From: Bill Graham on

"Neil Harrington" <secret(a)illumnati.net> wrote in message
news:e4ydnf8Ny7zCwJzWnZ2dnUVZ_tWdnZ2d(a)giganews.com...
>
> "Bill Graham" <weg9(a)comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:tvGdnSo6OsafMJ3WnZ2dnUVZ_iydnZ2d(a)giganews.com...
>>
>> "Savageduck" <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote in message
>> news:2009111517302780278-savageduck1(a)REMOVESPAMmecom...
>>> On 2009-11-15 17:24:37 -0800, "Bill Graham" <weg9(a)comcast.net> said:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> "Savageduck" <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:2009111517220470933-savageduck1(a)REMOVESPAMmecom...
>
>
>>>>>
>>>>> Good guns always commanded high prices, as they do today.
>>>>> I know, my Kimber set me back $1200.
>>>>> http://homepage.mac.com/lco/filechute/G-Kimber-CDP-LAc.jpg
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> Nice looking autoloader....Is it 9 mm?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> That sir is a good old 1911 design 45 ACP! Not some pissy 9mm.
>>>
>>> 9mm indeed?? !!!!
>>>
>>> For doublestack I have a Glock Model 23 in 40 S&W.
>>>
>>> --
>> Well! - Sorrrrrry. I used to have a colt auto chambered in 9 mm. It was
>> the most reliable auto I ever had.
>
> You can't beat the good old 9mm, but you'll never convince .45 fanciers of
> that. They all have an abiding faith in those pumpkin rollers and are
> impervious to reason. ;-)
>
> I've owned a lot of .45s myself, but all my automatics now (apart from
> rimfires of course) are either 9mm or 9mm short, and my revolvers are all
> .38/.357. It's just the ideal bore size. If God owned a handgun it would
> be in some 9mm/.38 caliber.
>
>> Generally, I preferred to carry revolvers, because I needed to know they
>> were going to go off if I ever had to fire them. Also, I wanted to walk
>> away with my empties still in the chamber and not lying someplace on the
>> ground.
>
> Yes, there are some obvious advantages to that. However, as far as
> reliability goes revolvers can have their problems too. I have a nice
> little S&W .38 hammerless on a light alloy frame, lovely thing to carry,
> almost brand new but it needs to see a gunsmith because it's stopped
> shooting -- something inside is cramped or binding. And I once had a
> brand-new Colt Agent that wouldn't work either. (Fortunately I'm only
> about 15 miles from the Colt factory, but it would've been bad luck if I'd
> just loaded that thing, put it away and some day had to use it in a
> hurry.)
I had a model 38, and carried it for years. I liked the shrouded hammer, and
the lightweight alloy frame....The gun served me well. I would fire it on
the range about once every 6 months, and it never misfired for me......I
normally carried it with the plus P ammo in it.....

From: Bill Graham on

"Neil Harrington" <secret(a)illumnati.net> wrote in message
news:rs2dncQadslz9ZzWnZ2dnUVZ_rydnZ2d(a)giganews.com...
>
> "Chris H" <chris(a)phaedsys.org> wrote in message
> news:rWFsDoKCAWALFACL(a)phaedsys.demon.co.uk...
>> In message <e4ydnf8Ny7zCwJzWnZ2dnUVZ_tWdnZ2d(a)giganews.com>, Neil
>> Harrington <secret(a)illumnati.net> writes
>>>
>>>"Bill Graham" <weg9(a)comcast.net> wrote in message
>>>news:tvGdnSo6OsafMJ3WnZ2dnUVZ_iydnZ2d(a)giganews.com...
>>>>
>>>> "Savageduck" <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:2009111517302780278-savageduck1(a)REMOVESPAMmecom...
>>>>> On 2009-11-15 17:24:37 -0800, "Bill Graham" <weg9(a)comcast.net> said:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Savageduck" <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote in message
>>>>>> news:2009111517220470933-savageduck1(a)REMOVESPAMmecom...
>>>> Well! - Sorrrrrry. I used to have a colt auto chambered in 9 mm. It was
>>>> the most reliable auto I ever had.
>>>
>>>You can't beat the good old 9mm, but you'll never convince .45 fanciers
>>>of
>>>that. They all have an abiding faith in those pumpkin rollers and are
>>>impervious to reason. ;-)
>>
>> Having used both the answer is "it depends" on why you are carrying and
>> pistol and the conditions. In the 70's when I used a pistol the .45 was
>> a better choice for operational reasons for urban work. For battle field
>> work a 9mm.
>
> If you mean because of stopping power vs. firepower, I think the
> much-vaunted stopping power of the .45 is largely a myth. Several years
> ago, two police officers wrote a book on the subject of stopping power
> (sorry I can't recall either their names or the book's title), based on
> their extensive study of actual shooting cases. What they went by, and
> graded their results by, was the percentage of "one-shot stops" for every
> caliber and load for which they could obtain data. Their conclusion as I
> recall it was that stopping power was much more dependent on the specific
> load than on the caliber, and the best one turned out to be a 115-grain
> JHP in 9mm, with a roughly comparable .45 load close behind. Full-jacket
> loads in either caliber fell far behind, not surprisingly.
>
> Now at the time of their survey the .40 S&W either didn't yet exist or
> wasn't as popular as it has become. My guess is that that caliber would
> outperform either the 9mm or .45 in a real-life situation, but probably
> not by very much.
>
> My own belief is that it all comes down to kinetic energy, assuming a
> bullet so constructed as to efficiently transmit that energy to the target
> rather than wasting it on the scenery beyond, and assuming optimum
> placement of course.
>
>>
>>>> Generally, I preferred to carry revolvers, because I needed to know
>>>> they
>>>> were going to go off if I ever had to fire them. Also, I wanted to walk
>>>> away with my empties still in the chamber and not lying someplace on
>>>> the
>>>> ground.
>>>
>>>Yes, there are some obvious advantages to that. However, as far as
>>>reliability goes revolvers can have their problems too.
>>
>> True and the problem is that when a revolver jams it is not easily
>> fixable. At least 95% of auto jams are easily and quickly cleared.
>
> Yes. About the worst that can happen is having the extractor override or
> tear through the case rim, leaving the case stuck in the chamber. And
> that's relatively rare.
>
>>
>> SO a revolver jam is usually fatal. This is why autos have a reputation
>> for jamming, people cleared them and lived to tell the tail. When the
>> revolver jammed no one knew.
>
> Heh. That could be.
>
I had a S & W 22 caliber revolver that would jam after firing about a dozen
rounds through it. The clearance between the rear of the cylinder and the
frame was too small, and I was never able to get it fixed......If I cleaned
it after a couple of cylinder full's, then it would work for another two,
but cleaning it that often was a PITA, so I never used it.

From: Savageduck on
On 2009-11-16 21:26:58 -0800, "Bill Graham" <weg9(a)comcast.net> said:

>
> "Eric Stevens" <eric.stevens(a)sum.co.nz> wrote in message
> news:s252g59k0273d9rvd3q5hcndtvntf1uf5o(a)4ax.com...

> <--------------Le Snip--------------------------->

> I've already told you. It was Napoleon.
>>
> Did Napoleon drive a Citroen or a Peugeot?

Simca.


--
Regards,

Savageduck

From: Bill Graham on

"tony cooper" <tony_cooper213(a)earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:iid3g5h186kqg6hja2t41i2kurqsljsohv(a)4ax.com...
> On Mon, 16 Nov 2009 20:00:02 +0000, Chris H <chris(a)phaedsys.org>
> wrote:
>
>>>>still drives on the left. However
>>>>it is a real mess and unlike the A4/Letter change the UK with it's
>>>>modern road systems will find it impossible to change to the right...
>>>>
>>>I see. The UK can't change their driving habits,
>>
>>Not possible now. Too many purpose designed roads
>>
>>> but you expect the
>>>US to change their measurement system to conform to yours.
>>
>>No not to mine but the whole world except the US
>
> The point is that you say it's impossible for one little island to
> change from driving on the left to driving on the right, but expect
> the entire US - which dwarfs that island in size and population - to
> change their entire system of weights and measures.
>
> Not possible now. Too many purpose-designed applications.
>
>
> --
> Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida

Actually, the lab I worked in for 29 years at Stanford University in the US
used both the English pound/foot system and the metric system
interchangeably. We had to do this because both the items we purchased, and
the designs we used to build stuff came from countries and designers that
used both systems. It was not a problem for any of us, that I am aware of.
Our machine shops prided themselves on being able to work with both systems.

From: Bill Graham on

"Neil Harrington" <secret(a)illumnati.net> wrote in message
news:w5OdnY4fCLN6WZzWnZ2dnUVZ_hadnZ2d(a)giganews.com...
>
> "Chris H" <chris(a)phaedsys.org> wrote in message
> news:kH2$3MNP2WALFADz(a)phaedsys.demon.co.uk...
>
>
>>
>> I don't know why the US still insists on being different.
>
> We aren't. We have remained the same, with generally the same standards.
> It's other countries that have changed, and for some reason you now want
> us to go along with whatever the current fad is. We won't do that without
> having some good reason for it, and there isn't any good reason. Why does
> this bother you so?
>
>> Over the last
>> two decades for many things the rest of the world has moved to take up
>> international standards except the US. In fact the US was the only
>> industrial nation globally to be different on most things. Now it is
>> the only nation, industrial or not that does not use the same as the
>> rest of the world.
>
> What part of "the rest of the world" uses something other than barrels as
> a measure for crude oil? Barrels are not metric. Neither are knots, an
> international standard unit for speed both at sea and in the air. Neither
> are hours, minutes and seconds, either in time or in geometry. Neither are
> astronomical units. Neither are light years. These are all important
> things to measure and/or use in calculations, and none of them are or can
> be made to be dependant on the everything-has-to-go-by-orders-of-ten
> metric system.
>
Yes. Units are not a problem, provided they are attached to the end of
numbers.....Unfortunately, there is a tendency among some modern scientists
to not do this, and problems arise as a result......