You start to feel like an old man when you realize that it’s been six years since 2018 and that 12-year-olds in 2018 are now adults. Adults and gun owners who really never got exposed to bump stocks. On June 14th, 2024, the Supreme Court ruled that, to the surprise of no one, Donald Trump’s unconstitutional bump stock ban had been declared unconstitutional, and the final rule was avoided.
Bump stocks are back on the menu, boys! In 2017, I wrote an article detailing just how silly they are and that they aren’t the boogeyman that the anti-gun crowd made them out to be. They were a silly and expensive way to waste ammo. I had a close friend who has since passed who really loved bump stocks and seemed to enjoy blasting through a mag of .223 Remington, and that’s what I mainly remember about bump stocks.
However, those 12-year-olds who are now adults and possibly gun owners may have never heard the ballad of the bump stock. I’m afraid that those younger gun owners might be in for a real disappointment.
What a Bump Stock Isn’t
A bump stock is not a machine gun. A rifle equipped with a bump stock is also not a machine gun. A bump stock attempts to replicate full auto fire by making it easier to pull the trigger. That’s what the intention is, anyway. In real life, it can be a hit-or-miss product, and there were, for a time, a wide variety of bumpstock devices. Some worked better than others.
Slide Fire
The idea behind bump stocks is something called bump firing, and it’s nothing new. As soon as someone made semi-automatic firearms, someone figured out how to bump fire them. Bump firing is a technique that uses the weapon’s recoil to move the weapon and make it bump against the shooter’s finger. You don’t need a stock to accomplish this.
You can hook your thumb through a belt loop and place your trigger finger lightly against the trigger. Get your hand open and off the pistol grip. Now pull forward with your support arm, and the gun fires. Keep the forward pressure; the gun’s recoil will move it backward far enough to reset the trigger. If you keep forward pressure, the weapon will bump fire and provide a higher rate of semi-auto fire.
Throughout the 1990s and early 2000s, many devices promised to make bump fire easier. Anyone who went to a gun show during this period found their eyes assaulted by a TV screen showing demos of the famed Hell Fire triggers. People want full auto but often can’t afford the limited firearms on the registry, so they turned to alternatives.
Slide Fire
How Does a Bump Stock Work
Bump stocks make bump firing easier. They make it possible to shoulder the rifle and use bump fire. The trick was the fact that the gun and stock were connected, but allowed the gun to slide rearward freely within the stock. The user needed to provide constant forward pressure and avoid pulling the grip and stock to the rear.
When done properly, the stock moves rearward under recoil and forward under the shooter’s manual pressure. This allows the finger to bump the trigger and creates a faster version of semi-auto fire.
Slide Fire
A company called Slide Fire ruled the market. They created numerous bump fire stock designs for a variety of weapons. Slide Fire started with some fairly rudimentary stocks but slowly created more and more advanced versions of the bump fire stock. Before the company shuttered, its stocks looked rather nice and not so…uhm…well, crappy.
Are These Things Worth It?
Are they worth fighting the government to legalize and repeal unconstitutional dictator-like edicts? Yes, yes, they are, and they always will be. Fighting for every inch is worth it. Are they worth a hundred or so dollars?
To me, they are not. Have you seen the price of ammo? Bump stocks are fun for about a whole magazine, and then it’s just kind of a thing. I almost want to buy one in protest and celebration, but for now, I’d probably sink that hundred bucks into ammo or, even better, make a donation to GOA, SAF, and local gun rights organizations. We’ve beaten the pistol brace rule, the 80% lower rule, and now the bump stock rule.
If you want one, buy one; it’s your right as an American.
Cover Photo: A professional picture of XS Sights new Glock Fiber Optic Sight Set. While it’s not my picture, it’s a perfect close-up of the fiber optic rod, which is central to this post.
One of the coolest things about fiber optic handgun sights [besides the way they catch and transmit light] is their fantastic sight pictures. Typically, these sight pictures consist of a front sight with a fiber optic rod and a plain black or serrated rear sight with a fairly wide notch that’s easy to look through quickly for straightforward sight alignment. With these sights and their sight pictures, shooters can still take advantage of their ‘brilliant’ nature to make quick and target-focused shots like they would with a regular red-dot sight.
For this reason, I’ve thought of and also shot with fiber optic iron sights as “pseudo-red-dots” for some time. Described in the simplest terms possible, fiber optic rods are nothing more than strands of specialized plastics with a special coating that traps light and reflects it lengthwise throughout the strand.
Fiber optics are extremely sensitive to light and work in virtually all lighting conditions with visible light without relying on another source of energy.
Even with this out of focus shot, the fiber optic front sight glows like a beacon Another professional photo of the new XS Sights Fiber Optic Set For Glock. I included this photo because displays all the crucial elements of a good F/O sight set: plain rear with wide notch and an easy to see front sight.This picture was taken at dusk in late spring, May 2019 after 7pm. Even with less than ideal light conditions notice how well the front sight of this Glock 34 catches the eye.
Target Focused Shooting
Target-focused shooting involves the shooter focusing their vision keenly on their target and shooting when the sight(s) of their firearm intersect the line of sight between the shooter’s eyes and the target. Likewise, target-focused shooting is generally done with both eyes open which makes it no different than playing any other sport that requires eye and hand coordination.
Since the eyes only need to focus on the target ahead, it can lead to faster shots than sight-focused shooting. This is because the eyes and brain do not require extra time to process the alignment between the actual target and the firearm’s sights. Target-focused shooting isn’t exclusive to handguns only, and in certain shooting sports, it’s the only way to shoot properly.
Shooting Clay
Consider shotgun sports, for example. These games revolve around fast-moving clay targets and would be a great example. In order to hit a moving aerial target with a shotgun, the shooter has no choice but to track the “bird” by looking at it directly as it moves in flight. Failing to do so is one of the most common ways to miss with shotguns because shooters will erroneously focus on their shotgun’s bead instead of keeping an eye on the moving clay pigeon.
By the time they find the ‘perfect’ shotgun sight picture and pull the trigger, the clay will have already moved to a different point in its flight path. Anyone who can grasp wing shooting can easily translate it to target-focused handgun shooting as well. With regard to shooting with red dots, target-focused shooting is mandatory.
A red-dot shooter is ideally focused on the target as if they were getting ready to bore through it with imaginary laser-vision and will fire when their bright red dot crosses their vision. The neat thing is that this exact technique can also be done with a fiber optic sight.
Using Fiber Optics As Pseudo Dots
By combining the principles of hard target focus and the light gathering/transmission abilities of fiber optics, shooters can also shoot nearly as effectively as they could with red-dot sights. The key that brings it all together is the glowing nature of the fiber optic and how easily their brightness “grabs” the eye.
In fairness, shooting this way isn’t limited only to fiber optic sights either. A shooter could also shoot this way with any other brightly contrasting front sight. However, fiber optics tend to offer the best combination of utility, speed, and precision.
The pseudo-dot method isn’t without its drawbacks either. First, in order for this to work properly, the fiber optic front sight must still be in alignment with the rear-sight notch. This entails two points in addition to the target lining up compared to the red dot, which only consists of one point lining up in relation to the target.
Second, when critical precision matters, such as trying to nail a tighter group at a smaller and more distant target, I find that one is better off using old-school sight-focused techniques for precision. This is really one of the areas where dots make a stark difference.
It’s also worth mentioning that fiber optic sights are considered semi-expendable and it’s not uncommon for them to get loose or inadvertently disappear. Fortunately that doesn’t prevent one from shooting with their pistol, but they lose the “brightness.” It’s always a good idea to keep spare rods on-hand.
The Takeaway
This Isn’t About Fiber Optics Versus Red-Dots, But…
Enough people in the shooting space have already written much about the pros and cons of shooting with modern slide-mounted red-dot sights. So, it’s pointless to repeat that here. However, it’s worth pointing out that the typical set of fiber optic pistol sights retails for less than $100. No one would disagree that shooting with a handgun equipped with an electronic red dot involves a higher cost.
It’s not just because the sights themselves cost between $200 to $600 retail. But there are also the optics mounting plates or the extra smithing work needed to directly mill a mounting surface on a handgun’s slide (and the taller back-up iron sights if/when applicable). Regardless, there is much that can be done with a simple pair of fiber optic sights, and it revolves around the concept of target-focused shooting.
A fiber optic rod in a Dawson front sight glows on this Glock 17, even under the fluorescent lighting of a hotel desk lamp during an evening in between a 2-day pistol course. I took this photo prior to shooting with any dots and it was that weekend that I solidified my target-focus with this “pseudo red-dot”. This very photo is what sparked this entire post.
Although many handgun shooters now live in a “dot-world,” in the realm of iron sights, fiber optic sights have now become the go-to analogs. They seem to be more popular than ever before, to the point where I’ve noticed they’re standard on many factory handguns today compared to even a decade ago.
Other Options
I may be biased, but I think their increase in popularity is a good thing. For general-purpose shooting, a set of sights like XS Sights’ new Glock set (or F/O sights in general) can offer a great deal of “shoot-ability” and flexibility to most shooters.
Such sights can be used exactly the same as any other traditional iron sight– with the ability to focus on the front sight itself and use its top edge as the visual reference. But more importantly, a shooter can also exploit the inherent benefits of fiber optics to shoot and transition between targets very quickly by using the front sight as a pseudo-red dot.
Reading USA Today’s timid complaint about the SCOTUS decision on bumpstocks, which essentially the media criticizing the inability of a federal agency to misclassify an item without Congressional legislation, does nothing to restore faith in accurate reporting. “Congress banned machine guns from the public in 1934…” No, they didn’t. They taxed them. That’s it. They created a tax trap.
They didn’t “ban” them until 1986, and even then, they only banned the addition of new ones while taxing existing ones. Basic. Simple. Facts. There’s no nuance or interpretation here; it’s just incorrect. It’s ignorant. But it’s presented in a news article for general population consumption, thus gaining credibility from those who trust the honest transmission of information based on the publication’s reputation.
FEAR & LOATHING THE BUMPSTOCK
They then cite the AMA or some American Medical Asshats associative group who predictably deliver the “gunshot wounds are bad m’kay” line but attribute it to “rapid fire bullets” being the issue. Once again, valid arguments are undermined by fabricated claims coming from an ‘authority’ figure or group that the average person is expected to trust. Show me one doctor or nurse in that quoted group who can disassemble a Glock and who understands even the most basic mechanics of that firearm. Find. Me. One. You fucking won’t.
Find me 100 POLICE officers at random right now, and I’ll show you a terrifying percentage of them who have no accurate concept of how the GUN ON THEIR HIP WITH WHICH THEY ARE TRUSTED TO MAKE LIFE AND DEATH DECISIONS WITH WORKS. And they can’t actually shoot it. They struggle just to ‘pass’ a “qualification” once or twice a year.
But why listen to my rant? Why listen to me instead of the vague fearmongery ‘we aren’t gonna tell you this is bad, we’ll just quote people who say this is bad who you, GenPop, don’t know and have no context for knowing they shouldn’t be listened to on this subject’ USA Today or [insert favored news brand].
My credentials only include: Federal Firearms Licensee, National Firearms Act Special Occupational Tax Holder, Firearms Technical Analyst, Small Arms Instructor, Small Arms and Towed Artillery Maintenance Specialist, Armorer, Infantry Rifleman, and Infantry Squad Leader.
OPINION & REACTION
My opinion is just purely based on vague reactionary 2nd Amendment worship and nothing like a reasonably nuanced and informed grasp of the legal and mechanical principles at play, right? Clearly. Let’s quote a medical group who will vaguely parrot that ‘injuries are bad and that these injuries are therefore also bad’ trope.
Why does this really matter? Firstly it irritates me when something is so grossly inaccurate but served forth as an authoritative summary. Secondly, we are seeing the time of Congress and the President hiding behind federal agency action as “we’re doing something, look,” a political hot potato smoke screen shift and become harder.
They’ve never actually had to put their names onto a law, so they’re insulated from the failure of the law because it isn’t a law. It’s just a policy that’s sometimes the law, except now it isn’t. “Woopsie. Our bad. Lolz. We’re helping.”
But hey, the brace rule nonsense got vacated, and bump stock buffoonery is done. The talking heads in the media who need to cry about how “this is the worst thing ever since the last worst thing ever, and we will all be killed by bumpstocks tomorrow” will. Attorneys will make a nice tidy profit on unlawful seizure of property suits and the like. And the world will keep turning with a couple policies being a little more grounded in reality by not being policies any longer.
While 5.11 cargo pants may be a bit of a meme in the firearms world, they are more than cargo pants. 5.11 Tactical has expanded its range to include a variety of modern and stylish pants. Beyond the traditional cargo pants, they offer the Defender series, a range of khakis, and intriguing options like the Cepheus Soft Shell Pants.
Cepheus is a bit of an interesting title. After a quick Google search, I found that Cepheus was the king of Aethiopia, and he had to sacrifice his daughter to the god of the sea. It’s also a constellation, and I’d guess that 5.11 Tactical named the pants after the constellation, not the fabled king.
The Cepheus Softshell pants are a new addition to 5.11 Tactical’s lineup. I was fortunate to receive them for free at a 5.11 SHOT Show event, not for review purposes. However, I’ve been wearing them for several months now and have been consistently impressed with their performance.
The Cepheus Softshell – More Than Style
Off the bat, these aren’t dress pants with a tactical edge. They wouldn’t look right with a blazer. They are outdoor pants, first and foremost. These are the kind of pants that are perfect for a hike, kayaking, hunting, or if you take a shooting class and need comfy, durable, and weather-resistant pants.
They are at home on the range, at the waterfront, on the boat, and up the mountain. The Cepheus Soft Shell Pants are designed with a tactical edge, featuring durable materials and weather-resistant properties, making them ideal for outdoor activities.
The Cepheus pants are made from 92% polyester and 8% elastane double weave. What does this mean to you? It means they are lightweight at only 9 ounces. Second, they stretch and move with you. It’s comfortable to do all sorts of motions, and we’ll talk more about that later. The material provides a soft shell resistance to water that allows it to bead rather than soak in.
The pants come with shoestring clips on the bottom and a button-and-strap design to blouse them to keep things from getting up there. This helps keep out bugs, sticks, plants, etc. It’s optional but quite handy in the great outdoors.
5.11 produces the Cepheus pants in pecan and black. These are clearly the pecan
Pockets, Pockets, Pockets
They are arguably cargo pants, but not your dad’s cargo pants. They are a bit more subdued in their cargo pocketry. The cargo pockets are placed higher on your pants than normal and feature a subdued, flat design. The pants have some stretch, so they only extend as much as needed. The cargo pocket portion features total security zippers and a flap covering the zipper and pocket.
Speaking of pockets, you have two cargo pockets, two front pockets, a pair of hip pockets just big enough for an AR magazine, two back pockets, and a very deep coin pocket. Pockets, pockets, and more pockets. The front pockets are reinforced for common pocket clips on knives, lights, and concealed mag pouches.
The front pocket fits my S&W 432 UC perfectly. It disappears into my pocket, and the way the pants sit provides awesome concealment for the gun. Something about the design of the pants makes sure it’s not too tight around the gun and avoids displaying the tell-tale shape. The pocket stretches, making it easy to draw the gun, and doesn’t provide much resistance against the draw.
The Cepheus pants provide room and storage for all manner of goodies. This includes guns, fishing gear, EDC gear, and beyond.
Run and Gun With the Cephus Pants
With the Cepheus pants, squatting, climbing, and moving in dynamic ways feel comfortable and natural. I can deliver some serious karate kicks. (If I knew how to do karate kicks.) In reality, doing stuff like loading and unloading a boat, climbing up and down on a truck, or running amok in the great outdoors is comfy and easy. At the range, it’s easy to assume a good kneeling position on the fly. The pants just move with you and provide a crazy amount of comfort.
As it heats up, the soft shell nature doesn’t make them the coolest pants, but they still beat jeans. The cargo pockets and rear pockets are zippered for increased security and to keep you from losing your crap on whatever adventure you dig into. It’s easy to zip and unzip your pockets and retrieve your stuff as needed.
The Cephus pants are an excellent example of the modern 5.11 style of pants. It’s not khaki cargo pants with giant pockets anymore. It’s sleek, modern, and intuitive.
The gun industry is built for Goldilocks. The vast majority of guns are built for the average-sized person. Smaller shooters often feel left out and might not realize that bigger shooters are also left out. The guns that fit us are often considered mistakes, like the M16A2 and its ridiculous length of pull. For me, the majority of handguns are fine, but the placement of the slide lock/release almost never works out for me. It’s the curse of big thumbs.
On the vast majority of handguns, my big thumbs pin the slide lock down when I use an aggressive, thumbs-forward grip. Glocks and SIGs are the worst about it. Guns like the Beretta 92 and CZ 75 series provided me with the sweet relief of a work slide lock, but they are few and far between. I tried for years to solve the problem myself.
Let’s see. I’ve tried moving my thumbs, altering my grip, and more, but none of it ever felt natural. I felt like I was giving up control over the gun in some cases. In other cases, I couldn’t get the grip to stick when I began introducing draws, reloads, and other dynamic shooting events. I figured my big thumbs were a curse until I met Rick Hogg, owner of War Hogg Tactical.
Solving the Big Thumbs Problem
Rick is a 29-year special operations veteran and currently a firearms instructor. He teaches classes around the country, and I happened to find myself in one of his Red Dot Courses. He teaches and prefers a slide lock reload. During our speed reload portion of the glass he noticed me having issues with getting the slide to lock to the rear for my reloads.
In about five seconds, he altered my grip and had my support hand just slightly change its position on the grip. Suddenly, the slide lock worked for me. My support hand protected the slide lock from my firing hand thumb. My grip remained high, my firing thumb fell into a natural position, and nothing felt awkward.
Traditionally, my support sat just a hair in front of the slide lock on a Glock 19 lower parts kit. My thumb naturally fell on the slide lock. With this new grip, the meaty portion of my support hand created a slight pocket for the slide lock to sit and remain uninfluenced by the thumb of my firing hand.
He worked on teaching me how to build that into my presentation by showing me a consistent way to wrap my support hand around the grip. We found a constant trigger point that allowed my hand to flow rearward around the grip and find the right position every time.
He also kept me accountable for when I messed it up, not in a rude way, but in a hey-fix-it way. If and when I messed up a reload I had to stop, lock the slide to the rear manually, and conduct a slide lock reload. I quickly learned that my big thumbs weren’t a curse but merely a minor obstacle to work around.
A Work In Progress
What’s the big deal with the slide not locking rearward? First, you might not realize the gun is empty. You get a click instead of a bang, and now you’re wasting time. When the slide locks rearward, you get both a tactile and visual sign that the gun is empty. Using the slide lock is also a much faster way to reload than doing the old slingshot.
I admittedly slipped here and there and still do. However, I saw a massive increase in my speed reload times. Not having to work the slide is a godsend for increasing speed. I learned a bit more than just how to position my thumbs. I learned a lot about how to make the support hand work for me and refined my technique for getting the gun back in action.
Like everything in the gun world, it’s a work in progress, but a slight alteration of my grip has made my life much easier. I was shooting a Glock earlier today, and for what feels like the first time ever, the slide locked to the rear. My big thumbs didn’t pin down Glock’s micro-sized slide lock.
If there are two things to take away from this article it’s that a slight grip change may help my other big-handed brethren, and go out and train. Even if it’s a fundamentals class, you are likely to learn something. I did a pistol red dot fundamentals course and I improved my reload speed. You don’t know what you don’t know, and sometimes even the slightest improvement can evade you without the watchful eye of a skilled instructor.
Title Image: A photo of Danish Royal Guards I took on my trip to Copenhagen years ago.
“America’s Rifle,” the AR-15, has also been at home in many other countries since it first became an entity during the early 1960s. Internationally, if not made and sold by American defense contractors like Colt Defense or FN, a Canadian company formerly known as “Diemaco” and better known today as “Colt Canada” is probably the supplier—at least in the NATO sphere of influence. Colt Canada has made and delivered weapons to several Western European NATO countries, including Denmark. The Danes first adopted their M-16-derived C7A1s in 1995, replacing their former battle rifle, the HK G3.
The C7 and Danish C7A1
A wheel of Colt Canada C7A1s with ELCAN C79 optics at the Danish KrigsmuseetA close-up of a Danish C7A1
Colt Canada’s most notable rifle and carbine products revolve around the 5.56mm NATO C7 and C8. The C7 is essentially a license-built M-16, while the C8 is the carbine equivalent. The original C7 dates back to the early 1980s and comes from a similar timeline as the original American M-16A2. In fact, the C7 was heavily influenced by the M-16A1E1 prototype, which was a precursor to the M-16A2 in the United States.
The C7 adopted many of the features found on the M-16A2, such as the longer buttstock and updated A2 handguards. Most importantly, it also took the thicker and heavier M-16A2 20-inch barrel profile with the now-standard 1:7 rifling twist made to stabilize the 62-grain M855 / SS109 5.56 NATO standard cartridge.
On the flip side, the C7’s designers retained the original M-16A carry-handle upper receiver, which has a simplified rear-sight assembly compared to the M-16A2 pattern upper receiver. In the same vein, the C7 keeps the M-16A1’s selector/safety scheme consisting of “Safe, Semi, and Full-Auto,” unlike the “burst” function on the third position of the M-16A2’s selector.
The C7A1 is an updated version of the original fixed-carry handle C7 and is the specific focus of this article since it’s the rifle the Danish military fielded in the mid-1990s. The Danes dubbed it the Gevær M/95. The most important difference between the C7 and C7A1 is the latter’s unique flat-top upper receiver with its own rail derived from the popular Weaver-rail pattern.
The C7A1’s upper receiver rail predates the now-standard Picatinny M-1913 rail, and colloquially, this older rail is also known as the “Colt Canada rail” or “Diemaco rail.”
Gevær M/10 Replaces the Gevær M/95 / C7A1s
Readers might be interested to learn that beginning in 2010, the full-size Gevær M/95 / C7A1s were replaced by the Gevær M/10 (Colt Canada C8 IUR carbine). The majority of the remaining stock is now under the purview of the Royal Danish Life Guards (Livgarden) and the Danish Home Guard (HJV).
The Danish Livgarden
The Danish Royal Life Guards (Den Kongelige Livgarde) is a military unit that dates back centuries, founded in the year 1658. One of the specialized units within the Danish Livgarde is the Vagtkompagniet—or the Danish Royal Guard company. This unit is specifically tasked with permanently keeping the peace over some of Copenhagen’s most important royal and national heritage sites, including the Amalienborg Palace, Kastellet (the old 5-sided citadel on the harbor), Rosenborg Castle/garrison of the Livgarde (also in Copenhagen), and the garrison of Høvelte.
The Royal Guard will also provide watch over other Danish palaces outside of Copenhagen as needed. The Royal Guard are the Danish equivalent of the bearskin headwear and red-clad sentries that stand guard outside Buckingham Palace or St. James in the UK in that both guard royal palaces.
Unlike their British counterparts, the Royal Guard is made up of mostly conscript soldiers. The Danish Royal Guard do wear a ceremonial uniform, typically consisting of a dark blue tunic with lighter blue pants and a bearskin hat of their own style. On special occasions the Danish Guard also wears a bright-red tunic. Equally ceremonial are the Colt Canada C7A1s they carry.
The C7A1 And The Danish Royal Guard
A group of Danish Royal Guards holding their Gevær M/95s Colt Canada C7A1s. If you look closely they have detachable carry-handles, a white sling and the short 9-round magazines. Image source: Wikipedia
The C7A1 rifles carried on duty while keeping the peace at the various royal houses and palaces differ from a standard Danish military C7A1 as the rifles on guard duty include detachable carry handles specifically designed to fit the Colt Canada pattern railed upper receivers. With their carry handles, Guard rifles differ from the rest of the Danish C7A1s which typically include a distinctive standardized ELCAN C79 optic instead.
Royal Guard rifles also have bright white ceremonial slings installed for decorative purposes. Sometimes, the rifles may be seen with attached American-designed M7 bayonets. But one of the most distinctive features of the Royal Guard’s rifle is the specially-made ceremonial 9-round rifle magazine. These give the weapons a flush and trim look and are loaded with 5.56mm NATO cartridges.
Following security concerns during terror attacks in Copenhagen in 2015, Royal Guards also carry fully-loaded 30-round STANAG magazines on their person. But they’re concealed so as to not disrupt their ceremonial uniforms and style.
The Takeaway
Dear reader, if you follow my work, you might consider that this piece is slightly different from most of what I write here. And it’s true, but I’ve had the chance to spectate the Danish Royal Guard on duty while visiting Amalienborg Palace in Copenhagen some years back.
Without getting too off-topic here, Europe is fascinating simply due to how full of history its streets and capitals are. Seeing the Danish Royal Guard in person is simply a different experience for me. The guards’ Colt Canada C7A1 / Geværs M/95 made an impression on me because I’d have expected that they carry something more archaic, like a Krag-Jørgensen bolt-action rifle and not a relatively modern M-16 derivative.
After all, regardless of furniture or configurations, the AR-15 is a fact of daily life for many of us shooters here in the United States. Because it’s commonplace, it’s easy to take for granted as an “everyday firearm” that isn’t anything special or exotic. That’s why seeing them protecting palaces and royalty just hits a little differently.
Besides the old-meets-new aspect of this old military corps from Denmark guarding their monarchy with the essential modern rifle, it was also alluring to view the mundane turn regal in a faraway land.
It’s all because of Flux Defense. All of it. What’s it? Well, everything regarding this entire article. First off, they showed that converting a traditional handgun into a PDW can be done effectively, efficiently, and without compromising the gun’s capability. It interested me in the idea of a modern civilian PDW, and I’ve been doing a series on the concept. It was also the Flux Defense Facebook page that introduced me to the SIG MP-320. The MP-320 is not just another grip module from SIG. It’s a unique and radical deviation from the norm, barely advertised or discussed, which piqued my interest.
SIG makes many grip modules, and so do many other companies. However, the Flux Defender Raider series stands out as more than just fancy grip modules. It offers a PDW-sized platform with a spring-loaded brace or stock, a spare magazine holder, and an optics mount. The innovative design of the Flux Raider is a testament to the company’s creativity, and when I saw the MP-320, I couldn’t help but get excited about the enhanced capabilities it brings to the table.
What’s the MP-320
The MP-320 is a grip module that requires you to add your P320 FCU and a complete slide. It’s not a firearm and doesn’t require an FFL transfer. The MP-320 isn’t like any other SIG OEM grip module; instead, like the Flux Raider, it aims to convert your P320 into a big, braced pistol. Into a Personal Defense Weapon, if you will. The MP320 is a grip module, complete with a brace and a top cover that encloses the slide and allows you to add an optic, light, etc, to your firearm.
The MP-320 from SIG aims to turn your P320 into a fairly large subgun. The rear portion of the grip module has a 1913 rail, which makes it easy to attach stocks, sling holders, etc. With an MP-320, you get an AR-type charging handle that connects to a new custom backplate that comes with the MP-320. The system provides a fairly sleek and slick design that offers you plenty of accessorization and converts how the pistol handles.
It’s still a pistol, but it’s a really big one. SIG is selling the MP-320 as a kit. You get the grip module and cover, as well as the PCB brace, charging handle adapter, a 30-round magazine, and even the new SIG ROMEO5 Gen 2. The package will cost 600 dollars, and you’ll have to provide your own slide and barrel. SIG also produced some six-inch threaded barrels to make suppressor use easier, selling for 200 dollars.
Why Haven’t You Heard of the MP-320
The MP-320 was announced three weeks ago, but why haven’t you heard of it? Why hasn’t SIG’s new grip module PDW conversion hit the front page of firearm blogs across the net? Good question. It’s probably because SIG has done nothing to advertise it. It’s not even listed on their website. In fact, you only see it mentioned in one SIG YouTube video.
It’s not even on the main SIG Sauer YouTube channel, but the SIG Academy channel. As of this writing, it sits at a mere 59K views. Also, you can’t purchase it online. It’s only available for sale at the SIG Experience Center. This is where we get into something that’s likely to frustrate some readers.
SIG only plans to produce 800 of these systems. They only produced 200 of the six-inch barrels. Once those 800 are gone, they are gone. This is a bit like the MCX TACOPS and MCX Surge. Once they are gone, SIG will not make any more of them. Why? That’s a great question.
Maybe it’s due to the brace issue? Maybe they will only produce 800 of this version and then produce another version that’s less exclusive? I’m not really sure what SIG plans. The MP-320 seems to be a limited-use item, and maybe it’s just niche enough that it would never demand massive sales.
Better than the Flux?
Comparisons will be immediately drawn to the Flux, which is fair. But is one better than the other? It’s tough to tell without a side-by-side test, but I don’t think it’s a necessary comparison. The MP-320 is larger and heavier than the Flux Raider and doesn’t seem to have the goal of being concealable. The MP-320 and the Flux are a bit like the MP5 and the MP5K. They have different purposes, although they are similar.
Overall, I think the Flux Raider is a bit better thought out and more feature-filled, but it’s interesting to see SIG get into the PDW game in such a limited manner. Will they advertise the MP-320? Are the current buyers beta testers for a bigger product? I can’t say, but SIG seems to be mum on the MP-320 series.
I was first introduced to cane guns by James Bond, specifically in the movie The World is Not Enough. It’s worth mentioning that the very first James Bond movie was a television film made in 1954. This often-forgotten film also featured a cane gun. I always thought the idea was interesting and fascinating, but I had no idea there was a fairly rich history of cane guns, and at one point, they were somewhat popular options. Popular enough to be produced by some big names in the firearms industry.
What’s a Cane Gun?
A cane gun is not just a walking stick but a concealed firearm. It’s akin to a cane sword but far more practical. These guns were designed to offer the urban gentleman a stylish walking stick that could also serve as ballistic protection. Walking sticks and canes were not always tools for those with mobility issues. They were once fashionable accessories for the Victorian-era gentleman.
Rock Island Armory
A well-made cane is naturally an excellent melee weapon. In fact, there are historical martial arts focused on using a cane for self-defense. The problem with using the cane as a melee weapon is how close you have to get to the threat, and once you involve a knife or even a firearm, you want as much distance as you can get.
Thus, cane guns were born. These guns were concealable, and a well-dressed man didn’t need to ruin the lines of his suit with a revolver. It would be concealed in plane sight but also quick to action. Cane guns were seen as an option to deal with the 1800s city street crime and allow a gentleman to dispatch hoods, aggressive animals, and other threats.
The Rise of the Cane Gun
One of the largest producers of cane guns in the United States was Remington. Remington called these the Dandy Rifle. A dandy was a well-dressed man of the era who always looked impeccable. This was the type who’d carry a cane as a fashionable accessory. Remington’s naming convention was spot on.
Remington employee John Thomas invented the percussion cane gun and received a patent for the weapon in 1859. The first Remington cane guns were percussion-operated, .31 caliber designs. They were black powder guns, and the firing mechanism was hidden until needed. The barrel was rifled, and the trigger was a simple hidden button that released a striker and fired the weapon. These were not muzzle-loaded, but loaded from the handle side.
These original Remington cane guns looked like gentleman’s canes and were discreet. They were stylish of the era and even lighter than most canes. The guns were produced for only a few years, and roughly 500 were manufactured. Once the Civil War kicked off, production went towards rifles and revolvers for the war effort.
After the war, Remington reintroduced their Dandy cane guns, but this time, they used metallic cartridges. Remington produced .22 rimfire and .32 rimfire cane guns with a similar design to the percussion weapon. It was still striker-fired, and a button released the striker to fire the weapon. Some of these were converted to .32 centerfire, but not by Remington.
Beyond Remington
Over the years, several small companies produced a variety of cane guns. They were popular in Europe and the United States. These guns varied quite a bit in size, caliber, and design. They weren’t all rifles, and some very popular British options were .410s. It’s worth noting that most of these chambers are the original two-inch .410-rounds popular for the era’s garden guns.
Some cane guns even featured removable stocks. A stocked weapon is more accurate, but it can’t see a big market for a long-range cane gun. Some of the more clever designs, like the Bean’s cane gun, used a bending design to turn the handle into a stock. The cane gun world wasn’t massive, but plenty of companies tried their hand at the market.
The Modern Cane Gun
The modern era of firearm production is devoid of cane guns due to the NFA. The National Firearms Act creates a registration scheme that classifies machine guns, suppressors, short-barreled rifles, and shotguns as Title 2 weapons. Within the NFA also sits an AOW or any other weapon category. The AOW category includes guns that don’t look like guns. Cane guns fall into this category.
A large majority of the older cane guns are exempt from the NFA due to their age, but not all of them are, so do your research accordingly. I’ve come across some modern cane guns made as expensive, limited production, or even one-off items. One of my favorites is a titanium cane gun that chambers 9mm and is integrally suppressed. I see photos passed around social media, but I struggle to find whoever created it.
These would be very niche items. Unline yesteryear canes aren’t common unless you have a disability that requires one. It’s also a single-shot firearm, so its utility is limited. I imagine accuracy is limited unless you find a way to mount sights. Imagine the drop testing you’d have to do just to make sure it can’t go off as you bump and hit the ground with it for every step!
I can’t say I don’t want one—specifically, a .410 variant with a 3-inch chamber. Buckshot would at least give me a little better chance of hitting something and give me five pellets for a single-shot weapon. I don’t need a cane, but I might one day, and I’d like one chock full of buckshot if that’s an option. Although, I guess I better move to an open-carry state!
The flat-top upper receiver has taken over the AR market. Why wouldn’t it? Optics are the norm these days, and iron sights are a mere backup option. As we know, the flat top upper saw service on the M4. Reportedly, a handful of fixed carry handle M4s exist, but by 1994, the standard m4 used a flat top upper with a detachable iron sight system. That started the slow and eventual takeover of the flat-top upper. The M16A4 swung into action in 1997, and now optics rule. That seems great, but what if I told you the first flat-top upper AR was invented in the late 60s and went by the name of the Colt 656 Sniper?
The Colt 656 didn’t feature the same Picatinny rail we are all used to. Instead, it featured a weaver rail system that was more appropriate to the era. The rail sits relatively high on the rifle, but it’s the true flat-top AR design.
The 656 is a continuation of the Colt 655. The Colt 655 was an attempt to create an M16 sniper. The Colt 655 used a heavy barrel on an M16 platform with a scope mount attached to the carry handle. This rifle was known as the high-profile sniper because of how painfully high the optic sits. The 656 design became known as the low-profile sniper.
The Colt 656 And The Needs Of The Army
The military was in Vietnam; they were prepared for the last war, as usual. Prior to entering Vietnam, sniper programs existed, but they weren’t often very formalized. Snipers were often the best shot in a unit, platoon, squad, etc., and they were given scoped rifles. A lot of the American snipers before Vietnam were self-taught, or maybe an intelligent officer designed a short course before the unit deployed.
The Vietnam War challenged American forces with asymmetric warfare, and the jungles hid the enemy well. A well-trained marksman could pick them off and act as a force multiplier. The United States was set on the M16, and with a need for scoped sniper rifles, Colt smelled a contract in the water. This led Colt to develop the 655 and 656 models.
With the 656, they chopped off the carry handle and attached a weaver rail. Then they mounted a scope mount and finally a scope. The scope of choice seemed to be either a Leatherwood or Realist, and both were variable optics with a 3-9X. The reticles consisted of a simple crosshair reticle and were a second focal plane design.
It appears that a rear sight was built behind the rail for non-scoped use. The front sight features an interesting hooded front sight rather than a set of wings like most AR designs. I’m curious as to why they went that route.
The Search For a Sniper
The Colt 656 and 655 never received military contracts, but were put against three other platforms. The first being a National Match M14 with an LTD War Lab ART Scope. The next was an accurized M-14 with the old M1D Garand M-84 scope. The final weapon being a .30-06 Winchester Model 70 but the optic is unknown.
The test went from July to October 1967, and 84 snipers carried a mix of rifles and used them throughout various patrols, missions, and in combat. The end result was 46 kills and nine wounded with the rifles.
The results were interesting. The M16 was disliked for its lack of accuracy beyond 300 yards, and the Realist scopes were fogging up internally. The M14 with the M84 scope had the same problem with fog. The Model 70 was slow and didn’t offer the firepower they desired. The winner became the National Match with the ART Scope.
Of these guns we know the sniper configuration of the M14 became the M21. We also know the Winchester Model 70 did become a sniper rifle and men like Carlos Hathcock utilized the weapon to excellent effect.
The End of the Colt 656
The Colt 656 flat top sniper rifle suffered the same fate as many of Colt’s M16 variants. It retired to the dustbins of history. There doesn’t seem to be any left, although some very dedicated machinists and AR collectors have produced their own replicas of the Colt 656. The rifle was too advanced for 1967, but a few decades later the flat top would establish the standard for AR, M16, and M4 rifles everywhere.
Today we’ve got David Yamane, author of Gun Curious on the show to discuss his book and his journey into firearms. David also has a YouTube channel at @LightOverHeat
John Slaughter, a man of formidable stature despite his modest height of five foot, six inches, was a living legend. Born in Louisiana in 1841, his true legacy was forged in the Wild West. Slaughter’s life was a tapestry of diverse roles: soldier, a lawman, a cattle baron, a renowned gambler, and a man who wielded the iconic Winchester 1887 shotgun, a weapon that became synonymous with his name.
The Early Life of John Slaughter
Slaughter was a man of action. Even from his early days, he was driven by the desire to make his mark and seek adventure. He enlisted in the Confederacy during the Civil War and served as a soldier. However, with the War’s end and the Confederacy’s fall, he chose to stay in Texas and work as a lawman. It was in Texas that his reputation as a formidable fighter began to take shape. As a Ranger, he confronted the diverse tribes vying for control of the land. He engaged in extensive battles with the Comanche and worked tirelessly to safeguard settlers in the untamed parts of Texas.
Here, he became known as a fearsome gunman. His skill with a rifle and revolver mixed with a cool head under fire earned him a reputation. That reputation, combined with his dark eyes and calm nature, made him a man that wasn’t often trifled with. He also wasn’t a dumb man. In his early life, he learned to speak Spanish, a skill that would serve him well for the rest of his life.
After almost a decade as a Ranger, Mr. Slaughter made his move to cattleman in 1874. He and his brother struck out as cattle drivers. While that doesn’t seem exciting, it involved him transporting cattle through dangerous areas, places rife with bandits, Comanche, and the varied dangers of the western United States. By the late 1870s, he had decided to start a ranch in New Mexico.
Into New Mexico
Since his reputation came from Texas, he became known as Texas John Slaughter, although he was not taken by being called Tex. It was in New Mexico he became quite famous for a violent altercation with a cattle rustler named Barney Gallagher. Gallagher was cheating at poker and Slaughter didn’t take kind to it. He put a .45 in his face, took the pot and left for home.
He got a movie back in the day
Gallagher followed shortly after. At Slaughter’s ranch, he told the foreman that he was there to kill John. The foreman relayed the message. Slaughter rode out to meet the man. Gallagher attacked, shooting and charging from his horse. Slaughter fired one shot, killing the man’s horse. When Gallagher climbed to his feet, he continued to attack, and Slaughter fired a second round, killing the man.
After this, Slaughter became a wanted man. He was arrested but freed due to a lack of evidence. After being freed, he went to Arizona, seeking a new start away from New Mexico.
A Lawman Once More
John Slaughter settled in Arizona and was elected sheriff of Cochise County in 1886. The county was most famous for the Shootout of the O.K. Corral, and while Slaughter took no sides in 1881, he did once warn Ike Clanton off his land, or he’d kill him, and Ike never returned.
As sheriff, the man’s penchant for the Winchester 1887 grew. It was a high-tech weapon for the time. Most shotguns were nothing more than double barrels. The Winchester 1887 offered lawmen a true repeating shotgun. It held five rounds in the tubular magazine and worked much like their rifles. It was a 12-gauge design, and the lever action design made it fairly easy to shoot.
When facing men on horses and moving targets, the scattergun was an excellent choice. A scattergun that fired up to six times before it needed to be reloaded was a devastating weapon and force multiplier. It’s easy to see why Slaughter would carry the weapon and why he was fond of it.
John Slaughter worked to clean the streets of Cochise County with his six-gun and shotgun. He chased the Apache Chief Geronimo. He arrested or killed large portions of the Jack Taylor gang. In a firefight with the gang, a round skimmed his right ear lobe. While he was small in stature, his cool-headed nature and skill with a weapon made him a formidable force. The land of Cochise County fell to domestication under the eyes of John Slaughter and the bead of his Winchester 1887.
The Life and Times of John Slaughter
Sheriff Slaughter passed away in February 1922. He lived a long and exciting life—a hard life, for certain. He had lost a wife and numerous children. Most have never heard of him, and it’s likely it’s because he was not the type to self-aggrandize. He was a quiet but stern man. Likewise, he didn’t seek the glory of men like Earp and Wild Bill. He and his shotgun tamed a violent corner of the West, and for that, he deserves to be remembered.
As we develop as a shooter, recoil changes from a thrill ride to inconvenience. Kick and muzzle flip are fun at first. But as time goes on, we realize that these things get in the way of what matters most—our split and transition times. This doesn’t mean that we’re going to revert to .22 LR for the rest of our lives, as downrange energy is still a major concern. This is where the 5.7mm comes in, and Smith & Wesson has an M&P 5.7 that fits the bill perfectly.
The Smith & Wesson M&P 5.7
In the 90s, FN answered the call with its 5.7x28mm cartridge and the accompanying pistol built to fire it. Reserved to fan lore for close to three decades, both the cartridge and firearm never truly caught on because of their limited availability.
However, that has started to change, and the U.S. market is finally seeing the 5.7 as a legitimate ammo choice. Mainly because Fiocchi has been able to flood dealer shelves with it.
With a newfound trust in ammunition availability, manufacturers started to breathe life into their 5.7 designs once again. The latest comes from Smith & Wesson. On paper, the new pistol is an extension of their famed M&P line. However, once you get your hands on one, it becomes clear that it is anything but.
M&P DNA
With this new handgun being called the M&P 5.7, naturally, a few features were carried over. The most obvious would be the polymer frame with its signature grip contour and texture.
However, because the cartridge is long, the grip is a bit on the wide side to accommodate the oversized magazine. This is compensated for by its thinness. For these reasons, this model does not come with interchangeable backstraps, as few hands will find that this area needs to be extended.
The next most notable family characteristic is its straightened and widened trigger, featuring the newer bow safety in place of the original hinge. Like other late-model M&Ps, it too exhibits a crisp break and rapid reset.
This is extraordinarily valuable on a gun that doesn’t leave the target under recoil. Using a Lyman Digital Trigger Scale, I measured a consistent breaking point at 3 pounds, 10 ounces, which is exceptional for a production pistol.
Although this serves as an excellent standalone safety, Smith& Wesson also offers the 5.7 with an ambidextrous thumb safety should you prefer additional assurance. This would complement the ambidextrous slide stop and reversible magazine catch for the left-handed shooter. So, if you are a southpaw, there is no need to make this additional control a sticking point.
Running an Optic on the M&P 5.7
Depending on when you started working with M&Ps, the slide cut on the 5.7 will either be an improvement or just standard equipment. I think it’s more important on this pistol than any other chambering because the lack of recoil makes it easy to keep the dot within the optic’s window while the gun fires.
This is one of the hardest transitional points for shooters switching from irons to glass. So, this setup is an optimal bridge between the two sighting systems.
By removing the cover, I found that this pistol could directly accept a Shield RMS2 sight. The RMS2 is an excellent choice for something firing this cartridge. The 5.7’s manageability means that an oversized optic window wouldn’t be necessary to track the dot between shots. This allows for the use of streamlined red-dot units that keep the overall silhouette of the gun sleek and carry less of a chance of impeding slide function.
Besides, its idiotproof “always-on” technology, coupled with auto light sensing, flattens the learning curve. This lets me get to the range without having to read up on anything other than zeroing, which is also easy guesswork.
Lastly, I was a big fan of how low it sat. It allowed me to run standard sights and keep the presentation that I’ve drilled into a habit.
TEMPO Timing
One aspect that is refreshingly new on the 5.7 is the TEMPO system. Although this cartridge might be easy on the wrist, its high operating pressure is sadistic to actions. Therefore, a delay system must be put in place to keep the breech from cracking open when the pressures are at their highest.
There are a few different ways to do this, but nothing is more effective than gas operation. The only trouble is the space requirements for all the components that comprise conventional designs.
Smith & Wesson realized that by doubling up on the barrel, this could be accomplished in a way that’s smaller than previous systems. Since the bore diameter is only .224 inches, this leaves enough room to sleeve the barrel itself with a shroud.
The barrel then rotates within this shroud after the bullet passes the gas port drilled into the barrel, unlocking a pair of lugs and allowing the fired case to be extracted and ejected. All the while, this rotation works to soak up some of the felt recoil, adding to the pistol’s overall shootability.
Firing With Fiochi
Fiocchi was gracious enough to send us all three of its current 5.7 loads for our testing, each with unique properties. The 35-grain ammo is built with a frangible projectile, opening closer-range practice on steel targets. This is new to me, for sure.
With a few hundred of these at my disposal, I also decided to pack a pair of Caldwell IPSC targets. The company’s 40-grain load features a tipped hollow-point projectile, making it ideal for long-range engagements.
Lastly, the 62-grain variant is loaded to subsonic velocities, making it perfect for suppressed shooting. With that in mind, I screwed a Banish 22 can to the end of my test pistol and was both surprised and delighted that it did not obstruct either sight picture. With the gun now fully kitted out, I set out to see how she ran.
I started by zeroing the pistol at 15 yards with the 40-grain ammunition. My initial thoughts were that this gun performed exactly as advertised. It felt like shooting a .22 LR, and with the can attached, it wasn’t too far off from that report either.
Stealing the term “Hollywood quiet” from Silencer Central best describes what that report was reduced to when using the subs. Honestly, that phrase even takes away from this setup. Movies usually use a chirp or whistle effect to simulate what they think a suppressed firearm sounds like.
Firing subsonic 5.7 through the Banish 22 was even quieter. So much so that when I pulled the trigger, I was able to hear the internal hammer drop as well as the complete cycling of the action. As I started with paper targets, the only real noise I experienced was the rounds crashing into the dirt after passing through the cardboard backer.
Ringing Steel
I needed to generate my own noise. So, I swapped in the steel targets and addressed them with a combined 45 rounds or two magazines worth 5.7. Landing two hits in less than half a second was no trouble at all. Likewise, double taps on each target were had in as little as 0.76 seconds.
Something S&W doesn’t disclose with the 5.7 is that you’re going to attract a bit of attention. As I wrapped up my final leg of testing, I was joined by a buddy and his 11-year-old son. They had heard the barrage of tings and caught a glimpse of what I was shooting.
Always interested in others’ opinions, I let both send some rounds downrange at a 66% Caldwell target that I had now moved out to 100 yards. Dad put about half a magazine’s worth into the center of the steel—with no hold over, mind you.
A touch recoil shy, I offered it to his son, knowing he’d enjoy shooting it. Leaving him the last five shots, he put three of them onto the plate. Not bad for the second time he’s ever shot a pistol.
The Upshot
I wrapped things up with a quick field strip and oiling of the M&P 5.7. It was a bit dirtier than other pistols I fired that day. However, I can easily attribute that to the higher round count as well as the suppressor use.
Nonetheless, it ran without any issues, and I have no reason to believe it wouldn’t continue to do so for another several hundred rounds. Smith & Wesson has done an excellent job of bringing another 5.7 option to the American market. And at an MSRP of $700, it’s an easy buy as well.
For those who are on the hunt for something in the ultra-capacity niche that is easy to shoot and ridiculously accurate, this is the gun for you. Just don’t expect the thrill ride of something nearly flying out of your hands when you press the trigger.
Arguably, the most important screw on a standard double-action revolver is its yoke screw. These screws tend to sit just above the revolver’s trigger towards the front of the cylinder on the bottom portion of the frame. Their primary job is to function as a set screw that retains the revolver’s entire cylinder assembly.
In fact, loosening this screw is the first step to stripping down a revolver to clean it. Likewise, keeping it tensioned ensures the revolver’s cylinder remains securely in place. Depending on the design of the revolver and its specific yoke screw, the screw can also be enhanced to stay put to help keep the cylinder in place.
Furthermore, regularly checking the yoke screw’s tension is an obligatory part of revolver ownership and smooth shooting experiences. You don’t want to end up like that YouTuber who claimed the Taurus 856 Executive Grade revolver he was reviewing had a “catastrophic” malfunction when that gun’s cylinder fell off the frame because its screw was loose.
In fairness, we all have to start somewhere, and revolvers aren’t like modern guns (which hardly use screws to hold things in place, maybe except for grip panels if applicable). But the lesson to take away is that whether a revolver costs $300 or $3000, its yoke screw needs to be periodically looked at to ensure it’s snug.
Taurus’ New Revolver
Last week, I picked up Taurus’ new 692 Executive Grade revolver so I could shoot it and write about it in the near future. This revolver was one of the brand-new products that Taurus showcased in its booth during the 2024 NRA Annual Meetings and Exhibits held in Dallas only a few weeks ago.
Besides being a brand new product, the Taurus 692 Executive Grade revolver is the company’s fourth revolver to receive its premium “Executive Grade” treatment, following the Taurus 856, Taurus 605, and Taurus Judge. At the time of this writing, I have yet to fire any rounds through this new revolver, though I am looking forward to doing so.
A close-up on the yoke screw on the new Heritage Manufacturing Roscoe revolver. Heritage Manufacturing is Taurus’ sister company and the Roscoe 5-shot compact revolvers offered with either 2″ or 3″ barrels were also brand new product launches at this year’s NRAAM show.
What does this new release from Taurus have to do specifically with revolver yoke screws? Well…
One of the most distinctive and unique features of the 692 Series is the fact that it ships with a spare 7-shot cylinder whose charge holes are bored out for the 9mm Luger cartridge. So, the shooter is able to shoot three types of ammunition through the 692: .357 Magnum, .38 Special and 9mm Luger.
Perhaps the neatest detail found in this revolver, I think, is its “cylinder retention system.” Taurus engineers implemented a creative “quick-detach” solution and elevated the meager yoke screw retention system to the next level.
Any time a 692 owner wants to change out cylinders to swap calibers, they only need to depress the spring-loaded plunger to release the cylinder’s yoke from the revolver’s frame and then simply swap the cylinders. There is no tedious screw to tighten and loosen when changing cylinders, nor does it require any tools.
Finally, with this slick implementation, the concern for monitoring the tension screw disappears. However, there is a smaller screw on the left side of the assembly that I can best describe as working similarly to the special screw found on a traditional 1911 mag catch assembly (opposite of the button).
A close-up of the Taurus 692 Executive Grade’s cylinder release plunger which brilliantly replaces the traditional cylinder screw. The regular screw immediately to its left helps hold the sideplate to the frame. And yes, it’s still a good idea to keep an eye on it from time to time.The 692 Executive Grade’s cylinder release plunger as viewed from the opposite side with its capture spring. Look at any standard 1911 mag catch and you’ll see how they’re similar.
Standard on Taurus 692 Series Revolvers
To be clear, this feature is standard on all Taurus 692 series revolvers, not just the recent Executive Grade model. Besides the added convenience and ease of use the special QD plunger affords, it also gives these revolvers a futuristic Space Age feel that sets them apart from the traditional regular yoke screw.
While I have yet to officially shoot and review this revolver, I got a good impression from the models at the NRAAM show floor in Dallas. That good impression continued when I picked up my own unit and took it home. It’s just that understanding how crucial the job of a revolver’s yoke screw is and seeing the way they implemented it with its unique mechanism was just really neat and wonderful.
In the end, it’s good to stop and smell the roses every once in a while and appreciate the small details.
The Taurus 692 Executive Grade in all its glory. Whether you’re shooting .357 Magnum, .38 Special or 9mm Luger the revolver holds seven cartridges and I found it very reminiscent of my beloved S&W 686 series L-frame wheelguns.
If you ask a room full of gun guys and gals what the first assault rifle was, you’ll get chimes of “STG 44.” You might also hear a minority shout, “Fedorov Avtomat.” You can sit back and watch them argue. If you want to give them something to think about, bring up the Ribeyrolles 1918, which is arguably the first true assault rifle if we use the current definition we established for assault rifles.
That definition is a select-fire rifle with a detachable magazine that fires an intermediate cartridge. The Fedorov Avtomat was a select-fire infantry rifle, but it chambered the 6.5x50mmSR Arisaka cartridge, which is not quite intermediate. The STG 44 fits the bill, but as the name implies, it was created in 1944. Now, the Ribeyrolles 1918 also fits the bill and came almost two decades prior.
Arguably, the STG 44 won the first successful assault rifle category and gave birth to the modern world of assault rifles we now know. However, it wasn’t an original idea.
The Origin of the Ribeyrolles 1918
The Ribeyrolles 1918 was the brainchild of Paul Ribeyrolles, a Frenchman who was the plant manager of the Clement-Gladiator motor vehicle and bicycle factory. During World War I, France’s wartime economy necessitated the conversion of everyday factories into weapons production centers.
Rock Island Auction
Clement-Gladiator had already produced the infamous automatic rifle, the Chauchat, for the French Army. Ribeyrolles helped produce the Chauchat and later helped develop the gas-operated semi-automatic Fusil Automatique Modèle 1917 for the French forces at the tail end of the war. Paul Ribeyrolles defined the idea of forward thinking. He was a trailblazer and a well-known one at that.
Rock Island Auction
World War I and trench warfare established that easily controllable, rapid-firing weapons were necessary for close-range combat. The big bolt-action guns weren’t great for clearing rooms. This led to the development of submachine guns, and the Ribeyrolles 1918 aimed to fall between the submachine gun and the battle rifle.
What We Know About the Ribeyrolles 1918
There is very little information on this Ribeyrolles 1918. We only have one photo of it, and it doesn’t seem like any surviving examples exist. Maybe some French attic has one stored unknown to the occupants, but that seems unlikely. What we know about the Ribeyrolles 1918 is that the rifle was a select fire design. It has a three-position safety: the rearmost position is semi-auto, the middle position is safe, and the forward position is full-auto.
The rifle operated on a straight blowback principle and fired a 8x33mm cartridge. This would have scored on the intermediate scale. Ribeyrolles scaled down the .351 Winchester Self-Loading cartridge to create the 8x33mm cartridge. The bullet was from an 8mm Lebel. The magazine held twenty-five rounds and was detachable.
Forgotten Weapons
The blowback action promised lots of recoil and forced the weapon to be exceptionally heavy. Blowback guns require hefty bolts to keep the action closed until the bullet leaves the barrel. Trying to use a blowback action with a rifle cartridge is tough.
It works for handguns but doesn’t do well with the power generated from a rifle. At 11.25 pounds, it weighed as much as the Fusil Automatique Modèle 1917 but fired an intermediate cartridge rather than a full-powered battle rifle cartridge. The gun measured out to about 43 inches in total.
Testing the Carabine Mitrailleuse 1918
The Ribeyrolles 1918 was presented to the French twice. Once before the war and once after the war. In both presentations, the rifle had severe reliability issues, and it often jammed and failed to operate. Additionally, the world really wasn’t ready for an assault rifle. It was a weapon without a purpose. The French saw it as too unwieldy and cumbersome to be a submachine gun, and the 8x33m cartridge only reached out to 400 yards.
In this era, the full-powered rifle rounds dominated, and the French watched the range they provided. The Ribeyrolles 1918 simply didn’t fit into their idea of how to arm a military force. Plus, this introduced another logistical concern. They’d have to issue cartridges for handguns and submachine guns, full-power battle rifles, and the Ribeyrolles 1918. Thus, the weapon has entered the realm of obscurity.
It’s most certainly a fascinating idea and was way ahead of its time, but sadly, its use is regulated to Battlefield 1
As far as training with firearms is concerned, shot timers are essential tools in the repertoire of both the serious student and trainer. Much like the whistle hanging around the neck of any field sports coach, the shot timer might as well be the whistle in the world of firearms. These days, shot timers are evolving with the latest technology and can connect via blue-tooth and talk to apps on cell phones or tablets for score keeping and time management. Hell, today, the latest and greatest devices can even recharge exactly like a modern phone.
However, we mustn’t forget about the two classic workhorses in this arena: the Competition Electronics Pocket Pro 2 and the PACT Club Timer III. Both of these shot timers are fast approaching the threshold of becoming old school, but in reality, they’re still perfectly viable and useful. I use both on a regular basis, and I like them for different reasons.
Competition Electronics Pocket Pro 2 Shot Timer
Though now discontinued, the Pocket Pro 2 is one of the most popular “classic” shot timers. Even today, it’s not hard to find them in the range bags of many shooters. The Pocket Pro 2 was the updated model that succeeded Competition Electronic’s original Pocket Pro (which ironically can still be purchased brand new).
Pocket Pro 2s remind me of my childhood when many toys and games ran off 9-volt alkaline batteries. These devices still have that quartz display screen and late 1990s chunky aesthetic of the era. There’s a spring-loaded belt clip on the back of the device so that one can hang the Pocket Pro 2 off their belt or pocket while training alone.
Using the Pocket Pro 2
Navigating through the settings and controls is also reminiscent of sending text messages on pre-smartphone devices. Likewise, there’s a bit of a learning curve to get the hang of it. But it’s not too bad once the user understands its rhythm. The black/green display itself is also reminiscent of the Texas Instruments Ti-34 calculator I used to bring to school.
Settings for timer start delays and par times are easily adjustable along with the device’s shot sensitivity, loudness, and brightness. I figured out early on that it’s best to run the display as dark as possible to conserve battery life. And honestly, when shooting outside during normal daylight hours, it has never been an issue.
The ability to adjust the loudness of the beep is much appreciated, especially when working and dry-firing inside the house, where normal shot timer beeps can be deafeningly loud (especially without hearing protection).
Durability-wise, my Pocket Pro 2 has generally held up okay, and I’ve never been exceedingly rough on mine. But at some point, I did have a failure in which the soldering between the battery terminal pad and the wire that powered the electronics gave out. A good friend of mine was nice enough to re-solder the connection and bolster it. I haven’t had any issues with it since he repaired it.
The Pocket Pro 2 has now been succeeded by the Competition Electronics Pro Timer and the Pro Timer BT (Bluetooth). Mine works fine, and I have no plans to retire it anytime soon.
PACT Club Timer III
The PACT Club Timer III is probably the most direct competitor to the Pocket Pro 2. And this shot timer works almost the same as its rival, save for some subtle differences. For example, the Club Timer III also uses the basic low-tech “calculator screen” display and runs off a 9-volt battery. Its external shell is also fairly voluminous, and it has a clunky body, although it’s more rotund and “aerodynamic.”
This device also comes with a handy spring-loaded clip, which makes it easier to hang off a belt or pocket for self-directed training sessions. Anyone who can successfully navigate the Pocket Pro 2 timer should also be able to navigate the Club Timer III settings just as easily.
Pocket Pro 2 vs Club Timer III: The Differences
General display screens of the Pocket Pro 2 (top) and the Club Timer III (bottom). While I do think the Club Timer III’s main display is cleaner, users do have the choice of showing only the total time and nothing else with the Pocket Pro 2 (makes the most sense in competition).
In many ways, comparing these shot timers is no different than making a classic Coke-vs-Pepsi comparison because both are so similar in form and function. But there are some differences that should be taken into account. The most obvious one is that the settings on the Pocket Pro 2 are far more user-adjustable than the settings on the Club Timer III.
For example, users can adjust the “beep’s” sound level on the Pocket Pro 2 from very soft to quite loud, while the “beep” on the Club Timer III is immutable—and loud. Without hearing protection, the Club Timer III’s beep can be as loud as a smoke alarm and honestly unpleasant to work with indoors.
Similarly, the Club Timer III’s “delayed start” time is fixed at 3 seconds, while the user can adjust it to whatever time they want with the Pocket Pro 2. I work with the Club Timer III on a regular basis, and the fixed three-second delay time has never been a hindrance.
Build
Externally, the Pocket Pro 2 resembles a 1990s boxy Mercedez (or a giant pager), while the curvier Club Timer III resembles a Volkswagen Beetle. Both have the same footprint, but the Pocket Pro 2 isn’t as wide.
The Club Timer III edges out the Pocket Pro 2 with its bigger display. Not only is it physically larger, but it’s also easier to see pertinent information like “DTFS” (draw to first shot), number of shots fired, and splits than it is with the Pocket Pro 2.
Sure, the latter will also show this information on its main screen. But I think the Club Timer III’s presentation is simply cleaner.
Price
The honest truth is that, currently, the PACT Club Timer III is probably the best deal overall, objectively—especially when it comes to dollars and cents. Competition Electronics has discontinued the Pocket Pro 2 and replaced it with its successor, the Pro Timer. However, the newer Pro-Timer retails for nearly $170, while the Club Timer III seems to retail for nearly $40 less.
These days, the best way to find a deal on a Pocket Pro 2 is to look out for a used one. But just because they stopped making them doesn’t mean people stopped shooting with them.
The Takeaway
Frankly, a shooter can’t go wrong with either shot timer as far as basic units for shooting, training, and practicing are concerned—even in 2024. Sure, the market offers more expensive and sophisticated shot timers today. But even these older designs, like the PACT Club Timer III or the Competition Electronics Pocket Pro 2, still perform the basic functions of any shot timer just fine and provide the shooter with the information they need.
Moreover, 9-volt batteries can still be found in almost any type of retail/grocery store today. So, their fuel source isn’t hard to find either.
The use of neither will restrain anyone from having a productive training session overall. Personally, these days I’ve been keeping my Pocket Pro 2 indoors for dry-fire since I can control the volume and I leave the Club Timer III in the range bag for live-fire.
