#46
 

On 2/27/16 12:36 PM, John H. wrote:
On Sat, 27 Feb 2016 12:20:14 -0500, wrote:

On Sat, 27 Feb 2016 07:37:58 -0500, John H.
wrote:

. Wish I could say the same about the Mosin Nagant. The Russians
must have spent a lot of time practicing how to load that damn thing.

I bet if you look around a little you could find the Soviet training
manual and the procedure they were taught. You were in the army, you
know they drilled this until they could do it in their sleep.

It's not that hard with the regular infantry version. A stripper makes the job pretty
easy. The sniper version has the scope mounted so that the stripper won't work. So
it's one round at a time, with the scope in the way. I suppose the snipers weren't in
a big hurry to reload. One or two rounds and they were out of there. The sniper
version is a much smoother operating gun though.
--

I can see why the "sniper" version would be your preference.

#46
 

On Sat, 27 Feb 2016 12:55:49 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote:

On 2/27/16 12:36 PM, John H. wrote:
On Sat, 27 Feb 2016 12:20:14 -0500, wrote:

On Sat, 27 Feb 2016 07:37:58 -0500, John H.
wrote:

. Wish I could say the same about the Mosin Nagant. The Russians
must have spent a lot of time practicing how to load that damn thing.

I bet if you look around a little you could find the Soviet training
manual and the procedure they were taught. You were in the army, you
know they drilled this until they could do it in their sleep.

It's not that hard with the regular infantry version. A stripper makes the job pretty
easy. The sniper version has the scope mounted so that the stripper won't work. So
it's one round at a time, with the scope in the way. I suppose the snipers weren't in
a big hurry to reload. One or two rounds and they were out of there. The sniper
version is a much smoother operating gun though.
--

I can see why the "sniper" version would be your preference.

I'm glad you can.
--

Ban liars, tax cheats, idiots, audiophools, and narcissists...not guns!

#46
 

John H.
- show quoted text -
He bothered because he thought it would upset me.

"What is 'douse'?"


Say what!
Lord help those poor kids you taught a few years ago. Didn't the school board instruct you on how to use a dictionary?

#46
 

On Sat, 27 Feb 2016 10:15:35 -0800 (PST), True North wrote:

John H.
- show quoted text -
He bothered because he thought it would upset me.

"What is 'douse'?"


Say what!
Lord help those poor kids you taught a few years ago. Didn't the school board instruct you on how to use a dictionary?

So when you say, "...you received a double douse of his rancor...", you meant Harry
got liquid poured all over him?

So when do you get the Bayliner?
--

Ban liars, tax cheats, idiots, audiophools, and narcissists...not guns!

#46
 

On Saturday, 27 February 2016 14:52:13 UTC-4, John H. wrote:
On Sat, 27 Feb 2016 10:15:35 -0800 (PST), True North wrote:

John H.
- show quoted text -
He bothered because he thought it would upset me.

"What is 'douse'?"


Say what!
Lord help those poor kids you taught a few years ago. Didn't the school board instruct you on how to use a dictionary?

So when you say, "...you received a double douse of his rancor...", you meant Harry
got liquid poured all over him?


Not sure if I would refer to your rancor as liquid, but you get the idea.

#46
 

On Sat, 27 Feb 2016 11:02:39 -0800 (PST), True North wrote:

On Saturday, 27 February 2016 14:52:13 UTC-4, John H. wrote:
On Sat, 27 Feb 2016 10:15:35 -0800 (PST), True North wrote:

John H.
- show quoted text -
He bothered because he thought it would upset me.

"What is 'douse'?"


Say what!
Lord help those poor kids you taught a few years ago. Didn't the school board instruct you on how to use a dictionary?

So when you say, "...you received a double douse of his rancor...", you meant Harry
got liquid poured all over him?


Not sure if I would refer to your rancor as liquid, but you get the idea.

Perhaps you simply made a mistake and misspelled 'dose'? No biggy. We all make
mistakes.
--

Ban liars, tax cheats, idiots, audiophools, and narcissists...not guns!

#46
 

On Sat, 27 Feb 2016 12:55:49 -0500, Keyser Söze
wrote:

On 2/27/16 12:36 PM, John H. wrote:
On Sat, 27 Feb 2016 12:20:14 -0500, wrote:

On Sat, 27 Feb 2016 07:37:58 -0500, John H.
wrote:

. Wish I could say the same about the Mosin Nagant. The Russians
must have spent a lot of time practicing how to load that damn thing.

I bet if you look around a little you could find the Soviet training
manual and the procedure they were taught. You were in the army, you
know they drilled this until they could do it in their sleep.

It's not that hard with the regular infantry version. A stripper makes the job pretty
easy. The sniper version has the scope mounted so that the stripper won't work. So
it's one round at a time, with the scope in the way. I suppose the snipers weren't in
a big hurry to reload. One or two rounds and they were out of there. The sniper
version is a much smoother operating gun though.
--

I can see why the "sniper" version would be your preference.

I assume it is the same reason why you wanted the Hbar AR (besides
sliding through the Md loophole in the law)
They were a selected for better accuracy than the standard infantry
version.

#46
 

On Sat, 27 Feb 2016 08:03:27 -0500, Keyser Söze
wrote:

Tim wrote:
On Friday, February 26, 2016 at 7:43:31 PM UTC-6, Alex wrote:
John H. wrote:
On Thu, 25 Feb 2016 20:25:27 -0500, Alex wrote:

John H. wrote:
On Thu, 25 Feb 2016 19:35:56 -0500, Alex wrote:

I just picked up a new Ruger SR40C for the car. Got the stainless
version so I don't have to oil the hell out of it for that environment.
The trigger is _smoooth_ for a striker-fired gun. It's an affordable .40
cal that I hope to not have to use other than at the range. They make a
9mm version for the same price.

http://ruger.com/products/sr40c/specSheets/3476.html

I'm wishing I'd waited for this to come out rather than get the Sig P938. This is a
sweet gun:

http://www.kimberamerica.com/micro-9?___SID=U

Comes in a .380 also.
--

Ban liars, tax cheats, idiots, audiophools, and narcissists...not guns!

That's a nice looking gun! I have large hands so a short, single-stack
like that might be hard to control for me.

Kimber does sell an extended magazine which gives a little better grip. I bought one
for the Sig P938. Big help, and an extra round.

Have you heard if Kimber has returned to their legendary build quality?
I've heard and read that it had suffered a bit but that was maybe four
years ago.
Except from Harry, I've not heard anything bad about Kimbers. This is my Kimber .45:

http://www.kimberamerica.com/tactical-custom-hd-ii-a

I love it. It's the best shooting gun I have...smoothest by far. I like the Sig 226,
but I can't shoot it as well as the Kimber. Then again, the Sig holds twice as many
rounds, so I need to shoot it only half as well...right?
--

Ban liars, tax cheats, idiots, audiophools, and narcissists...not guns!


If you search "Kimber quality" you will see a lot of results. The time
frames vary, as do the opinions, but the consensus seems to be that they
had problems and fixed them. If any problems did exist they could have
been limited to a few designs. Harry's opinion is worthless and usually
unfounded.

Having owned 3 Kimbers I can say I've never had an issue with any of
them. I did have one jam, but it was my own fault. It needed cleaned badly. otherwise...

Others I know who own Kimber arms regardless of what model or caliber
haven't had an issue with theirs either.

Maybe some people just like to gripe and look at the worst in everything.


Ignorance is bliss

As you so aptly demonstrate.

--
Cheers,

Schweik

#46
 

John H. wrote:
On Fri, 26 Feb 2016 20:43:31 -0500, Alex wrote:

John H. wrote:
On Thu, 25 Feb 2016 20:25:27 -0500, Alex wrote:

John H. wrote:
On Thu, 25 Feb 2016 19:35:56 -0500, Alex wrote:

I just picked up a new Ruger SR40C for the car. Got the stainless
version so I don't have to oil the hell out of it for that environment.
The trigger is _smoooth_ for a striker-fired gun. It's an affordable .40
cal that I hope to not have to use other than at the range. They make a
9mm version for the same price.

http://ruger.com/products/sr40c/specSheets/3476.html

I'm wishing I'd waited for this to come out rather than get the Sig P938. This is a
sweet gun:

http://www.kimberamerica.com/micro-9?___SID=U

Comes in a .380 also.
--

Ban liars, tax cheats, idiots, audiophools, and narcissists...not guns!

That's a nice looking gun! I have large hands so a short, single-stack
like that might be hard to control for me.

Kimber does sell an extended magazine which gives a little better grip. I bought one
for the Sig P938. Big help, and an extra round.

Have you heard if Kimber has returned to their legendary build quality?
I've heard and read that it had suffered a bit but that was maybe four
years ago.
Except from Harry, I've not heard anything bad about Kimbers. This is my Kimber .45:

http://www.kimberamerica.com/tactical-custom-hd-ii-a

I love it. It's the best shooting gun I have...smoothest by far. I like the Sig 226,
but I can't shoot it as well as the Kimber. Then again, the Sig holds twice as many
rounds, so I need to shoot it only half as well...right?
--

Ban liars, tax cheats, idiots, audiophools, and narcissists...not guns!

If you search "Kimber quality" you will see a lot of results. The time
frames vary, as do the opinions, but the consensus seems to be that they
had problems and fixed them. If any problems did exist they could have
been limited to a few designs. Harry's opinion is worthless and usually
unfounded.
I haven't fired thousands of rounds through mine - maybe 500 or so. But I've not had
any problems at all. Wish I could say the same about the Mosin Nagant. The Russians
must have spent a lot of time practicing how to load that damn thing. Hell, I screw
it up at the range. Those guys had to do it under attack by hordes of Germans!

Gosh, I'd been a believer in Harry's opinion until your comment. After all, he was a
hero of the Vietnam war, no?
--

Ban liars, tax cheats, idiots, audiophools, and narcissists...not guns!


In his mind, I'm sure he was.

#46
 

Tim wrote:
On Friday, February 26, 2016 at 7:43:31 PM UTC-6, Alex wrote:
John H. wrote:
On Thu, 25 Feb 2016 20:25:27 -0500, Alex wrote:

John H. wrote:
On Thu, 25 Feb 2016 19:35:56 -0500, Alex wrote:

I just picked up a new Ruger SR40C for the car. Got the stainless
version so I don't have to oil the hell out of it for that environment.
The trigger is _smoooth_ for a striker-fired gun. It's an affordable .40
cal that I hope to not have to use other than at the range. They make a
9mm version for the same price.

http://ruger.com/products/sr40c/specSheets/3476.html

I'm wishing I'd waited for this to come out rather than get the Sig P938. This is a
sweet gun:

http://www.kimberamerica.com/micro-9?___SID=U

Comes in a .380 also.
--

Ban liars, tax cheats, idiots, audiophools, and narcissists...not guns!

That's a nice looking gun! I have large hands so a short, single-stack
like that might be hard to control for me.

Kimber does sell an extended magazine which gives a little better grip. I bought one
for the Sig P938. Big help, and an extra round.

Have you heard if Kimber has returned to their legendary build quality?
I've heard and read that it had suffered a bit but that was maybe four
years ago.
Except from Harry, I've not heard anything bad about Kimbers. This is my Kimber .45:

http://www.kimberamerica.com/tactical-custom-hd-ii-a

I love it. It's the best shooting gun I have...smoothest by far. I like the Sig 226,
but I can't shoot it as well as the Kimber. Then again, the Sig holds twice as many
rounds, so I need to shoot it only half as well...right?
--

Ban liars, tax cheats, idiots, audiophools, and narcissists...not guns!

If you search "Kimber quality" you will see a lot of results. The time
frames vary, as do the opinions, but the consensus seems to be that they
had problems and fixed them. If any problems did exist they could have
been limited to a few designs. Harry's opinion is worthless and usually
unfounded.
Having owned 3 Kimbers I can say I've never had an issue with any of them. I did have one jam, but it was my own fault. It needed cleaned badly. otherwise...

Others I know who own Kimber arms regardless of what model or caliber haven't had an issue with theirs either.

Maybe some people just like to gripe and look at the worst in everything.


That's certainly true. I wanted a Kimber 1911 and, at the time, was
advised to not purchase one (by a trusted shop) and I found reviews
supporting that. It was 8-10 years ago so that this what lead to my
question to John.