Not sure how I found this civil war blog (Uncle? Tam? Someone
else?), but it has agreat article on Moore’s Patent
Revolver- the first revolver with a
swing-out cylinder (though not quite of the kind we're used
to.)
It's also interesting in that it was one of the many guns which
violated Rollin White's bored-through cylinder patent. History
buffs may recall that White was a Colt employee who first presented
his idea to allow a revolver cylinder to chamber metallic
cartridges to his boss, Colonel Colt. Colt rejected it out of hand.
White knew he was onto something, and left Colt to market his
patent.
Messieurs Smith and Wesson, enterprising and astute gentlemen that
they were, knew a good thing when they saw it and licensed White's
patent. This agreement was really the foundation of their new
handgun company, and they used it to produce their first revolver -
the Model 1. That patent made Smith and Wesson rich, allowed them
to grow like crazy relative to Colt, and should have made White
rich too. It would have, if he'd bothered to consider the fine
print.
You see, the licensing agreement required White to pursue all
litigation against infringers himself. Moore, like many others,
used White's patent without license - and White was obligated to go
after his revolver and his company. White would sue, win, and then
Smith & Wesson would somehow end up acquiring the infringing
guns - which they would sell themselves. (I've never read the
licensing agreement, so I can't be sure exactly how that
transpired, but Moore's case isn't the only example.)
Ironically, Moore's company survived and was purchased by White's
old employer, Colt, in 1870. More ironically, while Moore survived
White's fortune didn't; his defense of his patent cost him nearly
everything he made in royalties.
I'm thinking of a writing a firearms industry soap opera: "As The
Cylinder Turns."
- Not sure where I got this, but it's pretty interesting:a three-barrel revolver. What will people think of
next?!? (<--that’s humor, people.)
- Seems that Kim Rhode, ace Olympic shotgunner and ambassador for
the shooting sports,has a
blog. Hope she finds time to
post more often. (Who knew she was a fan of bacon-wrapped
meatloaf?)
- Speaking of Kim: I'm still a little miffed that they removed her
original event - women's double trap - from the Olympics, but left
the men's division. Why? No one knows for sure, but likely because
some of them uppity females were beatin' the menfolk. There are
lots of countries represented on the Olympic Committee, not all of
them known for their enlightened attitudes regarding a
woman’s place in society.
-An article
in The Economist(a magazine which often
displays a raw anti-American bias, yet is revered by Americans who
somehow consider themselves unbiased for having read it) talks
about gun ownership in the U.S. It states that while gun sales are
way up, the number of households owning guns has declined steadily
since 1973 - the implication that guns are being purchased only by
those evil "gun nuts." Their position doesn't square with my
observations, and I've yet to find any corroboration for it. Can
anyone comment authoritatively on their claim?
One of my little obsessions is simplistic technology. This usually
means older technology, that which is less complicated and
(ironically) many times better for us and our environment.
It was with tremendous joy, then, that I stumbled upon a great
website devoted to Luddites like me:Low Tech
Magazine. There you'll find articles
on simple technology, obsolete technology, and even technology
myths. It will probably vie for a large portion of my recreational
time; well, when I get any it certainly will.
(Yes, I realize the contradictions inherent in extolling the
virtues of old technology on a computer network. I consider such
juxtapositions an art form.)
What follows came up in a discussion about the reliability of 1911
pistols, but is actually universally applicable: to Glocks, SIGs,
HKs, rifles, shotguns - and, yes, revolvers.
The context of the discussion was the validity of looking at
failures during a training class as indicative of larger problems.
It usually takes a form similar to "I'm not going to fire 1,000
rounds in self defense, so a gun problem in a class proves nothing;
my gun is reliable enough for the 10 rounds it's going to
take."
The statement is valid - no one is going to fire 500 or 1,000
rounds in self defense - but the conclusion isn't.
A gun which is carried for self defense continuously deteriorates
in terms of its operational condition. Lubricants ooze out and
evaporate, while lint and dirt work their way into and onto the
operating surfaces. A gun which has been carried without stripping,
cleaning and re-oiling for a few weeks may in fact be at the same
level of cleanliness, and the oil and grease at the same level of
lubricity, as a gun which has just fired 500 or more rounds. (Yeah,
yeah, I know - you clean your gun every night and twice on Sundays.
You get a gold star that says "I'm the extreme exception!")
Now you might say that a failure at 600 or 700 rounds is immaterial
because you never will shoot it that much in real life, but
consider this: the gun that's been riding around in its holster for
a while may in fact be a lot closer in terms of operational
condition to that 600 round mark than you might believe. Since
malfunctions are, at some level, random, that gun may be at the
brink of malfunction with the first round - or second or third -
that's fired in defense of its owner. Different story now, isn't
it?
This is why it's important to test your self defense gun
thoroughly, and yes - that means a days where you shoot 500 or more
rounds through it without cleaning, oiling, or otherwise pampering
the thing. It's not to prove that the gun will shoot that many
rounds without malfunction; it's a way of helping you determine
whether the gun will function in the non-pristine condition in
which it probably always exists. The goal should be zero
malfunctions, because that's what's necessary when our lives are on
the line.
Over the weekend Rob Pincus - never one to shy away from a
firestorm (I was going to say another kind of storm, but this is a
family-friendly blog) - posted a video on YouTube. In it, he
details the failure of yet another compact 1911-pattern pistol and
expresses his disdain for the breed in general.
The online response was immediate and predictable. Many people
agreed with Rob, but a very vocal portion of the shooting public
disagreed vehemently. I don't have a problem with the disagreement,
mind you (Rob and I discovered some time ago that we share the same
feelings about the 1911 pistol, which is probably why we get
along), but I do have a problem with the nonsensical responses
given by those who disagree. Here are a couple of the most
annoying, and they apply not just to the present discussion but all
discussions about guns, cars, or darned near anything else on the
planet.
More to the point, they apply to the kinds of responses I receive
when I talk about the virtues of the revolver versus an autoloader
as a defensive tool; I've heard these same arguments to my
opinions, gotten them in emails, and seen them plastered over the
'net. That's probably why they're annoying.
1)"My is perfectly
reliable, so your opinion is
baseless/stupid/meaningless."Aside from the issues with
making claims about an entire population based on a single data
point, there are a couple of problems with this statement. First,
the two sides may not agree on the definition of "reliable". I've
proposed one such definition, but not everyone agrees.
I had a fellow once who told me his particular AR-15, a brand for
which I don't care, was "completely reliable". I picked it up,
inserted a magazine of fresh factory 55gn ball ammunition, and it
failed to feed the fourth round. "Oh, it doesn't run with Federal
ammo. That stuff is crap, and everyone knows it." Really?
Seriously? If an AR-15 can't feed SAAMI-spec ball ammo (XM193 in
this case), it's not reliable - period. The owner disagreed, his
definition of "reliable" obviously divergent from my own.
The more interesting facet of this argument is that partisans
frequently have selective memories. This is closely related to the
phenomenon of confirmation bias: a person simply forgets those data
points which disagree with his/her position. I've watched, more
than once, a shooter clear a malfunction and promptly forget that
he had one. When later he claims that his gun is perfectly
reliable, and then is reminded of the incident(s), he can't/won't
acknowledge that they ever happened. I don't watch much television,
but one of my favorite lines from a TV show comes from "House":
"everyone lies." Perhaps not intentionally, but they do.
I was in a class some years ago with a guy who had a malfunctioning
Para-Ordnance. (This is not a shock to me, as I've never seen a
reliable Para. Please, don't write and tell me about how Todd
Jarrett's Paras are so reliable that he made a YouTube vid; he's a
sponsored shooter, and both he and his handlers have a vested
interest in making sure those "demos" go without a hitch.) A couple
of weeks later he was on a forum talking about the class, and
mentioned that his Para ran without a hitch. Funny, what I remember
was picking up the live rounds that he was ejecting every few
minutes!
Remember that there is a difference between extrapolation (from one
to many) and representation (one of the many.) Picking a single
example to illustrate a broader concept that has statistical
validity, as this video does, is not the same as using a single
example as the basis for a self-referential supposition. The former
has data behind it; the latter has no data other than itself.
2)"All guns can
fail."This is a particular
favorite of mine, because it combines a lack of understanding of
both engineering and statistics with a dollop of third-grade
playground bravado. This statement attempts to get people to focus
not on evidence, but on speculation; sadly, it works - as any
political candidate can attest. If all devices can fail, then
logically it doesn't matter which one you own, correct? If all cars
break, why bother to look at repair statistics? Of course it
matters, except when the partisans and fanboys get to talking -
then the logic just flies out the window.
Yes, all mechanical devices can potentially fail. That's not the
point. The point is that some devices fail more than others, and we
can chart and often predict those failures based on past
experience.
(I hear a variation of this when I talk about revolvers: "I've seen
revolvers break too!" So have I - probably an order of magnitude
more often than the person writing/talking. The difference is that
for every mechanical failure I've seen on a revolver, I've seen
hundreds on autoloaders. There is a difference which cannot be
wished away.)
Whatmightbreak is a very different
thing that what actuallydoes. When we look at failures,
patterns emerge that help us make both buying and engineering
decisions. Smith & Wesson, for instance, looked at failures of
their Model 29 .44 Magnum and made running engineering changes that
dramatically improved the longevity and reliability of that gun.
They couldn't have done so had they not looked at the pattern of
failures that field experience had provided.
Availing ourselves of field data, from people who have seen more of
it than us, is one way we can make good decisions. Striking out at
the messenger because the message disagrees with some silly loyalty
one has developed makes no sense at all.
(Oh, BTW - I do have some experience with short-barreled 1911s in
the form of two Detonics CombatMasters, which some day I'll sell to
one of those rabid 1911 fanboys. And laugh all the way to the
bank.)
My morning routine is pretty consistent; I get up between 5:30 and
5:45, start a fire in the woodstove, grab a cup of tea, and sit
down with Tyler The Overindulged Rabbit to watch a program on PBS
called "America's Heartland", which comes on at 6:am.
The show celebrates the people in this country who do the hard work
to provide us with food, clothes, lumber and all manner of other
products. A simple fact of life on earth is that everything we
have, everything you see around you, was either grown or mined.
This show celebrates the growers (and sometimes the miners - they
had a segment on salt mining not too long ago.)
I'm proud of having grown up with loggers, farmers and ranchers,
and it's time they got some good press. America's Heartland exists
to do just that, and you don't need to tune into PBS to watch it
-their website has
every one of their episodes, spanning seven years,
streamed. You can even search for segments that were filmed in any
particular state.
After today's segment on peach growers I'm a little hungry. Thanks
to the farmers, I'm going to have breakfast!
If Monday's post got you a little envious, today's should fix you
right up.
I got an email the other day from a reader in Thailand (of all
places!) He had read my book and was looking for some
recommendations with regard to a home defense gun. He also shared
with me the gun situation in his country.
In Thailand, you must have permission from the authorities to
purchase a gun. You have to submit to a fingerprint check and give
them bank statements, plus have letters of recommendation from your
employer. The waiting period starts at three months, and that's if
you're asking to buy a common caliber (.22, .38, or 9mm.) If you
want any other caliber, particularly if it's larger than 9mm, the
wait time goes up.
Guns and ammunition are, according to the email, incredibly
expensive. A plain ol' Ruger SP101 is the equivalent of $2,700!
Once you've bought the gun (and it's very likely you'll only be
able to buy one in your entire lifetime), you have to feed the
thing - and if you want quality (U.S. made) ammunition, it'll run
you $3 per round. For the plain stuff.
So, stop whining about how ammo in this country is getting
expensive and how much guns cost these days. Our friends in
Thailand have it much worse off, and yet they persevere to give
themselves the most efficient self protection tools they can.
I had something else planned for today, but it wasn't nearly as
cool as this!
Over at Forgotten Weapons is a story aboutvisiting a gun show in
Belgium.
Now I know we all have a vision of Europe as being devoid of gun
ownership (or at least so restricted as to make it impossible to
own anything cool), but it would do us well to remember that Europe
is the land of the cheap and readily available suppressor.
Compare that to the
file-your-paperwork-and-$200-and-wait-six-months ordeal that owning
a simple muffler entails here in The Land Of The Free.
That's not the only thing about which (some) Europeans are more
enlightened. Take a look at the mounds of full-auto military
hardware for sale at the aforementioned Belgian show - then look at
the prices. Yes, $1250 for a Dror machine gun. I don't follow the
Class II world at all, but even I know that in comparison to the
U.S. that is a screaming, unbelievable, unfathomable deal. And
there are lots more where those came from!
Of course there is the other side of the coin, and on Wednesday I
hope to be able to present it to you. In the meantime, though, may
you dream pleasant dreams of cheap Thompsons.
(Editor's Note: I'll
admit to knowing nothing about blackpowder arms, so this article
from Ed was quite enlightening! If you've thought about getting a
cap-and-ball revolver but weren't sure about how to use it, Ed's
article will tell you everything you need to
know!)
Handling
Cap & Ball Revolvers By
C.E. "Ed" Harris
Learning to shoot a cap & ball revolver requires common sense
and attention to detail, but these guns are effective and
satisfying. Safety, reliability and accuracy of a black powder
revolver all depend on care exercised in loading. Doing this
correctly requires 2 or 3 minutes. It cannot be done hurriedly.
Think of your cap & ball revolver as being little different
from a modern one, except that it has its own reloading press
attached. If you give it the combined attention you do in shooting,
plus reloading ammunition, AND at the same time, you will be
OK.
Dry each chamber thoroughly prior to loading and ensure the nipples
are clear of oil or debris. This is done by "snapping caps" on each
nipple, and observing the disturbance of a leaf, paper or other
light material near the muzzle. In a hunting situation when you
don't want to risk scaring game, dry the chambers thoroughly with
patches. Use a straight copper wire to clear each channel. Hold the
cylinder up to the light and ensure you can see daylight through
each flash channel, then degrease the chambers with a light
volatile solvent such as Outer's Crud Cutter or Birchwood Casey Gun
Scrubber and dry with patches. When this is done, the revolver will
be sure-fire.
If despite your best efforts, a chamber has misfired, clear the
flash channel with a wire, re-cap it and try again. If this doesn't
work, the safest way to clear a misfire in a cap & ball
revolver is to carefully pry caps from all nipples with a small
screwdriver, while wearing safety glasses and pointing the muzzle
in a safe direction. Then remove the cylinder. Unscrew the
offending nipple and carefully pick out the powder with a copper
wire or other nonferrous object until you can freely insert a 5/32"
diameter straight punch into the chamber until it solidly contacts
the base of the ball or bullet. Then carefully tap out the ball
from behind.
Round balls are still the best choice for general use in either
light or heavy loads. They are extremely easy to cast, accurate,
and effective for small game. A round ball attains 900-1000 f.p.s.
in a full load and is a better killer and more accurate than the
slower conicals. I don't use the conical bullets in cap & ball
revolvers, because they offer no advantage in game killing power or
accuracy. The 200 and 250-gr. Lee R.E.A.L., H&G #130BB or Saeco
131, cast soft, are better options for heavier bullets in the .44
and .45 revolvers. The Lee R.E.A.L. is also available in the .36
caliber, and can be used in cap & ball revolvers of that bore
size with the same charges used for round balls.
I recommend a starting load of 20 grs. of FFFg or the same volume
of Pyrodex P in the .44 cap & ball revolvers and 16 grs. on the
.36 cals. Then work up the load as needed to get best accuracy.
Best target accuracy is usually obtained with 18-20 grs. in the .36
cal., and 20-25 grs. in the .44. Full service charges are 24grs. in
the .36, 28 grs. in the brass frame .44s, and 35 grs. in the steel
frames.
A wadcutter bullet like the R.E.A.L. is sized and pre- lubricated
like a conventional bullet, eliminating the need to apply grease
over the ball. I lubricate REAL bullets for my Old Army in a .454"
sizer, and use a .450-.451" for the replicas. You can either use
your favorite black powder lube, or do simply tumble the bullets in
Lee Liquid Alox.
Firm compression of the charge is necessary for best accuracy. With
charges less than 20 grains bulk measure in the .44 replicas or 25
grains in the Ruger Old Army, the stroke of the loading lever is
inadequate to compress the charge unless a wad or filler is used. I
thumb an Ox Yoke wad over the powder as I load each chamber. This
also avoids the risk of an inadvertent double-charge or seating a
ball with no powder under it. The wad also avoids spilling powder
from adjacent chambers when seating the ball or bullet, keeps the
bore cleaner and improves accuracy too.
If you cannot feel the charge compress slightly before the end of
the rammer stroke, you may need to also pour a bit of Farina, Cream
of Wheat or corn meal to take up the empty space in the chambers. I
dispense mine from a catsup bottle. Cream of Wheat or Farina do not
cake in wet weather, but do not compress, so the amount needed must
be carefully determined, to leave enough room for seating the ball.
Corn meal compresses and is more forgiving if you use a bit too
much.
Hodgdon Pyrodex is more difficult to ignite than black powder, so
it is doubly essential that the charge be fully compressed to
eliminate all airspace, otherwise hangfires or misfires may occur.
"Hot" caps such as CCI give the best results with Pyrodex. With
black powder, failure to compress the charge results in lower
velocities, greater velocity variation and vertical
stringing.
Seating a wad over the powder, combined with a tight fitting ball
or bullet positively prevents "flashovers", but applying lubricant
over round balls is essential to keep the cylinder from binding due
to fouling. It also aids accuracy, reduces leading and makes the
gun easier to clean afterwards. I use either Lee Case Lube or
Hodgdon SpitBall, with no particular preference to either, both
work well.
Its OK to load and cap all six chambers when target shooting at a
range, when the revolver will be fired immediately. In the field
never load more than FIVE chambers. Always carry the hammer down on
the EMPTY one for safety! The substantial hammer notches between
the chambers of the Ruger Old Army are much better than the puny
"pins" on original Colts, but Sturm, Ruger cautions to load 5 only,
and I agree with their advice.
Black powder folklore says pure lead is a must for bullets. It is
best, if you can get it, but certainly not essential. I routinely
use backstop scrap from .38 wadcutter and .22 rimfire bullets, 8
BHN, containing 1.5% antimony and 0.3% tin. I expect a good load to
group 2" at 25 yards. My best ones do better.
With black powder, a consistent bore condition is critical for
accuracy. Serious black powder competitors dry brush the bore and
chambers when they reload. An effective lube such as Hodgdon
Spit-Ball combined with Ox-Yoke Wonder Wads also helps you shoot
longer before needing to clean. Using Hodgdon Pyrodex rather than
black also helps. I have found that when using Pyrodex I can fire
60 continuous shots or more without brushing and the last group is
as good as the first.
The top black powder competitors buy as much of one lot of powder
as they can safely (and legally) store and work up their most
accurate loads with it. Once they find an accurate load, they
measure velocities, but only to provide a working baseline. They
emphasize that it does no good whatever to measure velocities while
working up a load unless groups are concurrently shot on paper,
because uniform velocity does not guarantee accuracy. Velocity
measurement is most valuable after an accurate load has been found,
because it defines a measurable parameter and gives at least some
chance of being able to approximate the same good results.
Pyrodex is more consistent from batch to batch than black powder,
and I prefer it for target loads because it seems more consistently
accurate and produces less fouling. It is also more readily
available in some areas than black powder because it can be shipped
and stored under the same regulations which apply to smokeless
propellant. Pyrodex is NOT noncorrosive, and requires the same
attention to cleaning that black powder does. The cleaning methods
and materials which work with black powder are also effective with
Pyrodex, and vice-versa.
Cleaning a black powder gun isn't the drudgery you have heard
about. There are plenty of easy-to-use black powder cleaners for
those who shun water. If you don't want to mix your own "Ed's Red"
and want a store bought product, you can get fine results cleaning
black powder guns with any of the various "waterless hand cleaners"
sold in hardware and auto parts stores. These have an appearance
and consistency like mayonnaise and are an emulsion of petroleum
distillates, water, soap and lanolin, occasionally with surfactants
or anti-oxidants added.
Never use brands which contain pumice or other abrasives! Brands
such as "Go-Jo" or "Goop" sell for about $2 per 14-oz. can, and
work extremely well.
To clean the revolver, remove the cylinder and unscrew the nipples.
This enables the wire core of a bore brush to clear the nipple
threads so the bristles will reach clear to the bottom of the
chambers. Scrub the chambers well with hand cleaner on the brush.
Then pack each chamber with paper towel, patches or tissue and use
a 2" long, 5/32" punch to push the packing out. This leaves the
chambers bright, clean, and lightly lubricated to prevent
rust.
Scrub the bore with a bore brush and hand cleaner and wipe dry with
patches. Use a toothbrush similarly to scrub the frame crevices and
nipple seats. Wipe the exterior dry with a rag, lightly oil the
cylinder pin, gas ring and ratchet, place a drop or two in the
hammer pivot and reassemble. This cleaning method is effective with
both black powder and Pyrodex and is quick and easy.
Use the waterless hand cleaner while at the range to clean your
hands after a shooting session. It also makes a good expedient
lubricant over round balls.
So, who says cap & ball revolvers are too much trouble? If you
try it my way, you'll be convinced that they do most sporting jobs
as well as a modern cartridge gun!
Aschronicled
here on Monday, the McMillan companies
were told by a VP of Bank of America that their business was no
longer desired by the bank - specifically because they manufactured
firearms. Several things have happened since then:
- The story went national on the Cam Edwards and Glenn Beck shows,
as well as all over the internet. Everyone, it seems, is talking
about this. McMillan has garnered a lot of support, much of it
newfound. (I’ve never watched Glenn Beck, but he makes some
very good points - particularly about the bank’s possible
political motivations. Aside from his obvious partisan stance, some
of the things he says about BofA makes one wonder.)
- BofA has posted a spin-doctored and unattributed statement on
their Facebook page which suggests Kelly McMillan lied about the
whole thing, that they really do support gun owners, and that they
support our troops and hire veterans (not sure what that has to do
with anything.) The feedback on their statement has been voluminous
and critical, as McMillan is a company known for ethical and honest
behavior, while BofA is - well, not so much.
- McMillan reports that they've had a number of banks call on them
to get their business, and will be making a decision soon. Seems
that there are banks which would love to do business with an
upstanding manufacturer like McMillan, and they may in fact have a
new problem: too many good banks to choose from!
It’s worth noting that this whole thing started on Facebook
and is being played out there, which in my mind solidifies the
value of social media as both a source of breaking information and
a vehicle for grassroots action. I think that’s
fascinating.
In case you've missed the flap, last week Kelly McMillan (of the
companies which bear the family name) posted to Facebook that he'd
been visited by a senior VP of Bank of America, the company that's
handled his company's banking needs for more than a decade. Seems
that they no longer want his business because he makes evil guns.
In Kelly's words (which I copied from his FB page, but I don't
think he'll care):
McMillan Fiberglass Stocks, McMillan Firearms Manufacturing,
McMillan Group International have been collectively banking with
Bank of America for 12 years. Today Mr. Ray Fox, Senior Vice
President, Market Manager, Business Banking, Global Commercial
Banking came to my office. He scheduled the meeting as an
“account analysis” meeting in order to evaluate the two
lines of credit we have with them. He spent 5 minutes talking about
how McMillan has changed in the last 5 years and have become more
of a firearms manufacturer than a supplier of accessories.
At this point I interrupted him and asked “Can I possible
save you some time so that you don’t waste your breath? What
you are going to tell me is that because we are in the firearms
manufacturing business you no longer want my business.”
“That is correct” he says.
I replied “That is okay, we will move our accounts as soon as
possible. We can find a 2nd Amendment friendly bank that will be
glad to have our business. You won’t mind if I tell the NRA,
SCI and everyone one I know that BofA is not firearms industry
friendly?”
“You have to do what you must” he said.
“So you are telling me this is a politically motivated
decision, is that right?”
Mr Fox confirmed that it was. At which point I told him that the
meeting was over and there was nothing let for him to say.
I think it is import for all Americans who believe in and support
our 2nd amendment right to keep and bear arms should know when a
business does not support these rights. What you do with that
knowledge is up to you. When I don’t agree with a
business’ political position I can not in good conscience
support them. We will soon no longer be accepting Bank of America
credit cards as payment for our products.
Kelly D McMillan
Director of Operations
McMillan Group International, LLC
623-582-9635 www.mcmillanusa.com
If you have accounts with BofA, may I suggest that you close
them?
It's fun to go back in time and revisit our earlier lives. I can
remember leisure suits (though thankfully I was only a teenager
when they were popular), when gas prices hit $1 for the first time
("a dollar for a gallon of gas? What's this world coming to?"), the
first "brick" cel phones (only the truly important, really rich, or
incredibly vain carried them), and looking at computer magazines
drooling over 5mb hard disk drives. ("Five megabytes, all in one
place!? What a wondrous time to be alive!")
I remember when the first PCs came out with a hard drive as a very
expensive option. The Shugart ST-506 drive was 5mb capacity and
cost something like $1500; it was soon replaced by the ST-412 10mb
drive which was considerably less expensive and thus far more
popular.
When MS-DOS v3.0 came out it supported a FAT16 file system
architecture, which allowed drive sizes up to 32mb. There was a
sudden jump to the larger capacity, and there were several 30mb or
32mb drives to choose from.
Up to then drives for microcomputers were all of the 5.25" size.
When 3.5" disks debuted we thought that it was a miracle of
miniaturization! Little did we suspect that things would get much
smaller and of much higher capacity very quickly. What a wondrous
time to be alive!
That was nothing, though. For some time I had a DEC PDP-11/70 in my
garage, complete with aDEC RM02 Hard Disk Unit. That hard drive was the
size of a dishwasher, weighed over 400lbs, used a removable
five-platter disk pack measuring 14" in diameter, and held - get
ready for it - a grand total of 67mb of data!
Today I have a couple of 1tb drives in a RAID the size of a box of
graham crackers. What a wondrous time to be alive!
Ten years from now I'll probably be laughing at that
statement.
I'll be teaching my Defensive Revolver Fundamentals class on July
1st, and Combat Focus Shooting on September 9th. Both classes will
be held in the picturesque town of Canby, Oregon, which is in the
beautiful Willamette Valley - a short drive from Portland
International Airport, for those of you from out-of-state! To
enroll in either of these classes, drop me an email.
Of course don't forget my classes in College Station, Texas in May.
I'll be teaching both Defensive Revolver Fundamentals and Combat
Focus Shooting on the weekend of May 19th & 20th. To get into
either (or both!) of these courses, send an email to Greg Taggart
at GKTTxAg@aol.com
Good if it brings new thinking and new dedication, bad if it
scuttles existing industry relationships. From what I hear, there's
been some of the latter - and aside from their formation of a new
shooting team with Jessie Harrison, we've yet to see much of the
former.
The TTAG piece is something of a coincidence because just a couple
of days ago I was looking at the traffic reports for this site,
including the search terms which bring people here. A HUGE
percentage of the people who come here from Google do so because of
a search about Taurus guns. My piece "Why I don't work on Taurus
revolvers" has become the single most-read page on this site.
In fact, if you Google "Taurus gun reviews", this site is #6 in the
result. Same for "Taurus revolvers". "Are Taurus revolvers any
good" has me in the #2 spot, and "Taurus revolver reviews" puts me
in first place!
This shocked me, because when I wrote that piece I wasn't thinking
about search rankings - just addressing the very real issues of
Taurus quality and why it's not worth my client's money for me to
work on the things. The comments on that blog entry are a mix of "I
think they're great and you're an idiot" to "you're right and I'll
never spend another dime on one of their products."
We don't really know what Google's algorithms for search results
are, but one speculation is that they adjust over time to reflect
(among a whole host of other things) those sites that are the most
often visited for any given search term. If that's true, Taurus
definitely has an image problem in the marketplace - an image
problem that isn't wholly undeserved.
It should be clear, based on my comments over a long period of
time, that I have something of a love-hate relationship with
Taurus. I like some of the unique things they do (except the
freaking Judge line, of course), but I'm continually let down by
their random quality control and indifferent engineering. Their
revolvers are probably the best thing they make - I've heard very
little other than horror stories about their autoloaders - but even
those need serious attention if they're going to be considered in
the same league with Ruger and Smith & Wesson.
I hope Kresser can make headway at Taurus, as I'd like to someday
be able to brag about having one in my holster.
Over the last month or so I've started following a new blog devoted
to security.
Though his focus is on information security and the technology
behind it, Bruce Schneier also has some very interesting thoughts
on security in general. His perspective is pretty intriguing, and
so hisSchneier on
Securityblog has been added to my
daily RSS feed.
Not many blogs make that grade, but his is good enough that I look
forward to reading it regularly.
You're
reading... The Revolver Liberation
Alliance! The blog about revolvers,
training, self-defense, and shooting in general (along with an
occasional surprise!)