[dkf]

Originally Posted by 9mm +p+

Just another loud mouthed D-bag that thinks he has all the answers, I wish people would quit posting this clowns BS. The history of the 40 is NOT what this asshat says it is, Paul Liebenberg of team S&W had been shooting the centimeter or daddy of the 40 for most of the 80's. Get your facts straight before you get online and run your mouth. "Let's compare resumes" Really...

His mouth got the better of him. Due to his comments on his Youtube channel he made the news and lost his carry permit in the process. Makes me laugh.

Now he can't legally CCW his lovely 9mm.

[lowflyer]

Originally Posted by Southswede

We all have limitations. It is good to know what these limitations are. It seems Yeager knows his. What's the problem?

I am not a psychologist, but I'd say the man is dealing rather poorly with his PTSD and may be overcompensating for his shortcomings with embellishment of his credentials, possibly as a means of dealing with some survivor's guilt.

I've seen several videos now in which he refers to his resume in response to criticism. A credible and truly accomplished person need not refer to his resume to back up his opinion or respond to criticism.

[G26S239]

Originally Posted by rustytxrx

scottieG59 is correct. you can get a pistol that shoots the ammo you slected well. This is a big pistol by most standards. Sig 229, stainless frame, stainless slide, 44 0z, compensator (weight). It handles the recoil of the .357 Sig 125 gr bullet with no issues. The pistol is 2 oz heavier than my s&w 1006 10mm.

It is not exactly like shooting a G34 with 9mm rabbit poot loads but I took it to the gravel pit to shoot some IDPA targets (pistol is not IDPA legal). My split time were good for me. One big thing was the grip fit my hand like it was designed for it.

I remember when that ^^^ model was introduced. It is beautiful! I have the grunt grade P229R 40/357 shown here with the P229 9mm Tutone.

[WinterWizard]

Originally Posted by dkf

His mouth got the better of him. Due to his comments on his Youtube channel he made the news and lost his carry permit in the process. Makes me laugh.

Now he can't legally CCW his lovely 9mm.

Yep. Guy is straight up liar, too. He made a video called "Unbanned" earlier in the month, explaining how he has unblocked all blocked users on his YouTube channel. He also explains in that video that he will not be even reading the comments and he doesn't care what people post, even if it's obscene, etc...

Well, I posted on one of his videos, disagreeing with some other commenter. I was promptly blocked. Ha ha ha! So he not only lied about the blocking, but he's obviously reading the comments, too. Double lie.

Guy is a serious d-bag piece of garbage. He's failed at every career he's attempted (fired from law enforcement, failed contractor, terrible instructor). This guy sucks. Who gives a crap about anything he has to say?

[DonD]

Originally Posted by SDGlock23

I can shoot a 135gr plated at 950 fps or a JHP at 1600 fps. A 165gr bullet at 850 fps or 1400 fps.

You must be one of those guys who knows more than the ammo or powder companies and says his handloads work just fine.

You can't do what you say with acceptable pressures. Hodgdon says max with a 4" barrel is:
135gr/1434 fps/31,900 psi
155gr/1283 fps/31,900 psi

The 165 gr number you quote is really out of line.

Loads like that are another reason people shouldn't shoot others reloads. Accelerated gun wear or possibly worse. Don

[Southswede]

Originally Posted by lowflyer

I am not a psychologist, but I'd say the man is dealing rather poorly with his PTSD and may be overcompensating for his shortcomings with embellishment of his credentials, possibly as a means of dealing with some survivor's guilt.

I've seen several videos now in which he refers to his resume in response to criticism. A credible and truly accomplished person need not refer to his resume to back up his opinion or respond to criticism.

And the defenders of truth, justice and the Yeager way are conspicuous with their absenteeism now aren't they?

[SDGlock23]

Originally Posted by DonD

You must be one of those guys who knows more than the ammo or powder companies and says his handloads work just fine.

You can't do what you say with acceptable pressures. Hodgdon says max with a 4" barrel is:
135gr/1434 fps/31,900 psi
155gr/1283 fps/31,900 psi

The 165 gr number you quote is really out of line.

Loads like that are another reason people shouldn't shoot others reloads. Accelerated gun wear or possibly worse. Don

Quite incorrect, not all powders are created the same. I don't offer my loads for others to shoot, but have worked them up in my gun. Throw in a 6" KKM barrel and the fact that the .40 case is at least as strong as the 40K PSI rated 357 Sig, then now you have something.

I should update my numbers though, with the right powder my 6" .40 will average a 135gr Nosler at 1,849 fps, a 155gr JHP @ 1,554 fps, 165gr Gold Dot @ 1,485 fps, 180gr JHP @ 1,402 fps and 200gr XTP @ 1,230 fps.


The G35 I use (22lb recoil spring with heavy loads) hasn't shown signs of wear yet. Besides, I don't shoot full power .40 all the time, just when I want to. Most of the .40 I shoot is light stuff for plinking. But the versatility of the cartridge is readily apparent.

[lowflyer]

Originally Posted by DonD

You must be one of those guys who knows more than the ammo or powder companies and says his handloads work just fine.

You can't do what you say with acceptable pressures. Hodgdon says max with a 4" barrel is:
135gr/1434 fps/31,900 psi
155gr/1283 fps/31,900 psi

The 165 gr number you quote is really out of line.

Loads like that are another reason people shouldn't shoot others reloads. Accelerated gun wear or possibly worse. Don

I formerly made a living at one of these companies developing those numbers and can attest that they are conservative guidelines. I can't speak for Hodgdon. However, in my experience, loading guide numbers were designed to keep the handloading individual out of trouble, taking into account the known variability in the performance of the powder and components. Exceeding the max values is done at your own risk, but that does not mean exceeding them will automatically cause harm. It just means the powder company defined boundaries in the performance envelope within which it would accept some liability risk.

Nobody should ever let another person shoot their reloads in any gun for any reason. It just isn't smart.

[English]

One of the things we hear again and again without substantiation is that higher power rounds accelerate gun wear. With high pressure high velocity rifles the rifling burns out in front of the chamber but that does not apply to handguns and Glocks in particular.

I can accept that greater bullet momentum will increase the load on the bearing surface between the barrel lug and the locking block, and since the locking block is almost certainly a poorer quality material than the barrel, I can accept that eventually it might need to be changed, but that is cheap enough.

Does anyone have any other ideas about what is likely to wear out to an extent which impacts the serviceable life of the pistol and is not easily and cheaply replaced? Even more, does anyone have any real information about extra wear taking place with 357SIG and .40S&W relative to 9mm?

English

[Tiro Fijo]

Originally Posted by English

One of the things we hear again and again without substantiation is that higher power rounds accelerate gun wear. With high pressure high velocity rifles the rifling burns out in front of the chamber but that does not apply to handguns and Glocks in particular.

I can accept that greater bullet momentum will increase the load on the bearing surface between the barrel lug and the locking block, and since the locking block is almost certainly a poorer quality material than the barrel, I can accept that eventually it might need to be changed, but that is cheap enough.

Does anyone have any other ideas about what is likely to wear out to an extent which impacts the serviceable life of the pistol and is not easily and cheaply replaced? Even more, does anyone have any real information about extra wear taking place with 357SIG and .40S&W relative to 9mm?

English

I have seen some SIG barrel lugs break off and one Glock 23 lug. The Border Patrol had some problems with the Beretta 96 in .40 S&W that was at first thought to be the hot Rem. 155 gr. HP they used, however later many believed it was the frame of said gun lacking proper radii. I have seen some Glock locking block pins break on G22/23's as well.

[BBMW]

Picking on one line in a long post, but....

Where in the US do you have trouble getting .40? This is now the dominent LE round in this country and is very widely available (here. Out of the country is another subject.)

In point of fact, with the panic horde buying that happens occasionally, .40 tends to be available when 9mm gets bought out.

Originally Posted by ScottieG59

If I am traveling and seek to purchase ammo, I may have problems finding 40 S&W or 10mm. I will likely be able to find 9mm anywhere I travel in the US.

[lowflyer]

Originally Posted by BBMW

Picking on one line in a long post, but....

Where in the US do you have trouble getting .40? This is now the dominent LE round in this country and is very widely available (here. Out of the country is another subject.)

In point of fact, with the panic horde buying that happens occasionally, .40 tends to be available when 9mm gets bought out.

That has been my experience as well. My local range has plenty of .40, but has been out of 9mm for weeks.

[Glockbuster]

I don´t know why some insist in training people to shoot while walking back. To me it has to be one of the most stupid things, walking into unknown territory.

[English]

Originally Posted by Glockbuster

I don´t know why some insist in training people to shoot while walking back. To me it has to be one of the most stupid things, walking into unknown territory.

I entirely agree, but isn't this in the wrong thread?

English

[Glockbuster]

Originally Posted by English

I entirely agree, but isn't this in the wrong thread?

English

Hello English, I forgot to make reference to the poor training tactics in the video in post #127. You will now be able to connect.

And I might as well take the opportunity to congratulate you for your valuable contributions here in GT.

[SCmasterblaster]

I guess that there are a lot more 9mm owners out there compared to .40 S&W owners.

[English]

Originally Posted by Glockbuster

Hello English, I forgot to make reference to the poor training tactics in the video in post #127. You will now be able to connect.

And I might as well take the opportunity to congratulate you for your valuable contributions here in GT.

Hello Glockbuster,
Thank you for that.

I have just watched the video and the walking backwards wasn't the only thing that made me cringe!

English

[uz2bUSMC]

Originally Posted by Glockbuster

I don´t know why some insist in training people to shoot while walking back. To me it has to be one of the most stupid things, walking into unknown territory.

So, you can not see any scenario where you would need to fire while moving backwards?

[English]

Originally Posted by uz2bUSMC

So, you can not see any scenario where you would need to fire while moving backwards?

The idea behind walking backwards is to do it slowly and smoothly so that you can use the sights effectively and make good shots as you walk. One of the other things in the video is doing the same thing walking forwards.

The problem with doing both things is that your movement does not change the aiming process of you opponent, and he is stationary and so better able to aim and shoot than you are and your opponent might well be behind some kind of cover. This is a kind of mutual suicide pact with the odds more against you than for you. Moving backwards has the added disadvantage that you are in danger of falling over or bumping into something. Either thing makes your situation worse because it disrupts your firing process.

If you are being fired on your first tactic should be to make yourself a difficult target. You do this by moving rapidly across his aim and changing direction rapidly so that he can't get used to the lead he needs. Depending on circumstances, this sideways running motion can be angled forward or backward to get to cover or to flank his position. At close quarters you can run past him at an angle and curve round behind him. You have the advantage in this situation of knowing what you are about to do before you do it. He is always trying to catch up.

What moving rapidly means here is running and changing direction at full acceleration. The only way to do that without falling over is by running forward. Moving fast sideways or backwards just does not work!

If you can point shoot with one hand you can get off quite effective fire at the same time as running, depending on distance. At close range this has the great advantage that you can fire round the clock relative to your body orientation.

English

[lowflyer]

To tie this back into the topic, learn to shoot a .40, and you will never be forced to walk backwards. :-)

[uz2bUSMC]

Originally Posted by English

The idea behind walking back wards is to do it slowly and smoothly so that you can use the sights effectively and make good shots as you walk. One of the other things in the video is doing the same thing walking forwards.

The problem with doing both things is that your movement does not change the aiming process of you opponent, and he is stationary and so better able to aim and shoot than you are and your opponent might well be behind some kind of cover. This is a kind of mutual suicide pact with the odds more against you than for you. Moving backwards has the added disadvantage that you are in danger of falling over or bumping into something. Either thing makes your situation worse because it disrupts your firing process.

The point of moving backwards wouldn't just simply be a preference, it would have to be because of a distinct reason. In general, I would move forward at an angle if all things were equal. If there was cover just a few steps behind me I would chose that over forward or lateral movement without the possibility of cover.

If you are being fired on your first tactic should be to make yourself a difficult target. You do this by moving rapidly across his aim and changing direction rapidly so that he can't get used to the lead he needs. Depending on circumstances, this sideways running motion can be angled forward or backward to get to cover or to flank his position. At close quarters you can run past him at an angle and curve round behind him. You have the advantage in this situation of knowing what you are about to do before you do it. He is always trying to catch up.

I can't say that I just openly agree with this. Yes, you want to be a fast moving target. Yes, you want to make it as difficult for him to hit you as possible. But knowing how well you tend to think things through I would guess that the above was loosely stated. I single bag guy only has a flank and a rear at face value since he will be trying to turn to shoot you. Although I see your point and you have the advantage since you are initiating the movement...you still have to cover a distance he only has to pivot. There is also the factor that your terrain may dictate what you actually can do. You wouldn't want to move into traffic if you were on the roadside and innocent people in your area may (should) dictate where you move for your engagement. Also, I would prefer to get inside his OODA with bullets and movement, not just movement alone.

What moving rapidly means here is running and changing direction at full acceleration. The only way to do that without falling over is by running forward. Moving fast sideways or back wards just does not work!

Again, what movement is feasible may be controlled by the surroundings. A few steps rearward may be preferable if you gain cover in contrast to moving quickly forward to no cover at all...especially if the BG has cover.

If you can point shoot with one hand you can get off quite effective fire at the same time as running, depending on distance. At close range this has the great advantage that you can fire round the clock relative to your body orientation.

English

Just to clarify I should say that I'm not comparing forward vs back or lateral movement compared to rearward movement simply as a preference.

[Bluescot]

What would be interesting to hear from would be the docs or emts that have treated gun shot wounds and listened to what they have to say.

One of our sons did a surgical residency in a Cleveland Ohio hospital emergency room. They saw a lot of gunshot wounds there.....surprise, Huh?

Since our family has hunted, camped and fished a lot when we were raising our sons I asked him what he learned about gunshot wounds from pistols while there.

He said all gunshot wounds have the potential to be fatal. Having said that he went on to say that a .22lr is a low probability of death. He said he treated a guy that was shot once in the chest and twice in the back. Got him coming and then going. He survived but a few more inches of penetration could have been fatal.

He summarized his limited experience up with maybe a 9mm but if you want to get it done quickly a .40 or a 45ACP is the way to go. He said in one month there he saw 35 gunshot patients.

What is the experience from the medical guys?

[michael_b]

Originally Posted by NEOH212

He's going to the paintball ranch tomorrow and afterwords he's going home to his mothers basement to play World of Warcraft.

(After he rubs his mothers feet that is.)

Lmao ... Your first post was interesting as well


Posted using Outdoor Hub Campfire

[4949shooter]

Originally Posted by English

The idea behind walking backwards is to do it slowly and smoothly so that you can use the sights effectively and make good shots as you walk. One of the other things in the video is doing the same thing walking forwards.

The problem with doing both things is that your movement does not change the aiming process of you opponent, and he is stationary and so better able to aim and shoot than you are and your opponent might well be behind some kind of cover. This is a kind of mutual suicide pact with the odds more against you than for you. Moving backwards has the added disadvantage that you are in danger of falling over or bumping into something. Either thing makes your situation worse because it disrupts your firing process.

If you are being fired on your first tactic should be to make yourself a difficult target. You do this by moving rapidly across his aim and changing direction rapidly so that he can't get used to the lead he needs. Depending on circumstances, this sideways running motion can be angled forward or backward to get to cover or to flank his position. At close quarters you can run past him at an angle and curve round behind him. You have the advantage in this situation of knowing what you are about to do before you do it. He is always trying to catch up.

What moving rapidly means here is running and changing direction at full acceleration. The only way to do that without falling over is by running forward. Moving fast sideways or backwards just does not work!

If you can point shoot with one hand you can get off quite effective fire at the same time as running, depending on distance. At close range this has the great advantage that you can fire round the clock relative to your body orientation.

English

We are trained to press forward in order to achieve a lawful objective. We aren't trained to move backwards. That having been said we ARE trained to seek cover, so if I had to back pedal a step or two in order to reach it I might think about it. Bur honestly, by that time I should have emptied a mag or two.

[rustytxrx]

It has taken me a lot of practice to learn to shoot moving lateraly. I am a righty. moving right seems like and different universe than moving left. very hard skill to learn.