields.
Its handle is unique with its dual material construction and incredible gripping power. The chopping head offers a large cutting surface for both powerful strikes and precision slicing. The entire unit is well-balanced and constructed to stand up to the rigors of heavy outdoor use.
One minor drawback
If there is one drawback that may prevent this hatchet from being ordered without a second thought, it is its price tag, which is suggested at $425.00. Yes, it’s a quality, Made in the USA product, but it definitely falls in between being within budget for some and not achievable for others.
However, if you do move forward on purchasing this item, you’ll get the Hawk in all its glory as it soars up and above most other hatchets.
Glocks are undeniably great firearms. As much as it pains me to admit that the world’s most boring semi-auto handgun is good, I must. Glocks might be plain, but I don’t believe a more proven or successful series of firearms exists. I don’t “like” Glocks in an aesthetic sense, but I readily admit they are a fantastic choice for duty, concealed carry, and competition. I’ve always had a problem with Gen 4 Glocks, and that problem might finally be solved by something called The Beave.
The Beave comes from Great Lakes Custom, a small firearms accessory company. It’s a beavertail that attaches to Glock Gen 4 and Gen 5 guns. You might instantly jump to the nonexistent comment section and tell me that Gen 4 Glocks already come with interchangeable backstraps, including a beavertail one!
Yes, they do, and frankly, they’re subpar. They are huge, bulky, and annoying to use. I’ve tried them, and I instantly ditched them. Glocks aren’t svelte firearms with thin grips to begin with. The Glock-brand beavertail merely adds more bulk to an already substantial grip.
You might be asking why I need a beavertail on my Glock. It’s because I have large hands—hands that consistently get a hefty slide bite from my Gen 4 Glocks. It’s annoying and becomes painful during training sessions. A beavertail allows me to maintain a high grip on the gun without bleeding after a few hundred rounds.
Enter The Beave
The Beave aims to provide a beavertail without the excessive bulk that Glock adds to its own beavertail adapter. Its super-small design is very thin and adds minimal bulk to the grip. Installation requires little effort. All I had to do was remove a pin from the Glock’s grip using a punch.
Simply slide The Beave into place and then slide in the OEM extended pin to secure it to your Glock. There’s not much more to it than that. The Beave is quite small, which initially made me curious about its durability. Prior to installation, I twisted, bent, and even dropped The Beave to see if it would crack or break.
The Beave is made from a very flexible material. This flexibility means that a bit of give prevents it from cracking and breaking. It’s a smart design choice. The more rigid something is, the thicker and bulkier it typically needs to be. If the goal is thin and bulk-free, flexibility makes a lot of sense. It helps keep The Beave problem-free without adding unnecessary mass.
Shooting With The Beave
Please excuse the lack of optics on my Glock 17 MOS. I’m currently in the midst of “handgun Barbie” and swapping accessories around. My iron sights were more than sufficient to test The Beave, so don’t fret. With The Beave installed, I did some basic shooting, and guess what? No more slide bite! I could grip high and tight—a grip principle that significantly helps increase control.
Basic shooting isn’t enough, so I holstered the Glock 17 equipped with The Beave and practiced drawing and shooting. The Beave stays completely out of the way and doesn’t impede my draw in any manner. I can instinctively grab the gun as high as I want, draw, and shoot without a second thought.
The Glock 17’s lack of slide bite and my ability to achieve that desirable high grip make it easier to shoot and control. Slide bite becomes a much bigger issue when it comes time to train at higher round counts, but that’s no longer an issue for me thanks to The Beave.
Getting One
You can check out The Beave at Great Lakes Custom’s website. This small beavertail does an excellent job of providing a thin, bulk-free beavertail option. The Beave is currently made for medium-frame Glocks—you know, the double-stack 9mms, .40 S&Ws, .357 SIGs, etc. Specifically, it fits Gen 4 and Gen 5 models.
Great Lakes Custom plans to release a model for the Glock 43X and Glock 48, and I’m really hoping they do a run of large-frame Glock Beaves. I love my Glock 20, and a Beave would be a fantastic addition to that gun.
The Beave is a simple solution, and it’s genuinely surprising that Glock couldn’t come up with something this straightforward. Luckily, the free market often provides.
If you ever wanted a manually operated AR, then you need to check out Solo 300. Their uppers are great for states that don’t allow semi-autos for hunting. They make great suppressor platforms, too. As the name implies, they started out with .300 Blackout uppers. They now have a variety of .350 Legend models as well.
If you aren’t familiar with the Solo 300, it’s an upper receiver that fits on any standard AR lower. What sets it apart from other AR uppers is that it’s a straight pull, manually operated design. There’s a slot cut on the left side of the receiver and a protruding bolt handle. The bolt handle screws into an abbreviated bolt carrier group (BCG). The BCG is cut down since you don’t need the mass like you do with a semi-auto AR.
This also means that it achieves its full length of travel within the upper receiver. No buffer system necessary. You can throw a Picatinny adapter on your build. This allows you to add a folding brace or stock depending on your barrel length. As a result, you can put together a very lightweight and compact build with a Solo 300 upper. I have a .300 Blackout build with a 6-inch barrel used as a suppressor platform with my Griffin Sportsman Ultra Light .36.
The system is pretty simple. When you cycle the bolt handle, the standard AR bolt rotates and unlocks just like it would when cycling in a semi-auto. If you had a round or empty case in the chamber, it extracts and ejects it. When you push the bolt forward, it strips a new round out of the magazine and rotates the bolt, locking it in place.
Early Solo 300 uppers like mine were modified standard AR uppers. They had the slot for the bolt handle milled out in the side. There was also a plug that filled in the charging handle slot in the upper, since you don’t use a charging handle with this design. Newer uppers, including the new .350’s, use a Gen II design that’s a dedicated upper for the Solo 300 system. My original style works fine, but I will say the new uppers look pretty clean.
The Solo 350?
Okay, they’re still actually Solo 300’s, but the most recent addition to the line is chambered in the Winchester .350 Legend. I’m a fan of the round and have a few rifles chambered in it. It’s a straight-walled case that uses .357 caliber bullet weights ranging from 124 grains up to 280 grains. Recoil is 20% less than a .243, and considerably less than a .450 Bushmaster or 12-gauge slug. The .350 has 20% better penetration as compared to a .243 as well.
The effective range is about 250 yards. At 200 yards, it still has about 900 ft lbs of energy, depending on the load, versus around 600 ft lbs for a .223, 780 for a .30-30, or 790 for a .300 Blackout at the same ranges. The heavy loads work great with a suppressor, too.
The Solo 300 .350 Legend uppers come with either 10 or 18-inch barrels. The 10-inch models have been around for a little while, but the 18-inch rifle length is new. All of the Solo 300 barrels are threaded and come with a thread protector. You can get them with just a barrel nut for an ultra-light presentation, or with various lengths of MLOK rails.
Options include a bright stainless barrel and bolt handle or a black barrel and bolt handle. There’s also an option for an FDE upper with a black barrel and bolt handle. Prices range from $449.99 to $559.99, depending on barrel length, handguard choice, and finish options.
Extended Bolt Handles
Another newer item from Solo 300 is the option for extended bolt handles. The one minor gripe I had with my Solo was that I’d sometimes rap my fingers on the lower’s bolt release when cycling the action. I felt like a longer bolt handle, or one kicked up at an angle, would help alleviate that.
Well, Solo 300 is on it and now offers that in a couple of options. You can get it in stainless or black Cerakote. You can also buy the standard length in both colors, as well, if you want to swap out. It comes with an attachment screw and rubber o-rings that you can add for an improved gip. Prices are a very reasonable $21.99 for the extended handle.
Is a Straight Pull AR for You?
So, do you really need a straight pull AR? It depends. If you like to hunt with an AR platform but can’t use a semi in your state, then it’s a great option. You can make a very handy and lightweight hunting build with a Solo 300 upper. It lets you use your existing AR lower, too, so you don’t need a whole new gun either.
.300 Blackout does a good job on a lot of game, and the new .350 Legend options give you more punch. Between them, they’ll handle anything from predators, hogs, and deer, up through black bears.
I mentioned earlier, too, that the straight pull action works great with a suppressor. Since it’s designed as a manual action to begin with, you don’t have to worry about subsonic loads cycling the action. You also eliminate any action noise while firing.
I’ve used my Griffin suppressor with the .300 Blackout, and it works great, even with the short barrel. I’ve also used the Griffin on 16-inch .350 Legend rifles and have been very impressed with how it performs. It’s soft shooting and very quiet.
I can see a .350 Legend Solo 300 in my future, as well as the extended bolt handle for my current upper. When I get one, I’ll be sure to post an update here on GAT Daily!
Gen II Solo 300 .350 Legend Uppers
350 Legend
416 Stainless barrel
5/8-24 threaded muzzle
5R Rifling
Fluted stainless thread protector
7075-T6 Aluminum
Mil-spec Ejection Port Cover
Compatible with buffer tubes, buffer hole plugs, and picatinny stock/brace adaptors (all available separately.)
The pistol caliber carbine (PCC) market has experienced consistent growth and significant momentum over the past decade. With no signs of slowing down, the market still feels somewhat stagnant. It’s largely dominated by 9mm AR variants, with a few notable offshoots like the Scorpion and MPX. We rarely see much caliber deviation. So, driven by my fondness for the unusual and interesting, I delved into the world of magnum PCCs.
Magnum PCCs occupy a peculiar niche; most are uncommon and rare, and one of the coolest was never produced in large numbers. Their prevalence varies depending on the specific configuration you’re seeking. Compared to most other PCCs, magnum PCCs often make a lot more sense.
They allow you to take fast, hard-hitting, and often flat-shooting cartridges, and make them faster, easier to aim, and more accurate overall. These firearms are still subject to NFA restrictions, meaning we often contend with barrels longer than ideal. Honestly, most of these would perform best with a 10-inch barrel, but that’s not a common offering.
Let’s explore some of these magnum PCCs, categorizing them from most to least common.
Henry Big Boy X
Many people overlook the fact that numerous lever-action rifles are, in essence, PCCs. Lever-action chambered in handgun rounds represent some of the earliest PCC designs. Henry, a leading lever-action company today, offers the Big Boy X series, which includes some of the most common magnum PCCs. The Henry Big Boy X is available in .44 Magnum and .357 Magnum.
The Big Boy X series ventures into the realm of “tactical” lever actions, more or less. While not overtly tactical, they incorporate black polymer furniture, high-visibility sights, a few M-LOK slots, and a Picatinny rail. The designs remain fairly simple and classic, eschewing the traditional blued finish and beautiful wood.
For residents of states with strict firearm regulations, it’s hard to beat the Big Boy X series for home defense. If owning a semi-automatic rifle is challenging, the Big Boy X provides substantial close-range power. Additionally, the .44 Magnum variant can serve as an excellent brush-hunting rifle. Its short barrel and high-visibility sights make it quick to maneuver. Furthermore, it’s fully red-dot sight-ready, which further enhances the rifle’s speed.
The Ruger Deerfield and Deerstalker Carbines
Over the years, Ruger produced two magnum PCCs in .44 Magnum. They differ in design and were built to be light, handy, close-range hunting rifles. Both are now out of production but are typically easy enough to find on the used market, provided you’re willing to pay a premium. The Deerstalker, also known as the Ruger Model 44, was the first.
The Model 44 was fed from a four-round tubular magazine and featured an 18.25-inch barrel. It weighed just under six pounds and utilized a gas-operated rotating bolt design, not dissimilar to the Mini-14. The Deerstalker rifles were generally well-regarded but had issues cycling lead ammunition.
The Deerfield carbine was the second option, produced from 2000 to 2006, and was slightly more modern. It fed from a four-round rotary magazine, much like the Ruger 10/22. The Deerfield had an 18.5-inch barrel and weighed 6.25 pounds. It’s a sweet little gun, and aftermarket companies have even developed extended magazines with up to ten-round capacities.
Uberti Cattleman Revolving Carbine
Revolving rifles are undeniably quirky, unusual, and rare. A fun historical note: they were the first repeating rifles fielded by the United States military, originally designed by Colt. Revolving rifles were always a somewhat eccentric category but offered repeating firepower in an era before lever-action rifles became prevalent. Uberti, an Italian company renowned for its Old West replicas, produces one of the few modern options.
The Uberti Cattleman Revolving Carbine features an 18-inch barrel and is chambered in .357 Magnum. They also produce versions in .44-40 and .45 Colt. The gun holds six rounds, uses a single-action trigger, and has open sights. It resembles a classic revolving carbine with a cartridge conversion but incorporates a more modern design that enhances safety and durability.
These guns can be tricky to shoot. You cannot place your support hand forward of the action, but the rifle is fairly light, so keeping both hands rearward isn’t overly difficult. This compact firearm has open sights but appears to lack any method for attaching an optic. It’s certainly a fun gun, though not the most practical.
Wren Metal Works Integrally Suppressed Bolt Action .44 Magnum
This firearm was simply too cool to omit from the list. It starts as a Ruger M77/44, a bolt-action .44 Magnum rifle. Ruger, it seems, has a penchant for producing .44 Magnum PCCs. The specialists at Wren Metal Works then take the M77/44 and integrate a suppressor that surrounds the barrel.
The end result is a “one-stamp rifle” (meaning it only requires one NFA tax stamp for the suppressor) that can quietly propel large, fast-moving, heavy chunks of lead. It’s easy to mount an optic, and a low-powered option would make this an excellent hunting rifle in my area, which consists largely of dense woods and brush. Wren Metal Works offers two models: the standard and the Custom.
The Custom features the Wren Metal Works Chassis, providing a more tactical option. It’s a precision bolt-action design with an M-LOK handguard, a folding stock, a built-in Picatinny optics rail, and an AR-style grip. Both rifles are expensive, low-production items, but holy hell, I want one!
The Ingram Durango Carbine
Here lies our rarest magnum PCC. In fact, there appears to be only one, produced as a prototype and later sold by Rock Island Armory. Gordon Ingram designed the gun, and several Durango carbines were created, including 9mm and .45 ACP variants, but only a single .44 Magnum Durango carbine.
Not only is it a .44 Magnum carbine, but it’s also a bullpup. This particular firearm uses the old R-Line Bullpup conversion stocks, which accommodate a standard action and barrel. It feeds from .44 Magnum Desert Eagle magazines. The type of action the gun uses isn’t clearly specified.
The other Durango Carbines were blowback-operated, but they were also chambered in 9mm and .45 ACP. A blowback-operated .44 Magnum seems like a very daunting and potentially unsafe design. Perhaps that’s why this gun remained a one-off prototype. However, most of the Durango designs seem to have been one-off prototypes.
We Need More Magnum PCCs
I’d love to see more magnum PCCs, especially semi-automatic models. I understand that designing for rimmed cartridges can be challenging, but I’m perfectly content with a tubular magazine for my magnum PCCs. However, it seems they were never big sellers, or Ruger would likely still be producing them today. That said, I’ll keep my eyes open and my hopes high.
Navigating corners has been a fundamental problem for infantry since the dawn of organized warfare. A corner represents a blind spot, an unknown where anything could be waiting. In modern urban combat, this challenge is amplified; you might encounter a tank, a machine gun, or a direct confrontation with the enemy.
What’s the optimal approach to a blind spot? If you answered “pie the corner,” you’re correct. If you suggested any of the five ideas below, you’re at least creative! We’re exploring five high-tech methods for clearing corners that don’t involve bending barrels or “slicing the pie.” Do they work? It’s a mixed bag, but at the very least, they are intriguing firearm curiosities worth examining.
The CornerShot
Thanks to “Future Weapons,” every millennial gun enthusiast is familiar with the CornerShot. This Israeli invention isn’t a firearm itself, but rather a device to which a firearm—be it a handgun, submachine gun, or grenade launcher—can be mounted. Your chosen weapon attaches to a pivoting head connected to a stock system.
The head can pivot at various angles, up to 90 degrees. The CornerShot system utilizes a camera mounted on the weapon’s head, which transmits its view to a display lens for the operator to look through and aim. The CornerShot garnered enough attention that Pakistan produced a copy, the POF Eye, and China developed their own, the HD66. It’s unclear if they also copied the stuffed animal designed to sit atop the original CornerShot, making it resemble a cat!
Change-Line-Free Shooting Tactical System
We don’t often criticize China enough for some of its peculiar firearm innovations. The HD66 is their CornerShot clone, but they also developed the Change-Line-Free Shooting Tactical System—a mouthful. So, we’ll call it the CLF from now on. The CLF takes a low-tech approach, eschewing a camera and LCD screen in favor of a periscope that the user looks through.
To the user, it appears like a standard rifle scope, but it incorporates a sharp angle, with the view originating directly above the pistol. The periscope portion of the optic pivots with the pistol, allowing the user to adapt. This is a more basic take on the concept, and it might even be viable. I’d certainly consider purchasing one and configuring a handgun for it as a short-barreled rifle (SBR).
Russian Makarov “Thing”
This Russian Makarov “Thing” lacks an official name, as I haven’t been able to find one. Chris Eger of Guns.com reportedly discovered this device on a police social media page. It’s an experimental, one-off prototype Makarov PM equipped with a camera mounted on top of the gun, connected by a wire to a lens strapped to the user’s arm.
This system allows the user to point the gun around corners by simply bending their wrist. I appreciate the simplicity of the design. I have no idea how effective it was, but given that the Russians—who seem to adopt almost everything—didn’t implement it widely, I doubt it performed well.
Round Corner Module
The Singaporean military employs a rather futuristic-looking bullpup rifle called the SAR 21. Since the SAR 21 already resembles a firearm from a cyberpunk dystopia, why not attach a camera to its optic and call it a day? The Round Corner Module is essentially just that. You attach it to your existing optic and then push the optic around corners.
The camera display shows your reticle, enabling accurate aiming and firing of the rifle. While the view through the Round Corner Module appears small and cumbersome, the intention is sound. It seems utterly impractical, and it doesn’t appear to have transitioned to their newer rifle, the BR18.
Aimpoint Concealed Engagement Unit
The Aimpoint Concealed Engagement Unit might be the lowest-tech yet most ingenious solution for shooting around corners. It mounts behind your red dot sight, similar to a magnifier. It’s a periscope that allows you to push a rifle around corners and take accurate shots.
The CEU rotates, enabling the user to see around angles and over cover. The Aimpoint Concealed Engagement Unit attaches and detaches easily, making it the most well-thought-out solution to this problem. However, it remains a fairly niche tool that hasn’t seen widespread adoption.
Shooting Around Corners
Clearing corners is an inherently dangerous task. Blind spots are problematic, and while we have an abundance of technology to peek around them, it seems that employing sound tactics remains the best solution. “Pieing the corner” is still the most effective option, even in the face of cameras, periscopes, and even stuffed cats.
Three essential fire-starting tools: matches, lighters, vs. ferro rods. Which would you choose?
Let’s compare three essential fire-starting tools: matches & lighters, vs. ferro rods. We’ll explore how each works and highlight its pros and cons. Let’s dive in! Each fire-starting technique has its unique flair and distinct pros and cons that can shape your experience based on the situation.
Matches & Lighters vs. Ferro Rod: Which Method Wins?
Several years ago, I read many wilderness skills, camping, and survival guides, mostly mentioning matches. Flint and steel were also the go-to method for firemaking. However, Carl Auer von Welsbach invented the ferrocerium (ferro) rod in 1903, but it didn’t replace matches for many old-timers.
The lighter dates back to 1823, yet it wasn’t as handy as the ones from 1932 made by Zippo. Currently, several companies are producing various lighters. However, the ferro rod has gained popularity and is a preferred firemaking item for survival kits and campers.
A matchstick can ignite tinder and kindling like this damp poplar bark that isn’t processed.
Matches
There is something very woodsy and nostalgic about lighting a campfire or lantern with a wooden match. Matches are reliable but weather-sensitive, and match cases are a simple remedy for the fickle matchstick. A match is an instant flame and can ignite tinder and kindling, unlike a ferro rod. Often, thin twigs, which are kindling, can be ignited easily with a single match. Each matchstick is a fire, and you can fit a lot of matches in a match case!
Pros:
Super easy to use—just strike and ignite.
Lightweight and portable, ideal for emergency kits.
Inexpensive and widely available.
Cons:
Can be affected by moisture; once wet, they’re useless unless waterproof.
Limited supply—once you run out, you’re done.
Wind can easily extinguish them.
Lighters
A lighter offers a flame now, which makes it’s convenient for firemaking, but it also carries risks. There’s no telling when the lighter will run out of fuel, and it has many moving parts. A lighter is ideal for lighting candles, lanterns, or stoves indoors.
Let’s not forget plasma lighters, which are entirely different. However, like lighters need fuel, plasma alternatives need a power source. Like matches, a lighter can ignite kindling. But you will want to back up a lighter with another ignition source for safety.
Small twigs (kindling) can ignite with a flame from a lighter.
Pros:
Reliable and reusable—hundreds or even thousands of lights per lighter.
Wind-resistant, especially butane torches.
Works in various conditions (except extreme cold for butane lighters).
Cons:
Requires fuel—when it’s out, it’s dead weight.
Can malfunction (flint issues, broken casing, etc.).
Not ideal for long-term survival situations without a fuel source.
Ferro Rod
A ferro rod needs thin tinder like fatwood, seen here, to ignite and produce a flame.
Ferro (ferrocerium) rods are durable and practical but require skill. In the matches/lighters vs. ferro rods scenario, two are instant flame. A ferro rod requires tinder as the first step in firemaking. To produce a flame, you must ignite thin, fluffy, dry materials such as cottonwood, poplar, cedar bark, or manufactured tinder. Then, you can ignite kindling and work up to small fuel.
While this method may not be as convenient, it wins in durability and the number of fires you can create.
Pros:
Extremely durable—thousands of strikes available.
Works in wet conditions; even underwater, it can still spark.
Excellent for survival and bushcraft since it doesn’t rely on fuel.
Cons:
Requires skill—need to know how to use it properly.
Produces sparks but not an instant flame, so you must prepare tinder well.
Not as fast or convenient as matches or lighters for casual use.
Matches, Lighters vs. Ferro Rod Conclusion
Matches are great for quick, everyday use, but have a short lifespan. Lighters offer convenience, but can run out of fuel. Ferro rods are the ultimate survival tool, but require preparation and technique.
If you’re heading out on an adventure, carrying a combination is smart. Which do you tend to rely on most?
I understand the challenge of finding holsters for firearms like the Beretta 81. Who, after all, is buying an old Cheetah and intending to carry it in 2025? As it turns out, I am. I struggled to find a suitable holster until I discovered Falco Holsters and their Hamilton A635 model. Falco offers a vast selection of holsters for both new and old firearms, combining a classic look and feel with modern features.
You might wonder why I’d choose to carry a Beretta 81 in 2025, especially with so many excellent modern firearms available. Contemporary options like the P365, Hellcat, and CC9, along with other optics-ready micro 9mms, are incredibly popular. The Beretta 81, by contrast, is a truly vintage firearm. It’s an all-metal, iron-sight-only, DA/SA, hammer-fired gun chambered in .32 ACP—a caliber most wouldn’t consider for self-defense today.
Despite its age, the Beretta 81 is one of my all-time favorite guns. It’s a double-stack, DA/SA, .32 ACP pistol in the classic Beretta design. It looks great, shoots well, and is genuinely fun to use. While it might not make a lot of sense to some, it’s a free country, and I have no doubt I can defend myself with the 81; I just needed a reliable carry rig.
The Falco Hamilton
I typically prefer polymer holsters, ideally Kydex or another cutting-edge polymer material. Since that wasn’t an option for the Beretta 81, I decided to try Falco Holsters. I was unfamiliar with Falco, but they seemed to specialize in holsters for older firearms. While they do offer nylon, their leather rigs appear to be their primary focus.
I ultimately chose the Falco Hamilton for concealed carry. It’s a traditional Inside-the-Waistband (IWB) rig designed for strongside carry. While appendix carry is popular, I still appreciate the reliability of traditional IWB. The Falco Hamilton is an all-leather rig featuring a pair of polymer belt clips that tuck securely under the belt for enhanced retention.
This holster utilizes a pancake-style design, which works best when worn in the 4 o’clock position. While it may not offer the quickest draw, this design has proven effective for a long time. The classic gun, paired with an old-school carry position and an old-school holster, creates a harmonious combination.
The Falco Hamilton is crafted from ⅛-inch thick full-grain Italian leather. It’s a substantial holster, weighing roughly seven ounces. The leather is treated for durability—hand-dyed, oiled, and lacquered to protect it. This results in a beautiful, rigid, and stiff design, which comes with both advantages and disadvantages worth noting.
Wearing the Falco Hamilton
As I write this, I’m wearing the Hamilton with my Beretta 81 holstered, locked, and cocked. The holster features a heavily reinforced mouth that prevents it from collapsing when you draw the gun. This allows for safe reholstering, and the stiff design ensures a smooth draw without any holster drag—simply grip, rip, and shoot.
The clips enable the Hamilton to be worn with a tucked-in shirt, offering excellent concealment. While neither the gun nor the holster is small, their positioning makes them disappear easily under a T-shirt. I’ve also been able to wear it with my work attire since it’s tuckable.
The rigid leather design means you’ll need to break in this holster before it becomes truly comfortable and conceals optimally. Initially, its stiffness prevents it from conforming much to the body. This can make your hip and pants look a bit stiff and uncomfortable. It requires many hours of wear and movement for it to mold to your body and become comfortable.
It’s never painful, but stiff leather is, well, stiff leather. Once the Hamilton breaks in, it transforms into a very efficient concealed carry holster. It becomes quite comfortable and securely houses my Beretta 81. The inherent stiffness also helps prevent the holster from wearing out prematurely, which could otherwise create an unsafe situation.
Ride or Die
The Hamilton makes it easy for me to strap up with a deliciously old-school gun and enjoy my day. The holster provides a comfortable, concealed, and safe option for a gun that’s not quite the norm. Check out Falco holsters if you need to outfit an old school gun.
Surplus M1 Garand supplies aren’t running out yet, but the Civilian Marksmanship Program (CMP) isn’t waiting for that to happen. They’ve teamed up with an American manufacturer to make new receivers and entirely new guns.
CMP took two test M1 rifles out to Phoenix during the Arizona Game & Fish March Outdoor Expo and then to the CMP Eastern Games in NC to introduce folks to the new CMP M1 project. This is a project that’s been in the works for a while now, and is just getting its reveal. CMP has partnered with Heritage Arms USA for these all-new build M1s.
CMP describes the new M1 Garand as a “commercial reproduction of the classic and historic rifle.”
It uses a commercial forged receiver built to the original military specs. CMP and Heritage Arms used the original drawings and specifications of a Springfield receiver. They also used original receivers as a baseline to recreate identical, forged replicas of the original.
The new M1 Garand receivers will have a CMP serial number in the classic, historical font and format. They’ll be built with commercial barrels and a mix of other commercial and GI parts. They’re saying that most will feature new stocks and barrels, but that many other parts will be original GI.
Why Make new M1s?
Although CMP says that they still have sufficient stock of M1 Garands on hand for now, and continue to try and bring back more from overseas, the supply won’t last forever. Rather than wait until the stock of M1s is exhausted, they teamed up with Heritage Manufacturing to develop a replacement now.
The rifles will be built by CMP armorers who have decades of experience building and repairing M1 Garands. Sales of these new rifles directly fund the CMP’s federally chartered national mission to promote marksmanship. Basically, by ensuring a steady supply of rifles, even after the surplus runs out, CMP ensures that it can continue its mission.
Being that M14s and M16s have the capability for full auto fire, they aren’t likely to be surplused out to civilians like the M1s have. They fall into the ATF’s “once a machinegun, always a machinegun” ruling, so converting them to semi-auto for civilian sales isn’t probable at this point.
Heritage Arms USA
Heritage Arms USA is located in Alabama, just down the road from the CMP armories and the Talladega Marksmanship Park. They’re relatively new to the firearms business, according to CMP, but have vast experience in the machining industry. CMP has worked with them on other projects in recent years, though. The video above gives some background on Heritage and the manufacturing process.
The initial run of rifles will be available in .30-06 and .308. CMP says that other variants will be available down the road. I’d imagine sniper variants would be the obvious next step. Maybe we’ll eventually see Tanker versions again as well?
How Do I Get One?
The CMP M1 Garand is a new commercial gun, so it has to be sold through the normal FFL sales process. CMP has updated its website recently and streamlined online ordering. You can purchase them through CMP, but they’ll still need to be shipped to your local FFL dealer. Alternately, you’ll be able to buy them directly at the CMP’s Talladega Marksmanship Park and Camp Perry stores in person.
The price of the .30-06 and .308 M1 Garands is $1,900 MSRP, plus $40 shipping and handling. You’ll get a CMP custom-fitted hard rifle case with each rifle purchase.
The New M1 Garands will be allowed for use in CMP competitions, and they’re hoping to ship by late Summer 2025. To preorder, check the CMP online order form.
When it comes to shotguns, I generally prefer traditional stocks—I believe “Monte Carlo stock” is the term. There are several reasons for this. Primarily, most shotguns are designed for a standard stock and pistol grip, and stock adaptations can be problematic, especially with Mossberg shotguns due to their tang safety. However, that’s now changing with the 590R series.
The Mossberg 590R series is derived from a breaching shotgun developed for the British Special Operations Community. The significant change with the 590R is the safety placement. Bid farewell to the tang safety and say hello to an AR-style safety mounted on the side of the receiver. Mossberg maintained the ambidextrous ideal and specifically designed the 590R series to work seamlessly with pistol grips.
The new safety placement positions the rotating safety precisely where your thumb naturally rests when gripping the pistol grip of the Mossberg 590R. It’s a metal safety that will feel familiar to anyone who has used an AR-15. A safety located on the side of a Mossberg shotgun might seem prone to accidental manipulation by the user’s gear.
Mossberg anticipated this potential issue and integrated a shielding device into the stock and pistol grip setup. This shield creates a protective “cliff” that runs over the top of the gun, safeguarding the safety from any unintended forces that could inadvertently switch it from safe to fire.
The stock design is distinctly Mossberg. It’s clearly inspired by the AR receiver extension and stock, but it’s a one-piece system, which is a superior design for shotguns. I’ve broken several adapters and bent a few receiver extensions near the threads enough to know that a hollow aluminum tube isn’t robust enough to withstand 12-gauge recoil for long.
Their included stock is pure, beefy polymer and solidly connected to the gun. It’s a six-position adjustable design, allowing for on-the-fly length of pull adjustments. The stock itself can be replaced with any MIL-SPEC AR-15 stock if desired. Mossberg’s proprietary design features a rather nice built-in recoil pad. The gun also accepts AR grips, and while the included grip is perfectly adequate for me, it can be replaced.
Beyond the Safety
While the safety is a major highlight, it’s not the only noteworthy feature. Mossberg produces both a standard model and an “M” model, with “M” denoting the magazine-fed versions. The pistol grip design significantly benefits the magazine-fed variants, making magazine changes much easier compared to a traditional grip.
The gun comes with a heat shield that sits a fair distance off the barrel and works extremely well. It’s also more securely fastened than any other heat shield I’ve encountered. It does an excellent job of protecting your hand. Like other Mossberg shotguns, it’s optics-ready and comes with the rail pre-installed, practically begging for a red dot sight.
My model includes flip-up Magpul sights, which are rifle sights on a shotgun. Mossberg’s new pump design is trim and slim yet perfectly usable. This tube-fed model holds six rounds and comes with an M-LOK tube-to-barrel clamp that isn’t strictly necessary but provides a convenient slot for a light or sling point.
The trigger group is entirely metal, which is an interesting touch, typically seen on the 590A1 series. The Mossberg 590R series is well-built and clearly oriented towards tactical use, though I wouldn’t be surprised if they produce a turkey hunting model in the near future.
At the Range
The Mossberg 590R may be a 12-gauge, but its recoil is manageable. The rear pistol grip offers several benefits, particularly concerning the “push/pull” method of recoil reduction. The grip allows you to pull the shotgun tightly into your shoulder and maintain solid pressure while firing.
Additionally, much like an AR, the gun now utilizes an inline stock. This design helps reduce muzzle rise and directs recoil straight back, rather than back and up as with a traditional shotgun stock. The difference is noticeable.
The stock and its adjustable length of pull make it easy to get behind the gun without it feeling cumbersome. I typically use position two, which is perfect for me. Another benefit I’ve found is easier reloading. It’s simpler to hold the gun up and on target, as the rear pistol grip makes it easier to manage the weight while feeding shells into the tube.
With that in mind, it’s also easier to perform any task with one hand while holding the gun. Opening doors, using a cell phone to call the police, etc., are all more manageable when you have a vertical grip on the firearm.
The Mossberg 590R’s sights can be a bit of a pain. Using the small peep of a rifle sight isn’t ideal for speed, and shotguns are often about speed. I ended up folding the rear sight down and using only the front sight, which yielded excellent results. Ultimately, a red dot is the way to go with these guns.
Running the Gun
The safety works quite well. It’s audibly “clicky” and responsive, moving in and out of position easily—just like an AR safety. My only complaint is that in the “fire” position, the tail of the safety rests against my trigger finger. When firing full-power loads, it can rub and become irritating. Reduced recoil loads, birdshot, etc., don’t pose this problem.
As expected, the gun is reliable. It feeds, fires, and ejects everything I’ve put through it. I fired mostly birdshot, but also a good amount of buckshot and several boxes of slugs. Everything cycled without a problem. It could even be a mini-shell gun with an adapter if you choose.
One downside is that with an inline stock, you’re now using taller sights. This creates height-over-bore issues at close range, where a shotgun truly excels. I’d advise using a large ring reticle on a red dot that can help compensate for this issue. With regular buckshot, it’s not overly noticeable, but with certain loads like FliteControl, it can create several inches of point-of-impact difference.
The 590R and You
The 590R finally provides a shotgun specifically designed and intended for use with a pistol grip and AR-style stock. It has been developed from the ground up to work with a rifle-type stock. The primary benefit I see to this design is making the transition to a shotgun much easier for individuals who are already proficient with the AR-15 platform.
While I won’t be swapping all my shotgun stocks to pistol grip designs, it’s refreshing to see Mossberg try something different and execute it successfully, with only a few minor quirks.
I have a bad habit of just buying weird guns for the sake of their weirdness. I try to keep this on the cheap side, but occasionally you run across something like the Cimarron 1862 Pocket Navy conversion. Then, you simply have to bust out a few hundred dollars for something that just makes you smile. This Cimarron 1862 Pocket Navy conversion isn’t your usual conversion; it chambers the .380 ACP cartridge.
The .380 ACP is known for its use in mouse guns, so its journey into a revolver is a bit of a long story. Original Pocket Navy revolvers were .36 caliber percussion cap revolvers. If you’re going to make a cartridge conversion of these .36 caliber guns, what’s your approach? If you want to maintain the open-top design, you risk too much pressure, especially when trying to keep things small.
The .380 ACP fits this need perfectly. Its low pressure is safe for an open-top revolver, and it keeps the gun’s size consistent with the original Pocket Navy revolvers.
What’s the Point?
You could opt for an obscure and hard-to-find .38 S&W or even a .32 S&W Long. While that would be cool, it limits you to revolver calibers that are often scarce. The .380 ACP, however, is the right size and pressure, plus it’s common and affordable. This lets you plink with the Cimarron 1862 Pocket Navy without breaking the bank.
As far as I can tell, this gun could work for certain cowboy shoots, like those organized by the Single Action Shooting Society. It’s fun to shoot, cheap to shoot, and fits that niche competition role well. For me, it’s just weird and cool. I enjoy single-action revolvers, but often hate the price of most revolver calibers. The .380 ACP makes shooting this one both fun and affordable.
Since we’re discussing the point, you might wonder why this little gun has a six-inch barrel. It seems that Cimarron originally intended to use shorter barrels, somewhere in the 3.75 to 4-inch variety. Unfortunately, the BATFE didn’t approve it. I’d assume this was due to the points system for the Gun Control Act.
Shooting the 1862 Pocket Navy
Speaking of shooting the 1862 Pocket Navy, let’s get into it. The gun doesn’t use moon clips because it doesn’t eject like a double-action revolver. Instead, the rounds headspace on the raised rims in the chamber. It’s a very simple design that works well for a single-action revolver. There’s no loading gate, but the rounds don’t sit directly aligned with the loading area unless the hammer is at half cock, which prevents them from sliding out of the cylinder.
There’s also no ejector rod, so you’ll need to bring a cleaning rod. You’ll have to press out the spent casings. The brass swells a little, so sometimes the rounds get stuck. If you shoot any steel-case .380, this problem will be even worse.
The sights are very rudimentary, seemingly original to the old Colt designs. The 1862 Pocket Navy has a gold bead front sight, and the rear sight is part of the hammer. When you cock the hammer, it aligns with the gold bead. Sadly, the gun isn’t all that accurate, even with its long sight radius.
It can put all five rounds into a four to five-inch group at 15 yards. I would expect much better accuracy from such a long sight radius, but that’s simply not the case. It has everything going for it—a light and crisp single-action trigger, the aforementioned sight radius, and a fixed barrel design. Yet, I can produce much better groups with other firearms.
It’s still a ton of fun to shoot, and you have to assume a one-handed shooting position with a bladed shooting style, like you were some sort of Wild Bill.
Worth the Squeeze
The gun has mild recoil, but it’s more than you’d expect from a .380 ACP. The little grip doesn’t give you much to hold onto, and when the gun recoils, the trigger guard will hit your hand. It’s not terrible or painful, but it’s mildly annoying. Going through a few cylinders quickly demonstrates just how annoying it can be.
The 1862 Pocket Navy is as reliable as you’d expect it to be. It’s a revolver firing a centerfire round with a single-action trigger. It’s going to work unless something serious breaks. It does get a little annoying having to pop out every case with a punch rod, so I never shoot this thing for high round counts.
I don’t compete in SASS or any cowboy-style competition, and I don’t have any real purpose for this gun. It’s not really good at anything specific. It’s fun, and it’s weird, but if fun and weird don’t appeal to you, the 1862 Pocket Navy might not be for you.
An array of waterproof or light and breathable footwear for every occasion.
Choosing the proper outdoor footwear is crucial, especially when weighing the difference between waterproof and light and breathable options. Waterproof shoes keep feet dry in wet conditions, but can be heavier and cause overheating. In contrast, light and breathable footwear offers comfort and ventilation but may not protect against moisture. This article will highlight the facts of each choice to help you make an informed decision for your outdoor adventures.
What’s Better for Footwear? Waterproof or Light and Breathable?
Most people associate outdoor footwear with hiking boots—I know I did! Hiking boots offer ankle support, traction, and durability for rugged terrains. Their design helps prevent injuries, making them ideal for challenging trails. Additionally, hiking boots are heavily marketed as essential outdoor gear, reinforcing their reputation as the go-to choice for outdoor adventures, especially the waterproof type.
Hikers and campers often prefer trail runners over traditional hiking boots. Trail runners are lighter, which reduces fatigue during long outings, and they offer greater flexibility and comfort on less technical terrain. Their breathability helps keep feet cooler and minimizes blisters in warm weather.
Many trail runners have outsoles (the part of the sole that touches the ground) that provide excellent traction while remaining less bulky than boots. They also dry quickly, making them suitable for wet conditions. This versatility allows users to engage in various outdoor activities. Many find that the benefits of trail runners suit their needs better than hiking boots. This preference goes for waterproof or light and breathable footwear.
Injuries
Leg, foot, and ankle injuries happen. No matter what you wear. More people wear boots than any other form of hiking footwear. However, boots won’t make you immune to injuries. In the same way they offer ankle support, they also make you slow to react and correct a bad step. If you depend on boots for ankle support, your ankles will never get stronger.
However, lighter trail runners are easier to maneuver and can help correct a bad step due to their quicker lightness. As for ankle support, it’s pretty simple. If you wear trail runners daily or on more hikes, your ankles will learn their job. You will strengthen your ankles and not depend on heavier footwear to compensate for weak ankles.
Why Waterproof?
Waterproof boots for snow and heavy rain, but not for deep rivers and creeks.
Waterproof footwear has its place. Hiking in the rain and working on a project outdoors when it’s raining come to mind. However, stepping into deep creeks, swamps, or rivers won’t do you any good. Your boots will hold water inside as well as they keep it out.
GORE-TEX material in footwear delivers waterproofing, windproof protection, and limited breathability. This technology keeps feet dry and comfortable in various conditions while allowing moisture to escape. Many companies have their proprietary version of GORE-TEX that is similar. Eventually, it will wet through and become heavy. The worst part is how long it takes for waterproof footwear to dry. This is detrimental on multiday trips!
Light and Breathable?
Trail runners are for outdoor trail running and hiking. They’re light and take nearly zero time to break in. Although not all trail runners are waterproof, they will dry extremely fast on a run or hike. Every step will push water out if you step in a deep puddle or creek. Suppose it’s a sunny day, even better!
Trail runners come in waterproof or light and breathable versions. You’ll be fine if you avoid puddles or creek crossings deeper than your ankle. Hiking in deep snow is the time to use waterproof trail runners with gaiters to keep snow out. I prefer Adidas for my trail runners, whether waterproof or light and breathable, for most occasions.
These are the author’s most-used footwear, comprised of trail runners. Breathable and waterproof.
Trail runner shoes easily slip off, and you can elevate your feet on trail breaks. Try that with boots. Also, when nature calls while camping, it’s easy to slip into trail runners and do your business. Trail runners may not last as long as boots, but they are less expensive when replacing your favorite footwear.
Conclusion: Waterproof or Light and Breathable?
Ultimately, use what makes you comfortable. The common backpacking phrase is “A pound on your feet equals five pounds on your back.” This saying highlights the importance of lightweight footwear, as extra weight on your feet requires significantly more energy to carry than the same weight in your pack.
This is the author’s usual hiking combo: light and breathable trail runners with trail gaiters to keep debris out.
Lever guns have been the big thing in the past couple of years. Pedersoli is modernizing another older repeating rifle mechanism, though with their pump action Jackal 44.
Pedersoli’s Jackal 44 is based on the 1884 Colt Lightning platform. It’s built from modern materials and is strong enough to handle the .44 Magnum cartridge. It’s a pump-action rifle with a side-loading gate and top ejection. The Jackal has an exposed hammer and a tang-mounted safety. They’ve basically taken a 140-year-old design and updated it for the 21st Century.
The Pedersoli Jackal 44 has a 19-inch barrel with 5/8” x 24 threading. It’s equipped with an adjustable fiber optic rear sight and a fiber optic front sight. The barrel is tapped to accept a Picatinny rail for optics mounting. It uses an under-barrel magazine tube that holds six rounds.
Materials and Finish
The rifle has a stock and forend made of walnut, with a matte oil finish. There’s checkering at the grip and on the pump for a positive feel. The stock has a high-profile comb suitable for use with a red dot sight. The stock is equipped with a Microcell butt pad. The receiver is Cerakoted, and other parts appear to be blued.
A New Wave of Modern Pumps?
I’m a fan of pump-action rifles. They’re generally fast and easy to handle. I always wanted one of the old Israeli Timberwolf pump rifles, but never managed to snag one. I like the Remington 760 pumps, too. In fact, I had one as a loaner on a recent camping trip in Montana.
The new Pedersoli Jackal 44 is a welcome entry into the field. I like that it has that old 1884 Lightning character, but with a modern caliber and sighting options. Details are a little slim right now, and it looks like the English page on the Pedersoli website is a direct translation from Italian. So, it reads a little odd to a native English speaker.
It’s a good-looking rifle, though, and I’m anxious to hear more about it. No MSRP is listed yet, or shipping dates, but I’ll be keeping an eye out for updates.
This isn’t a review per se; rather, it’s a post about appreciation for the Garmin Xero C1 Chronograph. This handy pocket-sized chronograph is one of my most indispensable tools that I rely on as a shooter.
At the risk of using cliched and tired adjectives, the Garmin Xero C1 really is a revolutionary game-changer.
There, I said it! I never use adjectives like those in my work.
It’s kinda too late now, since you’ll likely be reading this in June 2025. But after purchasing my own Garmin Xero C1 last summer and using it on a regular basis, I wanted to proclaim it as the unofficial “P.E. Fitch shooting accessory/product of the year for 2024.”
This little chronograph makes my life easier. As a writer and reviewer, having access to firearm and cartridge muzzle velocity is crucial. Without a doubt, most gun publications require writers to share muzzle velocity figures. They always have, and it’s hard not to love a time-saving tool that makes the most tedious part of reviewing any firearm that much easier.
Sure, this prima facie level of convenience that the Garmin Xero C1 provides is laudable, but I don’t think that’s its most remarkable aspect either. No, what blows me away is that when bundled as a system with its mobile phone app, the Garmin Xero C1 turns into an extremely powerful information-gathering system. Never has it been so easy to collect, store, and access gun-and-cartridge telemetry in one fell swoop.
How can you not love a device that makes capturing expensive information so easy?
Game Recognize Game: Farewell To The Labradar
I almost don’t feel qualified enough to be writing this. I’ve only owned and used two different chronographs in my life. The first was a Labradar, and the second is my Garmin, which has since replaced it. Because I started writing about firearms only roughly three years ago, I was able to cut in line away from dealing with whimsical traditional chronographs that were sensitive to light, had to be set up a certain way, and/or had the two triangular-shaped antennae that one had to carefully shoot through. I never had to deal with those types of inconveniences.
I plunked down $675 in February 2023 for my Labradar. It wasn’t cheap. At the time, I was starting to get more serious about writing firearms articles, so I wanted the most serious chronograph I could get my hands on.
And prior to Garmin disrupting the consumer-grade chronograph market, the Labradar was pretty much the top dog in its category. Since its launch in 2014, the Labradar wasn’t as clunky or cumbersome as the traditional bunny-eared chronographs, and it was objectively the best choice. Mind you, it still had its quirks, but it was hard to beat—until Garmin dropped that bombshell.
Using The Labradar Before The Garmin
The old and the new
For context, when the Labradar was arguably the top-of-the-line model, the unit was still relatively expensive. By all means, it captured accurate data.
But as a user, you still needed to purchase its power source and a stand separately. This added to its overall cost and complexity. I used a laser-level tripod–the same as a basic camera tripod. It was tall enough to shoot next to in a free-standing tactical bay.
The Labradar accepted six AA batteries, but it was also a power-hungry device, which basically made it mandatory to use some type of external power bank.
While the setup isn’t as complicated as a traditional chronograph, the unit was more sensitive to muzzle placement. Likewise, it was more sensitive to both rimfire and hot magnum rifle rounds (or rifle barrels with muzzle brakes). It was possible to adjust the settings, but that wasn’t super smooth either.
For rimfire or suppressed use, they sold a separate “microphone” that would pick up shots for the main device. I found that there was a learning curve to understanding how to capture muzzle velocities with the Labradar. Prior to capturing velocities, you had to ensure the device was pointed precisely at your target. Its exterior housing had a rough sighting notch meant to serve as a rudimentary sight.
Unfortunately, there were many times when it failed to capture and record many a rifle shot. And that feels quite aggravating when a cartridge costs over $2.00 each! But at the time, I’d argue it was top of the line. (I never messed with rifle-mounted chronographs because I work with so many handguns.)
The Garmin Xero C1 In A Nutshell
Charging the Xero C1 on an airplane!
With the full understanding that the Garmin team had years of hindsight to take into account after the launch of the Labradar, it wasn’t hard to topple the previous king by the time Xero C1s started rolling out.
The Garmin Xero C1 is far easier to set up and shoot with. It doesn’t need a separate stand. It also has a USB-C rechargeable self-contained battery that charges like a cell phone. The best part? It’s very small. It’s not hard to fit the Xero in a pocket. It weighs nothing and stows easily. It’s almost easy to take for granted that its 6-hour internal battery can be charged in the car on the way to the range.
Captured every shot from this braked Savage 110 Magpul Scout
When shooting, it’s far more forgiving and way more convenient when it comes to placement around the firearm, be it a handgun or rifle. It has no problem recording suppressed shots or shots fired from anything rimfire.
Capturing subsonic/suppressed .22 LR pistol data
The Garmin companion app (Shotview) for mobile phones easily talks to the Xero C1. It sends all the data, sorts it categorically by rifle or pistol, and makes information easy to find. The app also provides the end-user with extra opportunities to label and display each “session.” No need to take notes or write stuff down externally. It’s all there. Finally, each session can be easily exported as a CSV (spreadsheet) automatically.
Capturing Expensive Information Easily
Screeenshot of a CSV file that was automatically generated as a spreadsheet on my phone. (Data from Savage 110 Magpul Scout, 6.5mm Creedmoor)
Capturing ballistic information isn’t cheap. It’s not just the obvious costs associated with the ammunition or handloads that get fired into the berm. It’s also the effort involved in taking time to go to the range and setting everything up needed to capture this information. Time is a precious commodity.
Using the Garmin as a system saves time both on the front and back ends. Unlike the Labradar, which might have missed a shot, my Xero C1 seldom misses any shots, especially when shooting deliberately. Its easy setup is also a giant time-saver, and the device can sit right on the bench or to the side of the shooting mat, behind the muzzle. By compiling the data into the Shotview app, it saves time on that front, too.
Data from three different loads at a glance.
I think the implications of a convenient chronograph go beyond easy setup and ease of use. That it’s able to collect muzzle velocity data so effortlessly also means that it has never been easier to compile ballistic information. For the handloaders and really big-brain types, they can build metaphorical rifle-shooting goldmines with this information.
So yes, I think the Garmin Xero C1 chronograph warrants the term “gamechanger” for once.
Post Script
Now that it’s mid-2025, the Garmin Xero C1 has some direct competition. It wasn’t long after Garmin introduced the Xero C1 that Labradar also came up with a similar direct competitor. By now, Athlon Optics sells a Xero C1 competitor for approximately $150 less. I have no serious opinions on either of these Garmin competitors, but it’s worth mentioning that they are out there. I’ve never shot with either of them.
As for me, well, I spent a nice chunk of change buying both the Labradar and the Xero C1 within the span of a year. I’m tapped out on chronograph funds. As expensive as it was, the Garmin has been indispensable.
For more information, read Sean Utley’s full review of the Garmin Xero C1 chronograph.
