Facebook Instagram Twitter Youtube
Advertisement

The Home Defense PCC and Min-Maxing Your Setup

By
Travis Pike
-

There are some attitudes in the world of firearms I find a little weird sometimes. In terms of home defense, there seems to be a bit of a min-maxing attitude. Min-maxing is a term generally applied to gaming and RPG-style video games in particular. Min-maxing is where you attempt to focus your character on one particular, highly effective, skill (the ‘Max’) and ignore all others (don’t invest attribute points or whichever game metric) that would not do as much damage or succeed (the ‘Min’). The gun world has a mini-max attitude towards home defense, especially when we talk about the Home Defense PCC.

If you were to post on a social media platform and ask about using a PCC for home defense, you’d get a ton of responses, and most will tell you to get a rifle, completely ignoring your question or rationale behind using a PCC. Some who might be a little more willing to your rationale will just say get a .300 Blackout.

Does a rifle offer a more powerful weapon than a PCC? Yep, it sure as heck does. However, does that mean the home defense PCC is magically an ineffective tool? Nope, and today we’ll explore why.

…But the Rifle

Yes, the rifle is a better option and is more likely to do a one-hit stop. Yep, it works better against armor, with more penetration and damage with the projectile and all that.

However, not everyone is comfortable handling a carbine, especially in tight quarters. The 5.56 is less likely to penetrate through numerous sheets of drywall. A trained shooter has no problems, but the weapon still feels large for some shooters.

To which many give the 300 Blackout reply. 300 Blackout works exceptionally well in short barrels, and as a PCC, it can be relatively small. It’s an awesome choice. However, we have a Kardashian-sized but. The ammo is pricey. Super pricey and pricey ammo means less training. Even at the current cost of 9mm, it’s still 71% cheaper than 300 Blackout.

Why would anyone consider the home defense PCC over the rifle? 

It’s Friendly

What the hell does that mean? Well, a PCC tends to be less concussive, have less muzzle blast, and in many models, less recoil. I know direct blowback guns still recoil a lot, like 5.56 caliber guns, but there are tons of alternative options. CMMG has the radial delayed blowback, the MPX has a short-stroke gas piston, MP5 clones have roller delayed systems, and even the B&T series uses hydraulic buffers to reduce recoil from their blowback guns.

These modern PCCs present an extremely comfy and soft shooting firearm. Who doesn’t love less recoil, less muzzle rise, and more control? This makes it faster and easier to engage with follow-up shots and to engage multiple targets rapidly.

A good home defense PCC can provide shooters with a very easy to handle weapon for home defense shooting.

Size, Size, Size

A home defense PCC with a brace or in SBR status can be incredibly short. Look at the APC9 or even the APC9K or any of the Scorpion pistols. These teeny tiny guns are super easy to use indoors and are often very appealing for apartment dwellers. Small guns are handy guns.

The lighter weight and light recoil of these guns make them easier to handle with a single hand. You may need a single hand to navigate the environment inside your home. Something like the CMMG Banshee provides you with a sub-5 pound weapon that’s ultra-short and easy to maneuver.

Suppress It

The 300 Blackout can be suppressed quite well, but then we go back to a buck per round ammunition. Finding subsonic modern handgun ammo isn’t tricky. You can easily suppress a 9mm, 45 ACP, 40 S&W, or whatever. Handgun-rated cans tend to be more affordable and tend to be lighter and shorter as well.

Factor in the size of PCCs, and we have another advantage. A home defense PCC equipped with a suppressor is still super short and sweet for close-quarters use. A suppressor can be damn handy in a home defense situation. Not only will it save your ears, but it will make your weapon easier to control.

The Big World of Pistol Rounds

The problem with PCCs is obviously the pistol round. A pistol round simply doesn’t stop a target like a rifle round. That’s very true. However, I find it hard to believe that a couple of rounds of 9mm won’t stop a threat inside your home. I can’t seem to find any reports of a handgun or PCC failing to provide adequate firepower to repel a home invader.

Incapacitation Rates for reference

The home defense PCC isn’t perfect, but I don’t think it’s the squirt gun social media makes it out to be. Yes, you should use the most capable weapon you can, but not everyone can use a 5.56 caliber rifle. A PCC or braced pistol makes a lot of sense for shooters on the smaller side or those who wish to maximize their maneuverability. It doesn’t need to be discounted just because it doesn’t fire 5.56.

So, why would anyone consider the home defense PCC over the rifle? The real question is why wouldn’t you consider it, even if you decide on the rifle in the end a PCC should be considered. 

Gunday Brunch 49: Sig Wins Everything

By
Keith Finch
-

The boys go through the XM5 rifle. Caleb gently mocks some of the ridiculous aspects, says we will buy 6 of them total. Jack is in wide eyed anticipation of the new speediboi rounds. I am my usual cautiously optimistic Sig fan.

I like the XM5 concept. I believe the criticisms of the XM5 are often rooted in the mythos of the failure of the M14 and falsely attribute extra failures to the battle rifle concept. Meanwhile, battle rifles are still used worldwide with the G3, FAL, SCAR, and AR types still holding down combat roles, including service rifle in some instances. Usually used in specialized roles in NATO aligned (structured) forces, those forces who standardized around M855 (because America did) so we could share ammo (we can’t, since NATO ‘standard’ 5.56 is a fairly loose term. Partner forces shouldn’t swap ammo outside of dire emergencies).

This could go the same way as the XM8, that Americanized G36 that made it to an ‘XM’ designation too, where ultimately the military gets tired of spending the money and just upgrades our AR’s again.

The thing is, when looking at the XM8 era, there used to be a substantial upgrade curve the M4 could be pushed through (and was ultimately) to get the parity of performance with the wonder 5.56’s, like the SCAR and 416. However, like when we adopted the M14 and then M16, the XM5 is changing caliber. That seems to be catalyst necessary to carry a change when the previous rifle ran.

Yes, the M14 functioned. It was just big, heavy, got expensive to maintain, and was a rifle designed in 1928 (aesthetically and ergonomically) but produced in 1959 to compete against the likes of the AR, AK, FAL, and G3. It just couldn’t hang.

Go Sig. Congrats. I want one. (It’s FDE, of course I want one.)

Building a Basic Fighting Loadout

By
Travis Pike
-

There has been a massive uptick in an interest in the tactical world built around firearms. For decades we’ve all been fans of guns, but the market of tactical goodness has slowly grown to become a part of the firearm’s mainstream. There is a lot of gear on the market, and the question is, what do you need? Well, today, we are going to cover what you need for a basic fighting loadout.

Keep the word basic in your mind here. This is a high-level overview of the gear you need to form a simple, competent loadout for your goals. This article will act as your introduction to base-level necessities with a few pieces of quality gear tossed in the mix as suggestions.

What’s a Basic Fighting Loadout?

A basic fighting loadout or basic combat load is an outline of the gear you’d need in a fight. If you were in Ukraine right now fighting Russians, what would you need to be successful outside of your rifle? We will cover the basics of tactical gear and get you ready to fight Russians or LARP in the woods. Whatever calls your name.

A Sling

A very basic accessory that makes life much easier is a high-quality sling. A good sling goes a long way in ensuring weapon retention and ensuring you can effectively maneuver in your environment. Slings come in many different forms, but the most common and tactically chic is the tactical, quick-adjust two-point.

These offer an excellent combination of comfortable sling for carrying the weapon and maneuverability. A basic combat load isn’t complete without a way to sling your rifle. Good luck climbing ladders, low crawling, carrying a wounded ally, or relaxing on hour 8 of guard duty without a sling.

Suggested Slings – Arbor Arms Dual Adjust Weapon Sling, Blue Force Gear VCAS, and VTAC Sling

Magazines and Ammo

How many magazines should you have? Well, as many as you can afford! Well, kind of. For a basic fighting loadout, the Marine Corps suggests seven magazines. One in the gun, six across your body. That’s a fair bit of ammo with 210 rounds using standard capacity magazines.

Seven seems to be a good number and certainly gives you plenty of ammo for a long firefight. I’d say seven is optimum, but you should have a minimum of five magazines with four on your gear and one in the gun.

An IFAK

IFAK stands for individual first aid kit. An IFAK is designed to treat the person wearing it. Everyone should have an IFAK, even outside f the tactical world. I have one on my kayak, in my car, and on my plate carriers. These kits should pack a number of different items. This includes a tourniquet, H bandages, gauze, hemostatic gauze of some type, burn gel, gloves, and similar traumatic medical items.

Don’t forget basics like Neosporin, bandaids, and similar goodies for bumps and bruises. IFAKs are also a good palace to store water purifying drops. Like a firearm, an IFAK requires training to use effectively, and seeking medical training should be high on your priority list. Your basic fighting loadout is only as good as you can use it. You also need to pick quality gear from quality manufacturers.

Here’s a cheat code, use gear from North American Rescue. I suggest purchasing a complete kit if you aren’t sure what you need.

Suggested Kits – NAR USCG IFAK, NAR M-FAK,

Basic Toolkit

The Basic fighting Loadout tool kit would be made up of some very basic tools. We’ll divide these into short subsections, all under the tool kit banner.

Tools should be multi-use and provide some bang for their weight and size. For this reason, a multitool is often a must-have—a good multitool with tools you can use in everyday situations. Get a robust, well-made option.

Suggested Tool – Gerber MP600

While weapon lights and high-intensity beams are great, a must-have piece of gear is an admin flashlight. A simple, lightweight, and tough light that can be used for admin tasks. It’s not a room-clearing light but a set up camp, read a map or clean a weapon in the dark light.

Suggested Light – Streamlight Sidewinder

Weapons cleaning gear is another must-have. You need to keep your gun running regardless of the environment. A small kit designed for your weapon can be easily carried on your gear, in your pocket, or in an admin pouch.

Suggested Kit – Otis Cleaning System (For your weapon) and a rag

Human Fuel

What’s human fuel? Well, food and water. Hydration is always key, and you need to have a way to carry a considerable amount of water on your body regardless of the situation. The classic hydration pack gives you the most bang for your buck. You are part of your basic fighting loadout, so take care of yourself. 

Food-wise, well, anything high in calories, carbs, and some protein is good to go. Preferably something with a long shelf life. You want size-efficient food like protein bars, Powerbars, etc.

Suggest Hydration Carrier – CamelBak Ambush

Load Bearing Gear

Last but not least is how you carry all this junk? Well, that’s where load-bearing gear comes from. Load bearing gear is the generic term for the platform you mount your mags and gear to. In the modern world, it comes in three different platform types. We have plate carriers, battle belts, and chest rigs.

Plate Carriers

Plate carriers allow you to carry armor, and that’s their primary benefit. They are larger, hotter, and heavier but keep you hole-free. They also offer MOLLE webbing to mount your gear to, so you’ll need to provide the pouches.

Suggested Plate Carrier – Crye JPC 2

Battle Belts

Battle belts give you a Batman-like utility belt that mounts all your gear. They tend to be the most minimalist option and can make mounting a basic fighting load tough. You might pair it with a chest rig for additional gear. Battle belts keep you cool and can be easily removed and donned. Plus, they are very small in size and easy to store. They can be a great option for basic fighting loadout. 

Suggest Battle Belt – Tactical Tailor Fight Light Battle Belt

Chest Rigs

Chest rigs often offer you a fair bit of room without the weight and size of a plate carrier. They position gear on your torso and tend to be fairly lightweight. They can come with just rows of MOLLE or with included pouches, pockets, or a combination of the two.

Suggested Chest Rig – Blue Force Gears Vickers M4 Rig

What About Pouches?

If you are outfitting any of the above with pouches, you have plenty of options. I like the Blue Force Gear Ten-Speed pouches and the classic Taco pouches. For those looking to carry seven mags, the Tactical Tailor Fight Light double mag pouch has plenty of room for two AR mags.

Admin pouches are a dime a dozen, and be sure you purchase from a reputable company like Tactical Tailor, 5.11 Tactical, Eagle Industries, High-Speed Gear, etc.

Your Loadout

Gear is only as good as the user. Once you get the gear, you need to get the training so you can fine-tune your gear, its placement, and your personal TTPs. Don’t get got covered in Gucci gear with Wish dot Com skills. Personalize and perfect your basic fighting load. 

Is it the M14 all over again?

By
Keith Finch
-

Since the Army’s announcement of the NGSW winner, Sig Sauer, and the designation the the XM5 and XM250 the internet has been wild in the gun space. Lots and lots of commentary, one of the chief things I note are that people are usually missing a piece of the whole program when they level a complaint.

The most common is a misunderstanding of the new ammunition. The rest are various critical comments of that vary between having some merit and having little merit as they are ascribing problems where there aren’t any, or most commonly ascribing a particular problem more weight than it actually merits.

An example. The LPVO is more fragile and heavier than optics like an ACOG but offer increased capabilities, it has still been found suitable for use by special forces and conventional forces on rifles and carbines. This often translates to comments like, “LPVOs are fragile! Why would you put a fragile optic into combat!? Why would we do this? It’s stupid!”

It the vehement grafting to one fact or position that overshadows the balance of nuances involved. It’s the same incomplete logic loop where we get 5.56 is a “poodle shooter”, or “designed to wound”. Let’s acknowledge that we have progressed beyond dated concepts.

How it is like the M14

The XM5 is like the M14 in capacity and role. It is the primary individual rifle, partnered with the XM250, and if you put a rifle squad together with M14’s and M60’s it would look a whole lot like the squad with XM5’s and XM250’s at first glance.

Capacity limitations will be similar, magazines and belts taking up more space than their 5.56 counterparts and offering only 20 or 25 rounds instead of the 30’s. This is one of the most contentious points for the new rifle, the fact soldiers ammunition allotment over the same space and weight will be fewer rounds and that more capable ammunition won’t make up the difference. To this I’d say we’d have seen concern from people who are currently running MK17 rifles, KAC SR-25 carbines, or the M110A1’s. This is still a point of similarity however.

Weight is also a point. The 8.4lb MCX is much closer to the 9lb M14 than it is the 7lb M4.

We are spoiled that the M4A1’s base rifle is 6.4lbs slick. Comparatively however, the HK417A2, comparable to the XM5 both with a 13″ barrel is 9.3lbs. The M110A1 also breaks 9lbs the moment you add a single accessory, 8.73lbs slick. The M249 is 17lbs slick (and awkward as hell to carry) while the M60E6 is 20.4lb and the M240L weighs 22lbs, Barrett’s experimental M240 LW variant could cut that to 20lbs. The new XM250 cuts that LMG weight to 12lbs, with greater effective range and lighter ammunition than either the M60 or M240. The XM250 is equipped to use much better slings than previous weapon and has several features that will make it more comfortably portable than any current system, in addition to the weight savings.

Rifles will be slightly heavier, light machine guns will be significantly lighter.

If we compare the XM5 to the M27 IAR the base rifles are much closer in weight, and the XM5 comes in shorter at 34.1 inches vs the M27’s 36.9 inches. Two inches off the front, especially heavy barrel steel, makes a difference in handling even if the rifle is heavier in absolute terms. We see this play out in the M16A4 to M27, the M27 handles better but is heavier, and even an M4A1 to a rifle like the X95 which adds over a pound but is less fatiguing to shoot.

As for full-auto, I have no basis to judge 6.8 recoil right now. This may end up slowing semi-auto rates of fire as recoil disrupts sight pictures more too. But I do not know. I do know that the XM5/MCX SPEARs inline recoil mechanics with the stock will result in more controllable impulses than the M14’s offline stock. In the M14 the recoil transfers to the shooter at a higher point, often over the shoulder instead of into it. I expect the XM5 will handle like the MK 17 in automatic, robust but controllable in short bursts.

But superficially, yes, it would appear many of the M14 issues could recur in the XM5.

How it isn’t like the M14

We’ll go down the list and hit each point, but the short version is really the development. The development cycle was very different and, unlike the efforts made in the M14’s process to make sure we kept our nostalgic rifle and caliber, the efforts from all competitors in the NGSW were based on hitting performance metrics around a specific ammunition performance envelope. It had to be a 6.8, using an A1 type projectile given by the Army, and it had to hit other physical performance goals like weight, accuracy, stoppage rate, manual, maintenance, etc.

So let’s address some individual components.

6.8×51 (“277 Fury”)

What is old is new again, just higher pressure. The .276 Pedersen was 7x51mm and the 277 Fury is 6.8x51mm. The .276 Pedersen had a muzzle velocity of 2,740 fps in a 24″ barrel and the new 277 Fury will be pushing a 135gr round at 3,000 fps in a 16″ barrel. Unknown if the new projectile is faster than the listed match load so that it will reach 3,000 in the shorter 13″ barrels of the XM5.

Army wanted the speed advantages realized in the M16 and M4 combined with the battle rifle optimal projectile mass so that the rifles and automatic rifles/light machine guns would be able to cover a much greater area than current systems, with greater intermediate and armor defeat capability too.

This contest wasn’t about a new rifle. The MCX isn’t that new of a rifle, even in the SPEAR format. The Army wanted a new caliber, and this time they picked optimal physics over nostalgia. Good for them.

This is the biggest difference between the M14 program and the XM5 program, how we went about picking the caliber. We were not clinging to 30.06, we went where data says ‘optimal’ infantry calibers should be. We knew this in 1928, we revisited the knowledge during the NATO development trials in the late 40’s and 50’s, but stuck with .30 then. We then over corrected our .30 error by going super light and fast, and found that it worked pretty well for 300 meters and in. We even optimized it to the absolute limits of what 5.56 can do, and it does it pretty darn well. We just couldn’t out run the physics of what a .22 diameter round at optimal mass could give us in the powder charges available.

Ultimately, .30 caliber was too thick and slowed down too fast in the mass they wanted, .22 was too lightweight even in an optimal bullet shape (77gr) so it just lost too much energy for the further distances. 6.8 was just right, proper mass in the correct shape. We’ve known this a long time. .276 Pedersen to 277 Fury is the same advancement curve we put 5.56 through when we went from 20″ barrels to 14.5″ and optimized the powder burn and projectile design.

That is what the Army wanted, greater range envelope and as optimal a projectile for it as they could get when considering external (flight) and terminal (impact and effect on target) ballistics. Sig delivered that.

The XM5, MCX SPEAR

Unlike the M14, which was trying to hold onto a dated obsolescent design, the MCX follows the improved control patterns of the widely recognized rifle ergonomic king, Eugene Stoner. The MCX is nothing more than the AR-10, AR-15, AR-18, and SR-25 in their best form. Sig didn’t try and reinvent the service rifle, they took what was best out of our current service rifles and battle rifles and then built it in 6.8.

Giving a soldier who has an M4A1 an XM5 is going to make sense to the soldier. Every control is where it was, plus some bonus functions that make their lives better, like the folding stock, full ambidextrous controls, and mid-receiver charging handle backing the rear-receiver AR type. The current handling skill transfers and has avenues for improvements. This was always a strength of the MCX over the other competitors, it stuck to things that worked and that soldiers, our soldiers, are familiar with.

They kept it simple. They made it work.

The MCX isn’t fighting against better ergonomics to deliver a rifle that looks like it won WWII, it is taking the current best practices in the modern manual of arms and is delivering them to the soldier. Anyone could bring an XM5 into a modern AR centric rifle course, one that used the fancier control suites like KAC, LMT, Radian, etc. use, and perform fine. With the capabilities shift accounted for, the MCX SPEAR was the most ‘drop-in’ of the rifle submissions.

That matters, especially if you consider that all the rifles likely functioned well (at least firing conventional ammunition). I have doubts about the field conditions performance of both the True Velocity and Textron ammos. True Velocity has never received a glowing recommendation from the small batch testers I have spoken with, reporting a significant failure rate even in bolt action rifles. I have not tried any of their .308 or 6.5 in any auto-loader or bolt action.

As a side note, a suspect Beretta and True Velocity’s ‘Genesis’ is going to be tuned for brass more than the polymer cases that cost $69.99/20.

The XM250, MG68

In the parallel fashion of the XM5, the XM250 light machine gun/automatic rifle is going to make sense to people who are currently familiar with the M249 and M240. Every control an M249 user expects to be there is going to be there, with a few bonuses like the safety selector being more consistent the M4A1 and XM5.

The biggest addition, the XM250 is select fire. It has semi-automatic, this is a feature that is increasingly added to light machine guns to ease accurate zeroing and give an accurate single shot capability on demand. We just haven’t seen it adopted by a large force like the US, we clung to the M249 SAW and a small number of alternate M249 SAW variants.

The same complexities of belted ammunition are going to apply, but those aren’t terrible to work around and we’ve done well smoothing out the disintegrating link system. It’s lighter than the SAW, more ergonomic than the SAW, and much longer range than the SAW. It should out distance the M240 also thanks to higher velocity and higher ballistic coefficient ammunition.

Small machine gunner inspired improvements were made to things like the feed tray and charging handle. The tray now opens up/sideways instead of up/forward. This offers a lower profile and doesn’t bang up optics. If I recall correctly it retains the M240’s ability to be loaded “closed” by pushing the rounds through the feed paws. The charging is now operated by the support hand (left) and folds out of the way when not in use.

The XM250 is a logical progression of things machine gunners have wanted using the M240 and M249 actively for the last two decades.

One of my chief questions now is will the Marines adopt the XM5/XM250, reversing (partially) their decision to go to a magazine fed system? I believe it would be a good move, get a true light machine gun back. They may also go for a variant of the XM5, more heavily barreled, and keep the current light infantry rifle squad format they have with the M27’s. The M27 being a more heavily barreled, piston driven, and bayonet mountable, AR design. Maybe an MCX SPEAR with a 14.5″ or 16″ barrel. Maybe they get an HK417A2 because they like the M27.

The Cartridge Case

Just like the XM5 didn’t try and reinvent the battle rifle and the XM250 didn’t try and reinvent the light machine gun, the new hybrid metallic case that Sig came up with didn’t try and reinvent the metallic centerfire cartridge. It just takes advantage of a few things we know so that this 80,000 psi beastie can do its thing.

Firstly, brass cases need thick bases, not thick walls, because of how they are formed. Secondly, stainless steel can be used instead and be thinner, stronger, and lighter than brass. Thirdly, that gives the base of the case more space for a larger powder charge. Fourthly, the stainless steel rim and base is stronger and less prone to bursting, tearing on the extractor, or blasting a primer away.

In short, the multi-piece design results on a much stronger base case, is lighter weight, and is less prone to the failings of brass formed base cases. It is a four piece design instead of a two. The hybrid case has the stainless base, sealing washer, brass wall, and primer.

The Big Horn Armory AR500 Pistol – Big, Mean, and Beastly

By
Travis Pike
-

“Holy crap, it’s ridiculous, and I love it.” That was my first reaction to the Big Horn Armory AR500′ pistol.’ Pistol is an AR pistol or a large format braced pistol. When I say AR500, most people picture steel body armor. That’s not the case today. The Big Horn Armory AR500 is a line of pistols and rifles that chamber the proprietary 500 Auto Max round.

The AR500 takes the AR and makes it a larger frame weapon, and I don’t mean a large frame like AR 10. Think bigger. The 500 Auto Max comes from the 500 S&W Magnum cartridge. The rim has been removed, and it’s been optimized for feeding in a semi-automatic rifle. A gun built to handle that cartridge can’t be a lightweight little Armalite.

Instead, we get an 8.1 pound AR pistol with a 10-inch barrel that can hold anywhere from five to nine of these half-inch pills. It’s massive, meaty, and absolutely a beast of a gun. The 500 Auto Max takes advantage of the same projectile versatility as the 500 S&W Magnum cartridge, so the gun can be loaded for basically anything. You can hunt deer and hogs, and also Transformers. You know, everything.

The AR500 – A Monstrous Weapon

Everything about this gun is beefy. It’s huge all the way around. The nine-round magazine is massive and is roughly the same length as a AR 15 20-round magazine. Big Horn Armory installed a large, ambidextrous safety, a beefy magazine release, and an ambidextrous bolt lock to make the weapon fairly ergonomic.

The M-LOK handguard is modern and feels somewhat lightweight. I’d imagine they attempted to cut some weight when possible, and the M-LOK handguard is one way to go about that. It’s trim, slim, looks good, and provides plenty of mounting options. The brace is where we get into some interesting territory. It’s a blade-style brace on a weapon that essentially shoots a 500 S&W Magnum round.

That’s not the best brace for the gun by far. At the tip of the barrel, we get a chunky muzzle brake to help tame the beast. Our BCG is ridiculous and massive, and I imagine it has to be. About the only thing small and non-beefy is the charging handle and pistol grip.

The Round

The 500 Auto Max is a brutal round that can use a multitude of projectile weights. A 350-grain projectile hits with over 2,000-foot-pounds of energy within 100 yards. Like most straight-walled, big bore cartridges, this isn’t a long-range round. It’s designed for hunting within a couple of hundred yards at most.

That kind of power and energy allows the round to rip and tear like Doom guy through demons. In fact, this might be the perfect gun for the Doom guy. He’d certainly had no problems sending demons back to hell with the AR500.

Ammo can be hand loaded, and I’m betting most owners of the AR500 will take that route. However, if you want commercial ammo, you can go through Steinel, Buffalo Bore, and Underwood.

At the Range With the AR500

Do you know how the ATF is trying to do this whole turn brace-equipped guns into SBRs? Well, I’d love to see the ATF call the AR500 AR pistol an SBR because of the brace. That blade-type brace is insanely uncomfortable to set against the shoulder. It absorbs zero recoil, and that thin brace type ensures you feel every little bit of it. Expect a nice bruise if you plan to use the brace improperly.

I’m not recoil sensitive, and I enjoy the recoil, muzzle rise, and challenges these guns produce. The AR500 just happens to be a bit more painful than most, though, and isn’t a gun I fire long strings. Heck, I wouldn’t fire a failure to stop drill for time by any means. That being said, a little recoil and some muzzle rise won’t stop you from a fast follow-up shot.

The trigger is fantastic and it takes AR 15 lower parts kits so you can upgrade the trigger if you choose. It’s very smooth with a little heft too, but it won’t stop you from shooting accurately. I could land shots into a 6-inch gong easily enough from the standing at 100 yards with a red dot. Although, after every shot, I had to go down range and unwrap the gong’s chains from the beam.

That’s accurate enough for hunting purposes. In terms of pure accuracy, most groups fell between 1.5 MOA and 1.75 MOA. Not bad, and that’s to be expected from what’s essentially a giant revolver round.

Loud and Proud

The muzzle blast is fierce, and the brake might help with recoil, but it doesn’t help with the hand grenade-like explosion you hear or the muzzle blast. The muzzle blast is fierce, and the brake design sends it in all directions, including downwards. I’d hate to see what it’d be like to shoot this thing in the prone.

Ammo is pricey, so I couldn’t do a hardcore burndown for reliability. Nor does my shoulder want to. However, in the testing of 100 rounds, the gun never failed in any way. It functioned flawlessly. The five and nine-round mags worked great, and they kept the weapon fed.

One big thrill was shooting a bottle of coke and seeing it explode in a massive foamy ball of carbonated liquid. The AR500 from Big horny Armory is fun to shoot but not for beginners. The recoil, concussion, and noise aren’t going to be a fun time.

Getting Your Own

Big Horn Armory makes a number of firearms, and they all focus on 50 caliber platforms. This includes some beautiful lever guns and, of course, both an AR rifle and AR pistol. They can hook you up with the 50 cal AR of your dreams, mags, and more. It’s a small shop, but they do a number of custom options too. Check ’em out here.

Return of the Battle Rifle: Sig Sauer Wins the NGSW Contract

By
Keith Finch
-

The announcement went out late last night, the MCX SPEAR is now the XM5 Rifle, likely to become the M5 Service Rifle with the US Army. The rifle will be evaluated by the Marine Corps as well, although no official announcement of concurrent adoption has been released as of now.

The battle rifle is back. A new generation of Squad Automatic Weapon, select-fire and with a greater effective range, is coming with it.

There is still a chance, as their always is with military procurement, that this drys up after this contract and the US Military sticks it out with the M4A1. I don’t feel that in this one though. Not like the XM8, not like the SCAR and 416 either, the change here feels more permanent and it has to do with the caliber.

The new 6.8x51mm ‘Fury’ ammunition, with its high velocity in a fairly short 13″ barrel, is a true shift in the capabilities of the infantry rifle where the other examples were merely more efficient (and more costly) designs without anything additionally gained in effective range or energy. We’ve maxed out 5.56 NATO with MK 262 MOD 1, we can’t get much more out of that round or M855A1. Physics. The new 6.8x51mm offers a much more physics optimized package than the 7.62 or 5.56 NATO. This efficiency jump, with the range and terminal performance, is what separates the NGSW from its 5.56 “M4 replacement” predecessors.

In chats with Sig Sauer, the SPEAR rifle was pretty much done when the NGSW rolled around. They were already building the MCX’s larger iteration to chase agencies, units, and individuals who wanted the MCX in 7.62 NATO or 6.5 Creedmoor. The real development stretch was the new ammunition the US Army wanted. Lightening the case by using less brass and a steel base, which also strengths the rim for extraction, also allowed them to crank the pressure up to 80,000 psi.

It worked in prototype well enough to be selected. Now we will see what it will do en masse.

US Army Statement

WASHINGTON – The U.S. Army announced the award of a 10-year firm-fixed-price follow-on production contract to Sig Sauer, Inc for the manufacture and delivery of two Next Generation Squad Weapon variations (the XM5 Rifle and the XM250 Automatic Rifle) and the 6.8 Common Cartridge Family of Ammunition.

This award was made following a rigorous 27-month prototyping and evaluation effort that included numerous technical tests and Soldier touch points of three competing prototype systems.

The value of the initial delivery order on the contract is $20.4 million for weapons and ammunition that will undergo testing. The contract includes accessories, spares and contractor support. It also provides the other Department of Defense services and, potentially, Foreign Military Sales countries the opportunity to purchase the NGSW weapons.

The XM5 Rifle will replace the M4/M4A1 carbine within the close combat force, and the XM250 Automatic Rifle is the planned replacement for the M249 Squad Automatic Weapon

Both weapons provide significant capability improvements in accuracy, range and overall lethality. They are lightweight, fire more lethal ammunition, mitigate recoil, provide improved barrel performance, and include integrated muzzle sound and flash reduction.

Both weapons fire common 6.8 millimeter ammunition utilizing government provided projectiles and vendor-designed cartridges. The new ammunition includes multiple types of tactical and training rounds that increase accuracy and are more lethal against emerging threats than both the 5.56mm and 7.62mm ammunition.

The XM5 and XM250 will be paired with the XM157 Fire Control, a ruggedized advanced fire control system that increases accuracy and lethality for the close combat force. The XM157 integrates a number of advanced technologies, including a variable magnification optic (1X8), backup etched reticle, laser rangefinder, ballistic calculator, atmospheric sensor suite, compass, Intra-Soldier Wireless, visible and infrared aiming lasers, and a digital display overlay. It is produced by Sheltered Wings Inc. d/b/a Vortex Optics, Barneveld, Wisconsin.

NGSW-R and NGSW-AR, now the XM5 and XM250
NGSW-FC, now the XM157 Fire Control

From Sig Sauer

NEWINGTON, N.H., (April 20, 2022) – SIG SAUER is honored to be awarded the Next Generation Squad Weapons System (NGSW) Contract by the U.S. Army after a rigorous 27-month testing and evaluation process.

“The U.S. Army is taking a bold step toward command of the 21st century battlefield and SIG SAUER is immensely proud to be the selected provider for this historic revolution in infantry weapons. The fielding of the SIG SAUER Next Generation Squad Weapons System will forever change the dynamic of military engagement for America’s warfighters with American innovation and manufacturing,” began Ron Cohen, President and CEO SIG SAUER, Inc.. 

The SIG FURY Hybrid Ammunition (6.8 Common Cartridge), SIG-LMG (XM250), SIG MCX-SPEAR Rifle (XM5) and SIG SLX Suppressors meaningfully advance soldier weapons technology to meet the emerging requirements of the U.S. Army.

The SIG 6.8×51 FURY Hybrid Ammunition uses a patented lightweight metallic case designed to handle pressures higher than conventional ammunition, resulting in dramatically increased velocity and on-target energy in lighter weapons. 

The SIG-LMG lightweight belt-fed machine gun and SIG MCX-SPEAR Rifle are purpose-built to harness the energy of the SIG FURY 6.8 Common Cartridge Ammunition enabling greater range and increased lethality while reducing the soldier’s load on the battlefield.  Both the SIG-LMG and MCX-SPEAR deliver significant weapon and technology advancements to the soldier and provide a solution for battlefield overmatch in comparison to the current M249 and M4/M4A1. 

The U.S. Army’s procurement of the NGSW System marks the beginning of an era where combat weapons are coupled with a suppressor as standard issue equipment.  The SIG SLX Suppressors are designed to reduce harmful gas backflow, sound signature and flash.  SIG SLX Suppressors feature a patented quick detach design for easy install and removal. 

“We commend U.S. Army leadership for having the vision to undertake this historic procurement process to deliver a transformational weapon system to our warfighters.  This award is the culmination of a successful collaboration between SIG SAUER and the U.S. Army, and we look forward to the continuing partnership,” concluded Cohen.

SIG SAUER is a company that is driven by innovation and we are proud to offer the advancements of the NGSW System in the SIG 277 FURY Hybrid Ammunition (the commercial variant of the SIG 6.8×51 FURY Ammunition round), SIG MCX-SPEAR Rifle, and the SIG SLX Series of Suppressors available to the consumer.  For more information about these products visit sigsauer.com.

About SIG SAUER, Inc.
SIG SAUER, Inc. is a leading provider and manufacturer of firearms, electro-optics, ammunition, suppressors, airguns, and training.  For over 250 years SIG SAUER, Inc. has evolved by blending American ingenuity, German engineering, and Swiss precision.  Today, SIG SAUER is synonymous with industry-leading quality and innovation which has made it the brand of choice amongst the U.S. Military, the global defense community, law enforcement, competitive shooters, hunters and responsible citizens.  Additionally, SIG SAUER is the premier provider of tactical training and elite firearms instruction at the SIG SAUER Academy.  Headquartered in Newington, New Hampshire, SIG SAUER has over 2,900 employees across eleven locations.  For more information about the company and product line visit:  sigsauer.com.

What happened to that Brace Rule?

By
Keith Finch
-

We’ve been hitting the digital ink hard on the roll-out of the “Frame and Receiver” rule (which still isn’t published yet) and while I’m refreshing regulations.gov to see when they publish the rule format of ATF-2021-0001-0001 I looked at a publication on braces. Braces were ATF-2021-0002-0002 and how the braced firearm circumvents the NFA and GCA is the topic.

This is where we run into the clash of the NFA’s absurdity and the intent of the law vs. how a law can be applied. Rules must become increasingly more convoluted to encompass ever increasing complexity and nuance. They become more and more vague while promising they will finally solve this problem.

All of this predicates on the false premise that these particular firearms are more suitable for crime (based entirely off of the text of the NFA) than other firearms. This premise is evidentiary false, as criminal misuse of firearms tend to factor around price (cheap enough) and convenience of acquisition (illicit purchase or theft) and considers the physical capabilities of the firearm a distant third. Hell, if we consider the Frame and Receiver ruleset premise it throws the brace premise off balance. Many of the braced pistols are expensive examples of firearms and their popularity is in that it avoids additional expense and wait times while providing a nearly identical product to the taxable one. Heck, the tax may be paid afterwards in the more expedient fashion of the Form 1 instead of the Form 4.

The brace “problem” is entirely of the ATF’s creation, their inability to process rudimentary paperwork that the law mandates in a timely manner created the off design demand that the pistol brace is often purchased to fill. People don’t mind the tax or the background check overly much, it was the waiting that fueled this current ‘nightmare’ of alleged NFA violations.

This all dismissed the mountain of evidence that since all these violations have occurred, and crime has still trended along the lines of affordability and convenience more than capability, that the NFA was in error that these firearms are particularly criminally suited. They are merely firearms and should hold no special place above a handgun.

Preliminary Regulatory Analysis and Initial Regulatory Flexibility Analysis

There was a supporting document submitted with the rule proposal. You can find it here. It was covers the proposed rule from the Office of Regulatory Affairs. It covers the scope of the rule’s impacts financially and covers the estimated efforts required for implementation.

It shows, in short, it will be a nightmare to implement.

The ‘Need for Regulatory Action’ on Pg. 14. is where the tale really begins.

1.2 Need for Federal Regulatory Action
One of the reasons ATF is considering the proposed rule is the failure of the market to
compensate for negative externalities caused by commercial activity. A negative externality can
be the by-product of a transaction between two parties that is not accounted for in the
transaction. A negative externality addressed by this rule is that individuals and affected entities
may try to use purported “stabilizing braces” and affix them to firearms to circumvent the
requirements of the NFA, which requires registration and taxes to be paid on the making and
transfer of NFA weapons. Further, Congress chose to regulate these items more stringently,
finding them to be especially dangerous to the community if not regulated since they are used for
violence and criminal activity. See United States v. Gonzalez, No. 2:10-cr-00967, 2011 WL
5288727, at *5 (D. Utah Nov. 2, 2011) (“Congress specifically found that ‘short-barreled rifles
are primarily weapons of war and have no appropriate sporting use or use for personal
protection.’” (quoting S. Rep. No. 90-1501, at 28 (1968)). Therefore, if persons can circumvent
the NFA by effectively making unregistered short-barreled rifles by using an accessory, such as a
“stabilizing brace,” these weapons can continue to proliferate and could pose an increased public
safety problem given that they are easily concealable.

The reason the rule “needs” to be implemented goes all the way back to the GCA’s and NFA’s false presumptions that a shorter rifle is not suitable for individual civilian ownership and can therefore only further criminal activity. This is nonsense, even prior to the considering of the use evidence. Any number of experts in the firearm and law enforcement spaces could attest that the premise is garbage logic made up to support the rule to “do something” about violence. It did, and does, nothing substantial.

The differences between an AR-15 with a “permanent” muzzle device that makes the barrel 16″ in overall length and one in which that same muzzle device is merely tensioned on to the design specifications is nothing. But legally one is a normal rifle and the other is a crime enabling death machine. It is asinine.

The capability and lethality of the firearm is unchanged in any way, shape, or form. The round expelled from the muzzle will be traveling with identical (within manufacturing variance) speed and energy. The “concealability” of the weapon is the same, and even changing the length of a gun by upwards of 10 inches won’t change the portability and concealability of a roughly 7lb weapon by that much. The ways to hide a 40″ long M16 sized rifle all apply to the MK18 sized short barreled rifle, and vice versa. The M16 sized rifle is not superiorly suitable for citizen home defense and sporting use compared to the MK18, and arguably less so than the MK18 in many applications and more so in others.

It cannot be blanketly declared that short gun bad, long gun good.

It’s such a stupid declaration.

The M4 is a perfect example. The FN Military collector M4 is a good rifle only because the flash hider doesn’t come off easily. That is it. That is the difference between good gun and bad gun, one muzzle comes off with a wrench while the other has a weld and pin you have to take off and then use the wrench.

The practical truth is that all semi-auto and repeater style firearms (lever guns, magazine fed bolt guns, and revolvers included) occupy the same general threat profile as each other. I will call these ISA, Individual Small Arm, threats. While the capabilities in scale to each other can be different from a 9mm subcompact handgun to a 7.62×51 NATO chambered rifle, the threat to the public of man or woman armed with a firearm is roughly the same. The publicly funded response to this threat is roughly the same, cops wearing protective gear interdict.

The amount of damage a threat inflicts is determined by the environmental availability of targets, target selection criteria, and appear of effective counter force. Nothing whatsoever matters about barrel length or the legal inclusion of a stock for the threat profile we are talking about. They don’t matter, we know they don’t matter. We have seen the evidence again and again that the lethal power dynamic starts at armed and motivated assailant vs. unarmed and unprepared target, and that is all that is necessary to inflict substantial casualties. Not a 16″ barrel vs. a 15.9″ because 15.9″ was more concealable. Not even 16″ vs. 8″ barrel makes much difference, not in the scale of the efficacy of an attack.

No one with two brain cells to rub together is looking at Mandalay Bay or Pulse and saying, “good thing those barrels weren’t shorter.”

(Gues)stimates

The ATF stated they believed between 3 and 7 million brace units were on the market, making or intended to make SBR and SBS firearms.

Meanwhile, the Congressional Research Service (CRS) estimates between 10 million and 40 million units. How is it that the ATF’s highest estimate and lowest estimate from Congress are so disparate? How is the minimum estimate from Congress 42% higher than the maximum estimate out of the ATF?

There isn’t any overlap in the estimates. None.

How?

Could the ATF be artificially depressing the number to lower the amount of ‘estimated’ commercial and legal impact the rule change would have? We’re talking a 571% difference in the top end estimates. If we apply that rate of change to the projected costs this quickly becomes a nearly $2,000,000,000.00 ($2 Billion) dollar project. So who’s math sucks here? I’m betting Congress has the more accurate number, and I’d also put money on it being closer to 40 than 10.

However, in lieu of promulgating a proposed regulation, ATF has used and will continue
to use enforcement actions, to include criminal actions, against existing FFLs that manufacture
firearms that do not comply with the intent of the law. Since 2013, ATF has brought 3 actions
against manufacturers of firearms with “stabilizing braces” that do not comply with the intent of
the law. Those actions have not been concluded. ATF estimates that in the absence of this
proposed rule, these individual enforcement actions against existing FFLs would change the
market perception of these “stabilizing braces” and may affect the overall demand for these items
regardless of the implementation of the proposed rule. Therefore, ATF estimates that the overall
future demands of “stabilizing braces” would be less than it has been in the recent past, even in
the absence of the publication of this proposed rule. For the purposes of this analysis, ATF
estimates that the overall future demand for “stabilizing braces” would decrease overall since
Type 1 and Type 7 FFLs would no longer carry firearms with these “stabilizing braces” attached,
making the primary estimate of future “stabilizing braces” 211,178 per year.

So the ATF’s plan is to bully FFLs into “compliance” with the NFA instead of acknowledging and adjusting the false premise the rules are built upon, that these firearms are more dangerous than others. Instead of adjusting the NFA, or removing it entirely as a failed effort, the efforts are to double down on the dumpster fire and keeping making the rules harder to follow and be more vague.

It was the rules, or rather the time involved in following them, that caused this “problem” in the first place. Instead of tackling that issue and making following the rule non-problematic, the ATF is looking to add another questionably enforceable layer of dubious efficacy.

Overall, ATF anticipates that this proposed rule would affect the manufacturers of these
“stabilizing braces”; Type 1 FFL dealers who sell either “stabilizing braces” or the completed
firearm with an attached “stabilizing brace”; Type 7 FFL manufacturers who attach these
“stabilizing braces” to their firearms and sell them as a completed firearm with a “stabilizing
brace”; and individuals who have either purchased these “stabilizing braces” and attached them
to existing firearms or individuals who have purchased a firearm with an attached “stabilizing
brace.” Based on SME estimates, ATF estimates that 25 percent of Type 1 and Type 7 FFLs
would be affected by this proposed rule. Based on ATF licensing numbers, there are 52,840
Type 1 FFLs, of which 13,210 would be affected. Based on the same licensing numbers, there
are 15,524 Type 7 FFLs, of which 3,881 would be affected.

Just like their previously absurdly low estimate of braces, the percentage of FFLs affected feels low. Very low. I haven’t seen or heard of a shop that won’t deal in braced firearms if they are legal to begin with in the state. So perhaps a raw percentage is a terrible measure and we should be filtering by more stringent criteria? Maybe we exclude FFLs where the firearms aren’t sold per the law? Perhaps we filter the information by manufacturers’ percentage of affected products and volume of those products sold to gauge popularity? Possibly even add on projected demand and backorder information and add price filtering to see where these are going. Within that price filtering in place, let’s compare that to braced firearms used in crimes. Then compare that to firearms in general used in crimes.

What? That would make it look like cheap and available guns are the ones used most often in crimes?

Amazing. Who would have thought…

This is just to Pg. 17 in the analysis.

There are several pages of cost analysis showing that this is expensive and labor intensive. On page 41 begins the stated benefits.

This proposed rule is intended to affect attempts by manufacturers and individuals to
circumvent the requirements of the NFA and affect the criminal use of weapons with a purported
“stabilizing brace,” such as the shooting incident at the King Soopers in Boulder, Colorado. The
purpose of this proposed rule is to amend ATF regulations to clarify when a rifle is “intended to
be fired from the shoulder” and to set forth factors that ATF considers when evaluating firearms
with an attached purported “stabilizing brace” to determine whether these are “rifles” under the
GCA or NFA, and therefore whether they are “firearms” subject to the NFA. Congress placed
stricter requirements on the making and possession of short-barreled rifles because it found them
to pose a significant crime problem. Providing clarity to the public and industry on how ATF
enforces the provisions of the NFA through this proposed rule is intended to significantly
enhance public safety and could reduce the criminal use of such firearms, which are easily
concealable from the public and first responders. ATF invites comment on how to quantify the
expected effect of the proposed rule on public safety risk and how to monetize the benefits of
this effect.

Again, we are at the “found to pose a significant crime problem” being just thrown into the open as a foregone conclusion. No critical analysis applied. I wonder if this finding by congress was based upon some of those ‘Gun Control Studies‘ with a 99.6% failure rate in their data collection methodology. The conclusions taken from those studies would then be highly suspect since the studies were suspect. But we keep going back to, “Congress found (meaning “said”) they are bad.” as the justification. No effort made to examine whether that premise is true, just Congress setting the demonstrably false baseline.

The only thing accurate about the statement is that braces are being used by some purchasers to avoid the NFA provisions.

Why? Perhaps because my last SBR purchase took 13 months to complete, and I am not a unique case by any means, maybe that is why? I literally got an FFL and an SOT for my company here in the time it took to clear my SBR for transfer. Sure, it makes sense for the business to have one. We actually went and got it because of NFA wait times though. That was the trigger. The law was such a pain we chose to spend money to avoid the wait time again.

We have that option, we’re a firearm related business. The average consumer neither would or should be subject to needing the full annual costs of licensure just to avoid an atrocious wait time for a product, all in the absurf name of safety and crime prevention. Yep, so many crimes prevented by making folks wait a year and spend an extra $200 on a background check they can have conducted at the sales counter of their gun store.

You solved crime ATF. Gold sticky star for you.

Wait…

“ATF invites comment on how to quantify the expected effect of the proposed rule on public safety risk and how to monetize the benefits of this effect.“

They don’t have a clue how to measure whether or not this will have any positive effect… at all… anywhere… and they want to spend, and cost the industry, hundreds of millions of dollars to do it anyway. Instead of pushing to remove the source of the issue and streamline the pain points in the law, just over complicate it further.

Oh, and on the NFA Tax forgiveness…

This alternative would allow individuals and entities that currently have firearms with
attached “stabilizing braces” to apply under the NFA without paying the $200 making tax. In
this scenario, the societal costs would be the same except there would be no transfer payment.
Similar to the proposed rule, the bulk of this cost would be the forgone future revenue and the
loss in property for individuals not applying under the NFA. This scenario was rejected
because “stabilizing braces” are not serialized and an individual or entity could merely register
all firearms possessed with the intent of later obtaining a “stabilizing brace.” Further, although
used on a particular weapon, an individual might register all pistols as SBRs and then attempt to
utilize other stocks on these firearms. ATF requests additional comments about the feasibility of
providing tax forgiveness. ATF also request information on how this would affect your decision
to use this scenario under this proposed rule.

So they won’t exempt your stabilizing braces because then you could just put a regular stock on it instead. You gotta pay! Can’t make this workable and just accept the flood of SBRs for a window, knowing not all of them would have been previously braced firearms but making them all NFA compliant. That would again make too much sense and actually solve some of the pressures being exerted on problematic compliance concerns.

So there it is folks, the Brace rule information. It’s still bad too, but Biden didn’t signal it was done so perhaps they are still working on making it better… or worse… probably worse.

The GWOT Throw from Kitfox Design Group

By
Anna Martinez
-

From the Author: As I am researching a blanket I find myself reading articles about the first 100 days of the Global War on Terror, then on when the GWOT medal ceased..then on Joe Biden signing a law beginning the construction of the GWOT memorial in the National Mall.I see four different patterns of uniforms. I see the words victory, loss, I see photos of men hiking 240’s up a mountain side which bring my thoughts to my friends..my friends that lost their friends..my friends that watched this war begin..and “end”..and experience different but yet all the same new wars begin.

As I am researching a blanket.

https://www.instagram.com/kitfoxdesigngroup/

Kitfox

In early December 2021, Kitfox Design Group sent a call out for Global War on Terrorism Veterans to complete a survey about their time in. Just doing this shows how authentic they want this blanket to be. To capture and honor those who served. Twenty years of service went into months of sketching for KitFox to design a truly inspiring blanket. Well soon, that blanket will be available to order.

Much like the previous Vietnam blanket drop that so many fell in love with, (I myself have one draped over my chair in front of the fireplace) Kitfox will be doing the same type of timeline as far as informational teasers, updates, and preorders.

A Perfect Christmas Gift: The Vietnam Throw from Kitfox Design Group

https://www.instagram.com/kitfoxdesigngroup/

“GWOT Blanket Release Information-From kitfoxdesigngroup.com

The blankets will be available for pre-order Friday May 6th at 9am Central and will stay open through Monday May 16th at 11:59ish PM Central. 

There is an estimated 6-8 week lead time (but just like the Vietnam Throw, it might be shorter) depending on the quantity of orders. Should we surpass the expected quantity somehow, we’ll update the pre-order confirmation check box at checkout with current lead times. The goal in this scenario will be to have a pallet shipped to us at a time so we can get blankets out in waves in the order they were purchased. 

To stay up to date on this collection, please sign up for the newsletter. You’ll get regular updates and some behind the scenes secret updates that the main list won’t be receiving. We’ll also be sending out a $10 off coupon code/link to folks on the GWOT collection list at launch. (To receive this offer at launch, you must sign up through THIS form, even if you already receive our emails.)“

PSA: Kitfox just included a photo of a sample blanket in their last email. I won’t include it here due to it being in the private email sign ups distro, so go sign up so you can get a look.

War is heavy.⁠
⁠
I just hope I make some people smile, and facilitate a positive cathartic experience. ⁠
⁠
Remind dudes of good times with people they’ll never forget. ⁠
⁠
That’s all I want.-Kitfox Design Group

Review: Ruger Wrangler Bird’s Head

By
V. Caldwell
-

Most of us enjoy firing and using cowboy guns. This means lever action rifles, double barrel hammer type shotguns, and single action revolvers. I began firing these types back in the 1960s. I was about seven years old when I fired the Herbert Schmidt .22 revolver my father owned. The revolver handled nicely. The action wore out after a decade or so of use and the ejector rod fell off as well. It certainly wasn’t first class – or second or third class – but it worked OK for a few years.

Later I owned Colt and Ruger revolvers that worked just fine. The High Standard Double Nine wasn’t a single action but it looked like one and it too worked well. I have owned some type of .22 caliber revolver of the cowboy style most of my life. The latest is a fun revolver that won’t break the bank. 

I have used several Ruger Wrangler rimfire revolvers over the years. The revolvers use inexpensive source materials. After all, the .22 develops little pressure and momentum. It doesn’t take a block of forged steel to work well in a .22 caliber revolver.

The Wrangler is a fixed revolver. If you need a long range shooter or something for firing the .22 Magnum then you really need the Ruger Single Six, which is more expensive, but worth the tariff. For casual plinking, informal targets, cowboy type single action training, and training young shooters the basics of handgun shooting, the Wrangler is a sure bet. And even more – the Wrangler will serve for small game at modest range. That is a number of chores the pistol can fill at less than three hundred dollars retail. The top of the list is fun shooting. We all need a firearm reserved for fun and this is a good one. 

The Wrangler is available in a wide variety of finishes. Cerakote is durable and versatile. All Ruger Wrangler revolvers are supplied with a cold hammer forged barrel. The Wrangler features a transfer bar ignition. This means you may safely carry six cartridges in the chambers and keep a loaded cylinder under the hammer. Open the loading gate to load the revolver. Load a chamber, rotate the cylinder until you have loaded six chambers, and close the gate. To fire cock the hammer and press the trigger. The Wrangler like all Ruger single action revolvers uses a coil spring set up instead of the ancient leaf spring design. The Ruger single action revolver never seems to give trouble. The Wrangler has followed in this tradition. A new model features a birdshead grip frame. This grip frame-more or less- was originally delivered with the Colt Lightning. It is far more popular today than the Old West, but it offers a singular look. Some like it, some don’t. It comes off best in smaller revolvers with a short barrel, I feel. 

My Wrangler birdshead features very nicely done wooden grips. The barrel is shorter than the standard Wrangler with a 3.75 inch length. This is a good compromise for carrying in the field. It doesn’t rob the pistol of much velocity but offers a lighter, neater revolver that isn’t difficult to simply thrust into the back pocket. The revolver is delivered with a very nice DeSantis Wild Hog holster. I found it interesting that the birdshead revolver is only ten more dollars than the standard Wrangler on the shelf. Yet the grips are wood rather than composite and the DeSantis holster is very nicely made. The holster offers ambidextrous carry, right or left hand, and may serve as a crossdraw. While I like this holster a great deal I also like the DeSantis Doc Holliday. I ordered this holster just before Christmas. It is very nicely made of quality leather. Nothing wrong with the ‘free’ holster that came with the Wrangler. The Doc Holliday will get a lot of use. 

Firing the Wrangler is a joy. Remember- stay safe. Don’t cock the hammer in the holster. Wait until the revolver is well clear of your body! The hammer is easily cocked- the birdshead grip may move the hand a little closer to the hammer- and then press the trigger. As the handgun recoils grasp the hammer and cock it again. This is a fine practice piece if you shoot cowboy action. The sights are nothing to brag about. They are authentic cowboy type fixed sights. They are properly regulated for 40 grain loads. I would say that this is a ten yard sure thing for squirrel so you are good for a thirty foot tree. Rodents and reptiles at a few paces are a sure thing. As for accuracy- I think fast handling and shooting is a greater test of the firearm. Just the same the Ruger was tested for accuracy. I fired very carefully at fifteen yards. Most of the five shot groups I fired were inside of three inches. A single group when I was really on my game went into 2.2 inches. So- the handgun is accurate as the cylinder locks up tight, the barrel is good, and the trigger action is clean. The sights are nothing to brag about and perhaps my eyesight isn’t either. But I fired without shooting glasses. What it is for- fun shooting- the Wrangler Birdshead is a great revolver. It could be pushed into other chores such as Kit Gun, Camp Gun, and small game hunting. But fun shooting, that is the trick. 

The NATO BAR

By
Keith Finch
-

The new rule for ‘Frames and Receivers’ still has not been published on regulations.gov as of this morning, so who knows when we’ll deal with that nonsense again. So instead, let’s watch something fun. Ian has uploaded a wonderful video on the FINAL FORM of the BAR.

The Browning Automatic Rifle, made famous in World War II by American Forces. Originally adopted at the end of World War I. Shown to the military by John Moses Browning in essentially a, ‘Hey gents, check this out. You’re going to want them.’ party (and they did). Perhaps most infamously used by Bonnie and Clyde.

This was the magazine-fed 30.06 that almost started the battle rifle trend. It was close, arguments could be made that it’s success and the M1 Garand’s success led to the M14’s layout. The BAR also evolved into the M240, the FN MAG58, which is among the most beloved general purpose machine guns in existence.

Anyhow, the BAR still had some legs left in the 1950’s, a whole four decades after its debut. The 7.62 NATO had been agreed to since the US still loved them some 30.06 and we were going to completely disregard our promise to adopt FN FAL’s instead of the problematic M14 because we loved the M1 Garand too and the M14 looked like a Garand (operated quite differently).

So FN made one final variant in the 50’s, just before that battle rifle era, and this is it. Enjoy. Give Ian a follow too, you’re crazy if you haven’t.

Gunday Brunch 48: Ghost Guns Again

By
David Reeder
-

Didn’t we just leave this party? The ATF is at it again, having released the final version of the new rule regulating so-called “ghost guns.” It’s basically the same as the first rule, except now it has all the commentary about how they ignored most of the comments from law abiding gun owners. What a surprise. Oh, Caleb isn’t on this episode because he was lost in the Mines of Moria.

The Quickly Forgotten Taurus CT9

By
Travis Pike
-

In 2013 Taurus did something surprising and brought a rifle to the market. They have done rifles and even SMGs in Brazil, but this would be the first time they brought a rifle to the American market. They chose to take Taurus SMT MT G2, an SMG, convert it to a PCC, call it the Taurus CT9 G2, and bring it to the United States. They did this in 2013, which put them in a prime spot to get hit by the PCC craze that would be coming in 2014 and 2015.

Yet, the CT9 G2 failed and failed somewhat miserably, so what happened? Functionally the gun wasn’t terrible. The CT9 was reliable, easy to shoot, had decent ergonomics, and was surprisingly accurate, so what happened?

The CT9 Was… Kind of Ugly

When you import a semi-auto rifle into the United States, it has to have some form of ‘Sporting Use’ and cannot be imported with the basic cosmetic features we know and love. When FN imports SCARs, they come in a weird neutered configuration, and once in the States, they fix ‘em up.

The CT9 came to the States in a thoroughly neutered format and kept it. We got the terrible thumbhole stock that made the CT9 butt ugly. It’s very USC in its design, and the American variant of the rifle just looked bad. Taurus should have imported the gun, fixed it up, and attached a folding stock or even an AR-style stock. Anything but the thumbhole design.

10 Round Proprietary Magazines

Whenever I’m reading about a new rifle, and I see the term ‘proprietary magazines,’ my stomach lurches. Proprietary mags don’t always suck. CZ’s Scorpion mags are great, easy to find, affordable, and came in various capacities. Well, the Taurus CT9 is an example of proprietary magazine failure.

 

The gun came with two ten-round magazines, and that was it. Taurus never imported, sold, or made available any higher-capacity magazines. The weapon was never popular enough to warrant aftermarket support either. So owners were stuck with ten rounders and some modified Uzi mags to work, but most owners were stuck.

Weird Design Choices

On the outside, the design was pretty standard. It’s a blowback-operated 9mm PCC. Nothing crazy. The magazine release sucks with the short ten-rounders, though. The design wants you to grab the magazine as your thumb strikes the magazine release. However, a giant magwell is in the way of doing so.

The sights are big chunks of plastic that don’t fold out of the way. The front sight can’t be adjusted, so hopefully, it’s right! The rear sight can be adjusted and comes with a peep sight and a close-range aperture that resembles a Glock rear sight for close-range shooting. The sights… kind of suck.

Also, as part of the neutering, the barrel isn’t threaded. They should have deneutered the whole gun when it got to the states, but at the very least, they should have threaded the barrel with PCCs being so easy to suppress.

Absolutely Zero Support

Taurus released the gun and said have fun and faded away. They went to the store to buy cigarettes and never came back. They did diddly with the CT9. Not just magazines, but they never offered any 922R parts or support either. CZ did it right with the Scorpion. Release it, then get to working on kits to satisfy 922R to allow the manufacture of SBRs. You can toss an optic an AR foregrip on and that was about it. 

The CT9 got zero aftermarket support, either. Looking at message boards, people found various ways to attach stocks and similar items. No one else supported the gun.

Pistol Versions Never Existed

Taurus could have imported stockless, large format pistols variants of the CT9 and been ahead of the curve. That’s the route CZ took, and it worked well. Large format pistols would be easier, and wouldn’t have to worry about 922R and sporting purpose clauses. In 2013 braces had just been unveiled and certainly weren’t what they are now.

However, Taurus would have been ahead of the curve with a more SMG and more pistol-like version of the gun. Plus, we could have gotten real mags with the pistol version. I’m betting the SMG look would appeal to a larger crowd than the weird PCC look.

The CT9 and The Future of Taurus

Taurus has been innovating, experimenting, and seemingly upping its quality control in the last few years. I think the CT9 or something similar could make a serious comeback. Hell, make it use PT92 mags so Beretta mags would be available, or pull a Ruger and have multiple magwell options.

As of now, most CT9s are tough to find and seem to be drying up. I’m sure Ian will have one on the Forgotten Weapons channel soon. Or they might be back and better than ever in 2023, continuing the Taurus glow up.

The Perfect (Nearly) SCAR 16s/Mk 16

By
Keith Finch
-

The SCAR and FN catch flak, some deserved and some overblown.

But despite cost, despite a charging handle that went back and forth (at SOCOM request), despite trouble with optics, and despite SOCOM later saying, ‘Oh, yeah. The M4 can do most of this no problem, we’ll buy 17’s from now on,’ the SCAR is still one of the most high functioning rifles in any of its several calibers.

Henry and Josh run the SCAR 16s and a modern 1-8 LPVO (The newest Primary Arms offering) through the practical accuracy course and it scores 17, 16 is a perfect score and Henry through one miss high on the last target.

What I want to highlight is one of the most well documented displays of why I love the SCAR rifle. Look at the recoil (or rather lack their of) influencing Henry’s shooting. Look at how quickly and how consistently the SCAR places follow up shots, even at the 350-500 yard targets where groups are usually opening up usually the SCAR is stacking rounds.

The SCAR16 is incredibly accurate and incredibly durable, the Marines testing the IAR variant couldn’t induce one of their malfunctions in the test gun. The rifle runs incredibly well.

But as Mike Jones pointed out in his recent SCAR video, it comes with some weirdness still the FN has not changed. The suppression voiding the warranty (not FN’s services, just the official warranty), the A2 pistol grip, the dated early 2000’s handguard layout, the A2 pistol grip, the odd and stiffer mil-spec single stage trigger in the commercial gun, the A2 pistol grip… Yeah that one is the most annoying feature on any rifle offering that is not a retro.

Enjoy the vid!

Ghost Guns Solved!

By
Keith Finch
-

I’m out of funny applicable movie memes to apply the absurdity of this situation, so I’m using Colion Noir’s video instead.

The Texas lawyer and 2A advocate distills down the absurdity of this rule rather nicely.

It still makes no sense.

It still doesn’t clear up much.

It will still not have any impact on violent criminality.

It still isn’t published in the register as of this writing. Maybe as of your reading, but not as I am writing this.

I’ll summarize in text what I’ve been baffled about since President Biden opened his mouth and stumbled through is speech, picking things up and putting them down, while saying ‘Look, its gun shaped. Grrrr.’ [paraphrased].

The new rule, 120 days after its publication date, will regulate firearm assembly kits that do not require home builders go through an FFL to acquire them into ones that do. The exact methodology behind this determination of whether it is or is not a firearm is about as murky and vague as it gets, despite the ATF’s assurance that it isn’t.

What it amounts to is this.

  • Frames are fine still, technically.
  • Because PMF’s are completely legal and do not require serial numbers per ATF, the only exception is if the PMF is an NFA item, frames are still not required to have a serial number on their own
  • Whether a frame/receiver is or isn’t a firearm isn’t dependent upon the frame or receiver itself
  • Whether a frame is or isn’t a firearm is dependent upon the amount of assistance provided that is packaged into the kit

“Readily convertible,” was the key phrase the ATF locked onto. As far as I can tell, “readily convertible” simply means, ‘comes with directions’. So to use Joe Biden’s clumsy IKEA example, the couch is only a couch if it comes with directions to assemble it into a couch. If it is all the parts to make a couch but doesn’t come with directions or tools to assist you in its assembly, then it isn’t “readily convertible” into a couch and is therefore still not a couch.

The rules changes are very specifically targeting products like the Polymer80 that provide guidance to the buyers so they can assemble the firearm safely. They are declaring them firearms, requiring serializing, requiring FFLs to serialize them and track them in their A&D records (for all the good that will ultimately do as most traces dead end anyway, “successful” or not). However they couldn’t go so far as to ban 80% type frames outright, they had to invent the term “readily convertible” and give it a very convoluted definition. It absolutely hits Polymer80’s as they exist right now, the market for them is going to shift. How far remains to be seen.

Stone Glacier Packs: A Hunter and Precision Shooters Go-To Day Pack

By
Anna Martinez
-

“Stone Glacier is a result of 15 years of solo sheep hunts from the Dall country of Alaska to the unlimited districts of Montana’s Beartooth Wilderness. The goal has been straightforward: build the lightest, most durable gear using only the toughest technical materials available.”- Stone Glacier

Stone Glacier has a history of making great packs, clothing, and gear for the hunter. Now, insert Competition Dynamics, NRL Hunter, and other precision shooting leagues that bring you into more realistic shooting scenarios and can even involve some camping. Participating in this means that you have to have the right equipment just like you would in hunting.

Stone Glacier and Caylen Wojcik, a Marine Corps Scout Sniper and co-host of the Modern Day Sniper podcast, go over this in a great blog post below. Caylen has also worked with Stone Glacier to design the Kiowa 3200. With both a hunting and shooting perspective in mind, this is also a great day pack option for larger framed people.

Precision Rifle Matches: A Primer – Stone Glacier

The Avail 2200 “The ultimate “utility” daypack,”

Specs

  • Weight – 3lb 0.8oz.
  • Compatible with all SG frames including the R3, Xcurve, and Krux EVO Frames to achieve a 150+ pound load rating (check Design page for load rating info)
  • Dimensions: 20.5″ Tall x 12″ Wide x 8″ Deep (meets TSA carry-on size regulations)
  • 2,200 cubic inch main bag
  • 36 L
  • External compression panel
  • Hydration compatible (Hydro Sleeve – Sold Separately)
  • Heavy duty YKK #10 zipper
  • Cordura 500 and Xpac fabric
  • Heavy-duty, 1″ Duraflex military approved buckles and webbing
  • Made in the USA

Purchase Price/Options

Colors: Foliage, Tan
Price: $289

Worth mentioning, whenever an order goes through on stone glacier they have the customer use Route. It is basically an additional tracking and insurance on where your package is. It gave me a warm fuzzy especially with the current shipping issues we are all facing.

From the Writer, During the Match

The need for a new day pack came from shooting National Rifle League Hunter Matches. I needed to be able to hike with 100 rounds of ammo, tripod hooked to the bag, and comfortable enough to go up and down hills while having a rifle over my shoulder. It also needed to be able to give me quick access to things such as my tripod and shooting bag since I deploy these on the clock. I used to run an Eberlestock bag and it did its job however a big drawback of it were some of the smaller pouch placements. For instance, a small pouch was only located on the very top which made it flop over when retrieving anything. I also had to makeshift a way to stow my tripod as there wasn’t any cinch tabs to retain it. Note: This specific bag is a couple of years old so I am sure that Eberlestock now has better options.

I found Stone Glacier named in two main places, one, after searching “pack and tripod” on snipers hide, and by seeing a couple other precision rifle shooters and dudes in the equipment industry who knew about bags. A couple of options came up in both areas. After looking at each option I decided on the Stone Glacier Avail 2200. This is their smallest pack and is known to be a “day pack” as you can pack enough items for a day or two and still carry your animal out. The reviews were high and I noticed right away that it came with a tripod foot, straps on the side for tripod retention, and an easy to grab pouch in the front that enables you to just stuff items on the fly without having to unzip anything. It being a day pack as well means that it is a smaller frame. Me being a smaller framed female, and only having to carry a day worth of items, I didn’t want anything too large. Here it shows how the pack looks on a grown man.

Inside the cabin at the Arena, packed before the first day of shooting for NRL Hunter.

I ran this pack for the first time at a National Rifle League Hunter match in Georgia at the Arena Training Facility. Setting it up I immediately found use for the two smaller pouches on the inside of the pack and found ease in retaining my tripod. There wasn’t much hiking this match however the straps already felt like it balanced the weight better. I have not used the belt on the pack yet as I didn’t need to. The front pouch worked great for just throwing my rear bag in without being retained by anything but having the pouch tightened down. The bottom of the pouch held my ammo well without creating sag in the bottom of the bag as the bottom of the bag is a different, stronger material. The bungee cords kept the things I didn’t need every stage out of the way and stayed put.

The Biggest Takeaways

Tripod Stowing

The tripod foot sewn into the side of the pack and the cinch cords made retaining the tripod and removing it off the pack easy and fast. Stowing a tripod is as easy as collapsing it, putting one foot into the foot pouch, and cinching the strap down. Super easy and I haven’t ran into it snagging or coming loose during a hike yet.

Also, I could still get into the bag when the tripod is stowed. That is huge as I may need to reload my magazines or grab something inside but don’t want to loosen my tripod on the side of the bag.

Pouches

Sometimes when buying packs kitting the pack out with smaller pouches can be an additional purchase and separate placement after purchasing the bag. With the Avail 2200 the two smaller pouches on in the inside of the pouch were already there. Therefore, I had the larger pouch that can be accessed from the outside of the bag, the two smaller pouches sewn into the front side of the bag but can only be accessed by opening the bag, and the main large compartment which has two even smaller almost cup sized pouches on the walls of the bag.

Having pouches that are already sewn in and perfect size are a must.

Light and comfortable

The Stone Glacier Avail 2200 weighs 3lbs and 8oz overall without any additional frames. The pack is super light yet comfortable on the back and shoulders. It is also strong enough to hold weight as it is made from Cordura 500 and Xpac fabric. It also uses military approved Heavy-duty, 1″ Duraflex buckles and webbing.

Besides the amazing gear, Stone Glaciers passion for hunting shines through on all of their platforms. There are many cool hunting videos where they go in depth on certain hunts, the need for conservation in certain areas, and just as cool, really helpful product set up videos.

1...164165166...419Page 165 of 419
© All rights reserved © 2023 GAT Daily. Designed by GAT Marketing