The Surefire XSC was a bit of a surprise as far as I was concerned. The little gun world is notoriously underserved, and companies producing crap-tier lights like Olight were sadly dominating it. Luckily Surefire and Streamlight both stepped in to provide little guns with big power. Surefire did it through the XSC. The XSC is certainly a new option and one that’s extremely compact.
Surefire builds several models of the XSC designed for the SIG P365, the Hellcat, and Glock 43X and 48 series. It’s tough not to compare it to other models on the market, and when we talk purely size, the XSC has an advantage. It’s small enough that it sits nearly flush with the end of a standard P365 and is certainly flush on a P365XL. The XSC is 1.94 inches long and weighs only 1.7 ounces.
The Power!
That little light packs a healthy dose of power. It’s no OWL or Modlite, but with 350 lumens back by 2,000 candela it’s good enough for most indoor’s usage. In urban environments, it will light up enough of the environment at close range to establish PID. Inside the home, it’s well suited for lighting up a dark room and making sure it’s a bad guy and not a noisy cat.
This level of power isn’t going to overcome other bright lights. Those Photonic barriers would have to be quite weak for the XSC to beat out. It’s also not a light you can use beyond 25 yards. At 25 yards, I feel like I have complete confidence in my ability to identify what I am aiming at. The beam itself is more spill than focus. This creates a beam that fills your vision and does excel for close-range use.
It really fills rooms with light and provides your little gun with the means to establish PID in most environments. It’s not a light you’d mistake for a duty light. For the average Joe, the Surefire XSC shines bright enough to cast a bright and vivid beam at any potential threats.
Ergonomics and Setup
The XSC uses a rechargeable battery. I imagine they had to create a battery to keep the light this small. The battery lasts 30 minutes at peak output. The battery comes with a cradle to recharge it, and the battery can be removed from the light without needing to remove the XSC from your weapon.
The charging mount has a slot for an extra battery, so you can have two charging at the same time, and spare batteries are about 40 bucks. The charger uses a USB design, so it can be charged anywhere without issue. Surefire even includes 3M tape to secure the charger where you want it.
An onboard battery gauge with blinking lights lets you know your charge status at the press of a button. The little flashing lights come in a set of three, and how many are flashing relates to how charged your light is.
The controls consist of a pair of paddles that are low profile and easy to use. Press them inward, and you have all the power in your hands. One quick press triggers the constant on mode, and a long press activates the momentary mode. It’s simple and very workable.
Tiny and Mighty
The Surefire XSC isn’t going to blow you away with its power. In an era where Modlite kind of rules, the XSC seems dinky. I’m personally impressed that a light this small can offer this much power. For close-range self-defense, use the XSC shines, and I intend my pun. The XSC offers micro-sized guns, a micro-sized light made by a company that produces quality products. It’s a tool for the box, and if you carry a little gun, the XSC gives you one more option.
The boys are back and they’re recapping NRAAM 2023, and the new products as well as the general vibe of the show. Also, Caleb tells the best joke of his entire life and should probably retire after this.
Jack is left to nod and smile as he wasn’t even at the show and I just wandered trying to find the three actual new things at the show. NRAAM was a fun show in general but there wasn’t a lot that happened… except for that one thing that did. Watch the episode to see! ‘Murican Youths!
From the SIG Days event, you'll read below why this is relevant.
Allow me to correct the truthout headline for clarity.
We Need to Talk About Cast the Blame on Gun Manufacturers
I had no concept of how curmudgeonly I could become in my mid-thirties, but op-eds like this just reinforce a post I saw this morning on Instagram. It just listed how older generations believe, correctly, that younger generations are stupid.
They are, they haven’t lived long enough yet to recognize that they were stupid when they were young because they are still young. I was stupid too. We all were. I firmly believe that the point you are self aware enough to recognize the massive pile of stupid things you believed and did as a naïve youngling is when you have reached your adult maturity arch. Some people never do.
That youthful activist naivety comes through full force here. You can catch the hint that it’s coming too, truthout uses the currently trending all lowercase text in its logo and has a lot of ‘activist’ language instead of journalist.
But allow me to limit my shallow aspersions on the aesthetic to that bit as it feels like it telegraphs their opinion to come.
The following piece of utopia fiction do betterism is worth far greater critique, but it is on brand for the aesthetic.
Here we go.
Americans cannot end gun violence without confronting the fact that the U.S. is the world’s primary supplier of weapons.
We honestly could just end it at the subheading if we wanted to keep this brief and blunt, but they don’t so neither am I obliged to.
Americans cannot end gun violence. Period. Full stop. It is impossible. We are actively promoting it, and participate in it professionally, anywhere we militarily intervene or support. I wonder how many contributors to this op-ed or readers who agree with it wholeheartedly have a Ukrainian flag in their social profiles, or have professed their unwavering support unironically for the Ukrainians fighting while decrying weapons here. Not the specific types of violence here, merely the existence of guns.
You don’t get to have it both ways.
Americans cannot end ‘gun’ violence because Americans cannot end violence. We cannot end violence because violence is force. Force is valuable, it is a currency, it has legitimacy. Force can be used in a moral, immoral, or amoral way and we cannot get rid of any of those. The ability to project force is and will always be valuable, especially to a social order. It is a fundamental component to social order. It exists in every social order.
We aren’t even to the article yet…
Truthout is an indispensable resource for activists, movement leaders, and workers everywhere. Please make this work possible with a quick donation.
Oh, they are proud of their work. Good for them. A more cynical person, wizened to the world, may read that quick donation line and see ‘Truthout is an indispensable tool for propagandists, people who need propaganda, and the idiots who will consume it without question everywhere.’
More cynical, yes, a more cynical reader might indeed infer that.
Onto the no doubt well reasoned and articulate reasoning that reasons gun makers are the baddies in a world that cannot exist as freely or as advanced as it does without the development of personal arms and their access to them.
There is a familiar pattern after the mass shootings that have become a well-known feature of American life.
Yes there is. Propagate the event everywhere and give the deranged lunatic(s) their anticipated attention, then cry about why it keeps happening. The Democrats reliably hem and haw about their pet gun control proposals, the Republicans bumble their way through a defense of the 2nd Amendment, and experts in this field shake their heads at both of them for being about as well read on the topic as a five year old.
The initial shock and grief gives way to demands for greater regulation of gun ownership by Democrats, while Republicans dismiss such measures and blame mental illness instead. But if we actually want to do something about it, we need to have new conversations.
I agree!
The conversations need to take on a maturity that would leech them of all their value as political bargaining chips and therefore that will never happen. If we can keep people emoting, we can keep them spending on their favorite emotive cause.
But what are you thinking?
We often talk about where and how weapons are purchased — but rarely where and how they are ‘manufactured’. These realities challenge the conventional way we talk about guns in terms of a “culture war” between red and blue states.
I talk about how they’re manufactured quite a bit. It is actually what I like most about this industry, the technology and function. I find it fascinating. But you don’t mean where and how, you mean that they are manufactured atall. Especially in “BLUE STATES”, because how dare a Democrat be so hypocritical as to suggest weapons have any legitimacy ever anywhere.
And what you are seeing is just how shallow Democrats are in their commitment to a world of reduced weapon access, when only their most rabid and naïve members will propose hampering the weapons manufacturers too much. Since that political line costs them very real jobs and very real tax revenue for their very real voters, Democrats merely shop the idea of reduced weapons access because the idea is valuable. The end result is not, it is costly. Guns are not so bad that crushing people’s ability to make a living, and their blue state reelection chances, is ever too far on the table. Democrats may be stupid in many regards, but rarely that one.
For example, the blue states of Massachusetts and Connecticut have some of the strictest regulations on firearms carrying and possession. But they are also major sites of gun facturing [sic] in this country. The weapons used in the 2018 Parkland shooting, for example, were manufactured by Smith and Wesson, a gun manufacturer based in Massachusetts.
Oh? Blue states like housing large profitable businesses with DoD, DoJ, and international contracts?
The defense industry is both crucial and a multi-billion dollar revenue source? Firearm rights are constitutionally protected and therefore the industry that makes them is vital to both public and individual defense?
Who’d have guessed that they like money and can reason that housing vital and profitable businesses for the commercial and professional spaces makes them money?
Keep up kids.
The deeper and bigger point is that the U.S. is the world’s principal supplier of weapons.
As the third most populous nation on the planet with the best developed industry for that supply… yes? To borrow a line from the 1911 crowd, “Two World Wars!” and several long conflicts since.
World’s exported arms? Like F35’s? Or are we talking small arms, like rifles and handguns? Be specific, truthout. Obfuscation is a nasty habit we should all do our best to avoid. The whole of NATO is pretty much using the F35 platform as their next gen multi-role fighter and those are super expensive, what percentage of exports does that single plane account for in that 40?
Blue states with strict gun laws often suffer gun violence when weapons are trafficked in from red states with looser gun laws. Similarly, many countries surrounding the U.S. with high rates of gun violence, like Mexico, obtain guns both legally and illegally from this country.
Pause. Most crime guns are locals, truthout. Per ATF.
When firearms are recovered, they tend to be recovered in the state in which they were stolen (92%; 271,916). –ATF
Almost one third of crime guns are recovered less than 10 miles from where they were originally purchased. They didn’t go far before becoming a crime gun. Over 50% are recovered less than 25 miles from their FFL purchase location.
If they did go far, it took time.
With no system to effectively control and track who ends up with those guns, these weapons are often obtained by military units or police that have committed human rights abuses or who work with criminal groups.
How is the US, to say nothing of a private country simply selling rifles or handguns, supposed to police the weapons they sell once the enter the hands of a legitimate agency? How is Smith & Wesson, IWI, or H&K supposed to make sure guns sold to Mexican, or any other .gov entity of a foreign nation, remain always on team good guys? Forever? They can’t be stolen, nobody corrupt can ever touch them, they cannot be misused in any way so sayeth the builder?
Look up a fairly recent ATF initiative called Fast & Furious, where the ATF trafficked weapons to Mexico onpurpose and failed utterly to control or track those. Those weapons were specifically meant to track weapon streams to the cartels and identify bad actors, they lost those. They couldn’t do it even when specifically paying attention to the guns and with the ATF, the US Agency specifically empowered to police guns, that agency failed to track, to intervene, and to make arrests. Numerous deaths in Mexico and Federal Agent Brian Terry of the CBP are dead at the hands of Fast & Furious guns. Now you want a private company to be responsible for ensuring that their weapons are only used by good folks forever?
So when at least some of the guns in Ukraine get swept up to worse places and uses in a few years, suddenly our supplying them will become a bad thing? It’s a good thing now, very necessary right? Ukraine flags all around. But then in the future it will be bad. Unintended consequences! Oh no! We can’t just mark guns as on ‘good team’ forever. It’s almost like they’re inanimate objects.
For example, in September 2014, local police in the state of Guerrero, Mexico were responsible for the disappearance and murder some 43 students from the Ayotzinapa Rural Teachers College. The police were armed with rifles that were supplied legally from Colt, a prominent U.S. gun manufacturer headquartered in Connecticut.
Police? Government?? Doing bad things?!? That would never happen here!
Oh… yeah… Kent State. But surely that was just once and awhile…
Ah, yeah… Waco. The event, caused by US federal agencies, that motivated the Oklahoma City bombing. So yeah, maybe all government agencies shouldn’t be assumed to be good or in the right just because they are US based.
Usually with complete ignorance of how they work. Everyone likes ideas that sound good. Their opinions or only as valuable as their understanding of the ideas and the process goes. This is why things like the S.A.F.E Act and the Patriot Act get passed will all manner of suspect and dangerous nonsense within, they sound good. They have a nice title. Don’t look any deeper kids.
[But gun lobbies like the NRA, which are so influential in red states, don’t really represent gun owners — they represent gun manufacturers. In fact, of the NRA’s corporate partners, several are gun manufacturers based in blue states.
The NRA’s corporate partners are… corporations? Ones that exist wherever they are headquartered? Shocking.
As long as these corporations flood the U.S. and the world with guns, debate over who accesses these guns won’t get us very far.
Is this the part where we start singing “Imagine”, like those clueless celebs who pissed off their fan bases by being total clowns during COVID lockdowns? Who were sitting comfortably when people who live paycheck to paycheck instead of living seven to eight figure job to seven to eight figure job told them how to react to COVID? Is that where we are in the conversation now?
So our current conversation serves the status quo. It further divides people in this country according to a “culture war” narrative, where politicians clash in rhetoric, but everyone knows that the actual situation will not change.
Do they? Because most people in the conversation are under informed about the things they are discussing, often on all sides. Have you actually discussed what a background check is and involves with anyone who ‘supports background checks’? The conversations serve the ‘status quo’ but what is that? Define it for me please.
From the perspective of ending bloodshed, this isn’t working. We need to try something different, and it will mean some deeper interrogation about where these weapons come from.
There we go. Lofty motive. ‘Ending Bloodshed’ like if we just write it down on paper the right way the entirety of humanity’s history with the use of force will just be better.
So, completely ignoring motive. Got it. Just eliminate weapons, which have always existed in society and always will. Cool. Reality denial works so well as policy.
This could mean reviewing the practices and impacts of gun manufacturers,]
They make weapons. They are heavily regulated. But they make weapons. What are we going to review?
You want to know why these conversations seems circular? Because naive little utopian zealots never actually bother to follow through and understand what they are suggesting, ever. They just leave it at the pretty title and move on like they’ve actually improved the world.
[ demanding greater regulation,]
What? What regulation? What rule are we missing? We keep saying these things like we can regulate weapons into only being good weapons or regulate away the legitimate societal needs for weapons. We can’t.
[ and — as with any product that causes far reaching harm]
Like pharmaceuticals , alcohol, or vehicles?
[ — having a public conversation about whether companies should be allowed to make these weapons at all.
Okay so not those three other things.
I really want to hear what your alternative is to making these weapons, what would small arms would be replaced with, and if the US stops making guns what makes you think China, Russia, Turkey, or any other country would? Do we think sitting upon our moral and poorly thought through
[ — one that has dire consequences not only for U.S. communities, but for those all over the world.]
Like being able to defend yourself or your communities from bad actors who don’t care about your good intentions?
[ New ways of thinking will help us fulfill our responsibility to protect vulnerable people not just in the U.S., but people everywhere.
Ah, “new ways of thinking” will help. What new ways?
Here’s the big problem with stupid, altruistic, naïve, utopia fantasies. These are all ideas that have been thought, tried, schemed, altered, rethought, rehashed, and repeated, and they keep being repeated because new young people who are not at the place in their life to recognize that we’ve tried it already.. yes that way.. yes that way too.. no, here’s why that’s a terrible plan, etc., are saying, “Let’s try this thing that has never been tried before! I will not look into the accuracy of that claim in the slightest.”
The intentions are good, but there’s a saying about good intentions and a road being paved for a good reason.
Among the greatest hubris of the young is that hard to shake concept of ‘because something is well intentioned it is both a good thing and incapable of causing harm.’ Ironically that is central to the “culture wars” of today. The idea that a thing is both good and capable of causing harm is difficult to compute, and because of the naïve and inexperienced nature of youth they are quick to declare, “Well we just don’t need cars, guns, oil, etc.” without any grounded understanding of where any of those things touch their own lives or the lives of those around them. They are too young to consider second and third order effects. That problem, that blind spot in their thinking, extends to most altruistic utopian fantasies, they cannot be re-grounded in reality.
I recently started researching the PP-19 from Russia (with Love), and that triggered my curiosity about the Colt SMG. This child of the 1980s was the first AR9 on the market and saw some limited success with police and military forces. Not much, but enough to make it a staple of the 1980s. Colt is all in on the AR market and has continued to produce numerous variants of the famed rifle. I was curious if Colt was still producing the Colt SMG.
To be fair, I know they’ve produced a civilian rifle in 9mm for years on and off. While I don’t think they ever officially discontinued it, the Colt AR6951 tends to be one less common Colt design. While that might exist, are they still producing the Colt SMG? I knew a couple of years ago they made a Cotl M5 to continue the M4 series. The Colt website lists nothing, but some Google-fu led me to the Colt Defense website, where, lo and behold, the Colt SMG lives and breathes.
The Colt M5 SMG
Colt took the M5 designation and applied it to their new Colt SMG. It isn’t a lot different from the old gun on the inside. Both are simple direct blowback guns. They use the AR-15 layout that ditched the direct impingement design. Blowback makes sense for SMGs. It’s fine, not great, but it works, and it’s reliable. The downsides include extra recoil and a stiff buffer spring, and a heavy buffer design.
The upside is a cheaper, easier-to-produce gun with less likely to go wrong. The original Colt submachine guns used a four-position stock and a 10.5-inch barrel. In 1982 when it was created, it was quite short and capable. Using the AR-type design allowed it to translate easier over to soldiers and police forces that were familiar with the AR platform. Even if they weren’t familiar, a standard manual of arms existed that was easy to train cops and soldiers with.
The Colt M5 took the Colt submachine gun and drastically modernized it. They did stick to the classic Colt mags. Colt modified double stack, double feed Uzi mags, and they work. They offer shooters a last-round bolt-hold-open device and are quite sturdy.
They ditched the carry handle, the four-position stock, and the classic plastic handguards. In its palace sits a six-position Magpul stock and a free-floating M-LOK rail. The flash hider has been replaced by a tri-lug suppressor adapter as well. The gun gets the full M5 treatment.
This means we get fully ambidextrous controls. This is quite nice and rare to see on PCCs, especially PCCs that use Colt SMG mags. We still get the huge shell deflector and the internal magwell design of the classic SMG.
Who is Using it?
Good question. I can’t find any press releases or reports of the gun being used by any police force or military force. The problem with submachine guns is that pistol rounds kind of suck. If you are using a long gun, why not use a rifle round? Modern carbines like the Mk 18 style ruffles and 10.5 upper receivers aren’t much bigger than a Colt SMG M5 variant and are much more powerful and capable.
The M5 variant of the Colt SMG is neat, but for a modern Army or police force, it’s not the best option. However, Since CZ owns Colt, maybe they’ll release a civilian model. Maybe one that takes Scorpion mags? A man can dream.
Washington State will become the 10th state to pass some form of AWB (Assault Weapons Ban), pending Gov. Jay Inslee’s signature, which he has promised to provide. HB1240 makes illegal the manufacture, sale, and import of weapons covered by the bill, which includes a list of 62 specific weapons, and their variants, from expected choices like AK’s and AR’s to some more unexpected ones, including the SKS and SVD, and even stuff you’ll probably find only on Forgotten Weapons, like the Australian Automatic series of firearms. There is also the usual laundry list of AWB cosmetic features (which they explicitly announce are, in fact, NOT cosmetic, because scary) like detachable magazines, pistol grips, etc. Unlike the 1992 federal AWB though, there is only an allowance for one such feature, vs 3, and the features extend to handguns. Currently owned firearms are grandfathered, but if they think that’s going to mollify WA gun owners, or Pro-2A legal groups like FPC, then they haven’t been paying attention.
These banned guns are “weapons of war”, which according to HB1240’s AWB are only useful for “…kill(ing) humans quickly and efficiently” and “…are not suitable for self-defense”, which makes one wonder why police are specifically exempted from this ban. Those same police, you’ll remember, who Gov. Inslee doesn’t trust to properly employ a chokehold, are now the only civilians in WA State who can own these apparent mass-murder machines.
While it’s certainly within the WA legislature’s power to enact any legislation it desires –AWB or otherwise– it’s also within the power of the citizenry via the court system to challenge any such bill, and we expect to see FPC and others filing lawsuits to do exactly that very soon. Given the SCOTUS precedents set by Heller and especially Bruen, we don’t expect the law to last, but lawsuits take time, and a whole lot of wasted tax dollars. We will unfortunately just have to wait and see.
I’m a P320 fan. Specifically I like the aluminum AXG versions, I’m fairly ambivalent on the other models. But the internet is abuzz with a current lawsuit against the arms giant and there are a few photos of guns having fragged.
Here’s the thing. If the condition would frag any pistol, like an obstructed barrel or a double charged round, that isn’t an issue with the SIG specifically.
Ian over at Forgotten Weapons has a fairly objective 20 minutes of information on some of the current issues with the P320. The drop issue from the past, the current lawsuit against firing inadvertently (which happened to Glock too, they are the most popular pistol in the world), and the out of battery firing issue.
The P320 made it to over 1,000,000 units very quickly. It owns a massive share of the modern pistol market. There will likely be problems with any machine. There Beretta 92 and the Glock both receive their share of misplaced hate to this day.
The shotgun market has hit an interesting zone. It seems that we are finally coming to believe in the semi-auto shotgun. They’ve gotten to the point where they are reliable with a wide variety of loads and don’t tend to be ammo picky. That means they’ve seen a much higher level of adoption with tactical shooters. We’ve recently seen the rise of three new semi-auto shotguns that are defining the genre. We have the new Beretta Ultima Patrol, the Mossberg 940 Pro Tactical, and the Savage Renegauge Security.
I don’t want this to be a versus article where I try to declare one better than the other. I simply don’t have the range time with two of the three to have a real opinion there. However, I want to examine what these three guns offer the shotgun shooting world and maybe examine where the shotgun world seems to be going.
These three guns have a lot in common. They are all semi-auto, gas-operated 12 gauge shotguns aimed at the tactical market. They all feature a number of modern features that shotgun shooters have long desired.
Digging Into the New Generation Of Shotgun
I believe each of these shotguns offers you a specific advantage over the other. They also provide a few features shared between them that are really making them stand out. I want to break these three guns down and explain why you might choose one over the other. I do have a bit of a bias, and I am a fan of the Mossberg 940 Pro, although I do plan to eventually own all three of these shotguns for a very in-depth examination.
The Mossberg 940 Pro Tactical
Mossberg designed the 940 Pro Tactical by improving the 930 series by leaps and bounds to produce a very competent semi-auto shotgun. The 940 series really worked to improve the reliability of the 930 and offer a competent out-of-the-box fighting shotgun with the Pro Tactical. They improved the internals, as well as the externals.
On the outside, they equipped the gun with massive controls that are all easy to grip, hit, and engage with. Mossberg opened up the ejection port and loading port for easy loading. With the 940 Pro Tactical, they added a cut to facilitate the use of red dots with the Shield RMSc footprint. The stock offers insert-based LOP adjustments and an M-LOK barrel clamp for slings and accessories.
On top of all that, the 940 Pro Tactical is the cheapest of the bunch, often for sale for under 900 dollars if you shop around.
The Beretta Ultima Patrol
The Ultima Patrol premiered at SHOT this year and showed us that Beretta could make an affordable semi-auto shotgun. With the price of 1301s rising, the Ultima Patrol offers a semi-auto shotgun with the Beretta stamp for less than a thousand bucks. While we lose the BLINK system, we get an American-made Beretta fit the brim with features. This semi-auto shotgun is thoroughly modernized.
It features a series of enlarged, easy-to-use controls. It has ghost ring sights and an optic mount. The gun features a hook and loop patch to toss on side saddles with ease. The end of barrels feature M-LOK clamps, and the forend features a few M-LOK slots as well. Beretta is the king of semi-auto shotguns, with the 1301 and the Benelli series under their ownership.
Savage Renegauge Security
The Renegauge Security didn’t get the same attention as the Ultima or 940 series, and that’s a real sin. The Reneguage Security uses the DRIV system, which is the Dual Regulating Inline Valve system that vents gas before driving the bolt. The benefit is that this makes the gun low recoiling, likely the lowest recoiling of this group. It’s impressive how easy handling it is.
The Renegauge also features an adjustable M-LOK via a series of inserts. The stock itself is very Magpul SGA-like, with a sharp pistol grip but a traditional layout. The gun features larger-than-average controls but not larger than the 940 or Ultima. This gun also has the M-LOK clamp feature that makes accessorizing easy. We get ghost ring sights as well, with wings to keep them safe when things get abusive.
The Downsides To These Semi-Auto Shotguns
Each of these guns has a downside worth acknowledging, and let’s dive into these features.
Mossberg 940 Pro Tactical – The gun features a lack of proper sights and relies on a high-viz sight no better than a bead.
Ultima Patrol – Lacks any means to adjust the LOP and feels like a budget 1301.
RenegUge Security – Not only is it the highest-priced gun, but it lacks optic compatibility.
The Future of Semi-Auto Shotguns
I do think these three semi-auto shotguns are the future, or at least their features are. They have huge controls, which is nice to see. They also feature M-LOK barrel clamps, and I really want a company to make these for other guns. Two of the three feature LOP adjustments, and I think that’s a must-have. Another two of the three are red dot ready, and like all guns, shotguns benefit from optics.
Now all I want to see are reversible charging handles. If I could get any of these guns with that feature, I’d be an instant fanboy. The shotgun market is finally expanding a bit, and they seem to be finally modernizing, and it’s lovely to see.
Like a very few handguns the SIG P210A is a joy to fire.
There are few handguns I hold in the greatest esteem and have complete confidence in. A well-made 1911, the Hi-Power, Beretta 92, SIG P226 and CZ 75 are among these. For some time I have wished to own a SIG P210 pistol. Finances and opportunity have not met. Most modern new introductions are polymer frame, striker-fired handguns. There are plenty of inexpensive 1911 handguns. When someone introduces a top-quality pistol, it seems to be on the 1911 pattern.
The new SIG P210A is an exception. This is a steel frame, single-action 9mm with a single-column magazine. It isn’t similar to most handguns and defines excellence and accuracy.
A target version is also available.This is the standard P210.
The new SIG P210A isn’t an exact copy of the SIG P210. But mot will find it a better shooter. It is certainly worth its price. The new SIG is made in America. This is interesting, as the original SIG was made in Switzerland by Schweizerische Industrie Gesellschaft, while the majority of handguns marked SIG were manufactured by agreement with JP Sauer of Germany. The double-action system and frame-mounted decocker of the P220 were pioneered by the JP Sauer 38H, so JP Sauer had more than a little input into the design of the SIG Sauer P-series. The P210 is another matter. When SIG built their plant in New Hampshire, this marked the P-series manufacture in yet another nation. It might be said, the new pistol is Americanized. I don’t think anyone complained when SIG changed the P220’s magazine release from a heel to a push button and produced the American version, but I am certain some will complain concerning the P210A’s detail changes. The P210 replaced the .30 Luger and a short-lived SIG design as a Swiss service pistol and served from 1948 to 1975, when it was replaced by the SIG P220 9mm. The Swiss place a premium on accuracy, and the P210 delivered. The pistol was designed by noted designer Charles Petter. Petter was responsible for the French 1935 as well. While the French pistol is criticized as an odd and underpowered pistol, my experience with the 1935 is that it’s a miniature P210 in most regards. The pistol is very accurate. I once undertook a loading project with the 7.65 French Long the 1935 chambers. The result was a super-accurate pistol that fired a cartridge more powerful than most .32 H&R Magnum loads. But that is another story.
The P210 chambered the much more powerful 9mm Luger cartridge. After World War Two everyone had 9mm submachine guns so everyone in Europe adopted the 9mm handgun cartridge as well. Well, more to it than that but the change made a great deal of sense. The pistol was immensely popular in a nation of shooters and was widely used in target competition. The P 210 has been terribly expensive in this country. The new handgun is affordable and differs mechanically from the original P210. SIG pioneered a system in which the barrel hood butts into the ejection port for lockup. The P-series are famed for accuracy. The P210A uses this system rather than the P210’s locking lugs.
The SIG proved reliable with a wide range of loads.
The pivoting trigger is basically the same, while the pistol features an elongated grip tang for greater comfort. A great improvement is the new frame-mounted safety. The original P210 features a safety behind the trigger and just in front of the grips. This isn’t a fast or tactical system. The new safety is better suited to personal defense use. Unlike the Swiss and German P210 pistols, the new P210A, while not inexpensive, will be affordable for many of us. CNC machinery makes for real precision. The pistol is stainless steel, a big plus, with the stainless covered in black Nitride finish.
The P210 is a thinner and better-balanced handgun than the images portray. It is lively in the hand. It isn’t a lightweight however, at 37 ounces and 8.4 inches long. My pistol is a fixed-sight version. This suits my tastes well. The rear sight is adjustable for windage and the front post is dovetailed in place. They feature a white, three-dot setup.
The front strap is nicely checkered and the grips are nicely finished. The checkering adds up to excellent abrasion and adhesion. The combination of an ambidextrous safety and extended slide lock makes for greater speed in combat shooting, and the new beavertail grip tang makes for more comfortable shooting compared to the older design P210.
The grip design keeps the pistol centered and the sights come to the eye naturally as the pistol is grasped. The new lockup for the ramped barrel makes for excellent accuracy as the firing tests prove.
Since the P210 features reversed frame rails, with the slide riding inside the frame, racking the slide is more difficult than some pistols.
Properly designed cocking serrations riding on a raised boss in the slide make for excellent leverage. The slide is well-fitted, there is no lateral play at all.In common with the Petter designed French 35 and the Tokarev TT33, the P210 features a modular trigger design. The hammer, mainspring, sear and disconnect are in this unit. The trigger press is a smooth 3.8 pounds without any trace of creep, grit or backlash. The trigger is among the outstanding features of this handgun.
Firing tests- the SIG P210 comes on target quickly and offers excellent hit probability. The pistol simply hangs in the hand and stays on target. It wasn’t difficult to quickly empty the magazine into the X-ring. Speed loading is easier due to the funnel formed by the pistol’s grips. If you don’t think the P210A is a suitable combat pistol — shooting results are a counterpoint. This is a fast handling and capable handgun.
The pistol proved accurate with outstanding results with certain loads.The P210 is reliable with a wide range of loads.
Conclusion
The pistol is fast into action, mild in recoil and demonstrates excellent hit probability. But it is also a superb target handgun. As for absolute accuracy firing the pistol from a solid brace using the MTM Caseguard K Zone shooting rest I was able to five shot groups at 25 yards. Most ammunition groups five shots into 2.0 inches or less. An occasional 1.2 inch group shows what the pistol is capable of. I achieved this goal at times, but for the most part, the service grade loads printed five shots into 2 inches. The pistol is more accurate than I. The SIG P210A gets a clean bill of health in every category. If you need a red dot high capacity and a combat light- all desirable features- this pistol isn’t for you. If you want precision and pride of ownership over other considerations then take a look at this handgun.
Listen, I know Russia isn’t exactly popular right now. They’ve kinda been giant D-bags, but that doesn’t mean I have to stop appreciating Russian weaponry and reporting on it, right? Well, I hope not because, as an SMG fan, I recently stumbled across a new submachine gun from The Russian Kalashnikov Group. The PP-19 and now PP-20 seem to be your options for a Russian SMG, but according to the Kalashnikov Group website, they now have a PPK-20.
The PPK-20 looks to have been revealed in early 2020. According to TASS.com, a Russian News Agency, it was in state testing, but there wasn’t much information revealed afterward. Now, on the Kalashnikov Group Russian website, the PPK-20 has its own page, and it seems to be for sale to military and police forces worldwide. Now, we haven’t seen much good come out of Russian weaponry in Ukraine, but at least the AKs work, right?
What is the PPK-20
The PPK-20 is an evolution of the PP-19 series. This submachine gun family started back in the 1990s and began with the famed Bizon and its helical magazine in 9mm Makarov. It became the PP-19 Vityaz in 9×19. This gun used much simpler, cheaper, and likely more reliable box magazines. The PP-19 evolved into the PP-19-01. From that gun, we got the very modern and chic PPK-20.
The PP-19 series has always been and continues to be a standard straight blowback submachine gun. It uses an AK-style design but ditches the long-stroke gas piston system. Simple blowback is fairly standard for SMGs, and the downsides revolve around the higher-than-expected recoil and excessive weight. However, it makes a simple and cheap gun.
The AK series is basically a brand for Russia and the Kalashnikov Group. While they could and have made better and more ergonomically included SMGs, they stuck to their calling card for the PPK-20. There are benefits, which include lower training requirements for troops used to the AK series. One of the reasons the AR platform and ergonomics remain in military use is because it works, and we are used to it.
The downside is that AK ergonomics are basically that of a submachine gun made in the 1940s. The world has moved on from the age of the AK.
What’s New With the PPK-20
There is a thing with submachine guns and the initial K. Whenever someone makes a super short version of an SMG. It gains the K initial. As far as I can tell, this goes back to two German guns, the Walther MPK and the HK MP5K. The Walther came first with the MPL and MPK. The MPK was the same gun as the MPL, with a shorter overall barrel. The MP5K was an MP5, also with a short barrel.
K stands for kurz, which is German for short. If you’ve ever purchased imported .380 ACP ammo, it might be marked 9mm, Kurz. That K designation has made its way to the entire world of SMGs, including the Czech Scorpion, the SIG MPX, and beyond. It’s also found a foothold in Russia, apparently.
The PPK-20 follows the SMG tradition of using the K designation to bring us a short SMG. Well shortish. The PP-19 has a 9.35-inch barrel, and the PPK-20 works with a 7.14-inch barrel. That’s not the only difference.
The gun uses a stock that both collapses and folds instead of the triangle stock of the PP-19. The handguard features an M-LOK design with some short sections of Picatinny rail. They also pushed the rear sight all the way back to the end of the dust cover. This greatly increases the sight radius, which will make the gun easier to shoot accurately.
They also added a selector to the left side of the gun that’s much more modern than the classic AK safety, although, to be clear, that safety is still there. It’s also designed to function primarily with the armor piercing, ass-kicking, 7N21 armor piercing round but can use standard 9mm rounds as well.
All That and a Bag Of Chips
The PPK-20 is a big improvement on the PP-19, but it might be too little too late. The gun hasn’t been adopted, or at least if it has, it hasn’t been reported. The PPK-20 suffers from the same problems as any SMg, and that’s the fact it’s an SMG. Short carbines exist, and rifle rounds pack a lot more punch than pistol rounds. Who needs an SMG when you can pick up an M4 or even one of the AK-200 variants?
Try not to laugh and have your mind in the gutter. When I say muff pistol, I’m referring to a device often carried by women to warm their hands. Even in the 16th century, women didn’t get the benefits of pockets and the warmth they offered. Muff pistols were designed to be ultra-small and easily concealable firearms aimed at women. Not literally, but as a marketing tool. The Muff pistol became the concealed carry choice for women as the pistols were easy to carry in their hand-warming muffs.
The Orignal Muff Pistol
Tracking who made the first muff pistol is likely impossible. They came to be in the 1700s. At this point, the Queen Anne pistol was quite popular, and these guns were simple breechloading, flintlock pistols. The barrel had to be removed to load, and as you’d expect, they were single-shot firearms. They were somewhat small for the era, akin to the Glock 19. Like the Glock 19, they were used for various tasks and carried for duty and self-defense.
However, they were still somewhat large for most people, especially women and the fashion of their era. This led to the muff pistol, a smaller variant of the Queen Anne pistol. Think of this as the Glock 43 of the era. Its small size made it easy to carry, and it was easily hidden in the muffs that were popular with women of the era.
The most common manufacturer of Muff pistols was Bunny of London, or well, they are the easiest to find these days. Muff pistols were quite ahead of their time. They were carried ready and concealed, and a flintlock pistol wasn’t exactly the safest of firearms.
Knowing these would be carried ready to fire in a muff or pocket, they incorporated a safety device that would block the frizzen from opening, so if the hammer did fall, it didn’t really matter. Other designs often had drop-down triggers to prevent snagging and similar devices.
The ball rounds were often large and were anywhere from .390 patched balls to .490 balls. The barrels were rifled but short, and sights weren’t a consideration. Just point at close range and pull the trigger.
The Evolution of the Muff Pistol
Muff pistols, and pocket pistols in general, stuck around as gun technology evolved. This includes the realm of percussion and cartridge firearms. I got my own Muff pistol that came from the late 1800s. It’s apparently a .22 Short, but without any markings, and due to the age, I’m hesitant to fire it.
The design is interesting, and by the time they got to cartridge firearms, the barrels were no longer removable. Instead, they opened at the rear, and you could individually load a round into the barrel. These were single-action, hammer-fired guns. They were no custom Glock. The designs were quite interesting and invoked a manual ejector and rotating breech block.
Muff Pistols Today
You can easily find an antique muff pistol if you look at historical auctions. They don’t fetch much money, especially the cartridge variants, which were made fairly cheaply. They aren’t flying off the shelves with collectors unless they are sold in pairs or with a fancy display and loading case.
If you want one, it won’t be tough to find. It’s an interesting example of a concealed carry weapon in the early days.
Testing ammunition munitions and cartridges is complicated by any standard. Research and development begin in the ballistics lab and continue into field experience after the loads have been fired into gelatin for personal defense testing. The combination of science is demanding. The load must operate at a safe pressure for the given cartridge while providing maximum performance. This means careful powder and primer selection. A full powder burn and good accuracy are desirable.
Wound ballistics are at a high level of reliability. Over the previous century, tests have been conducted using dry cadavers, pine boards, European glue, wax, water, wet newspaper, and most recently ballistic gelatin. Gelatin is the closet media we have to flesh and blood and human and animal tissue, yet it really isn’t close at all.
Gelatin is useful for comparing one load to the other but not necessarily for comparing how the loads will actually perform in a living target. The results are close enough for government work! Ammunition companies, military and police agencies and institutions use gelatin for ammunition testing. Gelatin alone of the viable test media gives a permanent representation of the wound channel. As an example, I often use water for comparing one load to the other. It is repeatable, as well as reliable, and water results are consistent. On the downside, there is no record of the effect, and of course, water isn’t as data rich as gelatin. Water is more practical for most of us. We like to test our own ammunition and choose a load that fits our needs. Reliability may be tested by firing the load in our personal firearms.
Water testing is ok when comparing one load to the other.An expanded 9mm hollow point.
Recoil, control in the individual handgun, a clean powder burn, good bullet pull, limited muzzle blast and flash, and reasonable accuracy are important. A loading with a balance of expansion and penetration is desirable for personal defense. Preparing gelatin for testing is a demanding procedure. The gelatin must be properly mixed, and it is tested for consistency, so the results will be valid and repeatable. It is expensive to scrap a 40-pound block of gelatin that isn’t mixed properly. Consistency is vital. Agencies across the world must be able to compare ballistics results obtained in the United States. The term repeatable and verifiable are heard often.
Gelatin and ballistic testing are valid. There are pop culture so called studies with zero validity. So called street results have little value compared to lab testing, just because X caliber produced ‘a stop’ doesn’t mean X caliber is reliable in all or most circumstances. Some so-called studies claim to have confidential reports and secret sources. Their validity is zero. Science doesn’t ask you to believe, science presents the facts. As an example, a few years ago some writers actually convinced a gullible minority that secret testing—involving shooting alpine goats—had been conducted! The technical is seldom as exciting as fiction, but it is reliable. Don’t get caught up in a hoax. The results obtained in scientific testing are useful in comparing one load to the other. I do not wish to discourage anyone from mixing their own gelatin as there are many careful people capable of doing this work; it is simply a chore that most would not care to perform. There is a considerable investment in time and material. You have to know how to read a wound cavity for the results to be worthwhile.
The Hornady XTP is a reliable expanding bullet. This is performance at different velocity.
In water testing, penetration and expansion are tested. The bullet is found in the skin of a water jug, in the jug, or between jugs. The bullet is captured by the gelatin block. The wound cavity is represented in the block. Most jacketed hollow point bullets expand in an 18-inch block and stop. The gelatin block expands a bit and often snaps back to shape. You look over the entire cavity and determine the results.You will observe how quickly the bullet expanded past the initial caliber-size hole. Some penetrate the same length but begin expanding at different points. How deep and wide is the cavity, that is the question. This makes for a measurable complete wound volume. Two wound cavities with the same depth of penetration may have different characteristics. The FBI measures the total wound volume. The FBI also demands a minimum of 12 inches of penetration with 18 inches being desirable. This is reasonable considering the fact that the felons arms may be extended as he is firing at you—demanding penetration through the arm bones.
Heavy clothing or light cover may be part of the problem. Or, you may be dealing with a heavy and thickly muscled individual. Another consideration is the length of the beginning of the wound channel, sometimes referred to as the neck. If the neck is relatively short, then the bullet has begun expanding early. If the neck is long, expansion began later. This isn’t a trait that may be measured with other media. A rapidly expanding bullet may be desirable in home defense. An average-sized individual with light clothing will be addressed well by such a loading. On the other hand, the larger the opponent and the more heavily clad—as in a winter scenario—the bullet that begins expansion later might be the better choice. The choice, which depends upon an individual scenario, is common wisdom. However, some cannot afford the luxury of the individual scenario, and wisely plan for the worst-case scenario. In this case penetration is favored.
The final arbiter of effectiveness is shot placement. A shot to the arterial region that produces blood loss through damage is most desirable. The lungs are not particularly difficult to penetrate. The body has both hollow and solid organs. A hit to one of the solid organs often produces more shock and more bullet expansion. Bullets that expand well are often stopped by the heavy skin of the back. This layer or hide is more resistant to damage than commonly realized. Flesh, blood, bones, and solid organs are a mix in the body that cannot be easily duplicated.
Accuracy testing is the simplest and easiest to verify.
A pistol bullet may not expand at all. If the bullet nose strikes bone and the nose closes, then there will be no expansion. Gelatin is useful for testing because it homogenous. This simply means it is the same in detail through the gelatin block and does not differ. There have been attempts to modify gelatin for greater realism, such as the Royal Canadian Mounted Police testing of gelatin with bones interspersed in the mix. While interesting, such experiments simply give a rough idea of bullet performance in human beings, although the testing is valuable and valid. The RCMP also tested at 50 yards, reasonable in light of the ranges of climate and the real estate patrolled by the RCMP. A few individuals with little qualification to comment have argued against the FBI’s minimum penetration standard. This isn’t wise. The FBI has more resources than any gun writer and most ammunition factories. There is good reason I cannot recommend small calibers. The baseline of .38 Special and 9mm Luger for minimal personal defense is valid. These loads offer a high degree of protection for those that practice. And, in the end, that is what matters—practice, shot placement, and marksmanship.
Today we’re joined by Alex Sansone of @TheSuitedShootist who shares some real life tips and tricks with Caleb on how to dress like an adult and carry a gun.
Fast handling and reliable this is a great all around rifle.
My philosophy concerning rifles is to own but a few and master these rifles as thoroughly as possible. A primary rifle and a spare are good to have. The rifle should be light enough for constant carry, reliable, accurate enough for the task at hand, and simple enough for easy maintenance. I am not an operator and I have not been on the front line in institutional service in some time. I owned very good rifles when I was in service and teaching carbine classes. One of my abstracts on a federal level has been extensively used in training and to convince city fathers to approve carbine deployment. The rifles I own today are better than anything in the past. As for an all around personal defense rifle the SIG M400 is as good as it gets for the price. There are cheaper rifles. They may be ok for recreational use but I have seen quite a few failures in the economy class. I can live without a lot of cheap rifles.
SIG’s M400 TREAD is simple enough- a very good AR 15. The rifle features a reliable trigger an M LOK forend and a ell designed grip. The gas block is properly attached and the carrier keys are staked in place as they should be. TREAD as the M400 is also called simply means don’t tread on me as American an expression as there is. Since the rifle is manufactured in New Hampshire the M400 TREAD is well named. The barrel is a stainless steel light contour 16 inch tube with a 1 in 8 barrel twist. A three prong flash hider is attached. The weight of the barrel sets the weight of the rifle and the light contour keeps the piece light. The gas system is mid length. The chamber is 5.56mm NATO well suited to any commercial ammunition. The TREAD features a 15 inch aluminum handguard housing the free floating barrel. If desired you have plenty of area for mounting lights or lasers. The stock is the usual six point adjustable length type. Unloaded the rifle tips the scales at six pounds eleven ounces.
The M400 is a good defensive rifle.That’s America!
The things that make the AR run correctly have been attended to. The gas block and carrier keys are properly set up. The trigger system is reliable and properly fitted. The upper and lower receiver fit well together with minimal play. The rifle features an ambidextrous safety and magazine release. The single state trigger was operated in dry fire a few dozen repetitions before range work. Trigger compression is a clean six pounds and fourteen ounces. The rifle is provided with one magazine. The M400 worked reliably with a mix of Colt, OK, Brownells and PMAG magazines.
For optics I chose the SIG Romeo 5XDR. This red dot sight isn’t the most expensive but it offers good clarity and works well in fast reactive drills. The Romeo 5XDR was easily sight in. With a long lived battery life of 50,000 hours guaranteed I still change the battery on my birthday. The dot I 1 MOA with total adjustment of 100 MOA. The Romeo red dot weighs only 5.6 ounces.
Initially I sighted the rifle for 25 yards, getting preliminary zero out of the way. Sighting for 50 and then 100 yard was simple enough using the MTM K zone shooting rest. I used some of the last o a long hoarded supply of Black hills ammunition 55 grain FMJ loads. As I near the last few boxes of this loading ammunition availability is much better in both price and quantity. I enjoyed firing tis combination off hand from barricade and prone behind cover. At fifty yards firing three shot groups for accuracy were fired using the excellent Black Hills Ammunition 52 grain MATCH and the famous and much respected 77 grain SMK. 50 yards isn’t a challenge for these loads and the SIG M400 with three shots falling into .7 to 1.0 inch. Trudging to the 100 yard line I posted a target. At this range the SIG M400 Romeo Red and Black Hill Ammunition 77 grain open tip combination but three bullet holes in 1.5 inch. The Black Hills 52 grain MATCH went 2.0 inches and the 55 grain FMJ 1.6 inch. This is a fine shooter for the price and a rifle that has proven reliable and fast handling.
All told the M400 has a good array of features.The authors rifle wears a SIG red dot.
SIG TREAD M400 SpecsCaliber: 5.56 NATO
Weight: 6 lbs. 9 oz
Overall length: 32.5 in. (stock collapsed); 35.75 in. (stock fully extended)
Receiver: Forged aluminum
Barrel: 16″ stainless steel, mid length gas system, 1/8″ twist
Most shotguns use a very simple magazine system. It’s a fixed, tubular magazine that sits beneath the barrel. It’s the choice of police, military, and most shotgun shooters. Alongside the standard tube-fed design, we’ve seen the rise of mag-fed shotguns. Heck, just a couple of years ago, both Remington and Mossberg released mag fed shotguns to take advantage of the new style.
The classic and likely most widely accepted of these shotguns has been AK series guns that started with the Saiga and have exploded into an entire genre of shotguns. I don’t hate mag fed shotguns, but they do have some problems that don’t seem to get addressed often. After scrolling past my 10th bullpup, mag fed shotgun on a Defensive Shotgun page. I decided its time to talk about the problems with these guns.
The Obvious Advantages
Shotguns that use box magazines have some distinctive advantages. The first being they can be quick to reload. At least quicker to reload than a tube fed when going from empty to fully loaded. These guns do make carrying spare ammo easier, and while you can’t do a slug select drill, you can drop a buckshot mag for a slug mag pretty quickly.
You also aren’t limited to the length of your barrel for ammunition capacity. Some can get pretty nuts in terms of size. The VR series 19-round magazines, for example, are pretty nuts. Drums exist and make toting a box of shotgun shells pretty easy. There are some very clear advantages, but there are problems too.
The Downsides To Mag Fed Shotguns
The first downside that’s universal to these mag fed shotguns is shotgun shells. They are primarily made of plastic. Sure, some brass and even paper shells exist, but plastic shells are the dominant option. When left loaded in a magazine, the pressure put upon them by the spring, follower, and other shells begins to deform that plastic. This makes it, so the shells eventually won’t feed and will create plenty of jams and problems for you to deal with.
That’s the biggest problem. The second is that the magazines tend to be bulky and get a little unruly. Good luck finding a good mag pouch for your weapon. The large size and weight make them a bit tougher to accessorize with. Most shotgun gear is built around tube-fed designs.
Mag fed shotguns also have an odd quality curve. Most are complete crap, but there are some diamonds in the rough. The reason the majority are crap is the fact most are cheap Turkish designs. The guns and magazines are just poorly made and will either be unreliable from the start or just break to pieces along the way.
Guns from Iron Horse and Genesis-12 are absolutely outstanding, as are the Fostech Origin and Dissident Arms guns. Mossberg’s 590M series are good guns and represent one of the better, more affordable options on the market. For every one of these solid guns, there are piles of mass-imported Turkish crap.
Going Mag Fed
I have a few mag fed shotguns in my arsenal, and I enjoy them. They can be handy, but they are a tough sell for a home defense shotgun. The chance of shells deforming and failing is too much risk for me. I can see the benefits, but until shotgun ammo changes, you have to really weigh the downsides.
If there is one thing that the EDC crowd obsesses over it’s belts, right after gun brand, caliber, sight type, carry position, shooting style, holster type, holster brand…point is we like geeking out over gear. We’re always looking for that thing that’s going to give us that little edge (as long as it isn’t dry fire practice or working with a shot timer).
There’s already tons of videos and articles out there about the best belt for XYZ, or the new hotness, so why would such a niche page like mine want to wade into such an overly saturated pool? Simple really. Dress belts are generally too delicate to effectively support a gun, and most of the purpose built gun belts out there, while wonderfully effective, can be so robust as to look out of place through the belt loops of dress slacks or a suit. Case in point, the Mean Gene Shooter’s belt is advertised at “just over 1/4 inch thick”. Well, when you’re going for a sleek, streamlined silhouette, that’s a lot of hide to have hanging off your hips.
When it comes to any inside the waistband carry, but especially appendix, most of the conventional wisdom on belts is actually counter productive. Super rigid belts make it harder to conform to the contours of your body. This means that the belt can actually be pulling the gun away from you, increasing printing.
With traditional belts with holes, usually most people find that one hole is uncomfortably tight, but the next one down is too loose to where the gun flops around. Before these ratcheting belts came on the market, the only options we had for micro-adjustability were either web belts or the Wilderness style, neither of which is really appropriate in a suit. Now there are options that give us the functionality we need along with a more approrpriate aesthetic, and at almost half the thickness of a leather gun belt, these ratchet belts are definitely worth considering.
KORE ESSENTIALS:
I was first introduced to Kore Essentials by one of YouTube’s gun personalities. It seemed like a pretty great solution: a dress-looking belt that was purpose built for carrying a gun! What more could you ask for? So I ordered up a couple. Now this was about the time that I was also experimenting with appendix carry so, not knowing any better, I opted for the more rigid kydex-reinforced belt that they offered at the time. For those unfamiliar, these belts are cut-to-size, so you trim it down yourself and then attach the buckle. The micro-adjustability of the ratcheting system was not only convenient, but it also made appendix carrying much more comfortable. I even ran the belt through ECQC, and it didn’t fail. The leather was a little worse for wear, but that’s to be expected when you’re rolling around in the gravely dirt of Austin.
After wearing these belts daily for a few months, I did notice a problem. The release latch on the buckle was so pronounced that it was wearing a hole into the front of my pants. This was especially problematic with lighter fabrics like on my slacks and suits. My immediate solution was to not tighten the belt down as much, but that of course made the holster less stable. I’ve been told that Kore has subsequently updated the buckle design, but I cannot confirm if that redesign fixed this issue. I have no reason to doubt that it has. Update: After looking at the website, the buckle design still seems to have the same configuration. This leads me to believe it would have the same issue.
That bass-clef looking knob wore through 3 pairs of jeans and 2 sets of chinos in 6 months
The second thing that I’m not super fond of is that the leather started to de-laminate from the kydex and bubble up. It’s pretty unsightly, and so now the belt is all but unusable unless my shirt is untucked, or if I’m wearing a jacket all day. I’ve made do, but I found myself wanting a better solution. I tried a couple of their non-kydex reinforced fashion belts, but still ran into some of the same concerns.
SLIDEBELTS:
I’ll be honest, I ignored Slidebelts for a while because I saw their ads for the “Survival Belt” with the integrated blade and fire steel, and pretty much wrote them off. It struck me as a ridiculous concept. I randomly decided to give them another look, and was encouraged that they specifically identified different quality tiers of their belts on the website (top grain vs. full grain). I ordered a set of their top grain belts, a black, a brown, and a walnut, and I was pleasantly surprised by what I got:
Firstly, the buckle design on the Slidebelt is far superior in my mind. It’s sleeker, and there are no protrusions to wear into your clothing. Also there’s a much wider selection of buckle options, which is nice. The next thing that struck me was that their belts come with a slightly more pebbled texture to them than the Kore ones, which I happen to like. Also, the smooth face of the Kore belts caused dimples and separation to be much more apparent, causing the belt to show its age much faster.
Now I’m not crazy that the inside face of the Slidebelt isn’t finished. Aside from the fact that it makes the measurements harder to read when you’re sizing the belt, it just feels a little sloppy. And for a product that’s ~25% more expensive (MSRP) than the Kore belts that do have a finished inside, it does feel like they cut a corner there.
CONCLUSION:
Overall, they’re both perfectly serviceable choices. I can’t speak to how well the Slidebelt will hold up over time, but based solely on how they felt coming out of the box and the buckle design, they’ve unseated Kore for my everyday dress belt option when I’m carrying a gun. The construction is solid, and they’re a little more upfront about the materials they use. Kore does list the type of leather in the product descriptions, but you have to dig for it. I DO know some folks that are having belts made out of shell cordovan, and commissioning them from bridle/saddle shops, but at that point you’re essentially going bespoke, and that’s a little outside the realm of most of my audience.
Now will these products survive the rigors of a plain clothed executive protection detail? Something where you’re having to run rifle mags, a radio, and who knows what else on your beltline? No, probably not. They will however support my standard loadout until such time as I can get one of those snazzy custom cordovan numbers…which is probably going to be a while.
I have been playing with Anson Belt & Buckle lately as another option, and so far have been pleasantly surprised. I’m going to give it a little more time before I make my ruling on them though.
