The AR-15 and steel cased ammo - how to make Wolf or Tula shoot reliably.

We've all been there...walking around the local gun store (or, as I like to call it, the Magic Goody Shop) and seen Russian-made steel cased .223 ammo selling for quite a bit less than the brass versions of the same rounds.  And, many of us have fallen to temptation and bought scads of the stuff, thinking of how much money we'll save, and how we can plink 'til our heart's content for pennies on the dollar.

And then, many of us have faced the bitter disappointment of repeated malfunctions and losing money when we give away a large pile of ammo that simply won't function properly in our guns.

I've seen quite a few stories of people trying to shoot steel cased ammo out of an AR-15 rifle with less than satisfactory results.  The most common issue is the dreaded "stuck case", where the case wedges itself so firmly in the chamber that the extractor simply doesn't have the "oomph" to move it.  In fact, most often, the only remedy is to put a cleaning rod down the bore of your gun and whack it with a hammer.

That's what I had to do.  My AR was particularly finicky, barely firing 50 rounds of Wolf or Tula before hanging up completely, bringing an early ending to a day at the range.  The thing would run like a champ all day long on brass, even crappy brass, but a couple boxes of Tula would bring it to its knees.

I began reading about this on the Internets, and it is a common problem.  Many have the completely WRONG idea about what causes this, however.

First, it is NOT caused by a "lacquer coating" cooking off and leaving its residue in the chamber.  If you don't believe me, get a spent shell and hit it with a blowtorch.  Nothing's coming off of that sucker.  If you've bought your ammo in the past few years, it doesn't even have lacquer on it.

Second, many people believe it is because the steel expands, and, being less flexible than brass, wedges itself in the chamber.  That's not true either.  But, steel being less flexible that brass does contribute to the problem.

The answer is simpler (and fortunately more correctable) than either of those.

Steel doesn't expand like brass does in the chamber.  This allows a slight gap around the cartridge case upon firing.  That gap admits powder residue and carbon into the chamber, which begins building up on the sides.  Pretty soon, the dimensions of the chamber are too small to allow the casing to move freely in and out.  The next time the bolt slams a round into the chamber, it wedges there, unable to be moved without physical intervention.

"Well," you might say, "the 7.62 x 39 rounds that I shoot are steel cased, and they don't have that problem".  No, they don't.  But, it is not because the blowback of residue into the chamber isn't happening.  It is because of the shape of the round itself.  The sides of the 7.62 x 39 are tapered enough that they can still overcome friction with the sides of the chamber.  The .223 is far straighter, and so it is far more difficult for the extractor to overcome the frictional forces of the now smaller chamber that has a good hold on the straight walls of the shell case. 

This is the problem I had with my rifle.  On multiple occasions, always after firing less than 50 rounds of steel cased ammo, I have had a major stoppage with my AR.  It always involved a spent case hanging up in the chamber, it always was impossible to clear without jamming a cleaning rod down the barrel and knocking it out, and it almost always put my AR out of action until I could take it home and work on it.

Once, while in the presence of a buddy of mine, I experienced the problem and he said, "You need to run a little brass in every mag to keep it cleaned out."

That didn't make sense to me.  How did brass keep the action clean?  Besides, common knowledge was that you never mix steel and brass when shooting...that mixing the two would only make this problem worse. 

Then I read this article on the Box O' Truth about steel case and brass cased ammo.  Although their hypothesis confirmed my friend's statement that brass ammo could help clean the chamber, they stopped short of recommending (or figuring out) that running steel and brass together can make a gun run more reliably.

I figured it was up to me to test it.

I started by cleaning the chamber thoroughly and soaking it down with CLP.  I then loaded my mags with one round of brass case for every 9 of steel.  Then, I headed to the range.

Fully expecting to get a stoppage before the end of mag number two, the AR kept eating the steel case well past that point.  The brass coming out eventually carried a considerable amount of black deposit on the outside of it.  It was rock hard and couldn't be scraped off with a fingernail. I did a variety of shooting, including slow firing (shooting once every 20 seconds or so), sustained slow firing (shooting once every five seconds),  fast firing (shooting as fast as I could pull the trigger) and even some bump firing (near automatic rates of fire).

The AR had two hiccups, probably attributable to the Russian ammo's lower power.  On the first, the round didn't quite come all the way out of the mag.  I gave the bottom of the mag a whack and it kept going.  The next, the bolt didn't appear to come back far enough to grab the next round.  A quick pull of the charging handle fixed it. The gun seemed to run fine otherwise, and most importantly, no casings were getting stuck in the chamber.  After five mags and nearly 150 rounds, I was running out of time and would be late for another engagement, so I packed it up to continue testing later.  Besides, the gun showed no signs of slowing down.  I was satisfied.

I have seen other options recommended, such as changing uppers or barrels to get a chromed chamber, or using a chamber reamer.  Both would probably work, but for the occasional use of steel cased ammo, both seem to be overkill. A 100 round box of cheap brass cased ammo should let you shoot 1000 rounds of steel case, if this method works for you.  You might even be able to tweak the ratios and get away with 1 for 20 or 1 for 30.

If you have an AR that doesn't like steel ammo, but have a stockpile of it or have a source where you can get it for cheap, it's worth a try to mix some brass in with the steel and see if your AR will run it.

UBUNTU - PLEASE DITCH THE UNUSABLE MONSTROSITY CALLED "UNITY".

I've spent the morning just trying to get Unity to work. It's horrible. I can't understand any of it.

The whole point in a UI is that a person should be able to just sit down, and within a few minutes, figure it out. You simply cannot do this with Unity.

I just can't understand why the folks at Canonical would want to kill their disto like this. It is truly horrible to the point of being unusable.

I tried to do one simple tweak of moving the window buttons from the left to the right. It didn't work. Now, half the time the buttons are on the left, half of the time they are on the right. WHY?

With an old download of Ubuntu and the Gnome desktop, I could make my UI look EXACTLY the way I wanted it to. I could make it work for me. No longer the case.

I will never understand how taking away or hiding options is better for a user. Makes no sense at all. Now, I'm crippled.

The bad part is, I used to be able to just choose to use the classic Gnome interface. No more. Gnome 2 isn't even available.

Horrible. I'm convinced the people at Canonical are just stupid. They HAD the best Linux distro on the planet. No more.

Unity sucks. A lot. And, they're trying to force it on me. Forget that. I'm going elsewhere, and I'm recommending everyone else do so as well.

Kel-Tec P32 Review - Mousegun Mirth!

.32 Auto Keychain

Words cannot describe how happy I am so far with this gun.

Yeah, it's that good. And it is so good because it is so surprising.

It is not surprising because of it's superior Browning design (I don't know of another tilt-barrel pistol of this size), because it shoots a decently powerful .32 cartridge and yet manages recoil very well, because it is less than 7 ounces, five inches long, and less than an inch thick, and practically disappears in a pants pocket. It is not even good because it is reliable and acccurate.

It is surprising because it manages ALL of these tricks at once. This is a gun you can carry when you don't want to carry a gun. Stick it in your pocket, and it disappears, not to be thought of until you need it, or you get home and empty your pockets.

Now, there are people who look down their noses at the .32 auto. I agree. Although I regularly carry a 9mm, I sometimes feel that isn't enough gun. And, it a perfect world, I wouldn't consider anything less than a .40.

But, every one of those other guns has serious drawbacks to carrying. My full size 9mm, the Bersa Thunder, can be carried in an inside the pants holster, but the handle often prints through whatever shirt I wear over it. Plus, after a few hours, it tends to become uncomfortable.

I also have a Kel Tec P40, which I carry in a separate waist pouch. The waist pouch works great, but you have to deal with the extra bulk of carrying something "outside" your body. Also, access isn't great, because you still have to unzip it to draw your weapon.

But, when you shove the P32 in your pocket, it is as accessible as anything else in your pocket. And, no one will ever know you are carrying it.

It beats going unarmed, and that's the point. As a friend said, it beats throwing rocks.

Or, as I like to say, I don't know of a gun with which anyone would like to be shot. Any gun is better than no gun.

But, that's not to say that this is a bad gun.

The Kel-Tec is surprisingly accurate and smooth. I could punch holes in a tin can with reasonable regularity out to 10 yards, which is all one can expect for such a weapon. It cycled reliably with everything I fed it, except for some old, old rounds that actually had corrosion on the outside of the cases. On one, it struck the primer but the round didn't go off...not the gun's fault. On another, the last round wasn't powerful enough to push the slide back far enough to lock. Other than those (obviously ammunition related) minor issues, there was not a single problem.

Despite it's ultra light weight, the Kel-Tec was comfortable to shoot. I had initially avoided getting one of these for my wife because of reports that the recoil was stiff. I went with an AP-MBP .32 for her instead. But it seems to me that the Kel-Tec doesn't really recoil any more severely than that gun, despite being half its size. She could shoot it easily, and she had no problem racking the slide. She liked the way the Kel-Tec felt in her hand, and of course, it's "cute". She might end up taking it from me.

Guys...if you have a significant other who can shoot any handgun above a .22, rest assured that the Kel-Tec will be no problem for her.

Conclusion: The Kel-Tec will probably start going with me everywhere. I might carry it by itself, or as a back-up-gun, but it is so light and convenient, there is no reason NOT to carry it around with me everywhere. What is surprising from something this small and inexpensive ($249 at the local sporting goods store) is that the Kel-Tec is a real gun...not just a novelty that doesn't deliver on its promise.

Why I Am Beginning To Hate Dish Network...

During the past week, we had some severe winds. My satellite dish got knocked out of alignment, so I went online to request a service call.

As I was on the Dish Network site, I figured I might as well browse around to see if I wanted to change my service.

I have the 250 channel Gold package, and thought about downgrading to the $10 cheaper Silver package. But, as I started pricing the different packages, that they obviously don't want you to know what you will be paying for satellite service! Look at this:

Here's the price of the Silver package as displayed on Dish's front page:



And, once you log in, the price changes:



I understand the idea of luring in customers with reduced rates, but then, you go to the page where you add or remove services, and you see this:



Why the difference? And, perhaps the best part...my invoice:



One company, four different prices for the same service. Dish Network has NEVER been able to adequately explain to me how their billing is set up. I suspect that they don't know either. If they did, they might actually have to explain options that would save their customers money. And we can't have that...

The $5 Camera...Mamiya 1000 TL

I learned photography on an old Praktica LTL that was my dad's. He used it the whole time I was growing up to take pictures of my family, our vacations and everything else. The old M42 screw mount body was built like a tank and took great pictures, and it's humble origins in communist East Germany ensured that the price was right. It was the perfect camera for a college kid wanting to learn how to take good pictures, and I used it to great effectiveness back in the early 90's.

Alas, the old Praktica doesn't work so well anymore. The mirror is really dim, the film advance doesn't seem to work correctly, and the focus ring on the old 50mm Pentacon lens is so stiff as to be unusable. I retired it several years ago, after it shot a roll of film and left huge gaps in between the pictures, meaning I got several shots that were halves of two other shots! Disappointing, but the Praktica had more than done it's duty. I still have it, and will never get rid of it, but it is retired for good.

So, during a recent vacation to the Outer Banks, you can imagine my great joy when I found an old camera bag in a thrift store, tucked into the back corner of the room. I opened it to find this:



I wasn't familiar with the 1000 TL, but I was familiar with Mamiya. Before digital, I can remember salivating at their medium format stuff. At $5, the 1000 TL didn't even warrant testing. I figured if it didn't work, I could put it on eBay as a parts camera and at least make my money back.

I began looking around in the bag, which looked to be mid sixties vintage (the 1000 TL was made from the late 60's through early 70's). There were several vintage Hoya filters, a lens hood, a bayonet mount converter (to what, I have no idea), and a Soligor 135mm f/2.8 lens. Hoo boy. Jackpot.

But, when I got it out of the store, I discovered that the light meter actually worked. The shutter snapped crisply, and everything seemed to be in order. Best part was, it was an M42 mount, just like my old Praktica, so all my old lenses and teleconverter would work.

By today's standards, nothing in this kit is impressive, but back in the day, this was a solid piece of photographic equipment. It has shutter speeds from 1/1000 all the way down to 1 sec, plus B. I already have a shutter trip cable that can lock open the shutter for any amount of time I want. It has a self timer which will trip the shutter after about 10 seconds. It doesn't have a hotshoe, which is perhaps the only thing lacking that I really could have used, but since I don't plan on shooting indoors much with this camera, it's not really a problem.

It looks very clean inside and out, although, as is common with cameras this age, the light seals look cruddy. I've already ordered some black string and light seal foam to completely redo the whole thing. Nevertheless, I have a roll of Superia Xtra 400 in it right now, just to see if this thing works or not.

Regardless of how it turns out, I'm pretty happy to have found this. If it works well, it will be all that much better.

Hi Point C9 Review...A Lot of Time and Effort, Very Little in the Way of Results.

I had rotten luck with the Hi Point C9. That might make some mad. Heck, it makes ME mad! But, the truth is the truth.

I tried to like the C9, which is Hi Point's 9mm pistol. I really did try to like it. I bought an extra mag for it to try to make it work better, but it jammed. I sent it back to Hi Point to see if they could get it to work. They did some work on it, declared it cured, and shipped it back. It still jammed. I took it apart and polished the feed ramp, adjusted the mag lips, replaced the magazines, replaced springs, etc. It went from jamming to the last-round-hold-open (LRHO) activating before the mag was empty.

And, it was a crying shame, because the little C9 is about as accurate a 9mm pistol as you'd ever want. It was so easy to put round after round into the same hole (or nearly so) time after time. On the impromptu target you see above, the two shots on the right are the "sighting in" shots. I gave the rear sight a couple clicks to the left then proceeded to shoot the rest of the rounds that hit in the middle. Nice.

But, I had to quit kidding myself. All the tweaking, all the work, all the parts changes just didn't seem to make a difference in this little gun. And as much as I hate to say it, and as much as I want it to work, it is getting to the point where I'm putting a lot of time and effort into this gun and not getting much in return.

Before you start saying that I'm being unfair, keep in mind that I have had this gun for almost a year, and I've really stuck with it. Before you accuse me of being a snob against cheap guns, remember that I bought my wife an AP-MBP .32 for just over $130 with tax, and it is a fine weapon. Before you accuse me of being an anti Hi Point bigot, please find my post where I review the JHP .45 and sing its praises. Also, understand that I have a 995 Carbine in my stable. It is tricked out with an ATI stock and dual mag holders. It is one of my favorites, and rides in a shorty case along with my pistol grip Mossberg (I call that my "riotpak").

And yes, I've seen this:



And believe me, if my C9 performed like that, I'd never think of getting rid of it.

Maybe next weekend I'll give it one more shot. They say that the C9 is very sensitive to how you grip it. I don't think this has anything to do with the slide locking open, but you never know.

Depending on what happens, I might just have a gun for sale next week.

Bersa Thunder 9mm HC Pro Review (and comparision with the Ruger P89).

After a lot of effort, I finally got it! Surprising how difficult it is to find one of these things, but after much perusing of on-line gun classifieds, I finally snagged this one from GunsAmerica. As I review this gun, I'm also going to make some comparisons to the 9mm that used to be my main auto, the Ruger P89.

First, a little background. Both of the pistols have roots in military or law enforcement service, as well as origins with legendary firearms manufacturers. The Bersa is the service pistol of the Argentinian National Gendarmerie (police force), and while Bersa might not be a name with a pedigree, the Thunder 9 is based on the Walther P88 design, and the manufacturing seems to be solid. The Ruger's reputation comes simply from being a Ruger. They have been known for making tough, reliable firearms with anvil like durability. And most people DON'T know that the Ruger P85 (an early version of the P89) was a principal competitor when the military was looking for a replacement for the venerable 1911. It was actually created to fulfill that contract, so it was designed from the ground up for rough treatment and problem free operation. Although I'm pleased with the Bersa, I haven't owned one for ten years as I did the P89, so I can't speak to long term reliability. The P89 never failed me once during that time...not one mis-feed, jam, or breakage of any kind, even after thousands of rounds. That says a lot.

The bottom line? The pistol was $339, and was purchased from Roberston Trading Post out of Tennessee. These people are friendly, helpful, and made the whole thing easy. Plus, they had the best price around on the gun, they shipped for only $15, and didn't charge me a percentage fee for using a credit card. They are a class act all the way, and I highly recommend them.

My own FFL charged me only $10 to do the transfer, for a total price of around $365. You can get P89's in this price range, so as far as that goes, it's a toss up.

Both the Bersa and the Ruger are inexpensive for what they are: high quality 9mm pistols. The Ruger's quality is legendary, but is the Thunder 9 a good value for the price?

So far, it seems that way. The Bersa is impressive. I've only put around 100 rounds through it (and they go fast, through the Bersa's two 17 round mags that are included with the pistol). I shot a mixture of hollow point and ball ammunition of 3 different brands and I'm happy to report that the Bersa gobbled everything down without issue and was quite accurate. They say that the accuracy of these guns improves even more as you shoot them, but this gun is pretty good already.

I did three tests at 10, 15, and 20 yards, using targets on standard 8.5 x 11" paper. I didn't have a single round off the paper. Correlate that to a bad guy, and you're talking about a small space in which most of the vital organs reside. Obviously, the closer I was, the better. At 10 yards, it was not difficult to get 2" groups consistently. I feel that my own ability (or lack thereof) was keeping me from achieving even tighter groups, although I felt my accuracy improved as I shot through the hundred rounds.

Am I more accurate with the Thunder than the P89? Not necessarily. The issue that makes the Bersa so much sweeter is the trigger. The P89 is "stagey", with a long pull, even in single action. You pull the trigger back to what feels like a stop, then you have to take up even more trigger. You then get a fair amount of creep before the gun discharges. In contrast, the Bersa has no staging...just a little creep, then it fires. The P89 can shoot accurately, but the trigger makes you work at it.

After a hundred rounds, I didn't notice any fatigue or pain from recoil with the Bersa. The gun shoots smoothly and comfortably. At first, I was wary of the hard plastic grips, but I found them easy to hold and very form fitting and "meaty" for my large hands. I would like a rubber grip option, something other than a Hogue slip-on, but it is not a pressing issue. The Bersa grips are fine. I did take the sheen off of the grips by buffing them a bit with steel wool, and this improved both the appearance and feel of the grips.

Of course, the P89 grips are thin. I had a set of Hogue wraparounds that helped that a bunch, but the factory Ruger grips weren't nearly as comfortable to me. Also, it seems to me that the longer and more upright grip angle of the Bersa fits my style of shooting much better.

The Bersa has several options on it that make it a great value for the money. The "round chambered" indicator is nice, although I'd rather it be on the side than on top. I guess the idea is to make it easy to see when you are aiming, because it will be right where you are looking. But, if it were either on the left or the right, it would be simple to FEEL it, eliminating the need to look altogether. But, that's nitpicking, considering the P89 had NO round chambered indicator.

It also has polygonal rifling like the CZ82, which may not be an advantage from an accuracy standpoint, but will probably last longer than a barrel with traditional rifling. Also, the firing pin is reinforced to allow dry firing practice. I don't know how safe it is to do that, but I've heard in more than one place that the reinforcement was done for that purpose. I dry fired it a couple of times without any ill effects, but it is not something I'd want to do day in and day out.

Furthermore, the Bersa has an integral front rail and Glock style "dot U" sights. They are far easier to see than the Ruger's traditional dot sights. I'd like to have a laser at some point, but I think it would make holstering a challenge. And, shooting the Bersa is easy enough that it is really not necessary. EDIT: Since writing this, Bersa has begun to ship their Pro series with dovetail sights, front and rear.  By all accounts, they are compatible with Sig #8 sights, so upgrading should be easy.

Needless to say, the Ruger has traditional rifling, regular 3 dot sights, and no integral rail. To be fair, the Ruger design dates back to 1985, and other Ruger pistols have been updated with the features found on the Bersa, so we're kind of comparing apples and oranges, but there are still a lot of P89's out there for sale in this price range, which makes these guns compete with one another in the market.

Take-down is not difficult for either pistol, but the Bersa makes it so simple that a child could do it. You simply eject the mag and flip a lever down. The slide comes right off. Pull the guide rod and spring out, push the barrel forward and down, and you've just field stripped the pistol.

The Ruger requires you to lock the slide back and push the ejector down so that the slide can come forward. Then, holding the gun in your right hand as if you were shooting, place your index finger on the take-down pin. While holding a little bit of back pressure on the slide, push the take-down pin through slightly. With your left hand, grab the other side of the take-down pin (which doubles as the slide lock) and pull straight out. The pin won't come out, but it will move far enough out of the way to let the slide come forward. Then, just like on the Bersa, pull the guide rod and spring out, push the barrel forward and down, and you're finished.

Basically, you need only complete these steps in reverse to reassemble, but on both pistols, it takes a bit of fiddling to get the slide lined back up so that the take-down lever or pin re-engages. Neither is difficult, but the Bersa is brain-dead simple.

There is a world of difference in the finish between the two pistols. The P89 has a durable finish that can withstand a lot of abuse. I've dropped it, scraped it, bumped it, and so on. I forgot and left it in my truck for 2 weeks and found it coated with a light dusting of rust over the blued slide. A little steel wool and gun oil fixed it up good as new, showing no discernible damage. Of course, the frame was powder-coated or some other such tough finish and never had any scratches or thin spots.

Like the Ruger, the Bersa's frame is finished just fine. Unlike the Ruger, the slide is a disaster. I've heard this is not uncommon for the matte versions, which is why I originally wanted a nickel finish, but they were impossible to find, so I settled. I almost wish I hadn't. The finish itself is uneven and splotchy. It looks as if it ALWAYS has an uneven coating of oil on it, because some areas had a sheen and were almost glossy, while others were truly matte looking and dull. I personally don't care whether or not it is glossy or flat, but Bersa needs to pick only ONE! It is a shame, because this horrible finish almost ruins an otherwise handsome looking gun.

I've since corrected the problem by ordering a replacement nickel slide from Eagle Imports ($65), pictured above.  That solved my only complaint with the Bersa.  It now looks quite handsome. My advice is to order the nickel or duotone from the beginning, although I have heard reports that Bersa has solved the mottling on the matte slide.
Bersa warrants their pistol for life for the original owner. I've heard their service is very good. I've also heard that Ruger's is as well, but I don't know the terms of their warranty.

My recommendation? As far as I can tell now, you can't really go wrong with either pistol. But the fact is, the Bersa seems like a much more full-featured pistol for the money, especially if you have the extra scratch for the nickel finish or a buddy who's crafty with Duracoating. But, that's an extra step that you don't have with the Ruger. Plus, the Ruger is a known quantity. You know it will never fail you, because it is built like a tank.

I will give more info on the Bersa's reliability as time goes on. If it is as good as the Ruger's, then the choice is a no-brainer.

UPDATE, June 2015: Several years on, the Bersa continues to perform reliably. It runs well, even dirty, and accuracy is very good. The funny thing is, I originally got this pistol as a stopgap until I could get a CZ, but I don't see any real need to upgrade at this point. The price point has increased somewhat...the cheapest I've seen the Thunder 9 HC is right around the $400 mark.  Still a bargain for a solid, reliable combat handgun.