I’ve had a lot of dealings with the venerable 1911A1 and it’s variants. These were still the standard issue handgun when I was in the service. When I got out I worked for a time at Detonics. This company made some damn expensive guns in the 1980s; you’d pay $1100 for a new, in the box Scoremaster. But what you got for your money was an out-of-the-box accurate, dead-reliable high quality hand-fitted pistol.
They knew the gun was reliable when it left the factory because they fired three magazines of mixed ammunition through each and every gun before it went our the door. By mixed I mean several types of ball, hollow points, target wadcutters and semi-wadcutters. If the gun didn’t function flawlessly it went back and got reworked until it did. That was what you were paying a premium for after all- a well-made gun that you can count on.
Fast forward to 2010 SHOT Show. I was at the booth of a ‘premium’ 1911 manufacturer and listened as he explained that the $2200 dollar gun he was showing should be fired 500-1000 times to break it in before you should count on it. This struck me as a bit odd since I had just left a maker of inexpensive 1911s where the owner of the company said, “We recommend a 500 round break-in period, but honestly the gun should work out of the box. Just give it a good cleaning, lube it up and you ought to be ready to go.” This company’s products ran 20-25% of the cost of the ‘Premium’ gun.
He was very candid and went on to explain that while they did their best sometimes minor things slipped through- a rough surface, a small burs etc. that would work themselves out over the course of a few hundred rounds, so they liked people to ‘shoot them in’ before returning the product under warranty. Of everyone that I know that has purchased one of these guns it has, in fact, been reliable right out of the box.
So when the representative of the ‘Premium’ gun talked about a 500-1000 round ‘break-in’ period before the gun would be reliable I was dubious. This ‘break-in’ period means that if you don’t reload you are going to pay as much as $400 in addition to that $2200 price tag before you should ‘count on’ your gun being reliable. I know a number of people that have bought these guns and had numerous malfunctions in the first 500 rounds. To the companies credit most of these guns eventually settled down and became reliable.
The rational for this ‘break-in’ period was that these guns were manufactured to tighter tolerances and needed to ‘wear in.’ I’m well-known for speaking my mind- in other words without thinking- so I said, “So basically you charge a premium price, then draft your customers to finish the pistol for you. That sounds like a pretty good deal for you guys.”
The rep was speechless- in fact he gaped at me like a fish out of water. A couple of people chuckled and several looked uneasy. After thirty seconds of the fish-gape I moved on. So did several other people, mostly with thoughtful looks on their faces. I do not think I would have been welcome at that booth thereafter…
On another occasion a buddy of mine was proudly displaying his new premium 1911 and said, “It’s not really reliable yet; I’ve only put about 400 rounds through it.”
I said, “You know, if you bought a Glock for $450 dollars and it didn’t work right out of the box you’d throw a fit.”
He  looked gobsmacked, then a thoughtful.
Here’s the thing about break-in periods for premium 1911s- it’s a scam. The manufacturers of these guns have convinced us that this is normal. It’s not. The guns aren’t premium- they are just tight, and the manufacturers have convinced us that we should feel privileged to do their work for them. On a $400 1911 I can live with that. On a gun that is supposed be the top-of-the-line, the best of the best? It’s bullshit, and we need to call them on it. Because they will keep right on conning us as long as we let them get away with it.
There is a lot of talk out there about High Velocity Pre-Fragmented Projectiles such as Glaser Safety Slugs and Mag Safe ammunition. Some tout them as ‘the ultimate self-defense round’ and others decry them as useless and a rip-off. In fact they are neither- they are a special-purpose limited application round and within their limits they work quite well.
What is a Pre-Fragmented Projectile?
The most common form is a bullet-shaped copper shell filled with shot. The size and quantity of shot varies with the design. The end of a Glaser Safety Slug is capped with a polymer sphere. Mag safe has no cap, but rather fills the space around the shot with an epoxy resin. Since these bullets are lighter than conventional bullets they are fired at higher velocity than conventional bullets- usually 150-200+% of typical bullet velocities for a given caliber. This gives them a proportionately higher kinetic energy load as well. Another advantage is that they tend to have relatively light recoil, allowing faster follow-up shots.
They are called Safety Slugs for several reasons; first because they are designed so that if they hit a hard, angled surface instead of ricocheting they will break up into small pieces that are unlikely to have lethal effect at any significant distance from the impact. They are also likely to break up in a standard interior wall, especially if they strike at an angle, emerging if at all as a diffuse spray of small projectiles at low velocity that are unlikely to inflict a lethal wound. They will not over-penetrate a human body and possibly go on to strike an innocent bystander. Such rounds were originally designed for Air Marshals as it was felt that they would be less likely to over-penetrate the fuselage of an aircraft in flight and cause explosive decompression.
There have been a number of theoretical studies; many of these are well thought out and theoretically sound if you accept their basic assumptions. The primary assumption is that it is necessary to penetrate at least twelve inches to result in a ‘stop,’ as a cross-body shot might have to penetrate that far to disrupt vital organs and structures in the body. Unfortunately these studies don’t take into account documented cases of actual shootings in real life with high-velocity pre-fragmented projectiles. In these cases they have most often worked extremely well- overall at least as well as conventional hollow-point ammunition in their given caliber.
There are stories of these bullets failing to penetrate heavy clothing, leather jackets etc. To the best of my knowledge not one of these stories has been documented by any reliable authority.
One problem is that an intervening limb might take the hit, causing the bullet to break up before hitting the torso and failing to result in a ‘stop.’ That an intervening limb might take the hit from the bullet is well-taken. On the other hand a hit in the hand or arm with a service caliber Glaser will virtually insure that that limb is out of action- and we shouldn’t ignore cases where an intervening limb has deflected a conventional bullet.
Marshall Evans study of actual coroner’s reports of real-life, documented shootings did include two examples of 9x19mm Glasers failing to stop a suspect with a single hit. One was a cross-body shot that struck the back by the shoulder blade at an acute angle and while it did massive surface damage did not stop the perp- though it is doubtful that a comparable hit with any conventional bullet would have done better under the circumstances. In the second case the Glaser round passed through the upper arm and started to break up before hitting the suspect’s chest. A conventional round under these circumstances would likely have been more effective. In a few cases locally of use by police officers in the late 1980s and early 1990s they performed at least as well as conventional ammunition.
There have been a number of shootings with 9x19mm Glasers since that have been documented- on the average Glasers have performed about as well as a good conventional hollow-point. However that average doesn’t tell the entire tale. When broken down into full-frontal hits and oblique hits the statistics change noticeably. In cases of oblique hits effectiveness drops due to the low penetration of these rounds. In cases of full-frontal hits 9x19mm Glasers have been extremely effective at stopping with torso hits- but it should be noted that almost none of these were single-shot shootings. It is only on oblique (crossing the body) hits that effectiveness drops lower than good hollow-points. Since most home defense shootings involve full-frontal shots this is less of an issue for home defense uses than it is for law enforcement.
Then there is the argument that HVPFPs have very poor penetration against car windows, doors etc. This is hardly surprising- they are designed to not penetrate these types of obstacles. Many will argue that this makes these rounds unsuitable for general law-enforcement use. I happen to agree with this however it has no bearing on most civilian in-home self-defense situations.
Some also argue that an overzealous prosecutor can claim that you were using ‘special killer bullets.’ If you get hung up on this one some one should shoot your lawyer; the ‘killer ammo’ charge in the case of Glasers and their ilk is laughably easy to shoot down in court. You weren’t carrying special ‘man-killer’ ammo. Far from it- you were carrying ‘Safety Slugs’ that wouldn’t over-penetrate or ricochet and hurt innocent bystanders; you were in fact concerned enough about this possibility that you were willing to spend as much as $3 a shot to insure against accidental injury of innocents. It helps of course if this is actually true and reflects your real reasons for using this ammo.
Which brings up another issue: these rounds are expensive, often costing $3 a round or even more. I lived in an apartment years back and at a gun show a fellow questioned spending $3 a shot for defensive ammo. I asked him if he didn’t think maybe my neighbor’s 3 year old daughter’s life wasn’t worth a bit more than $3 a shot? Currently I live in a house with a wife, six dogs and a cat. It would really suck if a round from my gun penetrated a wall and injured or killed one of them, which even very good hollow-points frequently can.
HVPFPs aren’t perfect, nor are they useless. They are special application ammo that I believe is not suited to use as a police duty round. They are suited to special circumstances and civilian use in densely populated areas, apartment buildings or for homes where other family members are usually present. In these cases it would be wise to balance the situational effectiveness of these rounds against the likelihood of causing unintended injury to bystanders.
One thing that I feel is important to note- shot placement is critical with any defensive ammunition. You can have the best defensive ammunition on the planet and it’s not good if it doesn’t hit something important. Practice is paramount, and with Glasers or Mag-Safe the cost of that is prohibitive. Your best bet is to find a less expensive ammunition that hits the same point of impact and practice with that.
Another thing to consider- these rounds work because of their velocity, and since the bullet is light weight they lose velocity relatively quickly; they are a fairly short-range proposition. Since most defensive shootings- especially in the home- take place at very short range this is unlikely to be an issue.
For home defense in almost any good quality service-caliber revolver I would not hesitate to recommend them- with the proviso that you fire a cylinder full to insure that there are no issues. In a semi-automatic pistol I wouldn’t unless you are completely satisfied that they will function correctly- how you establish that is your judgement. My wife’s Kahr E9 cycled a magazine of Magsafes flawlessly. Normally I would still be a bit dubious but since the gun has never experienced any feeding problems with any type or profile of 9mm bullet I’m not concerned.
For general law-enforcement and self-defense outside of the home HVPFPs are often not the best choice due to their lack of penetration of obstacles. Law enforcement officers in particular may encounter situations where they need to fire on a vehicle or through obstacles and to a lesser degree legally-armed civilians may face these same situations. In these cases modern, good-quality hollow-point ammunition remains the choice of professionals.
So, Range report for 26 May- took the Rossi M68 and the Carcano-Mannlicher carbine over to Renton Gun Club. Mixed results for the day.
The Ugly Duckling “This isn’t even my final form!”
Starting with the bad news- Last time I took the Rossi M68 to the range it experienced 80% failures to fire. I replaced the mainspring and it’s an improvement- 20% failures. The primer strikes are a bit shallow; time to replace the hammer-mounted firing pin. After examining it it seems a bit short. I can buy one cheap enough, but I might just fabricate one; it’s not a complicated part.
Linda’s Rossi M68 with custom grip tailored to her hand.
 Now for the Carcano. The original front sight was drift adjustable and was offset significantly to the left. When I made the new front sight I canted it to the left to approximate the position of the original sight, though of course I had no real way of knowing that the original sight was correct. So when I go to the range I bought a large target- the one with five red squares on it- a two-inch square near each corner and a four-inch square in the center. I set it up at fifty yards; since there was not telling how far off the sights would be I wanted to at least keep them on the paper.
The range’s rules for rifles are that you can only load one round at a time, and this is a bit of a problem for Carcano rifles because they load from a six-round clip. The way the extractor engages you can’t simply drop a round in the chamber and close the bolt. So you need to either remove the bolt, clip the cartridge into the extractor and replace the bolt or try to get it to work with a single round in the clip. It doesn’t want to, and requires significant fumbling to get e round chambered that way. After I’d fired five rounds the solution was at hand- load five empties under one live round. Problem solved- load, fire, release the clip and repeat the process. Worked a treat.
The trigger has some slack, but after that it breaks pretty cleanly and the pull is not at all heavy. Maybe 5 lbs? Anyway it always surprised me with the bang, just as it should. Recoil is about what you’d expect from a 5-1/2 to 6 lb. gun in the .30-30/300 Savage range. It’s fairly mild, but after 15-20 rounds you start to feel it. I think there is a recoil pad in this gun’s future, but there’s no real hurry.
the steel butt-plate is OK, but a recoil-pad will be better.
Once I started shooting I discovered a problem with operator headspace and timing- I’d brought the wrong glasses. Instead of my general-use glasses I had my close-work shop glasses. This meant that while the front sight was sharp the little red squares tended to register as a tiny, indistinct pink blur.
So, based on my guess of how to set up the sights and allowing for the wrong glasses where did my Ugly Duckling hit at fifty yards? Dead On. Seriously, I mean dead-nuts exactly where the sights were pointed. Damn, I’m good… and absurdly lucky. Mostly lucky.
The sight picture does require a bit of explanation- The M1938 7.35mm Carcano had a fixed ‘battle sight’ that uses an atypical sight picture. The rifle has a drift-adjustable post front sight and a robust fixed V-notch rear. It seems crude and rudimentary but it’s actually quite clever. Italian soldiers were taught to center the tip of the front sight in the base of the V, rather than a more typical sight picture that would center it even with the top of the V. At ranges from 0-200 meters if they aimed center-mass of their target’s body they would hit somewhere on the torso. For longer ranges- out to 300-350 meters- they would get the same effect by centering the front post even with the top of the V. 350 meters was considered the maximum effective range of the M1938. Simple, clever and effective.
I wanted this to be a 100-150 yard gun and with that in mind I had altered the height of the front sight and deepened the V-notch. Using the ‘bottom-V’ sight picture it seemed to hit the exact point of aim. Using the conventional sight picture (with the top of the front post even with the top of the V-notch) the rifle hits about 4 inches high at fifty yards. If the tables I found are accurate this means it will hit about right on at 100 yards and about 3-4 inches low at 150 yards.
So how did I accomplish this remarkable adjustment to the sights to produce exactly the result I was hoping for? I’m going to go with Divine Intervention. Seriously, because I looked at it and guessed. Yes, I got the result I wanted, and yes I did it on purpose. I shortened the barrel and guessed at how tall the front sight should be and how deep the rear V-notch should be. But there is absolutely no way that it came out right by anything but sheer dumb luck. Like the man said, sometimes it’s better to be lucky than good.
As some have predicted the muzzle-blast is spectacular. After I touched off the first shot I clearly heard the work ‘Blunderbuss’ from one of the gentlemen at the other end of the firing line. Well, you shoot a load designed for a 21 inch barrel out of a 16-1/2 inch barrel and that’s going to happen. Once I am loading my own I’ll experiment and see if I can tailor the loads to the shorter barrel. Big Fun.
So, a mixed bag today. I’m over-the-moon about the Carbine, frustrated and irritated by the revolver. Oh, I shot the 22TTP today also, and it did what it does- shoots good groups a bit too high… got to remember to fix those sights next.