For those that demand a no-nonsense approach to their defensive grade pistol, the new Operator® 1911 in 9mm stands ready to deliver. Crafted on the solid foundation of a forged frame, slide and barrel, the Operator 1911 builds on the century-plus of service behind the gun and adds the benefit of the ever-popular 9mm round. Tactical Rack rear/tritium front sights, G10 grips, ambi safety, two 9-round magazines with bumper pads, forward cocking serrations, and more combine to make the Operator 1911 from Springfield Armory a must-have tool for self-defense.
Not double stack.
Not optic ready.
Not very ‘operator’ by the modern standards, to be frank. But I am certain it’ll shoot well with the forged frame and slide. I’m also a big fan of the grip panels. Classic Springfield naming conventions continue.
I’ll start off by saying that I’m far from an expert on 1911s. I owned a Series 80 Colt back when I was in college, but that’s about it.
With the burgeoning crop of 9mm 1911s coming in the scene, I figured it was worth revisiting.
I’m fortunate that a friend of mine is a rep for SDS Imports/ Tissas USA, so I was able to give him a call.
To try and keep things as unimpeachable as possible, all I said initially was “Hey, can I borrow your range-day demo gun to check out?”.
I wanted to make sure that I wasn’t getting a cherry picked review sample, and one that had some miles on it.
When I picked the pistol up, I was told that it had roughly 300 rounds on it so far, and had not been cleaned.
INITIAL IMPRESSIONS:
For a $619.99 MSRP, I wasn’t expecting anything super refined. The overall appearance was clean & consistent. No apparent defects or imperfections that I saw.
The Stingray is an aluminum-framed, commander-sized 1911, with the Ed Brown Bobtail to aid in concealment.
It uses the Series 70 type design, which purportedly results in a cleaner trigger pull than the 80 Series firing pin block.
The grip safety seemed nicely tuned, requiring very little pressure to activate.
While the slide uses Novak cuts for the sights, I was told that they are intentionally undersized, so some fitting will be required if you choose to upgrade from the factory 3-dot sights.
The slide ran smoothly, with no perceived grit or binding.
The trigger had a bit of take-up before the wall, and a little creep before the sear engaged.
Because I’m not a particularly sophisticated pistolero, and I currently lack a trigger gauge, I’ll refrain from going into too much detail on the trigger, and I categorically refuse to use the trope of it “breaking like a glass rod”.
Suffice to say it felt fine, and about what I expected for a $600 carry gun.
The G10 grips felt a little fat for the rest of the gun, but I’m not sure if I’d want anything slimmer. The sunburst pattern does feel like they copied Wilson Combat’s homework a bit.
There was no front-strap checkering, but that’s easily rectified with some skateboard deck tape.
In my next article, I’ll go over my range session & final assessments.
Disclosures:
I am friends with the Tisas rep, and we shoot together occasionally.
This was not a paid review from SDS/Tisas. With that said, when I met up to return the pistol my buddy did pay for my lunch, so my compensation for this piece was technically a pastrami sandwich & a chocolate egg cream.
World War 2 saw the American rifle squad wield a very diverse set of weapons. Never before and never since have American forces sued so many different firearms. Squads and platoons had the M1 Garand, The Thompson, the M3 SMG, the M1 Carbine, the M1911, the M1919 machine gun, the BAR, and likely more I forget about. With so many firearms in service with the armed forces, they had numerous quals soldiers wielding the weapons had to pass.
I’ve been on the search for old firearms quals and have stumbled across three World War 2-era quals that shine a light on the training your average grunt would go through. Let’s take a look at the classic quals for the M1911, the M3, and M1 Carbine.
The M1911 Qual
By World War 2, the M1911 already had decades of service under its belt. It served in the First World War and was still modern for the era of WW2. The M1911 Qual is quite expansive, with six separate tables and a requirement for 80 rounds of ammunition. This qual is found in the 1940 edition of FM 23-35. Keep in mind this is the standard and not the horse riding qual.
I’ve modified the language slightly to make it easier to understand in a modern context.
Table 1 – Slow Fire – Bull’s Eye Target
Stage 1 – 15 yards – Fire five rounds Into a Bull’s Eye target. No Time Limit
Stage 2 – 25 Yards – Fire five rounds Into a Bull’s Eye target. No Time Limit
Table 2 – Rapid Fire – Bull’s Eye Target
Stage 1 – 15 yards – Fire five rounds Into a Bull’s Eye target in 11 seconds.
Stage 2 – – 25 Yards – Fire five rounds Into a Bull’s Eye target in 15 seconds.
Table 3 – Quick Fire – E Target
Stage 1 – 15 yards – Fire five rounds Into an E Type Target in 10 seconds (Repeat 1X)
Stage 2 – 25 Yards – Fire five rounds Into E Type Target in 10 seconds (Repeat 1X)
Table 4 – Slow Fire – Bull’s Eye Target
Stage 1 – 25 Yards – Fire five rounds Into a Bull’s Eye target. No Time Limit (Repeat 1X)
Table 5 – Rapid Fire – Bull’s Eye Target
Stage 1 – 15 yards – Fire five rounds Into a Bull’s Eye Target in 11 seconds (Repeat 1X)
Stage 2 – 25 Yards – Fire five rounds Into Bull’s Eye Target in 15 seconds (Repeat 1X)
Table 6 – Quick Fire – Target E
Stage -1 – 25 Yards – Fire Five shots into an E Target in 15 seconds. (Repeat 2X)
The M3 SMG Qual
Interestingly enough, the M3 SMG Qual is shorter than the M1911 qualification. Seeing as how it’s a primary arm, that’s an odd choice, but the war was raging during the adoption of the M3, so maybe they were just getting troops armed as quickly as possible. Again I’ve broken this down to be a little more readable than FM 23-41.
Table 1 – 25 Meters – E Target
Phase 1 – Fire found rounds from the standing aimed position an E Target. No time limit.
Phase 2 – Assume the underarm assault position and fire a six-round burst into the E Target. No time limit.
Table 2 – 50 Meters – E Target
Phase 1 – Shooter can choose between a standing, sitting, or kneeling position and fire four rounds single shot into the E Target. No time limit.
Phase 2 – Shooter can choose between a standing, sitting, or kneeling position and fire a three-round burst into the E Target. No time limit.
Phase 3 – Shooter can choose between a standing, sitting, or kneeling position and fire a three-round burst into the E Target. No time limit.
Table 3 – 90 Meters – E Target
Phase 1 – Shooter can choose between a standing, sitting, or kneeling position and fire four rounds single shot into the E Target. No time limit.
Phase 2 – Shooter can choose between a standing, sitting, or kneeling position and fire a three-round burst into the E Target. No time limit.
Phase 3 – Shooter can choose between a standing, sitting, or kneeling position and fire a three-round burst into the E Target. No time limit.
M1 Carbine Qual
Finally, we are breaking away from the .45 ACP cartridge and getting into a real rifle qualification. .45 ACP is tough at 90 meters, but how does .30 Carbine work out to 300 yards? Here’s the skinny.
Table 1 – 100 Yards – Two A Centers on 6×6 Frame
Ensure you have two mags loaded with four rounds each. Begin in the standing and fire four rounds into the top A Center. Transition to the sitting and reload. Fire four rounds into the Bottom A center. The time limit is 35 seconds.
Table 2 – 100 Yards – Two A Centers on 6×6 Frame
Ensure you have two mags loaded with four rounds each. Begin in the standing and fire four rounds into the top A Center. Transition to the kneeling and reload. Fire four rounds into the Bottom A center. The time limit is 35 seconds.
Table 3 – 200 Yards – Two B Centers on 6×6 Frame
Ensure you have two mags loaded with four rounds each. Begin in the standing and fire four rounds into the top B Center. Transition to the sitting and reload. Fire four rounds into the bottom B center. The time limit is 35 seconds.
Table 4 – 200 Yards – Two B Centers on 6×6 Frame
Ensure you have two mags loaded with four rounds each. Begin in the standing and fire four rounds into the top B Center. Transition to the kneeling and reload. Fire four rounds into the bottom B center. The time limit is 35 seconds.
Table 5 – 300 Yards – 1 B Center on 6×6 Frame
Ensure you have two mags loaded with four rounds each. Begin in the standing and transition into the prone. Fire round rounds into the B center target. Reload and fire four more rounds. The time limit is 35 seconds.
Booming Along
The quals all seem fairly basic and certainly a product of their time. They do seem to be combat oriented, but only to a small degree. Keep in mind this wasn’t the only training soldiers received. This training just confirmed the soldiers had an idea of what they were doing with their issued weapons. It’s certainly an interesting look back at the WW2 era. I’m going to keep digging for a Thompson, shotgun, and even BAR qual, and maybe we’ll see a sequel to this article soon.
A while back, I wrote about the problem with the Mossberg bead. The sum of that article was basically that Mossberg puts their bead way too low on their barrels, which results in an issue with modern buckshot and slug loads. They tend to appear to shoot high. A good bit after writing that article, I ran into a company called Defender Tactical that produced rails for the Mossberg series shotguns. They also produce a sight system that aims to fix the Mossberg bead problem they call the HighBall.
HighBall is a clever way to name the system. Defender Tactical simply took the Mossberg bead and made it taller and much bigger. This does two things. First, it corrects the point of aim, point of impact problem with slugs and Federal Flitecontrol by simply raising the bead a bit. It sits at about the same height as a Remington bead on a pedestal.
Second, a bigger bead is easier to see. Shotguns are close-range fighting weapons, and in close-range scenarios, fights move fast. Bigger sights are easier to see and, therefore, easy to shoot faster with. The Highball provides you with a simple and affordable fix that’s easy to install on any bead-sighted Mossberg shotgun.
But Wait, There’s More
That’s not where the Defender Tactical sighting systems end. Alongside the HighBall, they created something called the SafetySight. The SafetySight replaces the rear safety with a larger easier to access safety that also doubles as a rear sight. At the front of the safety is a raised portion with a simple white line in the center.
Align the SafetySight with the HighBall, and you have a stand-in rear sight that allows you to get a bit more precise with your modern buckshot loadings and slugs. The combinations of the SafetySight and HighBall are a must-have. The combined price is quite attractive, and if you have a stock bead, it’s not going to work well.
At the Range
When it comes to cheap buckshot loads, the difference isn’t as obvious. When you start shooting slugs and buckshots like Federal Flitecontrol, the difference is night and day in terms of point of aim and point of impact differences. The HighBall alone makes it much easier to put those tight loads of buckshot exactly where you want them.
Even with just the HighBall sight, your speed and ability to put lead on target are impressive. That big bead is very easy to see and catches the eye nicely.
With the SafetySight combination, you get an even more effective and precise combination. It really shines when it comes to slug use. At 50 yards, a bead sight kind of sucks by itself, but the SafetySight and HighBall combo makes it very easy to throw slugs with excellent precision. Even out to 100 yards, there is a drastic improvement.
Is it better than a dedicated set of ghost ring sights? No, but it’s the peak of bead sights, especially on Mossberg shotguns. The combination of the two sights is an awesome addition to your Mossberg 500 at a very low price point. For 25 bucks, it’s tough to beat. Check it out here.
LEGAL ALERT: The Seventh Circuit has stayed the preliminary injunction against Illinois' "assault weapon" and magazine bans "pending further order of the court." The court also requested a response to Illinois' motion by 5/9: https://t.co/8OEtH2WSCZ
— Firearms Policy Coalition (@gunpolicy) May 4, 2023
HB5471, the recently passed, then halted by injunction, assault weapons ban for the state of Illinois, is back on again, after the 7th Circuit court’s review. Firearms Policy Coalition filed for an injunction in late April to halt the clearly unconstitutional ban, and it was granted by federal district judge Steven McGlynn, who noted that “The Supreme Court in Bruen and Heller held that citizens have a constitutional right to own and possess firearms and may use them for self-defense,” the judge wrote in his ruling. “[The ban] seems to be written in spite of the clear directives in Bruen and Heller, not in conformity with them.” This resulted in the law not going into effect, giving citizens of IL more time to purchase banned items, and hope that the law might never go into effect at all.
In spite of this, the 7th Circuit has reversed McGlynn’s decision, meaning HB5471, the IL AWB, is now law –an HB5471 FAQ provided by the state of IL is located here–. Of note, one of the judges comprising the 7th Circuit panel held in 2015 that “If a ban on semi‐automatic guns and large‐capacity magazines reduces the perceived risk from a mass shooting, and makes the public feel safer as a result, that’s a substantial benefit.” This kind of interest-balancing argument was specifically called out by Bruen as invalid, and it has to be stated that eliminating a fundamental right to reduce *perceived* risk, in order to make the public *feel* safer is absurd. Perception is not reality, and feeling is not being, as any functional adult should be able to explain, but regardless, the argument is legally moot according to SCOTUS.
This is not the first time anti-gun legislators and judges have actively ignored the Bruen decision, flouting the highest court in the land in the process, and it won’t be the last. While this is infuriating, especially for IL residents, if we take the long view, we have to admit that watching the gun-banning forces paint themselves into a legal corner they won’t be able to escape from, forcing SCOTUS to make a far more definitive ruling about “Assault Weapons” is somewhat entertaining.
As legal challenges to bills similar to HB5471 in WA, OR, NY, and others continue to inch forward, consider donating to the organizations fighting these battles. They don’t have a blank check from the taxpayers like the states who pass these laws, knowing they are counter to the constitution and the Supreme Court’s very recent decisions, and need support from all of us. The gun rights you save may be your own.
World War 1 established the modern flamethrower, and the German’s use of this device told modern armies they’d need one for the foreseeable future. If you sit and think about a flamethrower, you realize it’s a special kind of crazy, a sure sign that society failed by inventing such a way to kill another person. Flamethrowers proved to be very tactically capable tools and could flush out troops in pillboxes, bunkers, and caves. The Russians wisely adopted their own series of flamethrowers with the ROKS-2 and ROKS-3.
The ROKS-2 – Flamethrower in Disguise
The ROKS-2 is of particular interest to me. The Russians designed the ROKS-2 specifically to disguise the fact that it was a flamethrower. The flame projector was designed and built to look like a Mosin Nagant rifle. The weapon features a wood stock and rifle-like appearance and even the Mosin stock. Up close, it is easy to see that it’s not a Mosin, but at distances as far as 50 to 100 yards, it’s likely tough to tell what you are looking at.
The tanks also were designed to resemble the Russian backpack of the era. They used sheet metal to encase the tanks to make the pack appear flat and like a backpack of Soviet design rather than a tank fuel of flammable hatred. A false pouch was even added to the pack to give it that backpack look and feel. If you look at packs from the era, it certainly resembles the design.
The ROKS-2 weighed 55 pounds and carried 9 liters of fuel. The wielder could shoot flames about 35 meters toward Nazi scum but had only six to eight seconds of burn time. Nitrogen propelled the fuel, and a pyrotechnic cartridge ignited the fuel. The ROKS-2 granted the common Soviet soldier an anti-bunker weapon that was incredibly capable in urban combat. No one wants to be immolated or asphyxiated by the dragon’s breath worth fo fire the ROKS-2 generated.
Why the Dress Up
Flamethrowers were very valuable weapons. They were an infantryman’s tool that could clear out pill boxes and bunkers, caves, and destroy improvised bunkers. They were more effective at clearing these emplacements than machine guns and even rocket launchers and grenades. Flamethrowers not only killed the troops in these bunkers but would often completely destroy them.
The flame burned at over 1,200 degrees Celsius and could destabilize concrete and brickwork. It would fry electrical and communications wires and destroy weapons and ordnance stored in a bunker position. After the flame went throw, the position was basically dead, and even if it was retaken, it offered cover at the most. It tactically cut off the defensive position. This is why flamethrowers like the ROKS-2 were so valuable. They were force multipliers.
An infantry unit armed with ROKS-2 flamethrowers didn’t just kill the enemy and move on. They salted the earth behind them in a tactical sense. This often made the flamethrower man a very big target. If you were a grunt in a bunker and had to pick a target, the guy who is looking to fry you alive looks like a good target to hit.
The ROKS-2 disguised itself to keep the flamethrower man alive longer and to get the man to the threat without being the biggest target on the battlefield. The ROKS-2 made a big showing at the battle of Kursk, which was a brutal engagement with German troops and armor.
The end of the ROKS-2
The Russians eventually ditched the ROKS-2. Not because it was ineffective but because disguising it was expensive and difficult. To reduce cost and increase production, the ROKS-3 was developed. It’s essentially a ROKS-2 lacking the disguise. The ROKS-2 flamethrowers that were in service continued to be in service. Overall they had an effective flamethrower and an effective disguise tactic that ensured the flamethrower man remained alive long enough to prove society’s failure.
The VUDU line from EOTech started with their Front Focal Plane 1-6x. 9-Hole Reviews has reviewed the optic, still offered, and found it… wanting. The 1-6x30mm line is well established as a solid standard for carbine optics, with several strong offerings from numerous companies in a broad price range.
The VUDU… is not one of them. Josh and Henry agree.
Heck, EOTech somewhat agrees too, but it sold popularly enough that it would have been foolish to discontinue out of hand.
You see if you follow the model release line, and after having talked with EOTech, their 1-6 was never meant to be the flagship LPVO offering. That flagship was the 1-8 they developed next, which offers far superior illumination, capped turrets, brighter light transmission, and a very simple useable reticle.
So why the 1-6? Simple, a partially refunded proof of concept. And to work the bugs out as it were. One of the neat things EOTech did with the VUDU is keep their distinctive HWS reticle pattern at 1x, they then have a scaled center reticle for the FFP that is usable at higher magnification. This is neat, this doesn’t work out tremendously in practical shooting. The illumination is also problematic for FFP optics with how you have to illuminate the reticle. FFP optics with good illumination tend to be very expensive for a reason.
Most 1-6 offerings are Second Focal Plane, several 1-8’s to include the VUDU are too, and these SFP optics fit neatly into their role as carbine optics without needing an immensely detailed scaled reticle for the 6x erector range. Looking at FFP 1-6’s they tend to have poor reticle design. Even the venerable, durable, and otherwise well regard VCOG from Trijicon is much better reticled in its 1-8 scopes than the 1-6.
The 1-6 is helmed by the Second Focal Plane and that makes for one of the two chief problems with the VUDU 1-6, reticle scaling. It’s easier, as we see from the 1-8 and 1-10 FFP offerings, to build for those ranges and make the reticles work well.
The second, and arguably the one that seals these scopes into the realm of hobby optics instead of duty, are the uncapped and unlocked turrets. The carbine optic zero can be messed with easily and unintentionally by accidently turning one of the turrets, this problem is corrected on the 1-8 and 1-10 models with capped and locking turrets.
Where would the VUDU 1-6 work best? I’d say today that probably precision .22lr or action .22lr where the reticle scaling could allow for quickly adjusted shots but not at truly extreme distances. The scope is not without merits, it just doesn’t excel at the things most people ask out of a 1-6 LPVO as a fighting carbine optic.
I’ve said it before and I will likely say it again as the topic reemerges, the 1-4x, 5x, 6x and even up into 8x are all great carbine optics on anything in intermediate rifle caliber and with a 10″ or longer barrel. They work swiftest and smoothest in that role with SFP reticles. Front focal is the realm of precision. I understand why the US Army and Marines chose FFP, but they are also working within a couple extra parameters selected. Namely that their ammo is selected for them, their rifles are selected for them, and they are trying to reach a specific basic proficiency with a tight learning curve within those two previous parameters.
Before I knew anything about short shorts and FN FALs, I had heard the phrase Rhodesian Chest Rig. I can’t remember exactly where, but I remember reading a book about some special operations forces. I can’t recall if it was Green Berets or SEALs, but I remember the phrase, and I remember seeing it on a chest rig at the PX and later in modern writing about the GWOT. What is the Rhodesian chest rig? Why is it so often referenced, even in quasi-modern times? Was it the first chest rig? I finally decided to figure it out and spin it up for easy consumption for our dear readers.
The Rhodesian Chest Rig – Early Origins
The Rhodesian Chest Rig gained its name because it was the western world’s first use of the chest rig. Footage and photos coming out of the bush war in the 1960s and 70s showed Rhodesian troops in their short shorts, with their baby poop FALs, and rocking chest rigs. Prior to that, the Rhodesian forces carried most of their battle loadout like every other troop of this era. They used their belts.
Belts are great, but they do limit how much ammo and gear you can easily carry. When you are carrying ammo, water, and a butt pack, a belt gets crowded quickly. Not only that, but crossing water was difficult with belts, and the same could be said working in and out of vehicles. Anything on the belt adds width.
The Rhodie soldiers realized taking the mags off their belts not only freed up the room but was likely more comfortable and much easier to reach and reload with. Thus the Rhodesian chest rigs emerged and typically packed five FAL mags for easy access.
That’s the why, but where did the Rhodesians get the idea? Well, they stole it from the Chinese.
The Rhodesian Chest Rig – From China to Africa
More specifically, the CHICOM-equipped forces they were battling. The Chinese are arguably the inventors of the chest rig. It started with the Type 56 chest rigs. China made them for both the Type 56 AK and the Type 56 SKS.
The SKS variant carried tons of stripper clips, and the AK variant carried three AK mags with four pouches for grenades. Stripper clips or whatever else you would carry. The African Nationalist forces were trained and supplied by the CHICOMs.
The Rhodesian forces saw the chest rigs and must have thought it was pretty handy. Thus they began making their own in various configurations. Fereday & Sons of Salisbury were popular manufacturers of the rigs. While they had various sizes and shapes, they were all fairly identical to chest rigs.
Before The Chinese Chest Rig
While the concept of the chest rig came from the Chinese, it’s interesting to see how they developed the concept that eventually led to the Rhodesian chest rig. Before chest rigs existed for magazines, the American Army developed the M1918 Grenadier Carrier. This chest rig held 11 grenades and worked much like a modern chest rig, but just for grenades.
Courtesy Gear Illustration
In World War 2, the British had the Battle Jerkin. A jerkin is a type of leather vest, and the Brits modified them to act as load-bearing gear. The pouches had room for ammunition and mags, as well as various pockets for gear. This was less like a chest rig and more like a tactical vest. American soldiers would also rig their Thompson mag pouches into something akin to a chest rig, but this was a soldier modification.
It’s not clear if these pieces of gear led to the Rhodesian rig, but we can rightfully assume the Chinese developed the chest rig based on their equipment in World War 2. Specifically their Thompson and C96 web gear. These were not chest rigs, but not exactly belts, but something in between.
The rigs had straps that went around the neck and another strap attached around the neck. They sat at basically belly/belt level. The Thompson variant held five or so magazines, and C96 seemingly held a dozen reloads worth of ammo. Initially, they appear to be made of leather, but by the Korean War, they had moved to canvas.
It seems they simply kept modifying the designs and likely raised it to chest height to accommodate the longer AK magazines.
From China to Rhodesia
The Rhodesian chest rig took an interesting path from China all the way to Rhodesia. It’s since evolved into one of the many ways we carry gear and ammunition. It’s certainly inspired modern gear and even how we carry mags on plate carriers. So now we know how the Rhodesian chest rig became so famous and where it came from.
I’ve always wondered where the idea for the Ohio Ordnance HCAR came from. Ian, of course, over at Forgotten Weapons also wonders these things. Well in this video he went and found out.
Like many builds of new, cool, goofy, or wild guns… it started with a box of spare parts. In this case, allegedly a Conex of receivers that were not up to spec for NIB M1918A3 semi-auto BARs from Ohio Ordnance. Those are $7,000+ rifles so there isn’t much wiggle room for “blem” receivers in builds.
So what to do with a bunch of receivers you could make perfectly functional but would have marks show through and not look as pristine?
Modern BAR build making it lighter, shorter, more ergonomic, and tacti-cool. Because why not. It was also a little less costly to manufacturer and knocks a few hundred off of the price. So if you want a not quite as large, not quite as heavy, more modern-ish 30.06 for reasons. Go look at the Heavy Counter Assault Rifle from Ohio Ordnance.
While we admit this episode is now a bit dated, we just had to discuss the Red Cross’ recent admonition against committing war crimes in video games. Let’s be real, the things we’ve all done in video games are….well, not great.
“Have you been up to the Cloud District? Ha, what am I saying? Of course you haven’t.” *Quick Saving*
If you’ve paid attention to your favorite gun influencer, you’ve likely seen some mention of the Tactical Games. You see men and women with ARs and plate carriers accomplishing a mix of shooting and fitness-based exercises that look both chaotic and a ton of fun. The Tactical Games have become quite popular quite quickly and have provided a new type of shooting sport.
The Tactical Games breaks away from the game-like sports of 3-Gun and USPSA to provide something a bit more dynamic. The overall goal is to create a contest that implements the physical demands of police and military shooters with shooting. The Tactical Games are a new type of shooting sport for a new type of competitor.
According to the Tactical Games
If we asked the Tactical Games as an organization what they are, we get this answer:
“The Tactical Games were created to provide a platform to test the skills and readiness of tactical athletes from all backgrounds. Whether you are military, LEO, competition shooter, or a civilian gun enthusiast, you can compete in The Tactical Games. The Tactical games provide a venue for all shooters and athletes to compete against the best in the world to find weaknesses and test gear in the most stressful environment a competition can offer.”
If you ask me, it’s simply a contest that combines your fitness and shooting into one exciting and dynamic sport. While having a sub-second draw is valuable, it doesn’t mean much if you run a 15-minute mile or can’t lift a 150-pound sandbag. It’s a balance of skills that go beyond the gun. This is a sport that favors a balanced competitor.
The Weapons and Gear
I’ll give a quick rundown on the gear and weapons used in the Tactical Games. However, make sure you consult the rules for more detailed information. This should give a feel of what you need to compete.
The weapons are focused on modern tactical, mostly semi-auto rifles. The sniper division does have a bolt gun category. Calibers for rifles allowed include 5.56, .223 Rem, 5.45, and .300 Blackout. Handgun calibers must be 9mm and above. Revolvers are allowed as well.
Rifles can use nearly any type of optic but cannot use multiple optics. Backup iron sights are allowed. Most divisions allow handguns to use slide-mounted red dots. Slings and holsters are mandatory. The holster must be a modern tactical design, and you can’t use your race setup here.
They do prohibit bipods, coupled mags, drums, brakes, and compensators are not allowed. Suppressors are allowed but have to remain in place during the entire match.
Shooters must wear a plate carrier. Men’s plate carriers must way at least 15 pounds, and women’s have to weigh 12 pounds. This weight is taken slick without mags, pouches, water, etc.
The Divisions
There are ten Tactical Games divisions and five Sniper Challenge divisions. Tactical Games has men’s and women’s divisions. Sniper Games only appear to have unisex divisions. Each division is broken down by physical skill level, including your ability to manipulate weight and how fast you can run a mile. These are suggestions for shooters, and it’s not like you have to run a PFT before a match.
The Tactical Games offer both online and in-person training. However, the online training mostly focuses on physical fitness with a dry fire program. In-person training offers you events lasting anywhere from one day to three. None of this is free, but if you want to learn, this is one way to start.
There are some free videos on the basics for new competitors, and it is worth a watch to understand the safety rules, scoring, etc.
Scoring
The Tactical Games has two types of matches. There are time-only stages and points-only stages. Both types use a 100-point scale. How a competitor finishes on that 100-point scale is a direct representation of how you performed compared to the top score in your division. This ensures one stage isn’t more important than another. After every stage, your points are totaled up, and you get a final score.
Getting Tactical
The Tactical Games seem to be sweeping the industry. The mix of physical fitness and marksmanship completely changes the game. It’s no longer about one specific set of skills but several. If you wanted something that would allow you to test yourself in your ultimate LARP scenario, the Tactical Games is for you.
I have regarded shotguns as my primary alarm and emergency gun for many years. During the past fifty years I have broken an action pin is a Mossberg 500 and fired a Remington 870 until the trigger return spring broke. That is a lot of firing and a lot of training. No other type I have used and seen fired extensively in training as been as reliable as the pump shotgun save perhaps for the Glock 17 9mm handgun. I was slow to adopt self loading shotguns. One of the shotguns I now consider a front line defense piece is the Mossberg 930. I have investigated a number of 12 gauge buckshot shootings. The wound potential is unequaled. I have seen deer crumple from the impact of slugs as if hit by Thor’s hammer. The load combination is simply excellent for personal defense.
The Mossberg 930 and the newer 940 have some pretty well known proponents. . If you have see shooters like Jerry, Kay, and Lena Miculek perform the impossible with the Mossberg shotgun you will have great confidence in the design. Very few of us will reach their standard. Just the same if the 930 is good enough for the Miculeks it is good enough for us! I have used various models of the 930. The 940 is an even better gun with changes in the gas system. The 930 should be cleaned about every five hundred shells according to most. While this is a reasonable standard some loads are dirtier than others. The 940 also allows features an improved stock design with excellent length of pull and cant adjustment. The 930 is a good shotgun. The 940 is simply an improved version. 3 Gun competetion is the natural home of the competetion and tactical model. The 24 inch barrel handles quickly. The receiver is aluminum which saves weight. The safety is in the usual Mossberg position on the top tang making it accessible to right and left handled manipulation. The safety and bolt release as well as the cocking handle are extended for rapid manipulation. The magazine well is large enough for rapid replenishment of the ammunition supply. The extended magazine holds nine 2 ¾ inch shotgun shells. The chamber also accepts 3 inch shells. This makes for a formidable home defense shotgun. While a lighter and handy pump- they are also less expensive- will get the job done the automatic is clearly a desirable option for many of us.
Mossberg even offers a slug version with cantilever mount.The author’s Mossberg 930 and another front line shotgun the Mossberg 590.
The high end 940 competetion model features the magazine tube connector, bolt handle, bolt release button, safety lever and trigger in gold tone anodizing. The 940 also features a nickel boron action poarts finish for high lubricity. The gas system and coating on these Mossberg shotguns make them easily cleaned. There 930 and 940 cycle quickly. The interval between cleaning in the 940 may extend to 1,500 shells. This shotguns accommodates a heavy practice and competetion schedule. A new shotgun purchased for 3-Gun competetion it should be the 940. For most of us the 930 is a great choice. Occasionally a 930 comes up on the used market. If cast and length of pull adjustment are important- the 940 again as the stock offers good adjustment. So many choices! There are less expensive personal defense versions running less than eight hundred dollars at cheaperthandirt.com. The competetion model features a vented rib and ends with a Hi Viz TriComp fiber optic. While the 18.5 inch barrel defense gun swings quickly the 24 inch gun is fast, very fast, and balances very well. For what a shotgun is used for I don’t like pistol grips or box magazines. They are popular with those who don’t understand shotguns. The Mossberg shotguns handle like a shotgun should and offer excellent hit probability. A cohesive pattern is very important, The pattern should be centered. I wish to center the buckshot load in personal defense training. I don’t accept the ridiculous notion that birdshot works for home defense and I use cheap shells only for practice. I load the shotgun with reliable shells that provide a good pattern at maximum shotgun range. Most to the time these shells are the Hornady Critical Defense #00 buckshot. Remington Managed Recoil buckshot and Federal Flite Wad are other good choices.
When firing the Mossberg automatic shotgun quickly there are advantages in the design. The forend is generous offering good purchase. Even my personal shotgun with its non adjustable stock is practically ideal for most shooters. I am what most call average and the standard 930 fits me well. The rubber recoil pad is softer than most offering good shock absorbing function. Recoil is moderated somewhat by the gas operated action. I am no Miculek but I can really crank out shells and get hits with the Mossberg. Speed loads are excellent with this shotgun it isn’t difficult to keep the shotgun topped off and running.
Trigger action of a shotgun isn’t as critical as a rifle or handgun but should be crisp and feature a rapid reset. The Mossberg reset is sharp and the trigger break at a smooth 4.2 pounds. A loaded chamber indicator inside the triggerguard indicates when the action is cocked. My shotgun has been reliable through several thousand shells of all types including cheap foreign stuff. This is a great shotgun that offers pride of ownership and excellent protection. As for the 940 after firing several I am certain I will obtain one in due time. I am not blind to progress!
Designed for rapid handling and speed loading the Mossberg 940 is a formidable shotgun. While the author prefers #00 buckshot experiments with #4 buckshot are impressive. That is 27 buckshot balls in the pattern.There is no shoulder fired weapon as effective as a shotgun loaded with #00 buckshot.
I recently checked Cheaperthandirt.com for 12 gauge shell availability. Low brass has not been hurt too bad but buckshot is finally available in a wide choice offering the shooter an opportunity to test, pattern, and choose his or her load with confidence. CTD also has the Mossberg line available at a good price. Don’t deploy the cheapest shotgun shells for defense. Some don’t even use a wad the buckshot simply lays in the shell! But then- if the shotgun is used only for home defense even these loads make a rat hole at 7 yards.
Specifications:
Action Type: gas-operated, semi-automatic shotgun
Chambering: 12-ga., 2 ¾” and 3” shells
Receiver: hard-anodized aluminum, drilled-and-tapped for optics
Barrel: 24″ vented rib, smooth bore
Magazine: tubular, matte black,
FrontSight: HIVIZ fiber-optic, interchangeable
TriggerGuard: aluminum
Safety: tang-mounted slider, metallic
Fore–end: checkered black polymer
Buttstock: checkered black polymer
Recoil Pad: textured and vented black rubber
DropatComb: 1.35″
Drop at Heel: 2.15″
LengthofPull: adjustable, 13″-14.25″ using provided spacers
In the ever cyclic on-again off-again way that these cases go, the Illinois Assault Weapon Ban implemented by PICA has been reinstated as it goes through its next phase of litigation.
Appellate Judge Frank Easterbrook agreed Thursday to stay the ruling, at the request of the state’s lawyers, while last week’s decision is reviewed by the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. As a result, Illinois’ assault weapons ban appears to be back in effect – for now. The move comes after the appellate court earlier declined to block the ban. This leaning upon the actions of other courts instead of the facts in the case as they stand is legal logic that has allowed these laws to remain in place thus far. The efficacy of the law never needs defending, you just have to reference enough moderately similar cases from the proper perspective and keep saying its about safety.
No need to prove things are safer, its about safety and that is enough.
U.S. District Judge Stephen McGlynn, based in southern Illinois, temporarily blocked enforcement of the assault weapons ban last Friday, saying it not only restricted the right to defend oneself but, in some cases, “completely obliterated that right.” McGlynn is correct in his assessment, however the state lawyers went to the 7th Circuit to complain. It “is the only federal decision in the country” they are aware of that “enjoins restrictions on assault weapons” or large-capacity magazines under a decision handed down by the U.S. Supreme Court last year.
So because it is the first such decision, they’re trying to hold onto the ban and keep it in place.
However they are likely just playing for time. One of the cases the state referenced in order to reinstate the ban, because the 7th Circuit punted as lower courts often do in 2A cases, is now in front of a U.S. Supreme Court Justice, Justice Amy Coney Barrett. That case has been brought by a gun shop owner, those state lawyers must make their case to the Justice by Monday morning. If Barrett responds like McGlynn did then the ban might be off again next week. Barrett did pen a concurrence in Bruen and this could be the first major case we see in SCOTUS hands to indicate what she meant specifically and what the court at large will further define as the parameters protecting the 2nd Amendment and the state and federal governments limits upon regulating it.
I’m a shotgun nerd through and through. I think that’s well-established. Recently I was doing some research on the Benelli M4, specifically, the 1999 competition the Marine Corps led that ended with it becoming the M1014 Joint Service Shotgun. I wanted to know who the competitors were and eventually found one. Mossberg entered the contest with the Mossberg M9200A1. The gun is affectionately called the Jungle Gun by shotgun nerds. However, Jungle Gun refers to the folding stock variant.
Enter the 9200
The Mossberg 9200 had been built as a sporting shotgun in the early 90s. Mossberg went with a gas-operated system, and the gun was built in various configurations. This includes slug guns, bird guns, and general hunting shotguns. Mossberg did produce a Persuader model with an 18.5-inch barrel, a parkerized finish, and synthetic furniture. However, the M9200A1 is not a Persuader.
This was a purpose-built shotgun designed for the Joint Service Shotgun contest. It retained many of the features of the M9200 and Mossberg shotguns but also had a number of small variations. Like most Mossberg shotguns, the gun had a tang safety, interchangeable barrels, and was even compatible with some Mossberg 5500 furniture.
The Big, Bad M9200A1
The M9200A1 passed the rigorous tests imparted by the United States military and was built to the specs required by the bid. It didn’t win ultimately, but it was mostly a well-built, easy-handling shotgun. This wasn’t Mossberg’s first semi-auto shotgun, but it was seemingly the first they entered military trials with.
The M9200A1 utilized a big thick barrel, a design similar to what we see on the Mossberg 590A1. Thick barrels are like thick thighs. They save lives. In a military context, it prevents the barrel from bending or becoming damaged when it faces the rough and tumble world of Lance Corporal Schmuckatelli.
Mossberg also replaced a number of aluminum parts with steel parts, like the safety and trigger guard. The gun featured a Parkerized finish to top it all off. The sights were nothing more than a bead, and the gun had an 18.5-inch barrel. The magazine topped out at a mere four rounds, not quite the combat load we are used to. Choate-made magazine extensions to top it off.
Oddly enough, while the M9200 model had a 3-inch chamber, the M9200A1 only had a 2.75-inch chamber.
The Fatal Flaw
The M9200A1 and 9200, in general, are considered reliable semi-auto shotguns. These days they might have issues with the reduced recoil tactical loads we all know and love but with standard ammo, it wasn’t a problem. The guns ran fine and cycled quite quickly. The problem really came down to the manual of arms to reload the gun.
It was unnecessarily complicated. The bolt release had to be held down for every round loaded. Not just held down, but pressed, released, and pressed again, and finally pressed a last time after the shooter finished loading. Semi-auto shotguns weren’t new, and why Mossberg thought this was a good idea is beyond me.
Doing this in a firefight isn’t easy, and four rounds isn’t a lot between reloads. Also, you can’t really top the gun off. To load it, you have to flip it upside down and just hold it there. It’s much like the SPAS-12, which is its own piece of work.
The M9200A1 – Out of Service
Mossberg offered the gun to the civilian and law enforcement market, but it didn’t see much success. The Jungle Gun version wore a side folding stock and gained the name from its supposed use with the DEA in Latin American jungles. Beyond that, the gun wasn’t very popular, but I can’t help but want one.
Last year Law Tactical, LLC unveiled their revolutionary new AR-15 Internal Carrier (ARIC). The ARIC is a special bolt carrier group that has been redesigned to be compatible with Law Tactical’s famous AR Folding Stock Adapter.Besides that, it allows standard direct gas impingement AR-15s with folding stock adapters to fire with closed stocks.
A Little Background
The AR Folding Stock adapter (now on its 3rd generation/iteration) allows AR-15 and AR-308 shooters to fold their stocks to better stow and carry their weapons. Historically, AR-15 family could not do this because of the AR-15’s direct gas impingement system, which requires a buffer tube, spring and weight system in order to cycle. The original design calls for the entire action to be in a straight line, so folding was never an option. The Law Tactical Folding Stock Adapter offers AR-15 users a beautiful engineering solution, but there is one major caveat: weapons will not fire and cycle with the stock folded closed. Yes, technically you can get one round off, but the practice is discouraged by Law Tactical. Their solution to that challenge was to create and develop the ARIC, an “alternative bolt carrier group” whose brilliance is the fact that it doest reinvent the wheel. Rather, the ARIC keeps cyclea a standard direct gas impingement AR-15 by cleverly rearranging each component. Candidly, I think the ARIC is one of the neatest things I’ve personally seen in a long time. It has much to offer to shooters who choose to field rifles and carbines with Law Tactical AR Folding Stock Adapters who may find themselves needing a weapon with the ability to fire with folded stocks.
A close-up of the ARIC and a standard premium AR-15 Bolt Carrier Group (an LMT Defense in this case).
Dual Magic Wands
The ARIC omits the need for the weapon to have a weighted buffer and recoil spring inside the receiver extension (buffer tube). It cycles whether stock is folded or closed. The ARIC’s bolt does not move further back any more than a standard AR-15 bolt would either. The lynchpin of the ARIC system is a pair of sprung guide rods tie everything together. When the ARIC is properly installed inside the upper receiver, these rods stay fixed in place while allowing all moving parts to reciprocate correctly. In other words, they serve as rails for the unit to glide on. It is important to bring attention to the fact both guide rods must be in the correct spot inside the upper receiver in order to avoid reliability issues and for the weapon to cycle properly. I couldn’t help to notice that since the ARIC’s product launch, the majority of end-user reliability issues stem from this. Again because these guide rods stay in place, it’s crucial that they are positioned correctly before shooting.
A close-up shot of the pair of guide rods that tie everything together.
Shooting It So Far…
Compared to the volume of pistol shooting I do, I hardly shoot rifles. That said, I’ve been testing and evaluating my own ARIC in my 14.5 inch Lone Star Armory TX-4 Carbine. I’ve barely fired 250-300 rounds through this carbine, but the ARIC has been the only bolt carrier group that weapon has known. Naturally, it also has an AR Folding Stock Adapter. I have been satisfied with the reliability and the quality of the ARIC so far, so I have no plans to remove or replace it with any other bolt carrier group. The manufacturing quality, fit and finish are very noticeable in both the ARIC and the Adapter. This level of quality speaks volumes about Law Tactical’s products. Shooting a carbine equipped with and ARIC doesn’t feel any different. In fact, it’s quite easy to forget that you’re shooting a weapon with a “novel” bolt carrier. These do not affect the manual of arms either. Initially I was concerned about the rods sticking out too much and inviting a malfunction or bending, but they’re designed in such a way to avoid the issue. For those who wonder, it does have some proprietary parts due to its specialized design.
Although you absolutely need the AR Folding Stock Adapter to set it up, the ARIC itself is a drop-in part. No tool is needed to set it up nor field strip it to its major components either. It works wonderfully with the Radian Ambi charging handle I use on my TX-4, and I otherwise treat it like I would any other AR-15 BCG. I keep my ARIC well-lubed (just like I would for traditional bolt carrier group), and I strongly suggest you do the same. Especially if you are putting the first shots through a brand new unit. When my ARIC was installed on my brand new TX-4, it took the better part of a fully loaded 30 round magazine to break in. Law Tactical’s documentation informs shooters of this, and it’s no big deal. I haven’t had any stoppages since.
Suppressor Friendly, Too
Law Tactical sells two versions of the ARIC. The “C” and the “M”. The “C” is meant for unsuppressed shooting with general purpose SAAMI or NATO spec 5.56mm or .223 Remington ammunition. The “M” is meant for use with suppressed weapons. Although both the “M” and the “C” use the same weight of springs on their guide rods, the main difference is that the “M” is manufactured to internally handle gas differently due to suppressor backpressures.
If you already field an AR-15 with Law Tactical’s Folding Stock adapter and need the ability to fire your weapon with the stock closed, give the ARIC a shot…
CORRECT GUIDE ROD POSITIONINCORRECT GUIDE ROD POSITION. THEY MUST SIT BEHIND THE GAS VENTS WHERE THE “A” In ARIC IS
