Search results for query: *

x

I don't own one, but do shoot (cowboy action) with a number of guys who use them. I've not seen or heard of any problems with beyond the odd part failure you will likely see in any weapon used is a similar fashion. The only reason I don't have one is I prefer to shoot an exposed hammer gun.

Perhaps an early example of "fake news"?

Samuel Colt died in 1862. That would give him roughly 11 years experience with his basic 1851 design. I've been shooting that same design for roughly 55 years. I say thumb pressure.:)

I would expect nothing less from a genetic throwback inbred hillbilly. Oops, forgot which forum we're on. dremel tools + firearms = makes my head hurt. However, on the bright side, they're not my weapons. :evil:

Here's a thought, call 'em and ask. I would.

I just remembered one other thing I do while altering the rear sight notch. I will make windage corrections as I enlarge and lower the rear sight notch. Keep in mind, these changes are made gradually and shooting test groups after each change.

dd, you know as well as I that if you are to maintain a proper sight picture, making the rear "sight" notch deeper won't make any difference. You must either lower the rear sight or raise the front in order to lower the point of impact. Take note of what dd has done to the rear sight notch...

Sidnely, the only real limit on how light can you go regarding powder charge is you MUST have contact between projectile and propellant. Even a very light load can cause irreparable damage to a BP weapon if there is an air gap in the load. It matters not one bit if the propellant is real black...

Filing the rear "sight" notch deeper will only change how your sight picture appears, NOT the point of impact.

Hand file only, small changes only, then shoot a group or two. A little will go a very long way. I know this can be a bit tedious but it's the only way to get it right the first time. Besides, it's very difficult to "un-file" something. Be sure that when filing you keep the top of the...

damoc is correct, thumb pressure only.

After nearly 30 years, I switched from an 870 to a Super Nova w/pistol grip stock for a cruiser gun. Performance at and beyond 100 yards with slugs and excellent results with 00 sold me. Never regretted the change.

Your observation is spot on Craig. What many fail to recognize is even survival shooting or what ever you care to call it, still builds upon basic principals of marksmanship and that includes accuracy both in the shooter and his equipment. My last duty weapon, a well prepared 1911, was capable...

Precisely Mike, I've never seen a hand gun proof target shot at 25 yards, not saying they don't exist just that in 55 years of competition I've never seen one. All handgun proof targets I've seen have been shot at 50 yards/meters. Almost any decent handgun can shoot a decent group at 25 yards...

I've had several Rugers that were a bit tight where the barrel threads in to the frame. Each and every one was corrected by shooting a box or two of full house jacked loads. You shouldn't have to screw around like that, but then what better remedy than shooting. Before you buy into the idea...

Intended use has nothing what ever to do with accuracy. The gold standard has always been 50 yard for hand guns. An accurate hand gun should be able to shoot 2" groups at 50 yards all day long. Your intended use may not require that kind of precision, but accuracy is accuracy period.

Shotgun slugs and buckshot will both ricochet. We were trained to use that very fact to our advantage in certain situations. Both will ricochet not only off hard surfaces but also off of bare dirt and sod (grass) surfaces. They will continue with sufficient force to take the legs from under a...

With documentation as I recall, around $450. Like I said, wish now I'd grabbed it. BTW, back in the day when I was only a bit more seasoned than rookie green, I carried a 6" M19 with a bobbed hammer. In hind sight, that was probably not a good decision for a uniformed duty weapon.