Bulk ammo sale

Via email from Bulk Ammo Direct. These look like good prices:

Bulk Ammo Direct is having a sale on the following items:

-Federal American Eagle 5.56, loaded with Lake City Brass to NATO specifications. This ammunition is an ideal choice for the shooter looking for a great, affordable round for target shooting, training and practice. The ammunition is new production, non-corrosive, in boxer-primed, reloadable brass cases.
$283.00/case of 900, 30 rounds/box, 30 boxes/case
$30.00/case flat rate shipping fee to be added
Minimum order 1 case

-New Federal .223 in bulk. 55GR FMJ – 1,000 rounds per bag encased.
$30.00/case flat rate shipping fee to be added
Minimum order 1 case

-New production 22 LR
$850.00/case of 5,000 rounds
$30.00 – $40.00/case shipping fee to be added
Minimum order 1 case

We also have another supply of pulldown WC 872 propellant, packaged in 40 LB boxes, 60 boxes per pallet, total of 2400 LBS/pallet.
$6.25/LB plus shipping
Minimum order 1 pallet

To order ammo, go to: www.bulkammodirect.com, or email: sales@bulkammodirect.com.

To order propellant or 22 LR ammo, call or email:

Marc Coury
Bulk Ammo Direct
OFF: 310.766.1121
DIRECT: 949.645.3815

Jeff Semko
Bulk Ammo Direct
OFF: 310.766.1121
DIRECT: 310.493.9400

Gun safe expansion tools

Sometimes I wish I could just expand the size of my gun safe a little bit. It seems like there should be room in it for another gun or the magazines but it just doesn’t seem to work out. And I don’t want to buy another safe. I’m cramped enough for floor space as it is.

A few days ago I was asked if I would link to web site for gun storage solutions. After looking at the site a bit I decided they had some good products and agreed.

The Rifle Rods and Mag Mounts look particularly interesting to me.

You can’t really expand the gun safe in a practical manner but you can get more stuff into it if you organize it better.

USPSA match results

The last USPSA match I shot was in October of 2012. That’s two and a quarter years ago. Yesterday I shot in another one with a different group of people.

Two years ago I came second out of eight in my division. This time I came in fourth out of 10. I was fairly pleased with that result. But the main thing I was hoping to do was come in ahead of my son-in-law, John Vlieger. But I was a long way from accomplishing that result. Even if I had not had messed up one stage badly I still would have not beat him:

MCTS USPSA January 2015
Match Results – Limited
Place Name USPSA Class Division PF Lady Mil Law For Match Pts Match %
1 Vlieger, John A79695 B Ltd MAJOR N N N N 580.4732 100.000 %
2 McIngvale, Trip FY62076 M Ltd MAJOR N N N N 559.8666 96.450 %
3 Sturdivant, Peter TY80329 A Ltd MAJOR N N N N 514.8913 88.702 %
4 Huffman, Joe TY29386 B Ltd MAJOR N N N N 363.6948 62.655 %
5 Fox, Todd   U Ltd MINOR N N N N 360.9411 62.180 %
6 Sturdivant, Charlie TY80586 C Ltd MAJOR N N N N 348.6704 60.067 %
7 Standley, Robert A49729 B Ltd MAJOR N N N N 344.5438 59.356 %
8 Mecklenburg, John   U Ltd MINOR N N N N 286.2143 49.307 %
9 Maloney, Edward   U Ltd MINOR N N N N 206.3510 35.549 %
10 Fata, Paul   U Ltd MAJOR N N N N 165.8097 28.565 %

Oh well. It’s just more incentive to get out and practice more.

A gun for the man in your life


It’s simple; just watch Ramno and get your man whatever he’s carrying (not that I’ve ever been able to sit through a Rambo movie without turning it off and finding something interesting to do, like watching some oil varnish dry, but I can imagine he carries some manly weapons).

I dunno, maybe a scoped 10 inch 500 S&W for IWB carry? Something a man can get his hands around. Ladies; if you want to get me the 500, I’d actually be cool with it. I’d just carry it in a shoulder holster of some kind is all. A set of loading dies for it would be nice too, please. A 7.5″ 454 Casull would be my second choice. That’s just because I already have a DAO 38 snubbie– It serves nicely as ballast for the case it’s stays in.

My 2 cents on the AR system

Both Uncle and Tam linked to what seems to me like an excellent article on the failure mode(s) of the M16/M4 system, which cemented, for me at least, a great deal of respect for the platform. If you haven’t read the whole thing, Do Read it.

It concludes (after much explanation of HOW the conclusions were derived);

“How to Deal With Heat Limits
The Training Answer: First, every GI should see those Colt test videos [of firing them to failure] and know what his gun can, and can’t, do. While the Black Hills guys were correct in noting that SF/SOF guys usually manually fire single shots or short bursts, even most of them don’t know what happens when a gun goes cyclic for minutes at a time. A good video explaining “why you can’t do that” would be a strong addition to training, not only for combat forces, but for support elements who may find themselves in combat and feel the urge to dump mags at cyclic rate.

The Morale Answer: Every GI should see the same done to AKs as well. There is a myth perpetuated by pig-ignorant people (like General Scales) that the AK series possesses magical properties and that the American weapons are crap. In fact, nobody I know of at the sharp end is at all eager to change, perhaps because the laws of physics and the properties of materials apply just as firmly to a gun originally created by a Communist in Izhevsk as they do to a concept crafted by capitalists in California. If you’ve ever fired an AK to destruction, you know that it grows too hot to hold, then the wooden furniture goes on fire, then, if you persist on firing it full-auto, it also goes kablooey. Not because there’s anything wrong with this rifle, but the laws and equations work the same for engineers worldwide.

The Systems Answer: As you can see from the Colt videos, if you clicked on over to Chivers’s article, thickening the barrel nearly doubled the rounds to catastrophic failure on cyclic. An open/closed bolt cycle might have practical benefits. They wouldn’t show up in sustained heavy firing like the destruction tests, but they might show up in how a weapon recoups from high temps, and open-bolt autofire would eliminate cook-offs, at least. But any such approach needs thorough testing.

The Wrong Answer: Replacing the M4 with something like the SCAR or the HK416, something that is, at best, barely better, that is much more maintenance intensive, and that, contra Scales’s assertion that his undisclosed client’s weapon is “the same price,” is twice (SCAR) or three times (416) the money. (The 416 mags are the best part of the system, though).”

I’ve fired over a thousand rounds in a day, both from an AK and a Ruger Mini-14, and didn’t come even close to failure, or even serious degradation of the rifles. (I haven’t tried it with the AR simply because my business hasn’t made products for it as yet) But then I’ve WORKED WITH steel since I was a kid, and know first hand how soft and moldable it becomes at high temperature, and I’ve seen how it can be “hammer welded” which is welding two pieces together that are red hot, just by hammering them together). And just about anyone who grew up on a farm understands “instinctively” that even the best steel becomes soft enough to bend like a pretzel, using nothing but hand and arm muscles, at high temperature, because THEY’VE DONE IT over and over. And so, without even having to think about it, it was natural for me to avoid over-heating the weapons. I’ve never had so much as a cook-off (again; as kids we sometimes cooked off naked rounds on purpose, because it was interesting and fun). I have no doubt than an AR-15 would do as well in a thousand round, one day test, though it may need a little attention to keep it cycling with the carbon that gets into the action. My Colt AR has been known to stop after about 350 rounds unless I keep it real wet (and depending on the particular ammo).

That one of the M4s in the battle related in the article was able to get through ~600 rounds in a very short time is pretty awesome. The physical limits of the steel were exceeded at that point, and physics is physics.

Another quote from the article stuck out to me as great. It addresses the trade-off between the ability of a weapon to fire an enormous number of rounds quickly without failure, verses the operator’s ability to actually carry it (because it’s too heavy). This may be a paraphrase, but it’s really close;
“You can carry it all day or you can fire it all day, but you can’t do both.” Yup. Take your pick.

But then if you’re unfortunate and pathetic enough to have gotten your technical and physics information from Hollywood actors you might believe that, “Fire doesn’t melt steel”.

I found it interesting to look at the “service life” of a typical rifle in terms of actual bullet-acceleration-in-bore time. If we assume a nice round number of one millisecond to push a bullet through the bore, and if we assume a nice round number of, say, 30,000 rounds to wear out the rifle, that’s a “service life” of thirty seconds. Compared to your family car’s engine, the combustion system in a rifle runs at awesome power levels, and with no oil pressure. Your actual mileage may vary.


I reload my own ammo and occasionally a few rounds for friends. I have log files for each caliber and I recently wondered how many rounds I have reloaded for the various calibers. The log files were simple text files and included calibers for which I just did some chronograph measurements and calibers I only did preliminary things like explore powders and bullets to use.

It turned out that the typical log file entries were consistent enough that I could write a simple program to count the number of rounds I reloaded. A typical entry looks like this:

12/27/2014 100 rounds. Win primers. 180 grain Winchester JHP over 6.0 grains of N350. 0 rejects.

All the program had to do was search each line in the files for the word “rounds” preceded by a number then sum those numbers. I found a few cases were I had recorded group sizes or chronograph tests that match the format and changed those to something like “10 shots over the chronograph” from “10 rounds…” and ran the program on *.log in the reloading directory. The result was about double of what I expected in every caliber:

223.LOG: 2027 rounds.
22LR.log: 0 rounds.
3006.LOG: 467 rounds.
300WIN.LOG: 1351 rounds.
40SW.LOG: 34941 rounds.
45.log: 0 rounds.
9MM.LOG: 18643 rounds.
Total: 57429 rounds.

It’s not near as many as a lot of people but I was still amazed. Of course I did start reloading on October 3rd, 1996 which is over 18 years ago. So that only figures out to about 3200 rounds per year. I’m hoping to up that considerably and do a lot more shooting this year.

A story in one bullet

In 1860s America the percussion revolver was the prominent fighting handgun. The 44 caliber, or “44/100ths calibre” was so named at the time because of the gun’s bore. Today we tend to use groove diameter to define caliber, but then why does a modern 44 use a .429″ bullet and a 38 use a .357″ bullet?

Much of the answer lies in this one bullet. When the 44 caliber percussion revolver was converted to fire metal cartridges, it presented the following challenges. The cartridge case of course had to fit into the percussion cylinder chambers, and had to fire a bullet of around .452″ to fill the grooves in a 44 caliber bore. SO the metal case had to fit inside a .452″ or so chamber, and fire a .452″ or so bullet, AND therefore the bullet had to have a heel base of around .429″ to fit inside the metal case. Such is the 44 Colt cartridge. It was built for cartridge conversions of percussion cylinders. It’s a 44 caliber because of the naming convention of the time which went by bore, rather than groove diameter, it uses a .452″ bullet and has a .429″ heel to fit in the case.

From that transition cartridge we see the seeds of how a modern “44” came to have a .429″ bullet. A similar thing occurred with the conversion of 36/100ths calibre percussion revolvers, and that’s how a 36 used a .380″ bullet and how a modern 38 uses a .357″ bullet.

Classic dog shoots man story

This is via an IM from David M. at my work.

Someone wasn’t following all the gun safety rules:

Sheriff Steve Kozisek said Richard L. Fipps, 46, of Sheridan had driven to Murphy Gulch Road with two employees to move a vehicle that had become stuck. Fipps was standing beside his truck as chains were being removed from the front of it when he was shot.

Kozisek said Fipps told a dog in the front seat of the truck to get into the back seat. Among other personal items laying on the back seat was a .300 Winchester Magnum with the safety apparently turned off. The dog managed to discharge the weapon, which fired through the cab of the truck.

The gun wasn’t in use. It should have been unloaded and in a case. Now he may lose his arm. He and others could have been killed by this single shot.

A legend in my own time?

I recently had an email conversation with John G. at the Lewiston Idaho pistol club. I haven’t attended a match there in probably two years but he said they still tell stories about me.


So he claimed. Then he gave me the following examples (link added about the magazine shooting incident):

A shooter dropped a mag while reloading on the run and somehow booted it into the target area, prompting the story about Joe Huffman, who once shot one of his own mags clean through…  Better to be infamous than forgotten, I suppose.  Strangely, I’m reasonably certain that the person telling the story wasn’t shooting with us when it happened, suggesting you’ve become part of the oral history of our matches.

We also still use you as a unit of measure for heights (e.g., “Joe Huffman could shoot over it but nobody else can, so it’s high enough”).

Wow! I’m thinking maybe I should go back and shoot a match with them again sometime over the holidays.

I was wondering. Does this make me a legend in my own time? Or just in my own mind?

Remington clarification

Here are some of the headlines from the lamestreet media (phrase stolen from Alan Korwin):

Never trust the media to get things right. Especially in relation to firearms. Here is what Remington says, via a Tweet from greenmeanie:

HOUSTON, Dec. 6, 2014 /PRNewswire/ — On Dec. 5, 2014, papers were filed seeking approval of a proposed settlement of two economic class-action lawsuits of certain Remington bolt-action centerfire firearms that contain either a Walker trigger mechanism, or a trigger mechanism which utilizes a “trigger connector.”

The filings triggered multiple news reports that mistakenly conveyed the proposed agreement in significant fashions that require immediate clarification.

  • These settlements are not recalls.
  • These settlements are not any admission that the products are defective or unsafe.
  • These settlements are an opportunity for any concerned consumers who have the Remington Model 700, Seven, Sportsman 78, 673, 710, 715, 770, 600, 660, XP-100, 721, 722 and 725 rifles with either a Walker trigger mechanism, or a trigger mechanism which utilizes a “trigger connector” to have Remington install a new trigger.
  • The benefits under the settlement, including the trigger replacement program, will not be in place until after court approval of the settlement and full notice will go out at that time.
  • This culminates from extensive mediator-supervised negotiations between lawyers for those concerned about the triggers and Remington, who while denying there is any cause for concern, always desires to ensure that its customers are satisfied with Remington products.

    A joint press release will be issued to better explain details of the proposed settlement.

    For further information, contact: Mark Lanier at wml@LanierLawFirm.com; 800-723-3216

    SOURCE Lanier Law Firm


    Years ago I read about a fascinating pistol target device described by Jeff Cooper as an Apitir. I searched for it at the time and found nothing. I later forgot the name, which I knew only as an odd name starting with an A. After rediscovering Cooper’s description and searching for it just now, I still find nothing. If anyone is building them, or has build even one, they haven’t posted it on line by the name Apitir, and almost no one has been talking about it.

    Cooper describes it in the sixth item on this page. It’s a great idea, Cooper wanted it to be widely embraced, and since no one else is talking bout it, at least under that name, well, there it is for you to ponder.

    It shouldn’t be difficult to build, but I don’t quite understand what he meant by “actuated by the shooter…with the shooting hand.” Maybe he intended that your pistol be holstered as you pull a cord or some such, and then as the disks begin to roll you draw, aim and fire. My (apparently incorrect) memory of it was that you’d shoot a central target, which would release the two rolling disks. He did not indicate the angle, or pitch, of the sloped runners. A variable slope would allow you to experiment, or change the difficulty, as desired. Some experimentation would be in order, to find a rail design that reliably keeps the disks on track, and lets them fall off when hit.

    I remember thinking that a magazine full of the disks, and a feeding mechanism, would allow for several actuations, or tries, before having to reset the thing. That would make it more complicated and expensive, but far more useful.

    If I had any trust that it would remain unmolested by rifle fire for a number of years, I’d have one built and keep it at the Peterson range. Something like that would make a pretty sweet rifle target though, too.

    One compromise design, or variation, would replace the steel disks with clay “jackrabbits” or similar targets.

    Regarding primers…

    …and getting testy;
    There is total energy, and then there is peak power, time to peak power (which in audio circuitry we referred to as “rise time”) and duration of peak or near peak power. So you’d likely want to be able to graph it as power over time, to “really know” what’s happening. Point being of course that total energy would be somewhat inconsequential unless the power were up to a certain level for a certain period.

    But maybe you got it just like that already. If so, carry on. Don’t mind me sitting in the corner and muttering.

    Experiments with oil and primers

    A week or two ago Ry showed up in my office and said he wanted to do an experiment. He and I have had conflicting information on the contamination of primers by oil. The common word on the Internet and word of mouth is that if you get the tiniest amount of oil on the chemically active portion of a primer then it would go dead.

    However Ry had seen Lyle demonstrate this was not true by putting CLP in a shell casing with an active primer then detonating it a minute or two later. I had done similar things myself. I wanted to deprime some cases with live primers and to test the “kill the primer with oil” hypothesis I put a thin oil in the mouth of a shell casing and waited, sometimes a day or more, but they would still fire just fine. Bah! As usual the Internet is wrong. Right?

    As we talked about the experiment we realized the Internet story wasn’t quite the same thing as our first hand data. Our first hand data wasn’t of putting oil directly on the primer. It was putting oil in the mouth of a shell casing. We believed the thin oil would make it through the flash hole into the active area of the primer.


    But that was an assumption. It was not a proven fact.

    So what we decided to do was soak the primers for few minutes in a paper cup and then load them in a shell casing. We would do several primers then test them at various time intervals, like an hour, a day, a week, and a month. We expected the primers would still be fine after a month and the myth would be busted.

    Here are the solvents we tested:


    We used Winchester small pistol primers:


    Here are the primers being soaked prior to inserting on the empty shell casings:


    An interesting thing occurred. The primers soaked in Break Free CLP turned the CLP slightly red after a few minutes:


    And the primers in the water turned the water slightly yellow:


    We also created two control sets. One set had dry primers in a dry shell casing and the other set had dry primers with solvent put in the shell casing.

    After we had all the shell casing loaded Ry added more of the solvent to the test shell casings so evaporation would not be a factor in the long term testing.

    We then tested both control sets and the test set.

    We hand loaded the empty shell casings into a handgun and put the muzzle tight against an air pillow used for padding in Amazon shipments. We then fired the gun. If it failed to fire we would cock the hammer and try a second time. If it failed both times we called it a dead primer. There were no primers which failed on the first attempt and succeeded on the second. If it popped the air pillow it was a “vigorous” detonation. If it failed to puncture the air pillow it was a “mild” detonation:


    The dry normally inserted primers would punch a hole through both sides of the air pillow even though there was a significant air gap between the two sides:


    We tested two primers for each solvent. The results with solvent only in the shell casing mouth were as follows:

    Solvent Detonation Result
    Water 2 vigorous
    Break Free CLP 2 vigorous
    WD 40 2 mild
    3-IN-ONE 1 vigorous, 1 mild
    Tetra Gun Lubricant 2 vigorous

    This confirmed the tests Lyle and I had done years ago. The primers were still active after putting oil in the case mouth.

    Here are the results of the primers soaked in the paper cups with solvent:

    Solvent Detonation Result
    Water 2 dead
    Break Free CLP 1 mild, 1 dead
    WD 40 1 mild, 1 very mild
    3-IN-ONE 2 mild
    Tetra Gun Lubricant 2 mild

    We will have updates later after the remaining primers have soaked for longer periods of time but it is clear that the flash hole is a significant barrier to the entry of solvents into the primer compound and the common wisdom of oil damaging primers is true.

    Update from Ry after one day:

    Solvent Detonation Result
    Water 2 dead
    Break Free CLP 1 mild, 1 dead
    WD 40 1 very mild, 1 dead
    3-IN-ONE 1 mild, 1 dead
    Tetra Gun Lubricant 2 dead

    Well, there’s always the Contender

    Via TFB, we see The Dominator, a 308 Winchester upper for the 1911. OK then. As Cooper was fond of saying; I suppose we should refrain from asking “why?” I don’t know what it’s for, but it is interesting from a gadgetry liker’s point of view. If it were a choice between the two I think I’d take the Thompson Center Contender. Hmm; how about a 300 Win Mag upper for your LCP, then, for, you know, uh…practice, or something, so when you’re out shooting for defense with your .380 it would serve as low recoil practice for big game hunting.

    Boomershoot 2015 statistics

    Boomershoot 2015 is now half full:

      Total Average per position taken Average per total positions
    Positions Taken 38 - 0.50
    Participants 71 1.87 0.93
    Friday Field Fire participants 11 0.29 0.14
    Friday Clinic participants 6 0.16 0.08
    Friday High Intensity participants 16 0.42 0.21
    Private Fireball participants 0 0.00 0.00
    Saturday Field Fire participants 29 0.76 0.38
    Saturday Clinic participants 4 0.11 0.05
    Saturday High Intensity participants 8 0.21 0.11
    Dinner participants 37 0.97 0.49
    Shooters 70 1.84 0.92
    Spotters 1 0.03 0.01
    Media/Bloggers 9 0.24 0.12
    ATF Approved 12 0.32 0.16
    Staff 24 0.63 0.32

    Keep in mind this after the event has been open for entry for a little over a week and over seven months before the event. There are still positions open in every area so whether you want to shoot from the well drained ground on the berm, with a bench with room for a canopy, or in the .50 Caliber Ghetto you still have those options available.

    There are still opening for Private Fireballs too. The smoke from these can sometimes be seen from over three quarters of a mile away. It’s tough to describe the intensity of the blast when you are 50 feet away. The phrase we hear about 75% of the time from first timers is, “Holy shit!

    Sign up here.

    Kit Gun

    OK, so I’ve been ignorant. Laugh and make fun of me and get it out of the way. Tam posted about a “Kit Gun” recently. I’d seen that term many times, and it’s always been used as though everyone understood what it meant and there was therefore no point in trying to explain it. Kind of like the high school meetings I missed because, well, “We told everyone” they said (meaning they told a few people and assumed everyone else would hear it from them. I was always out of the loop because I only attended half days my senior year. It was a good excuse to avoid pep rallies anyway.

    I searched “kit gun” some time ago and came up with nothing helpful, but doing it just now I found it! A kit gun means it goes with you on hiking and camping trips, and the term comes from the “kit bag” that a hiker or camper might carry. Well I’ve hiked and camped all my life and never heard of a “kit bag”, so the term “kit gun” has been not at all obvious to me. I somehow missed that memo. I suppose everyone knew about all this but me.

    That makes just about every gun I own a “kit gun”, technically, since I would take most any of them along on a camping trip or a hike, and have done so in most cases, but I guess the term refers to one that’s generally more handy (smaller and/or lighter) than some other similar gun in a similar caliber, kind of how a “carbine” is a relatively shorter and lighter version of a particular rifle. As far as I can determine through observation of usage though is that a “kit gun” refers to a handgun only, not a long gun, even though I do have what might be called a “kit bag” that holds a long gun. So a relatively light and handy rifle equals “carbine”, while a relatively light and handy handgun equals kit gun. Is that about right?

    Does this mean that ANY service pistol is a “kit gun” simply because soldiers tend to hike about and are known to camp?

    Just learned this today, so it may be flawed. I’ve ordered “gun kits” before but apparently those do not necessarily qualify as “kit guns”, though there may be such a thing as a “kit gun kit” from which you build your own kit gun.

    OK, so there MUST be a term for a light or small and handy shotgun that I’ve never heard. “Coach gun” maybe, but that’s a side by side with exposed hammers, in my mind anyway, which would exclude many other light and handy shotguns.

    Bath time

    I did a bunch of dozer work at Boomershoot Mecca this weekend. It was very dirty work. The ground was very dry and it turned to powder as soon as I broke it up with the blade. I got really dirty:


    I wore gloves and my hand was clean by comparison:


    I have a solar heated shower at Mecca so I dusted off my clothes and rinsed off my head, arms and hands before I got in my car and left for the day.

    But what I didn’t have there was my gun cleaning supplies.


    It probably is functional for at least as many shots as would be needed in a self-defense situation. But I’m sure the wear rate would be dramatically increased with the oil being soaked up by the dust. And the odds of a malfunction have to be much higher than normal.

    It’s ultrasonic bath time for my STI.