Here we test out the S&W Model 432 in .32 H&R Magnum, an ideal concealed carry revolver setup.
If you’re a frequent reader of this magazine and column, you know I have an affinity for the .32 H&R Magnum and .327 Federal Magnum revolver cartridges. And, in contrast, I’m often perplexed as to why so many shooters cannot seem to grasp the appeal of either cartridge.
The combination does a fantastic job of bridging the gap between the .22 Long Rifle/.22 Magnum and the .38 Special/.357 Magnum. They’re substantially more powerful than the first pair, more comfortable to shoot and offer a higher capacity than the second. So, anytime there’s a new .32 H&R Magnum or .327 revolver, I’m fast to give it a look, which is why as soon as I learned about Lipsey’s Exclusive S&W Model 432 in .32 H&R Magnum I requested one for review.
Not as powerful as a .357 Mag. or .327 Federal Mag.
Lipsey's Exclusive, limited supplies
The Cartridge
The .32 H&R Magnum cartridge is essentially a .32 S&W long cartridge lengthened by 0.155 inch. Additionally, the .32 H&R Magnum is loaded to a maximum average pressure (MAP) of 23,000 psi, as opposed to 15,000 psi. That’s a pressure increase of 53 percent. The result is that the .32 H&R Magnum has an instrumental velocity of 1,020 fps with a 95-grain bullet as opposed to the .32 S&W Long’s 750 fps with a 98-grain bullet.
Another neat feature of the .32 H&R Magnum is that the cartridges are only 0.337 inch in diameter as opposed to 0.379 for the .38 Special. This means that, in most compact revolvers, the cylinder will hold six .32 H&R Magnum cartridges … as opposed to five .38 Specials. Also, a largely unknown fact about .32 H&R Magnum revolvers is that they can chamber and fire .32 Short, .32 Long and even .32 ACP ammunition.
The little S&W Model 432 in .32 H&R Magnum from Lipsey’s is compact and comfortable to shoot, and the notched rear and XS front sight makes it easier to aim than most snub-nose revolvers.
The Revolver
The Smith & Wesson J-frame revolver has been a trusted companion for those wanting a concealable revolver for personal protection for almost 75 years. Recently, S&W announced a partnership with Lipsey’s to offer a Model 432 J-frame with an aluminum frame and chambered for the .32 H&R Magnum. This revolver is only 6.32 inches long and weighs a scant 16.3 ounces. This is a concealed hammer design, so it’s double-action only, but the revolver has some features not commonly seen on factory new J-frame revolvers.
S&W fitted this revolver with XS Sights’ Minimalist Revolver front sight, which features a Tritium vial surrounded with a photoluminescent green ring. This is a highly visible sight in any light, and S&W smartly paired it with a dovetailed U-notch rear sight that has a Novak-like profile. One of the weaknesses of the J-frame has always been the sights, and this fixes that problem.
Also, S&W worked with Lipsey’s and designed a special set of VZ “High Horn” G10 UC “boot” grips that are slim—but also very comfortable. The revolver comes in two finish options: matte black and matte stainless. The barrel is 1.8 inches long, the front edge of the cylinder is beveled, and the charge holes are chamfered. It also has an enhanced trigger and uses titanium pins. The other good news is that this revolver doesn’t have what has become to be known as the “Hillary Hole,” which is an external keyed lock. It retails for $759 … while supplies last.
The Holster
I’m not a fan of pocket carry—not because I think it’s a bad idea, but because it just doesn’t fit my wardrobe and carry/training style. I like a handgun on my strong side just behind my hip bone. That’s how I train with all the handguns I carry concealed, so that’s where I like to wear them, no matter the make or model. When I received the revolver for review, I ordered a Galco Gunleather Concealable Belt Holster ($169) for OWB carry and one of their Royal Guard 2.0 holsters ($212) for IWB carry. Both are very comfortable, easy to draw from and re-holster into, and they make this compact revolver seemingly disappear on my side.
With Galco’s Concealable Belt Holster, the little .32 H&R Magnum from Smith & Wesson can easily and comfortably be carried outside the waistband. It’s so compact and light you’ll hardly know it’s there.
The Load
Though this little revolver will chamber and fire four different cartridges, there’s not a lot of .32 H&R Magnum ammo options to choose from; a major online retailer lists only six loads. So, in the interest of providing potential customers with a complete defensive handgun package, Jason Cloessner of Lipsey’s worked with gun writer Jeff Hoover and Buffalo Bore Ammunition owner Tim Sundles to develop a load specifically for this mini gun.
The problem with low-power, small-caliber handguns is that they tend to not deliver great terminal performance with hollow-point bullets. This is because they lack the velocity and energy to push an upset hollow-point bullet very deep. The answer to this problem is a hardcast bullet with a flat nose, like a wadcutter or semi-wadcutter. These non-deforming, flat-nose, hardcast bullets cut a caliber-size hole in anything they hit, they penetrate extremely deep, and they don’t need to be loaded to extreme pressures or velocities to deliver this kind of performance. There are the same type loads outdoorsmen often choose for bear defense with larger handgun cartridges.
The Load Buffalo Bore ($38.32, per box of 20) created for this revolver uses a 100-grain, hardcast, wadcutter bullet that’s loaded to a standard pressure, and it’s advertised as offering a muzzle velocity of about 900 fps out of the revolver Buffalo Bore designed it for. My testing showed these velocities to be spot-on, and when I fired these loads into blocks of Clear Ballistics, they penetrated more than 2 feet. No, this isn’t the same level of performance you can expect out of a .357 Magnum or even a .327 Federal Magnum, but it will for sure deliver enough penetration—no matter how big and fat your attacker might be—and this is from a little gun that’s easy to carry and that doesn’t have a lot of recoil.
The Package
If you like the idea of a compact, lightweight revolver for concealed carry, and if you want a complete setup that includes the gun, and an IWB and OWB holster, and a good self-defense load, the exclusive S&W 432 in .32 H&R, two Galco holsters and the Buffalo Bore load makes for a complete package.
Wouldn’t it be cool if Lipsey’s would just bundle all those items together in a single box? I doubt that will ever happen, and even though they know my affinity for .32s, and I helped them with their limited edition .327 Single Seven, nobody asked my opinion. So, I’m giving it to you—if you buy the revolver, get at least one of the holsters and the ammo to go with it.
S&W 432 Deals
Smith & Wesson
$759
Guns.com
$778.99
Editor's Note: This article originally appeared in the November 2024 issue of Gun Digest the Magazine.
It’s smart to have a good lawyer lined up before the trouble starts. Here we discuss how to choose the right self-defense attorney.
When faced with the prospect of needing legal defense after a self-defense incident, the importance of selecting the right attorney cannot be overstated. This critical decision can mean the difference between safeguarding your rights and facing serious legal consequences—even when you are completely innocent.
Following are the essential considerations and questions to ask when seeking an attorney for self-defense cases.
Identifying Trustworthy Legal Counsel
It can be a daunting task to find legal counsel who you are comfortable with, and who can provide you with the defense you want … and need. People often encounter dismissive or unhelpful attorneys when seeking legal advice.
The legal profession, like any other, includes both highly skilled and less competent individuals. The key to finding the right legal counsel is not just identifying a knowledgeable professional, but finding one who can build a relationship of trust and confidence with you. Mounting a successful legal defense after acting in self-defense demands an attorney well-versed in criminal defense and, more particularly, self-defense cases. There are many criminal defense attorneys but very few who are well-versed in the nuances of a self-defense claim.
Finding a Self-Defense Attorney
First and foremost, it’s crucial to engage an attorney who is engaged in criminal defense and has experience with self-defense cases. This specialization ensures that the attorney understands the nuances of defending individuals who have used force to protect themselves or others. You don’t want someone showing up to a self-defense case who primarily handles divorces or bankruptcies, but you also don’t want someone who only represents criminals. There are nuances and important considerations when defending a case of justifiable self-defense versus other sorts of alleged crimes.
Verify the attorney’s legitimacy by checking their standing with the state bar association. This simple online check ensures they have no disciplinary history that might compromise their ability to represent you effectively. Understanding the attorney’s track record in handling similar cases, including their experience with trials and negotiations, is essential.
Aligning Philosophies on Self-Defense
Equally important is assessing the attorney’s philosophy on self-defense, and their understanding of the Second Amendment. This alignment ensures that they approach your case with a perspective that resonates with your beliefs and values regarding the right to self-defense and firearm ownership. Most people want an attorney who sees self-defense from my perspective—not just as a legal concept or theoretical framework—but as a fundamental, natural right.
Interviewing Multiple Attorneys
Interviewing multiple attorneys is recommended to find the best fit for your case. While this process may involve paying consultation fees, it’s a worthwhile investment in ensuring you have the right advocate by your side. It’s a lot like finding the right doctor before a medical emergency: You want someone you trust and who has the expertise to handle your specific needs. You want someone you feel comfortable working with. This is not a choice to make after the emergency arrives.
For proactive legal preparedness, joining a legal protection program like the Armed Citizen’s Legal Defense Network offers distinct advantages. These programs provide access to a network of attorneys who defend gun owners and provide a good place to start in your search for a self-defense attorney.
Practical Steps in Choosing an Attorney
During your initial consultations, ask prospective attorneys about their experience with self-defense cases, including their trial experience and success in negotiating favorable outcomes. Understand their fee structure and ensure transparency regarding costs. While referrals and testimonials can provide insights, recognize that personal fit and professional compatibility are paramount. Google reviews are great, but they’re not an adequate substitute for personal consultations.
Conclusion
Choosing the right attorney for self-defense cases requires careful consideration and thorough research. It’s not merely about legal expertise but also about shared values and a commitment to protecting your rights. By engaging a competent attorney early and potentially joining a legal protection program, you can enhance your preparedness and mitigate the uncertainties associated with legal challenges after a self-defense incident.
Proactive legal planning is crucial. The time to find an attorney is before you need one. By doing your homework now, you can ensure that, if the worst happens, you’re prepared with the right legal support. Remember, your choice of attorney can profoundly impact the outcome of your case and your future.
The legal journey after a self-defense incident is daunting and emotionally taxing. It demands that your attorney bring their “A” game from the start and maintain it until the end. The stress of knowing that an innocent person is relying on you is immense. Your attorney must have the ability to stand strong, face the sleepless nights and still be able to competently defend you. Keep searching until you find someone who can.
Editor's Note: This article originally appeared in the November 2024 issue of Gun Digest the Magazine.
Walther Arms has just announced the PPK/S SD, a .32 ACP PPK/S variant with a threaded barrel.
Walther recently reintroduced the famous PPK and PPK/S in .32 ACP, and now the company has announced a suppressor-ready version called the PPK/S SD as well. If you’ve ever wanted to LARP as a secret agent, things just got a whole lot easier.
Chambered for .32 ACP, the Walther PPK/S SD is the same as the standard PPK/S besides its new threaded barrel. Walther has not specified the thread pitch, but it’s presumably the standard 1/2×28. However, the threaded barrel extension was designed to ensure proper alignment when using a suppressor. Each gun will ship with two 7-round magazines and a thread protector.
Rob McCanna, President and CEO of Walther Arms, said this about the new pistol:
The PPK/S SD .32 ACP is a celebration of Walther’s legacy of precision engineering and innovation … By integrating modern features like the threaded barrel into such an iconic design, we've created a firearm that bridges the gap between timeless style and contemporary performance. We're excited to offer our customers a PPK/S that not only meets but exceeds the expectations of modern shooters.
The Walther PPK/S SD is available now with either a black or a stainless steel finish and the MSRP is $1,099 for both versions.
Here we discuss crimping techniques that can take your rifle’s accuracy to the next level.
Crimping a bullet in place might be the last phase of the reloading process, but it certainly isn’t the least important. In a number of instances, it’s absolutely necessary; other times, it’s optional and, sometimes, it should be avoided altogether. Knowing which type of crimp to use is important … and knowing whether to use a crimp at all can be a complete game changer.
Basic reloading techniques dictate that a straight-walled cartridge requires a roll crimp—which curls the case mouth into the bullet—to keep the projectile from moving deeper into the case under recoil or, in the case of a revolver, moving out of the case and locking up the cylinder.
However, the use of a roll crimp requires a bullet with a cannelure, or a crimping groove, or else you run the risk of bulging the case, deforming the bullet … or both. If your chosen projectile doesn’t have a cannelure, a taper crimp—one which squeezes the case wall radially inward against the shank of the bullet—is the only way to prevent damage to your case or projectile.
The .45 Colt definitely requires a good crimp; in a modern revolver, the recoil will pull those bullets out of the case. Photo: Massaro Media Group.
The handgun cartridges I shoot most—.38 Special, .45 ACP and .45 Colt—are all crimped in some fashion, I don’t crimp bottlenecked rifle cases unless absolutely necessary. The lever gun cartridges—at least those that use a tubular magazine—get a good roll crimp in order to hold things in place, but I rarely use a roll crimp on my .308 Winchester, .300 Winchester Magnum, .470 Nitro Express or .22-250 Remington; the neck and its tension does the work for me.
The .500 Jeffery has a recoil level that tests the mettle of the short neck; a heavy roll crimp is a good idea. Photo: Massaro Media Group.
Ramp up the recoil to the hard-kicking Weatherby cartridges, or the .500 Jeffery and .505 Gibbs, and those cartridges in the magazine can have their bullets driven deeper into the case from the aggressive recoil.
Solution: Proper Crimp
In fact, it was a problem-solving conversation with my buddy, Bob Rose—who has a newly built .505 Gibbs—and is having all sorts of trouble keeping his bullets at the depth he seated them. He’s used several different bullets, with cannelures of varying depth, having applied roll crimps from what would be considered light, to “this time you’re not going anywhere,” only to see the same results: Those cartridges in the magazine had their bullets sunk deep into the case.
We covered a number of scenarios, as I’ve loaded rather extensively for both the .500 Jeffery and .505 Gibbs—both have hellacious recoil—and have solved a good number of problems with both. Looking at Bob’s reloading technique, I saw no flaws in the process or the logic; instead, it was an examination of the magazine boxes of the respective rifles we were loading for that I feel is to blame here.
The author doesn’t crimp the .505 Gibbs, as there’s plenty of neck tension to keep the bullets in place—if the magazine doesn’t allow the cases to move during recoil. Photo: Massaro Media Group.
You see, I loaded the vast majority of the .505 Gibbs and .500 Jeffery ammunition for rifles that had a magazine box of specific geometry—that is, the side walls of the magazine box have a correlative “shoulder” to the cartridge in order to prevent the cartridge from slamming forward under recoil. In Bob’s case, it seems there’s a bit more room for play, and he’s seeing the nasty effects of the high level of recoil. He’s got a Lee Factory Crimp Die on order and hopefully that'll help solve his ordeal without having to change the magazine box of his rifle.
Some folks use a crimp as a means of evening out velocity. Since I was a kid, I remember reading about how the Weatherby magnum’s cartridges were best served by using a roll crimp to achieve both consistent velocities and optimize accuracy. The theory is that the additional pressures built during the ignition phase—required to move the bullet out of the roll crimp—will help to generate a repeatable pressure curve, resulting in improved accuracy. Considering that so many factory loads are roll crimped—and not just Weatherby ammo—there might be some credence to this concept.
I’ve pulled apart several factory loads over the years and have found that some timeless component bullets, such as the Nosler Partition that have been offered as components since the 1940s without a cannelure, are offered to the OEM ammo manufacturers with a cannelure. This is presumably to meet a requirement for crimping the factory ammunition, though I have often wondered why that would be, as the match-grade ammo featuring Sierra MatchKings, Berger Match or Hornady ELD Match bullets had no such cannelure.
I started experimenting with what I’ll call “unnecessary crimping,” and I did find that, in some instances, it has helped to even out velocities. Though by my own admission, the situation depends more on the rifle and its chamber than it does some universal law regarding crimping.
So, what is the rule regarding a crimp on bottlenecked rifle cartridges? Providing there’s enough neck tension to properly hold the bullet in place—and by that I’ll say that the .300 Winchester Magnum, with a neck length of 0.264 inch is enough—I feel comfortable saying there’s no rule. If you feel that you’re seeing your bullets move as a result of recoil, try a firm roll crimp, or grab one of those undervalued Lee Factory Crimp Dies and see if that tool will even things out for you.
Trial And Error
Experimentation can be the key to success when it comes to reloading; the goal is to achieve repeatable results by any means necessary. Each rifle can present a different set of challenges, and I like to have a diverse set of tools when trying to get my ammo and rifle combination to perform the way I want.
Quite a bit of emphasis is put on varying seating depth, changing primer brands, minuscule changes in powder charge weight or even powder type, but if adding a crimp into the mix gives me one more tool in the box to get that rifle where I need it, I’m good with that. For a hunting rifle, the level of accuracy might not be the same as that of a long-range target shooter, but when you want the best, it’s smart to consider all options.
Try your pet load with and without a roll crimp, and see if you find any difference, for better or for worse. You might find an unexpected solution, making a good load even better. Use your chronograph to best observe the differences between crimped and un-crimped, and I’d wager that the one with the more consistent velocity figures will also be the most accurate.
Editor's Note: This article originally appeared in the December 2022 issue of Gun Digest the Magazine.
We take a quick look at the Tephra-22, the latest suppressor from Aero Precision.
Aero Precision is a relative newcomer in the suppressor game, having only released its first can in 2022 with the Lahar-30 line. Since then, all three sizes of the Lahar-30 have received good reviews and have gained a general reputation of having very good performance in relation to both their size and price, so it’s exciting to see Aero continue to expand its suppressor lineup. The company recently announced its newest can in the form of the Tephra-22.
Weighing in at 7.2 ounces and shipping with 1/2×28 mounts, the Tephra-22 is rated for .22 LR to 5.7×28 and is compatible with both rifles and pistols. It features seven 17-4 stainless steel baffles as well as a stainless steel serialized housing and mounting hardware, and outside it features an aluminum tube and end cap. The stainless steel components receive a black nitride finish and the aluminum parts feature an anodized finish in either black or brown. Additionally, the Tephra-22 is user-serviceable and can be disassembled and cleaned without any specialized tools.
Both colors of Tephra-22 suppressors are available for pre-order now and are expected to begin shipping at the end of November. MSRP is $375 for both models.
We check out the Savior Specialist Range Bag, one of the many excellent range gear options available at Gunmag Warehouse.
Far too many shooters are guilty of using a subpar range bag. Sure, that old duffel may “work”, but why not make life easier with something specifically designed for the task? GunMag Warehouse has plenty of excellent range bags to choose from, one of which is the Savior Equipment Specialist Range Bag 2.0.
Savior Specialist Range Bag Storage
How many times have you gone to the range and been forced to waste several minutes digging through your stuff just to find that one tool or box of ammo? The problem with most range bags is they’re just bags. Featuring one large compartment and maybe a couple of smaller ones, they can fill up quickly and without any semblance of organization. This is where range bags like the Savior Specialist come in.
The primary draw of using a range bag like the Savior Specialist is its organizational features. Its main compartment is 13 inches long, 8.5 inches wide and 9 inches deep, providing a total internal volume of 994.5 cubic inches. That’s big enough to fit two whole ammo cans if you desire, but there are more efficient ways to utilize the space. This is aided by some of the accessories included with the bag.
One of those is a divider for the main compartment which is both adjustable and removable. When installed, it bisects the large space to help keep your kit logically separated. On one side, there’s enough space to store loose earmuffs, eye protection, ammo boxes or any similar shooting equipment, all while retaining enough room on the other side to store three handguns.
That leads us to the next organizational aid—three handgun pouches. These measure 12 inches across and 8 inches tall, so they’re big enough to fit some pretty large irons, and most average-sized pistols will leave enough room for extra magazines. That said, the bag’s front compartment features a better way to store spare pistol mags, as it has six elastic pouches that should fit most double-stack pistol magazines. Each pouch can also easily fit two single-stack mags.
The spare pistol mag panel is also removable for when you’re having a dedicated rifle day and just want additional space in the front pocket. Once removed, the pocket easily fits six AR-15 mags instead.
Many ranges charge by the hour, keeping you acutely aware that time is money. If that’s how your go-to range operates, it means that every second saved from rummaging through your bag means more time can be spent shooting. Being able to draw spare, loaded mags from a central location will certainly help with that.
It’s also worth mentioning the smaller compartments found throughout the bag because they can still fit quite a bit of kit. The front compartment where the spare magazine pouches are located also features zippered internal and external pockets, and the same is true for the two side compartments as well. One of the side compartments also has internal organizational pockets for pens, notebooks and other small tools, and both side compartments feature netting pouches on the outside for additional storage.
Finally, we’re just left with the top panel that covers the main compartment when zipped. This panel has two additional means of storage, including another zippered internal pocket as well as a MOLLE panel made of hook-and-loop material. That last detail means you can attach additional MOLLE pouches, such as an IFAK, to the bag’s top or attach a hook-and-loop accessory like the included spare pistol mag panel.
An IFAK pouch (not included) attached to the bag's MOLLE panel.
These features combine to make the Savior Specialist one very modular and versatile range bag. Regardless of what you plan on taking to the range on a given day, you can easily and quickly rearrange the various components to make a dedicated handgunner bag, rifleman bag or a mix of both.
For those who enjoy being extra organized, the bag also comes with six hook-and-loop label panels for the three handgun pouches if you want to mark what each one is specifically holding.
Other Savior Specialist Features
Better organization isn’t the only thing the Savior Specialist has going for it, as good range bags also protect your guns and other expensive gear like binoculars or range finders. Thankfully, this bag offers that in spades as well.
Firstly, the pistol sleeves and external side pouches feature much more padding than what’s found on typical range bags. They’re not bulletproof, but they’re certainly thick enough to keep what’s inside from getting too banged up.
More important is the durability of the main bag itself. While the external shell is made from the typical 600D polyester, what sets the Savior apart is its internal polymer frame. This keeps the bag rigid and offers multiple advantages over most soft-range bags.
Most obviously, that includes protection. It would take serious effort to damage the bag badly enough to compromise the polymer frame, and until that happens, whatever you put inside of it will stay perfectly safe from impacts. Speaking of safety, for protection against theft, all of the bag’s zippered pockets can also be locked with a small padlock.
The bag’s rigidity also means that it’s easier to load and unload, as it won’t be flopping over itself when empty like soft bags do. Additionally, the bag can conveniently double as a shooting rest. While it won’t be as ideal as a dedicated rest, the Specialist is both tall and rigid enough to easily serve as a gun rest.
As for carrying the bag, it’s about what you’d expect. It has a set of straps on the top for carrying with one hand as well as a removable strap for slinging it over your shoulder. That said, the shoulder strap is very generously padded, so it’s still comfortable to carry even when loaded with a lot of guns and ammo.
The final point to mention is fashion, as you do have several colors to choose from including black, green, gray, red and FDE. The range bag has an MSRP of $109.99, but GunMag Warehouse currently has the Savior Specialist available for $89.99. For the features this bag has, you’ll be wondering why you didn’t pick one up sooner.
Here we examine the twists and turns of early rifling development.
In the 1500s, spiral grooves cut into gun bores were used to spin-stabilize bullets fired through them. While the method of creating these grooves has changed, this system has remained the same and is considered “best” by nearly all barrel makers.
Attempts to improve land-and-groove rifling included choke boring, free boring, gain twist, deep and shallow grooves, few and many grooves, and odd and even numbers. No one system demonstrated significant superiority over another. About 1850, the first alternatives to land and groove (L&G) rifling made their appearance.
Charles Lancaster was considered the first to produce a rifled barrel using a spiral bore in England. Referred to as oval or elliptical boring, the oval interior was turned as though a straight oval tube was twisted, causing a bullet fired through it to be swaged into a slightly oval shape and spun as it traveled down the bore. The idea (in part) was to create a barrel that would perform equally well with a solid bullet or a charge of shot, but that goal did not succeed if experiments firing shot loads through rifled shotgun barrels are any indication. Nevertheless, the system worked with solid bullets. The success was tempered, for blackpowder fouling presented a more significant problem than a deep-groove rifled barrel.
The Civil War saw the Greene Oval Bore Rifle, an early bolt action wherein two bullets were loaded, with the second bullet with its powder charge acting as a gas check behind the charge of the first load. When the action fouled, the rifle had to be used as a muzzleloader. They were made in America with machinery bought from Lancaster. Recovered bullets from Antietam indicate some use.
Sir Joseph Whitworth (December 21, 1803–January 22, 1887) was an English engineer, entrepreneur, inventor and philanthropist. He devised the Whitworth rifle, often called the “sharpshooter” because of its accuracy, considered one of the earliest examples of a sniper rifle.
A similar spiral-bore effort used polygonal rifling. While it is unknown who produced the first such barrel, the best-known effort was by Sir Joseph Whitworth in England in 1853. While the hexagonal-bore Whitworth could be fired with a cylindrical bullet, it was soon found that the best accuracy was obtained only with a six-sided bullet contoured to a mechanical fit.
The 560-grain Civil War-era Whitworth bullet measures .450 inch across the flats. The design may have inspired the .45-70-500 gr. “long-range” bullet developed for the M-1884 and M-1888 Springfield rifles.
Semi-military Whitworth rifles, equipped with telescopic sights, were used by Confederate sharpshooters to pick off several Union officers. Major General John Sedgwick was the most famous who was killed by a single bullet at more than 500 yards. The system was also successfully used in artillery pieces, two of which were employed by Confederates at Gettysburg.
The Pedersoli Whitworth reproduction allows you to try a unique hexagonal-rifled gun like those used during the Civil War, which equipped the sharpshooters of the Confederate Army, hence the name “Whitworth sharpshooters.”
The last rifling innovation of the 19th century came in 1871, the work of William E. Metford, a British engineer. Metford’s system utilized shallow rifling with rounded lands, which reduced the bullet’s drag and deformation. Accuracy was excellent, and the design was used in the British military rifle designed by James Paris Lee in 1888.
William Ellis Metford (October 4, 1824–October 14, 1899) was a British engineer best known for designing the Metford rifling in .303 caliber Lee-Metford and Martini-Metford service rifles in the late 19th century.
Unfortunately, highly erosive smokeless powders and corrosive primers soon degraded the accuracy of the soft-steel barrels of the day. A similar system was used in Japanese Arisaka rifles, which benefited from better steel and maintained accuracy better than conventional L&G barrels. Barrels made in America by Charles Newton also used this system, utilizing five rounded lands and grooves.
The bolt-action Lee–Metford was a British army service rifle that used James Paris Lee’s rear-locking bolt system, detachable magazine, and an innovative seven-groove rifled barrel designed by William Ellis Metford.
In 1901, the first head-to-head tests of an oval-boring system versus conventional rifling began at the Springfield Armory. The details are fully documented in the Annual Reports of the War Department for the Fiscal year ended June 30, 1902, Volume VII, Reports of the Chief of Ordnance and Board of Ordnance and Fortification, Appendix XII.
The project began July 16, 1901, with the following letter to the Chief of Ordnance:
“Dear Sir: I have invented a gun with an elliptical bore of .30 caliber, suitable to take the ordinary fixed ammunition of this caliber. I desire to have a thorough Government test, such as will demonstrate the quality of the gun for service. I desire to have the test made at the earliest convenience in order that I may be present.
Very Respectfully, W.F. Cole M.D.”
The Chief of Ordnance was Brigadier-General A.R. Buffington, inventor of the Buffington “wind gauge” sight—the most sophisticated military type of its day—used on the M-1884 and M-1888 Springfield rifles and carbines. General Buffington ordered, “test without delay the gun presented by Dr. Cole” and invited Cole to attend the tests.
The Springfield Armory’s experimental shop (Building 28), circa 1923.
Two days later, Dr. Cole met with the Board to test his rifle, which had the same 30-inch barrel as the Krag and used the same ammunition. “The cross-section of the bore is an ellipse the short diameter being .30 inches, the long diameter .31 inches, and having a twist of one turn in 7.29 inches.”
The U.S. Springfield Model 1896 Krag-Jorgensen bolt-action in .30-40 Krag.
The rifle was tested against the Krag at 1,000 yards. Three five-shot groups for each rifle averaged 25.11 inches for the Krag and 13.72 inches for the Cole rifle (extreme spread). The next day, a 300-yard test was conducted with a different Krag with better results. Velocity tests for the Krag (at 53 feet) were 1,991.55 fps, and for the Cole, 2,058.66 fps. On July 23 and 26, three five-shot groups were fired at 1,000 yards. Results were 18.96 inches (Krag) and 17.46 inches (Cole.) The test on the 26th had the Krag set up with a different stock and fittings.
Results: 15.71 inches (Krag), 17.68 inches (Cole). On October 1, firings were done at 1,200 and 1,500 yards. At 1,200: 28.6 inches (Krag), 23.5 inches (Cole) and 23.1 inches (new model Springfield rifle 2,300 fps velocity). At 1,500 yards, the results were 40.3 inches (Krag), 37.0 inches (Cole) and 26.9 inches (Springfield).
At this point, the Board in charge of testing sought to conduct further tests to determine the effects of different twist rates and the type of rifling with “an exhaustive series of firings with a barrel rifled according to Dr. Cole’s plan.”
On June 14, 1902, the Board met to consider test results comparing a new Cole barrel with an 8-inch twist to the new Springfield barrel with 8-, 9- and 10-inch twists.
Through March and April, 80 five-shot groups were fired in the above three twist rates at 500 yards with a group average of 4.4 inches for the four-groove Springfield barrel. The same number was fired through a Cole barrel rifled with an 8-inch twist for a group average of 3.9 inches. 80 groups were shot through the Springfield at 500 yards from May through June using 8- and 9-inch twists for a group average of 4.07 inches. Through the same period, 72 groups were fired through the Cole, and the group average was 3.8 inches. From February through June, 46 groups were fired at 1,000 yards through the Springfield for a group average of 11.33 inches. Simultaneously, 38 groups were fired through the Cole for group averages of 10.33 inches. Pressure measurements for the Cole and Springfield rifles were virtually the same.
The Board recommended that Cole system barrels be made for the first 500 Springfield magazine rifles produced for field and armory testing.
By this time, Buffington, who had served as interim Chief of Ordnance, had been replaced by William Crozier. Crozier raised the issue that the superiority of Cole’s system may have resulted from gas escape in the four-groove barrel and recommended cupping the base of the bullet. Frankford Arsenal produced 3,000 rounds of this ammunition.
Beginning July 26, 1902, 20 barrels of each type were produced for further testing with a 1:10-inch twist. The results for 500-yard tests (one five-shot group per barrel) yielded an average of 5.6 inches for the Cole and 5.9 for the Springfield. At 1,000 yards, the results were 15.6 for the Cole and 22.3 for the Springfield. Considering the terrible results of the Springfield 1:10 twist, two additional barrels with a 1:8-inch twist were produced of each type. At 500 yards, the Cole averaged 4.6 inches and the Springfield 5.4 inches for five groups, and at 1,000 yards, the results were Cole 7.5 inches, Springfield, 10.0. In terms of velocity, at 1,000 yards, the Cole had an advantage.
At the request of Captain Lissak, the above two rifles were sent to the Seagirt, New Jersey range, where the National matches were being held. There, opportunities were offered to various and sundry to try them out. The reported results for 200, 600 and 1,000 yards rated both rifles equally accurate, with opinions favoring the Springfield rifling.
In its September 23, 1902, report, the Board recommended two other rifles be produced with the 1:8 twist, one with each type of rifling for analysis of accuracy plus endurance. To this end, the production of 10,000 cartridges was requested for a 5,000-round test for each rifle. The Board’s report garnered the following reply:
“OFFICE OF THE CHIEF OF ORDNANCE
Washington, September 29, 1902
Respectfully returned to the commanding officer, Springfield Armory. The experiments with the elliptical-groove system (Cole’s) should be discontinued. Dr. Cole has been informed that the Department does not consider that it possesses sufficient advantages over present system to warrant further experiments.
William Crozier
Brigadier-General, Chief of Ordnance”
The Annual Report offers no further comments from Board members or any expert shooters at the Springfield Armory, including Freeman Bull and Richard Hare!
In the January 13, 1910 Arms and the Man (which predated American Rifleman), gun-designer Charles Newton excoriated the Crozier decision. “In conclusion we have failed to find any point in which the land and groove system is proven or even claimed to be superior to the oval bore in a smokeless-powder rifle and the latter is conclusively shown by the Ordnance Department’s experiments above cited to be more accurate and it will hardly be questioned that it is more durable, more easily cleaned and delivers its bullets in more perfect condition than the land-and-groove type.”
To this day, barrels of every U.S. military small arm have been rifled with the land and groove system.
Rifling systems: While this chart doesn’t cover everything, it hits the high points. The main issue in the 1850s was the odd-versus-even land and groove numbers, the theory being that with an even number, the pressure of two opposed lands created more bullet distortion than when each land was opposed by a groove. What became the standard Springfield rifle resulted from extensive testing at Springfield and Harper’s Ferry, published by the authority of the Secretary of War in 1856. After 1855, rifles and carbines from the Springfield Armory (until the Krag was adopted) featured three grooves of approximately equal width. The Krag had four. The idea of gain-twist rifling never demonstrated any improvement over a fixed system.
The next phase in alternative rifling came in the late 1930s with the German application of hammer forging to barrel making. This method was first applied to the MG42 machine gun, where the barrel was hammered into shape over a mandrel placed in the bore of a barrel blank, shaping, rifling and chambering in one step. Hammer forging requires expensive machinery.
In the Post-War era, this technique is mainly used to produce what is now termed “polygonal rifling.” For clarity’s sake, the only actual polygonal rifling was that in Whitworth-pattern barrels with flat sides and angled corners. Current “polygonal” bores have sloping sides and rounded corners. This term also encompasses Metford rifling and oval boring.
In the 1960s, Heckler & Koch (HK) began marketing a line of rifles and handguns with polygonal rifling. While the details of HK’s testing are proprietary, its conclusion is as follows: “Compared to conventional land-and-groove profile barrels, bullets fired through polygonal barrels have a higher muzzle velocity, as there is little gas leakage. This increases the amount of energy acting on the base of the bullet. There is no chance of the propellant gases “overtaking” the bullet and adversely affecting its flight properties and directional stability.
A polygonal profiled barrel does not have any sharp internal edges. This virtually eliminates the deposit of residues. A polygonal barrel is easily cleaned, reflects heat more efficiently and has a high resistance to erosion. With no sharp edges as with land and groove barrels, the notching effect on bullets is also avoided. The net effect is increased barrel service life plus no need to finish machine the barrel or chrome plate it. Manufactured with HK’s famous cold hammer-forged barrel process, these polygonal barrels are made of HK proprietary cannon grade steel.”
The Heckler & Koch rifling system features rounded corners and sloping sides.
Given the advantages of longer barrel life, virtually all current polygonal barrels are used on semi-automatic and automatic guns (both rifles and handguns), which see far more shooting than other actions.
Additional advantages of polygonal bores: they can be produced through buttoning and cutting. There is controversy over the use of lead-alloy bullets, particularly in semi-auto handguns where lead buildup just forward of the chamber can cause excessive pressures. Careful inspection and cleaning are the rule and heeding warnings issued by the manufacturer.
Currently, polygonal rifling is used by HK, CZ, Kahr, Glock, Magnum Research and Tanfoglio. The only American company to enter this market is La Rue Tactical, which produces high-end uppers for M-16 platform rifles and its own competition/sniper models.
Will polygonal rifling become the new standard? Significant changes may soon follow with the U.S. Army’s adoption of the HK M110A1 Squad Designated Marksman Rifle, Cal 7.62×51 (.308). A modified version, the G28 Compact Semi-Automatic Sniper System (CSASS), is the latest.
The reader may well wonder at the abrupt and apparently nonsensical decision to abandon oval boring on the part of William Crozier. The politics within the American military bureaucracy gives new meaning to the word “byzantine.” This dynamic is documented in the 1994 book Misfire: The History of How America’s Small Arms Have Failed Our Military by William H. Hallahan. Though this work has been criticized for specific technical errors, in terms of analyzing the personality quirks of those in charge of small arms development, it appears dead on.
A.R. Buffington was required to retire at age 64. Crozier (then a captain) was a popular and highly respected inventor in the Ordnance Department. His work on an improved Krag had little resemblance to the 96 Krag. Crozier was on good terms with Teddy Roosevelt and his Secretary of War, Elihu Root. When Root appointed Crozier Chief, the latter jumped over thirty officers his senior and rank to brigadier general. The old guard fought the appointment in Congress, but Root won in his shake-up of the military. Roosevelt and Root pressured Crozier to deliver a rifle equivalent to the Mausers Roosevelt had faced in Cuba.
The Model 1896 Krag figured prominently in early U.S. military rifling tests.
It would seem understandable that Crozier had little interest in any modifications that might delay the delivery of the new rifle. The M-1903 Springfield was indeed an equivalent to the 98 Mauser. In fact, it bore enough similarities that the government paid Mauser $200,000 to avoid a patent-infringement lawsuit. Crozier later tangled with Isaac Newton Lewis over his machine gun. After a Senate investigation, Crozier was fired.
We take a quick look at 6mm ARC, a cartridge that’s ballistically superior to 5.56 NATO in almost every way.
The 6mm ARC (Advanced Rifle Cartridge) SAAMI cartridge (and chamber specs) was introduced in January 2020 and revised in June 2020.
Hornady ballistician Jayden Quinlan said, “The 6mm ARC began with a simple question: What can we do with today's technology to maximize the performance of the AR-15 platform? We subsequently modeled and tested a variety of designs in different calibers until we were able to produce the most flexible cartridge possible within the limits of the AR-15 system.”
The 6mm ARC was engineered using a long, high-B.C. bullet in modern autoloading rifles. The SAAMI maximum average pressure is 52,000 psi. The twist rate should be 1:7.5 to stabilize 105- to 108-grain high-B.C. bullets and 1:7 twist to stabilize the 115-grain Berger VLD.
According to an article by Richard A. Mann on June 18, 2021, “Hornady … identified a need for an ‘unnamed' Department of Defense entity and a concept cartridge was discussed. The entity showed extreme interest, so Hornady began development. Ultimately, the result of that collaboration is what's now known as the commercially available 6mm ARC.”
“However, the 6mm ARC isn't really new. In about 1975, Dr. Louis Palmisano and Ferris Pindell took the .220 Russian case, which is based on the 7.62x39mm Soviet cartridge, necked it up to 6mm (0.244 inch) and changed the shoulder angle to 30 degrees. Even though the 6mm PPC never gained SAAMI approval, it found great popularity in the bench-rest competition circuit. Most shooters made their own brass and loaded their own ammo.”
“However, note that there are several versions of the 6mm PPC. Though they're minutely different, this results from a cartridge not having SAAMI approval. While some believe the 6mm ARC is based on the 6.5 Grendel cartridge, it's really nothing more than yet another variation of the 6mm PPC.”
Quinlan said it delivers less felt recoil than larger short-action-based cartridges. However, it also uses modern, heavy-for-caliber 6mm bullets that provide excellent accuracy and ballistic performance at an extended range. The 6mm ARC delivers better ballistics than the 5.56 NATO with similar recoil. It delivers comparable ballistics to the .308 Winchester with 30 percent less weight on the firearm platform and ammunition.
General Comments
The maximum cartridge overall length is 2.26 inches, the head diameter is 0.441 inch, and the case capacity of the 6mm ARC is 34 grains. With Hornady's 108-grain ELD-Match, the 6 ARC drops and drifts less than any .223 Rem. bullet. The 6mm ARC is available in: 105-grain BTHP Hornady Black, 108-grain ELD Match, and 103-grain ELD-X Precision Hunter. Hornady lists reloading information for gas guns (52K max pressure) with bullets as light as a 58-grain V-Max.
6mm ARC Factory Loading Data And Factory Ballistics:
We take a quick look at the Galco Hawkeye for the SIG P365 XL, a leather IWB holster designed for optic-equipped pistols.
Who says you can’t have a classy leather holster for your red dot-equipped carry pistol? The Galco Hawkeye makes that possible, and the company has just added a new fit for the popular SIG Sauer P365 XL.
The Galco Hawkeye is made from reinforced premium steerhide and is available in tan or black for right-handed fits. Unfortunately for lefties, no left-hand options are currently available. The design features snap-on belt loops so the holster can be attached or removed without taking off one’s belt, and each will come standard with 1.75-inch belt loops. However, 1.25- and 1.5-inch replacement belt loops are also available for purchase separately.
SIG P365 X-Macro model shown.
If you couldn’t tell from the name, the Galco Hawkeye was designed to accommodate pistols with compact, carry-style red dot sights installed, and as such it features a protective leather optic shroud. The holster also features an open-top design with a butt-forward cant to help facilitate a full firing grip when drawing.
SIG P365 X-Macro model shown.
The Galco Hawkeye for SIG P365 XL pistols is available now and has an MSRP of $149. Other available fits for this holster model include the SIG P365 X-Macro, the SIG P365 XL Spectre Comp, the Smith & Wesson M&P Shield 3-inch, the Smith & Wesson M&P Shield Plus and the Taurus 856 T.O.R.O. 3-inch.
We discuss some of the best aftermarket parts for upgrading a SIG P365, one of America’s most popular carry pistols.
SIG Sauer’s P365 is one of the most popular carry guns in the country. Since it was introduced, it has quickly outpaced the sales for other guns in the same category and has inadvertently created something of an arms race all its own.
Why? Well, it’s extremely tiny, but it has an onboard capacity of 10+1 rounds standard. Not only did this completely upset the balance of power in the micro-compact world, but it also set the stage for a reinvention of what we know when it comes to accuracy and reliability in the size class. It could be said that the P365 completely redefined the carry gun.
Modular Madness
However, we as a people rarely leave well enough alone. In many cases, this hubris results in “upgrades” that are anything but. We’ve seen it time and time again—some type of gimmick becomes all the rage but ends up offering no real benefit for the shooter in the end.
I remember that feeling of coming home with a blank slate whenever I picked up a new Glock, Beretta or 1911. I can’t tell you the number of times I’ve permanently altered something because of the words of an instructor I saw on YouTube, or the creeping sensation that if I didn’t have the right stippling on my grip I was at a serious disadvantage.
Most guns on the market today are fine just as they are. Even though many people regard the standard Glock sights, for example, as merely dovetail protectors, they’re, in fact, quite functional and perfect for most end uses. Yet, it’s very hard to find somebody at competitions, carry classes or even the range who shoots with stock sights. The culture of “customizability” has infiltrated every aspect of shooting, and up until now, you had to take a gamble on your gun’s value if you wanted to increase certain aspects of its performance.
It took the shooting public quite a while to realize the potential of SIG’s modular handgun systems. The original attempt to add such a design wasn’t well received, and I wonder as I write this how many shooters even remember the P250, the progenitor of the P320. While not a reinvention of the handgun wheel, the P250 was a step in the right direction when it came to treating a user to a customizable pistol that could be quickly and easily converted between full-size and subcompact on one internal chassis. This design was eventually discontinued.
However, the stage was set and, while not a groundbreaking design in its own years of production, the P250 is owed the credit of being an important design. In the following years, the P320 and subsequent P365 have dominated the national scene. Unlike some others, SIG has embraced the aftermarket and even endorsed the use of third-party parts on their guns. While this might seem insignificant in the world of modular everything, this is really the first time in the commercial history of arms production that small shops have the ability to supply a major manufacturer with custom parts … and have those parts assembled out of the factory for shipping to the customer.
The Mischief Machine Omega module has 1911-style grip panels that allow you to change textures and colors quickly and easily.
P365 Barrels
My top recommended brands for P365 barrels are True Precision and Faxon. I’ve shot these brands extensively with zero issues. They are, in my direct experience, slightly better in terms of on-paper accuracy than SIG factory, Grey Ghost Precision and ZEV.
In the author’s opinion, True Precision makes some of the more accurate barrels for the P365, though by merit of size alone the gun is limited on long-distance accuracy.
How much better? Well, True Precision and Faxon average about 1 inch at 10 yards for five shots, the others 1.5 to 2 inches. At 25 yards, True Precision offers the best across the board, about 3.5 inches for five shots of any given load. The sights on the P365 aren’t exactly fine, but they’re precise enough. The sight radius is the real limiting factor, and at a point you just can’t expect to be shooting dimes with a micro 9mm.
A threaded barrel isn’t a requirement on a modern pistol, but since there’s the affect length of the flashlight to consider, a bit more barrel won’t hurt.
Luckily for you, all the above brands are readily available online. These barrels are great, but the stock P365 barrel is very accurate. Most of these barrels are a cosmetic upgrade, and if you want added function, you’re looking at a threaded model. I’d consider the cost of the threaded models to be worth it simply if you want to buy yourself an additional 50 fps on most loads.
P365 Grip Modules
Because the serialized part of the P365 is the internal chassis (fire control unit), you’re free to swap out your grip style as much as you like. Polymer versions are pretty nice and can be had for relatively cheap. If you want to practice your own stipple patterns, SIG sells OEM grip modules. If you mess up, you aren’t out a gun. SIG makes these in several styles, including 10- and 12-round sizes, and in a few colors.
Aluminum modules are all the rage now, and there are a growing number of companies that offer them. Icarus Precision has several variations encompassing any finished size and barrel length currently made. These are very well-made pieces; however, I find them to be too slender in the grip and have some uncomfortable bumps on the trigger guard. You might feel differently. SIG offers Icarus models on the P365 build studio.
Mischief Machine makes a variety of grip modules, such as the manual safety version here and variants for the XL models. The author prefers a manual safety on his guns, having spent so much time with 1911s.
Mischief Machine is another company that’s hitting the aluminum module market quite hard. These are very clean designs that mimic the shape of the stock unit. They work with all of my normal P365 holsters. Available in both a single-piece and with grip panels, the Mischief Machine designs are very well made and have some nice, subtle performance-enhancing touches, such as a 4140 steel recoil lug and bushings for the grips. Not only does this grip module have a tangible impact on accuracy, but it’ll also likely outlast the rest of the parts with just how well it is made.
Wilson Combat's P365 grip module.
Wilson Combat makes an excellent polymer grip module that’s an affordable, functional upgrade over the SIG stock module. At a retail price of about $65, it offers quite a bit, including an undercut trigger guard, optional weight channels to balance the gun, an extended beavertail and comfortable texturing. For the money, this is a very good P365 upgrade, and it’s a fraction of the cost of an aluminum module.
Optics
Optics are starting to appear on all types of pistols these days, and SIG was one of the first companies to offer optically equipped pistols from the factory. Grey Ghost makes a great optics-ready slide that’s at the top of my list. I’ve put many rounds down range with one, and it was a clean and well-made upgrade. If you prefer something a bit flashier, ZEV has their Octane slide with RMSC optics cut, and it has about as much serration as the Emerson knives I carry. While it may appear to be overkill, the P365 is a very small gun, and extra traction never hurts.
Last on the list is the True Precision Axiom. Like the others, it’s a drop-in proposition and allows for a couple different types of optics to be mounted. I wasn’t a huge fan of the cosmetics and the ports cut in the sides—while it might a be a moot point, I don’t like places where lint can collect, but to each his own.
Small P365 Upgrades & Parts
The nice thing about the P365 is that you can order most of the small parts direct from SIG. They have a parts shopper on their website that’s very helpful. A growing number of companies are also producing small parts, such as triggers and enhanced springs. But, at that point, you might just want to invest in a SIG FCU and build up your gun around it.
Sig Sauer stocks a large number of small parts. The flat trigger upgrade came directly from Sig.
The P365 is a relatively easy gun to work on—though there are more things going on in that small gun than you’re probably aware of. If you want to make some changes, make sure you educate yourself or watch enough tutorial videos on how to navigate the inner workings.
Editor's Note: This article originally appeared in the 2022 Everyday Carry special issue of Gun Digest the Magazine.
We tested CR920X vs CR920XP to see which compact Shadow Systems came out on top–the compensated XP or non-compensated X.
In general, I’m a fan of Shadow Systems and what they’re doing. It’s innovating, it’s putting out new products that meet market demand quickly. It’s dropped 4 new pistols in less than a year. Three of them have integrally compensated barrels that fit into readily available holsters.
Most recently the company released the CR920X, its most requested pistol, akin to a Glock 43x or Glock 48. I say “akin” because it’s cross-compatible with Glock holsters and has the slim profile of a single stack. However, it boasts a 15+1 metal magazine in addition to all the trimmings we expect from Shadow Systems: stippled frame, optics ready, cross-compatibility and accuracy.
Then last month, they released an integrally compensated CR920XP. While it boasts many of the same features of the X, it has a slightly longer dust cover and most importantly an integral compensator machined from steel with a tool-less novel locking mechanism. This last feature makes it quite a different animal.
We will examine both of these offerings and compare and contrast them.
CR920X Overview
ECR920X vs CR920XP, it doesn't matter, either case you get a pistol with an attractive spiral-fluted barrel.
The CR920X is a slimline, single-stack width 9mm pistol, but it contains a double-stack steel magazine that holds 15+1 or 18+1 with a plus 3 extension. The magazine has an enhanced spring to ensure proper feeding and all the trimmings we expect from Shadow Systems. Ergs
The ergonomics on this pistol are second to none in the sub-compact space in the writer’s opinion. My natural point of aim and indexing of this pistol allows me to line up the sights quickly and effectively which is mission critical with a carry pistol, in addition to the additional grip of real estate making it controllable. I own and have shot the standard CR920 and CR920P quite a bit (these are the true subcompact offerings—think Glock 43 size). While it’s definitely a less-snappy sub-compact, with a flush-fit magazine it’s near impossible to get all 4 fingers on the grip.
The grip also has a nice magazine well, with some sloping and geometry that makes magazine changes a breeze. From a capacity and dimensions standpoint, it’s a double-stack Glock 48 with more ammo onboard. Since it’s a subcompact, it will only fit a handful of lights, like the TLR7sub.
CR920X Reliability
In the CR920X vs CR920XP the non-compensated model wins in the size department. Seen from above, the CR920X (bottom) most definitely offers a more compact package.
As mentioned, unlike my other Shadow Systems pistols that require a break-in period to function reliably. The manual recommends 500 rounds—and I urge this to pressure check any pistol—before it’s broken in. I’ve even had some front-end malfs with other Shadow Systems pistols. That said, I had zero failures from shot one with the CR920X. It has been 100 percent reliable with various ammunitions and incredibly accurate despite its 3.4-inch barrel.
CR920X Fit & Finish
The machining on the pistol is yet again what I expect from the company’s guns—flawless. The pistol has ample serrations, as well as lightening cuts in the slide to reduce the “coupled mass” of the slide as it cycles.
The CR920XP is built on almost the exact frame as the CR920X. As I mentioned, it has a longer dust cover, but this keeps the compensator hidden. For those familiar with Shadow Systems, it’s similar to how the XR920P (their integrally compensated crossover that’s roughly the size of a Glock 17) is set up.
This design, I think gives the pistol a more refined aesthetic. Though from a size point of view, it does make the gun more a compact and less of a sub-compact. The CR920XP in this respect is essentially the same size, albeit slimmer, as the MR920 or Glock 19 but it’s compensated and has the same capacity (15+1).
CR920XP Ergonomics
CR920X vs CR920XP is a draw in ergonomics. Both models have excellent grip texturing, plenty of grip real estate and flared mag well for fast reloads.
To the quick, the grip frame is the same as the 920X and it points similarly, but the compensator makes the pistol’s balance different. The device adds a touch of weight to the front of the gun. This adds balance to the gun you feel when you point it initially and also under recoil. Not that I don’t like the way the CR920X points, but the XP’s heft in the front, in addition to the downward force from the compensator, helps you get on target and stay on target.
CR920XP Reliability
Typically I’m leery of compensated guns because I’ve experienced reliability issues with some models, especially in the beginning. And I did have some issues with CR920XP, but nothing that raised red flags. The pistol suffered a failure to extract and failure to battery in my first 10 rounds shooting my 125-grain handloads. However, after switching to 147-grain factory ammo I had no issues—including with my handloads when I went back to them.
CR920XP Shootability
I’ll admit, I didn’t expect there to be as stark of a difference between the pistols from a recoil mitigation perspective. I find 9mm to be incredibly controllable and never felt like it needed to be compensated. Then I shot the CR920X next to the 920XP. The difference in both perceived recoil and muzzle flip between the pistols is not only palpable but significant.
Do I have a problem controlling the CR920X? Not in the slightest, it’s pleasant to shoot for as light as it is at 19 ounces. The CR920XP however is more controllable, flatter, and faster, with minimal muzzle rise and is only 2 ounces heavier with the steel compensator.
Point shooting with the 920XP is a breeze and the rounds land in basically the same hole with minimal effort at high speed. As with most comped guns, if your grip isn’t strong, you can get some feeding issues, but if you hold it like you mean it, this problem disappears.
I ran both of them on a plate rack, and the XP shoots flatter ergo faster, but not by an insane margin. My fastest clean run of a 6”x6” plate rack at 15 yards with the 920X was 3.63 seconds, with the 920XP posting a 3.31-second time. I’m not winning the match with these, but I’m putting accurate fire on multiple targets quickly—a big need with a carry gun.
CR920X Vs CR920XP Accuracy Test
Ammunition
Pistol
Average Group Size In Inches
147gr Winchester
CR920X
0.95
147gr PMC
CR920X
1.61
125gr RN Reloads
CR920X
1.87
147gr Winchester
CR920XP
1.09
147gr PMC
CR920XP
1.43
125gr RN Reloads
CR920XP
1.49
The average is taken from four groups of five shots from a rest at 10 yards.
Parting Shots On The CR920X Vs CR920XP
The CR920XP proved a very controlable and accurate pistol–especially for one tailored for concealed carry.
Both of these guns are home runs in my book—from a size-to-feature ratio, value for the money ($800-900 MSRP), innovation, and cross-compatibility with Glock holsters. Naysayers will ding them for the proprietary mags, but they’re $30 or less and made of steel with reliability in mind. Furthermore, the ergonomics are amazing, and these guns point naturally where your natural point of aim will indeed be your point of impact: a critical function of a carry gun.
From a holster point of view, that’s one area where I personally need to get a new holster; this gun needs a Glock 48 holster. My T-Rex Arms Sidecar for a 43x MOS that fits all my other CR920s could not accommodate the CR920XP, as the compensator is much blockier than the CR920P.
The pistols are modular and accurate—especially for a 3.4-inch barrel—and Shadow Systems’ customer service is top-notch. What’s more, in the event you use your gun in self-defense, the company replaces it. Oh, and they’re made right here, stateside, in Plano, TX.
Step Into the Shadows: Explore Shadow Systems Insights
We take a quick look at Charter Arms’ new Coyote line of .380 ACP snub-nosed revolvers.
You don’t see .380 ACP revolvers every day, but anyone interested in owning one has just been given another option in the form of the Charter Arms Coyote.
Because .380 ACP is a rimless cartridge that was designed for use in autoloaders, Charter Arms Coyote revolvers must be loaded using moon clips. Each gun will ship with two TK Customs moon clips to feed the 5-shot cylinder. Additional moon clips are available for purchase separately as well. Sporting 2-inch barrels, these are double-action/single-action guns with exposed hammers and standard snub-nosed revolver sights. One trick up the Coyote’s sleeve is that the barrels are also ported to help reduce recoil.
Charter Arms Coyote revolvers are relatively lightweight at 14 ounces, mostly thanks to their aluminum frames and the lightening cuts in their underlugs. They’re available with either a standard metal-colored frame or with a pink or lavender finish, but all three versions will ship with checkered rosewood grips. The MSRP for all Coyote models is $448.14 and they’re available now.
Here we take a deep dive into the development, history, function and use of the German Gewehr 43 self-loading rifle.
The Gewehr 43, or G43, was an excellent semi-automatic combat rifle produced late in World War II by Germany. Nobody can say for sure, but if the Germans had G43 rifles at the onset of the war, the outcome may have been different. At the very least, the Allies likely would have lost more men were they forced to contend with this rifle’s impressive firepower.
The increased use of semi-automatic rifles during World War II changed the concept of the combat rifle from manually operated bolt actions to fast-firing semi-autos. This change didn’t happen overnight, but the writing was on the wall that self-loading rifles were the way of the future and virtually every major player of WWII was investigating how to get more of them into the hands of their armed forces.
At the turn of the 20th century, armies around the world were experimenting with semi-automatic combat rifles. The French, in an effort to replace their Lebel bolt action rifles, adopted the Fusil Automatique Modèle 1917 and put it into service in the latter part of the First World War. It used a gas-operated system with a long-stroke piston with a rotating bolt and fed off an internal 5-round magazine. Troops found the rifle heavy at over 11 pounds, too long, the magazine was too fragile, and the rifle difficult to maintain in the trenches. Bolt action rifles were still more reliable in the mess of war and cheaper to produce on a mass scale, but that did not deter further development of other semi-automatic rifles.
The next significant self-loading rifle came out of Russia in 1915 with the Avtomat Fedorov. This also saw limited use in WWI. It was a short-recoil operated, locked-breech rifle that was actually a select fire weapon capable of both full-auto and semi-auto fire. Later models had a 25-round detachable magazine. This rifle had reliability issues, was difficult to maintain and when used in automatic mode it heated up too quickly.
M1 Garand
The first truly successful self-loading military rifle arrived in 1936 with the American M1 Garand. It not only lacked the bugs and reliability issues that plagued previous designs but was also able to be mass-produced and widely issued to American armed forces. While older self-loading rifles had seen action before, their numbers paled in comparison to how widely the Garand would end up being issued.
The Garand was the first standard-issue self-loading rifle adopted by the U.S. military, and it proved to be a great advantage when facing troops mostly armed with bolt-action rifles like the German Karabiner 98k.
The Soviets were also determined to replace their bolt-actions, but their efforts weren’t as successful as the American’s given they never managed to produce enough self-loading rifles to make them standard-issue equipment by the war’s end. Soviet efforts to produce one seriously started in the 1930s and resulted in designs like the AVS-36 and the SVT-38, but both designs had many issues and neither was truly combat-ready. That changed with the adoption of the improved SVT-40 rifle in 1940, and while it still saw widespread use during the war, too few were produced to replace the Mosin Nagant.
The Road To The Gewehr 43
Well aware of the existence of the SVT-40 and M1 Garand in the hands of their enemies, Germany realized that a self-loading rifle was sorely missing from its inventory. The response was the development of the Gewehr 41 in 1941. Or, more accurately, the Gewehr 41s considering there were two of them: the G41(W) and the G41(M).
The German Army provided specifications for a semi-automatic rifle to several firearms manufacturers. Two of the design criteria seem odd by today’s standards. One specified that no holes were to be drilled into the barrel to port gas into the operating mechanism, as they believed the gas port could cause premature erosion of the bore and lead to accuracy issues. Another design feature the German Army requested was a manual bolt action backup in case the auto-loading system failed.
Walther and Mauser submitted prototypes, and both designs employed a cone-shaped gas trap at the muzzle that deflected gas into a long-stroke piston that operated the mechanism. The rifles were chambered for the same cartridge as the Karabiner 98k, 7.92x57mm Mauser, and were loaded via the same stripper clips used with the bolt action. The new Walther and Mauser designs, however, used fixed, 10-round box magazines. Both designs were adopted by the German Army as the G41(W) which was the Walther design and the G41(M), the Mauser design.
The Mauser G41 followed the German Army’s design specification criteria to the letter and as a result, it looked a lot like a Mauser bolt-action rifle. It even incorporated a traditional bolt handle that automatically disconnected the bolt assembly from the recoil spring if the rifle was used in manual mode. The controls and sights were also similar to the Karabiner 98k bolt action.
Walther ignored some of the specifications sent to them, and they were better off for it. The Walther G41(W) design did not include the manual bolt-action backup system and was the better of the two G41 designs. But—there’s always a but—neither the Mauser nor the Walther Gewehr 41 were very successful.
Like many semi-automatic combat rifles before them, they were a nightmare to maintain in field conditions, were too heavy, hard to disassemble and frankly didn’t work all that well. Gas fouling issues plagued both designs and both rifles required intricate machining that was time-consuming and expensive to build. The Walther, being the better design of the two G41s, was built in larger numbers but still saw very limited use. Given the many issues with both G41 versions, Germany’s journey to a semi-auto combat rifle was not yet over.
Rise Of The Gewehr 43
In June of 1941, Germany invaded the Soviet Union, and in combat, they encountered small numbers of Soviet troops armed with SVT-38 and SVT-40 rifles. All’s fair in love and war, so some captured examples of these were sent back to Germany for evaluation. After looking under the hood, it was clear that the SVT-40 was a superior design to either G41 variant.
As a result, Walther copied and refined the SVT-40’s short-stroke gas system and combined it with some elements of the G41(W) to produce the Gewehr 43 in 1943. The G43 used a simpler and more reliable ported gas system to operate the bolt. Many of the machined parts were replaced with stamped metal parts which helped cut manufacturing costs and production time.
The Gewehr 43 action used an improved gas-operated short-stroke piston taken from the SVT alongside a flapper-style locking bolt borrowed from the G41(W). In a flap-locking system, a pair of flappers on the sides of the bolt lock into the receiver when the bolt is in battery. The flappers unlock and pivot into the bolt when a shot is fired, sending the bolt backward to cycle the rifle.
The G43, like the G41, was chambered for 7.92x57mm Mauser. However, unlike the G41, the feed system on the G43 was again inspired by the SVT as it was given a 10-round detachable box magazine that could be recharged while installed in the rifle via 5-round stripper clips.
Just over 400,000 Gewehr 43s were produced between 1943 and the end of the war in 1945, a truly impressive amount for such a short time and given the state of the German industry that late in the war. That said, the later-production rifles often look noticeably rougher around the edges than the earlier production models. As Germany became more desperate for arms, the priority shifted from making fine weapons to merely functional ones.
It's also worth noting that in 1944 the Gewehr 43 was redubbed the Karabiner 43 or K43, however, the guns are identical besides the name they were stamped with.
The general consensus on the G43 is that it was an excellent combat rifle for its day. Its only real issue was that it arrived too late and in too few numbers to become the standard-issue infantry rifle.
Gewehr 43 Sniper Variants
Much like the SVT-40 that helped inspire it, the Germans also attempted to use the G43 as a sniper or designated marksman rifle. Also like the SVT-40, it was found to be more effective as an infantry rifle and was used far less by snipers/designated marksmen than the more accurate optic-equipped bolt actions of each respective nation. That said, about 50,000 Gewehr 43s were equipped with 4-power magnified ZF-4 scopes for sniping roles.
Essentially, the G43/K43 is only for serious collectors, truly dedicated to owning this piece of history. Even with production numbers of over 400,000 rifles, the G43 is relatively rare and commands a high price. The prices vary based on condition and other factors, but at the time of writing, the rifles are generally selling for between $3,000 and $5,000. For a shooter-grade example with some condition issues or one sporterized or rechambered for a different cartridge, you may be able to snag one for closer to $2,500. Any way you skin it, these are expensive rifles to buy today.
If you’re fortunate enough to own a Gewehr 43, there’s something you need to be aware of if you plan on shooting it. Like the M1 Garand which can be damaged by using modern ammo, so too can the G43. The gas port of G43/K43 rifles was made quite large to compensate for heavy fouling, but this means that shooting some types of ammo through it can result in excessive wear. To prevent damaging the rifle or potentially injuring yourself, it’s a good idea to install a modern, aftermarket shooter’s kit that’s designed to ameliorate this issue. Kits like this enable you to adjust the amount of gas flow to a low enough level to safely cycle a G43/K43 without hurting the gun.
Legacy Of The Gewehr 43
The G43 may not be the most iconic or influential rifle of WWII, but it’s nonetheless historically significant. While it wasn’t the first or the best self-loading rifle to be fielded during the war, the story of its development is an important chapter in the transition between bolt-action and self-loading military rifles that occurred during this period. Germany may not have entered the war with a semi-auto rifle, but it certainly tried to end it with as many as it possibly could.
An IRA member armed with a G43.
Of course, the Gewehr 43’s story doesn’t end with WWII. It went on to see some minor, mostly peacetime use by countries like France and Czechoslovakia after the war, as well as some action in the hands of non-state actors such as the Provisional IRA. Today, they’re mostly historical relics to be enjoyed by private collectors and displayed in museums, but with over 400,000 made, likely, they’re still being put to practical use somewhere.
In the eyes of a jury, your choice of carry pistol could be the difference between murder and acquittal.
What you carry everyday can affect the outcome of your self-defense trial. You might even be found guilty of murder because of the carry pistol you chose.
How could that be so, you ask? The jury. The jury will be either 6 or 12 citizens from your home county, all of which have clean criminal histories, and typically middle aged or older. Occasionally, younger folks get on, but not often. And, when deciding your guilt or innocence, they’ll take into account all the facts presented at trial, including the type of gun you used.
Case in point: I worked as an expert in a Tucson, Arizona, case, where the prosecutor made a big deal about the Glock 19 pistol the defendant used, and the number of rounds it held. He did so in an attempt to sway the jury against the defendant, at one point calling him a “gun nut.” Did it work? Not really, because the trial ended with a hung jury, with the majority voting to acquit and the minority to convict.
As with many hung juries, the Pima County prosecutor decided to prosecute again. This time, I advised the defense attorney to ask each police witness what gun they carried (Glock 17s) and how many bullets were in the gun. This time, there was no mention by the prosecutor about the gun the defendant used. Interestingly, the second jury also hung, and the judge eventually dismissed the case.
Another case where the prosecutor (again in Arizona) made a big deal about the type of gun used was when a retired school teacher, Harold Fish, was hiking and forced to shoot and kill an attacker. Fish used a 10mm 1911 pistol, and during trial the prosecution made a big deal about the power of the 10mm. The jury came back with a guilty verdict.
Your Carry Pistol As Evidence
You see, when a person uses a gun in self-defense, the gun will be confiscated by the police as evidence in the shooting, and if you’re prosecuted, it’ll become a lead witness in your case. Typically, the gun will be introduced in court, waived around in front of the jury and, absent a cogent and logical argument from the defense, might just prejudice a member or two of the jury against you.
However, in most cases, skillful work by the defense can nullify or even turn the argument into a positive one for your side. Let me explain, using myself as an example, with a hypothetical cross-examination in a hypothetical court case. I personally carry a 10mm 1911 pistol for daily carry, and a line of questioning might go like this:
Prosecutor: Mr. Hayes, the 10mm pistol you used in this shooting was a powerful gun, right?
Me: Yes, it is.
Prosecutor: In fact, the FBI carried it for a little while, but it proved too powerful for their agents, right?
Me: That is what they claimed, but as I understand the issues, it was more about the gun they chose rather than the power of the 10mm cartridge.
Prosecutor: Can you explain your answer? (Note, the prosecution, by asking an open-ended question, they do not know the answer to have just sealed their fate in this issue.)
Me: They chose the large-framed Smith & Wesson 1076 pistol which, being a large-framed pistol, was simply too large for many agents to use effectively. The large frame resulted in the agents with small hands having to shoot the gun by grasping the pistol and having the backstrap of the pistol recoil against the knuckle of the thumb, instead of the web of the hand. This can be very painful and eventually cause injury to the shooter’s hand. Additionally, that particular gun was heavy, and since most agents wore suits and ties instead of a duty belt in uniform, the agents also found it difficult to conceal.
Prosecutor: I see. Well, then, isn’t this an issue for you?
Me: Absolutely not. You see, if I carried the Smith & Wesson 1076, I too would find it difficult to conceal. Instead, I carry a Nighthawk 10mm Commander, which is both lighter and smaller. It is, in fact, easy to carry.
Prosecutor: (Not knowing when to stop.) OK, Mr. Hayes, what about the extreme power of the 10mm pistol?
Me: Being a firearms instructor early in my professional career, and now as an expert witness myself, I have both heard of and seen cases where less powerful ammunition resulted in an armed citizen or law enforcement officer needing to fire several shots in order to stop their attacker. The more times a person has to shoot to stop an attacker, the more chances there are to miss and hit innocent individuals. Additionally, I have seen many cases of the person being shot twisting and turning and taking shots in the back, resulting in an indictment for an otherwise justifiable shooting.
Prosecutor: Thank you, Mr. Hayes, no further questions.
Note: I would make sure the defense counsel brought up the issue again, where I could explain more in depth about my level of expertise and the selection of the ammunition I choose to use. In a normal self-defense trial, this role would be for the expert witness the defense hired to explain these issues to the jury.
In addition to the gun and ammunition you used, there are other issues to consider. One is the name on the side of the gun and the name of the ammunition. If both these marketing decisions are implemented to tickle the imagination of the purchaser, to make them feel like a “badass,” then it’ll also perhaps persuade the jury you are a “badass.” Names like “persuader,” “ultimate kill machine,” “the assassinator,” etc. would probably work against you, not for you.
Take Law Enforcement’s Lead
So, what to choose and why? The safest gun and ammunition to choose is what your local cops choose. And since it’s a concealed carry pistol, a smaller version would be fine. As far as ammunition, avoid the boutique ammo makers and stick with the make law enforcement regularly use.
Every choice I make regarding what I use for self-defense is filtered through the eyes of my potential jury. I would recommend you do so, too.
Editor's Note: This article originally appeared in the 2022 Everyday Carry special issue of Gun Digest the Magazine.
We check out Warne’s new line of HyperLite Scope Rings, made using a lightweight yet very durable alloy.
Ultra-lightweight rifles have been incredibly popular recently, with manufacturers incorporating materials like titanium and carbon fiber to shave off every extra ounce possible. Well, light rifles need light accessories when the goal is keeping the setup’s weight at a minimum, and Warne’s new line of HyperLite Scope Rings will help with that.
Made out of Warne’s MagnaFusion alloy, the company says that HyperLite Scope Rings weigh up to 35% less than comparable aluminum models while retaining the same level of strength and stability. The rings are made in America and are precision CNC machined before being given a Cerakote finish. They feature integrated recoil lugs, dual-screw clamps and a STANAG 4694 mounting interface that makes them compatible with both Picatinny and Weaver-style bases.
Brian Motland, CEO of Warne, said this about the new rings:
Our new HyperLite Scope Rings represent a significant advancement in the world of lightweight shooting accessories … By incorporating our advanced MagnaFusion Alloy, we’ve created a product that not only reduces weight but also maintains the exceptional durability and reliability that Warne is known for.
Warne’s HyperLite Scope Rings are currently offered in low, medium and high options for 30mm, 34mm and 1-inch tube sizes. MSRPs range from $109.99 to $119.99 and they’re available now.
We take a quick look at .224 Weatherby Magnum, the smallest belted case commercially manufactured.
The Weatherby line of proprietary cartridges was somewhat incomplete for lack of an ultra-velocity .22. The previous .220 Weatherby Rocket was actually an Improved wildcat based on the .220 Swift case, and Weatherby never manufactured this cartridge. The .224 Varmintmaster was introduced in 1963, but, according to the late Roy Weatherby, development work went back 10 years prior to that.
Introduction of the cartridge was delayed because of lack of a suitable action. The cartridge was offered in a reduced-size version of the Weatherby Mark V rifle, but the gun is no longer available. Weatherby continues to sell the ammunition.
The .224 Weatherby lies ballistically between the .223 Remington and the .220 Swift. It’s a belted case with the advantages and disadvantages inherent in this type of construction.
For the handloader, it mitigates certain headspace and case-stretch problems and should provide maximum case life. It’s an excellent long-range varmint cartridge with performance similar to the .22-250 Remington. Its popularity was determined largely by economic factors. One could buy a Remington, Ruger or Winchester bolt-action in .22-250 for much less than a .224 Weatherby.
It was the smallest belted case manufactured commercially.
.224 Weatherby Magnum Loading Data And Factory Ballistics:
Looking to go armed, but are stuck in the weeds as to what to arm yourself with? Here are 20 excellent concealed carry gun options that will keep you on the defensive.
