Range day

Posted on by

Went to the range for Independence Day and did a bit of shooting because ‘Murica.

Put a Magpul vertical foregrip and backup sights on the JAKL and fired another 100 rounds through it. No hiccups. And the bolt hold open is now functioning with the Pmags, so it looks like after about 300 rounds this thing is doing everything it should.

SO, have my impressions about it changed? Nope. It’s basically an AK in .223 with AR ergos. It has its pluses and minuses over an AR. It’s more compact and it can be shot without cleaning a good bit longer than the AR. Because it has moving parts up front along the barrel, it won’t be as accurate as an AR but it’ll certainly be ‘accurate enough’ for the sort of tasks a gun like this would be called up for.

In .223 there’s a good bit of variety these days…AR, Mini14, AK, AR180, Beretta, Sig, FN, etc. Seems like everyone makes a pew-machine in .223 these days. Not like in the old days. But although the AR still has detractors, (I know a Vietnam vet who swears up and down that the AR platform is garbage, but his experience discounts almost 60 years of development and improvement) it is probably the most developed, refined, and improved semi-auto rifle that ever existed.

When its time to run out the door with a rifle, I’ll grab the AR over the JAKL but that’s mostly because of the long and proven track record of the AR platform. But, I have to say, so far I’m liking the JAKL and plan to do a good bit more shooting with it. At the moment, I’m putting it below the AR but above the Mini14.

‘Murica

Posted on by

It’s Independence Day (if you call it ‘4th of July’ then, for the sake of consistency, you should call Christmas ’25th of December’). Independence comes from self-determination and, as Heinlein said, “…willingness to do sudden battle anywhere, any time and with utter recklessness.”

And nothing says ‘freedom’ like being proficient and prodigious with your thundertoys.

Shoot your fireworks, cook your hot dogs, drink your beer. But those things aren’t what gave us this holiday. Guns and the willingness to use them did.

The range. Go.

Ford F-150 surprise

Posted on by

Someone pointed something out to me the other day that was utterly fascinating.

This person has a Ford F-150 of relatively recent vintage. Having had the needle on ‘E’, they rolled into a gas station just as the fumes finally gave out and the engine sputtered to a stop. As they were about to refill the truck they figured that this seemed like a good time to rotate the gas from the cans in the bed of the truck. So..dismount the can, put your nozzle on the can, and…..fuel up, right?

Not so fast.

Apparently the newer Ford F-150 (and other ‘capless’ gas tank vehicles) are designed in such a manner that you cannot fill them from a gas can without using a special nozzle. Or, put another way, you cannot just grab a jerry can and fill your rig without the magic nozzle. Did you know this? I didn’t. The person who told me about it didn’t. Guarantee you, though…he knows now.

I am amazed at this. I understand that the folks who design vehicles are, perhaps, not thinking about the times where you’re next fuel fillup is coming from a 5-gallon can someone carried to your base location on a cargo-shelf’ed ALICE pack. But…as survivalists, it would be nice to know that we need a special geegaw to fill the bloody truck from a gas can.

Apparently the vehicle comes with one of these magic funnels but, as you know, one is none and, really, for something as critical as filling your escape vehicle, why wouldn’t you have three or four? Or one paracorded to every other gas can. Fortunately, extras are available.

Moral of the story – if you think the vehicle you currently drive may someday need to be filled from a man-portable gas container of some kind…..actually try doing it. This way you know for sure that it’ll work. The las thing you want is that nasty surprise when you’re by the side of the highway at 2am and you’ve got plenty of extra fuel and no way to get it into your rig.

The multi-cartridge approach

Posted on by

Tam, over at View From The Porch, had a post about how the .327 Federal pistol will shoot several cartridges – .32 S&W, .32 Long, .32 Mag, .327 Federal, and .32 ACP. She  opined that for those of us scavenging for cartidges after the apocalypse, this multi-caliber functionality might have an appeal.

That got me thinking about where we’ve been and where we’re going in terms of the ‘one-gun, multi-cartridge’ pistol. (Note there’s a difference between multi-cartridge and multi-caliber.)

The most common would be the .357 Magnum – it can fire .38 Special and .357 Magnum (and .38 Colt if you somehow stumble into a hardware store that hasn’t been open since 1927). Ditto .44 Magnum, but I’ll bet there are plenty of .44 Mag shooters who have never even seen a .44 Special. The .45 ACP revolvers shot .45 ACP and .45 AutoRim. Smith and Wesson’s seemed-like-a-good-idea-at-the-time .460 Smith and Wesson will shoot .45 Colt, .454 Casull, and .460 S&W. The guys at Ruger have a Redhawk that’ll shoot .45 ACP or .45 Colt.  The old Ruger single actions in .32-20/.32 Mag, .38-40/10mm, .45 Colt/ACP, 9mm/357 still turn up but you better make sure not to lose that extra cylinder. (And, really, how hard would it be for Ruger to come out with a convertible double action revolver, hm????) The Survivor/Medusa would shoot pretty much anything in the .38/9mm range but it was kind of a sucky gun to begin with. These are all examples (and, yes, I know there are others) of a multi-cartridge gun….but they are all of the same caliber. Once you get into multi-caliber guns things get more interesting.

A multi-caliber revolver is quite a trick to pull off since a ready barrel change would be required and thats a feature found on very few revolvers. (Looking at you, Dan Wesson.)  But, when you get to automatics, its a different story. Ruger had a P89 that was a ‘convertible’ that let you swap between 9mm (.35 caliber) and .30 Luger (.30 caliber) with just a barrel change. HK had a switch barrel auto back in the day (HK4) that let you shoot .22, .25, .32, and .380.

The larger Glocks lend themselves to this sort of thing and I have seen setups where people will have a Glock that can toggle between .40, 10mm, and .357 SIG. When it comes to autos, the real bottle neck is the breechface…the cartridges often need to share a similar rim diameter.

The undeniable king of claiber conversions is the Thompson Contender which is a single-shot but has no equal in terms of versatility and potential caliber changes.

Its an interesting things to ponder….what pistol would give you the highest odds of finding ammunition for it in a crisis? There are people who are quick to point out that if a fella had a 10mm, .38 Super, .40 Smith, or .41 Magnum he could probably have found ammo during the last ‘ammo drought’ when 9mm, .45 ACP, and .357 couldn’t be had for love nor money.

There is a little merit to that. Problem is, if the caliber is obscure enough that people leave in on the shelf during a crisis then it is probably obscure enough that most stores won’t have any of it in the first place. Sure, your local Cabela’s will probably carry .38 Super but the local KwikeeMart probably won’t…so you’re back to square one.

What would be the most common calibers to find for your pistol in a world gone mad(der)? For the autos, I’d think a man with a 9mm would have an easier time of it than a .45 ACP devotee or .40 S&W fan. In revolvers, I’d say the man with a .357 would do pretty well for himself.These are, of course, centerfire cartridges. Probably the most ubiquitous ammo will be .22 LR and having a couple pistols and rifles chambered in that cartridge would be a paramount idea. And, yeah, .22 Mag or .17 Whatever is a zippy little mofo but you’ll find a hundred or more rounds of .22 for every round of any other rimfire you come across.

Of course, some folks figure any cartridge will work if you stockpile enough ammo for it. Well, yeah, that’ll work….if you’re never away from your supply, if your supply remains safe and secure, if you’re supply can last you for your anticipated lifetime, if if if…..

This, in a roundabout way, gets us back to one of those classic survivalist discussions about ‘cartridges for the end of the world’ or some similar hot-stove-league topic. I settled that argument, for me, years and years ago. I’m confident that, given the chamberings of my pistols and rifles, I’ll not have the worst time trying to find ammo down the road.

I was about to say that someday someone will come out with a modular pistol frame that will enable a broad spectrum of caliber and cartridge swaps. And then it occurred to me that we are probably 90% of the way there with SIG’s 320 model that uses the fire control group (FCG) as the legally-defined firearm, letting you buy all the barrel/frame/slide/mag combinations you want without the hassle of federal paperwork.

Hmm. I should investigate that a bit. I’m sure the aftermarket will be jumping onto that platform and getting us all sorts of barrels and whatnot. Hmmm.

 

Moar JAKL

Posted on by

So I’ve decided that it took about 200 rounds to break in the JAKL pistol that I purchased. It runs just fine now, regardless of whether it is shouldered or fired from the hip. It still does not like to lock open on empty Pmags, however. With GI mags it’s just fine. But, mag hold-open aside, it hasn’t bobbled a single round since it’s second trip to the range where it got it’s 200th round put through it. So…I’m giving it a conditional nod.

And I bought a carbine version.

The interesting thing about the carbine version was that it had several choices for a stock. Since the back of the receiver is a segment of pic rail, you can throw any 1913-compatible stock on there. And, being a bit of a minimalist, I went with the JMAC aluminum side folder in matching green and it is….gorgeous. This thing is a nice looking stock and the lockup is tightighttight. Sadly, good looks and good manufacture do not come cheap. Oh, but wow is it a nice piece of gear. I may have to get something like that for my Ruger carbines.

The nice thing about this buffertube-less design is that it really does help to make things compact for transport while still keeping things ready for use at a moments notice. There’s always the likelihood that some day you’ll need to grab the essentials and hightail it somehwere…and when that happens, space will be at a premium. The smaller you can get a competent carbine, the better.

So, liking the JAKL so far once it’s been broken in. I’m curious to see if it’s disdain for the Pmag hold-open will remain after a few hundred more rounds. At the moment, however, I am without much reservation against this thing. No two ways around it, its the new kid on the block and as such needs a long time before a level of trust can be established that would make me feel comfortable running out the door with this thing. However…it seems promising. I ordered up a vertical foregrip and Magpul backup sights (in OD, natch) to mount to this and will be dropping a dot of some type on it eventually.

If the wrist-brace thing blows over, I could see dropping a brace on the pistol version and you’d have a very nice little piece of work. So, for now, I’ll continue putting some more .223 through it here and there and see how performance goes.

Video – Medieval Surgery | Arrow Removal Techniques

Posted on by

Merciful Crom….I knew the Middle Ages weren’t a walk in the park but, geez…

If the world really turns into a Stirling or Kunstler novel it may actually come to pulling arrows out of people. How did they do such things in years gone by? With an interesting array of horrific techniques:

Egads that looks horrible. And the guy leading the video looks more than a little creepily at home in this project. Someone go check that guys basement.

Realistically, I think that if anyone gets shot with a broadhead hunting arrow these days the odds are pretty good its gonna just punch right through. I’ve known more than a few elk hunters who tell me their arrows punch through both sides of an elk. Factor in a modern crossbow and, unless the point lodges in a bone, the bolt is just gonna whistle through.

Grisly business all around, that.

Wanna see something cool?

Posted on by

You guys remember that a few weeks back I bought a like-new Aladdin kero lamp for $25? Well,check this baby out…it is literally new-in-box from about 40+ years ago:

How cool is that? Absolutely brand new and left over from the Reagan years.

And, heres the sad thing: from a pragmatic, practical, and logistical standpoint this is a silly purchase. It’ll run eight hours on one quart of fuel. Thats four nights on a gallon, which means I have about 400 days worth of kero for this thing. Thats 20 5-gallon cans. Those take up a lot of space. And this thing generates heat, which isnt always welcome. And a degree of indoor pollutants. And a fire risk. And some delicate spare parts (mantle, chimney). Whereas a good 12v. LED light will, as I’ve proven, run 21 nights (at least) on one charge, poses no fire risk, generates several times the light, no heat, can be recharged from multiple sources (generator, car, solar, bike generator, etc.) and doesn’t require delicate spare parts. From a practical standpoint, this item makes absolutely no sense in my preparedness TOE. Except…I like them. I like their charm, warmth, good looks, and general homey-ness. But, make no mistake, the primary emergency lighting ain’t these. But…on a cold winter night, when youre sitting by the window watching the wind howl and blow the snow around, its a good deal more comforting than the harsh LED lamps.

Oh…price? $89 plus shipping. Couldn’t resist.

Sacrificing gear and why your 2nds should be as good as your firsts

Posted on by

A comment on the previous post about the perceived need these days to be more than a little armed at all times….specifically, regarding vehicles:

 If gear or extra guns must be shed, abandoned or cached away from home base in an incident so be it. That excess cargo kit in vehicles should be sacrificial extra inventory items any way. How much is your life worth? It may be stolen from vehicles, the vehicle stolen, or the vehicle totaled out or torched in some scenarios that are indeed possible. It is deadly serious out there, so equip yourself to at least stand a chance.

This ties into something I’ve always found interesting when it comes to survivalism – the notion that ‘just in case’ gear, or gear that you stash away for an unlikely-but-possible emergency can be several orders of magnitude beneath your ‘primary’ gear in terms of quality.

Let’s say that you decide you’re gonna ride out the apocalypse with your Daniel Defense AR, a tricked out Glock, and maybe a sweetly set up Rem 870. But you figure that you should have a stash somewhere else ‘just in case’. And, more often than not, that same person stocks their ‘backup stash’ with a Makarov, an SKS, and whatever extra shotgun they have laying around.

I’ve mentioned this before but heres the crux of things – if you need to resort to your hideaway stash becase you can’t get to your primary gear, then its safe to assume that your life has just taken a turn for the spectacularly ungood, agreed? So, in that time of (literally) existential crisis doesn’t it seem to make sense that you would want the best gear you can have?

Or, put another way, assuming the guns listed above, you show up at Uncle Steve’s cabin, tear up the floorboards, find your Pelican case of hideout gear, and throw the lid open. Would you rather your DD AR and Glock was in that case or would you rather it was an SKS and a Mak?

When people skydive, do you think their backup ‘chute is of lesser quality and construction than their primary ‘chute? When people scuba dive, do you think the respirator and tank that are carried for emergencies are made to a markedly lesser quality?

This is why, personally, I spend the money on such a heavy layer of redundancies. I can take a good Glock 17, a quality AR, and a reliable 870, tuck them into a Pelican case and stick it away in a hideyhole somewhere ‘just in case’ and be just as well armed with that set up as I would be as if I hadn’t had to resort to my stash. And I can do that several times. Sure, stash one and two may never get used, but when its 3am on a dark rainy night and I’m frantically pulling that Pelican case out from under the woodpile while looking over my shoulder for the headlights that I’ve been trying to avoid….that third stash will be worth the expense of the other two.

And this doesn’t just apply to guns. Think about the stuff you keep in your vehicle. I know people who, when they wear out a pair of boots, throw them in the vehicle for emergencies. Dude, an emergency is when youre gonna want a pair of good boots…not ratted out old ones with blown stictching, split seams, and floppy soles.

Your backup gear should be of the same ‘tier’ as your primary gear. Is that expensive? Heck yes. But it’ll seem dirt cheap if you ever need to use it.  Are there exceptions? Maybe. If your primary setup is a SCAR and a Zev Glock you could probably get by with an AR and a regular Glock, for example. But there is not going to be an award given to the person who made it through the apocalypse with the least expensive gear. I have no doubt that a person could make do with bleached-out two-liter pop bottles to store their water in, a ChinaSport 3-9x on their .22, and a Harbor Freight generator. Maybe. But if you didn’t have to, why would you? Don’t you want to give yourself every possible advantage at a time when you’re desperately going to need them?

As the commenter pointed out, yes, you may wind up sacrificing your gear for some reason. And thats gonna suck. But up until that point, you will have a tremendous advantage in your favor.

Everything is sacrificial when it comes to survivalism. Yes you paid $3k for that rifle. But if you go through that checkpoint and you get caught with it you may wind up in jail cell as the world collapses around you. So out the window at 45 mph it goes. It hurts, yes…but look at whats more important.

We purchase things all the time, never use them, and consider it money well spent. Take homeowners insurance for example. If you pay the insurance for 30 years and your house never burns down, was it a waste of money? No, it was not. For those thirty years you transferred your risk to someone else. For those thirty years you were effectively bulletproof if something happened to your house. So, no, not a waste of money. Same thing with any gear you wind up having to ditch or never get to use – it bought you a level of safety and security by its very existence. Worth the expense.

So do it right the first time and get back-up gear as good as your ‘main’ gear. Or if thats really too painful, and I know it can be, get the next step down. But for the love of Crom, don’t just skip the second- and third-best options and sink straight to the Mosins and HiPoints. Scared and desperate future you will thank you for it.

Yesterday it was overkill, today its a minimum standard

Posted on by

It occurs to me that I’ve always found it a little…skewed? …that when it comes to things like a ‘Get Home Bag’ or other I’m-away-from-my-main-gear kits, the first emphasis is almost always on weapons. I’ve known people who have gotten stuck in Manhattan and had to walk off the island during 9/11, or been in an earthquake that brought things to a halt, or any one of a dozen similar scenarios. In almost all of them , the thing that made the most difference was comfortable shoes to walk in and water to drink. Nowhere in there did anyone say that the real gamechanger was having a pistol or carbine tucked away in their gear. (In fact, in virtually all the scenarios people have told me that they were in, being visibly armed would have been a big problem what with all the cops and other folks running around.)

I suppose, fairly, that the circumstances of your stranding have a lot to do with whether you’re need for a firearm is higher or lower. If you’re walking three miles home through the city because you’re alternator died it’s not as high a need as if you have to walk three miles through the city because the power grid just went down and night is falling fast.

Thats not to say that those things aren’t important, but rather that their usage in a crisis is almost nil. Yeah you should have them, but you’ll wind up using 90% of your other gear before it comes time to use that 10% that goes bang. Usually.

But when I think about the situations where I’m away from base, even in this current (mostly) non-EOTWAWKI period, my concerns drift towards the potential for violent encounters. There are far too many deranged homeless people, drug-influenced crazies, politically motivated thugs (‘peaceful protesters’) and just general whackadoodles out there for me to feel comfortable going anywhere these days without some sort of means to protect myself. And in a real crisis, the kind where civilization is hanging by a thread, being on foot with a backpack of useful gear just means that you’re an epic loot drop for anyone who thinks you’re ‘easy pickings’.

I’m starting to think that the real-world has finally caught up to the level of risk and threat the we always kind of imagined it was. Twenty years ago I was far less likely to be subject of a home invasion, mugging, armed robbery, or violent crime than now. Heck, there was a period of years where I never even bothered locking my door. But, for better or worse, it seems like the times have changed to the point that not having a weapon of some sort in any type of ‘survival kit’ or ‘bail out bag’ is just poor planning.

I’ve always kept a G19, holster, and a couple mags in my Bag O’ Tricks ™ just in case….and one of the reasons I got the Ruger PC takedown carbines (or the PC Charger) was specifically for toting around in my bag. It’s just interesting that the things that seemed a little ‘out there’ or ‘overkill’ a few years ago seem like reasonable prudent measures no

 

A reminder to just give up on Them

Posted on by

Once in a rare while, someone tries to engage me, usually in an intelligent and articulate fashion, about why I ‘need’ an ‘assault weapon’. Years ago, I would have tried to reason my side of things out with them. Perhaps in some naive country-mouse way I think that a light will go on in their brains and they’ll say “Gosh, you’re right. I never considered that.”

Yeah, no.

In addition to that particular would-be argument, I also get the ‘do you really think that [type of TEOTWAWKI] is going to happen?”

Again, there was a time I’d lay out my reasoning in the hopes of causing the other person to come to the same conclusions I had, and welcome them into the fold. Welcome to the world of survivalism, here’s your complimentary tinfoil hat.

Again, no.

Guys, you do you and I’ll do me. If you want to try and evangelize, proselytize, witness, preach, or otherwise try to convert ‘the others’ you are, by Crom, welcome to do it. However…and this is strictly my opinion, YMMV… give it up. The time to convince people to learn how to swim was before the ship hit the iceberg. You warned ’em, you offered to help teach them, and all they did was tell you the ship was unsinkable and that you don’t need that life jacket anyway. The time to try and save these people is long past. Stop spending energy on them and leave them to sink or swim as best they can, you’ve got to find a path to the lifeboats and you don’t have time to convince people that they need to head towards the boats as well.

Is that enough with the Titanic metaphors?

Look, here’s the real deal, sans cloudy metaphors and analogies – there are three kinds of people in the world right now: those who agree with what youre doing and support it, those who neither agree nor disagree and do not purposefully interfere with what youre doing, and those who disagree with what youre doing and are actively trying to hamstring you. Work with and value the first, respect but ignore the second, and stay the frak away from the third.

Stop worrying about other people who aren’t important to you and focus on the ones who are. Its a wild ride we’re on these days and there’s no room in our lives for people who are working against us.

I’ve covered this before. Our lives are too short to waste resources (time, money, emotional bandwidth, tears, trust) on people who are, intentionally or not, working against you.