This year I am keeping track of the companies that I query and that do not offer a discount. This is not to penalize that company in any way. But, I am asked about company xyz and it will just to be quick place to reference if they have already been asked. If it is any way construed as negative I will remove it.
I am branching out and asking some companies that I haven't before. First round is email, then I begin calling.
2011 queries:
- Colt = Perhaps in the future
- SigSauer = per Brad B. none offered, reconfirmed not avail 7/2011
- Glock = per Brad none offered, added GSSF info
- MidwayUSA = per Brad none offered
- Springfield Armory = Sent some promo materials
- KelTec = No
- Kimber = emailed
- EAA = No
- Bianchi International = emailed bounced back; have to call
- HK = none confirmed 7/2011
2010 queries:
- Comp-Tac = No
apparently didn't work (like 2011 KAHR price list). They are fixed now.
Thanks and sorry!
Man Bag II: What fits in a Maxpedition Versipack Fat Boy?
Written by reg mathuszSomebody asked what will fit in the Maxpedition Fat Boy. I always keep a Glock 23 in it, so I decided to retry to see what fits.
Glock 23? Yes, you don't even need the holster strap (I have a velcro strap that I use, not the official Maxpedition one).
S&W M&P fullsize? Yes
Colt 1911/Government? Yes, although I didn't think it did. I seem to remember the zipper catching on the hammer/beavertail. I wonder if when the bag was new it was stiffer and didn't work. One thing to note is that my Colt is series 80 style with a classic round ring hammer and stock (pre-duckbill) grip safety. Big grip safety tangs or fancy hammer? That may not work.
S&W 1006/4506? Nope.
S&W 1066/4566? Yes (5900's should fit too)
Sig P225? Yes
Sig P220? Yes, I thought not, but it seems to. Doesn't extract well with Hogue rubber panels (duh).
FN FNX? Nope, hammer catches zipper
Browning HiPower? Yes, suprisingly with ease
3" K/L frame? Yes
4" K/L? Nope, well, at least not with fullsize Hogues, or wood presentations
Smaller pistols will, of course, fit but you definitely will want the optional "holster" which is a velcro loop (or similiar) to angle the pistol so it can be withdrawn easily.
Hope that helps!
Galco leather belt vs Blade-Tech hybrid belt (gun belt as a dress belt?)
Written by reg mathuszYou have probably heard that a key component of carrying a pistol (at least on the hip or the waist band) depends on your belt.
I don't care if you buy the belt at Wal-Mart or Macys -- their belts stink. They are not thick enough or rigid enough to support any serious weight. Heck, I have even bought a couple belts, including a Bianchi "gun belt" that wasn't good enough.
Years I have sucked it up and bought Galco. In fact, my primary 1.5" leather belt is a Galco. It is over 10 years old! It cost, what I thought was a fortune at the time (I think it was $60) for a belt. It was worth every penny.
For dress belts I have used various department store 1.25" belts. Despite not carrying a pistol (ok, maybe a J-frame Airweight a couple of times) these belts never last. I ended up buying one or two a year from just daily wear.
I thought, although expensive I should get a good belt and not worry about for a long time and possibly be able to carry a pistol with it too.
I went and bought a black Galco. It was $80!
Ah, but it did not disappoint.
I wanted a brown one also, but was balking at spending another $80. I happened to be looking for a Blade-Tech holster locally when I found their line of hybrid belts. These are leather with a kydex insert/backing. Interesting--it was also about half the price. In brown. Sold!
Both belts make excellent dress belts. Well, for that they are certainly over-built. But, I do find myself now snapping on a multi-tool, cell phone, flashlight to it.
Carrying a pistol? Amazing. Both belts easily support a pistol! I have strapped fullsize 1911's and my big S&W's (1006) to it without a problem. The rigidity of a 1.5" is definitely missed though. I wouldn't want to carry the big items for an extendeed amount of time. However, I was pleasantly surprised that either belt comfortably carries a Glock 23 or a fullsize S&W M&P with ease. I wouldn't hesitate to carry either all day.
The differences between the two? (leather vs hybrid leather/kydex)?
Well, to be honest glancing it is hard to tell the difference. Both belts look like quality products. The Galco is finished on both sides including the threads, while the Blade-Tech is finished on one side-- The underside is a light tan.
Wearing the two does have a different feel. The Galco, being a traditional leather breaks in and stretches. The more you wear it the more it molds and fits to you. After you have it a while you can actual see it take shape. Commonly it will bend at the buckle notch you frequently use. One thing that is nice (about leather) is as you put more weight on it the belt will actually slightly give. Wearing heavy pistols like the 1006 is very comfortable. An alternative way to read into that is that the belt is very forgiving if you gain/lose a little weight. You can flucuate, say from summer to winter weight (lol) and still remain on the same belt notch.
The Blade-Tech hybrid is stiffer. It does not give. If it is tight it will always be tight. If you gain ....winter weight.... you are going to have to move to the next notch on the belt. This also comes into play with a heavier pistol. It doesn't give so it pulls the pistol in towards you, regardless of weight, or your body.
The advantage? Man, carrying the pistol is SNUG and in close--great for concealment! Disadvantage? Not necessarily the most comfy.
The end result? BOTH are great belts, and I wouldn't hesitate highly recommending either one!
Ok, so in part II (click here: part I was the 357SIG) of my continuing defense of misunderstood cartridges is the 45GAP. Now, here is a cartridge designed to duplicate the 45ACP. Yet another unquestionably effective round with over 75 years of military service. Glock wanted to put it into their standard platform (read smaller frame). Currently, GLOCK is currently the only major manufacturer to offer a pistol in it.
It is common to see it poked fun at unfairly. The most common things I see are:
1. Serves no purpose
It does if you can't fit your hands around a Glock 21/30. It does if you want a big bore round but want to squeeze it into a Glock 17/19/26 sized pistol and not to mention weight class.
2. Hard to get ammo for
Harder than 9mm, 40, 45, but far from impossible. Prices seem to be in the same range as the 45ACP. Unless 45 is on sale.
3. Limited capacity
No more so than a standard 45ACP.
4. Doesn't have the +P capability of the 45ACP.
This is somewhat true, although there is a large contingency of folks that claim a 45ACP +P is not needed. I wouldn't sneeze at a 185gr or 230gr coming at me at any speed. I do like +P personally though. But then again, I like 45Super.
5. It is on its way out.
This argument is used for everything non-9mm, 40, 45ACP. Lots of state agencies carry it, and GLOCK is known for NOT discontinuing support for a product. Have no fear.
6. Only Glock makes a pistol for it.
Not a problem if you are ok with Glock. If not, you will need to consider something else. There are lots of 9's, 40's and 45's available. LOL
So, it duplicates (exactly) 18gr and 230gr ballistics of a 45ACP? What's not to like!
The one big advantage I don't hear people talking about that the 45GAP has a CLEAR advantage over the 45ACP is in SHORT BARREL BALLISTICS.
Because of the shorter case and higher pressure it will have little velocity loss when moving to short barrels such as a subcompact GLOCK. This is not the case with 3" 45ACP's. Folks like to read 45ACP ballistics, often forgetting that the most of them are for a 5" barrel!
Yes, 4" ballistics are similar but drop to a 3" Colt Defender (a great pistol btw) and you may be surprised at how slow that round may be coming out! Still think you don't want a +P round? Some common 45ACP rounds are going a little over 750 fps. Again, not that I could dodge it, but ballistics show the 45GAP fares much better losing only 30-50fps! (the #'s are out on GlockTalk).
For someone looking at a Glock platform pistol, big bore, and wanting a subcompact also the Glock 37/38/39 make a good choice. A lot less expensive than a set of 1911's too.
More...
It is so rare and refreshing to see pistol match info posted in a local newspaper and picked up by Yahoo News (even if it is tailored in my area). I had to screen capture it:
Here is the actual link to the article if you are interested:
I get tired of the caliber wars on the internet. Shoot what you like!
Anyhoo...the 357 Sig seems to take its unfair share of criticism. It was originally designed to duplicate the performance of the police favorite 357magnum 125gr load. Unarguably, an effective round.
Oversimplified (and slightly incorrect), it is a 40S&W necked down to accept a 9mm bullet. The extra case room gives it increased case capacity (velocity) and the bottle-neck increases feeding and reliability -- although I have seen contradictory info on whether or not it 357Sig actually headspaces on the case mouth or neck.
Here are some of the arguments you hear against the 357Sig:
1. It doesn't do anything that a 9mm can't do.
Then why does everyone seem to need +P and +P+?
2. 9mm +P and +P+ can do the same thing.
Similar, but not exact. Make sure your pistol is +P rated, you shoot +P+ at your own risk, there are very few rated for it.
3. 357Sig ammo is expensive and hard to get
This is somewhat true, at least compared to standard 9mm and 40. However, shot much of that +P+ ammo? Not cheap or easy to find.
4. 357Sig is not a 357magnum.
Well, true. It does not have the flexibility of the magnum (bullet weight ranges). However, it does closely replicate the 125gr and 147gr (vs 158gr) ballistics. Now it is true that the upper range of 357magnum does blow 357Sig out of the water. But, remember the focus was 125gr bullets.
5. 357Sig is dying out!
LOL! People have been saying that about 10mm and 41magnum for years and years. Yet, I can readily find several brands on the shelves. There are quite a few law enforcement agencies (including State Patrols) that have standardized it. I don't think it is going anywhere for a while.
Early on, I read a law enforcement agency's review of the 357Sig (I want to say Henrico, but I forget). They wanted to duplicate their previous 357magnum performance. They tested 9mm, 40S&W, 357Sig, and 45ACP. I don't think 45GAP was out at this point.
It concluded that for barrier penetration (especially windshield) the 357 Sig 125gr performed the best. It was followed by 40S&W 155gr.
A few years after adoption they evaluated the wound ballistics from actual shootings. They found that the 357Sig actually did not reproduce the 357magnum 125gr. They had VERY different wound patterns. However, the end result (dead assailant) was the same.
But, I can tell you that a 3" 357Sig pistol (like a sub-compact Glock) is a lot more pleasant to shoot than a 2" J-frame revolver with full power 357 magnum loads! And at least in my hands, that results in better accuracy. I haven't clocked any loads but I suspect the 357Sig is more efficient velocity-wise also.
An additional advantage is that you can easily (depending on pistol brand) purchase a 40S&W barrel for your 357Sig and have two calibers in one! (usually mags are the same).
Shoot it. If you like it, then that is good enough for me. Better? Well, that depends on perspective. A Glock 32 is much more manageable and has more capacity than a S&W 686, but I wouldn't necessarily trade mine in for one. But that's just me. I am thinking about a 357Sig barrel for my Glock 23 though :)
Glock 19/23/32 vs S&W M&P 9/40 Fullsize (FS) part II
Written by reg mathuszThis is a follow up to:
"GLOCK 23 vs S&W M&P 9 FS"
which was a pic comparison request of the midsize GLOCK (19/23/32/etc) VS S&W M&P 9/40 FS (fullsize).
I have long said that the midsize GLOCK is one of the best ALL AROUND sized pistols. It is good for carry, target shooting, nightstand, etc. (notice I did not say it is the best in each category), but overall the best.
The M&P FS is designed primarily as duty pistol. It is longer and taller than the Glock 19/23. You can look up the specs but the pics show the differences. It is noticeable. But how noticeable?
Let's take a look at some common carry methods:
- Outside the waist band (OWB): Comfort is the same, concealability is close if you cant the M&P. The slide is longer so a longer, looser cover garment is required. This becomes much more important for IWB carry (see below). One thing related is that that if you carrying spare mags on the hip on your belt, the Glock polymer mag is more forgiving (it digs less noticeably into your side) than M&P which has a pretty big bottom lip.
- Shoulder holster: Equal
- Ankle: HA! Just kidding
- Inside the waistband: Read on...
I have been carrying my GLOCK 23 in a Comp-Tac CTAC holster. I decided to try my M&P 9FS in the most similar holster I have for it - Crossbreed SuperTuck Deluxe. The holsters themselves are different (hmm...another post idea) but accomplish the same thing.
The carry difference between the two (concealability, comfort) was almost identical despite the M&P's longer slide and height. The BIG difference is in the shirt or cover garment. You cannot wear a tight shirt with the M&P. The 23 was more forgiving (duh...shorter grip).
Both these holsters are supposed to be tuckable, meaning that you can tuck your shirt into the holster for concealment not requiring a jacket. To me, you are making your pistol harder to access, but a pistol is better than no pistol.
I have tried it with both and find that the M&P works but you can't hardly move. The Glock is slightly more doable but you can't sit or bend over. I, personally, would not recommend either for tucked if you are going to moving. The compact M&P's and subcompact Glocks are a perfect choice for that. Of course, one of each is your best choice.
As (if) things warm up out here in the Pacific Northwest I will be doing a 9c vs Glock 27 (SuperTuck vs CTAC) comparison too. I want to see how the Crossbreed does in HOT weather (so far only mid-80's).
But, overall the Glock midsize vs the M&P FS is not that a big of a difference in size and carry comfort/concealment. Well, depending on how/what/when you want to do with it.
