An evaluation of common shooting stances that can help you shoot a handgun easier and more consistently.
I began working in law enforcement in the early ’90s. At that time, competition pistol shooting and tricked-out pistols were the rage, and the things that worked in competition were the marketplace and training. Though you don’t hear so much about it now, at that time there was a running debate about which shooting stance—isosceles or Weaver—was the best.
The goal of a shooting stance is to provide you with a balanced and versatile foundation to shoot and move from, maximize awareness of your surroundings, and the ability to direct fast and accurate fire in the most directions.
The Weaver stance was developed by Jack Weaver of Lancaster, California, in 1959 for the purpose of ensuring quick and accurate shot placement with a handgun. It was later codified by Jeff Cooper and very much resembles a fighting stance that might be used by a boxer or mixed martial arts fighter. This shooting stance allows you to deliver force quickly, while maintaining balance and the ability to move.
The isosceles began to get a lot of attention when Rob Leatham used his version of it to win several major competitions. According to Max Michel, who has won more world speed shooting championships than anyone, “The isosceles stance allows the competitive shooter to square up to the target, which gives stability and a full range of motion in a 180-degree arc, allowing them to easily transition to multiple targets.”
Most do not understand either of these shooting stances, or they complicate both with the insistence that any deviation from their rigid understanding nullifies both techniques. I’ve been trained in both by what would be considered masters. I learned the Weaver stance at Gunsite Academy, and I learned the isosceles—or at least his version of it—from Michel. Both work very well, and if you’re just learning to shoot a handgun, both will provide you with an equally solid foundation to learn from.
The Weaver
Though some believe the Weaver stance is a bladed stance, it’s not. You stand with your body squared to the target. Feet should be about shoulder width apart, and some suggest your strong side foot be slightly behind your weak-side foot by about a half step. Your knees should be over your toes, and your shoulders should be over your knees. Essentially, you have a very slight forward lean. Your head is held erect and when you draw your handgun, you bring it up to eye level. You do not drop your head.
The main distinction of the Weaver stance is that your weak or support arm elbow is bent at about a 45-degree angle, and your shooting arm’s is either straight or the elbow is very slightly bent. What’s critical about the Weaver stance is that you push the pistol forward with your shooting arm and apply pressure to the rear with your support arm.
Regardless of the stance you shoot from, keep your head erect. Do not tuck it between your arms or lean it to one side.
The Isosceles
Just as with the Weaver stance, your body should be squared to the target. Your feet can either be side by side, shoulder width apart or one can be slightly forward. Also, just as with the Weaver, your knees should be over your toes and your shoulders should be over your knees, and your head is held erect; when you draw your handgun, you bring it up to eye level.
The main distinction of the isosceles stance is that both of your arms are extended, with the elbows locked or only very slightly bent. And, just like the Weaver stance, you push the pistol forward with your shooting arm and apply pressure to the rear with your support arm.
For the key takeaways and what’s most important, let’s look at the similarities between the two as opposed to the differences.
Feet about shoulder width apart
Knees over toes, shoulders over knees
Head erect
Bring handgun to eye level
Push forward with the shooting hand, pull with the support hand
The Good
The good thing about learning a shooting stance is that if you do either the Weaver or the isosceles correctly, it will make learning to shoot a handgun easier. This is why a stance of some sort is generally the second thing you learn … after grip. If you develop a good shooting foundation, you can then direct more of your attention to the other aspects of shooting—like grip, sight alignment and trigger control—because you’re not trying to do/learn everything at the same time while trying to maintain balance. And balance is what really matters when it comes to a shooting stance.
The Bad
Regardless of the stance you’re shooting from, one of the most frequent mistakes is not keeping your head erect. You can better monitor and react to your situation with your head erect. If you don’t believe me, just watch a professional NFL quarterback. When they drop back in the pocket to pass, where they’re under duress and must maintain awareness of pass rushers/attackers, they keep their head erect. As a pistol shooter, you should do the same; keep your head erect and bring the pistol’s sights up to your eyes.
This is an over exaggeration of the isosceles stance. Notice how the shooter’s head is sucked—turtled—down between his arms.
The Ugly
Often, you’ll see those shooting the Weaver stance cock their head to the side and rest it on their shooting arm. Similarly, you’ll see those shooting the isosceles stance duck their head like a turtle between their shooting arms. Neither approach is correct. Just the same, shooters will excessively blade their body with the Weaver stance, and they’ll spread their legs too far apart or lean too far forward with the isosceles stance. When learning to shoot, these bad stance examples might not seem like a serious problem. It’s when you advance to more complicated shooting problems or are learning to deal with tactical situations that these ugly habits can cause problems with your performance.
The shooter’s head is erect, but so is his body. He’ll probably be able to make a good first shot, but after that, he’ll struggle to control recoil and make fast and accurate follow-up shots.
The Balanced Stance
I strongly suggest that new shooters pick either the Weaver or the isosceles stance and use it correctly as you develop your shooting proficiency. Learn either—it does not matter which one—well enough so that it’s a reflexive response to the decision to shoot. This leaves more of your brain available to help you shoot better.
Regardless of the stance or arm positioning, assuming a balanced stance is the goal.
However, you’ll eventually find that you will use some combination of both shooting stances to address more complex shooting problems, such as you might have to do during competition or tactical training, or heaven forbid, a situation where you must shoot to save your life. Once you become proficient at shooting a handgun, the only thing that really matters about your stance is that it’s balanced enough to control the handgun … and balanced enough to keep you on your feet during a fight.
Editor's Note: This article originally appeared in the August 2023 issue of Gun Digest the Magazine.
I believe most gun writers take for granted how fortunate we are. We’re for damn sure not special, but many of us do have access to special people, experts the average shooter would love to be able to talk to for just a few moments. Some of these experts are just doing their job to help gun writers educate the shooting public, and some of these experts are friends.
Wilson believes the 15+1 round SFX9 with its 4-inch barrel is the best defensive handgun currently offered by Wilson Combat.
For example, if I need some specifics on ammunition, I have contacts at all the major manufacturers who will take my call. And if I want to discuss defensive handgun application, I can reach out several Gunsite Academy instructors. My job then becomes to pass that information on to you.
Bill Wilson, founder of Wilson Combat, is a friend. He’s someone I can reach out to when I need an expert opinion or gun guidance. We’ve shot together, hunted together, drank beer together and even talked about some of the people in the gun industry who aren’t the experts they claim to be. Wilson, especially when it comes to handguns, is an expert. I thought it’d be cool to ask him some questions about defensive handguns that you might consider asking him if you had the chance.
Understand that Wilson isn’t what I would call a bloviator. He has an opinion that’s founded on experience, and he’ll give it to you simple and straight. Wilson doesn’t endlessly wax on like a gun writer to prove his opinion is the right one. You may not agree with him on everything, but when considering his answers, realize they’re not coming from some geek behind a gun counter or some tactard at your local range—they’re coming from one of the best handgunners in the world.
Bill Wilson of Wilson Combat.
Favorite Number: 9, 40 or 45?
Many interested in carrying a defensive handgun struggle with what cartridge it should be chambered for. It might be the ultimate defensive handgun question, so it’s the first question I asked Wilson.
Wilson: With the high-performance 9mm ammunition available today, I’m pretty much a 9mm guy for range use and self-defense. I’ve never had any use for the .40 S&W or 10mm.
Jacketed Hollow-Points Or Mono-Metal Bullets?
For years, the gold standard regarding defensive handgun bullets has been jacketed hollow-points like the Speer Gold Dot or the Federal HST. But mono-metal bullets XP are becoming more popular. I asked Wilson which he preferred.
Wilson: Obviously, now that I own Lehigh Defense, I’m a big fan of the highly effective Xtreme Defense and Xtreme Penetrator bullets. The more I use them, the more impressed I become with them. They don’t have any of the negatives of a JHP, such as varying performance when fired through heavy clothing and/or barriers due to the HP getting clogged, occasional failure to expand for various reasons, or lack of penetration. They will perform the same under all conditions.
Wilson has a lot of experience with JHP and mono-metal bullets, but he’s become a fan of the bullets offered by Lehigh Defense—which is why he bought the company.
Defensive Handgun Sights?
It wasn’t that long ago that you were stuck with the sights that came on your defensive handgun when you bought it. Today, there seems to be endless aftermarket options, and most manufacturers even offer various styles. So, I asked Wilson which defensive handgun sight he liked best. You might find it interesting that he didn’t even mention the ubiquitous three-dot sight.
Wilson: Most of my pistols have a black rear and a red fiber-optic front. But for a dedicated carry gun, I also like a tritium front sight.
Do You Appendix Carry?
The current in-thing is appendix carry. It does offer a very fast draw but, at the same time, it can be very difficult to draw from the appendix position if you’re extremely crouched. It’s also somewhat conditional on the configuration of your body at the belt position. IDPA has just recently allowed appendix carry for competition, so I thought I’d ask Wilson for his thoughts on it.
Wilson: I’m not a fan of appendix carry for various reasons, and I’m also way too fat for it. (Bill Wilson is in no way fat, but like me, there’s a little extra bit on him at the belt line.) I’ve settled on point of hip carry with a straight drop and use one of our Rapid Response model holsters, the basic design originated by Bruce Nelson.
What About Gun Cleaning?
If you were in the Army like I was, you were taught to clean your gun every time you used it. However, the Army did that not so much to teach you to clean your gun every time you used it, but to teach you how to properly field strip and clean your gun. So, I asked Wilson, who I’m sure probably shoots more than anyone reading this magazine, how often a defensive handgun needs cleaned.
Wilson: More often than I do! At least once a month and probably every two weeks if you are out in a dusty environment. The most important thing for a steel frame gun is to keep some lube on it, and all oils will migrate away and/or dry up pretty quickly. Unless it’s really cold weather, I use a very light viscosity grease, which will stay put and not dry up.
Custom Or Custom-Built 1911?
Wilson Combat is famous for custom 1911s. In my opinion, they’re the premier source for custom 1911s. You can buy a full custom 1911 from Wilson Combat or you can send them your 1911 for customization. I asked Wilson which option he thought was best and which, of all the 1911s on the market, would be the best to send in for customization.
Wilson: These days, with all the high-quality semi-custom and full custom complete pistols available, that’s the best way to go. But if you want to go the custom-build route, both Colt and Springfield Armory guns will make a good base gun.
What’s Wilson Combat’s Best Carry Gun?
If you go to the Wilson Combat website looking for a defensive handgun, there are a lot to choose from, and prices can exceed $4,000. I wanted to know what Wilson thought the best defensive handgun his company offered was. It wasn’t the most expensive.
Wilson: I personally carry a SFX9 subcompact (It has a 10-round capacity with a 3.25-inch barrel), but I think our SFX9 compact, with its 15-round capacity and 4-inch barrel, is our best all-around carry/range model. I shoot this model better than any pistol I’ve ever fired, and it’s my primary training pistol.
Editor's Note: This article originally appeared in the June 2022 issue of Gun Digest the Magazine.
MDT has just released the ORYX bipod, a functional and affordable design available with two attachment head options.
When it comes to bipod shopping, the options always seem to be dominated by expensive, high-tier models and cheap Chinesium. The number of decent yet affordable bipod options is lacking in comparison. Thankfully, the new MDT ORYX is poised to help fill that gap and offer another functional and efficient bipod at a reasonable price point.
The MDT ORYX is both durable and lightweight thanks to its high-strength polymer construction, and the M-LOK model weighs in at only 11 ounces. On that note, the ORYX is available with either an M-LOK or a sling swivel stud attachment head. It has a height of 7.2 inches to 10 inches (measured by the pivot point), a footprint width of 9 inches to 11.5 inches and the head adjustment has 50 degrees of cant.
Further, the MDT ORYX can be adjusted with a single hand, including stowing, deploying, adjusting cant tension and adjusting leg length. The bottoms of the legs also feature a tire tread-like texture, allowing them to get a good grip in most environments.
The MDT ORYX bipod is available now and has an MSRP of $99.95 regardless of the attachment head style selected.
Flat trajectory, excellent long-range accuracy and mitigated felt recoil define the .270 Weatherby Magnum.
Most shooting enthusiasts think that the .270 Weatherby was developed to satisfy a demand for this caliber after the popularity of the .300 Weatherby Magnum had been established. As a matter of fact, the .270 was the first of the line developed by Roy Weatherby on the necked-down .300 H&H case.
This was in 1943, after experiments with an improved .220 Swift that Weatherby called the .220 Rocket. It was largely actual hunting experience with the .270 WM that started Weatherby on the high-velocity trail. This culminated in his starting a commercial gun business in September of 1945.
The popularity of the .270 Winchester made it almost mandatory for Roy Weatherby to include this cartridge in his line of commercial magnum rifles. The .270 Weatherby Magnum has been used extensively, and successfully, on all species of North American big game. It has also achieved notable success on African plains game.
Those who’ve used it claim the .270 Weatherby provides flat trajectory, excellent long-range stopping power on all thin-skinned game and noticeably less recoil than the famous .300 Weatherby Magnum. As an added attraction, the .270 Weatherby Magnum isn’t impractical for varmint shooting. The 100-grain bullet is excellent for this purpose, thus making the .270 Weatherby Magnum a versatile all-around cartridge. However, it’s important to allow plenty of barrel-cooling time with this and all other high-intensity cartridges.
The .270 Weatherby Magnum is easy and economical to reload, and empty cases are available for it. Like the other large-capacity magnum cases, it doesn’t lend itself to reduced loads and is at its best with full or nearly full charges. It’s a fine choice for the hunter who wants to include varmint hunting potential in a big game rifle. It has been one of the most popular cartridges that Weatherby offers.
When replacing it isn’t an option, here’s how to refinish a simple rifle stock.
Restoring firearms has been a hobby of mine since I became interested in guns nearly four decades ago. The Gun Digest Books of Exploded Firearms Drawings were invaluable as I started this journey. Having a few gunsmith courses under my belt and the knowledge contained in these books allowed me to pick up many firearms on the cheap—even if they were missing parts, incomplete or straight-up broken.
While it worked fine in its initial state, the refinishing job made this Stevens Model 66 presentable at a local shooting match.
The Stevens Model 66 was a relatively inexpensive bolt-action .22 rifle, and like most firearms made by Stevens, this was viewed like a hammer or a screwdriver: a simple and relatively inexpensive tool. It was produced from 1929 to as late as 1945. It’s tube fed and can chamber .22 Short, .22 Long and .22 Long Rifle ammunition, and the stock is built of walnut and equipped with a large takedown screw. This particular model was improved with an aftermarket, receiver-mounted peep sight, and it was purchased in 2019 for $50 at my local Cabela’s in Reno, Nevada.
That’s right: $50.
It was so cheap because it was missing the factory rear sight, and the stock looked like it was left out in the rain for 75 years. It had no warmth or luster that’s so often seen on walnut stocks from days gone by, and the finish was flaking badly on the wood, particularly on the lower half of the stock.
Still, the metal was relatively clean with no pitting or rust, and the rifle proved reasonably accurate with the peep sight. This wasn’t a personal family heirloom, and thoughts of a nice Boyds laminate stock came to mind as a replacement.
Unfortunately, Boyds doesn’t make a stock for this model. Neither do any other stock manufacturers, for that matter, because rifles such as these were low priced to begin with and, again, viewed as simple tools. You could almost read into this as “disposable,” but the truth is that most firearms are built to outlast many lifetimes.
At this point, I was left with two options: Keep shooting it as-is with the hope of finding a replacement stock in nice condition, or roll up the shirt sleeves and refinish the walnut myself.
I chose the latter.
The end result was certainly better than the way this rifle was found.
Refinishing Candidates
Before refinishing a stock, make a clear examination of conscience. It’s true: Refinishing many stocks will decrease the value of the firearm. This holds true for antique Winchester lever-action rifles, handmade double guns … and just about anything with a two-piece stock, and anything with deluxe checkering or carving in the wood.
For most of those firearms, you might need the services of a professional. Unless you’re a master woodworker, please steer clear of such projects.
But, the Stevens was perfect for this job. It was low in price, had a simple one-piece stock with no checkering and its profile could best be described as “smooth and rounded.” Mild sanding wouldn’t be very noticeable, and the stock grain was very simple to begin with. Again, if you’re going to start a refinishing project, keep all these factors in mind before you destroy something potentially valuable.
CitriStrip was the brand used in taking the original ruined finish off this rifle. Biodegradable products make sense when working with natural materials, as they’re not as likely to stain or contaminate the wood.
For a stock such as this, you’ll need some sandpaper of various grits (120 to 400), a coat hanger, wood stripper, lemon oil, degreaser, steel wool and the Birchwood Casey trifecta of Tru-Oil, Walnut Stain and Stock Sheen & Conditioner.
Step 1: Disassembly
As always, ensure the firearm is unloaded before you start working on it. There, I said it. I had to say it.
Have a well-lit, well-ventilated area for your project, and if you’re not familiar with the firearm in question, find a resource such as one of the Gun Digest mentioned earlier, or at the very least, search up a quality YouTube video to help you out.
A forensic scientist could probably figure out how and why the wood was trashed in this manner. There were no cracks nor signs of trauma, but something took that finish.
The Stevens was extremely simple to take apart due to the takedown screw. Separate the barreled action from the stock by removing the screw, and set the action and this screw aside. The rest of the stock’s furniture (butt plate and trigger guard) are removed via four slotted screws. Take these off and set them aside as well. If you’re attempting a project similar to this and find the screws to be of different sizes; make sure you remember which screw goes to which hole by putting them in plastic bags and marking them with a magic marker.
Step 2: Strip The Old Finish
Depending upon the original finish, you’ll most likely have to resort to a chemical stripper to remove it all so you can start with a blank slate. If a lot of varnish or wax was used, you might need to go with mineral spirits. In this case, however, I went with CitriStrip. This is a biodegradable wood stripper that’s safe for indoor use.
The removal of the finish revealed a decent-looking piece of wood hidden beneath. The grain pattern was a bit wild on the right-hand side of the stock
You want to pour it on the stock and work it into the wood. This one makes a nice lather, and once the entire stock was covered, a metal coat hanger was used to hang it on a tree in the backyard for 24 hours.
When refinishing a stock, you’ll need a place to hang it during different segments of the process. A tree outdoors worked well for the author.
The next day, it was immediately evident that most of the old finish was gone. The stock was then placed in the utility room sink and rinsed in hot water with Dawn dish soap. Over 70 years of dirt, crud and the original finish were removed in less than one day. Steel wool got the last bits of finish out of small spots, but there was still some grease and scale left, so it had to be degreased.
Step 3: Degrease The Stock
Boil water, and use your utility sink—or maybe a bathtub or cattle trough—whatever will keep you out of trouble with your significant other. Place the stock in the sink or tub for a soak, then lather it in degreaser. Let it sit for 15 minutes and rinse with boiling water. Allow it to float for 5 minutes, and then flip it over for 5 minutes on the other side. Do this about five or six more times until the water is just warm.
This process will swell up the wood fibers in the stock and fill out small dings in the wood that the stock may have picked up over the years. It might also show hairline cracks in the wood, so examine it carefully before you continue and repair as needed.
At this point, take the stock out of the water and hang it up to dry again. Once it’s completely dry, I hit the stock with a light coat of lemon oil to put some natural oil back into the wood.
This is when you’ll want to sand the stock. I recommend doing it by hand; electric sanders might leave marks in the woodgrain that become visible when you stain it. Start with 120-grit and work your way up to about 400-grit, always working with the natural grain of the wood.
Finally, go over it with fine steel wool.
Step 4: Staining The Stock
The stock is fully prepped at this point, and you can stain it the color of your choice. There are some true artisans in woodworking out there who can do unbelievable patterns in the finish … and maybe you have that kind of talent. As for me, I like to keep things simple and efficient. I went with Birchwood Casey Walnut Stain. This is a water-based stain that can be found at your local gun shop or sporting goods store, and it provides a rich walnut color on your stock.
Initial stain looked like black walnut, a configuration not originally found on this Stevens .22 LR.
It’s a concentrate solution, so you might want to place a drop on the stock to see how it looks, and the stain can be diluted with water for a lighter color if it appears too dark for your taste. Apply it with a clean, lint-free cloth or brush, and once again, allow the stock to dry at least 12 hours.
Going back to Birchwood Casey, you’ll want to use Try-Oil Stock Finish at this point. This stuff seems to dissolve or clump up and become useless when exposed to air, so poke a small hole in the foil seal under the bottle cap so it comes out in drops.
I do this step by pouring it on the stock and allowing the wood to absorb it into the grain. When it looks finished, wipe it down and hang to dry yet again for another 24 hours. If you’re seeing open pores in the wood, repeat this step again, including drying for another day.
If you see any imperfections in the wood, sand them down with the 400-grit sandpaper and the steel wool once more. Wipe the stock down with tack cloth and you’re almost ready for the final finish.
The Waiting Is The Hardest Part
Wait about seven days and polish the stock with Birchwood Casey Stock Sheen and Conditioner. A double coat will give you more of a classic matte finish. If you want to take it further and go with some added protection against time and the elements, you can coat the stock with Birchwood Casey Gun Stock Wax. I didn’t go to this point, as I wanted a simple working finish, but I brought this rifle back to a respectable working gun finish, and it’s ready to be passed on to the next generation of shooters in the not too distant future.
The initial stain looked a little too dark, but working through the process imparted a matte-type finish more at home on these older rifles.
If you wish to bed the action, this would be a good opportunity, but that’s another DIY project completely … although it’s much less difficult than you might think, and it can dramatically improve a rifle’s accuracy. The rifle went back together easily and shot as well as I expected.
In our 21st-century view of the world, the answer all too often is to dispose of something that’s cheap or perceived as replaceable. If you find yourself with a working, wood-stocked rifle that has seen better days, know that you can bring it back to life and restore that sentimental value. It’s a rewarding payoff for a few days of stripping, sanding and staining. Outside of the time factor, the investment is less than $50 in materials.
This Stevens Model 66 may not have had any sentimental value for me, but I sure hope that, someday, it will for one of my grandkids.
Editor's Note: This article originally appeared in the December 2022 issue of Gun Digest the Magazine.
The author extols the virtues of his Ruger Hawkeye in .257 Roberts to explain why it has a permanent spot in his collection.
I now jokingly refer to myself as a dinosaur, meaning I’ve started using things like a Parker 51 fountain pen and a Buck 119 Special knife. That also means I like my bolt- or lever-action rifles made of metal and wood and am happiest when my rifle is a classic sporter and wears iron sights.
My first centerfire rifle was a Mauser 98, which I turned into a sporter configuration. That rifle was eventually traded for a handgun I wanted, but I never lost my love for rifles designed with the features of the Mauser 98 action. I have some rifles with push-feed actions, and they work perfectly, but there is something special about the Mauser.
When it came time to add a rifle in .257 Roberts caliber for reloading work, I wanted one with the classic features of the 98. At that time, the obvious choice was a Ruger Model 77 Hawkeye. I already had a Model 77 Mark II in 7×57 caliber, and almost all features of the newer Hawkeye were identical. Since the Model 77’s introduction in 1968, the Ruger bolt actions have had classic lines, Mauser-type claws, non-rotating extractors, and dual-locking lugs.
The Ruger Hawkeye 77 .257 Roberts is an elegant sporter.
By the time the Mark II came along in 1991, the original tang-mounted sliding safety had been replaced by a three-position wing safety on the right-hand side at the rear of the receiver. In the rear position, the safety is “on,” and the bolt is closed and locked. In the middle position, the safety is “on,” but the bolt can be opened. While forward, the rifle can be fired. This arrangement is like the Winchester Model 70, and it would be difficult to imagine a more reliable or desirable type of safety that locks the bolt and firing pin. The Ruger Model 77 Hawkeye is available in numerous configurations and calibers, but the classic Hunter version suits me.
The Ruger Hawkeye has a versatile three-position safety that allows you to open the bolt with the safety on.
Taking a cartridge case designed for one caliber and changing the neck size to hold bullets of larger or smaller diameters has long been a common practice. A case that has been around since 1892 is the 7mm Mauser or 7×57. Its bullet diameter (bore or groove diameter) is .284 inch, but between the lands is .275 inch. Thus, the cartridge became known in Britain by that designation, and the .275 Rigby was soon world famous.
The 7×57 was loaded with a 173-grain round-nose full metal jacketed bullet with a muzzle velocity of approximately 2,300 fps. That is not spectacular by modern standards, but the bullets penetrated exceptionally well, as W.D.M. Bell proved using that load for elephants. Jim Corbett used the cartridge in sporting form extensively with his Rigby rifle in India, eradicating man-eating leopards and tigers.
With a cartridge case as world-famous as the 7mm Mauser, it was only natural to be given the “neck treatment.” Necking it up produced the 8×57 Mauser that became a worldwide military cartridge. And by necking it down to hold .257-inch diameter bullets, Ned Roberts created a wildcat cartridge that Remington would eventually standardize in 1934 as the .257 Roberts. For many years, the .257 Roberts was a popular sporting cartridge chambered in several popular rifles, such as the Winchester Model 70 and Remington 722. Many custom rifles were also chambered for the round.
A .257 Roberts is an excellent choice for many types of hunting.
For many years, Warren Page was the shooting editor for Field & Stream, a Gun Digest contributor, and an avid competitor and experimenter. One of his projects involved necking the .308 Winchester to hold bullets of 6mm diameter — resulting in a cartridge close to the present .243 Winchester. Not to be outdone, Remington necked the .257 Roberts case to hold 6mm bullets and created the .244 Remington having a 1:12-inch twist. The .243, which has a 1 in 10-inch twist, was initially available with 80- and 100-grain bullets, the former intended for varmints and the latter for medium game. Remington loaded the .244 with 70- and 90-grain bullets.
The .243 was deemed by many as the more versatile cartridge, eventually leading Remington to change the twist rate to 1:10 and renaming the .244 the 6mm Remington. More than any others, these 6mm calibers led to the .257 Roberts’ decrease in popularity.
Factory loads in .257 Roberts caliber are effective but somewhat limited.
The advantages of the .257 Roberts over cartridges like the .30-06 Springfield, .270 Winchester, and 7mm Remington Magnum include reduced recoil while still giving relatively flat trajectory and adequate performance on varmints, predators, and medium game. However, when the .243 Winchester and .244 Remington were introduced in 1955, they quickly decreased interest in the .257 Roberts and .250 Savage calibers. The newer cartridges are more desirable for hunting varmints and predators, but the advantage, if any, for use on medium game is imaginary. Be that as it may, rifle makers produce goods to sell, so very few factory rifles are available in .257 Roberts.
Cartridges in the magazine can be removed by depressing the floorplate release.
I always admired Page’s writing, and while working on reloading projects, I deemed it necessary to get a rifle in .257 Roberts. My choice then was the Ruger Hawkeye, so I had my local dealer order one. When it came, I completed the paperwork and admired the elegant rifle. Currently, the Ruger Hawkeye has an MSRP of $1,399, but I think it rivals some other classic rifles that are even more expensive.
My Hawkeye has a beautiful walnut stock that is superbly checkered with wraparound checkering on the forearm. Compared to all but one other rifle I own, the polishing and bluing are probably the best on the Hawkeye. I could not ask for a rifle that is more refined and beautiful. Moreover, it has the desirable features of the Mauser, the Ruger Marksman trigger, and excellent three-position safety.
The grip checkering on the author’s M77 is well executed.
When it comes to .257 Roberts ammunition, the availability just about matches the availability of rifles in that caliber. I can find at least 10 factory loads in product listings, but just try to find any on dealers’ shelves, and if you find any, don’t look at the price tags. One factory option is the traditional 117-grain load with velocities of approximately 2,700 fps. Such a load is quite adequate for deer-size game under most conditions.
However, more exotic loads are listed by several companies. For example, Nosler lists ammo featuring the 110-grain AccuBond at 3,050 fps, 115-grain Nosler Ballistic Tip at 2,925 fps, and 100-grain Partition at 3,000 fps. Hornady has a Superformance load with the 117-grain SST bullet listed at 2,945 fps. Such loads transform the .257 Roberts into a good performer on medium game at rather long ranges.
Handloads utilizing the 60-grain Hornady flat point (left) to the 120-grain Speer (right) can make a .257 Roberts extremely versatile.
Although some wonderful .257 Roberts loads may be listed in catalogs, my handloads add so much to the versatility and performance of the rifle. I’ve used bullets ranging from the 60-grain Hornady flat point intended for use in the .25-20 to the Speer 120-grain spitzer boattail. The 60-grain bullets loaded to about 2,000 fps will group into a ragged hole and work well (and quietly) on varmints.
Some of the author’s favorite loads use (left to right) 60-grain Hornady, 75-grain Sierra, 100-grain Speer, 117-grain Sierra, and 120-grain Speer Grand Slam bullets.
The range of bullets available in .257-inch diameter includes a great many styles. My favorite varmint load is the 75-grain Sierra hollowpoint with enough IMR-4064 or Hodgdon Varget to give just over 3,000 fps velocity. That load prints five-shot groups at 100 yards that consistently measure well under an inch, the smallest I obtained with the Ruger. The 75-grain V-Max gives comparable groups when loaded at 3,000-3,100 fps. For larger game, handloads with bullets in the 100- to 120-grain range perform well, my favorite being the 115-grain Nosler Ballistic Tip. A load with the 117-grain Sierra SPBT has a velocity of approximately 2,700 fps with IMR-4955 and has performed well.
An attractive grip cap embellishes the stock.
Despite the .243 Winchester, 6.5mm Creedmoor, and other newer cartridges, my .257 Roberts has not lost any of its versatility or capability. The Ruger Hawkeye Model 77 is an elegant rifle with excellent performance. If it were necessary to dispense with some of my centerfire rifles, the Ruger .257 Roberts would be among the last to go. I don’t shoot a “system,” and I don’t “run” ammunition, but my Ruger Hawkeye is a keeper.
The Shadowland firearms training center and a tribute to the one of the most storied lawmen to ever chase down a bad man.
Shadowland isn’t some mythical place where mall ninjas, tactards and has-been or wannabe gunfighters go to drink whiskey and video themselves pontificating on their greatness. It’s where I live; it’s just a small hacienda and collection of shooting ranges hidden in the West Virginia Hills. But it was inspired by history—a history those who are students of the gun and gunfighters might be interested in.
Wicked Grips created these custom grips with the Shadowland logo for one of the author’s 1911s.
When I went to work as a special agent for the railroad police, I met John Velke. Velke was writing a book on the history of the Baldwin-Felts Detective Agency. I helped him with some research and even contributed a chapter to the book’s second edition, which is mostly a chronological detailing of the organization and its founder’s exploits between 1885 and 1930. But it was also something more. It was an introduction to a very prominent figure in American law enforcement, a gunfighter and a detective. Just as much as it was the history of a detective agency, the book was a biography of a man named William Gibboney Baldwin.
Cover of the book,The True Story of the Baldwin-Felts Detective Agency, by John A. Velke III.
William Baldwin founded the Baldwin-Felts Detective Agency, and, in time, it became the Norfolk Western—now Norfolk Southern—Railroad Police Department. Baldwin was a self-described “shootist” who had a storied law enforcement career, survived many gunfights, tracked down members of the Hatfield gang and even did some work for President Teddy Roosevelt. On the East Coast, around the turn of the century, Baldwin was every bit the legend Bat Masterson was in the West. My area of responsibility with the Norfolk Southern Police Department was the same area Baldwin covered during his tenure. His exploits were of extreme interest to me; I chased bad guys over the same ground he had, and I spent time behind a badge where he’d had shootouts and even survived an assassination attempt.
The great detective, gunslinger and shootist, William Gibboney Baldwin. (Image courtesy of John A. Velke III.)
Baldwin’s career began in 1885 in Charleston, West Virginia, when at age 25 he went to work for the Eureka Detective Agency. Shortly after, he opened his own agency in Bluefield, West Virginia, originally named the Virginia and West Virginia Railroad Detectives. In 1989, Baldwin became involved in one of his first gunfights. Attempting to arrest murderer Bill Moran, who was known as the Terror of Flat Top, two of Baldwin’s detectives were badly wounded, and Baldwin was shot twice. But Moran never stood trial; his body was littered with lead.
A few years later, Baldwin was tried and acquitted for the murder of Henry Hawkes. Hawkes had pulled a gun on Baldwin during the attempted arrest of Hawkes’ son. Baldwin swiftly pulled a revolver and promptly shot Hawkes in the head. During the trial, Baldwin testified that while in the employ of the Norfolk & Western Railroad—one of his many clients—he had shot 13 men. Celebrated Western lawmen the likes of Masterson and Earp have the reputation of being fearsome gun-wielding pistoleers, but reliable documentation to support all their so-called gunfights combined doesn’t equal those of Baldwin. Had Baldwin’s escapades occurred west of the Mississippi, he’d have likely eclipsed both these American icons in popularity.
This author’s Special Agent credentials, 2005.
Sadly, due to strike-breaking work conducted by the Baldwin Felts Detective agency, the organization developed a tainted and feared name in the coal fields of southern West Virginia, western Virginia and eastern Kentucky. So dreaded was a “railroad detective” in these areas, they’re still more feared there than local, state and even federal law enforcement officers. It’s unfortunate that those events shade the amazing and adventurous career of Baldwin. He and his agency were engaged in several criminal cases of great importance, and they also worked diligently to protect American transportation interests during World War I.
Additionally, Baldwin was partly responsible for American law enforcement’s adoption of fingerprinting as a method of identification. He was part of a three-man International Association of Chiefs of Police committee that included New York City Police Sergeant Joseph Faurot—who is now considered the father of fingerprinting—and famed detective William Pinkerton. Baldwin took the lead on this committee and traveled to London for conference with Scotland Yard on the fingerprinting process.
There’s no doubt Baldwin was a gun guy. It’s reported that he had a special holster crafted to conceal a handgun in his trousers that was attached to his suspenders. He also regarded himself as a shootist, as can be seen from the marksmanship cards he saved from 1894. His marksmanship ability is also unquestionable based on the 52-foot (17-yard) 10-shot group measuring about 2.4 inches. He was known to carry a Smith & Wesson 38-44 revolver, as well as a very rare Mauser Zig Zag revolver.
Marksmanship cards of William G. Baldwin. Note the inscription at the top. (Image courtesy of John A. Velke III.)
Baldwin named his Troutville, Virginia, estate Shadowland. After collaborating with Velke on the second edition of his book, my wife and I decided if we ever had a piece of ground worth naming, we’d do the same. This was somewhat ironic since our first home—a used 1979 single-wide trailer we’d lived in when I first became a police officer—was set in a mobile home park called “Shadow Wood.”
The Shadowland sign at the driveway entrance to this author’s West Virginia home and shooting range.
If you turn up the driveway to our hillbilly plantation/shooting range, you’ll see a sign that says, “Shadowland.” Nope, it’s nothing swanky, and it’s a long way from an antebellum mansion. But it’s our home, our castle. It’s where we live, shoot and hunt. And it’s where we raise kids who do the same, and who’ve also been trained to accept that they’re their own first responder. It’s also a historic tribute to one of the most storied lawmen to ever chase down a bad man.
Editor's Note: This article originally appeared in the January 2022 issue of Gun Digest the Magazine.
The author takes a closer look at the XR920 and MR902L, two crossover-size 9mm pistols from Shadow Systems.
As I’ve said in some of my other Shadow Systems reviews, “Plastic Fantastics” are everywhere now. We’re almost 40 years into the “trend”, but if it’s been persisting that long, I think it’s more than a mere fad at this point. It’s a theme, a motif, a movement. Of late, we’ve seen “crossovers” in this space; that is to say, pistols that have a compact slide and full-size frame à la the Glock 19X or Glock 45. But we don’t really see the inverse that often.
This piece is an overview of two different crossover pistols from Shadow Systems—the XR920 and the MR920L.
Grip Frames And Ergonomics
The grip frames and ergs are definitely different between these two pistols. The XR920 has the DR920/Glock 17-size grip frame but with much better ergs than the Glock 17 in this writer’s humble opinion. You can read more of my thoughts on this frame in my full DR920 review.
Both the XR920 and the MR920L also have the same Shadow Systems features and accouterments that the company includes with its standard full-size and compact pistol lines. That means these guns have medium stippling all around their grips, thumb ledges above the trigger guards so you can hit the gas and still stay on target, OEM magwells that are in the Goldilocks zone (not too big, not too small) and no finger grooves on the grip (Glock Gen 4 haters, rejoice!). They also both ship with interchangeable NPOA (natural point of aim) backstraps.
The pistols both pointed well in my hand, but my personal geometry pushes my preferences toward the MR920L and similar compact-frame guns like the Glock 19.
Slides
The slides of the XR920 and MR920L have more serrations than a bread knife, both featuring forward and rear cocking serrations. These come in handy whether you’re running an optic or not, and I find that I use the forward serrations for press checks even if I typically use the optic to chamber a round.
Sporting the same attention to detail that we’ve come to expect from Shadow Systems, the machining on the slides is both elegant and aggressive. The tops of the slides feature serrations as well, in addition to lightning cuts to shed some weight.
Further, both the XR920 and MR920L feature Shadow Systems’ patented optic system that allows users to mount virtually any optic directly to the slide. No plates, no weak points. I’ve racked the pistols using their attached optics off tables and other hard surfaces, and they stayed zeroed every time.
As you can see, the MR920L has more serrations on top and front due to the longer slide, but the rear of the slide is identical (6 serrations if you’re counting).
Barrels
The barrels are both match-grade, but I opted for slightly different configurations. The XR920 sports a 4-inch spiral-fluted black nitride barrel with conventional rifling.
The MR920L instead has Shadow Systems’ 5-inch bronze TiNi threaded (1/2×28) barrel with spiral fluting, and it gives the package a bit more visual flair. With the longer barrel, I picked up an average of 33 fps in velocity with the same ammo (average of 890 fps with 147-grain factory loads in the MR920L vs. 857 fps for the XR920). With 115-grain reloads, I picked up 53 fps on average with the long slide (1,093 fps for the MR920L vs. 1,040 fps with the XR920).
When it comes to my personal Shadow Systems guns, such as my oft-carried MR920 with an RMR, I tend to prefer non-threaded barrels. Sure, I have spare Shadow Systems barrels with threads lying around if I want to twist on a whisper pickle, but for the day-to-day, they’re not necessary. The pistols remain plenty accurate in either configuration.
Shootability
Boringly predictable. That’s not to say that they’re not fun to shoot, as they certainly are, but as someone with a lot of trigger time behind Shadow Systems pistols, they performed as expected.
As you’d imagine with the XR920, given that it has a Glock 19-length top with an approximately 4-inch barrel, it’s very similar to the MR920 in its sight picture and handling. The slide length makes it faster out of the holster while maintaining a full-size frame and capacity, something that Shadow Systems touts on their website. For whatever reason, I feel like I can shoot short-slide guns slightly faster than long slides. Plus, if you have meaty mitts, the larger grip offers more real estate (I don't, I have medium hands).
The MR920L, by contrast, has a slightly more diminutive grip with a long side and extended sight radius. I prefer this grip size because unlike with the larger XR, the magwell serves as a useful pinky ledge for me on the MR. It points well too, especially when I used the medium backstrap, and I got my splits down to about as low as they can go with Glock-style handguns—around .17 seconds—with great accuracy.
The MR920L also seems to soak up a bit more recoil than the XR, likely due to its mass being slightly higher with roughly an extra inch of slide. It also is more front-heavy for this reason, making tracking the sight under recoil a bit easier. I feel like the MR920L is a bit more elegant, easier to drive on target, and more balanced overall, but this is all subjective.
Both guns ran fast and functioned very well out of the box, and it took no time to get used to the feel. It’s vaguely familiar and oddly welcome, like when you run into an ex-girlfriend when you’re both newly single.
As far as trigger pull, the XR920 averaged 3 pounds, 8 ounces, and the MR920L averaged 3 pounds, 11 ounces, each measured over ten trigger presses on my Wheeler digital gauge. Both figures are well under the advertised weights of 4.5-5 pounds.
The target pictured above, as you can see, is mostly A zone hits with a Charlie here and there. These are all double and triple taps, from the holster, out to 30 yards. The guns are plenty accurate.
From Precision to Performance: All About Shadow Systems
As with most pistols, both the XR920 and MR920L are far, far more mechanically accurate than I could be. I opted to not equip an optic on either this time, as I’ve been trying to get “back to basics” in competition lately by getting reacquainted with iron sights. Regardless, the tritium front and blacked-out rear sights found on these guns proved to be more than adequate.
As one would expect, the match-grade barrels on both perform plenty fine for practical accuracy and I can make good hits out to 35 yards with predictable results. Also, as you’d expect, the MR920L’s longer sight radius and 5-inch barrel do make the longer shots seem easier and more precise.
Critique
What would a review be without a critique? As always, I tend to ding Shadow Systems for being slightly “over-engineered,” but that’s not a bad thing. It comes good-to-go out of the box, and you’d be hard-pressed to find anything you want to upgrade. The guns come with Shadow Systems’ direct-to-slide optic mounting system, magwells, three different interchangeable backstraps, night sights, stainless steel guide rods and pre-stippled grips.
I have heard, however, that aftermarket triggers are hit or miss, and Shadow Systems themselves don’t recommend using an aftermarket Glock trigger. This is because, despite first glance, these pistols are not Glocks. The company has a pretty interesting “Technical Tuesday” series on its YouTube channel that touches on this, where CEO Trevor Roe gets into the weeds on various topics.
However, BOTH of these models still fit in open-ended Glock holsters, and the XR920 is cross-compatible with most Glock 19 holsters while the MR920L will fit most Glock 17 and 34-length holsters (be advised, you may need an open-ended holster, I typically run these guns in a T-Rex Arms Ragnarok).
Also, unlike other Shadow Systems pistols that needed a break-in period (it’s still recommended by the manufacturer), these both ran smoothly right out of the box with no FTEs or malfunctions of any sort.
Parting Shot
While the Shadow Systems XR920 and MR920L are technically “crossover” pistols, they each are viable options for the discerning shooter who wants a “little extra” in the form of either a larger grip or a longer barrel and sight picture. While I prefer to carry something a bit more compact, the XR920 could certainly fill the role. Also, when it comes to competition, I typically shoot Shadow Systems guns in Carry Optics, but the MR920L just might make an appearance on the days I feel like kicking it old school in Production/SSP divisions.
If you’re looking to check multiple boxes with a single pistol, check out the XR920 or MR920L.
Here are the best tactical shotgun options for home and personal defense, plus the definitive guide on the weapons system.
The tactical shotgun still has a place in self-defense, even though its popularity has been supplanted by the meteoric rise of the AR-15. Really, the shotgun exists outside of the basic self-defense arena, which is dominated by the handgun. Because of its legendary reputation and brute power, the shotgun is more of an offensive weapon. It has been used in warfare since the invention of the powder which powers it, and the military is not usually in a defensive mission.
A tactical shotgun need not be fancy.
The shotgun is also the most versatile weapon out there. While it’s not always the best for every purpose, it can serve nearly every purpose requiring a firearm. For home and property defense, at close to moderate range, it is hard to beat the right type of shotgun. Also, a tactical shotgun may be legally obtained more easily than a handgun (as in Canada or Australia). But before we look at the best in class of this type of gun, let’s get into what actually makes a tactical shotgun.
Already know all this stuff? You can JUMP AHEAD to our picks for the best tactical shotguns.
A tactical shotgun can take several forms (there is no hard and fast definition), and also serve as a multi-role tool, especially if one lives on a farm or ranch, where it can serve animal control duties as well. Traditionally a standard hunting shotgun is used for this purpose, such as a Remington 870 Wingmaster, loaded with hunting loads, since the concept of a tactical shotgun is relatively new. While a weapon like this can suffice, there are some better shotgun configurations to work with.
Size
Yes, size does matter, but sometimes the biggest isn’t the best for everyone. A shotgun can be too heavy, kick too much, or penetrate too much. Some people can handle it and some can’t. Also, abilities change over time, for better or worse. That said, let’s talk size.
Like a law enforcement or military shotgun, the tactical shotgun should have a short barrel, 18.5 inches is the shortest civilian-legal length (outside of shotgun-style firearms, such as the Mossberg 590 Shockwave). Making it more agile, the shorter barrel keeps the gun maneuverable in close confines—such as a house.
Gauge
The gauge of choice for the tactical shotgun is almost universally the 12 gauge, but other gauges can work as well. The 20 is not a 12, but being on the receiving end of a load of 20 gauge buckshot or slug will certainly ruin your day. There is the added side benefit of being much more user-friendly than a 12 gauge for smaller-framed members of your family. A 20 gauge tactical shotgun is a great idea from the standpoint of maneuverability since, in home defense situations, you may use your shotgun to check the interior of your home.
Tactical shotguns can be customized to your needs and applications.
Capacity
Reloading in the middle of a gunfight is something no one relishes. Most standard Remington 870s or Mossberg 500s have a magazine capacity of four to six rounds (three and six in box magazine fed versions), which really should be enough. If you want a larger magazine capacity, that’s fine, but realize that the extra weight forward of an extended magazine tube slows down your swing and makes the weapon decidedly muzzle-heavy, as well as just heavy in general.
Pump-Action Vs Semi-Auto Shotguns
While there are some outliers, tactical shotguns come in two styles—pump-action and semi-automatic. Personally, I prefer semi-automatic shotguns—especially for hunting—given their quickness and ease of use, however, each action has its pros and cons.
The great advantage of pump-action shotguns is their versatility and affordability. No matter what you load into a pump—be it high wall, low wall, etc.—it will run it. This is a great advantage when you take the tactical shotgun out of a strictly defensive role. And they’re cheap to get into, often running $500 or less. Heck, the legendary Mossberg 500 can be had around $300 to $400. This means nearly any shooter can arm themselves well.
As for cons, pump-actions open the door to human error—in particular short-stroking in which the pump isn’t completely actuated and fails to cycle. Not good. Furthermore, they are slower shot to shot than a semi-auto.
We’ve established the semi-auto in most shooters’ hands is the faster option, however, there’s another advantage. Gas-operated shotguns also generate less recoil, which makes them less punishing in practice and improves their shot-to-shot accuracy.
The tradeoff, semi-autos are the more expensive option. Not across the board, there are solid affordable semis out there, but most options run $500 and north. Pick one up with an Italian accent, such as a Berretta, well you’re talking a definite champagne tab.
Additionally, semi-auto shotguns are sometimes picky about loads. Too light and it won’t cycle, which leaves you with a pretty intricate single-shot. Some of this has been cured in recent years with innovations such as Remington’s Versa Max and Savage’s Dual Regulating Inline Valve, but it’s a facet you’ll need to pay attention to when you go out shopping.
Tactical Weaponlights
There are several ways of attaching a tactical light which don’t necessarily require the use of a Picatinny rail, commonly found on the AR-15 system, which more and more tactical shotgun manufacturers are starting to add. There is the option of using a light-bearing forend such as the one offered by Surefire. These forend units, which are model-specific for pump or semi-auto, replace the original forend on the weapon and hold the tactical light and operation switches. The switches allow for thumb operation by both right- and left-handed users. There are models available in LED or incandescent bulb systems, with the LED versions far outnumbering incandescent versions. The LED is going to stand up to shotgun recoil much better than any incandescent bulb, and the lumen power is now right up there with the formerly dominant xenon incandescent systems.
Surefire's Dedicated Shotgun Forend provides 600 lumens of illumination.
In addition to dedicated forend mounts, there are universal mounting systems available that can be affixed to the magazine tube to hold your light system of choice. These, however, usually require the use of a light that has an external wire leading to a pressure switch adhered to the forend by Velcro. This wire can catch on things. This may not be the best system available, but it is less expensive than the Surefire system and, since we are talking defense here and not dynamic entry on a SWAT team, the external wire mounting might not be an issue.
Sights
A single bead works okay for ranges of 15 to 20 yards when using buckshot on a full-size silhouette target. But for accurate fire, you are missing out on the precision capability of the weapon when you use a bead-sighted shotgun.
Shotguns can be very accurate with slugs and shots if you equip them properly and train with them. Remington’s rifle sights mounted on their shotgun are excellent, but ghost ring rear sights and red-dot optics can bring the system to another level.
A tritium front sight, such as this XS Dot, can enhance a tactical shotgun's low-light capabilities, but has limitations.
Ammunition Selection
Load selection for your tactical shotgun will depend on where you reside, or rather, what type of structure you reside in. Interior construction and location may even determine if a shotgun is a viable home and self-defense option. If you live in an apartment with paper-thin walls, or even a house or trailer with this type of construction, the shotgun may be totally out of the question due to over-penetration risk.
Birdshot
These are the shot on the upper part of the chart. Essentially, there are dozens to hundreds of these loaded into a shell, meant to increase your chances at hitting an airborne target on the move. Yes, they'll put a two-legged threat down, however, they are not the optimal choice. The shot loses velocity quickly, can have poor penetration qualities and in most circumstances isn't advisable for personal defense.
Buckshot
These are the shot on the lower part of the above chart. The pellets range in size from .24 inch to .36 inch and as their name implies were originally used to harvest deer. They still fill this role, but are generally the go-to option for tactical applications. Typically, 00—also known as “double aught”—is the most common, with a shell pitching nine pellets approximately the size of a 9mm or .38 Special bullet. The one concern tied to buckshot, particularly at the “aught” end of things is over-penetration—something to keep in mind if you envision the tactical shotgun as a home-defense tool.
Slugs
Again, the slug finds its genesis in hunting season and presently is the most used load for those who hunt medium to large game with a shotgun. The advantage of slugs, they extend the effective range of a shotgun and have absolutely devastating terminal ballistics. Weighting 1 ounce, slugs also do a job on drywall and other permeable barriers, a facet worthing considering.
Next comes shell length. The most commonly-used shell lengths, regardless of gauge, are 2-1/2 (.410 gauge only) to 2-3/4 (20 and 12 gauges) inches. These shells, depending on powder charge and shot type, are adequate for most any shotgun duties that the particular bore is capable of handling, from clay targets to deer, or larger close-range game when slugs are used. Magnums can be overkill both on the giving and the receiving end in most defensive encounters.
There is a 2-3/4-inch magnum load (same velocity, slightly heavier payload) but it is not commonly encountered. Beyond that is the 3-inch magnum round. A round is generally considered a “magnum” charge for the given gauge when it provides longer range, more power, a heavier payload, and/or, you guessed it, more recoil. For example, the standard 2-1/2-inch 12 gauge shell loaded with 00 Buckshot holds nine pellets. In the 3-inch magnum load, it packs 12 pellets and begins to become unpleasant to shoot.
Recoil
Speaking of recoil, here is a chart comparing recoil energy for various 20 and 12 gauge loads and how they compare. For load selection, this may help some of you who are a little overzealous with the “biggest is the best” mindset. Yep, you can handle the big loads for a few shots, but not for long-term practice, and you must practice with the rounds, or their direct equivalent, that you plan on keeping in your weapon.
This is kind of a “beating” chart — it shows what kind of beating you will take based on gun weight and load. To understand foot-pounds, the measure of free recoil energy, we will use this definition: one foot-pound is a unit of work equal to the work done by a force of one pound acting through a distance of one foot in the direction of the force. In other words, one foot-pound is the amount of energy required to move a one-pound object (not including calculations of friction) a distance of one foot. 12.5 foot-pounds of energy is the amount of energy required to move a 12.5 pound object one foot and so on.
12.5 has always been given as the standard amount of free recoil energy for the 12 gauge, but, as you can see, when you change gauge, payload and shell length, you boost the amount of foot-pound recoil energy. The other factor involved in felt recoil in this list is the weight of the gun. What is not included in these calculations is action type, which is important, since a gas-operated semi-automatic shotgun (such as the Benelli M4 Tactical Shotgun) has reduced recoil over that of a pump or double in most cases.
Benelli M4 tactical shotgun outfitted with ATI furniture.
Okay then, how much of a thumping do you want to take on the butt end of your defensive weapon system? How much can you take, while still being proficient and not developing a horrible flinch? How effective will your shots be? A 3 or 3-1/2 inch magnum in a six-pound shotgun for home defense in suburbia or Midwest rural areas? No. While traversing or living in grizzly country in Alaska? Sure, no problem, but in my house or on my property — no way. I want my shot to hit the first time, every time. I don’t want stray pellets or slugs endangering others. I don’t want a flinch developing. And maybe most importantly, I want to have fun shooting my guns.
Less-Lethal Rounds?
Even if you buy some of the new rubber pellet or bean bag “less-lethal” 12 gauge rounds, similar to law enforcement less-lethal rounds that are available to civilians, you can still kill or maim someone at close range, especially if you hit them in the head or throat. We now use the term “less-lethal” to describe intermediate weapons in law enforcement rather than “non-lethal” for precisely this reason. People can die due to any type of force being applied to them, so nothing is considered non-lethal in terms of force application.
If you can’t stomach the use of deadly force to preserve your own life, then maybe you can be prepared to use it in order to save your family. But if you feel you couldn’t take a life to save even your own family then you shouldn’t be using a lethal force weapon for defense to begin with. Instead, consider using a civilian C3 Taser or pepper spray.
Now that we have what makes up the tactical shotgun, let’s dispel some of the myths that revolve around the weapons system.
Tactical Shotgun Myths
Myth #1:The tactical shotgun is an “alley cleaner.” Fire one shot at a group of people and they all go down. Well, at least in the movies. Shot pellets in most choke configurations spread at a rate of one inch for every yard traveled. Seven yards is the standard assumed distance in interpersonal firearms combat. A seven-inch hole at that range means that you can miss your target or its vitals if you don’t aim. Remember that seven inches is an average for all shotgun barrels and ammo types. Depending on our choke and load, many combinations will shoot even tighter than that.
Myth #2: The tactical shotgun is easy to use and fire. In an old police training film from the late 1960s, the instructor, with his best John Wayne/Clint Eastwood attitude, says, “The shotgun doesn’t need to be aimed. With the shotgun, you can whirl, fire and blow the guy away.” This statement sounds cool, but now brings a laugh from police cadets when they see the tape. The fact is, you can’t go out and buy one of these wonder weapons, load it, and leave it in a corner or close at hand ready to go without practicing with it. The tactical shotgun requires work to master, and it is not for the recoil sensitive, at least in its 12 gauge configuration. You cannot fear or dread this weapon. You have to embrace it and make it an extension of yourself — zen-like but true. If you are using a shotgun for self-defense, you must be able to hit the target you are facing without endangering others.
Myth #3: The tactical shotgun is an infallible “stopping weapon,” guaranteed to take down the largest attacker with ease. Many people think that if you hit the bad guy with a shotgun round, it’s gonna kill him instantly and blow him six feet backwards to boot. Well, no. Remember, your shot pattern may be no more than an inch wide when it hits the intended threatening target and can easily miss the vitals, which would fail to stop a determined opponent. Shotguns can fail to stop the aggressor — it’s happened. This also means that a shotgun hit is not always fatal. Many people survive. Sure, it’s way better than a handgun in a fight, and usually a better choice, it just isn’t guaranteed. Nothing is.
In Summery, What You Want In A Tactical Shotgun:
18-inch barrel
Chambered 12-gauge or 20-gauge
Mininum of 4+1 round capacity
Sights or optic
Ability to change out chokes
repitable manufacture and a quality build that doesn't require aftermarket upgrads
Now that we have a handle on the platform, what makes it up and what it can and can't do, let's check out the best tactical shotguns currently available.
Best Tactical Shotgun Options
Mossberg 590A1 Tactical
Given the foggy future of the Remington 870, the 500 Series is the undisputed king of the pump-action hill. Not that many shooters didn’t already have it there previously. The smoothbore is battle-tested, having filled enumerable military and law-enforcement roles, and is as dependable as a well-trained dog. Not always the case, nowadays all of Mossberg’s tactical models are 590—special-purpose models of the original 500. Of the off-the-shelf sections, the 590A1 comes with everything you could want, from ghost-ring rear sight to 6+1 capacity. Its heavy-walled barrel takes a lot of abuse, giving you the peace of mind the 590 won’t flop under testing conditions. Additionally, there are 11 variations of the shotgun with some excellent features some might find better fit their needs. Best of all, nearly anybody can afford to get into one of the best tactical shotguns ever conceived. MSRP: Starting at $727
Stoeger M3000 Freedom Series Defense
Turkish shotguns, in many cases, have a deservedly shaky reputation. The decided exception being Stoeger, which under the ownership of Benelli has become synonymous with affordable quality. When it comes to semi-auto tactical shotguns that description fits the M3000 Freedom Series to a tee. Inertia driven (there is an explanation here about the mechanism), the gun is light and agile, plus clean running. We’ll confess, it’ll thump a bit more with heavy loads compared to a gas gun, but you’ll find inertia’s run faster. Not a bad tradeoff. You won’t want for firepower either, with the gun coming with an 7+1 capacity standard. Ghost ring rear sight, blade front sight, adjustable length of pull, optional Weaver scope base—the M3000 has a lot of positives. There’s a nit to pick, however, the gun has a fixed cylinder choke. No big shakes if the aim is a strictly defensive gun, but hems its versatility if your aim is more at a survival tool. MSRP: Starting at $619
Kalashnikov USA KS-12
The Kalashnikov is a proven platform for shotguns. They have been appreciated and used by law enforcement, military, civilian sports shooters and hunters since they were first introduced in the early 1990s. While they were still being imported, the Russian-made Molot Vepr-12 was the established king of 12-gauge tactical AKs but was sanctioned from import in 2017. If you can still find a Vepr for a decent price, that’s the real one to hunt for on the secondhand market. As far as newly produced and available AK shotguns go, the current best choice is KUSA’s KS-12. Offering better build quality and higher average customer satisfaction than the Chinese or Turkish versions, the KS-12 is an American-made Saiga-12 clone that comes in the gun’s ideal configuration straight from the box. Whether your 12-gauge needs are for home-defense, SHTF or 3-gun competition, the KS-12 has all of the AK’s best features to offer in a shotgun platform. It reliably cycles with a variety of loads and is fed by detachable 10-round box magazines. It comes ready to mount optics and muzzle brakes, and the KS-12TSFS variant also includes a folding stock, making this a true tactical option. MSRP: $856.80
Beretta 1301 Tactical
While it doesn’t get the credit of other Italian tactical shotguns, the 1301 is an unassailable system. It should be, Beretta has been turning out shotgun since before America was a country. This is apparent in the little things the company includes on the 12-gauge, from an adjustable length of pull to a rounded loading port (no mutilating your thumb on reloads). The scattergun is versatile too, able to digest light load, heavy loads and everything in between. This is thanks to Beretta’s BLINK gas operating system that’s designed to digest almost every off-the-shelf load. To boot, it’s fast—the company claims the fastest, but I don’t have split times to plead their case. The ergonomics of the gun are traditional but very comfortable and intuitive. And the controls are well proportioned, making manipulating the gun easy. Personally, I would have liked better than 5+1 capacity, but with all its other assets that’s far from a deal-breaker. MSRP: $1,720
Benelli M4
1200
If you’re after a truly battle-hardened option, this is it. With users from U.S. Marine Corps to the SAS, and other pros, the M4 certainly has the resume of “best tactical shotgun”. But what makes it so special? More than anything, it's ARGO (Auto Regulating Gas Operated) system. Basically, the gun was specially designed for the Marines, who had trepidations about adopting a semi-auto. Thus, Benelli whipped up the ARGO, which improves reliability by taking gasses further up the barrel than normal. Essentially, it’s cleaner gas, that reduces fouling. It can digest thousands of rounds between cleanings. And it’ll keep fighting through swamp mud or an arctic freeze. Pretty nice assets. Furthermore, it’s simpler and lighter than most gas systems. But is it worth its top-shelf price? Depends. If your answer is, I need something to survive the end of the world, then yes. But if it’s, I need to defend hearth and home, it might be overkill. MSRP: Starting at $2,099
Remington 870
An oldie, but a goodie. When it comes to pump-action shotguns, there are few more classic, trusted and reliable options than the legendary 870. Its twin action-bar design set the standard for unfailing cycling and the gun itself is all but bulletproof. And affordable. Basic 870 models can still found in the $350 range. While Remington had turned out several tactical models in the past, most are gone from their present catalog since the company’s sale in the fall of 2020. Presently dominated by hunting variants, if you want a fancier tactical model, you may have to check the secondhand market for the time being. Otherwise, more basic configurations like the 870 Tactical are still available and affordable. MSRP: Starting at about $500
If you don’t understand the difference between rimfire vs. centerfire cartridges, this article should make things clear.
Rimfire and centerfire are the two primary ignition systems for cartridges. Specifically, it refers to where the primer is located.
For the most part these days, rimfire has fallen out of favor and centerfire has become the dominant form of cartridge design, and indeed for good reason. Despite this, plenty of rimfire cartridges are still incredibly popular and remain in common use.
That said, not everyone truly understands the physical differences between these two cartridge types. If that’s you, read on.
A Brief History Of Cartridges
The first sealed cartridges emerged in the mid-19th century with paper cartridges that contained a percussion cap. The first guns to use them were the Chassepot rifle of France and the Dreyse Needle Gun of Prussia.
In both cases, a percussion cap (acting as the primer) was sealed in the cartridge, which was ignited by a firing pin.
The next step was the advent of the drawn brass case. The first brass case cartridges, such as those of the Maynard carbine or Burnside carbine (both developed in the 1850s), used an external primer to ignite the propellant, but neither saw widespread adoption.
Rimfire priming first emerged in the 1840s starting with the 6mm Flobert (literally a 6mm BB on top of a percussion cap) for use in Flobert “parlor guns,” small-caliber pocket pistols popular in that era.
Louis-Nicolas Flobert’s rimfire cartridge design was primed by adding a drop of a volatile primer compound (originally fulminates, but today more commonly lead styphnate which is more stable than fulminates) and spinning the case so the priming compound makes its way into the microscopic hollow in the rim of the case before the propellent charge is added and the bullet is seated.
Eventually, someone had the bright idea to just tap a hole in a brass cartridge case and seat a percussion cap, and that is exactly what a centerfire cartridge is.
How Rimfire Works
When rimfire cases are manufactured, the rim—which is fully enclosed—is mushroomed out by a millimeter or two away from the case body. The rim of the case has a small hollow, less than a millimeter in size, running around the entire edge.
Now, all cartridges need a priming compound; a small amount of a volatile substance that creates a spark when struck. The spark goes to the main propellant charge which then burns and creates the gas pressure that sends the projectile out of the barrel.
To prime, the manufacturer adds a small amount of a priming compound to the case. Once enough cases have had the primer added, they get placed in a centrifuge and spun, which pulls the priming compound into the hollow inside the rim.
Add propellent, seat bullet, done.
A loaded .22LR model scaled up to the size of a mortar round. The priming compound in a .22LR is in the rim. This complicates magazine design for feeding.
Rimfire firearms use a firing pin or hammer that crushes the rim, igniting the primer.
Initially, rimfire cartridges were very popular, but they quickly lost ground to the centerfire cartridges that were more powerful, had longer effective ranges and better general utility.
While small rimfire calibers were always common such as 6mm Flobert and .22 Short (first released in 1857, then followed by .22 Long, .22 Extra Long and .22 Long Rifle in 1887), larger rimfire calibers existed as well such as .44 Henry, .32 Rimfire, .38 Rimfire, .41 Short and .56-56 Spencer.
By the early 20th Century, rimfire cartridges had all but died out save the .22 caliber family, but .22 Long Rifle remains one of the most popular calibers in existence and is manufactured in far greater volume than almost any other.
How Centerfire Cartridges Work
As mentioned, the genesis of centerfire cartridges were the Chassepot and Dreyse rifles which put a primer cap inside a paper cartridge.
Dreyse paper cartridge (left) versus a Chassepot paper cartridge (right).
The Chassepot cartridge had the primer at the base of the cartridge whilst the Dreyse Needle Gun cartridges had the primer about midway, leading to firing pin fouling and ultimately breakages that the Chassepot did not suffer from.
Thus, the modern cartridge and firearm owe their existence to the French.
The basic idea is to drill a hole in a brass case and seat a percussion cap in the hole. The firing pin or hammer strikes the cap, the spark hits the powder and the pew occurs.
Two competing centerfire primer designs emerged, based on the primer channel that the spark travels through. You have the Boxer primer (single hole in front of the primer) and the Berdan primer, which has two spark channels through the base of the cartridge.
Berdan (left) and Boxer primer pockets show the differences in the systems. (Photo: CCI.)
The ostensible advantage is that two sparks are better than one, but neither has proven more advantageous than the other. Berdan primer pockets are also more complicated to manufacture, leading to lower popularity.
Both have survived (Berdan primers are more common in Europe and European calibers, such as 7.62x39mm which is commonly Berdan-primed), but Boxer primers are the most common.
Compared to the rimfire cartridges of their time, early centerfire cartridges proved more powerful, had longer effective ranges and easier trajectories to make accurate hits with at longer distances.
In the mid-18th century, the performance gap between rimfire and centerfire cartridges wasn’t that significant, but by the time the first smokeless powders arrived, the jig was basically up. In 1860, .56 Spencer was competitive, but by the time .45-70 Government arrived in the 1870s, it became clear that centerfire was the way of the future.
Rimfire Vs. Centerfire: Which Is Better?
What is it that made centerfire cartridges so much more popular, and kept them that way? The answer is severalfold.
First is the ease of manufacturing. The thing about making rimfire cartridges is that it takes extra time to put the cases in a centrifuge for the rimfire primer, and priming is easier to screw up.
The presence of the priming compound requires extra safety precautions to make manufacturing safer. Literally ALL of the major rimfire ammunition manufacturers (CCI, Aguila, Winchester, etc.) have separate facilities that only manufacture rimfire ammunition.
So, it's easier and safer to manufacture centerfire ammo at scale.
While a rimfire case could easily be made for modern calibers, it's also true that A.) the odds of bad priming increase with rimfire and B.) rimmed ammunition is less (or less easily) compatible with most modern firearm designs.
Granted, quality modern .22 LR ammunition is vastly more reliable than cheap bulk-pack, but the nature of rimfire priming (spinning the cartridge and hoping for a uniform spread under the rim) relies more on chance than seating a primer in a centerfire case.
While centerfire ammunition will always be slightly more inherently reliable than rimfire, the reality is that even high-quality stuff of both variants will have the occasional dud. Those who claim to have never experienced a bad primer on a centerfire simply haven’t shot enough of the caliber in question.
Even with solid primer strikes like these, a dud primer will still fail to ignite the cartridge. While rarer, it can happen with quality ammo too.
Then we get to the guns of today versus the guns of yesteryear. Namely, how they feed cartridges.
Most popular firearms today, whether pistol or rifle, utilize box magazines. And rimfire does not play nice with box magazines.
While rimmed cartridges are usually a necessity in revolvers and lever, pump or slide-action long guns, rimless (or even rebated) cartridges are far easier to feed reliably from a box magazine.
Due to the presence of rims on rimfire ammunition, it throws a wrench into the geometry of designing a reliable magazine. Stacking rimmed cartridges straight on top of each other usually causes rim lock (rims of cartridges becoming locked onto one another), resulting in most rimfire magazines being designed at a steeper angle to accommodate for this. This means that most reliable rimfire magazines are single-stack and have a capacity of 10 rounds or less. For longer magazines, it usually necessitates a cartoonish, banana-like curve for the same reason.
A Ruger BX-25, 25-round 10/22 magazine. The distinctive curve in this case is present less because of cartridge taper and more to prevent rim lock.
More complicated follower designs are usually necessary as well to ensure a proper feeding angle from mag to chamber.
By the 1880s, this was all already obvious. Early bolt-action rifles with box magazines (Mausers, Krag-Jorgensen rifles, etc.) almost all used rimless ammunition. The notable exception is the Mosin-Nagant with its rimmed 7.62x54r cartridge, but even Mosins can experience rim lock when out of order.
For proof of this phenomenon, just visit some discussion boards about rimfire rifles. You’ll quickly see that the guns that feed from box magazines are constantly associated with feeding issues related to the magazines.
Consider also which common rimfire models are accepted to be the most reliable. Spoiler, none of them use traditional box magazines. For handguns, rimfire revolvers are clearly the most reliable. For rifles, the best use either a rotary magazine design like the Ruger 10/22 or a tube magazine like on an old Marlin Model 60 or Remington Nylon 66.
So, while it’s not impossible to make a reliable box mag for a rimfire gun, it is certainly more challenging and constraining. With modernity’s love for high-capacity, double-stack magazines, the preference for centerfire cartridges becomes obvious.
Different Tools For Different Tasks
The predominant rimfire calibers of today are .22 LR, .22 WMR and .17 HMR. They are much smaller than the most popular centerfire calibers and far weaker…but they are also very popular for specific applications.
So, what does this mean?
While discussing these priming methods and their relative merits is fine from a technical perspective, it doesn't matter much in the real world outside of certain circumstances. The reality is the extant rimfire cartridges are used for things most centerfire calibers are not.
This means that, for the most part, it’s not really a question of rimfire vs. centerfire. Both excel at their respective tasks and that’s exactly why both are still in common use.
Most situations that call for a firearm have a pretty obvious winner between the two ammunition styles. Plinking on the cheap, pest control and small game hunting are all logical uses for rimfire, while larger game hunting, long-range precision shooting and defense are all jobs better suited for centerfire.
That said, you may find yourself in a position where either could be acceptable. In these cases, it will be up to you to weigh the pros and cons of not only the ammunition but the respective firearms available to you.
Hunting varmints, but at considerable ranges in windy conditions? That’s probably a good time to opt for something like .22-250 Remington over .22 LR.
Looking for a pocket pistol small enough to stuff in your sock for backup defense? Given the very similar ballistic performance, the higher inherent reliability of a centerfire like .25 ACP may be a smarter choice than .22 LR.
We could discuss hypotheticals all day, but you get the point. While determining whether a situation calls for rimfire or centerfire is usually pretty cut and dry, you may have to weigh the options yourself at some point.
The takeaway here is that there’s no clear winner when it comes to rimfire vs. centerfire, only appropriate tools for different applications.
Understanding the strategy of using an expert witness in a self-defense trial.
One of the most misunderstood aspects of a self-defense trial, and the legal strategy that goes into it, is the role of the expert witness.
Federal Rules of Evidence, 702 states:
A witness who is qualified as an expert by knowledge, skill, experience, training or education may testify in the form of an opinion or otherwise if:
(a) the expert’s scientific, technical or other specialized knowledge will help the trier of fact to understand the evidence or to determine a fact in issue;
(b)the testimony is based on sufficient facts or data;
(c) the testimony is the product of reliable principles and methods; and
(d)the expert has reliably applied the principles and methods to the facts of the case.
This means two hurdles must be met.
First, the proffered expert witness must be able to be accepted by the judge as being a person who possesses advanced knowledge of a particular aspect of the case, and that knowledge must be used to educate the jury as to a facet of the case that the layperson (most jurors) would not know of or understand.
A perfect example of this is DNA evidence, with the expert witness brought into court to help the jury understand what it means in the case at bar. When it comes to scientific evidence such as DNA or ballistic interpretation of gunshots, usually the state/prosecution will utilize local police detectives, who are paid for by the department and usually in the pocket of the prosecutor.
So, in most cases of murder or manslaughter, the defense must hire an expert—someone who is likely an ex-cop or ex-homicide investigator and has the formal training to stand toe-to-toe with the police detective and give the interpretation to the evidence that’s favorable to the defense.
Massad Ayoob, a prominent firearms and self-defense author and trainer who has also appeared as an expert witness in many trials.
Primary Objectives
Recently, I was contacted by a public defender who wanted to hire me for a murder case. In this case, the issue to opine on was whether the surveillance camera caught an act of self-defense, as the defendant was claiming self-defense.
I reviewed the video and counted the shots fired, in what sequence they were fired and from where. I quickly determined the defendant was lying to his attorneys (who knew less than nothing about guns) and told them I couldn’t help them. Because it was a public defender case and I was to be paid by the government, I didn’t even bother to submit a bill. I wanted nothing to do with the case.
Another case (my first one) had to deal with deciding how a teenager had suffered an injury to his hand when handling a J-frame revolver and it discharged, striking and killing his sister. I attempted to recreate the injury using an exemplar revolver, videotaped the test and showed the court how the injury occurred.
The second hurdle to be cleared is that the opinion offered must be the result of generally accepted methods of investigation, which need to be discussed in the expert report.
Straight Facts, No Opinions
What an expert witness cannot do is give an opinion as to the ultimate question. Meaning, was the act an act of justifiable self-defense? When someone says they’ll just hire an expert to give such an opinion and they will walk free, it indicates a naive knowledge of the law. Attorneys are guilty of this naivety at times, as the role of the expert isn’t covered sufficiently in most law school curriculum. I spend a lot of time telling attorneys I cannot give the opinion they seek, but usually the evidence can be explained so the jury understands what the prosecutor is saying isn’t plausible or likely to have occurred, leading to that acquittal.
Occasionally, the expert witness can make such a statement though. For instance, when the prosecutor asks for the expert’s motive for testifying. This usually comes up in pro bono cases (meaning the expert is working for free, which happens occasionally) when the case is so egregious and there’s no money to pay for the expert. Some experts take the case anyway, as I’ve done on occasion.
Typically, the question of how much you’re being paid to testify is asked of the expert, implying the expert will say anything the defense wants him or her to say for the money. When this occurs, it opens the door to the following response: “Well, nothing counselor.” And if the gods are shining upon the expert that day, the attorney will then ask “Why?” The expert’s response usually follows something like this: “I took this case for no fee, because I have never seen such a miscarriage of justice in all the time I have been doing this.”
I have only had it happen to me once in my career, but it was enjoyable to be able to answer the question.
Regular Rarity Of Expert Witnesses
Expert witnessess are likely needed in just about all self-defense cases but, for two reasons, are rarely used.
The first reason is the attorneys handling the case don’t realize they need one, and the second reason is experts typically cost a great deal of money.
The fact of the matter is that many otherwise qualified people simply don’t understand they could become a court-recognized expert and never pursue it. If the industry had an armed citizen who was a recognized expert in all counties in the country, willing to testify for a fellow armed citizen who was being prosecuted for a legitimate act of self-defense, we’d see fewer innocent persons convicted.
Think about becoming one of these experts.
Editor's Note: This article originally appeared in the April 2022 issue of Gun Digest the Magazine.
Alliant Powder Reloder TS 15.5 is aiming to nullify your need for a thermometer as a handloader.
“See, this one goes to 11.” Why don’t they just make 10 louder?” “This one goes to 11.”
The classic exchange from This Is Spinal Tap has been referenced more times than you could count, but it immediately came to mind when I heard of the release of Alliant’s Reloder TS 15.5—“it’s 0.5 better.”
But there’s more to this new powder than just modifying Reloder 15—which is incredibly useful in cartridges like the .17 Remington, 5.56mm NATO, .22-250 Remington, .308 Winchester, .30-06 Springfield, .375 H&H Magnum, .404 Jeffery and .470 Nitro Express—and the new release needs a fair shake.
Alliant’s new Reloder TS 15.5 powder, shown here in the 1-pound canister.
Temp Through Time
Well, let’s start with its proper name: Reloder TS 15.5. The “TS” stands for Temperature Stable, and that’s been the buzzword among the latest powder releases. Exactly how instable was our old lineup of powders? Well, there was a rule of thumb among ballisticians that became near-gospel: Every degree Fahrenheit of temperature change—up or down—from the test data temperature would either add or subtract 2 fps.
For example, if you developed a load using good old IMR 4064 at 65 degrees Fahrenheit, and then took the load to hunt late-season caribou adventure, where the temperatures hover around 0 degrees, you could expect a velocity loss of roughly 130 fps. Take that same load to Texas in June or to Zimbabwe during October, where a thermometer reading of 100 degrees is common, and you’ll see your velocities increase by 70 fps or so.
Now, should your chosen powder charge be well within the realm of safety, that increase might not matter in the least. But, if that load is on the cusp of unacceptable pressure, when the temperatures get warmer you might find cratered primers, a sticky bolt, difficult extraction and other issues.
In a bolt-action, lever-action or single-shot rifle, the temperature fluctuation might not pose a huge issue, so long as the pressures are acceptable, and shouldn’t result in much more than an adjustment of your scope. But I’ve seen shooters bring a rifle to the range in the warmer months—after having put it away after deer season, knowing it was properly zeroed—only to find a bughole group at a different point of impact.
“My scope must’ve got bumped.” No, we’re likely seeing the effects of warmer temperatures. This is why the manufacturers are stressing the temperature stability of newer designs, and they have proven to minimize the effects of temperature swings.
RL 15.5 metered very well, needing very little trickling for precise load weight. Photo: Massaro Media Group.
That Extra 0.5
Reloder TS 15.5 claims a burn rate “between Reloder 15 and 16,” but that’s a rather vague statement, as there’s an awful lot of real estate between the two. Looking at a modern burn rate chart, you’ll find that Reloder 15 sits just north of IMR 4064, and Reloder 16 sits just south of H4350. In between resides Hodgdon’s Varget BL-C (2) and H380, as well as IMR4350 and IMR4451, Winchester 748 and 760, and Alliant’s own Power Pro 2000MR and 4000MR.
Assuming a burn rate smack-dab in the middle, you’re looking at a rather versatile powder, which can serve a good number of different cartridges, from the .223 Remington and .22-250 Remington, up through the 6mm Creedmoor and 6.5 Creedmoor, to the .308 Winchester and .30-06 Springfield. Based on my experiences with the .375 H&H Magnum, I could see where Reloder 15.5 would be a natural fit.
The RL TS 15.5 is an extruded stick powder, with a rather large grain structure when compared to RL 15, looking very similar to RL 16. This shouldn’t pose an issue in the larger cases like the .30-06 and family, or the .22-250 and 6.5 Creedmoor. But for the .223 Remington, and even the .308 Winchester, compressed loads might be an issue.
That said, I had more than acceptable results in my .308 Winchester, using a 180-grain Nosler Partition (perhaps one of the finest choices for an all-around hunting bullet) and a charge of 44.7 grains of RL 15.5, sparked by a Federal GM210M primer. In my well-worn Ruger .22-250 Remington, a charge of 37.0 grains of RL 15.5 topped with a 53-grain Sierra MatchKing printed three shots in just over ½ inch at 100 yards, at a velocity of 3,690 fps.
Based upon the excellent results I’ve had over the years using RL 15, IMR 4064, IMR 4350 and H380 in the .375 H&H case—all being in that same burn rate range between RL 15 and RL 16—I thought that RL 15.5 would be a natural fit for the classic case. While there’s no published load data for the .375 H&H using the new powder, it’s apparent that the differences in most cases between RL 15 and RL 15.5 aren’t much more than 1 grain, so using the RL 15 data as a starting point is a safe plan.
Using a 285-grain Speer Grand Slam and the data from the Speer Handloading Manual Number 15, I started at 2 grains below maximum, with 67.0 grains. The Speer data tops out at 69.0 grains, and that’s where I found the accuracy/velocity combination I deemed suitable for a proper hunting load. Pushing that bullet at 2,490 fps into three-shot groups measuring just under 1-MOA, I saw an ES value of 15 fps for this load.
The extruded stick grain configuration of RL TS 15.5; it’s a short-grained powder, yet bulky. Photo: Massaro Media Group.
Made in Sweden, Reloder TS 15.5 has a de-coppering agent built into the formula to help reduce bore fouling, and it has the potential to perform equally well in hunting applications as it does in target rifles. For those fans of the 6mm cartridges—especially the .243 Winchester and 6mm Creedmoor—you might find a fast friend in RL 15.5. I think it’ll also prove that this powder might be perfectly suited to the Mauser-based cartridges like the 7×57, 8×57, .257 Roberts and more.
Will I be abandoning those proven loads I have using good old Reloder 15? Probably not. But, when working up a new load for a different bullet or for a new cartridge, RL TS 15.5 could be the powder that just might yield one of those magic combinations.
Editor's Note: This article originally appeared in the July 2022 issue of Gun Digest the Magazine.
The long-awaited Hi-Point Yeet Cannon YC9 is finally here, sporting several upgrades and available in four configurations.
Hi-Point Firearms has just announced that the YC9 is finally available. Its designation stands for YEET CANNON, a meme name bestowed upon it by an online contest. Goofy nomenclature aside, the pistol is packing some substantial upgrades over its predecessor the C-9. Best of all, despite the makeover, the YC9 is still sporting a very reasonable MSRP of $229.
Hi-Point YC9 YEET CANNON.
Firstly, the Hi-Point YC9 has four variants available upon release. There are two standard models, of which the only difference is one has “YEET CANNON” emblazoned on the side for those who really appreciate the name. The third variant has a non-threaded barrel, and the fourth variant comes equipped with a Crimson Trace red dot sight (and a higher MSRP). Those last two variants should already tell you that a threaded barrel (1/2×28) and an optics-ready slide are two of the new standard features of the YC9.
Hi-Point YC9 CTRD.
Besides being both optic- and suppressor-ready, the final big upgrade is the YC9’s double- to single-stack magazine that raises capacity from 8 to 10 rounds. Other new features include the addition of an accessory rail, a replaceable Glock-pattern front sight, a reversible backstrap and an overall aesthetic facelift that adds front slide serrations and a more ergonomic grip.
Hi-Point YC9 NTB.
The Hi-Point YC9 is available now, and it’s already started hitting store shelves with a sub-$200 price tag. If nothing else, for less than two Benjamins, the Yeet Cannon’s upgrades add a lot of tactical potential to the budget blaster.
A discussion on how to measure your defensive handgun accuracy and precision skills.
The ability of a handgun to stop a threat is often debated. Most often these debates center around the cartridge the handgun is chambered for, and/or the type of ammunition being used. Though terminal performance is a very important part of the stopping equation, shot placement matters, too. In fact, disregarding extremes, shot placement might matter more than anything. The ability of a handgun to deliver the shot placement you desire depends on two things: accuracy and precision.
An accurate handgun will place the bullets where you want them. The more precision a gun delivers, the smaller the target you will be able to hit. For example, if you can hit a softball at 10 yards every time with your handgun, it’s accurate. If you can hit a golf ball at 10 yards every time, your handgun is accurate and has a high level of precision.
So, regarding self-defense handguns, how much precision do you need?
This, of course, could vary greatly depending on the situation you might be in. However, most self-defense shootings occur within about 10 yards. If your handgun can keep all its shots inside a softball at that distance, that should be good enough.
But, it’s not as simple as that.
A softball has a diameter of 3.5 inches. If your handgun will shoot 3.5-inch groups at 10 yards, it will hit a softball every time at that distance. But that’s what the handgun is capable of, not what you’re capable of. You’ll have to do everything perfectly to deliver that level of precision and, while you might be capable of doing that on the range, you won’t do it in a high-stress self-defense shooting situation.
Under stress, you want to be able to deliver softball-sized groups. The chances are your pistol is capable. The question is, are you?
Precision Needed
For argument’s sake, let’s assume that if you can place your shots within 1.75 inches of where you’re aiming, that’s good enough for self-defense. In other words, we’re saying that softball size—3.5-inch groups—are sufficient.
But, to account for shooting under stress, let’s assume that your 3.5-inch groups will turn into soccer ball-sized groups. Like some have said: Your worst shot in training will be your best shot when under stress. If you’re only going to shoot half as well under stress, you need to shoot twice as good during practice.
Precision Available
At the risk of restating the obvious, our goal is for our handgun to deliver 1.75-inch groups at 10 yards. This is usually determined by shooting from a rest. The question is, how high of a hurdle is that to clear for modern defensive handguns? Is that an unreasonable expectation?
I recently tested 11 new for 2022 defensive handguns by shooting them from a bench at 10 yards using self-defense capable ammunition. Three groups of five shots each were fired with each handgun, and the average for all groups and all handguns was 1.74 inches. As an average, that’s not very reassuring. However, the average was drastically skewed by a single handgun that only delivered groups measuring about 4 inches. That’s bad considering that—under stress, with that handgun—you’re in the range of soccer ball-sized groups again.
Somewhat surprisingly, the $500 Tisas PX-9 Gen III delivered the best precision of all the defensive handguns tested.
If we take that poor performer out of the mix, the average drops to 1.51 inches. At 10 yards, 10 of the 11 handguns tested delivered the necessary precision for defensive use; except for the one, none had an average group size larger than 1.75 inches. Considering these 10 handguns, which included revolvers and semi-automatics from nine different manufacturers, with prices ranging from only $500 to $3,700, that’s not bad. It should give you confidence that just about any self-defense handgun will deliver the precision you need.
Best And Worse
What might surprise you is which handguns delivered the best and worst precision. The smallest average group size was turned in by a pistol that has a suggested retail price of only $500. The worst precision—the one we excluded with the 4.02 group average—was delivered by a pistol with a suggested retail price of $561. Discounting this poor performance, the next largest average group size was delivered by a $600 pistol.
There were two very expensive pistols in the test. One had a suggested price of $2,895 and it turned in an impressive three-group average of 1.29 inches. The other, which was the most expensive gun tested, had a three-group average of 1.68 inches. This is larger than the 1.51 average for the 10 best shooting handguns. So, it would appear that the amount of money you spend may or may not matter when it comes to precision. Including the junk gun, the $3,700 handgun only out-shot three of the other nine pistols.
Measuring Handgun Accuracy
Accuracy, as we said, is the ability to hit what you’re aiming at. To some extent, accuracy is dictated by how well the gun is sighted in. You can have a very precise shooting handgun, but if it’s not sending bullets to where the sights are pointing, all that precision is of little benefit. On average, out of the box, these 11 handguns placed their groups within 1.7 inches of the point of aim. The handgun that had the best zero out of the box cost $700. The centers of its groups were within a half-inch of the point of aim.
Accuracy and precision all tie together. If you want to keep all your shots inside a softball at 10 yards when shooting under stress, you’ll need a gun capable of delivering a decent level of precision, but it will also need to be properly sighted in. Based on this test, I think you should expect to adjust the sights on any defensive handgun you might purchase, regardless of price.
I think this test proves you should be reasonably confident that no matter the defensive handgun you purchase, it should be capable of delivering a level of precision suitable for self-defense to about 10 yards. If it doesn’t, send it back for repair or trade it for a different handgun.
Sure, there are many other considerations when it comes to selecting a handgun, but with today’s modern handguns I’d say there’s a 91 percent chance they’ll provide all the precision you need. That also means that you’ll have to take the blame for any missing that occurs.
Editor's Note: This article originally appeared in the July 2022 issue of Gun Digest the Magazine.
When it comes to building your perfect custom rifle, it all starts with your dreams and the action.
When having a custom rifle built, one of the most enjoyable aspects is the blank canvas with which the project begins. I’ve seen all sorts of unique builds, from double rifles built on shotgun actions to pump rifles chambered in cartridges suitable for thick-skinned dangerous game, to drillings in some strange configurations … and rifles built on resurrected actions of a time long ago.
Custom guns can be downright fun. But the most popular—and often the most practical—choices are those classics that are relatively affordable and available. Many of the custom rifles were based on surplus military actions. Much of the WWII-era Springfields, Enfields and Mausers were transformed from the simple (yet obviously effective) military guise into sporting works of art.
A custom rifle can be built on just about any action, but some have attained popularity for a reason.
With World War II more than 75 years behind us, those rifles are becoming increasingly scarce, and the custom rifle of the last three decades has been, as often as not, built on the Mauser 98 sporting rifle actions, Winchester Model 70s and Remington 700s—and with cause. These are solid designs that are easily worked and can make a rifleman’s dreams come true.
I’ve handled some absolutely amazing custom rifles based on more contemporary actions like the Ed Brown Model 704, the Granite Mountain Arms M98 clone, the CZ550, the Howa 1500 and more. It seems that the controlled-round-feed and push-feed crowds are equally represented in today’s custom rifle world.
I reached out for further insight from a trio of my favorite custom builders, all of which have a stellar reputation, and whose work I greatly admire: Mark Bansner, Todd Ramirez and Dan Rossiter.
Todd Ramirez
Todd Ramirez at his bench. He’s renowned for his custom rifle work.
Phil Massaro: What are some of your favorite actions to base your custom rifles on, and what features are you looking for?
Todd Ramirez: My favorite action is the Mauser action—the aftermarket square-bridged actions. It’s very diverse, so you can build a .416 Rigby-length action, all the way down to a .223 Rem. on a mini-Mauser action. The Mauser action has a long, thin action tang, which allows the creation of a perfect grip. The Winchester action, on the other hand, has a wider tang. It’s very wide similar to the Remington-style tang, so your grip is oversized and blocky.
The grip is the heart of the rifle, because all the control is from the grip: the trigger, bolt handle and safety. A gunmaker who builds with a Mauser action has to fine-tune the action and stone out machine marks and other imperfections. Also, being that it’s square-bridged, the mounting system for the scope can be set up centered true to bore. This removes all scope binding.
Of course, on the Winchester 98 action, one can still build the same quality of a rifle. You can square bridge the action, add custom bottom metal and aftermarket triggers, sculpt the tang some and weld on a custom bolt handle. The action still needs to be trued and surface-ground to be square bridged. The Winchester comes out to be more work and money than the Mauser action. That’s why, on my premium rifle builds, I prefer to use a Mauser action. The Winchester is my second choice.
A pair of fine custom rifles from Todd Ramirez, built on Mauser 98 actions and stocked in beautiful, high-figure walnut.
When it comes to Remington, I prefer the aftermarket actions because they’re machined true and have an aftermarket M1-style extractor. Plus, the option of components is endless with the Remington platform. The action is easy to inlet, but it does not lend itself to having a sculpted tang for a more tapered grip. It has a wider tang like the Winchester.
Mark Bansner
As president of Bansner & Company of Adamstown, Pennsylvania, Bansner has a healthy reputation as a custom builder of rifles, from the lightweight mountain guns, to safari rifles to precision target guns. Famous for his synthetic-stocked rifles, Bansner is no stranger to fine walnut nor deep bluing.
Mark Bansner in his Pennsylvania shop, with a custom .404 Jeffery made for Alaska, Africa and Australia.
Phil Massaro: Mark, which are your favorite actions to work with?
Mark Bansner: Well, we work exclusively with bolt-actions, and there are three basic categories: the Mauser 98, the Winchester 70 and the Remington 700. All have their clones. For example, the Granite Mountain Arms is a Mauser clone, the Dakota 76 is a Winchester 70 clone and the Defiance is Remington 700 clone—and all have their strengths and weaknesses.
The Mauser is the most complicated to work with, as there are a couple of features that usually need to be changed out to satisfy most customers. The straight-bolt handle will need to be bent to accommodate a low-mounted scope, and the “flag” safety switched for the conventional wing-style safety. Once that’s sorted, you’ve got a great action to work with, and though some may say that a Mauser 98 is sloppy, I’ve made some very accurate rifles with this action. Of course, modern clones like the Granite Mountain Arms come machined to much higher tolerances, but the cost goes up dramatically, and the wait time seems to increase each year.
The Winchester 70 is a great platform—no worries about the safety conformation or bolt handle—and has also been a popular choice, with most customers seeking the controlled-round-feed actions for a custom build. But both of these actions have a square bottom, and that’s where the Remington 700 shines: It’s a round action and can be worked on a lathe.
Is the 700-style action the most popular action in your shop today?
MB: Far and away, the 700 and its offspring are the most popular among my clientele, and that includes the M704, which we love so much. That M704 has a unique controlled-round-feed bolt face, but its essence is a derivative of the Model 700. That said, I can’t begin to tell you how many ½-MOA Mausers and Winchester 70s we’ve built over the years.
If you were building a custom gun for yourself, say, for a special elk or bear hunt, what would you choose as an action?
MB: If I were building a synthetic-stock gun, Cerakoted for weather resistance, I would assuredly reach for the M704, or maybe a Model 700 clone. If I wanted a walnut-stocked rifle, I’d reach for a Winchester Model 70 or a Dakota Model 76. But I have come to love that stylish M704.
Bansner & Company is the brainchild of Bansner—with voluminous input from fellow gunsmith Ben Moedinger—and is as well known for their synthetic stocks as they are for their accurate barreled actions.
Any experiences with the Ruger No. 1 or other falling-block single shots? I see many custom rifles built on that platform.
MB: I’ve seen some gorgeous custom work based on the Ruger No. 1, but they’re a chore. When they shoot, they shoot wonderfully, but when they don’t … well, there’s the amount of pressure put on the barrel by the forend, the rubber bushings needed to adjust it, and a bunch of stuff that, as a gunsmith, just doesn’t appeal to me. I know the engravers love them, but the platform isn’t for me as a builder.
For the customer looking to get into a custom gun for the least amount of money, is the 700 family the way to go?
MB: Absolutely. There are a good number of 700 clone actions available at an affordable price and, with minimal work, can be made into one helluva rifle. If you can seat that barreled action properly into a decent stock, the results will be eye-opening.
Dan Rossiter
Dan Rossiter, of Griffin & Howe, working on the stock of a beautiful .35 Whelen rifle.
Dan Rossiter is the shop foreman at the prestigious Griffin & Howe, and a member of the American Custom Gunmakers Guild. Working with the firm that is renowned for its custom rifles—G&H built the .30-06 that Ernest Hemingway made famous in his Green Hills of Africa—Rossiter has developed some well-founded opinions on the basis for a custom rifle.
Dan Rossiter: We build three different lines of hunting rifles at G&H, two of which need to achieve ½-MOA three-shot groups with factory match ammunition or we don’t let them out the door.
I’ve worked with two precision action manufacturers: American Rifle Company and Defiance. G&H bases our wood-stocked “All American” rifle on American Rifle Company’s Mausingfield Action. This action is a controlled-round feed, with a Springfield-type inertia ejector and a Remington footprint. We barrel the All American with a Proof Research carbon-fiber barrel. The precision to which both the action and the rifle is built shows up down range in a very real way.
The other action G&H uses is made specifically for G&H by Defiance. These are a controlled-round feed, with three-position safeties and TriggerTech triggers. We build a lightweight synthetic-stocked rifle—the Highlander—with these actions.
Going Your Own Way
The Classics: G&H’s reputation was built on taking military rifles such as the 1903 Springfield and Mauser 98 and turning them into functional works of art, and the company still builds the “classic sporter,” as do other custom builders.
FN Mauser: If I’m building a classic bolt action for a cartridge that’s the same overall length as the .30-06 or .300 Win. Mag. families, I’m looking for an FN commercial Mauser action. These actions were very nicely made and typically sport better tolerances than their military counterparts. With the investment in some bottom metal and a three-position safety, you will have the basis for a wonderful custom rifle. Just find a gunmaker worthy of the task.
Winchester Model 70: If you’re into the whole classic British magnum thing, then find yourself a Winchester Model 70. Modifying a standard Model 70 for a .300 H&H or a .375 H&H is a straightforward affair. These actions already have a great three-position safety and, although custom bottom metal is an upgrade, the factory offering looks good and works just fine. These actions can actually save money if used for a custom build when compared to commercial FN Mauser.
1903 Springfield: These actions can make a beautiful custom rifle. Make sure the heat treat is good (many serial number references exist for this), and keep the cartridges to the .30-06 family. Three position safeties are available, as are custom bottom metal.
Granite Mountain Arms and Satterlee: Consider the classic Mauser double-square-bridge action in four different lengths to suit just about any cartridge designed for a bolt-action rifle. These GMA actions are wonderfully machined, and they are ready straight from the maker. They sport three-position safeties, a great bottom metal, excellent triggers and will feed all the major families of cartridges right out of the box. Satterlee Arms deserves a mention here as well: They don’t come in as many lengths as GMA, but they do come in titanium. Like GMA, these are precision-machined, double-square-bridge Mauser actions.
Falling-Block Single Shot: Steve Earle of Steve Earle Products makes one of the finest single-shot falling block-actions in the world. It’s a reproduction of the Daniel Fraser falling-block action and is so well machined it boggles the mind. It’s also immensely strong, absolutely beautiful and wonderfully elegant in its handling qualities when properly barreled and stocked. I strongly recommend contacting Glenn Fewless of Mook Machine Works, who makes a barrel specifically for these actions, with a full-length integral rib.
Building ‘The One’
There are a great number of gunsmiths willing to build you a rifle on any platform you could feasibly imagine, so long as you’re patient enough to meet their time table and have a checkbook that can cover the costs of the endeavor.
However, there are the logical choices that can check the boxes with a minimal investment and still give the satisfactory experience of the custom rifle. Whether the platform is a Remington 700, Winchester 70, Savage 99, Ruger M77, K98 Mauser or CZ550—and though sadly discontinued, there were a lot of great big-bore rifles built on that platform—there’s no wrong or right answer when it comes to your custom rifle. The single requirement is that you, the owner/shooter, enjoys the rifle, irrespective of the opinions of others.
If you want to crunch the numbers to check if your handload’s velocity expectations match reality, you’re going to need a chronograph.
My friend, Mike McNulty, had come over to my house, as we were planning to do the necessary load development for an upcoming safari to Zimbabwe. With his beloved Heym Express .505 Gibbs in tow, we knew we had a great load using the standard 525-grain bullets—long proven in the voluminous case—but Mike was interested in using 570-grain slugs on this hunt. We’d obtained some premium bonded-core softpoints, and the solids of correlative weight, and consulted the data published by the manufacturer in their own reloading manual.
In order to be safe, we decided to stay 2 grains below the published maximum and carefully loaded up a half-dozen of each bullet. Grabbing the Oehler 35P chronograph and heading (optimistically) to the range, one could only imagine our dismay as the display showed 1,750 fps … instead of the book advertised 2,160 fps. I thought that the chrono was giving some sort of false reading, until we checked the speed from a proven handgun load in my EDC gun, as well as another rifle: It wasn’t the chronograph, much to our disappointment. Factory loads from Mike’s .505 Gibbs registered very close to the advertised velocity, so all signs pointed to the data.
The Oehler 35P chronograph has been the industry standard for years, though the newer designs are gaining ground. Photo: Massaro Media Group.
I ruled out a bad measurement for the powder charge by pulling some of the loaded cartridges, and everything was fine in that department. I started to cross-check the published data with other reloading manuals and found a considerable discrepancy, which made sense with the observed velocities.
But why? What could’ve gone wrong, either in the manual or with the rifle?
The same thing happened to me when I was helping a friend do some load development for a 7mm Remington Magnum. Using 175-grain Nosler AccuBond Long Range bullets, one load showed great velocities yet mediocre group size, while the group that gave hair-splitting accuracy clocked 300 fps or so below the “book” velocities. I finally found the proper blend of both attributes, but the simple fact that the truth varied so much from the manual’s observation simply perplexed me.
Fighting The Formulas
I’ve had this happen a number of times, where a certain manual shows a maximum load for a cartridge/bullet weight combination, and yet another—when referring to a bullet of similar configuration and conformation—will show a radically different number. Now, when it comes to reloading manuals, one must understand that they’re a test report—an observation of the effects and statistics of a combination of bullet, powder charge, primer choice and a particular and unique barrel/chamber combination.
Should a particular reloading manual test things with a fast—or slow—barrel, it wouldn’t be difficult to see where the discrepancy could come from, and why it might not translate well to your particular rifle or handgun. In Mike’s instance, the discrepancy was enormous.
If you want one new tool to improve your reloading, a chronograph is it. Photo: Massaro Media Group.
Imagine if we believed the velocity listed and sallied forth, confident in the capabilities of the rifle and cartridge, only to blame the bullet for the poor penetration … when the fault is to be laid at the feet of the velocity of the chosen load. In this particular situation, we’re talking about a dangerous game cartridge that’s generally used at short ranges. If the same level of deviation was to rear its ugly head in a .300 Winchester Magnum or 6.5 PRC, you could easily see where the shooter would be beyond puzzled as to why the bullets were hitting so low.
What surprises me so often is how many reloaders have a complete aversion to a chronograph. Without the chrono, I’d have had no idea how far off my velocities were in both of those situations. Yes, the .505 Gibbs—with its terrible recoil—was visibly less violent with the slower ammunition, so there was that indicator, but the 7mm Remington Magnum didn’t show that much of a difference in recoil.
The moral of this story? A chronograph is an absolutely necessary tool for the serious reloader.
Chronograph = Mandatory
There are all sorts of reasons for owning a high-quality chronograph, with long-range shooting being quite obvious. If you wish to employ a trajectory-calibrated turret like the Leupold CDS, or a ballistic reticle to adjust elevation for longer shots, knowing the precise muzzle velocity is paramount. For those who shoot IPSC competitions, having your ammunition qualify for either major or minor is utterly dependent on an accurate velocity measurement. For those who’ve gone as far down the rabbit hole as I have—and it’s a long journey—seeking the near-perfect load with lowest extreme spread in the velocity category, a chronograph is among the must-have tools.
The type of chrony is a personal decision, though I will say that any chrony is better than no chrony at all. With the frequency I use mine, I wanted the industry standard and opted for the Oehler Model 35P, with three skyscreens to eliminate as much error as possible. The unit uses the observed speed between screens one and two (the first and middle), and then between one and three (first and last), averaging the measurements. It’s rock solid, and so long as you don’t hit it with an errant shot (been there, done that), it’ll last a lifetime. It even has a printer to keep a hard copy of the shot string and all its velocity data.
The Labradar unit uses Doppler radar to measure velocity, without needing skyscreens; it’s a pleasure to use.
Many folks like the LabRadar unit, which doesn’t rely on a light source, as my Oehler and many other units do, but uses Doppler radar to track and measure your bullets velocity. MagnetoSpeed is another unit that uses cutting-edge technology to accurately measure velocity, though mounting the bayonet-style measuring device absolutely will affect accuracy. So, you shoot for group, and then secondarily, you shoot to measure velocity; it’s very accurate and gives consistent readings in comparison to my Oehler 35P.
Whichever unit you choose, even if it’s an entry-level unit, recording the velocity of your rifle and handgun loads is as important as measuring group size. I believe a consistent velocity in a rifle load to be nearly as important as the 100-yard group size; in fact, at longer ranges, it may prove more important.
The MagnetoSpeed uses a “bayonet,” which attaches to the rifle’s barrel to measure velocity.
For load development, for the process of truing a rifle’s long-range trajectory, and most certainly for the best use of a ballistic calculator like a Kestrel unit, a reliable muzzle velocity value is paramount. I can no longer go forward blindly accepting a reloading manual’s published values; there are too many variables involved in the testing procedures—no fault of the manual’s publishers—which can throw a wrench into the works.
A chronograph will tell the tale, and get you as close to the truth as possible, shy of actually truing the rifle at each and every distance you intend to shoot.
Editor's Note: This article originally appeared in the August 2023 issue of Gun Digest the Magazine.
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.
