One Adam-12, One Adam-12, End Of Watch

Rest in Peace Officer Malloy.

Word went out yesterday that Martin Milner passed away at the age of 83. Milner was the star of one of my all-time favorite shows, Adam-12. As a kid in the mid-1960's I caught every episode (in glorious black & white). At the time Adam-12 was as close to reality TV as we could get, and the producer Jack Webb's claim that the stories were lifted right out of the LAPD case files made things even more believable to this impressionable teenager.

Milner was already a seasoned acting professional before taking on the role of Officer Pete Malloy. His career started in 1947 in the movie Life With Father, playing the teenage son of William Powell and Irene Dunne. He went on to star in a number of highly regarded movies such as Sands of Iwo Jima, Operation Pacific, Gunfight At The OK Corral, Dial M for Murder, Mister Roberts and Sweet Smell of Success. Milner's first TV role was in a 1950 episode of The Lone Ranger. Looking at his filmography it's clear he had one heck of a work ethic and was never idle for very long.

Milner's breakout role was as co-star of the iconic TV series Route 66, running from 1960 - 1964. Three years later producer/director Jack Webb of Dragnet fame picked Milner for the starring role in his reality-based TV show about the LAPD.

By all reports Milner was a hard working, stand-up guy who who defied Hollywood convention, enjoyed family life and remained married to his wife for 58 years. That alone is one hell of an achievement!

Here's a montage from the first episode of Adam-12, where Pete Malloy is straightening out his new rookie partner, Officer Jim Reed. Nothing like starting off on the right foot.

Rest in Peace Martin, you've earned it.

Stay sharp!

- Brian

The Beretta M9 Is A Great Service Pistol, So Get Over It

I recently traded into a Beretta 92FS pistol. This is the commercial version of the pistol that 30 years ago became the US military's M9 service pistol. It has been almost 15 years since I handled or shot a Beretta 92/M9 and I figured I needed to reacquaint myself with the platform.

Beretta 92FS, the precursor to the M9 service pistol

I had the good fortune to be on active duty in the mid-80's when we traded in our M1911A1 pistols for the M9. In fact, by the time our units at Fort Lewis, WA received the first issue of M9 pistols around 1987 I'd had almost a decade of experience shooting the military issue M1911A1. I feel I'm in a perfect position to compare and contrast the two pistols

Let's start with the M1911A1, or the 'yankee fist' as many refered to it. I won't drag the readers down the well worn path that is the history of the M1911. We'll just cover the basics: 

• Invented by John M. Browning and considered by many to be his best handgun design
• Adopted by the US military in 1911 (hence the military desigination 'M1911') to replace the venerable (but badly out-dated) Colt SAA revolver 
• First saw wide battlefield service with US forces in WWI
• The design was modified in the 1920's based on input from Soldiers who used it during the Great War. The resultant pistol was dubbed the M1911A1 and it remained the standard US service pistol right up into the 1980's
• During WWII over 1 million M1911A1's were produced by Colt, Remington Rand, Ithica, Union Signal and Switch and Singer
• At the close of WWII the War Department decided it had more than enough M1911A1s to meet service demand and closed down the military production lines. The pistols produced during the war years continued to serve as the US standard service pistol through the Korean and Vietnam wars
• The M1911A1 was officially replaced as the US military's standard service pistol in 1985 when the Beretta M9 was adopted

M1911A1 in WWII factory packaging

I believe the M1911A1 was the best semi-auto service pistol in use anywhere in the world right up through the 1960's and the Vietnam War. No other service pistol could match it for reliability and knock-down power. But by the early 1970's it's design had been surpassed by a host of improvements in handgun technology. In addition the US Military's stock of general issue M1911's were simply worn out. After almost 30 years of service and three wars (WWII, Korea and Vietnam) the pistols were old, rattly and unreliable. Nobody shot them well. The sights were awful and the triggers even worse. By 1980 the venerable old warhorse was serving way past its retirement date and it was time for something new and improved.

Next let's look at the Beretta M9 pistol:

• Based on the Beretta 92, designed in 1975
• Saw initial but limited use with the US military in the hands of Navy SEALS starting in the late 1970's
• The Beretta 92 won the 1979 Joint Services Small Arms Program (JSSAP) competition, beating out a number of competitors from Colt, S&W, SIG, H&K, Browning and a few others. The USAF ran the JSSAP competition and the Army griped about the outcome (they really didn't want to buy an Italian pistol) so the results were shelved
• In 1983 Congress put the Army in charge of a new selection program and told them to try again. Both the Beretta 92 and the SIG 226 beat all other competitors (including the M1911A1) and tied for the lead. Beretta submitted a much lower contract bid and won, fair and square
• Both S&W and Ruger bitched about the outcome of the 1983 trials so in 1989 Congress ordered a new trial. Once again the Beretta 92 (now designated the M9) came out the clear winner
• The M9 platform has seen almost continuous combat from 2003 to today, racking up an impressive combat record in the hands of all branches of the US Military

The Beretta M9 as adopted by the US Military in 1985 and still serving today

So in three separate trials the Beretta 92/M9 beat all comers, including the beloved M1911A1. The DoD specified a minimum 8,000 round service life in the 1984 trials, yet in tests the M9 has shown to have a service life in excess of 30,000 rounds. The M1911A1 'control' pistols used by the DoD during the trials failed long before that point, most not even making it to the minimum 8,000 rounds. Yet folks in the shooting community and legions of Gunstore Commandos - and a good number of our Soldiers, Marines, Airmen and Sailors - bitch constantly about how the Beretta is in some way substandard.

Let's look at the gripes:

1. The Beretta family and/or the Italian government bribed Congress to adopt the pistol. This silly rumor has been kicking around since the mid-1980s and it's been investigated to death. While I don't discount the willingness of an occasional Congresscritter to take cash under the table to do a deal (Dan Rostenkowski, anyone?) this specific claim has been proven baseless. The pistol won the competition on its merits (and low bid price), not because Italians were delivering bags full of lira to the Congressional office buildings
2. The SIG P226 really won the competition but got undercut at the last minute when their best and final bid price was leaked to Beretta. Again, no basis in fact. SIG's US representative, SACO, blew the bid process by refusing to lower contract prices on things like magazines and spare parts, making their bid significantly higher than Beretta's
3. It's a 9mm. Yes it is, but don't blame Beretta. The DoD specified before the competition started that any pistol selected would be in the 9mm caliber. Beretta would have been happy to build pistols in 50 Action Express if that's what the competition requirements called for
4. It's got a weird trigger.  Really? What's weird about it? From the late 1970s through the 1990's the DA/SA trigger design was all the rage, and was considered a far better and far safer design than the M1911A1's single action design. S&W, Colt, Ruger, SIG, H&K, Walther, and a host of other manufacturers made millions of pistols using the DA/SA design, and EVERYBODY wanted one. The Beretta trigger happens to be one of the best DA/SA designs ever brought to market. It was only after Glock came along with the trigger with the little thingey in the middle that folks began to change
5. It's got a weird safety. The biggest gripe the 1911 partisans and Internet Commandos have about the M9 safety is that it's nothing like the M1911A1. Well OK, I agree - the M9 safety is nothing like the 1911's. That's because the M9's safety is better. There, I said it. As early as the late 1950's (when the Army started making noises about looking for a new pistol) it was recognized that the M1911A1 safety design was outdated and dangerous. That's why the Army mandated carrying the pistol hammer down but without a round in the chamber. Plus the safety lever was set up for right handed shooters only. The Beretta's ambidextrous decocker system provides an absolutely safe method of lowering the hammer on a loaded chamber and permitting perfectly safe carry with a round in the chamber. Far better than the M1911A1
6. It's got an open slide. The Beretta's open slide design was touted as an advantage over the competitor's fully enclosed slides. I remember sitting in on meetings where we were briefed on the benefits of the new pistol and the open slide design was praised for it's improved barrel cooling and resistance to crud build-up inside the slide. The resistance to getting clogged with sand was particularly emphasized. OK, in retrospect there may not be any real benefit other than reduced weight, but reports from the sandbox are that as long as you do routine maintenance on the pistol, to include removing any sand or grit that may have slipped through the slide and down into the dust cover, the pistols are as reliable and run just fine
7. It's got a fat grip. Yes it does, but it's not that fat. In fact, compared to something like the Glock 17 the grip is actually quite comfortable and manageable. I have medium-large hands and I find the grip quite comfortable. The real issue with the grip is the long reach to the DA trigger for those with medium or small hands. This can be alleviated by carrying the pistol with the safety off and the hammer cocked to the first notch, which brings the trigger back further in the trigger guard. Of course the Army frowns on this practice but if you are a civilian it's a perfectly safe way to carry the pistol.   
8. The slides break, killing people. Early in the service life of the pistol the Navy SEALS experienced precisely three (3) broken slides. On two occasions the slides broke completely into two pieces, with the rear section smacking the shooters in the face. One high speed-low drag operator suffered a broken tooth. That's the full extent of the human devastation caused by broken slides. Investigation revealed these were high round count pistols that were shooting waaaaaay out of spec high pressure ammo. When the Army heard about the incident they took three civilian spec 92SB pistols they had been testing and shot them until the slides failed. One pistol's slide let go at just over 20,000 rounds and the other two let go at over 30,000 rounds. Analysis of the broken slides revealed all had heat treatment problems. Beretta beefed up the slides around the locking block area and improved QC on the heat treating. This was back in 1988. Since then there have been zero instances of slides cracking or breaking on any M9 pistol. It simply hasn't been an issue for over 25 years of production and service. Time to drive a stake through the heart of this idiotic rumor
9. It wears out too fast. A pistol is a mechanical device that wears out with use, and it wears out faster if not maintained properly and even faster when used in environments where dust and sand is prevalent - like the Middle East. General issue weapons in the DoD inventory get minimal care and maintenance. Yes they get cleaned but they don't get maintained as well as they should. This means many of the M9 pistols that have seen up to 30 years of service, including 15 years of continuous wartime service in the hands of hundreds of service members, have been shot a lot but received minimal maintenance. As you would and should expect, they are worn out. Again, don't blame Beretta or the pistol's design. Blame a military that has seen an extraordinarily high OPTEMPO for the past 15 years in an environment that's known to accelerate wear on all mechanical devices, coupled with a reluctance to pull marginally serviceable weapons from the inventory
10. It's unreliable. Another Gunstore Commando rumor that refuses to die. Remember, in three separate reliability tests the Beretta tied for first place in one and beat all comers in the other two. Well, there was a point during the GWOT where the Beretta pistols the Army owned were exhibiting a surprisingly high number of malfunctions, But again it wasn't Beretta's fault or the fault of the pistol. It was magazines. Specifically, non-manufacturer spec magazines that were built to a badly flawed Army contract specification. After years of active combat the Army was running out of M9 magazines. The Beretta-produced magazines were of excellent quality, but they were wearing out at an alarming rate with years of service in a very sandy/dusty environment. The Army needed a lot of replacement magazines, and needed them fast. To save a few bucks they awarded a contract to a third party (but very reputable) US-based magazine manufacturer named Check-Mate. In an effort to try to extend the service life of the magazines the Army contract stipulated that both the outside and the inside of the magazine bodies were to receive a phosphate coating. When Beretta and Check-Mate read the contract requirement they both notified the Army that the coating on the interior of the magazine body would cause ammunition feeding problems. The Army refused to budge and told Check-Mate that either they comply with the contract as written or it would be taken from them and given to one of their competitors. Check-Mate complied, delivered the magazines and things started to go south from there. Army Soldiers in combat started to report multiple malfunctions, mainly failure to feed issues. Of course they blamed the M9 in general as being unreliable, but the issue was very quickly traced to the phosphate coating on the inside of the magazines. In fact, both Beretta and Check-Mate had told the Army to expect this to happen. The rough textured coating on the inside of the magazine body was trapping sand and grit, which interfered with the smooth operation of the magazine follower causing malfunctions. This problem triggered a nationwide shortage of Beretta factory magazines for the 92-series pistols as friends and family members of Soldiers snapped up every available magazine to send to their loved ones fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan. The Army quickly realized its mistake and revised the contract spec to require a dry lube coating on the inside of the magazine. Once all of the phosphate coated Check-Mate magazines were pulled from service the reliability problems went away. It should be noted that the USMC, fighting in many of the same regions and often right alongside Army units, continued to use Beretta-manufactured magazines and continued to enjoy excellent reliability out of the M9
11. It's not a 1911. This is the zinger of last resort that any Gunstore Commando will throw down when losing an argument about service pistols. It's usually delivered with a dismissive wave of the hand as they walk away from the argument, firm in the belief that their logic is unassailable. Sort of like a liberal shouting "you're raaaaacist!" when you bring up the black-on-black murder rate in Chicago. No Virginia, the M9 is not the M1911A1. It's actually better. Now remember, we can't compare the M9 to your Ed Brown Classic Series 1911. We have to compare service pistol to service pistol, and the M9 proved in three separate DoD tests that it handily beats the WWII-era M1911A1 in every evaluation category. A lot of 1911 partisans argue that if - just if - an updated 1911 design had been included in the trials it would have wiped the floor with all the pretenders to the throne. Maybe, Maybe not. We'll never know. You can't run an Indy race against a car that doesn't show up at the starting line

For more information on the procurement controversy go read the Government Accounting Office's 1986 report 'Allegations on Army Selection of Beretta 9-mm as DoD Standard Sidearm'

________________________________________________________

Does the M9 have some flaws? Of course it does, but the 'flaws' are not shortcomings in the pistol's basic design but shortcomings that have cropped up as firearms and accessory technology has progressed over the past 30 years.

In my eyes the current M9 design has two major shortcomings. First is the lack of an adjustable/replacable front sight. The second is the lack of an accessory rail (also referred to as a 'Picatinny' rail). Remember, the standard M9 reflects a design that was locked in-place in 1985, before the advent of Tritium night sights and small, powerful weapons lights.

While the rear sight on the M9 is 'drift adjustable' (that's gunsmith speak for the need to smack the thing with a hammer and drift punch to adjust the point of aim), the front sight is actually an integral part of the slide and is neither replaceable or adjustable. That was OK in 1985 when we were just thankful to be moving away from the awful sights found on the M1911A1, but today that design simply isn't good enough. In my opinion every pistol issued to an American Soldier should have replaceable Tritium night sights. You simply can't provide that with the current design of the M9.

Next, the accessory rail. In 1985 nobody had even heard of a thing called a weapon light. If you needed to light up a target at night you usually used a hand held flashlight. Then in the 1990s companies like SureFire and Streamlight started developing small, lightweight high intensity lights that could be mounted below the barrel on the dust cover. This first resulted in a bunch of goofy clip-on rail systems but then swiftly led to manufacturers incorporating a standard accessory rail into their pistol designs. Today it's almost impossible to buy a newly manufactured pistol that does not have an accessory rail built in, but the M9 design is still stuck in 1985.

Enter the Marine Corps. While the US Army developed only a grudging respect for the M9, the USMC seems to have fallen in love with it. The average Marine spends far more time than the average Soldier on the range and is therefore more familiar with, and in tune with, his or her duty weapon. I'm told the USMC also pays much more attention to weapons maintenance than the Army does, and is more aggressive in replacing worn parts like recoil springs. As a result the USMC has gotten better service out of their M9s. But they too recognized the ageing design of the pistol. In 2010 the USMC contracted directly with Beretta for a redesigned M9 that incorporated an accessory rail, a re-configured trigger guard, three-dot sights, some polymer parts to save weight and improved 'sand resistant' magazines. Designated the M9A1, it is scheduled to replace all standard M9 pistols in the Marine Corps inventory. Surprisingly, the M9A1 still retains the integral front sight, so good luck trying to fit Tritium sights.

USMC M9A1

The M9A1 is a logical upgrade to the 1985-era M9 but no other branch of service has shown interest in it. The reason for this lack of interest is called the Modular Handgun System (MHS) competition.

Around 2008 the Army and Air Force decided that the M9 design had reached the end of its service life and it was time to look for a new service pistol. Since 1985 handgun technology has undergone a number of key improvements. The most visible change has been the emergence of the polymer framed, striker fired designs like the Glock. Pistols like the Glock 17 and the Smith & Wesson M&P line absolutely dominate the American law enforcement market, from local police agencies all the way up to the FBI and have even found strong acceptance in limited roles within the US military.

So the two services are keenly interested in adopting a standard service pistol that is striker fired, has a polymer frame, improved safeties and offers easier maintenance. After several fits and starts, in 2014 the DoD announced the kick-off of the selection program for what they call a Modular Handgun System (MHS). Beretta quickly figured out that any re-configuration of the M9 design would not meet 100% of the MHS minimum criteria. So Beretta tried an end-around move to bypass the MHS competition and offered the Army a radically re-designed model of the M9 called the M9A3.

Beretta got smart with this redesign and takes the original 92-based platform as far as it can go. The M9A3 incorporates a true M1913 'Picatinny' accessory rail, Tritium front and rear sights, a supressor-ready barrel, minor changes to the decocker safety and a recontoured grip. The frame of the pistol is still aluminum alloy, but Beretta re-engineered it to accept different sized grips and backstraps. At first Beretta tried to sell the M9A3 to the Army under the existing M9 contract, claiming the changes were allowed under the 'minor engineering changes' clause. The Army said no, deciding that the changes were too radical to be considered 'minor'.

But Beretta's not giving up, and apparently has a plan that just might work. As the MHS tests move forward Beretta is putting the M9A3 into limited production for civilian sales. Even limited production proves that the company can ramp up to volume production if the orders pour in. Next, Beretta is willing to play a watch and wait game. Even though the MHS program will eventually pick a winner Beretta knows the US military is in the draw down mode and money may not be available to field the selected pistol. This puts Beretta in a good position to step forward and tell Congress that it has a ready replacement for the M9 that meets 85% of the MHS requirements and offers near 100% compatibility with existing DoD service pistol support systems (training materials, spare parts, holsters, maintenance tools, etc.). Who knows, Beretta may just pull it off!

________________________________________________________

So 30 years on two things are clear. First, the M9 has received limited respect from those who carry it. To be honest I think the pistol was somewhat doomed from the beginning simply because it was replacing the venerable and beloved M1911A1. NO pistol other than an updated 1911 could have overcome that hurdle. The rumored failures I outlined above gained so much traction that they are impossible to control or squelch. When a Soldier going in to combat is handed a perfectly serviceable M9 all he/she has heard are the barracks rumors fueled by all the drivel out on the internet. What he/she doesn't hear is the truth.

The second thing that's clear to me is that the M9 was the best pistol selected in the 1985 trials and has proven to be an outstanding service pistol. It's real failures are few and dozens - perhaps hundreds - of service men and women are alive today thanks to the M9's ruggedness and reliability in some of the worst combat conditions imaginable. It's a pistol I'd unhesitatingly carry in to combat if I had to go today.

Stay sharp!

- Brian

2015 Blade Show

Well I'm a few weeks late in reporting, but it's been busy both at work and on the home front.

Earlier in the month the annual Blade Show came to town. This year I was accompanied by my friend Doug who had very little background in knives, but a lot of curiosity. This is my fifth Blade Show visit and its become something of an annual ritual. I reserve the show date on my calendar and warn friends and relatives not to burden me with any responsibilities on show day. To me the show is like a second Christmas, and my family knows enough to not spoil it for me.

This year I didn't have an agenda - I wasn't on the hunt for the newest interpretation of the Bowie knife, or the best bushcraft blade, or the latest offering from Buck/Cold Steel/A.G. Russell/etc. This year was more about wandering around with Doug, introducing him to the finer points of knife design and execution and admiring the work of many of the individual makers. Doug is smart and showed a lively interest not just in knife design and manufacturing, but he also got interested in what I'll call the psychology of knife collecting.

So let's hit some of the highlights.

The show was packed. This was easily the largest crowd I've seen at a Blade Show. Our first clue as to the size of the crowd came when we were looking for a parking spot. The show venue, the Cobb Galleria, has plenty of parking, so when it took us 20 minutes to find a spot I knew it was going to be packed. The second clue came when we entered the arena. The place was jammed! Just a few years back vendors were complaining about low show attendance. The poor economy and a general malaise seemed to have kept folks home. This year things seemed much improved and it was great (though sometimes annoying) to see the displays and tables packed two and three deep

Buck's presence at the show was much subdued. They had a smaller than normal booth, weren't doing any sales and didn't seem to be drawing the crowds. I don't know if this was a reaction to the recent passing of Chuck Buck or just a general business decision to reduce their presence at the show. It was sort of sad to see. I did check out their new Selkirk fixed blade. This is a Chinese produced (something the Buck rep seemed a little defensive about) fixed blade made out of 420 steel. Overall I was impressed. It's an excellent design with a one piece blade and integral hilt and pommel and a very comfortable grip made of what seems to be Micarta. The street price is also well below $100.

Buck Selkirk

Folks gripe about Chinese made knives, but producers like A.G. Russell proved long ago that if proper quality control is applied the Chinese can turn out excellent blades at astonishingly low prices.

As always, the Ka-Bar booth was hopping and Uncle Ethan Becker was in attendance, dispensing wisdom and friendly jabs in equal measure. This year nothing at the booth grabbed my attention but Doug showed a lot of interest in the USMC Combat Knife. Ka-Bar does an outstanding job with these blades, easily the best examples available from any knife manufacturer. Ontario, Case and a few others make their own versions of the USMC Combat Knife, but Ka-Bar's is by far the best interpretation available on the market today. The stacked leather handle models are extremely well done and gorgeous.

Ethan Becker (right) holding court at the Ka-Bar booth

While at the Ka-Bar booth I mentioned to Doug that besides being a knife designer, Ethan is also a professional chef. Doug walked right over to Ethan and asked, "In your opinion, who makes the best kitchen knives?"  Without hesitating Ethan shot right back, "Al Mar, but don't tell them I said that!"  Classic Ethan.

The Italians are coming! The Italians are coming! I don't think I've ever seen this many Italian manufacturers at the show. Perhaps it was because their wares never really caught my eye, but this time I found something to like. The folks at the Maserin booth were showing off their wares and one of their locking folders caught my eye

Maserin Knives

Maserin's little 'Birdland' folder seemed extremely well done. I'll admit that it was the orange handle scales that caught my attention, but once I got to handle the knife I realized what a great little package it is. Slim, a very nice blade profile, it locks up tight, has a good 'walk and talk' and the blade is well centered in the blade well. This is the first Italian-produced knife I ever considered worth putting money down for.

Maserin Birdland

About this time I lost track of Doug and eventually found him bugging the Browning Knife guys...

Doug, on the left, peppering the Browning guys with questions

A new (to me) maker that caught my eye was White River Knife & Tool from Coopersville, Michigan up near Grand Rapids. What got my attention were the examples they had on-hand from their Classic Series. These blades are extremely well done using profiles that hearken back to the classic upper midwest hunting blade designs from Rudy Ruana and Bill Scagel. But two things really set White River's designs apart. First, their generous handle sizes. There's a prevailing line of thought in knife design that says little blades need little handles. This often translates into small fixed blade knives with handles too small for the average adult male to get a good purchase on. White River makes sure even their smallest fixed blades sport generous handles. The handles are slim but well proportioned and provide enough real-estate for a good purchase. Next is blade thickness. Another prevailing trend in outdoor knives is thicker is better - the sharpened pry-bar approach to knife making. This trend has resulted in a generation of blades that are simply far too thick for their intended (or likely) use. White River uses blade stock of the proper thickness for its intended use. This results in larger fixed blades that are light, handy and easy to maneuver.

White River Classic Series - very nicely done

Here's a gratuitous shot of one of the Case knife displays. I've freely admitted to my Case knife addiction in the past, and Case's show displays don't help with the problem. It's like a drunk walking into a liquor store that's offering free samples. All I'll say is that it's a damned good thing that Case doesn't do sales at the Blade Show.

Case knives. Crack cocaine. What's the difference?

As Doug and I were making our way around the show floor we ended up in the collector's corner where the Buck Collector's Club, the Randall collectors and other similar groups were set up. Doug became fascinated by the George Herron knife collection owned by R. Duncan out of South Carolina. This is where Doug got into the psychology of knife collecting. He peppered Mr. Duncan for over 20 minutes with questions about knife value, perceptions, motivations and what keeps a collector going. I think Duncan only put up with Doug's line of questioning because Doug told him he was a Citadel grad. Doug came away with a far better understanding of what drives knife collecting, and I think something clicked (more on that in a bit).

Doug peppering George Herron knife collector R. Duncan with endless questions

Some of the exquisite Herron-made blades in Duncan's collection. This whole
collecting thing absolutely fascinated Doug

So after learning all about knife collecting, and having admired some of the custom work on display on the tables of individual makers Doug wandered over to the Buck Collectors Club display area. The Buck Collectors Club displays are always the 'mac-daddy' of knife collection displays at the Blade Show. It's row upon row of collections of all the various blades and styles made by the Buck family since the mid-20th century. Buck collectors are extraordinarily devoted to the brand and the club gets a lot of support from the company and the Buck family. Doug was clearly impressed by the vast array of Buck products. Before this all he knew about Buck came from the few products he'd seen for sale in the PX. Then we made the mistake of wandering by the Collector's Club information table in the display area. Doug intermediately spotted a Model 110 for sale as a fund raiser that had been re-worked by David Yellowhorse - resplendent in sliver and turquoise handle inlays and delicate file work on the blade. Doug went back to the table two or three times, each time getting closer to pulling out his wallet. Finally he asked me to lead him away and to never let him go back by the table while we were still at the show.

He's hooked.

- Brian

Vietnam Birddog Memoir: My First Mission

Hey, look who's got a blog!

My good friend Bill, the guy who got me addicted to fly fishing, has decided to fire up his own blog to highlight his time as a Birddog pilot in Vietnam. Hop over to Bill's blog, have a read and leave him some feedback.

_______________________________________________________________________________

Vietnam Birddog Memoir: My First Mission: "Headhunter One-Four, cleared for takeoff.". The radio call from the control tower at Camp Holloway airfield was the authorization...

The Airweight Chronicles II

Beware weepy eyed nostalgia.

In the first installment of this saga I hinted that earlier incarnations of the S&W Airweights are better simply because they are older. Everybody knows older is better when it comes to revolvers (and knives, cars, airplanes, cameras, cowboy westerns and women, especially women).

A couple of days ago Bill and I went to the range to compare his venerable old Model 37 Airweight against my current production 642. I stepped up to the firing line absolutely convinced that Bill's Airweight would prove to be the much better shooter. After all, it was made back in the 70's when S&W still lavished lots of attention on these fine little revolvers.

A pair of Airweights: S&W Model 37 on the left, S&W Model 642 on the right

Boy was I wrong.

The 642 Airweight was a much better shooter. There really was no comparison. While both revolvers exhibited the same accuracy the 642 was much easier to manage and much more pleasant to shoot. This is only partly due to the trigger job I did on the 642. What surprised me was that the trigger on the much older Model 37 was just as heavy and stiff as the original trigger on my 642. But two other factors combine to make the Model 37 unpleasant to shoot. First is the trigger itself. The Model 37 sports a wide, serrated trigger. Combined with the stiff, heavy trigger pull this serrated trigger digs painfully into the trigger finger. By comparison the 642 trigger is narrower and has a smooth, rounded face that is much easier on the finger.

The next issue are the grips. I admit, the classic old checkered wooden grips on the Model 37 just look better. They look the way revolver grips should look. But while this style works well on larger (and heavier) revolvers, under the sharp recoil of this light little snubbie the checkering digs painfully into the palm of the hand. Combine the grips and the wide, serrated trigger and the overall shooting experience is one of pain. The Model 37 is simply too uncomfortable to shoot beyond one or two cylinders full of weak range loads. By comparison the 642's fat rubber grips provide a better purchase on the revolver, making it much more comfortable to hold on to under recoil. Weak range ammo is fun to shoot and stout self defense loads, while not exactly pleasurable, are manageable and don't tear up your shooting hand.

S&W's Airweights have only gotten better with age. My favorite snubbie with my favorite coffee mug!

But the news is not all bad. Many of the Model 37's issues are easily addressed. Bill already has some Uncle Mike's boot grips on the way to replace the factory wooden stocks. The obscenely heavy trigger pull can be easily overcome with a simple trigger job. The trigger itself can be switched out, but the additional cost may not be worth it; with the new grips and trigger job Bill's little revolver should be much better behaved.

There's a lot of pontificating on the internet about how the earlier Airweights were much better pistols than the ones currently being manufactured. In particular, a lot of folks sing the praises of the 'pre-lock' models (the revolvers made before S&W incorporated the silly safety lock into the side of the frame) over the current series. Well, based on my limited sample set I have to say that the pontificators are full of bull. In my opinion the current production Airweights are better pistols. They have stronger +P-rated frames, they come with a better trigger and grips and the fit and finish is outstanding. Yes the trigger pull on the current Airweights is unacceptably heavy, but so are the trigger pulls on the vintage Airweights.

You gain no real advantage buying an older Airweight; the current production models are simply better.

Stay sharp!

- Brian

Keeping Time

Let's wander off the reservation a bit and talk about watches.

I'm a traditionalist. I like my guns to have cylinders that rotate. I like my knives to be made of steel and leather. And I like my time pieces to be all mechanical.

Now, I'm no Luddite. The folding knife in my pocket has synthetic handle scales, I own a lot of Glocks (the original 'Tactical Tupperware'), and the watch I wear most often has a quartz movement.

But show me a traditional Colt Single Action Army, or a Randall Model 1 with a stacked leather handle or an Omega Speedmaster and my heart will skip a beat or two. But alas, I can't afford a Colt Single Action, the wait time for a Randall likely exceeds the time I have left on this earth and my wife would kill me if she spotted a Speedmaster on my wrist. So I make do the best I can. Ruger Blackhawks, some nice Ka-Bars, and for wrist watches a Seiko diver or two.

Today we'll talk about Seiko Divers, and in particular the rugged, almost bomb-proof Model SKX009.

.

Seiko SKX009

I've owned several Seiko dive watches down through the years. The first one, a gift from my wife back around 1985, was Seiko's earlier 6309 model. She bought it for me from the Post Exchange in Frankfurt, Germany when I was assigned to the US V Corps HQ. I was thrilled. I had my 'high end' diver. At a time when you could pick up a plain-jane Rolex Oyster through the PX system for about $700 this Seiko was a bit pricey at something like $200. Two hundred bucks was a lot of money to us in those days (particularly with a new baby) and I really appreciated her gift.

Seiko 6309 circa 1980

The 6309 became my daily wear piece. I doubt I took it off even to shower. It got banged up in the normal course of my military duties, the original band ended up being replaced several times over and then one day about five years after Roberta gave it to me it just stopped running. I had a local watch repair shop take a look at it and they reported the bad news - one of the seals had failed, water had leaked into the movement and rusted everything up. The cost of repair exceeded the value of the watch so I just tossed it and moved on.

For a few years I got pulled over to the dark side, aka, Casio G-Shocks. The G-Shock line came out at about the same time my Seiko died. The military fell in love with the G-Shocks. They were inexpensive, rugged and as accurate as a Swiss chronometer. In fact, I've been told that the Air Force began issuing them to their flight crews and para-rescue personnel. The best part was (from a budget perspective) that they were so cheap they were considered expendable. When they stopped working (usually because the battery died) you just threw them away and issued a replacement.

I own a number of Casio G-Shocks. They are all wonderfully accurate (particularly the ones that sync with the atomic time signal from Fort Collins, Colorado). But they are machines without a soul - overly complex, often difficult to read, gimmicky and difficult to use. When the manufacturer has to provide a 20 page instruction manual that's your clue that the gimmicks have overwhelmed the basic functionality.

I need a watch to do two things - display accurate time in a format that is intuitive and easy to read under all conditions and provide a tool for simple timing tasks, like tracking how long the steaks have been on the grill. With its rotating timing bezel the Seiko diver watch accomplishes these tasks with a healthy dose of manly panache.

Let's keep it simple. I like guns with cylinders that rotate, knives with wooden handles and watches
with mechanical guts

But I'm under no allusions; the Seiko SKX009 is no Swiss chronometer, or even close to it. While the quality of materials and construction is very high the movement that Seiko puts into these watches offers only middling accuracy and limited features. The Seiko 7s26 movement is a watch movement born of compromise, designed for ease of automated production, ease of service and ruggedness. These movements can be accurate, and I've got watches that use this movement that can hold to less than 20 seconds/day, but I've got other watches using the same movement that struggle to hold to a minute a day. By comparison I have a watch that sells in the same price range as the Seiko SBX009 that uses an analogue quartz movement and it holds to 15 seconds per month.

The 7s26 movement with the winding rotor removed.
Seiko manufactures these by the tens of thousands each year,
Keep in mind that the movement is less than 1 1/2 inches in diameter
and most of the production is done by robots!

The 7s26 is a 21-jewel automatic movement, meaning it is self winding, but it lacks the ability to hand wind the mainspring and it lacks a hacking feature. Hacking is when you pull out the main (winding) stem and the second hand stops. This feature is extremely useful when you want to synchronize your watch with another time piece to gauge its accuracy.

So, it's a 'good enough' movement. How about the rest of the watch? Well this is really where Seiko shines. Seiko is rightfully proud of its SKX-series of watches and that shows in the overall quality of construction of these time pieces. Polished stainless steel cases, screw-down case backs and crowns with waterproof seals, extremely bright luminescent paint on the watch dial, high quality stainless steel or rubber watch bands and ISO certified water resistance down to 200 feet. These watches are rugged and slick looking little beasts.

It's been beaten up, beaten on and neglected. And it's still ready to go!

Seiko knows it has a winner on its hands and dresses its Diver line up in a wide variety of dial, hand, bezel and strap combinations. This drives collectors mad, but that's the whole idea. There is an incredibly strong collector market for modern and vintage Seiko diver models that spans the globe, fueled by folks who are captivated by the concept of a relatively inexpensive, rugged and good looking diving watch that offers outstanding service and value.

I think that describes me...

Stay sharp!

- Brian

Aw Snap - An Update

I've been remiss in posting this, but it's been a busy two months.

I put up a blog post back on 28 February lamenting how I broke my Leatherman Blast and had to send it back to Leatherman for repair or replacement.

I put the tool in the mail the next day and two weeks later almost to the day the UPS man dropped a small box off in my car port.

Inside was a letter of apology from Leatherman letting me know the Blast was no longer in production but they substituted a newer model as a replacement (I guess it wasn't worth it to them to try to replace the broken screwdriver blade).

What I got was a Leatherman Rebar.  Now, I don't collect Leatherman tools - I just accumulate them and abuse them - so I didn't know anything about this particular model. It turns out the Rebar doesn't match the Blast tool-for-tool; there's a few things missing from the Rebar like scissors (which I actually used fairly often). However, the Rebar offers a few things the Blast didn't, like a dedicated serrated rope cutting blade. an awl (for those of you still into leather crafts) and replaceable wire cutter blades.

Leatherman Rebar

The Rebar is also a smaller overall package that incorporates a very nice feature - Leatherman 'rolls' the exposed edges of the handle sections, making it very comfortable to grip without having to use the plastic liners found on the Blast.

Notice the rolled grip edges - makes for a very comfortable grip without adding to the overall width of the tool

Overall I'm very pleased with the replacement tool. The Rebar is well thought out and well executed and seems to be an overall improvement over the Blast.

Thanks Leatherman - both for standing behind your warranty and producing excellent products!

Stay sharp.

- Brian