Category Archives: Arms

10/22 Precision Rifles

KIDD 10/22 in Archangel stock, Ruger 10/22 with Feddersen barrel in Vantage stock

These are both Ruger 10/22 style rifles built for shooting .22LR with maximum accuracy. On top is an $860 rifle built entirely by KIDD Innovative Design. The receiver and trigger are milled from aluminum, and the bolt from hardened steel. The single-stage trigger is also a crisply machined assembly that adjusts down to a pull of just 1.5 pounds. The lightweight barrel is guaranteed to group inside of half an inch at 50 yards. The gun here is screwed into a comfortable $100 ProMag Archangel Target stock

Do you have to spend $1000 to get an accurate .22 rifle? Expert barrel maker Fred Feddersen says one of his $170 barrels will turn an off-the-rack Ruger into a gun that can compete with any custom autoloader. So the second gun shown is a standard Ruger 10/22 receiver and bolt onto which I swapped Feddersen’s barrel. Of course I don’t think I can really shoot that well with a standard trigger, so to be fair I bought another $200 KIDD trigger assembly for it. The gun is shown here screwed into a beautiful $175 Tactical Solutions Vantage laminated stock.


The ammo shortage continues to plague the market for .22LR, so I consider myself lucky to still have four different types of ammo on hand. I screwed an AAC Element suppressor to each barrel, put each rifle in the Archangel stock, mounted the same high-power scope, and shot ten-round groups at 50 yards with the following subsonic 40gr loads:

  • Eley Match
  • SK+
  • CCI HP
  • Aguila SuperExtra

I have plenty of the Aguila on hand, so I used that for sighting and shot two groups with that. The Ruger/Feddersen fired all 50+ shots without any hiccups. The KIDD began to bog down at the end, experiencing a few failures to fire or extract on the Aguila. Cleaning the chamber and bolt face and testing some more showed it’s capable of running smoothly when clean, but evidently it doesn’t like too much of the copious .22LR fouling to build up. Do those tighter tolerances translate to higher precision?
Continue reading

Rimfire Suppressors: Lessons and Warnings

One of my first suppressors, registered ten years ago, was a GEMTECH Outback-II: a lightweight can designed for the diminutive pressure and volume generated by .22LR cartridges. As was common at the time the suppressor was not designed to be routinely opened and cleaned.

This is a big mistake for a .22LR suppressor, and here’s why: .22 rimfires are very dirty. Over time layers of condensed lead, hardened with powder byproducts and bullet lubricant, will accumulate on the baffles that are supposed to disperse the propellant gasses inside the can. After thousands of rounds the silencer can double or triple in weight and lose most of its sound attenuation as it clogs with lead.

A few years ago one licensed manufacturer, SRI, began to “jailbreak” old suppressors that weren’t originally designed to be cleaned: for a few hundred dollars they clean or replace the old core and fit an endcap that can be easily unscrewed. Curious as to just how bad the problem can be I decided to open my Outback II. (Doing this in a non-destructive fashion took quite a bit of work, a lot of penetrating lubricant, and a few special tools.) Here is what the baffles looked like:

Outback-II aluminum baffles after thousands of rounds

For comparison, my latest rimfire suppressor is an AAC Element II, designed to be routinely opened and cleaned, and here is what its baffle stack looks like when new:

Baffle stack from AAC Element II suppressor

Partially sandblasted aluminum baffles from old Outback-II suppressorJust how bad is that fouling? I spent about two hours with a sandblaster trying to clean the Outback’s aluminum baffles. Here’s a picture with two done and two just begun:

I can see why many consider it better to just replace the baffles once they’re this bad. The fouling on the inside cone of the first baffle was so stubborn I simply could not get it off with a sandblaster. Some people report better results wet tumbling baffles with steel pins for a day or two. However any mechanical cleaning strong enough to remove the lead alloy that builds up will eventually degrade the facets of the baffles themselves — especially those made of aluminum.

Is this avoidable? One experienced gunsmith I know has always applied lithium grease every few hundred rounds to his rimfire silencers. After thousands of rounds his suppressors have no buildup that can’t be wiped off with a cloth. Anti-seize and other heavy lubricants are also used for this purpose.

Lessons learned:

  1. Don’t buy a rimfire suppressor you can’t open to lubricate and clean.
  2. If you have a sealed suppressor you shoot a lot of unjacketed bullets through then eventually you’ll need to get it opened and cleaned.

AR-15 “Pistol” PDW

AR-15 .300BLK Pistol PDW

This is my recent AR-15 pistol build. The upper assembly from CMMG was $700 and features a KeyMod free-float handguard and 8″ medium barrel. It is chambered in .300BLK, which is currently the most versatile and efficient AR-15 caliber for such short barrels. I assembled the lower from a Seekins Precision forged receiver, Phase 5 Tactical pistol buffer tube, Noveske QD end plate, CMC 3.5lb single-stage trigger, and Stark SE-2 grip. Total component cost for the lower was $450. Unloaded weight for the complete firearm is only five pounds.

A generation ago sub-machine guns were the middle ground between handguns and full-power rifles. A famous photo from moments after the 1981 assassination attempt on President Reagan shows a Secret Service agent readying an Uzi he had produced from a nearby briefcase. We have since learned that power is more important than volume of fire, and that guns on full-auto with concealable magazines run empty far too quickly. Today the niche between handguns and long guns is filled with rifle-caliber “personal defense weapons” (PDWs), which are powerful enough for a serious gun fight but still portable enough for every day use and potential concealment.

AR-15 Pistol and Short-Barreled Rifle (SBR) lowersThe advantage of a “pistol” AR-15 is that it can be equipped with a barrel shorter than 16″ without the hassles of registering it as a Short-Barreled Rifle (SBR). What qualifies it as a pistol is that it doesn’t have a full stock or second vertical grip, yet the buffer tube required for the AR-15 to function can serve in a pinch as a three- or four-point mount, providing accuracy on par with a traditional carbine. (The ATF, struggling to make 80-year-old laws look reasonable in spite of evolutions in gun design and tactics, recently ruled that even arm braces do not turn a pistol into an SBR.)
Continue reading

NFA Rules on Pistols, PDWs, AOWs, and SBRs

The National Firearms Act (NFA) was enacted in 1934 in an attempt to control weapons popular in Prohibition era gang warfare. After eighty years its implementation by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms (ATF) has become rather strange, and its controls on items like short barrels and suppressors seem archaic.

The following infographic shows a variant of the XCR with a 10″ barrel. This is a piston-operated autoloading firearm that can chamber a variety of light rifle cartridges. Under federal law the top three configurations are considered pistols, and no special controls apply to their construction, sale, or possession. (State laws can vary widely on these matters, so those are not addressed here.)

Something weird happens in the fourth configuration: Adding a second vertical grip turns it into an NFA-regulated firearm called an “Any Other Weapon” (AOW), and would be a felony if the receiver were not already registered as an AOW.

To comply with the NFA I had to use a different receiver registered as a Short-Barreled Rifle (SBR) for the last picture.

Infographic: NFA Rules on Pistols, AOW, and SBR

Hollywood Reality Check: Stun Guns and Tasers

Not long ago the knockout myth was a staple of action shows: Heroes could drop victims cold with a single karate-chop to the back of the head, then carry on with no concern they would regain consciousness before the end of the scene. Fortunately, increasing awareness of the seriousness of brain injury has relegated this plot device to farces. In reality any blow that knocks somebody out for longer than a few minutes is likely to cause extended and often permanent brain damage.

But Hollywood has replaced the knockout blow with an even more absurd gag: the stun gun, which with a single zap appears to drop victims to the ground and render them unconscious long enough to be moved and tied up. The reality is that electroshock weapons are far less reliable and effective, but also very interesting.

Typical Stun GunBasic electroshock weapons are often misleadingly called stun guns. They create a high voltage charge between two electrodes. When pressed against a conductor like human skin low current flows through the conductor between the electrodes. The current triggers pain receptors, so the victim feels extreme pain, but the sensation is localized to the area between the electrodes. The shock may be startling, but its effects are limited to the individual’s reaction to pain. A typical person will recoil from the shock and try to avoid continued contact. An angry person might just get more angry.

In order to cause more dramatic reactions electric current needs to travel through muscle. Taser International pioneered the development and publicity of electroshock weapons that can cause major muscle groups to involuntarily seize up, usually resulting in victims falling to the ground, incapacitated. There is some fascinating science behind the exact methods Taser uses to achieve these results without endangering a victim’s heart, worth reading in this feature by the IEEE.Taser X26

But Tasers are not magic wands: A lot has to go right for them to work effectively.

First, the electroshock effect only lasts as long as the current runs: As soon as the current stops or the circuit is broken the victim suffers no lingering impairment. To maintain contact Taser electrodes are actually hypodermic barbs. (This fact surprised me, especially since the barbs often punch through clothing and draw blood. A Taser engineer I talked to noted that more than a million people have been voluntarily “tased” and there have been no reports of associated infections. He mused that the electric current may have a sterilizing effect, though there has been no scientific study on that question.)

Electrodes have to span core muscle groups to cause incapacitation. If the barbs are too close to each other their current path, and hence their effects, will be localized. The electroshock effect also depends on where the electrodes hit: Areas with few muscles and nerves, like the lower rib cage, do not reliably incapacitate. However Taser electrodes are also barbed on their sides so that a victim attempting to pull them out to stop the pain will likely complete a highly incapacitating circuit leading from his hand through his chest to the other electrode.

Because the electrodes need some separation Tasers are ideally discharged from a short distance. Two electrodes are propelled from the weapons with an 8 degree vertical spread. In less ideal conditions one electrode can miss, in which case the victim gets no shock. Or the victim could be too close for the electrodes to spread adequately. In those circumstances Taser trains users to “drive” the weapon into contact with the victim: in addition to the fired electrodes a Taser cartridge contains contact electrodes, and its circuitry can detect which one to energize to complete the largest circuit on the victim.

It is possible to “armor” against Tasers by wearing conductive clothing or spray-on coatings. However if you’re armoring yourself against Tasers you should consider that the next steps in the escalation of force are impact weapons or firearms, which will more likely cause serious injury or death. (This is why Tasers are so popular with law enforcement: In many scenarios they can cut short altercations that would otherwise require officers to tackle or grapple subjects, resulting in frequent injuries to both parties. Although that benefit has been tarnished by disturbingly many incidents in which officers abuse Tasers to inflict pain or assert power in non-violent confrontations.)

So, clearly Hollywood is getting it wrong when they depict simple stun guns incapacitating people, or advanced electroshock weapons like Tasers knocking people out. Please stop.

The Problem With Nickel-Boron

A few months ago I discussed metals and coatings for firearm actions. I noted the NiB (nickel-boron) gets discolored by fouling, but my photos only showed a sparkling new NiB-X BCG. Following is a picture of what it looks like after a few hundred rounds of use, followed by ultrasonic cleaning and then aggressive scrubbing with steel and brass wire brushes. For comparison I show my heavily-used chromed BCG on top.

AR-15 bolts: Chrome and NiB-X, as clean as they get

Is this just a cosmetic issue? This is the only cleaning I’ve given the NiB BCG. I haven’t lubed it and I have subsequently run a few hundred rounds more without any action failures. However it seems plausible that if fouling can bind to the surface this stubbornly it could build up to the point of overtaking the nickel-boron’s lubricity and causing a stoppage that only traditional lubricants prevent. As noted in the original article this is not a problem with chrome and NP3: All photos of those to date have been after they were used and wiped clean with minimal brushing.

Update: A number of people say it’s unfair to compare a BCG from a piston gun to one from a DI gun, since the latter is subject to much harsher fouling. So for comparison I pulled and cleaned an NP3-coated BCG I’ve been running in a DI gun: pictures in my comment below.

Reloading Adventures: Rounds Stuck in Chambers

I reload for half a dozen guns in .308 Winchester. Reloading is a lot easier if you only have to neck-size fired cases. Until recently I kept all brass segregated by rifle, and only “full-length” case-sized brass that came out of semi-autos (which are under enough pressure during extraction to bulge the case body). Then I thought I’d get clever and see if any chambers were cross-compatible, allowing me to use brass fired in one gun in others without full resizing. Sure enough, a handful of fired cases suggested that all my bolt-guns were interchangeable.

However, since this apparent epiphany I have broken a CTR stock, a Savage bolt handle, and five cleaning rods in the process of extracting rounds stuck in chambers. I have also resolved to small-base-size any case that isn’t being reloaded for the bolt gun in which it was last fired. Here are some nuances I’ve learned.

Evidently fired case size isn’t consistent. Even though I’ve been using a single lot of brass, not all loads fully form the case to the chamber. Presumably even if I stuck with the same load the brass would exhibit different springback on subsequent reloadings as it work hardens.

I eventually discovered that my DTA chamber has a relatively large base, which led to my other painful discovery: “full-length” rifle sizing dies do not necessarily size the whole case. For example, when properly set, my Lee full-length .308 die doesn’t even cover the bottom quarter inch of a case. Only a “small-base” sizing die will ensure the entire case is squeezed back into spec.

My other irritating discovery is that few “case gauges” check for full chamber fit. The Wilson case gauges I had been using all along are actually overbored to ensure they can measure fire-formed brass. They are only meant to check headspace and trim length. The fact that a case clears a Wilson gauge is insufficient to determine whether it will chamber in any gun. The only gauge I could find to guarantee chamber fit is the blue JP Enterprises one in the middle of this picture:

L.E. Wilson gauge, JP Enterprises gauge, formerly stuck round

The JP gauge is cut to the minimum SAAMI chamber spec, which means that if a round clears it and fails to chamber you’ve got a chamber problem, not a case size problem. But we’re talking about very fine tolerances. The round in the JP gauge in the picture is actually oversize enough to jam in my Savage. You can barely tell that by looking, but you can feel the base protruding ever-so-slightly at the rear of the gauge.
Continue reading

Hand-discharging loaded rounds

Hand-fired loaded round

This sequence shows me discharging a loaded round I couldn’t disassemble. There is no reason to ever do something like this other than brazen curiosity. If you want to disable a live round you should pull the bullet and dump the powder. If for some reason that fails a safer alternative to discharging it is to “cook it off” in an open pit fire. (Ensure that anyone not wearing a face shield and thick clothing stands clear until it pops.)

Firearm cartridges are not particularly powerful or dangerous unless they are tightly confined. Without a gun barrel to contain and direct the pressure smokeless powder burns slowly, if at all, and bullets are propelled only by the force of the primer. (Granted, primers are not toys. They are true explosives. Small firearm primers produce 5-10 foot-pounds of energy, and can produce pressures on the order of 25kpsi in a small closed chamber. Like firecrackers, they can burn and maim.)

The round I had on my hands contained a full load of powder that turned out to be too fast for the bullet. I managed to pull the rest of the batch, but one bullet came out and left its copper gas check in the case. In that condition it could have been safely fired in a gun, except that it could have badly fouled the bore depending on how the gas check engaged it. So instead I drilled a hole in a piece of wood to tightly hold the case neck, put on leather and a face shield, then detonated the primer with a steel punch.

Integral .300BLK case and bullet on the left; hand-fired case and bullet missing gas check on right

An integral pulled bullet and case are shown left. The hand-fired case and bullet missing its gas check are on the right.

The problem with any containment when discharging a round is that without experience and knowledge of the case and powder you may be surprised at where the force ends up. The unsupported case could become a projectile or fail and produce shrapnel. The bullet and any other particles in the path of the venting gases can also be ejected almost anywhere. The setup above was carefully planned to allow for the worst possible outcome in every dimension. What actually happened is that the case neck held fast in its hole in the upper plank and the unsupported annealed upper body was blown out by the pressure, but did not fail. The gas check ended up embedded in the bottom plank directly below, and the gas was able to vent out the gap between the planks, blowing only minor wooden debris along with it.

Products I’m looking for in 2014


  • Supply in the firearms industry is finally starting to converge on demand. But reloaders are still grasping for powder, and .22LR is still absurdly scarce. We’re looking for both of those shortages to end by the middle of this year.
  • Expanding subsonic rifle bullets: Looks like this is finally the year for these to hit the mainstream market. Outlaw State Bullets and Lehigh Bullets have had some expensive offerings. But this year Norma is supposed to begin importing their Plastic Points, and Remington should finally have an offering tailored for their 300BLK.
  • .38 Supercomp Sig and Glock conversions. The caliber offers the ballistics of .357 Sig in the diameter of 9mm, which translates to more magazine capacity. Also, as a straight-walled cartridge it’s easier to reload.
  • Laser Doppler Anemometers: Solid-state devices for shooters, similar to laser rangefinders, that can measure downrange winds. Winds are the last primary ballistic factor that can’t be measured outside instrumented ranges. Even the most skilled long-range marksmen in the field have limited indicators from which to read and compensate for windage. Admittedly this technology is still some years off from commercialization.
  • Chemical laser guns. Well maybe not this year, but the technology is there for it.



  • High-speed consumer video cameras: GoPro may be inching back into this niche left by Casio four years ago. Their top offerings can now sustain 240fps at 480p, but I’m still looking for thousands of frames per second in a sub-$1000 camera, which is no stretch given the state of the art.
  • Reasonably-priced HD IP security cameras: For some reason these persist at over $200 when the state of the art should have them closer to $100.
  • Digital thermal and night-vision gear: No manufacturer seems to want to lunge for the tipping point. Equipment that is currently produced at a small scale, and therefore costs 4- or 5-figures, could be profitably mass-produced and sold for 3-figures to the sport and non-military security markets.