John S. Farnam: Defensive Handgunning

[Buck Snort]

I just completed Farnam's book on Defensive Handgunning (2nd Edition) and there are some statements he makes in it that have gained my curiosity. To wit: 1.) "Revolvers are tempermental and not particularly durable............revolvers are not tolerant of dirty environments, nor are they designed for heavy use. Armorer level maintenance is required every five thousand rounds or so." 2.) "Autoloaders are designed for military use and are thus robust and tolerant of dirty and rough environments as well as lack of maintenance and heavy use. Armorer level maintenance is rarely required."
3.) The weaver stance is best (for autoloaders). Because of the shape of the grip and other factors the isosceles stance is awkward and difficult to correctly assume." 4.) "Magazine springs can fatigue when magazines are left fully charged for long periods." 5.) "....extensive use of ammunition with unjacketed lead bullets will often smear the inside of a pistol barrel with lead residue and greasy bullet lubrication. This makes cleaning the pistol's bore an arduous task and often turns the whole pistol into a greasy gummy mess!"

Do any of you see any problems with these statements?

 

[scaatylobo]

Yes

" John S. Farnam: Defensive Handgunning

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I just completed Farnam's book on Defensive Handgunning (2nd Edition) and there are some statements he makes in it that have gained my curiosity. To wit: 1.) "Revolvers are tempermental and not particularly durable............revolvers are not tolerant of dirty environments, nor are they designed for heavy use. Armorer level maintenance is required every five thousand rounds or so." 2.) "Autoloaders are designed for military use and are thus robust and tolerant of dirty and rough environments as well as lack of maintenance and heavy use. Armorer level maintenance is rarely required."
3.) The weaver stance is best (for autoloaders). Because of the shape of the grip and other factors the isosceles stance is awkward and difficult to correctly assume." 4.) "Magazine springs can fatigue when magazines are left fully charged for long periods." 5.) "....extensive use of ammunition with unjacketed lead bullets will often smear the inside of a pistol barrel with lead residue and greasy bullet lubrication. This makes cleaning the pistol's bore an arduous task and often turns the whole pistol into a greasy gummy mess!"

Do any of you see any problems with these statements? "


****** I am a fan of his stuff,BUT as in any profession we are free to not agree with all of a writers stuff.

I was a HUGE fan of the Weaver back when I started as an LEO but that was in the early 80's.

I got 'into' the isosceles when I realized that it used the front of my ballistic vest to it most functional state [ front Toward enemy ].

I would also agree that after cleaning thousands of rounds from many handguns - yes lead is messy and unless VERY hard ,a royal pita to get out.

I get his 'newsletter' online and he does send some very good insight and stuff you keep you in the loop of those that have the pleasure of shooting for a living.And attending classes all week/every week.

I would add that Massad Ayoob is another that has written some very good stuff,but I do not agree with some of his writings,and that goes for Janaich et al.
__________________

 

[Sam1911]

Am I surprised that one of the greatest living defensive shooting instructors has a few pet equipment opinions that I might not agree with? Not really.

I've read stuff by Tom Givens, Mas Ayoob, Larry Vickers, and many others who had an equipment point or three that weren't really my flavor, either.

So what? We all have opinions on that kind of thing.

If you are at a level where you need their opinions on which handgun to buy, (or whether lead bullets will "gum up" your gun ) then their recommendations certainly won't hurt you.

But, assuming you know half-a-thing or two about guns going in, then EVERYTHING ELSE he has to say is where you get your value out of the training or reading.

 

[Vern Humphrey]

1.) "Revolvers are tempermental and not particularly durable............revolvers are not tolerant of dirty environments, nor are they designed for heavy use. Armorer level maintenance is required every five thousand rounds or so."

Correct. In the '60s, the Air Force for reasons that boggle the mind, adopted the .38 Special for aircrew. The Army followed suit for helicopter crews. I saw many a S&W revolver turn into crud in the jungle environment.

2.) "Autoloaders are designed for military use and are thus robust and tolerant of dirty and rough environments as well as lack of maintenance and heavy use. Armorer level maintenance is rarely required."

Again correct. The M1911A1 functioned well in Viet Nam. An important point is that revolver parts require some hand-fitting, hence the need for Armorer level maintenance. Automatic parts are interchangeable, and can be replaced by the unit armorer or even the user.

3.) The weaver stance is best (for autoloaders). Because of the shape of the grip and other factors the isosceles stance is awkward and difficult to correctly assume."

Not in my experience.

4.) "Magazine springs can fatigue when magazines are left fully charged for long periods."

Wrong. It's cycling, not compression that wears out springs.

5.) "....extensive use of ammunition with unjacketed lead bullets will often smear the inside of a pistol barrel with lead residue and greasy bullet lubrication. This makes cleaning the pistol's bore an arduous task and often turns the whole pistol into a greasy gummy mess!"

Correct. Wrong or insufficient bullet lube, wrong lead hardness for the velocity and so on all contribute to lead fouling, which can be a bear to clean out. My solution is to use a 50-50 mixture of white vinegar and hydrogen peroxide. (Use a vacuum line cap from an auto parts store to plug the barrel, fill it and as soon as a gray scum forms, dump it down the sink. Don't get any on the finish, and thoroughly dry and lubricate after using.)

 

[Old Fuff]

Having met Mr. Farnam, I would agree with Sam's assessment that he is indeed, "one of the greatest living defensive shooting instructors," although perhaps lesser known then some. That said, his opinions should carry some weight while also being subjected to examination.

Concerning revolvers vs. pistols. It has pretty well been proven through military environmental testing that the best of today's pistols will keep ticking when revolvers give up. On the other hand it is unlikely that most civilian and law enforcement officers will subject their sidearms - whatever they may be - to the kind of extreme environments that the military may encounter. In more normal use, revolvers have a long and proven record of reliability because they are not ammunition dependent to function. Also the better makes of revolvers can easily stand up to 5000 rounds without requiring any special attention, with the possible exception of some of the very smallest and lightest when matched with a steady diet of Magnum-level loads.

While the use of lead alloy bullets may (or may not) leave some leading in the bore, extensive use is less likely to cause wear associated with jacketed bullets, and are more economical.

At the moment I can't think of any of the "big name" combat shooting instructors that still advocate revolvers over pistols. The last one that comes to mind is the late Border Patrol ace, Bill Jordan - and having also known him and watch him shoot I'll say that I personally give his opinions considerable weight.

At the present time, and looking toward the future, it is unlikely that the popularity of revolvers will ever again challenge that of pistols, but for some they remain a viable self-defense weapon with many virtues, professional trainers not withstanding.

 

[David E]

John knows his stuff, but that doesn't mean he's infallible.

I agree with Vern's post.

 

[ironhead7544]

Cast bullets are for practice. Leading is easily removed with a bore brush wrapped with pieces of Chore Boy or Chore Girl copper scouring pads. Wrap enough for a very tight fit. Also removes plastic from shotgun bores.
Some autoloaders are delicate. The Ruger Security Six and GP100 are very tough.
I agree with John on leaving mags unloaded.

 

[Rexster]

1) Partially correct. Not all revolvers need that much maintenance, nor are all that delicate. I have a couple of older GP100s with grunge grooves under the extractor, to enable more shots to be fired before enough crud accumulates to cause that particular potential problem to interfere with shooting. Several GP100s have famously gone tens to hundreds of thousand of rounds with nothing breaking or wearing out.

Revolvers do have problems with some harsh environments, but can tolerate some types of long-term neglect quite well.

2) Largely correct, of duty/service-type autopistols. There ARE plenty of finicky, delicate autopistols out there! Springs must be replaced at regular round-count intervals. Extractors, ejectors, and pins must be monitored for wear. There is a write-up on 1911 maintenance/replacement intervals at the 10-8 website, as an example for one particular pistols. I am not saying 1911s are finicky or delicate! I seem to recall seeing a small parts replacement schedule for SIGs somewhere, too. One must pay attention to the crosspins in Glocks, too. Nothing last forever.

3) True for some, untrue for others. I do believe that SOME folks are built in a way that makes Weaver better for their unique body structures. John Farnam is probably one of the folks for whom Weaver is better. I cannot say what the percentages are either way. I started handgunning around 1982 with a 1911, using Weaver. In 1983-1983, I went through a police academy, was mandated to use a DA revolver, and had to shoot their way, with Isosceles. For many years thereafter, I used ISO for revolvers and DA autos, and a modified Weaver for 1911s. My modified Weaver eventually modified itself into ISO for 1911s.

4) Wrong! This was debunked long ago, assuming good magazine springs. That being said, there is no harm in letting springs rest, nor in changing magazine springs.

5) True. Messy bullet lube is messy bullet lube, and lead is lead. Either can accumulate. The flip side of cheaper unjacketed practice ammo is more cleaning.

To be clear, I am NOT saying John Farnam is giving bad advice. There is NOTHING wrong with following his advice and recommendations. I respect his firearms advice, even if I don't agree with 100% of it.

 

[BullfrogKen]

I've known John for over a decade. I consider him among the best instructors of the modern era. He personally brought to the industry the concept of the "itinerant trainer" back when the only successful schools were resort-based.


The challenge of putting words in a book is that it doesn't change as times change. Some things are eternal. But some things, like equipment selection and tactics, change as equipment and tactics change.


I will tell you this - I've never seen anyone in this industy so willing to try something new. I've been fortunate enough to meet, study under, and train alongside a substaintial number of professionals in this industry. My statement ought to carry more weight than someone who's only met a handful of instructors.

New equipment . . . new tactics . . . new methods of teaching. John constantly challenges himself, changes his mind when the evidence warrants it, and is in a process of continuous growth.


Everyone holds opinions we might take issue with. That book only represents a small effort from an entire life's work. I'd even go as far as to call it miniscule. His book, when considered in its totality, is one of the best on the subject of self-defense and I'd recommend it without hesitation.

 

[Deaf Smith]

1.) "Revolvers are tempermental and not particularly durable............revolvers are not tolerant of dirty environments, nor are they designed for heavy use. Armorer level maintenance is required every five thousand rounds or so."

As a general statement he is correct. But some, like the Rugers, do not fall in this category. BUT, remember he is comparing revolvers to such as Glocks, and he has one with over 170,000 rounds through it! That might color his opinion.

2.) "Autoloaders are designed for military use and are thus robust and tolerant of dirty and rough environments as well as lack of maintenance and heavy use. Armorer level maintenance is rarely required."

Well revovers were many times 'designed for military use', at least 100 years ago. But yes, as a general rule he is correct.

3.) The weaver stance is best (for autoloaders). Because of the shape of the grip and other factors the isosceles stance is awkward and difficult to correctly assume."

That depends alot on the individual!!! Just go to any IPSC or IDPA match, look at those not using powerpuff loads and fancy game guns and you wil see what works. And many of them DO use such as the isosceles stance.

4.) "Magazine springs can fatigue when magazines are left fully charged for long periods."

Many springs can fail if they have poorly made springs. Some work fine after years of constant tension of being fully loaded. This has more to do with the quality of the magazines involved.

5.) "....extensive use of ammunition with unjacketed lead bullets will often smear the inside of a pistol barrel with lead residue and greasy bullet lubrication. This makes cleaning the pistol's bore an arduous task and often turns the whole pistol into a greasy gummy mess!"

Called lead fouling and especially if the slugs are driven hard and fast it happens. If jacketed bullets are used you get copper fouling, but not as bad as lead. But if you use the lead ammo just for SD and not practice it's no biggie.

Overall he is correct but some is subjective.

Farnam has been around for a long time and I'd at least listen to what he says. He, like most, have their own opinions, but I'd listen well to what he says.

Deaf

 

[Rexster]

BullfrogKen is right about John Farnam being willing to try new things. I went with a DAK SIG P229 pistol as early as I could find one, for police duty, largely based on John Farnam's writing and advice about the DAK system.

It is funny to see folks deride the DAK as a solution for the lowest common denominator. It was true professionals who first embraced DAK, such as John Farnam among instructors, and folks such as some of the narc raid guys that work for my PD, who train with handguns far beyond what the SWAT guys do. (We buy our own duty firearms at my PD, and it is no Podunk/Mayberry PD.)

John Farnam also, notably, pushed the use of rifles and carbines for civilian/LE defense, and the use of optics on these weapons. He is sensibly progressive.

 

[76shuvlinoff]

Although I have not read much of his writing I took Mr Farnam's defensive handgun course 5-6 years ago. You meet a few people in your life that actually have a long term affect on you and I would have to say John and Vicky Farnam easily fit into that list for me. We had a very small class so the one on one time was extensive and invaluable.

Like I said, I have not read much of his writing but there was one statement that will probably stick with me forever. I was struggling on day one, John took my pistol and popped the steel target a couple times.

" It ain't your gun son"

 

[jad0110]

At the moment I can't think of any of the "big name" combat shooting instructors that still advocate revolvers over pistols.

Though I wouldn't say he advocates revolvers over semis, Clint Smith is pretty open minded on both platforms. Though I sense he personally prefers the wheel gun. The following quote comes from the Thunder Ranch webpage (http://www.thunderranchinc.com/director.html):

"Although considered archaic by some the "wheel" gun is far from being stricken from the list of effective defensive tools by the educated. In the hands of knowledgeable persons the revolver is more than an equal of any other defensive handgun."

 

[Old Fuff]

"Although considered archaic by some the "wheel" gun is far from being stricken from the list of effective defensive tools by the educated. In the hands of knowledgeable persons the revolver is more than an equal of any other defensive handgun."

My choice of the word "advocate" may have been a poor one...

Clint Smith is one of a handful of trainers that acknowledge that revolvers still have a place (abet a small one) in the overall picture, but pistols substantially dominate in their school handgun programs. This should come as no surprise because today pistols dominate in real life. A possible exception is ordinary civilians with concealed carry permits that have no military or law enforcement responsibilities, and often prefer small .38/.357 snub nose revolvers. More often then not, in the unlikely event they encounter a situation that requires shooting it will be unexpected, close and fast - without a whole lot of shots being fired. While I'm sure there are exceptions I am unaware of, I don't know of any current trainers or schools that specifically target this group, or for that matter is they're any good literature or videos on the subject. Unfortunately the training obtained in the usual CCW application process is woefully inadequate in my view.