That’s what drew a friend to a Savage Axis 2. A $75 rebate on an already budget-friendly rifle made it irresistible to him. It’s his first hunting rifle, and he brought it to my property to sight it in, shoot, and learn a thing or two. We spent the day blasting through a healthy amount of .270 ammo and taking the rifle through its paces from 50 to 200 yards.

Beyond Bare Bones

There are many Savage Axis 2 rifles in various calibers and configurations. This particular model is a .270 Winchester variant with an FDE polymer stock. According to Savage, the deal came with a Bushnell Banner 3-9X scope that was mounted and even bore-sighted from the factory. It’s a basic rifle in most senses, but it does perform at a level that surprised me.

He spent $500 and received a $75 mail-in rebate. To score a rifle and optic for a total of $425 isn’t a bad deal. The Savage Axis 2 comes with the Savage AccuTrigger, which is a user-adjustable trigger designed to be light and short but safe.

In the center sits a very thin metal device that protrudes away from the trigger. This device pivots rearward when you pull the trigger and acts like a safety. When you get through the pivot, you’re touching the trigger, which is very light and short by design.

The Axis 2 uses a four-round detachable box magazine, so it’s quick and easy to clean the gun. A detachable magazine also makes it easy to fix or replace a broken one, while internal magazines can be a bit of a pain to repair. Without surprise, the budget-friendly Axis 2 uses a push-feed configuration.

The .270 variant of the Axis 2 features a 22-inch barrel, and it’s surprisingly light. At 6.3 pounds, it won’t weigh you down all that much. For stalking through the woods and climbing a tree stand, the lighter the rifle, the better it is in most cases. The rifle is 42.5 inches long overall, and the length of pull is a comfy 13.75 inches.

Shouldering the Axis 2

According to Savage, the Axis 2 features enhanced ergonomics. I always hate when companies use such vague terms. I can’t say how ‘enhanced’ the ergonomics are, but I can say the Axis feels surprisingly nice. As mentioned, it’s super lightweight and impressively comfortable.

The pistol grip is thin but comfortable and easy to wrap your hand around. The forend also features relief cuts to allow for a better grip of the front of the gun. It’s easy to grab and hold onto, making it easy for different-sized shooters to grab the rifle and go.

The Axis 2 uses a large tang safety naturally placed for easy thumb access. It’s textured and can easily be silently pressed from safe to fire. The bolt handle uses a large T-handle-style design that allows for good positive engagement on the bolt for total control. It’s large enough to work with gloves in case it’s cold and harsh outside.

The trigger guard doesn’t feel as glove-friendly. It’s not particularly wide, so depending on the thickness of your glove, it might feel restrained. Luckily, we’re in Florida, and we don’t need mittens.

To The Range

The first thing we have to do is zero the rifle scope. We did some research and settled on a 50-yard zero. In Florida, we don’t hunt in open areas, and a 50-yard zero would easily carry us to 200 yards. A 200-yard shot in northwest Florida is unheard of, and I typically just shotgun hunt due to how thick our tropical rainforests and swamps seem to be.

The boresight was true, and our impacts were close to the point of aim. What wasn’t close was the adjustment of the Bushnell Banner. It’s listed as a ¼ MOA adjustment. So, at 50 yards, it should be ⅛ of an inch per click. It wasn’t. We measured carefully, did the math, and even double-checked it. We made the adjustments and fired again.

The point of impact radically shifted. I measured the distance, and it seems like each click was ½ inch at 50 yards, which means at 100 yards, each click was 1 MOA. It’s clearly printed ¼ inch on the turrets. We redid the adjustments completely and took it back to zero, and this time, we used the ½ MOA as our measurements.

Surprise, we were zeroed. Once zeroed, we left the scope as is. The Bushnell Banner has a very budget-friendly scope. It’s one of the cheapest 3-9X outside of those random Chinese companies you see on Amazon with crazy names. The Banner ended up remaining zeroed and is still zeroed now, a few weeks later. However, its design contains flaws, and if this was my rifle, I’d swap the optic.

Accuracy At The Range

Once the optic was zeroed, we started shooting at 50, 100, and 200 yards. I’m not as good of a rifleman as I once was, but in a supported sled, we produced 1 MOA and slightly smaller groups with Remington Core-Lokt 150-grain projectiles.

We removed the sled and shot in supported positions and made very nice groups within the 2 MOA range. (Both of us need some practice.) In the offhand, we rang a 4-inch steel gong with regularity. The Axis 2 will certainly ruin Bambi’s day.

The AccuTrigger looks very nice. The light trigger and short pull help take the trigger out of the equation. I am impressed by it and find it quite nice for such a budget-friendly rifle. What’s not so impressive is the action. It’s not smooth at all. It’s functional, but it’s gritty, and it takes some effort to work. This is where the budget nature of the rifle rears its head.

Recoil will feel stiff if you’ve spent your shooting life with AR-15s. A bolt-action rifle in a full power centerfire caliber will feel stiff but not painful. It doesn’t beat you up, and you can comfortably shoot for extended sessions. Reliability wasn’t an issue in any way. It went bang every time we pulled the trigger. That’s lucky because .270 isn’t cheap.

Final Thoughts

I like the rifle and its ergonomics, price point, and performance. I don’t like the optic, though. I would purchase the Savage Axis 2 without the optic. Save a little extra money and buy your own optic. If you do that, the price savings and the 75-dollar rebate should allow you to get a better optic than the Bushnell Banner 3-9X.

The Savage Axis 2 is a mix of clearly budget decisions, like the action, with some surprisingly nice features, like the stock. For the price point, I think you are getting a solid rifle that deserves a better optic.

The post Savage Axis 2 in .270: A Perfect Hunting Rifle appeared first on The Mag Life.

I’m a big shotgun fan. I like all shotguns—big and small, singles, doubles, pumps, and automatics. Of all the shotguns I’ve owned and fired, I have never had a chance to experience a Winchester 1887 or even a clone of one. I remember looking at a Chinese clone years ago but sadly passed it up. I looked at replicas from Cimarron and Uberti, but their price points were too high for me to justify.

When Cimarron announced the Terminator with its MSRP below $700 and street price of about $580, I was excited to get my hands on one. The 1887 Terminator also comes from a company I trust. Cimarron imported these guns from China, but with their backing, I felt a bit more confident in the gun. Cimarron sent this test for review, and I’ve been beating the hell out of it. That said, let’s get into it a bit.

Breaking Down the 1887 Terminator

The gun remains pleasantly faithful to the original 1887 shotguns. Unlike the old 12-gauge 1887s, the Cimarron version is designed for smokeless powder 2.75-inch shells. Other than that, they are faithful reproductions, complete with the downsides and oddities of the design. It’s worth remembering these were the first successful repeating shotguns. There was little from which John Browning could draw inspiration.

The 1887 Terminator series features wood furniture furniture for the stock and handguard. It’s chunky wood that looks nice for a Chinese import. The matte black finish wouldn’t be mistaken for a blued design, but at less than $600, I won’t complain. Both the wood and metal finish seem nice and strong.

The lever action is smoothish. It feels a little janky as it moves back and forth, a symptom of having to cycle such thick and long rounds. This model’s barrel is 20 inches, and a 22-inch and 28-inch version is on the horizon. Personally, I prefer the shorter 20-inch gun.

The gun can only chamber 2.75-inch rounds, holding five in the magazine tube and one in the pipe. Although you can technically ‘ghost load’ a seventh round, it’d be ill-advised for safety reasons.

The Oddity of the 1887

John Browning created the gun for Winchester, but it’s worth mentioning that he didn’t really want to. He wanted to create a slide-action shotgun, which he later did with the 1893 and 1897. However, Winchester was known for its top-tier lever-action rifles. They had a brand, so to speak, and wanted to maintain it. Browning went to work on the lever-action gun as a good company man and created the first successful repeating shotgun on the market.

The 1887 is a rolling block repeater, which is a fairly novel idea. The rolling block was a proven design, but it was usually a single-shot weapon. The tube-fed design was typical on lever-action rifles and worked so well with shotguns that it’s still the dominant shotgun magazine type.

To make the system work, we have a unique manual of arms that is unique to shotguns and lever-action rifles. To load the magazine, the user has to open the action mostly. If you go all the way, the shell lifter gets in the way. With the action mostly open, you get two loading options: the chamber and the magazine tube.

The magazine tube is the lower option, so you have to reach past the chamber and into the gun and shove the cartridges into the magazine tube. It’s a bit awkward, and its design prevents you from toping the gun off easily as you shoot. However, in 1887, the gun held three times the ammo of the standard double barrel, so reloading likely wasn’t a big concern.

There is no safety, just a hammer with three positions. It goes to full-cock, half-cock, and no-cock. The half-cock position is the ‘safe’ position for carrying with a loaded chamber. As such, it’s not a gun I’d use for home defense or keep the chamber loaded for modern use.

Playing Cowboy With the Cimarron 1887 Terminator

You can tell which companies shoot their guns and which are fine with the status quo. As soon as I shouldered the 1887, I realized Cimarron was the former. The gun’s length of pull measures out to just over 13 inches. It’s accessible and easy to shoulder for most shooters. I imagine a lever-action design with a long length of pull would be a hassle.

At 7.8 pounds, you can feel the weight of the thick wood stock and all-metal design. Weight isn’t a bad thing with a shotgun, and 7.8 pounds isn’t a bad weight, especially considering that the gun was designed in 1887. The Cimarron 1887 Terminator feels solid, but how does it shoot?

At first, it was rough out of the box. The cheapest bird shot with low brass and folded crimps gummed the action up. When you tried to work the action, it was stiff enough that it required me to break my firing position to open the action. It took some real force to get the gun to cycle. A higher brass buckshot round with a rolled crimp proved to be smooth shooting.

I was a bit concerned about the stiff action, but it seemed like the gun needed to break in a bit. After a couple of hundred rounds, it cycled smoothly with the cheaper ammo types. I’ve not heard of a break-in period with a manually operated gun, but the Cimarron 1877 Terminator needs one. To be completely fair, the gun was always reliable. It just was challenging to cycle.

Throwing Lead

I cycled plenty of birdshot and buckshot through the gun. I shot the cheap stuff primarily, including Monarch buckshot, some Sterling, and a few Fiocchi loads. Everything fired and choked its way in and out of the gun. Patterns with basic buckshot were fair.

We saw 7 to 8 inches at 15 yards. I mixed old and new by shooting some Flitecontrol from a gun designed in 1887. The cylinder choke created a pattern that looked more like a slug than a load of buckshot. At 50 yards, I could ding steel over and over.

The gun does have one small accuracy problem. The bead sits directly on the barrel, creating an effect where buckshot and slugs appear to hit high. You have to aim a bit low to compensate for it. With buckshot, I aimed five inches low and landed buckshot center mass. With slugs, I aimed at the bottom of the belly button of the target to land chest shots. It’s accurate to the Winchester 1887, but still worth mentioning.

I also grabbed some mini shells. They work okay. In a tube of seven rounds, at least one will fail. The two-inch shells ran a bit better, and the 2.25-inch shells ran perfectly. I don’t recommend mini shells for serious work, but they run mostly okay in the Cimarron 1887 Terminator and tune-down recoil.

Going Fast

There is no recoil pad, and the front forend lacks enough grip texture to initiate a decent push/pull. It’s not so punishing that I gave up shooting. I am okay with recoil, but it isn’t the gun for you if you are recoil-sensitive.

I tried a few standard shotgun drills. From the low ready, I mounted the gun and fired two rounds of buckshot as fast as possible on a ten-inch gong. I can do that with a standard pump action in under 1.5 seconds. I did it in one second a few times in the past. With the 1887, I got 1.85 seconds for two shots at most. The lever action just isn’t as intuitive as a pump action.

I also tried port loading. It’s fairly easy. The 1887’s open-top nature allows you to toss a single round in the chamber very quickly. The hardest part is not closing the action after you open it; it becomes a part of muscle memory.

Blasting Away

The Cimarron 1887 Terminator would be a great choice for SASS, ya know, the Single Action Shooting Society. It’s SASS legal, and that’s where it excels. The Cimarron 1887 Terminator is affordable if you prefer this gun to the typical double barrel. It could be used for pest control, as well as small game and predator hunting. It wouldn’t be my choice for deer with the hammer-fired design and loud click required to move from half cock to full cock.

Ultimately, it’s a fun gun for me. It’s an experience your typical pump gun doesn’t deliver. Cimarron has made owning an 1887 affordable and provided a reliable, fun-to-shoot shotgun.

The post The Cimmarron 1887 Terminator: The Cowboy Shotgun Rides Again appeared first on The Mag Life.

What’s the Ruger Super Redhawk?

The Ruger Super Redhawk is a large-bore revolver that hit the gun market in 1987, meaning it has nearly 40 years of use under its belt. That first model was released in .44 Magnum—understandably so—with later models including .480 Ruger and .454 Casull. The Super Redhawk came on the heels of the Redhawk, launched in 1979. Unlike the original Redhawk, which is designed more for carry and self-defense, the Super Redhawk is definitely a hunting handgun. There’s no denying it. That doesn’t mean it isn’t fun to shoot in general, though, because it is.

Ruger Super Redhawk Specs

There are two barrel lengths offered for the .44 Magnum variant—7.5 inches and 9.5 inches. It’s the 7.5-inch barrel model we’re covering today, not because the bigger-barreled model isn’t fantastic in its own right but because the 7.5-inch is simply a more versatile revolver. Thanks to that barrel length, this isn’t a gun you’re going to simply slide into an OWB holster and go about your day wearing. But it is an excellent gun.

The Ruger Super Redhawk boasts stainless steel construction and a frame made to withstand the not-insignificant power of .44 Magnum. Ruger reinforced the top strap, sidewalls, and barrel mounting to ensure the revolver is capable of handling even the hottest magnum loads. With that in mind, the manufacturer also built the gun with a triple locking cylinder for superior alignment (the last thing you want is a revolver with the timing off). The cold-hammer forged barrel has precision rifling and a transfer bar mechanism that acts as an internal safety. It has a satin stainless finish and a black Hogue Tamer Monogrip for a comfortable, secure feel.

Other Features of the Super Redhawk

Other features of the Super Redhawk include an adjustable rear sight and red ramp front sight, a grip frame compatible with numerous custom grips, and a 1:20 twist rate. The gun has dual chambering, meaning it can be run with either .44 Magnum or .44 Special, although Ruger is careful to note that they should be factory loads.

With a 7.5-inch barrel, the gun has an overall length of 13 inches, so it isn’t exactly a carry gun. Empty, it weighs 53 ounces, and its 6-round capacity doesn’t bump the weight up too much. Of course, if you mount an optic to the revolver—something you can easily do thanks to the integral mounts on the rib—it’s going to add even more weight.

Overall, this is a well-designed, cleanly machined revolver. The parts have good fitment—a must for a magnum revolver—and the details make it clear the gun’s made to handle hard use and a wide range of loads.

How does the Ruger Super Redhawk shoot?

The first thing you think when you’re looking at a 53-ounce, .44 Magnum revolver is that it’s probably going to recoil significantly, and you wouldn’t be wrong. The good news is the Hogue Tamer Monogrip has a textured rubber exterior that helps you maintain a solid grip during live fire. Those grips are great on their own and not something I’ve ever had reason to change. For a hunting handgun, comfort tends to be a bigger consideration than looking flashy.

Enough of the revolver’s weight is in its frame that it isn’t exactly front-heavy, although the bulk of its weight is ahead of the grip. You feel the pull of that weight when you pick the gun up, but once you’re holding it two-handed, you discover it’s surprisingly nicely balanced. I’ve run guns with so much weight in the front it feels like they’re dragging down while I’m shooting offhand, and that isn’t something you want. However, the weight of this gun is a great feature for mitigating felt recoil.

Some Stout Recoil

Felt recoil during live fire is stout regardless of the load you’re using. Certain loads produce more recoil and muzzle rise than others, but you feel all the magnum loads. There’s no mistaking it for anything but what it is. That said, it’s reasonably simple to get accustomed to the feel of the recoil and muzzle rise and bring the revolver back on target smoothly. There’s no reason at all for the gun to jump around or veer wildly off target. Make sure your grip is firm, your weight is well behind the gun, and you’re prepared for recoil.

The first time I fired a Super Redhawk was years ago, and the best part of it was finding out how precise these guns are. Is there a lot of recoil? Yes. Do you want to spend long live fire sessions with it? No, not really. But you also don’t need to because it’s beautifully accurate and precise on target whether we’re talking paper or deer. The Ruger Super Redhawk produces tight groups with no flyers and no excuses for poor shooting once you’re used to it. The factory sights work well, but you can also mount a scope on it, something that’s pretty common among handgun hunters. The trigger pull is extremely smooth, and the break is clean.

Can you hunt with the Ruger Super Redhawk?

Yes, the Ruger Super Redhawk is an awesome hunting handgun. It’s possible to shoot offhand during a hunt with this revolver but it’s preferable to have a rest. That might be shooting sticks, the edge of a window in a blind, or some other stable object—whatever you use, it’s a good idea to utilize a rest when you’re hunting.

I’ve hunted with the factory irons and also with a scope mounted to the gun. Zeroing the scope is fast and easy, so don’t worry about spending a crazy amount of ammo or time. The fact that it’s an accurate gun helps a lot. On hunts, the Super Redhawk can handle a lot of abuse and functions reliably in different climates. This gun has seen rain, snow, sub-zero temps, and super hot days. It shows no noticeable signs of wear, and really, it’s as pretty as it started out (and I am not that easy on my hunting guns).

The .44 Magnum cartridge is a solid hunting round for a wide variety of game. You can use it on coyotes, feral hogs, and deer. That said, the Ruger Super Redhawk isn’t the ideal gun for self-defense against bears. Even though the .44 Magnum cartridge is a capable round, it’s going to be a lot harder to make rapid follow-up shots on a fast-moving target with this gun. It’s a smarter choice to go with a big bore you can keep on target and handle accurately during rapid fire when it comes to defense against bears. But for hunting in general, it’s perfect.

Get You One

This is a revolver that does take a bit of an up-front investment, but it’s also the kind of gun that truly survives generations of use. It’s practically bombproof. When you get the Ruger Super Redhawk, you’re not just getting yourself a revolver; you’re getting a family piece that can be passed down.

The bottom line is that the Ruger Super Redhawk is a well-made, precise, and reliable gun. It’s well worth adding one to your collection if you’re a hunter. And if you don’t hunt, maybe it’s time you started.

The post The Magnum Legend: Ruger Super Redhawk appeared first on The Mag Life.

This modernized Galil Ace exhibits several new features that allow the design to take advantage of new technologies. These include accessory rails, including an M1913 Picatinny rail on the top of the receiver and barrel, improved controls, and additional calibers.

We recently had the pleasure of giving IWI’s Galil Ace pistol a workout at the range, and we’d like to let you know how it went. Is the Galil Ace a reliable, accurate weapon? Let’s dig in.

Tech Specs

Let’s peruse the technical specifications to see what we’re working with here.

• Barrel Length: 8.3 inches.
• Chrome-lined, cold hammer forged, CrMoV barrel.
• Rifling: 1:7 right-hand twist.
• Caliber: 5.56mm NATO (.223 Remington).
• Weight: 7.6 pounds.
• Operating System: Closed rotating bolt, Long Stroke Gas Piston.
• Action: Semi-auto.
• Magazine Type: AR15/M16/M4.
• Sights: Adjustable, with tritium front post and rear aperture, tritium 2-dot.

Although the pistol we reviewed is chambered for 5.56mm, models are available in 7.62x51mm (.308), 5.45x39mm, and 7.62x39mm. These calibers cover most of the bases for folks wanting an American or Russian caliber for their weapon platform.

Also, various barrel lengths and stocks are available, depending on what you’re after. I’ll note that the pistol reviewed here is the Gen. 1 model; IWI is into the Gen II model now, with further upgrades, including MLOK handguards.

The Brace

This pistol version of the Galil utilizes a pistol brace that resembles a short rifle stock. There’s nothing very remarkable about it (if you’ve seen one brace, you’ve seen most of them). However, there is one very cool feature on the Ace that sets it apart from other platforms, and that is the ability to fold the brace to the side, making this a very compact package. Another remarkable feature is the hinge that IWI uses; it is incredibly overbuilt and robust (and even phrasing it like that is an understatement). This hinge will stand the test of time and outlast us all. To fold the brace, just grab it near the hinge and push it down while pulling up on the pistol itself to disengage it and then fold it.

The Controls

The controls on the Ace are interesting, as they are on all Galil firearms. Just above the trigger guard on the left side is a selector switch. If it’s to the rear, it is on safe, and moving it forward is the fire position. Safe is marked in white, and fire is marked in red. Simple enough. The switch is easily manipulated by the thumb.

But wait, there’s more; on the right side of the receiver, we have another selector switch. In the up position, the pistol is on safe, and if the switch is flipped down, it is ready to fire.

The neat part is that if you flip one of the switches, the other automatically moves, so they are not independent of one another. This is rather unique in the firearms world, and it gives us users some options to fit our specific needs.

The charging handle is on the left side of the receiver. If the shooter is right-handed, he can perform all operations of the pistol while never removing his hand from the pistol grip. Overall, the controls are well set up and make a lot of sense, and the weapon can be manipulated with ease with a little practice.

Other Features

The Ace’s rear sight has an L-shape aperture with two options: a long-range and a short-range option. This works well, though the apertures are both fairly small. One would expect that the short-range aperture would be larger, but I did not perceive this. There are two tritium tabs on each side of the aperture for dim light firing.

The front sight is a tritium post, and it’s fairly straightforward. Overall, the sights work very well and are among the better ones in the firearms world. Engaging targets at close and intermediate range was very easy.

One spectacular aspect of this particular model is that it accepts standard AR15/M16 magazines, which are among the most available and least expensive magazines in the US. Bravo to IWI for deciding to go this route!

While there are more robust magazine designs, there’s a lot to be said about the availability and affordability of AR-15 magazines.

At The Range

We retired to the range on a sweltering, humid summer day to test the Galil Ace. Since this pistol belongs to a friend, he had the honor of firing the first rounds.

The handling characteristics of the gun are interesting, in that it’s small and compact yet it weighs nearly eight pounds. That gives it an extremely solid feel (plus, it has many features of the AK47). Overall, it is a very well-balanced firearm, and when brought to the shoulder, it inspires confidence in the operator. The brace, pistol grip, and handguard are all very comfortable.

As soon as the Ace is brought up to the shoulder, the sights are instantly aligned on the target, which is a great feature. And unlike the standard AK sights, the rear aperture sight on the Ace is on the rear of the receiver, which does two things:

1. It gives a longer sight radius, which improves accuracy.
2. It provides a better sight picture because we have an aperture sight, and it is close to the eye, so the eye naturally centers that front sight post in the rear aperture. This is very well thought out and is also used on the Valmet family of guns.
3. It’s more easily adjustable than the AK sights. On the AK, all adjustments have to be made via the front sight assembly, which can suck. With the Galil, the rear sight can be adjusted for elevation and windage, which is far superior.

There was some muzzle flash associated with firing the Galil Ace, but it wasn’t quite as much as I had anticipated. The recoil was very modest, given the gun’s weight and excellent recoil system. As expected from a barrel that’s just over eight inches long, the muzzle blast was loud.

The pistol balanced well, and swinging it back and forth between engaging multiple targets was easy and intuitive.

Of course, no stoppages were experienced, which is not a surprise, given this weapon’s pedigree. We used several different loads, including Frontier Cartridge 55-grain 5.56mm rounds and Nosler’s 53-grain Varmageddon .223 ammunition.

Parting Shots

IWI has a real winner with the Galil Ace. It’s reliable with a variety of ammo, accurate out to 100 yards and probably well beyond, and shoots smoothly with very little recoil.

The Ace’s compact nature makes it a natural for vehicles, as it can be stored away easily. When it’s time to use the weapon, it is accurate enough to reach out if needed, especially if optics are employed. Although the first generation of Galil Ace pistols has been discontinued, the 2nd generation is available. Be sure to check one out for yourself!

The post IWI Galil Ace Pistol: Range Review of a Tiny Titan appeared first on The Mag Life.

For me, the TP9 SF is the most preferable among the company’s many models, four of which I’ve personally owned. The SF is seldom seen or heard of, though, as it lives in the shadow of newer, often flashier renditions such as the SF Elite and SF Elite Combat. These bear a strong resemblance to Canik’s Mete series, which first gained popularity overseas. Despite its low consumer profile, the plain old SF is what I keep ready as a first-line backup duty gun. It’s the gun I hang on my belt most frequently for teaching. Here, I’ll share why the TP9 SF has earned esteemed status among the choices in my gun safe.

Reliable, With a Caveat

Like other modern Caniks I’ve owned and spent time around, the TP9 SF just works. For a time, Canik recommended a break-in period of 200 rounds using 124-grain 9mm Luger ammo; after that, their TP9s were approved to run the grain weight of your choice. While that recommendation seems to have quietly gone away, I did it anyway with my own SF. Whether that “worked” or it never needed a break-in at all, I’ll never know. What I do know is that it never malfunctions.

Now, there is an idiosyncratic firing issue that I’ve experienced about four times in the 50,000 or so rounds I’ve fired through Canik pistols. I’ve also seen it occasionally in students’ TP9s. It is a failure of the trigger to travel rearward enough for the gun to fire. The cause is a finger that’s too high on the trigger, failing to disengage the trigger safety. If there is any universal fault with Canik’s striker guns, this is it. However, it is a rarely occurring issue that can be addressed with time behind the gun, even in dry fire. I trust my own SF enough to carry it on duty as a guard and courier. That should suffice to say I’m not worried about this issue.

Ergos on Point

Lots of pistol makers boast of a low bore axis, indicating minimal offset between the ulna of the shooter’s forearm and the bore of the barrel during operation. Canik was among the early adopters of this trend with their first-generation TP9 SA, a gun I used so long I wore it out. Thoughtful designers of the SF sculpted the frame right where the thumb and trigger finger grip. This effectively decreases the distance from the backstrap to the trigger and provides a slight cradle that enhances grip security. Two backstrap choices are included.

The polymer grip has a lightly pebbled texture on the front and rear, and the side panels have a sandpapery texture. People who like a very rough grip will not be pleased, but I think it’s great. The sandpaper part can prematurely pill rash guard sleeves.

A reversible magazine release and extended, both-sided slide lock make the TP9 SF not only fully ambidextrous but also friendly for users with smaller hands. I love that the slide lock is within easy reach of my thumb for fast loads.

Distinctive but not showy angles on the slide profile maximize the shooter’s ability to take in visual information when the SF is pointed downrange. The corners have been lopped off to create an angled dome-shaped slide that also saves on weight and bulk when carrying the gun on long days. I find this to be a great advantage for duty use.

Simple Sights

The U-channel rear sight and front white dot sight are drift-adjustable. I’ve not tried it, but they seem tall enough to accommodate a suppressor if a body wanted to use a threaded barrel with the SF. Canik finally came around to the notion of putting replaceable sights on their guns, but oddly enough, these are a mix of Smith & Wesson on the front and Glock on the rear, making shopping for a set of sights challenging.

At $399 MSRP, I don’t expect tritium sights, but it sure would be advantageous, at least on the front. Ergonomically speaking, I like the narrow gap on the rear sight as it makes precision and distance shots more attainable. I have found that I must hold about six inches low at 25 yards to make center-ish hits on a six-inch bullseye, thanks to the combination of sight height and bullet arc. Every gun has some feature that is ultimately a training issue, and the low hold at a distance is the technique that I’ve found I need to use.

Trigger Connoisseurs Rejoice

For skilled shooters, the crowning glory of Canik is their trigger. Its smooth, brief takeup, crisp break, and short reset are as good as those in the most expensive stock guns in the striker-fired market. It’s on par with and has maybe a little shorter reset than Walther’s PDP guns. It has a shorter, cleaner break than HK’s VP series. I know because I use all three. They are all good, but for me, the Canik’s superior ergonomics and price make it the clear winner.

Of course, it is possible to replace the stock trigger as some people have an irresistible compulsion to do. I do not know what brands/models fit because I’ve never felt the need to replace what’s already as good as I’ve had for duty use and teaching. Match shooters who want a feather-light pull can find a way to make that happen with the TP9 series; indeed, their purchases are a small but important part of keeping the accessories industry alive.

Uncommonly Accurate

My training associate and I have sent many rounds downrange through several makes of pistols, trying to best our highest iron-sight scores on the well-known 700 Aggregate, AKA Humbler drill. It’s a 25-yard bullseye challenge. Both of us achieved our best scores on this test with separate Canik SFs. We’ve done the test with numerous Glocks (including ones with accurized barrels), an HK VP9, Lone Wolf LTD, a Sig 1911, and probably others I don’t recall. But the SFs always prevail with accuracy.

I’ve no information on barrel manufacturing or sourcing by Canik. But they’re doing something right in the barrel department and for a lot less money than their competitors.

What’s Not Right

Canik has some issues in the optic mounting arena. Their polymer plate mounting system offers a fit for pretty much every major brand of full-size optic, but it is ineffective at maintaining a tight mount. This has been my experience with a TP9 Elite Combat, as well as with students’ guns I’ve seen. Perhaps to keep the SF in the budget-friendly category, it’s not even sold with an optic-ready slide option. The chunky mount on the Warne rear sight, though it is elevated enough to bear co-witness with an optic, is likely so long as to interfere with an optic cut, so the otherwise nice rear sight would have to go.

I will likely explore this at some point—having my SF’s slide milled and refinished so that I can direct-mount the optic of my choice. Plain-top slides may have been appropriate a few years ago when Canik first released the SF, but an update that offers users a choice of optic mount is overdue in the current era. Optics are here to stay.

All Value, No Hype

The TP9, in its regular package, ships with two 18-round metal body/polymer floorplate mags that are compatible with other guns in the TP9 and Mete lines. In addition to two backstrap choices, Canik generously includes a Kydex holster. The “One” package, no longer advertised, includes only one mag and no holster.

Holster choices are a bit limited for the SF compared to Canik’s shorter-barreled pistols. But they’re out there in every configuration. I found a perfectly suitable belt/paddle holster for general use on eBay. A thorough web search will yield two, at last count, companies that make a Level II or III duty holster for it.

Color choices include tan and black, with other colors occasionally showing up as distributor specials. The finish on my black SF has held up well to holster wear. Gone is the erosion-prone Tenifer finish from the early days of TP9 pistols.

When shopping for this gun, do not confuse it with the SF Elite or SF Elite Combat, the shorter-barreled versions, the latter having a threaded barrel. MSRP on the SF is $499.99. Vigilant shopping can make it yours for just over the $300 mark. Prices for this gun have seen a decrease in the last year; I believe that’s due in part to the increase in demand for optic-ready guns, which this is not. It is still, in my estimation, the best-quality off-the-shelf striker gun available in terms of trigger and barrel quality, and for that, the price is a steal.

The post TP9 SF: The Unsung Hero of the Canik Brand appeared first on The Mag Life.

Since coming onto the scene in 2004, the Px4 Storm has seen its fair share of adoptions and models dedicated to duty and concealed carry, ranging in calibers from 9mm to .40 S&W and .45 ACP. I have always advocated for the virtue of double-action pistols, even over more ubiquitous striker-fired guns. But I am also a fan of the classics, and the Beretta Px4 Storm often escaped my mind.

However, upon reading the news that the Langdon Tactical Beretta Px4 G-SD won Best Competition Gun for 2024 at the Industry Choice Awards, I decided that the time was right to delve into what the Px4 Storm has to offer. I came into the new G-SD model to accomplish that mission and see how a 20-year-old model was receiving renewed praise.

Px4 Storm G-SD: Quirks and Features

Although it is not as well-known as pistols like the Beretta 92 or Cheetah, the Px4 Storm has been out and about since 2004. The development of the G-SD model, in particular, is a collaboration between Langdon Tactical Technology and Beretta toward that twentieth anniversary. Langdon has done excellent work at taking Beretta double actions and giving them just enough juice to yield an improvement over the high standards Beretta holds to their stock handguns.

The Px4 has the benefit of a lighter polymer frame, a familiar double-action mechanism, and a slide-mounted safety/de-cocker like on other Berettas. But the unique rotating barrel is something not seen on most modern pistols and some shooters espouse that it is more mechanically accurate and dampens recoil. Small wonder that LTT picked up this sleeper gun, slicked the action, and cut the slide for a red dot, among other improvements, to turn it into an excellent competition gun.

Beyond the polymer frame, rotating barrel, and double-action hammer-fired mechanism, this model falls into the full-sized handgun category with a 4-inch barrel and double-stack steel-bodied magazines. Ordinarily, the 9mm versions of the Px4 ships with two 17-round magazines; however, the G-SD ships with two flush-fitting 17-rounders and an extended 20-rounder. The matte grey stainless-steel slide has vertical slide serrations at the rear and the front.

Ergonomics and Controls

The Px4 features fish scale texturing at the front and rear of the grip, and the rear can be fattened with the three optional backstraps that come in the box, though I have yet to meet a Px4 Storm owner who has yet to use them. The G-SD, like others in the Storm lineup, has a prominent slide release on the right side along with a reversible magazine release that can be switched to the left side to accommodate left-handed shooters. This release is wider and has a higher profile than the standard release, making for quicker reloads.

The G in the G-SD denotes an ambidextrous G-style decocker without a safety. Thumbing the decocker down would ordinarily lock the decocking lever into a safety position, deactivating the trigger while dropping the hammer on a live round safely. The decocker simply drops the hammer and springs back to the firing position instantly. There is no manual safety to worry about forgetting, but the Px4 comes with a robust firing pin block that requires a trigger pull to discharge the pistol.

The G-SD has a pair of takedown tabs forward of the trigger guard. Pulling them down and pressing the trigger will free the slide for disassembly. The Px4 has a rotating barrel that is turned by a camming block housed under it with the steel guide rod.

The rest of the G-SD constitutes a universal rail for mounting a weapon light and sights, which consist of a drift-adjustable blacked rear notch steel sight and a Hi-Viz orange front blade. Interestingly, this pistol does not come optics-ready from the factory.

The Px4 Storm is a double-action/single-action handgun that can be fired through a long pull of the trigger or alternatively with the hammer cocked by the slide in single-action for a lighter trigger pull. Although the Langdon version is marked by an action job, I noticed the trigger pull and reset to be crisper than other stock Px4 Storm models that I have sampled. In double action, the reset is very audible, although it is all the way out to its resting position. But the trigger pull stacks and is smooth throughout, breaking at 6.5 lbs. on my Lyman trigger scale. In single action, there is 1/3 of an inch of play before a light break of 4 lbs. 4 oz.

On the Range with the Px4 Storm G-SD

On first inspection, the G-SD presented itself as a mild upgrade to a design that has changed little since its inception. The Px4 Storm is a known performer, but being a polymer-framed hammer-fired pistol makes it an anomaly. It is even more so in recent years with the advent of the micro-compact 9mm and the trend toward optics-ready handguns. But it might be best left to the experts at Langdon to go whole-hog on upgrades on a bit-by-bit basis rather than Beretta trying with measures that will please some and not satisfy others.

Accuracy Potential

With that out of the way, the G-SD is a solid choice as a stock option and as a basis for the upgraded LTT model. I began using the G-SD as a bullet launcher to collect velocity data across different types of ammunition before going all in to run a higher round count and look for assets and liabilities with the platform itself. I ultimately ran over 350 rounds of 9mm Luger ammunition through the G-SD without an issue. My primary loads were Igman 124-grain FMJ target rounds, but the Px4 digested its fair share of jacketed hollow points ranging from Barnes Tac XPD 115-grain +P to Sig Sauer Elite Performance 147-grain subsonic rounds. I am pleased to report that I had no failures to fire or function. Despite the variety of grain weight, all ammunition was shot close to the point of aim.

A Reliable Shooter

It was not hard for the sights to fall in place quickly as the Px4 Storm has plenty of real estate to hold onto for recoil control. As I shot drills with the Px4 Storm, I paid attention to the recoil impulse—especially compared to other 9mm pistols I had in inventory. The Px4 is a fast shooter but the cycling of the pistol felt slower and softer. In fact, you can feel the twisting of the barrel as the pistol recoils.

It reminded me of shooting a full-sized 1911 in some ways because the lower pressure .45 ACP round, while it generates more recoil thanks to its heavier bullet, never cycles with the sharpness of a similar pistol in 9mm. Against my venerable CZ-75B, I shot just as well with the Px4, and the former has similar recoil despite being a lighter gun compared to the all-steel CZ.

The Px4 was able to keep up, shooting past 50 yards on steel silhouettes. It was a hoot to shoot, and in terms of ergonomics, the story is mostly good. This double stack has a thicker grip that helps distribute recoil across the palm, which makes it even easier to work with compared to micro-compacts and many double-stacks that have a more pointed grip to them.

A Few Downsides

However, there is always a trade-off with double stacks. In the case of the G-SD, that could come down to trigger reach. With the hammer de-cocked, the trigger is fully reset. A good double-action trigger pull is best managed for most of us by pulling the trigger with the crease of the index finger rather than the pad. If your fingers are not long enough for the grip to reach the trigger, running it with the pad can move the muzzle as you shoot and make it harder overall to squeeze the trigger. My larger hands fit the Px4 Storm just right, and I would imagine anyone with an above-average-sized hand would be well served, but smaller-handed shooters might have trouble.

The sights are more than ample, and there is plenty of real estate to get a grip on the slide, particularly using both the cocking serrations and the ambidextrous decocker to do the job. Slide-mounted decocker/safeties have their critics. Some shooters who use an overhand method for racking the slide can accidentally decock the pistol and put the handgun in the safe position when they intend to keep shooting.

The geometry of the G-decocker keeps it stationary in hand on the rack, and if it is tripped, you can simply squeeze the trigger again as there is no safety position. The extended magazine release button is easy to hit, and the slide release is intuitive to actuate, even with my short thumbs. However, I was a bit surprised that the G-SD did not go with the ambidextrous slide release, where a growing list of manufacturers are updating their models to be fully ambidextrous.

The Beretta Px4 Storm G-SD: Is There a Bottom Line?

Overall, the double-action pistol platform is not as popular today as it should be. The long pull of the trigger and hammer-fired action lends itself well to safety, whether it is while carrying or presenting from and to the holster. Of course, they can be carried that way without the need for a manual safety, so you are always ready to shoot. It can be argued that the Beretta Px4 Storm arrived too late. But if you are looking at the strengths of a double-action pistol but want the benefit of a lighter polymer gun, too, the Px4 is an obvious first pick, and the G-SD model is probably the best version to get.

The competitor who is accustomed to a double action should also have a look at the Px4 thanks to its softer shooting rotating barrel alone, and the LTT version can be built to suit most preferences. For the rest of us, the G-SD is a well-built option and would be a great home defense or duty option. However, that has to be tempered by competitive options. The Type G Px4 Storm is nothing new, and the minor updates to the design that constitute a stock G-SD do not go far enough in the age of the red dot and ambidextrous options.

The post The New Beretta Px4 Storm G-SD: A Range Review appeared first on The Mag Life.

It might explain why I just acquired a pistol that was released way back in 1988: the Glock 19. Why in the world would I get a pistol that was released so long ago? Aren’t there newer designs that are more trendy and modern? Can the Glock 19 really hang with the younger kids? And how many Generations of the Glock 19 are there?

I’ll answer that last question right now; as this is written, Glock is on the fifth generation of their Model 19. Each generation offers features that add to the last generation. I won’t bore you by rehashing each generation, but we’re going to take a look at the differences between the Generation 3 (Gen 3) and the Gen 5 pistols.

A Big Splash

In 1986, the Glock 17 made possibly the biggest splash the handgun market has ever seen. If there was a bigger upset, I can’t recollect it.

Glock brought many revolutionary concepts to the table, which undoubtedly stemmed from the fact that he wasn’t a “gun guy.” He set out to design a pistol for the Austrian military with no preconceived notions, and I believe that’s what set the Glock apart from other pistols.

People either loved or hated the Glock 17, and that’s still pretty much true today. Even by 1980s standards, the Glock 17 was a pretty large handgun. In response to that criticism, Glock chopped a little off the barrel and shortened the grip to a more compact size, and voila, the Glock 19 was born. When this happened, I suspect that the heavens parted and angels sang, as it was an instant hit. Slightly smaller and lighter than the Glock 17, it’s just easier to carry.

Wide Professional and Civilian Use

In addition to millions of civilian users, many law enforcement agencies and military units still use the Glock 19. These include the US Army Special Forces, SFOD-D (Delta), Army Rangers, Navy SEALs, FBI, and CIA.

Evidently, despite being out since 1988, the Glock 19 is still monumentally relevant in today’s world, and that does not appear to be changing any time soon.

Those organizations have access to any firearms that they want, and they specifically went with the Glock 19, which says quite a bit about the platform. It’s a very simple handgun, and simple often equates to better.

Gen 3 vs Gen 5

Let’s examine some of the differences between the two generations. I’ll tell you now that there isn’t really anything earth-shatteringly different between them. However, there are some subtle differences that are immediately apparent.

That said, I do like the changes that the Gen 5 Glock 19 incorporates. There are things that the Gen 5 has that the Gen 3 does not.

Finger Grooves

Shooters will notice that the finger grooves on the Gen 3 pistols are not included on the Gen 5 pistols. This is generally seen as a positive thing, as many shooters expressed unbridled hatred toward the finger grooves. They never bothered me, and I found them to be functional and helpful on the Glocks that I’ve owned over the years. But then, I have very average, medium-sized hands, which is what the Glock grips are mostly geared for.

Personally, I like the straight front strap a little bit more because it feels closer to the classic Glock 17 and 19 that I owned so many years ago when they first came out. Further, Glock now uses their RTF (Rough Texture Finish), which is a decent gripping surface that helps to ensure a grip under slippery conditions.

Flared Mag Well

Gen 5 Glock 19s now have a flared magazine well, which facilitates faster reloads under stress. Granted, it’s subtle and not wildly flared like some competition pistols, but it’s enough to be beneficial when doing high-speed drills or engaging bad guys in a firefight, which is a big win for LEOs.

Aside from delivering faster reloads, that outward flare at the bottom of the grip helps to enhance the grip a little bit. It offers a sort of little ridge at the bottom of the grip that I find appealing. Again, the flare is subtle, but it’s there.

I find this feature to be slightly superior to the Gen 3 non-flared mag well.

Widened Rear Sight

The rear sight notch has been widened so that there’s more daylight on either side of the front sight base when it’s centered in the sight. It’s not drastic, and you might not have even noticed had I not mentioned it. But it’s designed to be a little more forgiving for speed/combat shooting. Of course, Glock still uses the “goal post” white outline, which I like. Many shooters hate them, but I see nothing wrong with them (other than the fact that they’re polymer).

New Mags

Beginning with the Gen 5 guns, Glock started using orange followers in their magazines. These function just like all the other mags, but the orange follower is nice. It serves as a clearer indication of an empty magazine, helping shooters discern an empty mag from a malfunction. Also, as the follower moves through the magazine, whether it’s loading or unloading, the orange follower shows up through the witness holes on the back of the magazine very well.

From my experience in training and shooting classes, Glock magazines have proven to be the very best in terms of durability and reliability. No other magazines can beat them, and I’ve seen them take some serious abuse and keep running strong.

Ambidextrous Slide Stop/Release

I find the Gen 5’s ambidextrous slide stop/release to be a slight advantage over not having one, but it’s far from a deal breaker. It’s nice to have, but since I’m right-handed, it’s not overly necessary. Still, it makes the pistol more versatile for lefties and the times when we’re shooting with our offhand. The magazine release can be switched to either side.

This is a major win for left-handed shooters and those of us who like to train with our weak hand. I’m not sure why it took Glock so long to make this upgrade, but I won’t complain too much.

Forward Serrations

Initially, the Gen 5 Glocks didn’t have forward serrations on the slide, which left some to be desired. While they are useful, I rather like the front of the slide to be “slick,” so from an aesthetic sense, I’d prefer they not be there. Of course, they make press checks easier, and they also offer more intuitive slide manipulations for weak-handed shooters, so they have a function. The Gen 3, of course, does not have them at all. It’s not a deal breaker for me either way.

Backstraps

While the Gen 3’s back strap is plain, the Gen 5 comes with four added back strap options. There are a couple to make the grip larger and two that not only make it larger but also add a beavertail. Many people have observed that adding the beavertail allows the shooter to get a higher grip on the pistol without running the risk of slide bite.

Personally, I just run it without any of the backstraps added, giving me the smallest grip size possible. Given that my hands are medium-sized at best, I like grips that are small. Even so, the 19’s grip is about as large as I care to go on a pistol.

Dual Recoil Spring

While Gen 3 Glocks utilize a single recoil spring, the Gen 5 series takes advantage of a dual recoil spring. Both seem to do a nice job of dampening the recoil of the 9mm cartridge. I do like the metal construction that the dual spring uses, and that one gets the nod from me. Plus, it would be no trouble to order one of the latest recoil springs and pop it into your Gen 3 (or any generation) Glock.

Trigger

Glock triggers notoriously vary from very good to mushy and gritty. The triggers of the Gen 5 guns that I’ve handled have been very good. Mine has the usual take-up, followed by the wall and a crisp break without much creep. I actually like it.

In my experience, the Gen 3 triggers aren’t terrible but don’t seem quite as consistent as the newer triggers. I think Glock stepped up its game as far as triggers are concerned. I’ve never really had too much of a gripe about Glock triggers, although I know that opinions vary greatly on the subject. My philosophy is that I need to adapt myself to whichever trigger I happen to be using. That means dry fire and live fire practice.

Finish

While the Gen 3 Model 19 has the Tenifer finish, the Gen 5 uses a more durable nDLC finish. Glock states that this is an improvement and that it will resist scratching and corrosion, as well as help the pistol function in adverse conditions. So far, the finish is living up to its reputation. I’ve been carrying the Gen 5 G19 in a Kydex holster, and normally, that would cause wear on the slide of a pistol, marring the finish. However, the Gen 5 model is shrugging it off and still looks like new.

The nDLC finish has a deeper black appearance while looking slightly glossy. It’s not shiny, mind you, but it’s just a little glossier than previous slide finishes.

At The Range

We retired to the range to compare both pistols with live fire. As expected, reliability was perfect. We ran Nosler 9mm ASP 115-grain JHP, Nosler Defense T-BND 124-grain, Federal 124-grain HST +P, and a few other types of ammo through both Glocks, and they worked perfectly.

Accuracy was virtually the same with both the Gen 3 and the Gen 5 models, and we couldn’t discern a noticeable difference in either. Honestly, despite the Marksman barrel in the Gen 5, both pistols can shoot more accurately than we can, so there’s no way we’re going to shoot them to their maximum accuracy anyway.

The two pistols’ recoil was also very similar, which is not surprising. I did prefer the Gen 5 without the finger grooves, but that’s just me.

In Summation

Is one generation drastically superior to the other? I would say no. However, the Gen 5 does have some attractive features that the Gen 3 does not. If I were restricted to using a Gen 3 Glock 19, would I feel disadvantaged? Not at all.

While there might be more accurate pistols out there, the Glock’s attributes, taken as a whole, make it a superior pistol.

Further, many people in the gun culture still use the Glock 19 as a yardstick with which to compare newly introduced pistols despite it being around since 1988. And yes, this pistol can hang with any of the newer pistols that are being introduced.

So, is the Glock Gen 5 Model 19 the best version yet? I think so. Each generation becomes a little more refined and well thought out, and I have to say the extra features that are found on the Gen 5 set it at the front of the pack. If I had an older generation of a Glock 19, would I run out and sell it to get the Gen 5? I wouldn’t call you crazy if you did. The accuracy didn’t seem drastically different between the generations, but the Gen 5 does have great features that I like. Overall, it’s a great pistol.

The post The Glock 19 Gen 3 vs. Gen 5 Comparison: Are They Really Any Different? appeared first on The Mag Life.

When my buddy asked me if I wanted to check out his ACR, I didn’t want to be impolite, so I picked it up to give it its due attention. Upon shouldering the rifle, I noted that it felt extremely…right. It just felt good in that it balanced really well and pointed so naturally. It was pretty neat.

The pistol grip was comfortable, as were the forward handguard and the stock. All told, this rifle had extraordinary handling characteristics. Okay, I must admit that someone had done his homework when designing this rifle.

Operation & Features

The ACR is a short-stroke piston-driven system with a rotating bolt similar to the AR-15. When the action is worked, the bolt moves through the receiver with amazing smoothness. In fact, I had to cycle the action several times just to enjoy that smoothness.

From what I can gather, the ACR (Adaptive Combat Rifle) came into existence to nudge the AR-15/M16 out of its role as the US general issue combat rifle. And it does bring some novel approaches to the table. However, does the ACR succeed in making the M16/M4 obsolete? Let’s see.

This rifle weighs a little over 8.5 pounds, so it’s heftier than a standard AR15. This weight, though, does give the rifle a very solid, reassuring feel when the shooter is holding it. It also soaks up recoil.

A useful aspect is that the rifle can be field stripped and the barrel switched out in seconds. If the user desires, he can swap to different barrel lengths or configurations without much frustration. I can’t say the same is true for a standard AR.

The Stock

The stock deserves special mention for its adjustability. It can be adjusted to seven different positions, offering a lot of versatility. It’s far more comfortable than it appears in photos. The comb is also adjustable and can be raised and lowered to accommodate various heights depending on your needs. Finally, the stock can be folded over to the side of the receiver, making this an extremely compact rifle. All in all, it’s one of the best stocks I’ve ever used on a plastic black rifle.

Magazines

Much to my surprise, the Bushmaster ACR utilizes AR-15/M16 magazines, which makes me happy because they are ridiculously abundant and inexpensive. There’s something to be said for being able to stock up on piles of magazines for one’s choice of weaponry. Plus, with the various platforms that take these nearly universal magazines, they can be used for a number of our weapons.

Controls

Most of the controls on the ACR are ambidextrous, including the magazine release, bolt release, and selector switch. However, the charging handle is not ambidextrous and is located above the hand guard on the left side, which resembles the charging handles of the Heckler & Koch MP5 and HK91/93 series of weapons.

The location for the charging handle isn’t bad, and it works well enough. Fortunately, it does not reciprocate when the weapon is firing.

The magazine release and the bolt release both work well and smoothly, so there are no complaints there, and they are easy to reach.

Pistol Grip and Trigger

Some thought went into designing the pistol grip, which was very comfortable and did its job well. It will fit a wide range of hands and fill the hand well.

The trigger on the Bushmaster ACR is crisp. I wouldn’t call it light, but overall, it was very good. It was superior to some of the AR15s that I’ve used and equal to others. This makes sense since some of the components used in the ACR are the same as in the AR15 trigger group.

Range Time

We didn’t have the time or chance to wring out every ounce of accuracy with the ACR on this particular range trip. We did, however, ring some steel, and out to 100 yards, the ACR did just fine.

Given the rifle’s substantial weight, the recoil was rather tame. The action was extremely smooth, and it was pleasant to fire. Reliability was 100%, which we expected.

The rifle we tested had no iron sights; however, a Sig Sauer red dot sight was mounted on top of the Picatinny rail that spanned the receiver and most of the barrel. That is a huge asset for mounting optics and all manner of iron sights.

The RDS allowed us to engage targets at medium range quickly and efficiently. The Sig RDS utilizes a 2-MOA dot, so a certain amount of precision can be achieved. Although such scopes aren’t intended to be very precise, they’re intended to allow fast engagement at CQB distances, and they do it well.

In Summation

Does the ACR render the M16/M4/AR15 obsolete? Despite what many want to believe, I don’t think it does. Yes, it’s a cool rifle with some great features. The stock is outstanding and very adjustable, but the controls, while good, don’t seem to be placed well enough to knock the M16’s controls out of first place as far as ergonomics are concerned. Further, the ACR is a little heavier than the M16/M4, and while that might help to reduce the recoil, it still provides troops with a heavier rifle to tote around, which saps energy.

All in all, this is one very modular rifle. It can mount any optics that you’d care to name, given its expansive Picatinny rail that spans not only the top of the receiver but also most of the barrel. It shoots smoothly and accurately, and rapid hits can be landed on the target.

Am I sold on the Bushmaster ACR? Well, it’s a nice rifle, but I’ll hang onto my AR-15, thank you very much. I guess I’m just an old dinosaur who resists change. On the other hand, the Stoner-designed AR-15 has been getting it done since the 1960s, so there’s nothing wrong with that. That said, the ACR will no doubt appeal to the younger generation.

The post Bushmaster ACR Platform Review: A Fun Battle Gun appeared first on The Mag Life.

Through official channels, Gaston Glock heard about the Austrian Armed Forces’ request for a new handgun. The Ministry of Defence released a list of 17 criteria. Glock assembled a group of European handgun experts from various disciplines.

These were high-level competitors and a mix of military and police shooters. Glock took three months to develop a prototype, and in 1982, the company submitted several samples for testing. The pistol was named the Glock 17, not because it held 17 rounds in the magazine but because it was Glock’s 17th patent.

Glock won the contract, and the Glock 17 became the weapon of choice for the Austrian military. After that, Glock quickly rose to prominence and dominance. Over the next few years, they slowly captured the American police and European military markets and slithered their way into the hands of Special Operators around the world. Two even made their way to my hands many years ago.

The Glock 17: Glock’s Duty Gun

The Glock 17 remains one of Glock’s most popular handguns and is currently in its fifth generation. My Glock 17 is a Gen 4 MOS model and was my first Glock and first optics-ready gun. I only purchased it for the optics-ready capability because I wanted to try red dots. The Glock 17 chambers the 9mm cartridge and occupies the duty or full-sized genre of handguns.

Barrel Length – 4.49 inches
Overall Length – 7.95 inches
Width – 1.26 inches
Weight – 24.87 ounces
Caliber – 9mm
Capacity – 17

Generation 4 Glocks come with a Glock rail system, which resembles a Picatinny rail. It’s a single-slot rail and might require a specialized key to mount accessories and lights. Glock’s popularity ensures you will always find lights, lasers, and cup holders that easily fit the Glock rail. Further, the Gen 4 models introduced a reversible magazine catch that can be swapped to the other side for left-handed operation. It’s also much larger than previous generations.

The Gen 4 system has a modular backstrap system I lost years ago. I think the Glock is thick enough, and I don’t want to add extra girth to the gun. Inside, we get a dual recoil spring assembly that supposedly reduces recoil and expands the lifespan of the recoil system. For what it’s worth, I don’t notice a big difference in recoil between the Gen 3 and Gen 4 Glocks, however.

The MOS System

MOS stands for “Modular Optics System.” Glock released optics-ready guns that utilize a plate system to mount various optics. Each plate has a different footprint, and you can swap it to accommodate whatever optic you might have or want. It’s not a bad idea, but it has flaws.

First, the plates are super thin. There isn’t a ton of thread holding the optic to the gun. Plates also make the optic sit higher than direct milling.

We also stack tolerances by mounting plate to gun and optic to plate, leaving more room for problems.

Plus, the optics plates Glock sends from the factory kind of suck. They rust, are prone to breakage, and are sometimes warped and bent, creating all sorts of issues. It’s not all bad, and I’m not trying to make it sound horrid, but there are flaws in the design. My Glock 17 hasn’t had issues with the MOS, but I don’t use my Glock 17 for anything but testing Glock stuff, optics, etc.

The Glock on The Range

The Glock 17 is boring but an absolutely amazing firearm. It’s easy to say that Glocks became famous because they were cheap, but in reality, they completely changed the handgun world.

These days, every other gun from every other company is attempting to imitate Glock because it works. We’ll start the review by talking about reliability. I don’t have an earthly idea of how many rounds this gun has fired. It’s a lot, but I’ve never had anything other than ammo-related malfunctions.

The gun hasn’t jammed, failed, or found any way not to go bang when I pull the trigger. That’s one of the biggest selling points of the Glock series. They are remarkably reliable. They worked in the worst conditions and just kept going, and this Glock 17 is no different.

Blasting Fast

The Glock 17 Gen 4 series has very moderate recoil that’s comfortable and controllable. It’s a full-sized gun chucking 9mm rounds, so it recoils how you’d expect. The weapon is very easy to control and easy to keep on target. Tracking the red dot between shots is easy, and you can keep the slide running while the dot stays a blur.

I’m sadly out of practice, but I achieved some fairly quick times on various drills—quick for my current handgun skill level. I accomplished a sub-3-second Bill Drill for a Safariland holster with an ALS device. I worked my time down steadily, and I maintain that practice.

I can drive it to less than 2.5 seconds and maybe get that sub-2-second Bill Drill I’ve always wanted. Drills like the El Presidente are easy fodder for the Glock 17, and the gun doesn’t mind if you go fast.

It’s a straight shooter capable of excellent accuracy overall. Stock Glock triggers are fine, and it’s more about grip than trigger pull to get acceptable accuracy, anyway. At 25-yard, A-zones are terribly difficult with a red dot. Within 15 yards, you should be able to draw and hit an A-zone in less than 1.5 seconds. If I trot back to 50 yards, I can consistently hit a 10-inch gong.

Getting a Grip

The Glock series has always been a step behind when it comes to ergonomics. That’s likely why so many companies exist to improve Glock’s ergonomics. The big Gen 4 button is a nice change. The mags don’t always drop free, and factory OEM models are the only ones that mostly drop free. It takes a bit of a thrust sometimes to convince the

I despised the Glock slide release because my thumbs would pin it down. A class and some personal instruction from Rick Hogg of War Hogg Tactical helped me change my grip slightly, and that’s no longer a problem.

The Glock Gen 4 series has some slide bite I don’t care for. They’ve rectified this with the Gen 5 series of guns. It doesn’t always occur, and I’m sure I can train myself not to grip quite so high. If I didn’t mind the extra grip width, I could throw on the rear beavertail.

I can nitpick things like the finger grooves, which I admittedly dislike, but they don’t inhibit the gun’s reliability. Glock could make some improvements, but they are ultimately very minor improvements.

Coming Around

My contrarian nature makes it hard to admit, but there is a reason why Glock is so well-represented among people who use guns for a living. It’s not just because it’s cheap; it’s because it’s a solid, well-made, and reliable service pistol. The Glock 17 was the firstborn and still one of the most popular pistols in the world. If you want a gun that works, then Glock is for you. Now, if they’d only release the MOS3 guns to the average Joe…

The post The Glock 17: The Gun That Started It All appeared first on The Mag Life.

KE Arms didn’t invent the polymer lower. In fact, the origin of their lower traces back to a company called Calvary Arms, which is no longer in business. Cavalry Arms produced polymer lowers from 2000 until it closed in 2010. In 2003, it was more or less mastered with the CAV-15 MK III. When Cavalry Arms closed, they sold their proprietary information to GWACS.

The weapon, lower, and information ended at KE Arms, with a vengeful GWACS later suing the company. That’s a story unto itself. It’s full of drama, an anti-gun infiltrator, and more. It’s a long story, but it seems like KE Arms pulled ahead, and in 2023, the Judge vacated the claim filed by GWACs.

The KP-9 – How It Works

Historically, the problem with polymer AR-15 lowers comes from the portion where the receiver extension attaches to the lower. This area often breaks. Companies like ATI have used metal and created hybrid lowers to try to prevent this. KE Arms went an entirely different route. They used an injection-molded design that doesn’t stop at the lower.

They mold the stock, receiver extension, and pistol grip, which are made of 30% glass-filled nylon polymer. The molds create two halves of the lower, which are sonically welded together. I didn’t know anything about glass-filled nylon, so I looked it up. Adding glass to nylon obviously makes it a bit tougher.

Combining the two also creates a material with better dimensional stability, increased wear resistance, and better temperature resistance. Making the stock, buffer, tube, and beyond out of nothing but polymer eliminates potential weaknesses.

The benefits of a polymer lower receiver are a lower weight and potentially a lower price point. The receivers on the KE Arms website retail at various prices, depending on the configurations. I purchased mine for $59.99. That’s not a bad price for a partially stripped lower, a stock, and a pistol grip.

Partially complete means it comes with the ejector and magazine release installed. It also comes with proprietary takedown pins, selector detent, and the roll pin that retains the buffer detent. Other than that, I just ordered the KP-9’s parts kit to finish it out.

Going Over the Lower

The lower uses a simple straight blowback system and requires a carbine spring and a heavy buffer. The KP-9 comes with an ejector, which can be adjusted if necessary. This can be handy for tuning the gun for reliable and proper ejection with your upper and BCG. The KP-9 utilizes Glock magazines and has a flared magazine well for those quick reloads. It’s almost as good as a Colt SMG magazine lower.

The KP-9 uses the M16A1 length of pull. At 13 inches, it’s perfect for the vast majority of shooters. You might hem and haw about an adjustable LOP, but 13 inches will work with most shooters without a problem. In the end, we get an M16-style butt plate with a little extra texture. The stock also features a few sling points and options.

The stock has QD cups, so installing a QD sling design is possible. There is also a slot that allows you to run a sling through the stock, or you can attach an M-LOK sling point here since the slot is an M-LOK spec design.

In terms of weight savings, I weighed the KP-9 against a dedicated Aero Precision EPC lower, both with identical buffers. The KP-9 weighs one pound and fifteen ounces, while the standard lower weighs two pounds and eight ounces. That’s a decent little bit of weight savings. You can feel the weight savings, and the gun feels front-heavy. I used a Mutt AR-9 upper with a rifle-length barrel, STNGR handguard, and standard upper.

The takedown pins are nonstandard and do not attach to the lower like a typical lower. These are fully removable and remain in the lower via detents. It’s odd, but it works, and my advice is not to lose your pins.

To The Range

Ergonomically, the lower has quite a few high points. It’s lightweight, and the stock length is just perfect. I find the comb comfy and perfect for using optics. One thing I’m not a huge fan of is the pistol grip. The grip is fine, but where it meets the stock annoys me. It’s annoying, but it doesn’t detract from my shooting ability.

It took me a while to get used to the safety. It doesn’t click into place. If you’ve shot standard ARs, this might short-circuit your brain just a bit. Again, it’s not a problem but an ergonomic oddity. The KP-9 excels when it comes to the safety. It’s a clever, low-profile, ambidextrous design that works insanely well. I ran the KP-9 PCC both left and right-handed.

While I looked like a shaved ape trying to manage the gun left-handed, I could use it left-handed. The flared lower also helps you manage quick reloads and seems to take the abuse well, especially if you are trying to run the gun left-handed and slamming the magazine into the magwell like an idiot.

The included Mil-Spec trigger functions well. It’s light and short, and the rest is extremely chunky. I don’t ride the reset, but I can hear and feel it as I shoot. Another noticeable noise is the spring reciprocating with the buffer. It’s loud but does not affect the weapon’s reliability; it’s just somewhat annoying.

Recoil seems to be a little less violent than that of most other straight blowback 9mm AR rifles. Maybe the plastic slightly flexes, much like a polymer frame handgun? It’s tough to say, but there is a slight, noticeable difference.

Going Hard

I’ve been using and shooting the KP-9 for several months now. It’s been perfect and reliable with all types of ammo. I had concerns, especially about the takedown pins. They’ve yet to fail me. The pins holding the trigger in haven’t failed or seemingly wallowed out the receiver. It might be polymer, but it’s tough, and this might be the only real way to produce an entirely polymer frame lower receiver.

KE Arms has it worked out quite well. While I can’t adjust the stock or switch the pistol grip, I can get an almost complete AR 9 lower for $60, and that’s tough to beat. If you’re on the fence about polymer lowers, check out KE Arms; they do it right.

The post The KE Arms KP-9: Poly Power appeared first on The Mag Life.