Firearms

Archived Posts from this Category

31 March, 2025

Second Time’s the Charm? MAC 2, Take 2

Posted by blackcampbell under Firearms | Tags: , |
Leave a Comment 

My experience with my first “Turkenelli” — the Military Armament Corporation’s MAC 2 shotgun was…lackluster. You can read about it here. A knockoff of the Benelli M2 12 gauge semiautomatic shotgun, it is an exacting enough clone that they are supposedly 90%+ parts compatible. When I took the thing down the first time, I didn’t need the instructions; it was nearly identical to my old M1 Super 90 from the ‘90s. The question was, at $400 after tax, was I getting anywhere near the quality and usability of a gun five times the cost?

Having had a plethora of issues with the weapon, SDS Imports out of Chattanooga had me send it back. The experience with their customer service department was very good. The lady on the phone had responded to my initial email within 24 hours, the tech team had looked at the pictures and concluded “Whiskey Tango Foxtrot” and had me send it back. 48 hours later (plus Sunday), I had a new MAC 2. I decided to do the same 50 round run at the local range to see if my experience would be replicated.

I got the same marine-finish MAC 2 with black plastic furniture and a standard shotgun grip. (I like these more than the “tactical” grips.) The MAC 2 comes with the standard Benelli ghost ring sights, but also an Picatinny optics rail. It has a front slug mount…but not a rear. (Really, guys?) A rotating and heavily knurled cocking lever, standard button to release the bolt, and cross-bolt safety. Exactly like the Italian M1/M2s. It also comes with cylinder, modified, and full chokes. The finish is nice — and appears to have been badly applied in my original unit, judging from the level of wear seen. More in a moment.

For the test, a ran 5 rounds of Winchester #4 buck, 30 rounds of 00 buck — all with a 1150fps velocity according to the boxes; 5 more 00 buck with a 1350fps speed, and lastly 5 shells of older Super-X rifled slug with an 1150fps speed. I figured, like the Benelli, the lower velocity might give me malfunctions to eject or feed like some of the Benellis have in the past. All 50 shells ran without an issue.

The original MAC 2 I had purchased patterned very well an shot true to point of aim with the pre-installed cylinder choke. The #4 buck shot a wide pattern at 15 yards — about 30 inches on the widest axis. The pellets on the 00 were generally within a foot or so and stayed on the silhouette target, aiming center mass at 20 yards and not really taking my time. Interestingly, the shot cups veered pretty wildly — up to two feet from the shot pattern. Slugs shot to point of aim between 5 and 20 yards.

The MAC 2 can pop them out pretty quickly, too. The inertia system of the older Benellis isn’t as quick at the ARGO in the M4, but the gun never lagged behind my ability to get back on target and hit the trigger again. Extraction was enthusiastic, as well; the shells were throwing about three yards and slightly forward. Recoil is not as soft as the ARGO delivers, but it’s not as brutal as a pump action.

With a successful range trip concluded and only the barrel/tube support having worked its way forward during shooting, I took it home to clear the thing. This is were things went wrong with the first MAC 2, and I’m pleased to report that this shotgun did not show the signs of wear on the finish anywhere I looked. Not did it have the damage to the bolt head or receiver that the initial gun did. While a sample of two is hard to make sweeping generalizations — I suspect I got a Monday morning gun the first time. It disassembled and reassembled without issue and the internals were not overly dirty, as you would expect from an inertial semi-auto.

The MAC 2 has the following specs:

  • Chamber: 12-gauge, 3-in.
  • Action: semi-auto, inertia
  • Barrel Length: 18.5 in.
  • Stock/Forearm: Black plastic (although they do a really nice walnut.)
  • Capacity: 5+1 (MAC’s website does have +2 tubes.)
  • Sights: adjustable ghost ring rear/blade front
  • Optic Compatible: yes (Picatinny rail)
  • Finish: bead-blast aluminum
  • Overall Length: 47.8 in.
  • Weight: 6 lb., 8 oz.
  • Chokes: Benelli/Mobil® 1/3/5
  • MSRP: $549.99 (I got mine for $350+tax.)

So…is it worth it? In the original review, hell no. Now? If this shotgun is indicative of the quality of most of the MAC shotguns, then yes. You get a parts-compatible Benelli clone for a third the price that runs well (even the original shotgun I tested ran with only two failures to eject)) and looks the part. I might even pop for their M4 clone.

 

25 March, 2025

Update to the Review of the MAC 2 Shotgun

Posted by blackcampbell under Firearms | Tags: , |
Leave a Comment 

So, I bought a MAC 2 shotgun about a month back and had a… not great experience with it. After sending in the pictures taken upon cleaning it after the first use, I was contacted by Reyes for SDS customer service in Knoxville within a day of sending the email with the complaint. When I called her, I forgot about time zones and such and got in touch with them only 15 minutes before close for the weekend. She informed me that the tech guys had looked over the pics and yes — that was not normal and send the gun back. Before clocking out for the day, she had my waybill emailed to me with the instructions on returning it.

FedEx took a week to get it back to SDS, during which time I was on a roadtrip that would have allowed me to just drop the damned thing off about the same time. But the turnaround was 72 hours. I had a replacement MAC2 by Monday. Same model and finish. Noted remarked that the damage was mostly the bead-blast style coating flaking from wear. Not good, but not actual structural damage, save that seen on the bolt face. Still — good response from SDS: their customer service is solid, the tech guys didn’t cheap me out like I was expecting, and once I get this out to shoot, hopefully, I’ll have a better experience.

 

24 February, 2025

So, I bought a Turkenelli… Review of the Military Armament Corp. MAC 2

Posted by blackcampbell under Firearms | Tags: , |
[2] Comments 

I’m not really a shotgun guy. I don’t find twelve gauge all that much fun to shoot, but I always had one. I’ve owned a few semiautomatic shotguns, including the original Benelli M1 Super 90. I noticed a knock-off of the Benelli M2 by Military Armament Corporation at the gun store the other day. The price was hard to resist (sub $400), so I didn’t.

Now, I’ve heard a lot about the quality of Turkish shotguns being as bad as some of their handguns (Tisas) are good. But at $400, I figure if it’s even halfway to the Benelli, it would be worth it.

So how good is it? Wrong question. How bad is it?

First, the good stuff: It actually comes with chokes, something Benellis I’ve bought don’t, plus the tools to adjust the chokes, the sights, the angle and distance of the stock. It’s got adjustable ghost ring sights, a rail for optics, and is very pointable and light. It looks good, and at first pass, the action runs well and smoothly.

I got the M2 home last week, and broke it down, cleaned and lubed it. I noted a few aluminum shavings here and there — probably missed in the cleaning phase of the production. I took it out for a run today (Monday). I put a total of only 50 shells through it (plus another 30 in a Kel Tec KS7). It’s pretty light at six and a half pounds, and you feel the stouter stuff after a few boxes.

The M2 uses the time-tested Benelli inertial recoil system, so it should run some of the lighter stuff that the ARGO system wouldn’t. In this case, I started with some Norma reduced recoil buckshot. Out of 20 rounds, I had a single failure to eject. Not a bas start. I tried a couple of shorty Aguilas, anticipating they wouldn’t cycle. I was correct. Back to Norma Performance buckshot for 20 rounds. The Turkenelli ran them without issue, save for one failure to eject. Again, for the first time out, now awful. Hornady Black buckshot ran like a top save for one failure to fire that looked to be the round. (It was three years old.) Ten rounds of slug with no malfunctions. All 2 3/4rds, no magnums.

Accuracy was decent, though the reduced recoil shot about two inches high at 15 yards. It was spot on with the Black and slug. While the shorties didn’t cycle, they did pattern spot on at point of aim.

So far, so good. As usual, when I got home, I started cleaning the weapons, starting with the MAC 2. First thing I noted was that the magazine tube really didn’t want to unscrew. I also noticed a bunch of aluminum shavings from the threads and there was some damage from the brace that holds the mag tube and barrel. It had worked it’s way forward a bit during firing.

I don’t mean a few shavings like you’d find from having not cleaned the area…

This is just from the magazine tube being unscrewed. But wait, there’s more. I pulled the tube and dismounted the barrel. Here’s the front of the receiver:

Note not just the impact damage where it meets the barrel; look inside the receiver there. But we’re just getting started, Dear Reader. I pulled the bolt and took it down. Here’s the bolt:

Aluminum shavings. I popped the trigger assembly, using the firing pin retaining pin, as they instructed. That was a mistake:

Nice. And before you say anything, yes — you could do this with the Benelli and not break stuff. With the trigger guard off, the real fun started. There were aluminum shavings and damage everywhere. Remember, this is only 50 shells, nothing hot; in fact, half of it was reduced recoil.

No — that’s not dirt. How’d the bolt look? It was scuffed at the front of the face.

After half an hour of cleaning I had a nice collection of metal filings and had to go over the cleaning mat twice just to get rid of the bits. I even vacuumed the floor under my seat. And once I was done and oiled the weapon…? More shavings.

That’s after I cleaned the hell out of the gun. There was still more.

Aluminum, admittedly, seems a bit of a bad choice for a 12 gauge, but I’ve seen it from other manufacturers. None of their stuff spontaneously shed aluminum, like Arianna Grande losing weight. And again — 50 rounds of normal factory ammunition.

So is it worth it? NO. Not just no, hell no. Steer away from this. I can only imagine how they’ve messed up the ARGO system in their 1014s. Yes, it’s sub-$400, but you can get a Maverick, which won’t shred itself with normal operation. Hell, my cheap Kel Tec has hundreds of rounds through it and even eats shorty shells: no failures.

I have a warranty claim into MAC for the firing pin retaining pin and a request to replace the weapon. Will I fire this thing again? Unlikely. If it’s shedding metal, it’s going to fail somewhere.

Update: I reached out to SDS in Tennessee the same day as this occurred, and I will give them this — their customer service folks are on it. They confirmed that this is not a normal event and that the weapon needs to be replaced. The lady on the CS line was very helpful, especially as I got in touch with them right at the end of their work day.

More as events unfold…

 

5 October, 2024

RIP Paul Harrell

Posted by blackcampbell under Firearms | Tags: |
Leave a Comment 

Paul Harrell was a YouTuber who did excellent videos on guns, ammunition, and other subjects connected to the shooting community. A former Marine and soldier, he brought a no-nonsense approach to the sport that advocated safety, provided reviews of products, compared different types of ammunition for their efficacy, while always bringing a wry humor to his presentation. So it was completely in character to pre-film a video entitled “I’m Dead”, in which he apologizes to all his 1.2 million viewers that he had passed. Harrell was diagnosed with pancreatic cancer that was much more aggressive than originally thought.

“My sincere apologies…I had hoped that I would continue in this format for the next 10 or even 15 years. And even once I was diagnosed I had hoped we would be here two or three more years, and it’s turned out to only be a few more months. And my apologies for that. It really makes me feel like I’ve let everybody down.”

The video channel Harrell created will continue to be available on YouTube and his brother will supposedly be creating new content.

 

11 September, 2024

Ejection Issues with the New Walther PPK .32

Posted by blackcampbell under Firearms | Tags: , |
Leave a Comment 

Here I go into the issues with the new Walther PPK .32 and some of the possible reasons this may be happening.

 

11 July, 2024

Review: The “New” Walther PPK

Posted by blackcampbell under Firearms | Tags: , |
[3] Comments 

I’ve had several PPK and PP knockoffs across the decades, but I didn’t buy my first actual Walther PPK/S until about five years ago, when an Interarms period Walther showed up for a very reasonable price. It’s a great pistol, but I replaced it with one of the new Fort Smith-made PPKs in .380 a year later. With the release of the new Walther in 7.65mm (.32 acp), I jumped on the first one I saw when the guy that had been thinking about it didn’t just buy it. He walked away to look at something else; I bought it.

First off, Walther definitely took a hint from some of the latest packaging trends. The pistol comes in a very Apple-like simple white box with a gray Walther logo on it. Inside, there is a blue presentation case that is quite nice, with the pistol and extra magazine inside. Documentation, etc. is under the flap in the white box. Noticeably missing in the box is what you used to find — a spent cartridge and a target showing it had been test fired. I haven’t seen this in most manufacturers of late and I suspect a lot of them are kicking their products out the door without an actual test firing. That said — an A for presentation.

Both the .32 and .380 PPK are the same size, weight, and have the new extended tang/tail on the back of the frame. A lot of folks, especially those with bigger hands, love this. I do not. The pistol is beautifully formed, but the tail carried a sharp angle from side to the underside. I find a too high grip on the .380 and I come away with a triangular bruise in the webbing of my hand. Your mileage may vary. One complaint I’ve heard about the new tail is it presents a spur that could catch if you pocket carry. I haven’t experienced this issue in the years I’ve been carrying the PPK in my pocket. If you put your thumb on the hammer of the pistol while drawing, it clears a pocket with little issue.

The very low profile sights are minimal, to be kind, and this aids in concealment and in drawing from teh same. This is not a long-distance weapon. This is made for self-defense distances — under 15 yards. At contact to 5 yards, I can keep a two in the chest drawing and firing fast from low port, with a quick aim and follow up for a head shot. Rapid acquisition of the sights is doable and sub-2″ groups up to 10 yards are easy with little practice. For me, this has been the case with every version (including knock offs ) of the PP and PPK platform.

Back to build quality: The engraving in the “little” PPK is excellent — much deeper that you see on the .380 — to the point I can tell them apart just from that. (The .32 in the bottom pistol in the following images.) If fact, the only real way I could tell the difference otherwise is the slide is sprung much lighter on the .32, and is very easy to manipulate, whereas the .380 requires a bit of pull to cycle.

Trigger pull seems to be about the same between the two pistols, though I haven’t measured it — it should be about 10ish pounds on a long double action with a fast, crisp break; or a 4-5ish lbs. single-action. There’s a bit of takeup on the single action, but once you hit resistance, it’s going to break clean. The extractor spring seems a bit weak on the .32 — more on that later. Even the magazines will swap from one to the other, and yes — the .380 fit in the .32 mag. The only visible difference is an extra witness hole with a 7 to show the .32. The .32 mag in the .380 will lock in but will not lock the slide back. If still fed a round into the chamber when cycled. I’m not recommending you do this, but I was curious…

Take down and cleaning are the same, although my recoil spring on the .32 did not want to come off like the .380 does, and I didn’t want to use too much force. I just lubricated the barrel around it. Then it was off to the range to shoot both and torture test the little one.

For the .380 I used Freedom Ammunition’s 100 gr. remanufactured FMJs and Sellier & Bellot 90gr. FMJ. The .32 was fed only FMJs — 150 rounds of Magtech, 100 rnds. of PMC — both 71 gr. FMJ; Fort Scott 71 TUI., Aguila 71 gr. and Fiocchi 73 gr., then finished with 40 rounds of Underwood .32+P 55 gr. Xtreme Defender with the fluted copper bullets.

The .380 Walther has eaten everything I’ve thrown at it from 68gr. Lehigh and Underwood, to 100 gr. remanufactured stuff, and the only issue I’ve had is with S&B. There’s a real snap to the recoil impulse that is sharp enough that very occasionally, it will half drop or fully engage the decocker! It happened once with the Freedom 100 gr. on this trip but hasn’t happened before. Fortunately, everything else runs fine and the 90 and 68 gr. Underwood perform flawlessly, with hits into a coke can from 20 yards — no issues. I stay away from the S&B for my .380 PPK, although I’ve never had an issue with anything else.

The .32 — oh, the .32. The first box of Magtech was causing issues — solid primer strikes that dented the hell out of the primer, but requiring two or three trigger pulls to get them to ignite. I put this down to the ammunition. I was also having failures to eject. The empty would extract, but get caught above the incoming round about half the time. Then I figured it out: On the .380, the recoil with the new tang makes me teacup the pistol, with my thumb folded down. On the .32, I was riding with my offhand thumb forward…and pressing to the slide. I was slowing the action and causing the failure.

On the PMC, I started having stovepipes. I was 170 rounds in, so I stopped and cleaned the gun a bit. Problem solved for about 50 rounds, then recurred. However, when I switched to the Aguila and Fiocchi I had no such issues. They’re both slightly faster cartridges than the Magtech (which fired dirty!) and the PMC. The little PPK likes the hotter stuff. The Underwood +P 55 gr. Xtreme Defenders ran without an issue and printed solid 2″ groups at 10 yards free-standing. The Magtechs had the worst groupings, but partly that was my stop-and-start shooting while clearing jams. The stovepipes were super easy to clear: hook the casing with my finger and pull. The gun would go into battery and fire, no problem.

Now…I’ve used Fort Scott ammo before and it’s good stuff. Just not in the PPK. Every. .single. round… failed to feed, jamming up going into the barrel and requiring me to take the slide off to pry them out. The bullets are just too long for the breech. Avoid them for the .32 pistol! It does seem that the .32 is more finicky on ammo. It likes the hotter stuff and when it gets dirty, the chance of jamming — mostly stovepipes that can be quickly cleared — goes up. This is much the same for the .22 PPK/S my daughter has as a plinker; 40gr. only and the hotter the better, or you’ll get failures.

Would I carry this as a defense pistol? No, I’d stick with the .380 PPK or if I’ve got the opportunity to carry on my belt, my Alpha Foxtrot S15. If I want a deep concealment .32, the super-light and small Kel-Tec P32 is still king, for me. Would the PPK .32 be fine for a defense carry for someone who was recoil averse or had arthritis or some other condition bad enough that something heavier sprung might be hard to manipulate? Absolutely. When clean and well-fed, the gun is very reliable. Dirty and lighter range stuff is more prone to failure, although after I sorted my grip on the pistol, the incidence of failures to eject dropped from about 40% to about 2%, and that was usually after 50+ rounds of fouling from the cheaper stuff. It didn’t happen at all with Fiocchi, and only twice out of 100 rounds with Aguila (and that was with the gun filthy!)

So is it worth it? Depends, do you want a PPK in the original chambering like I did, and like fans have been railing on Walther for the last six decades to produce? Then, yes. Is it a good self-defense pistol? Provisionally — with good ammo and for people who are recoil averse. Is it a good range toy? With crappy ammo, and a lot of the .32 is meh quality, it’s a pain in the ass; with the hotter stuff, it’s good. Is it worth the near $1000? Meh… it’s easily the best-looking pistol ever designed. There’s something about it — the James Bond connection aside — that is just classy as hell, especially in the stainless steel. However, I keep feeling this pistol should be coming in about $700-ish max, but inflation has skewed pricing so badly the last four years I just can’t mentality keep up.

But was it worth it? I was not as impressed as I thought I would be after seeing it, and it’s a beauty. But I think the .380 runs better.

 

24 February, 2024

Review: Tisas Yukon C10 10mm

Posted by blackcampbell under Firearms | Tags: |
Leave a Comment 

I bought one of the Tisas Service 1911s a few months back so I had a .45 I could use for our idiotic CCW setup here in New Mexico. Here, you qualify with the “largest caliber” you might carry in revolver and auto. I use my old 1917 issue Webley Mk VII for the revolver, but had to borrow a .45 auto to qualify every two years. The Tisas was ludicrously cheap, I had the cash, so boom — bought one. Other than feed issues that turned out to be a bad magazine, it ran flawlessly.

So imagine my delight when I found out Tisas was doing a commander-sized, bobtail 1911 in 10mm — God’s own caliber. I’ve been a 10mm fan through the drought of 10mm love in the ’90s after the FBI agents couldn’t shoot it, so they moved to .40S&W. I had an original Glock 20, but the grip angle on Glocks is (for me) awful. I’ve had the Tanfoglio — a pistol that was much maligned until people actually shot it, and now you can’t touch them for a reasonable price. I have a Kimber Camp Guard (which I carry on trips into the woods, etc.) and a Chiappa Rhino DS40 that went to Aria Ballistics to bore the cylinder out to 10mm. So a carry-sized 10mm? Yes, please.

I’d seen the 9mm version of the Yukon in the local gun store, and it was superb. The 10mm is also top-notch quality. It’s a Series 70, and the fit and finish are on par with early Kimber — when they were excellent. Solid lockup on the barrel, fully supported barrel. No MIM parts, save the safety levers. Oh, yes — ambi safety standard. Thank you, Tisas; you’ve outdone most 1911 manufacturers, already. It’s got a gray Cerakote forgerd carbon steel frame and black forged carbon steel slide. The grips are G10 “sunburst” texture in gray. The slide stop and safety levers are black and complement the gray frame. The trigger and hammer are skeletonized and there’s a good beavertail. 25lpi texturing front and back on the grip, and an Ed Brown style bobtail.

It comes with an excellent hard case, cleaning rod and brush, bushing wrench (that you don’t need — it’s a standard spring cap set up), and two magazines — again, beating most of the other manufacturers there.

So how’s it shoot? Wonderfully. It’s accurate and presents as a 1911 should: very well. The U-notch rear and fiber optic front sight work well and allow fast acquisition. The recoil…is stout. Compared side by side with my Camp Guard — a standard Government model size — the Camp Guard soaked up the hottest rounds (155 grain, 1650fps) and was mostly comfortable to shoot and quick to do follow up shots. The Yukon has more muzzle flip than most 10s do, and the recoil is not uncontrollable, but it does take some wrestling to keep it on target for follow up shots and was slower to do so. Still, Mozambique drills allowed two in the 9 ring and a center head out to 10 yards with reliability. I did note, however, the safety on the right side of the frame was cutting up my thumb prettily after 50 rounds.

We ran 250 rounds of various loads — 135 grain frangibles that were more the short & weak style, 180 grain Blazer, the 155 grain Texas feral pig killer ammo. No malfunctions other than a few failures to go fully into battery that were definitely the operator getting tired (and bleeding all over the size of the pistol from his thumb). Weak on the locking rings and the slide rails was about what you would expect for a trip out like this. There was some.

Accuracy was top-notch, function was nearly flawless — and the flaws I suspect were me — and the fit, finish, and quality of manufacturer are as good as anything Colt, Springfield, or Kimber are putting out. At $720 before tax and shipping, is it worth it? Unequivocally, yes.

 

24 February, 2024

Review: Alpha Foxtrot AF1911S15

Posted by blackcampbell under Firearms | Tags: , |
Leave a Comment 

I tried one of these a few months back at the shooting range and was seriously impressed. Considering I had recently stumbled across my (then) new favorite pistol, the Springfield Armory Prodigy in the 4.25″ barrel, it was no small feat. I knocked out a “first impressions” post that still holds true. So, yeah, I bought one. Right up front — is it worth it? Every penny.

The S15 is an officer’s size 1911 that uses the Glock 48X magazine…so it takes the Shield Arms 15-round 9mm magazines for the same. The magazine that came with the gun was flawless. The three I bought later required a few trips to the range before you could squeeze the fifteenth round in. That said, there were no failures to feed.

The pistol has a DLC (diamond-like coating) finish that is tough and stands up to abrasion extremely well. At about the 1500 round count, now, the pitol is showing some wear on the finish at the locking rings on the slide…but that’s it. The bull barrel is crowned and also finished in the same DLC (diamond-like carbon) coating the slide has. The finish is still very much intact. It’s glassy and very black, and looks good against the aluminum frame. It does love to hang onto fingerprints, however. I’ve been carrying it in a Galco Stow-N-Go IWB holster I had bought for the Springfield Prodigy, and at 28.5 oz. it’s a little heavier than the Colt Defender.

The pistol shoots incredibly well for me. My buddy that hits the range regularly with me is a Glock fanboi, so he has to work a bit on his aim due to the grip angle. I find it presents better than anything I’ve shot to date when drawn from the holster. The flat top of the slide is serrated to cut down on glare, but I find it also helps me shoot like a I used to years ago — no sights, point shooting where I simply use perspective to “run a road” from the flat top to the target. It’s fast and accurate (for me.) When taking time to use the sights — which are good, in the Novak style — this is one of the few pistols I used the trendy thumbs forward grip everyone seems to teach these days. One handed, two-handed, off-handed…the thing hits where I point with tight groups out to 15 yards with on issues. Beyond that, I’ve got to work a bit for sub-3″ groups. Old eyes.

The recoil is mild and the slide action is fast. Follow up shots are easy and smooth.

The grip is molded in aluminum with the grip panels part of the frame; there’s no changing grips, but it does allow the pistol to be incredibly thin at a hair over an inch wide. I’m finding it drops into the hand and presents like it’s part of me. Your mileage may vary. It’s got the usual higher end do-dads — beavertail, memory pad on the grip safety, skeletonized hammer and trigger. The trigger is excellent. It started off mid-line 1911 good but has smoothed out to a nice 4 lbs. with a hair of takeup before the wall and a crisp release. The reset is short and audible.

Now the negatives: It’s not cut for an optic. I don’t like them so this doesn’t bother me. It might you. Supposedly Alpha Foxtrot will be offering models cut for optics. It’s go no ambidextrous safety. As a lefty, this is annoying, although I find drawing and cocking the pistol is very easy while presenting. That said, even Tisas and Girsan are offering pretty everything but the bone-stock GI 1911s with ambi safeties. It’s a third or so of the market…economies of scale guys.

After 1500 rounds or so, there’s been one failure to go into battery. It never reoccured so I’m putting that down to operator error. No failures to eject, extract, feed, or otherwise function with absolute perfection. It is the single best handgun I’ve owned.

 

10 September, 2023

2000 Rounds In — a Quick Review of the Springfield Armory Prodigy 4.25″

Posted by blackcampbell under Firearms | Tags: |
Leave a Comment 

I bough the the 4.25″ Prodigy at the start of the year (2023) and I’ve been running it steadily every since. It’s relatively lightweight — a similar weight to the Springfiend Hi-Power clone — small enough to conceal without much effort, and it is utterly spectacular for accuracy. The complaints about needing a better flared magwell I think are overwrought; I’ve never had an issue with a magazine change. If there’s anything, it’s the plate/ rear sight assembly gets a bit loose after a few hundred rounds and needs tightened. I may just Loc-Tite it. I’m not planning on running an optic.

If I had one gripe — and it’s a small one — I would like to have had a flat strap to the slide. Over the years, I used a lot of pistols with a flat top and it made perspective shooting (using the flat to “run a road” to the target) quick and accurate without needing to use the sights save for more precise shooting. It’s why the Walther PPK suits me so well, why I love my Kimber Camp Guard and can shoot them quickly and with minute of bad guy accuracy while moving.

Reliability at 2000 rounds is this: one failure to go into battery, but that might have been me limp-wristing it while shooting one-handed. Even if it wasn’t, that’s a 0.05% fail rate. That’s completely acceptable for a self-defense handgun. Here’s the wear so far for 2000 rounds: pretty standard wear along the barrel sides and top where it impacts with the muzzle opening on the slide. Minimal wear on the locking lugs on the slide — this is better than most handguns I’ve seen at this round count. Wear on the rails and the top of the lower frame is well within what I would expect. The outer finish is still pristine, ever with holster use.

I know some folks had trouble with the initial run of the Prodigy — especially the 5″ version, but my experience with the commander-length has been just shy of flawless. For $1400 or so, it’s definitely worth it.

 

27 June, 2023

First Impressions: Tisas Service 1911A1

Posted by blackcampbell under Firearms | Tags: |
[2] Comments 

First, the backstory: Here in New Mexico, our concealed carry requirements are a bit mental. It’s obvious that the people that wrote them don’t know a ton about guns and how they work. There’s a qualification that needs to be done every two years, but the renewal is every four. Mostly, this is to make the instructors money, although I’ll admit maybe shooting your firearm once every two years is a real minimum. (In the military and police, quals were once a year…that seemed, even then, a bit long of an interval.) Oh, you do this at seven yards. You can practically hit someone with the weapon itself at seven yards. The real issue, however, is in addition to having to qualify for a revolver and semi-auto separately (okay — the manual of arms is different enough that basic handling might be an issue for some; but they’re still a point and click interface) and in the “largest caliber you plan to carry”. They’re looking at the number. Not if, say, 10mm is a whole lot more recoil than .45ACP, or .357 magnum is a bit more tricky to use for some than .38 special — no. Number big — that’s important. So that means that while I prefer a 10mm to most cartridges, I have to qualify with a .45 to basically carry whatever the hell I want.

Well, I guess technically I should be doing that with .50 calibers, but no.

That means once every two years I have to dust off my .455 Webley and borrow a .45ACP from someone. It’s stupid. I decided I’d rather have a cheap .45 I could make good enough hits at spitting range. In the local gun store, the excellent Right to Bear Arms, they had a few .45s. I’d been dickering about over buying one all summer, so far. There was a used Springfield Armory XD9 for about $400, then there was a no-name Turkish 1911 for about the same.

Enter the Tisas 1911A1 Service pistol. This is a seriously no-frills pistol. Old-school Colt Series 70 with no ambi-safety, a GI hammer and tang. No memory ledge on the mainspring grip safety. No real sights — they’re black, they’re small, but they work. The frame and slide forged carbon steel with a really good Cerakote finish in “basic black, sans pearls”; the barrel is cold hammer forged and bright silver. There’s no full-length guide rod nonsense here. Just the old style spring cap fitted into a bushing. It comes with two 8-round magazines, which puts Tisas way ahead of most stingy 1911 manufacturers, where you get one magazine and shut the hell up. Black plastic grips finish the package, though I’m tempted to throw a few shekels Tisas’ way for the wood grips with the US emblazoned on them.

In the shop the trigger was 1911 good, but not top of the line 1911 good; so better than most other pistols out of the box. It breaks at about 5 lbs but feels lighter, has a bit of takeup to the wall, and a crisp release. The reset is short and audible. You can feel a bit of movement in the grip safety as the mainspring moves, but I’ve felt that in high end guns, as well. Not a deal breaker. The slide runs smoothly and it’s sprung tightly. The hammer felt like it was scraping a bit against the frame, but there’s no indications of wear. I snapped it up today and headed out to the range with 100 rounds of Blazer Brass in 230 grain. No cleaning. No oiling. Let’s see how this POS fares.

Out of the box, without any of the usual care I would give a pistol before it’s first time out, I had four failures to go into battery; the shell just hung up a bit going into the pipe. It only happened on one of the magazines, and did not occur on the second. At 10 yards, I did the bottom group with the first box of ammunition. The initial right and low was due to my grip which was a bit off from shooting the Prodigy. A slight wriggle on the grip and most of it was in the orange. The upper group was the second box, with a bit of trailing down in the last magazine or two. That’s pretty good for a $400 Turkish pistol.

Even better, after getting it home and cleaning the thing, the finish in the high abrasion areas was completely unblemished save for the usual spots on the firing pin block. The Cerakote held up along the slide rails and the locking lugs; something a lot of pistols don’t pull off in a similar round count. (I seriously think the coating is better than on my Kimber Camp Guard, which at 2000 rounds is showing it’s age.) Function was smooth, save for the sense the hammer is still scraping a bit, but I’m not seeing indications of it. I may just be looking for something to bitch about.

The Tisas 1911 is imported by SDS out of Tennessee, which also handles Spandau and Tokarev. Allegedly, their own engineers go out to the plant in Turkey to oversee some of the development. I’ve heard rumors that Girsan and Tisas basically come off the same lines, but I don’t know if that’s true. In addition to coming with an extra magazine (and well done, Tisas!), the 1911 comes with a pretty nice hard case, the usual owners manual and other “by stuff” paperwork, a patch rod and brush, a bushing tool and a good trigger lock. It’s actually a solidly good presentation for a surprisingly good pistol.

The next outing, now that it’s been treated properly, we’ll see how it does and I’ll append this post. But for now: is it worth it? For the price, you cannot beat this. It’s a solid 1911 and as good as most I had in the 1990s for about the same price as in the 1990s. When a comparable Rock Island or badly finished Springfield GI is $650ish, the Tisas is better finished and in the ballpark on build quality and accuracy. Do it.

(Update: With a cleaning and decent lube job, the Tisas functioned flawlessly the second time out. Accuracy was excellent for a cheap-ass pistol with the old, barely-there sights; and good for a 1911…meaning better than a lot of the polymer framed guns out there. All of my issues were due to the extra magazine. I didn’t use it, and that seemed to mitigate the issues. I suspect I could have just shot it dirty with that magazine only and had the same results. The wear on the finish, again, is very, very minimal. I’m truly impressed with the Ceracoting on the gun. With a decent magazine, this is easily an acceptable carry weapon, if you don’t mind a full-size service pistol. With this second run, I have to redouble my recommendation: at $400, you cannot beat this if you’re looking for an entry 1911.)

 

« Previous Page — Next Page »