Stephen Camp - Makarov

Makarov! Well Worth the Money!

http://www.hipowersandhandguns.com

This is not a "range report" on the Makarov. I have a couple of those out there on www.pistolsmith.com and www.1911forum.com as well as other sites if interested. This concerns my observations of the little jewel after fair use over a bit more than a year.

With other than the 115 and 120-grain JHP loads, these pistols are normally dead-bang reliable and I was truly surprised at the pistol's mechanical or intrinsic accuracy, especially when using the cheap surplus ammo we all buy. At prices now ranging in the $150 - $200 range, you get one heck of a good pistol. Even with the two loads mentioned above, but a minute's careful attention to the bevel at the lower end of the feed ramp solves their reliability problem, at least in my guns.

I place high regard for things that work and the Makarovs work! For a defensive arm, I'm not as partial to 9x18mm Makarov as other calibers, but I'd much rather have a Makarov that I could count on than a larger caliber handgun that usually was dependable.

For those who may not be familiar with the Mak, what you get is a conventional DA/SA single-stack automatic in the ". 380 +" power range. Its magazine release is at the butt rather than behind the trigger guard and the fixed sights are miniscule. I find them hard to pick up at speed. The magazine holds 8 rounds for a total payload of 9 shots before having to reload. The DA trigger pull on my Bulgarian is smooth, but heavier than on my E. German. Both are very usable "as they come", but could be made better with some work at home if you're into such things or by a gunsmith if you're not. I highly recommend dropping by www.makarov.com if you're a fan of these little gems or think you might be. One thing I do like about them is that even though they have the slide-mounted, single-side thumb safety, down is for fire and up is for safe, just the opposite of most autos having the safety on the slide. Because the pistol is not large, it is easily manipulated with the thumb for those wanting to carry the pistol with the safety engaged. The thumb safety also acts as a decocker. The pistol weighs 1.7 lbs. and has a barrel length just under 4."

This is an E. German Makarov that is stock. It has not been altered in the least, but does have one of the "CCW magazines" from www.makarov.com in it. They work great and are inexpensive with high quality.

Here's some chronograph data on the 9x18mm fired from the Makarov. The figures listed are based on ten-shot averages about 10' from the chronograph.

9x18mm Makarov Ammunition Average Velocity (ft/sec)

LVE 115-grain JHP 1025

Sellier & Bellot 95-grain FMJ 924

Barnaul 95-grain FMJ 1058

Fiocchi 95-grain FMJ 1020

Corbon 95-grain JHP 1100

Hornady 95-grain XTP 984

Not in the same league as the 1911 with regard to aftermarket parts, they do exist and the Makarov lends itself quite nicely to some upgrades, but I find that some folks simply will not do this even if it's financially feasible for them!

I believe that the pistol is plenty good enough to sink the cost of the gun in upgrades! Let me explain why.

At my age, I have trouble seeing small, military-type fixed sights and the Mak certainly has those. While the plastic grips that come standard on the pistol are fine for concealed carry, I personally like the Pearce rubber ones better as I have large hands. Many will add the grips, but just "get along" with the sights, which while fine in slow, deliberate fire are hard to pick up at speed or see in less than good lighting…at least for me! Some have problems with the DA pull, but rationalize it with something like, "It's OK for the money."

Really? I don't think so. IF the pistol is to be used for self-defense, there's a good chance that the thing will have to be fired double-action for the first shot and with its lesser ballistic payload, placement becomes even more critical than with say a .357 SIG. While I would not have any springs lightened or bent for this effect, I would get as smooth a DA pull on my protection Makarov as I could. While my Bulgarian Makarov has a pretty good DA pull, it's not as smooth as my E. German, but were either just too rough or heavy, I'd gladly invest in my own chances for survival in a lethal force scenario. While it was not necessary on my pistols, better sights were and I went ahead and bought a Wolff conventional 19-lb. recoil spring as I have shot and intend to keep shooting the pistol quite a bit. (These can be found at www.gunsprings.com and work fine with all the ammo I've tried.)

Shortly after I bought my new Bulgarian, I noticed an ad for what was called the "Beast Conversion Slide" over at the Makarov site mentioned previously. For $150, I'd get a new Bulgarian slide that was fitted with Novak high-visibility fixed sights with the familiar 3-dot arrangement. Even though this cost as much as the pistol, I feel it was well worth it. The pistol has very close POA vs. POI and the slide is nicely finished in a black matte of some sort. While the conversion is no longer available, one can send their slide to the good folks at www.makarov.com (You CAN trust them) to have the Novak sights added for about the same price. Assuming a fellow did this and then had a gunsmith do a trigger job and perhaps added Pearce grips, I'd reckon, he'd cough up about $250 to $275, well over what he paid for the gun.

This is my Bulgarian Makarov fitted with the Novak sights. It makes sight acquisition at speed much easier.

"I would never be able to get my money back out of the gun with that kind of money in it."

So what? If you're not planning on selling the pistol, you won't anyway, but consider this: With Makarovs getting harder and harder to find, prices continue to rise. Who can say that in a few years, another shooter might not be willing to pay your price if you decided to sell? A collector wouldn't, but a shooter just might.

I personally would do it even if I knew I could never get my money back out of it as I do not intend to part with my Makarovs. They're built like tanks and should last through many thousands of rounds and you can afford to feed them with the inexpensive ammo we can now get. In centerfires, 9x19mm and 9x18mm Makarov are probably the least expensive calibers available in many loadings. In a gun that I intend to shoot lots, I want it to suit me and the Mak is worth shooting in my opinion.

"For that kind of money, I could get a CZ-83 and a couple of spare magazines and maybe some .380 ammo."

That's true and you'd be getting a very fine pistol and one that's capable of cocked and locked carry, if desired. It would have the magazine release behind the trigger guard and would have at least a 10-round magazine, but it is a larger pistol and .380 ACP costs more on average than 9x18mm Mak. Either is a fine choice in the larger pistols for these calibers and you might just be able to find one of the CZ's in 9x18mm Mak, but if you really like the feel of the Makarov pistol and it won't be too hard financially, I'd get it fixed up to suit me and allow more effective use of the gun. Spare parts and extra magazines will be much less costly than for any other centerfire pistol…including the CZ.

The fact that the Makarov is initially inexpensive does not mean that it doesn't make a fine "base gun" upon which to do some specific refining. It's a good gun as it comes, but can be a great gun with a minor investment in money and time.

These things beg to be shot, so why not have yours where you can really squeeze out its potential and maybe enjoy it even more? It might also be very good in the event that you are in "the dark place" and need to be able to get the hits.

Printed with Permission. Mr. Camp is a WORLD CLASS GUN WRITER OF OUR TIME. Please visit his website and review his excellent books that are available. I posted the link to his website at the very top of this page.

Teddy

Stephen Camp - Master Gun Writer

http://www.hipowersandhandguns.com

Which is the Best 1911 Grip Safety, GI or Beavertail?

This is a question that is discussed repeatedly on various shooting forums and the answers usually fall into those listed below:

Answer 1: The standard GI grip safety is the best. If it weren't, John Browning wouldn't have put it on the gun in the first place.

Answer 2: The beavertail is best. It allows for a higher hold on the gun and more control in rapid fire.

Answer 3: The beavertail prevents hammer bite and I find it more comfortable.

Answer 4: People do it just for looks.

Usually these are the "standard" answers but are often followed with discussions concerning whether the beavertail grip safety is more appropriately called a duck tail safety due to the way that most turn up at the end.

The first answer is fairly common and one that turns a lot of people off, none more than myself. The truth of the matter is that John Browning did change the grip safety from the near Commander-like design to what is now commonly called the "traditional" or "GI grip safety." With the greatest respect for John M. Browning, that does not necessarily have to mean that he had achieved perfection in this component of the 1911 pattern pistol. Answer 1's "pontification factor" not only doesn't help the person asking the question, but possibly keeps him from asking any others, and that's a pity in my view. I pretty much ignore folks giving this "high" caliber advice.

This Colt Series 80 stainless Government Model has the traditional spur hammer and GI grip safety and this combination has served for decades. I personally don't find it the most comfortable combination.

Here is the stock hammer and GI grip safety that came with my Mil-Spec after I bobbed the hammer spur and rounded the lower edges of the grip safety. The gun is now fitted with a wider checkered spur hammer, but it has been bobbed and reshaped to avoid hammer bite. This is a definite improvement for me, but it is not as comfortable for long shooting sessions as the wide grip safety. (If your pistol has a spur hammer and a trigger pull you like and don't want to change, a spur hammer can be shortened so that it will work with the upswept wide grip safety.)

Answer 2 is true in that a slightly higher grip is allowed on the pistol. Others may very well be able to decrease split times and gain increased accurate rapid-fire ability with the gun, but I'm just not one of them. Sometimes I've been faster with the GI grip safety and other times, the wide grip safety. For me, the addition of a wide grip safety does not significantly or consistently allow me to accurately shoot any faster than the standard GI. Perhaps it would were I shooting extremely hot .45 ACP ammunition. On that possibility, I cannot say because I've not tried it, but with ball equivalent loads, no differences for me. I suspect that some people might think that it does; I did too until I saw the timer's results on more than one occasion. That there was no improvement in my particular case doesn't have to automatically translate into there being none for others. I do not have enough wisdom to speak for all people. I mention only what has been true in my case.

The third answer is true for me as well and is the reason that the bulk of my 1911 pattern pistols are fitted with wide grip safeties, usually from Ed Brown.

When a person answers similarly on the forums, he is usually told that he's "not holding the gun correctly". I guess that could be true enough in some instances, but after shooting for over thirty years and being a certified police firearm instructor, tactical team handgun trainer, CHL instructor, and taught in my earlier years by some champion shooters, I think I know pretty much how to grip a 1911 pistol. I strongly suspect that the majority of people holding the 1911 are probably doing so correctly…or very close.

I find the wide "duck tail" grip safety to be the most comfortable. That's why I spent the time to fit one to this Caspian 1911 "built" at home. For me, a gun that is comfortable to shoot in both long individual sessions as well as for the long term is highly desirable. The wide grip safety just "works" for me. Some are fortunate enough not to get bitten by the original GI hammer/grip safety combination. Good for them! That does not mean that the same is true for everyone else. It damned sure isn't for me!

Here is why I use the wide grip safety by choice: It keeps me from bleeding. It is that simple. I have fleshy hands and get nipped by the spur hammer that almost always accompanies the GI grip safety. Depending upon the specific grip safety's edges, it too can abrade the skin between my thumb and trigger finger. I have friends who do not suffer this problem and one who can shoot hundreds of rounds through his Commander with its original short GI grip safety with nary a problem. That's great for them, but to assume that since it works for some, it should work for all is simply incorrect. It definitely does not work for me.

I have found that by bobbing the hammer spur and rounding the bottom edges of the traditional grip safety, I can shoot roughly 200 to 250 full-power shots without problems, but not quite as comfortably as with the wide grip safety.

I do not know how true Answer 4 might or might not be. Some people very well could prefer the "look" of the wide grip safety. In this regard, I have no preference, but opine that if a person prefers the beavertail/duck tail "look" and has the money or talent to get one fitted to his gun, have at it. For me, that possible aspect is a non-issue with regard to functionality or "shootability" of the pistol.

Currently I have one 1911 set up with the GI grip safety and spur hammer and the pistol is shot frequently. It is a Springfield Mil-Spec. Trigger specialist, Teddy Jacobson, replaced and upgraded certain internals as well as the hammer for a better trigger pull and I changed the stocks, but otherwise, the gun is stock. I wanted one gun that was set up pretty much in the style of the "old timey" 1911 pistols. It is not as comfortable for me as one equipped with a wide grip safety, but it is comfortable enough that I can shoot it a couple of hundred rounds per session without problems. Were it my only 1911, it would have the wide grip safety.

It might be worth mentioning that some folks report success in eliminating abrasions from hammer bite and cutting from the grip safety by bobbing the hammer and then shortening the grip safety tang. In this configuration it is flush with the rear of the frame, sort of making the rear like that of the Browning Hi Power. I have not tried this approach and cannot speak to it from first-hand experience as I have only shot one such modified 1911. (It did work fine for me the one time I shot the gun, but I only fired a couple of magazines of ammunition so I do not know how it would be long term.)

If you are considering a 1911 or wondering if you "need" the wide grip safety, I submit that you already know the answer. If the gun's biting you each session and you're tired of it, then you do need the wide grip safety. You can try bobbing the hammer spur about 1/8" and reshaping the bottom of the spur as well as "melting" the edges of the safety itself and that might do the trick. If not, I think you'll enjoy your shooting more with a wide grip safety. I cannot speak for others but I bet most folks shoot better when their pistol doesn't mimic a piranha in a feeding frenzy on the web of the shooting hand.

This Norinco 1911 has a Pachmayr drop in wide grip safety. It can easily be removed and the original hammer and safety replaced if desired. I do not think that the drop in looks as nice as the fitted, but in my experience, it will prevent bloody hands just as well and is less costly.

Should you opt to go with a wide grip safety, most will need to be fitted to the frame and this does alter the frame's shape permanently. There are "drop in" parts that will work. Most don't look nearly so nice as the fitted ones, but the upside for some people is that their gun's frame isn't altered either.

Ask yourself this question when making a decision on grip safeties or other similar "basic" custom touches:

Who does this gun have to please?

If it is you, go with what works for you.

www.hipowersandhandguns.com

http://www.hipowersandhandguns.com/Corbon%209mm%20115.htm

Corbon 9mm 115-gr. DPX +P

(Fired from Browning Hi Power w/factory barrel, w/Barsto barrel, and from Glock 26)

Today's defensive shooters expect quite a bit from expanding ammunition. In the past, expansion was a "sometimes" thing. While that is still true today, it's my observation that bullets intended to expand actually do…most of the time. No longer is expansion itself enough. Now, we want at least 12" of penetration in calibrated 10% ballistic gelatin, which is considered the "gold standard" in ballistics tests intended to simulate what might be expected in tissue. It is not perfect, but it is the standard and it does pretty well replicate what is seen when expanding bullets are pulled out of flesh and blood. (My primary "test media" used to be living critters called javelina, but I no longer have access to those hunting grounds! It takes me longer to test ammunition on something tough enough to be interesting and perhaps meaningful to defense against human adversaries.)

Corbon advises that the 9mm 115-gr. DPX +P both expands reliably in either bare or denim-covered (4 layers) gelatin and penetrates at least 12". People testing in ballistic gelatin have pretty well confirmed that it meets these expectations and frequently exceeds the now-standard 12" minimum.

I do not have the funds to purchase ballistic gelatin or a means by which to keep it at a constant temperature for repeatable tests. My informal expansion tests use either water or "wet pack." (Super-saturated newsprint that has soaked 24 hours and drained for 30 minutes before shooting. Results are similar to those from gelatin although the wet pack limits penetration more.)

Nevertheless, I do some expansion checking on my own and for this test, I used water.

I thought it might be interesting to do the things often passed over. I don't know if the thought is that such matters are irrelevant, but I tried to provide some information not so frequently reported. I'm speaking of such things as accuracy, felt recoil, reliability, and consistency from shot to shot. In any event, these are things I can do and pass on.

"DPX" is Corbon's acronym for "Deep Penetrating X". The "X" refers back to the Barnes copper alloy X-bullet used in rifle ammunition for several years. In rifle ammo, the bullet expanded in an X shape, hence the name. In a given rifle caliber, the X-bullet would almost always penetrate deeper than an expanding rifle bullet of the same caliber and weight. The pistol ammunition has six "petals." This homogeneous bullet cannot suffer bullet-jacket separation. There is a gap between the petals. It seems reasonable that while this creates a larger wound channel, it also allows for a bit deeper penetration as the bullet is not exhibiting quite the same "parachute effect" as more conventional JHP's. Those petals are tough and not easily bent by hand, either. Edges are somewhat sharp.

Corbon 115-gr. +P DPX uses cases marked with the company name and indicate +P pressure levels. The h ollow point measures 0.175" wide and 0.40" deep. The primer does not appear to be sealed.

The 9mm DPX measures 1.12" LOA and the bullet is seated snugly in the case. Cycling the same loaded round 3 times through a Browning Mk III from a full magazine did not cause set back. The same test was applied using a Glock 26…with the same results.

The 115-gr. DPX was fired into water from a Browning Hi Power from the very slightly slower Barsto match barrel. It's expanded dimensions: 0.61 x 0.59 x 0.50" tall. It lost no weight. As the petals bent outward before folding rearward, the expanded bullet would have measured at least 0.755" across at least for some of its penetration depth. Notice that the bullet still has some "length" to it; this aids penetration. The expanded bullets from the Glock 26 were virtually identical. The average velocities attained by both guns seem with within the DPX bullet's operating velocity envelope.

Though more than a few use service size handguns chambered for 9mm, many use compacts. I chronographed this ammunition from both a Browning Mk III with its 4 21/32" barrel and a Glock 26. The latter has a 3.46" barrel that has polygonal rifling as opposed to the Hi Power's conventional lands and grooves. Both pistols have a twist of 1:10. I also installed a Barsto match barrel in the Mk III. It has bore measuring 0.3565" and a 1:16 twist.

These two pistols were used to evaluate the DPX ammunition. Both have been altered slightly. The Glock uses the two-piece steel Wolff guide rod and standard power springs. The Hi Power was shot using a Wolff conventional 18.5-lb. recoil spring and a Buffer Technology shock buff. (I also fired a few rounds without the buffer to see if function would be affected. It was not.)

Average velocities, standard deviations, etc, are based on ten shots fired approximately 10' from the chronograph screens.

Corbon 9mm 115-gr. DPX +P Chronograph Results:

Firearm	Low Velocity (ft/sec)	High Velocity (ft/sec)	Average Velocity (ft/sec)	Extreme Spread (ft/sec)	Std. Deviation (ft/sec)
Mk III(factory bbl)	1225	1275	1244	50	20
MkIII (Barsto bbl)	1216	1257	1233	41	15
Glock 26	1161	1210	1181	50	17

In defense situations it is generally acknowledged that slow and precise shots will be the exception rather than the rule. This is probably true in the vast majority of deadly force scenarios, but I personally still place value in a round that is at least capable of being shot accurately should the opportunity present itself. For this reason, I shot the 9mm DPX slow-fire from a rest at 15 yards from the Hi Power with both barrels as well as the Glock 26. I also fired it in more "practical" type shooting drills at 7 yards.

This group would be smaller if the human error was removed. It is obvious that this load has more than enough accuracy at this distance for self-protection and that misses will not be the fault of the ammunition or pistol.

Here's a group fired with the same gun using the factory barrel. The POI is slightly lower and closer to the POA. Accuracy is for all purposes equivalent to that with the Barsto…with this ammunition. I have seen some jacketed rounds that grouped quite a bit better through the Barsto, but the greatest improvements I've seen have been when using cast bullets.

My Glock 26 is fitted with Aro-Tek fixed sights and the 115-gr. DPX is dead bang "on" at 15 yards. The all copper bullet appears to work well from either polygonal or conventional rifling.

Moving up to 10 yards and using a Weaver stance from a low-ready position, I fired 4 sets (8-shots) of controlled pairs on humanoid type target with a dotted circle in the chest as the target. This was not timed, as I didn't have access to a timer today. (When I do, I usually have hell getting the thing to work right!) I would estimate each controlled pair to have taken about a second from start to finish.

This ammunition does not have the felt recoil of the Corbon 115-gr. JHP +P. It is distinctly easy to shoot and control from the Hi Power. This one's wearing Craig Spegel checkered, black delrin grips and uses the factory fixed sights.

The same drill was performed using the Glock 26. The holes with the marks were from the Browning Hi Power. As with the Hi Power, the Glock was extremely easy to handle with this load.

At this point, I moved up to 7 yards with the Mk III. >From a low-ready, I raised the gun and fired one shot as quickly as I accurately could as in the "rescue shot" scenario. This was repeated 8 times.

There is no question that Corbon 9mm DPX could be used in situations requiring "finesse" in insuring the elusive "one-shot stop."

So far I am quite favorably impressed with this ammunition. It works fine in two distinctly different pistols. Groups leave nothing to be desired for the ammunition's intended purposes. Expansion seems uniform and penetration should be satisfactory to most. Felt recoil is noticeably less than with the Corbon 115-gr. +P and POI was very close to POA.

Let's compare some similar 115-gr 9mm loads to the 115-gr. DPX +P from the Hi Power and the Glock 26.

From the Browning Mk III w/factory barrel:

Corbon 115-gr. DPX +P:

Average Velocity: 1244 ft/sec

Corbon 115-gr. JHP +P:

Average Velocity: 1411 ft/sec

Remington 115-gr. JHP +P:

Average Velocity: 1264 ft/sec

Federal 115-gr. JHP:

Average Velocity: 1177 ft/sec

The Corbon 115-gr. JHP +P generates about 12% more felt recoil while the Remington is near equivalent at but 2% greater. The standard pressure/velocity Federal has about 5% less "kick" when fired from the same gun as the others.

From the Glock 26:

Corbon 115-gr. DPX +P:

Average Velocity: 1181 ft/sec

Corbon 115-gr. JHP +P:

Average Velocity: 1305 ft/sec

Remington 115-gr. JHP +P:

Average Velocity: 1239 ft/sec

Federal 115-gr. JHP:

Average Velocity: 1111 ft/sec

From the little gun, the 115-gr. Corbon JHP +P has about 10% greater felt recoil than the DPX. Remington 115-gr. JHP +P, + 5% and Federal 115-gr. JHP offers 6% less.

These two Corbon DPX rounds show the primers after firing from the Hi Power (left) and the Glock. In neither case are the primers flattened. Though rated +P and clearly marked as such, these do not appear to be loaded to as high in the +P range as the company's 115-gr. JHP.

With Corbon's history of loading pretty energetic, fast +P rounds, I began wondering why this one's not, too! I pulled a DPX bullet and compared it to a bullet pulled from the JHP load. The DPX is approximately 0.685" long and is seated approximately 3/10" deep. The JHP is measures 0.51" in length and is seated about 1/10^th inch less. 9x19mm has a relatively small case capacity and the reduced volume limits the amount of powder that can be used.

I also think there may be another reason: Pushing the DPX faster probably only increases penetration. It expands only to the depth of the hollow point and it obviously has the velocity needed to do this. Corbon is seeking an effective defense load that would provide the penetration levels so many find essential, but not excessive penetration. This is admittedly just a guess, but it seems reasonable.

Only 60 rounds total were fired through the two test pistols. That is not enough to prove reliability in one's personal firearm, but it appears that there will be few problems in guns designed to feed other than FMJ ammunition. Magazines could be fully loaded without binding and feeding was "slick" in both guns; there was zero hesitation in chambering. There was no "bump" and then feed. In short, DPX feed as slick as glass in these guns.

The 9mm DPX load fed without hesitation in both the Glock and Hi Power pistols.

For some that have used X-bullets in rifles, fouling could be extreme. I am happy to report that such is not the case at these more sedate handgun velocities. Cleaning the barrels was no more difficult than with standard bullets using standard gilding metal.

I am extremely pleased with my initial experiences using this ammunition in these two pistols. I think this is going to prove both popular and effective. I seldom say this without considerably more shooting/testing, but assuming reliability, I would not be afraid to use this ammunition for serious purposes. In 9mm, this is impressive stuff.

More on the "XD"

Dear Mr Jacobson,

I read with interest your comparison of Glock to the XD.

I would like to say I own a 40 service model and am generally quite happy with it. I find it to be quite accurate and I like the grip safety on a weapon without an exposed hammer.

There is a web sight called PISTOLGEAR and they have different parts including guide rods and springs. They have an item called Don's guide rod. I have no experience with the products.

I must say that I have quite a bit of experience with various pistols and revolvers and am a retired Sheriff's deputy and police firearm instructor and armorer. I enjoy your blogs and postings and appreciate your input and thoughts.

Having said that,

If you really want to have a problem, try reassembling an XD with the disassembly lever in the assembled position. The gun will start to go together without much effort and then it will REALLY be stuck!!!

It took a visit to my local gun shop, a call to the factory, and a lot of work with a plastic hammer to make things right.

No damage was done. The manual is not much help and was written by an attorney.

I do believe this must happen to others. I am somewhat more experienced than the average user. I thought you might like hearing about this in case you haven't run into this yet.

I enjoy my XD but purchased it mainly because the price was right and I had a decent quantity of ammunition. I will probably get a glock eventually because of easy availability of everything. I also believe the Glock 9's to be the best of the Glocks.

Keep up the good work

Sincerely

Paul

GLOCK vs. SA "XD"

WELCOME TO THE NO BS ZONE OF TEDDY JACOBSON

SEE ARTICLE VERY BOTTOM

ADDED NEW COMMENTARY 7-25-06
http://www.actionsbyt.typepad.com


ADDED NEW COMMENTARY 7-20-06
http://www.actionsbyt.wordpress.com


I have decided to write my personal opinion regarding the comparison of the Glock Pistols vs. the Springfield Armory "XD" pistols. As most of you know I prefer a Glock pistol and it is my daily carry handgun of choice. At this point in time I carry a Glock 19 and before that I carried a Glock 27.

I want to write this chart for my friend "Marina" who has been very nice to me. I want to thank Chad Mathis who is the Operations Manager at the Glock factory in Georgia. He has been honest and very fair in his dealings with me and I am grateful to him.

I miss my good friend the late Shelly Soliday of Glock and I often hope that he is now at peace and in a much better place than we are. Having said these things you can be sure I know about the Glocks and the "XD" and will give you honest answers, to help you in your selection process, I will not get too technical and will make my comments short and to the point.

COUNTRY OF ORIGIN
Glock = Austria
SA-XD = Croatia

POLYMER FRAMES
Glock = Yes
SA-XD = Yes

STEEL SLIDES
Glock = Yes
SA-XD = Yes

TOTAL DISASSEMBLY
Glock = Can be done in minutes with few tools
SA-XD = Can be very difficult

CHANGING OF EXTRACTOR
Glock = Very Easy
SA-XD = Very difficult

GRIP SAFETY
Glock = None
SA-XD = Yes

PARTS AVAILABILITY
Glock = Yes, there is no problem getting parts
SA-XD = I have not seen any parts available for the XD

HOLSTER AVAILABILITY
Glock = No problem Right or Left Handed holsters available
SA-XD = I have not seen any holsters for this pistol in leather

AFTER MARKET LASER
Glock = Available
SA-XD = I have not seen any available

STEEL RAIL INSERTS
Glock = Front and rear
SA-XD = Front only, plastic in rear

MAGAZINE AVAILABILITY
Glock = Available everywhere
SA-XD = Unknown

AFTER MARKET SIGHTS
Glock = Available everywhere
SA-XD = I have not seen any

AFTER MARKET SPRINGS
Glock = Available from many companies
SA-XD = I have not seen any

MAGAZINE SPRINGS
Glock = Available
SA-XD = I have never seen any

AFTER MARKET GUIDE RODS
Glock = Available from many companies
SA-XD = I have not seen any

SLIDE FINISH
Glock = I have found the new exterior finish superior
SA-XD = Not as durable as Glock

ORIGINAL SIGHTS
Glock = Good
SA-XD = Good

As to the grip safety of the SA-XD removal and re orientation of the grip safety spring for reassembly is very difficult for the average person. I do not recommend this to anyone unless they understand how it goes back together. I have even gotten emails and calls requesting my help from people that could not put the XD back together. I have not covered every thing like flash light rails, etc, because I do not like a flash light on my pistol. I have told you the truth and now the decision is yours.

I have modified my carry Glock 19 by having the slide hard chromed by Virgil Tripp. I have installed a New York trigger spring and I air brushed a ceramic coating on my barrel before baking it on there using a titanium color. I have installed a superior ISMI chrome silicon flat recoil spring with their compatible steel guide rod.

I want to thank all of you for reading my commentaries. Should you have any questions you can email me. Please be sure and read the previous commentary by WORLD CLASS ASTROLOGER STACEY DEAN ABOUT CURRENT TIMES AND I FEEL THE VERY WORST IS YET TO COME...
http://www.staceydean.org

UK Govt Sources Confirm War With Iran Is On

Op-Ed News | July 24, 2006
by Nafeez Mosaddeq Ahmed

UK Govt Sources Confirm War With Iran Is On
In the last few days, I learned from a credible and informed source that a former senior Labour government Minister, who continues to be well-connected to British military and security officials, confirms that Britain and the United States

"... will go to war with Iran before the end of the year."

As we now know from similar reporting prior to the invasion of Iraq, it's quite possible that the war planning may indeed change repeatedly, and the war may again be postponed. In any case, it's worth noting that the information from a former Labour Minister corroborates expert analyses suggesting that Israel, with US and British support, is deliberately escalating the cycle of retaliation to legitimize the imminent targeting of Iran before year's end. Let us remind ourselves, for instance, of US Vice President Cheney's assertions recorded on MSNBC over a year ago. He described Iran as being "right at the top of the list" of "rogue states". He continued: "One of the concerns people have is that Israel might do it without being asked... Given the fact that Iran has a stated policy that their objective is the destruction of Israel, the Israelis might well decide to act first, and let the rest of the world worry about cleaning up the diplomatic mess afterwards."

But the emphasis on Israel's pre-eminent role in a prospective assault on Iran is not accurate. Israel would rather play the role of a regional proxy force in a US-led campaign. "Despite the deteriorating security situation in Iraq, the Bush Administration has not reconsidered its basic long-range policy goal in the Middle East..." reports Seymour Hersh. He quotes a former high-level US intelligence official as follows:

"This is a war against terrorism, and Iraq is just one campaign. The Bush Administration is looking at this as a huge war zone. Next, we're going to have the Iranian campaign. We've declared war and the bad guys, wherever they are, are the enemy. This is the last hurrah-we've got four years, and want to come out of this saying we won the war on terrorism."

Are these just the fanatical pipedreams of the neoconservative faction currently occupying (literally) the White House?

Unfortunately, no. The Iraq War was one such fanatical pipedream in the late 1990s, one that Bush administration officials were eagerly ruminating over when they were actively and directly involved in the Project for a New American Century. But that particular pipedream is now a terrible, gruelling reality for the Iraqi people. Despite the glaring failures of US efforts in that country, there appears to be a serious inability to recognize the futility of attempting the same in Iran.

The Monterey Institute for International Studies already showed nearly two years ago in a detailed analysis that the likely consequences of a strike on Iran by the US, Israel, or both, would be a regional conflagaration that could quickly turn nuclear, and spiral out of control. US and Israeli planners are no doubt aware of what could happen. Such a catastrophe would have irreversible ramifications for the global political economy. Energy security would be in tatters, precipitating the activation of long-standing contingency plans to invade and occupy all the major resource-rich areas of the Middle East and elsewhere (see my book published by Clairview, Behind the War on Terror for references and discussion). Such action could itself trigger responses from other major powers with fundamental interests in maintaining their own access to regional energy supplies, such as Russia and particularly China, which has huge interests in Iran. Simultaneously, the dollar-economy would be seriously undermined, most likely facing imminent collapse in the context of such crises.

Which raises pertinent questions about why Britain, the US and Israel are contemplating such a scenario as a viable way of securing their interests.

A glimpse of an answer lies in the fact that the post-9/11 military geostrategy of the "War on Terror" does not spring from a position of power, but rather from entirely the opposite. The global system has been crumbling under the weight of its own unsustainability for many years now, and we are fast approaching the convergence of multiple crises that are already interacting fatally as I write. The peak of world oil production, of which the Bush administration is well aware, either has already just happened, or is very close to happening. It is a pivotal event that signals the end of the Oil Age, for all intents and purposes, with escalating demand placing increasing pressure on dwindling supplies. Half the world's oil reserves are, more or less, depleted, which means that it will be technologically, geophysically, increasingly difficult to extract conventional oil. I had a chat last week with some scientists from the Omega Institute in Brighton, directed by my colleague and friend Graham Ennis, who told me eloquently and powerfully what I already knew, that while a number of climate "tipping-points" may or may not have yet been passed, we have about 10-15 years before the "tipping-point" is breached certainly and irreversibly. Breaching that point means plunging head-first into full-scale "climate catastrophe". Amidst this looming Armageddon of Nature, the dollar-denominated economy itself has been teetering on the edge of spiralling collapse for the last seven years or more. This is not idle speculation. A financial analyst as senior as Paul Volcker, Alan Greenspan's immediate predecessor as chairman of the Federal Reserve, recently confessed "that he thought there was a 75% chance of a currency crisis in the United States within five years."

There appears to have been a cold calculation made at senior levels within the Anglo-American policymaking establishment: that the system is dying, but the last remaining viable means of sustaining it remains a fundamentally military solution designed to reconfigure and rehabilitate the system to continue to meet the requirements of the interlocking circuits of military-corporate power and profit.

The highly respected US whistleblower, former RAND strategic analyst Daniel Ellsberg, who was Special Assistant to Assistant Secretary of Defense during the Vietnam conflict and became famous after leaking the Pentagon Papers, has already warned of his fears that in the event of "another 9/11 or a major war in the Middle-East involving a U.S. attack on Iran, I have no doubt that there will be, the day after or within days an equivalent of a Reichstag fire decree that will involve massive detentions in this country, detention camps for middle-easterners and their quote 'sympathizers', critics of the President's policy and essentially the wiping-out of the Bill of Rights."

So is that what all the "emergency preparedness" legislation, here in the UK as well as in the USA and in Europea, is all about? The US plans are bad enough, as Ellsberg notes, but the plans UK scene is hardly better, prompting The Guardian to describe the Civil Contingencies Bill (passed as an Act in 2004) as "the greatest threat to civil liberty that any parliament is ever likely to consider."

As global crises converge over the next few years, we the people are faced with an unprecedented opportunity to use the growing awareness of the inherent inhumanity and comprehensive destructiveness of the global imperial system to establish new, viable, sustainable and humane ways of living.

DISCLAIMER: All comments and opinions are my own.

Teddy
http://www.actionsbyt.com
http://www.actionsbyt.typepad.com
http://www.commentsbyt.blogspot.com

www.staceydean.org

Mercury Retrograde - What's That?

Presently viewed from Earth, the planet Mercury appears to be moving backwards. Astrologically, this phenomena is known as Mercury Retrograde. In truth, the planet began to slow down in it's orbit July 4th and will not resume it's regular motion until July 29, 2006. During this time period we can ALL expect an increased amount of foul-ups, such as accidents and breakdowns, with all modes of transportation. I fully expect NASA's space shuttle launched July 4, 2006 to not bode well. I pray to be wrong.

ALL forms of communications are also negatively affected during Mercury Retrograde. George W. Bush will attend a major conference of the G-8 nations in St. Petersburg, Russia the weekend of July 15-16, 2006. It will be interesting to see what develops at that conference, however, I can assure you that decisions made DURING Mercury Retrograde are cause for REGRET!

BE PREPARED BY BEING CAUTIOUS JULY 4 -29, 2006!

YOUR ONE YEAR PERSONAL FORECAST BY STACEY DEAN ONLY $36.50 (NORMALLY $65).

PERSONAL CONSULTATIONS ALSO AVAILABLE. CHECK OUT MS. DEAN'S CREDENTIALS....

website:www.staceydean.org

email: staceydean@msn.com

ALL MAJOR CREDIT CARDS ACCEPTED

CALL STACEY AT 702/739-7899 TO PLACE YOUR ORDER.

(To PROTECT your credit card, you must place your order with Stacey Dean personally. 24 Hours Message Phone is available if she is in consultation. All calls are returned promptly if you leave you name and phone number, with the area code, please, and a brief message.)

Remembering you with prayers, love and rainbows,

Stacey Dean, PMAFA

Professional Psychic

Certified Astrologer - American Federation of Astrologers

Office: 702/739-7899 (Pacific Time Zone)

Website: www.staceydean.org

Email: StaceyDean@msn.com


ANOTHER LINK FOR YOU TO VISIT.
http://www.gunscout.com


MUST READ
http://www.actionsbyt.typepad.com

Project Street Gun - MUST READ / 7-11-06

In order to proceed with the street gun project for those who have paid, the cut off date for payment to be received is friday, July 14th.

If you have already sent payment which has been received, you have been sent email confirmation. If you have mailed payment and it has not been received, you will receive an email when it does.

I WANT TO THANK ALL OF YOU THAT KEPT YOUR WORD AND RESPONDED IN A TIMELY FASHION. IF A FEW PEOPLE DO NOT RESPOND IT WILL LEAVE AN IMMEDIATE OPENING FOR THOSE THAT STILL WANT IN. I WANT TO KEEP MY WORD AS DOES MR. CAMP AND ALLOW THESE FEW EXTRA DAYS TO HEAR FROM THE FEW PEOPLE THAT ARE NOT UP TO SPEED.

In my world of reality I must work with honorable folks as this is the way I was taught and brought up. I will get started on my end as soon as everything is complete. The average person has no idea how involved it is to make these kits for frames that I never see. I have been doing this for many years, I do not know how many more projects I can do, but I can do this one.

It is not easy for Mr. Camp to make these books as they are really that good and second to none. www.hipowersandhandguns.com


There is no better buy for the money and the real quality you get in a SA mil-spec for 500.00 dollars. I saw some mil-spec pistols for sale in the last catalog I received from www.cdnninvestments.com They do not show firearms on their website only in dealer catalogs but you can call them. I believe the G.I. model I saw was 400.00 dollars.

I will continue this later but for now I wanted to get this commentary up for you to see.

Thankyou.

Teddy
www.actionsbyt.com
281 565 6977 land line

Street Gun Project Closed

We have met our quota and I want to thank all of you for your nice emails and your phone calls. It is not very easy to do something like this but we havelearned a great deal.

I have had to take in less work so I can manage to deal with a small class and our expertise shows by the finished product. It depends on my health whether I will have another project like this down the road.

Thanks to my good friend Mr. Stephen Camp we are able to manage the current project as I could never do this without his expertise. When ordering parts in your behalf, money is not a factor as we buy the best there is, as this SA Mil-Spec will always be there to protect life and property.

I have learned a very long time ago as a kid to play it straight with people and honesty and integrity is so very important to me. The books that Mr. Camp has written and printed are so very good that I have no doubt they are the best you will ever get to read and own.

I will keep you updated on everything. The reason that I try and write daily bloggers on TYPEPAD and WORDPRESS is because I am still having issues with this BLOGSPOT that is owned by GOOGLE.

If you want to find most of my bloggers please do a search on http://www.google.com
on Teddy Jacobson.

http://www.hipowersandhandguns.com/Products5.html

Thankyou.

Teddy
http://www.actionsbyt.typepad.com