Tucson-John

{Of course I don't mean to single out bicycles here; it's just an example.} I live in a fairly remote area outside of Tucson. Shooting outdoors has always been a fun thing but safety, common sense, & consideration have always been the hallmark of many of the people here. I get livid when idiots BRING or LEAVE GARBAGE out to the open areas.... Lately I have noticed that on State Leased land many people are using it to ride Mountain Bikes...Fine. but many of these people don't seem to care that others have used that areas for shooting sports for DECADES! They ride THROUGH the areas where one is sighting in, practicing, etc - to the point that most all have to travel further and further to escape the Mountain Biker's ill-considered & unsafe practices. A friend of mine had what he considered a close call & actually stopped the Bike rider & explained that if he did not watch where he was riding and listen, he may well ride over a berm or wash that someone was using as a back-stop. And that it was important to watch what others were doing on open areas & give each other some SPACE! He said this in a fatherly, genital way; for I know the man & he is NOT a very hostile fellow. He later told me he was actually surprised that the bike rider kept riding CLOSER: it didn't make sense. The young fellow on the bicycle left & called the Sheriff accusing the other fellow of threatening him with a firearm! The Sheriff came and sorted out all the huff from the young man & took no action as he told him that there was something not quite right about the cyclist's story as it kept changing, etc. In this instance, because the pistol was on the man's hip; it's very presence threatened the other fellow. He probably didn't hear a word said: just fixated on that pistol. My point is that whenever a firearm is involved with an owner, that owner represents firearms owners to the uneducated public. Certainly this could be said to be an element of prejudice but I believe it to be factual. Once when hunting up on a local Mountain we past a couple & said good morning. The woman actually turned to me in a very worried voice & said "you're not going to shoot us, I hope?" I honestly couldn't believe what I was hearing.... I very gently assured the young woman that I had never such intention & was very careful of my trajectory. She responded by asking me in an almost trembling voice what a "trajectory" was, while pulling closer to a younger fellow I thought may be a nephew or son...... I set the little shotgun down several feet away from them and explained; I also digressed into safety rule after safety rule.... I about 60 seconds later I bid them good day & heard her say in a hushed tone to her younger companion, "I had no idea there were men with GUNS up here, I'm SO sorry".... My point being that every time we take a firearm in public we, in a sense become, an unwilling Diplomat for the perception of firearms ownership. It's an annoyance for me primarily because every nuance I make, every word I say, is judged in the light, not of an individual; but as a "man with a gun".

Not only do I wish you good luck in this but I am impressed that you are "taking your sweet time" in making SURE that your points are being made. Too often, the depth of an injustice makes one want to lash out or simply be done with the matter and move on. In some cases, I think that would be appropriate, but in this one - I think your points are so salient, so important, that making sure you get to be heard is really the main agenda. Frankly I think this goes well beyond some character dealing out selfish greed, extremely poor customer service, & a lack of care about the very backbone of his business.....I think this represents the gouging attitude that ruins many sports or activities. Just my opinion, but what you are doing by reacting to this situation is helping those in your area who do not have the strong "financial voice" you have.

I was VERY young when I saw my first negligent discharge. A young boy had a .22 & had his finger on the trigger as he closed the chamber (details fuzzy) and nicked his friend in the hip. The other time I saw a ND was at a RANGE!, when someone striped his leg with a Glock by putting it in a holster with a thumb-strap that got into the trigger guard. In fact (TTBoMK) the whole Glock "New York" trigger issue was in response to a lack of training being addressed by mechanical means instead of educational ones. One of the things that I maintain is to not use the word "accident". Those were negligence; first last and always. Just an opinion but the WAY something is worded can help place it in perspective. When we fall pray to the trap of saying that gun accidents are responsible for an injury, we actually give ammo to anti-gun hype. I have never seen a firearm jump off a table & discharge. Someone had to make an error of judgment. When you really examine it a true "Accident" with a firearm is hard to come by! On another level: It's VERY possible that a store with emphasis on safety, that is well advertised, may actually attract more interested individuals than one that does not. When someone feels safe, they get closer to items of interest. Safety can be a marketing gold mine.

Jay is abiding by the forum rules by not stating the name of the club. Let's not encourage anyone to stray too far. (And the political rhetoric could be toned down, too. Thanks...) I apologize, I actually didn't mean to print the name herein. I realize that would be a "foux pax" & inappropriate; but to use the "power of the press" within the internet per se'. All manner of greed is described with this.....the "bait & switch", the "I have your $, so to heck with you" attitude, etc, etc... Just by the level of number of responses, this touches a cord in many folks!

One thing missing....... The name of the club. I WOULD have a talk w/ the manager & raise Hell. I would also tell him that you have pretty strong internet access and that if he doesn't play fair w/ a good customer you will start being honest and that bad press will out-live any cheap-skate few dollars made on scrounging brass. What this guy is doing is what a LOT of people do with this sport: they make a lot of money middle-manning for a fast profit; morals be damned! The whole panic buying when Obama got elected is a great example; who raised their prices? A Hell of a lot of people did! This was the same as Brady-Bill times. No one NEEDS to sell a higher markup since no laws have been passed....it's just opportunistic gouging. When folks leave a disaster site, often the gas stations suddenly raise their prices, etc, etc. This type of thing should be met with serious intensity. It's one thing to give to the NRA & hope we can all get our materials once Eric Holder starts his Janet Reno interpretation....But it's another to look at what grass-roots organizations are doing locally. This "Gun Club" you're talking about is NOT in business to make money; it's in business to exploit. There is a difference. If I were you I would give him fair warning & fight back. He essentially bilked you out of thousands of dollars, with not so much as a kiss.

The seriousness of this whole subject is a prescription for high blood pressure. If you DO act appropriately & say something; it becomes very bad press for others in the store thinking of purchasing a (first) firearm; if you are discrete, the point is not taken as strongly as it should. I have only had this happen once, at a "sporting goods" store and I quickly raised my hand to brush the barrel before it swept my aged body. Quite eye contact with the perpetrator was all that was needed as he knew he committed a sin. But the story seems to be similar to those above. Some people should not drive, teach school, become a doctor, or own a firearm. It's just too much responsibility for those who are targeted by today's advertising or are interested in Hollywood personalities opinions.

This could be where it started: http://ammunitionaccountability.org/default.asp The consensus is that the cost vs. the bureaucracy is not a feasible adventure. HOWEVER.....we really need to know that now that the Dems control the congress & White House we WILL see some crazy stuff. The best thing (IMO) is to 1. be prepared, 2. make sure a reasonable unified voice is heard as to WHY these things won't work as planned!

There are a lot of ways to keep tabs on what the administration does in certain matters like firearms laws. There are services that will route any new legal proposals from both the House & Senate as well as White house to your Email. I was interested enough to subscribe....WOW, Did I get a boat-load of material! Thus far, in a nut-shell, only the usual players are even interested in any curtailment (the Violence Policy Institute, Brady, ad nausea) & they have sent "wish-lists" & that's about all. The ISSUE is that there is so much "pre-legislation fear" that MANY things are off the shelves.....gone. This is actually what Brady DID during '94: their legislation made middlemen much wealthier and that's about all. Hi-caps were still available but at 4 times the price, etc. Well this time it's just about anything! In AZ we usually have sources from the small "Mom & Pop gun store" to the mid-size sporting goods stores for public sources. Most of them are shopped out starting with the election day. Now it's become almost a competition to hoard material. Primers being one of the most important items as for many people, they cannot be replaced. I don't foresee this stopping at anytime soon because it feeds on the fear of permanent loss. Frankly, the present Administration doesn't have to make any laws: we have already diminished supply, ourselves. From what I've actually read, they are much too busy with the economy & foreign policy to play with gun control. The taxes they could get from ammo or whatever is too small to develop a whole bureaucratic tax agenda & playing with the BATFE to gather peanuts is not worth the potential backlash from the public. It's just the usual players that are demanding more laws & that makes a reaction buying spree. Primers are made in various ways but most all depend on BOTH preexisting physical construction and in a boxer primer the manufacturing of the shell or cap body really has to be exact; any deviation from a certain height will spoil the primer. Additionally the anvil has to sit in snugly & consistently and the chemical makeup has to include a physical sensitizer (powdered glass generally) that has a consistent mix in it's lot run. Because glass can separate from the rest of the material, opportunities for problems exist if speed of production is mandated before quality of the final product. The Tula Arsenal in Russia was their (the USSR) prime source. It would be interesting to find out if that government-run firm was directly involved in Wolf's production methods. As Russia is a cash strapped nation, production runs are designed to maximize initial profit not long term name recognition. That's not to say anything they make will be garbage but the opportunity to make a really fine hand load goes down with the company that demands bulk sales before anything else. I've heard of a lot of ammo firms from Russia, Wolf, Bear, etc....their names can change quickly. Long standing firms like Remington have an investment in their name; so goes a great deal of emphasis on output quality.

I've heard it said many times that we react as we train. With that in mind, IF I was in your position I would retain my 34 and make it my "sports" weapon. When that weapon was in my hand I would be thinking of meets & targets. I would think that you carry it a different way than you would a uniform duty weapon...... That way you can "compartmentalize" the use of the two for two different agendas. The 21 is for business; it's method of carry would be different, your physical orientation to that piece would be business, etc, etc. I heard about this from a fellow who always used to interject the words & phrases "IDPA" & "target" when referring to subject matter at a range & very consciously altering his descriptions & speech when referring to work: never confusing the two.

REX is actually remarkable. I mention it (for an example) as the exceptionally low level of unburnt powder in a variety of barrel lengths was similar. REX is not a panacea for all needs, but for clean burn; it's a jaw dropper. With regards to your Blazer material; you would need to pop one open and actually SEE whats there before you could even start to choose what's competitive with it. An enormous amount can be determined by simple examination. Would CCI actually tell you what's in it? I have no idea. Sometimes, if you get to a tech instead of a marketing rep, you may get a straight answer. It's worth a 2 minute call if you have an interest. I have wound up with a great deal of journals & books on the subject; just by collecting some esoteric information on smokeless powder when the opportunity arose. REX has little to NO graphite. This may be a clue. The graphite is used as a method to enhance the metering & pouring of a material as well as helping it deal with static electric initiation problems. It burns poorly and frequently finds itself in residue. That does NOT mean that a powder having graphite will not burn cleanly, but powders that do - generally have little to none [& high residue powders often have a lot of it]. (revision) I just did a bit of homework for you. CCI (& fellows) have a deal with Alliant for their powder in their packaged ammo. Their Mexico City dist. is a good place to start. I'm going to guess that it's not a canister powder of course, but a bulk lot of of something similar to Power Pistol.

Since I haven't gotten too many responses I've done my best to gather info from other sources. Alliant appears to be one of the most consistent in terms of levels of energetic components. That is, ratio of NC to NG maintaining themselves for the longest "on market" time period. When the company was Hercules, it developed Bullseye, (colored) Dot series, 2400, & Herco. The RATIO formula has not altered but when the company was bought (& the canisters read "formerly Hercules") they did alter levels & even existence of Rosin, polyester as well as the stabilizers Diphenylamine & Ethyl Centalite. Thus the "cleaner burning" marketing agenda on their labels at that period. The point being that this particular company has the longest proven powder (energetic) components of major canister providers. Their ratios of NC to NG have a track record going back about 60+ years w/ those quoted above. Their allocations to common loadings have remained fairly consistent through-out the years with alterations coming from SAMMI. The interesting case of the LOWERING of loading data of 357mag being prominent. The changing of loading data of "new" cartridges being interesting in-so-far as chamber design changes also take place [Glock & .40S&W or some companies making their 357sig cartridges head space on the mouth others on both the mouth and shoulder of the cartridge like a rifle]. TTBoMK I have not heard of SAMMI LOWERING any loadings.... Hodgdon in a very interesting company. It's history is relatively new(er) starting off about the mid 1960's. They were interested in development of marketable powder from available material starting points like Cordite or Ballistite (which is 50/50 NC to NG with only a small % of dipheylamine). They are listed as an Importer/Exporter. They also acquired IMR and distribute for Winchester. They recently acquired Goex (Blackpowder). So they are a real "mover" & appear to be a competitive with Allient in the business, having some relationship with Primex Technologies which I suppose gives them the "in" to work with energetic material world-wide. Due to quite a bit of research the levels of component elements range from zero to a highest level that will allow functionality in today's cartridges. The days of Cordite are over for the most part but canister powder does not HAVE to HAVE anything but an energetic material and a stabilizer: it's burn rate can be controlled by shape & weight alone (as in Cordite). The range levels that you will really see (IF we can ever get the REAL information) of the powders will be: Nitroglycerin Cas Number: 55-63-0 Percentage Range: 0-40% Nitrocellulose Cas Number: 9004-70-0 Percentage Range: Remainder to 100% Diphenylamine Cas Number: 122-39-4 Percentage Range: 0.3-1.5% Graphite Cas Number: 7782-42-5 Percentage Range: 0.02-1% Dibutyl phthalate percentage Range: 0-10% Polyester adipate proprietary or simple polyester Percentage Range: 0-10% Rosin Cas Number: 8050-09-7 Percentage Range: 0-5% Ethyl Acetate Cas Number: 141-78-6 Percentage Range: 0-1.5% A powder does NOT have to have all of the above materials. Notice the potential high levels of burn-rate modifiers. The stabilizers can exist at a level of 1% but the Rosin & polyester can make up a very large percentage or VIRTUALLY NONE. REX powder (SB NC powder Mfg in Hungary) can be nearly pure NC in flake form. Their powders are named "0" - "3" with REX #2 being a VERY clean pistol powder. A friend had a quality chrono & was shocked to see how fast some of the 9mm &.38 loads were with virtually no carbon or unburnt powder. The material claims to be NC with an extremely* small level of burn rate modifier (as it's shotgun powder). I believe that the percentages are unusually low; as I have actually not seen any powder this clean previously. *REX is produced by NIRTOKEMIA of Hungary, available in 1Kg canisters at $23.99 USD Information quoted above came from MSDS from PRIMEX Technology.

You're welcome. Many people try some wild stuff with reloading: often out of curiosity & not a sense of irresponsibility. If the facts are known most would be very conservative in their approach & we would not hear about people having their guns blow up, etc. But sadly not much is spoken of what is taking place on a physics or chemical level with firearms because much of this is not common knowledge. The concept of a detonation, for instance from a sever LOWERING of powder levels is rarely talked about but the facts are that smokeless powder IS an explosive. We have become so used to the expression "propellant" that we think in those terms. We are dealing with common H.E. materials - that have been "tamed" for the express purpose of making a projectile fly down a tube. However those materials are still there, albeit coated with polyester & graphite & initiated with a dramatically lower level of primary initiation than would occur in an industrial blasting setting. When conceived in those terms we immediately see why any adjustment [from what has been published as appropriate] for the task at hand is a gamble. There are hard & fast rules that will apply IF we bear in mind that the goal is to continually control the initiation process to maintain a deflagration. If we do not, we move from a burning to a detonation because that is actually what the material chemically "wants" to do. Our safety not only lies in following well trod ground in terms of what research (i.e. "deflagration to detonation" modeling) is available to us but to recognize that the materials are only as safe as their combined elements will allow. Many materials that were common only decades ago are never seen any more in certain areas (like primers) because research showed them to be too great a risk at NOT containing a controlled "burn". Other newer materials allowed progress. The invention of triple based smokeless powders made safer artillery possible as that venue controlled the rate of burn in a space that was an order of magnitude larger (& contained more surface area) than a firearm. The whole of the subject is fascinating..... (Pun intended.) :-)

There is a REASON why you would not want to load it.....Powder blends for different burn rates are made with blends that go BACK TO A SOLVENT LEVEL in the manufacturing process. Companies don't blend solid powders together like salt & sugar.... Please understand this. The mixing of two powders will give spiked burning rates no matter how well you "mix" them. The result is jumps & drops in pressures. This happens virtually in nano-seconds. The results are WILDLY unpredictable. At the very least you are not going to get a group that you can count on. The other issue is vibratory separation within the shell that may result in a real disaster. Depending upon a variety of factors you could blow the chamber immediately; even with a very light load.

Your G34 has a bbl longer than most. This would be an important consideration for me in making a decision - the barrel length. With many hand loads, the time spent burning in the barrel determines both efficiency of the powder and potential of your round.A GREAT example is the 357sig. IMR quote speed pretty much at the same level as the 357mag. When we look at the barrel length on each quote we see why. You put a 357mag loaded with slow powder in a six inch wheelgun & certain weights will reach 1700fps!!! My point is the "burning room" you can get from that G34 bbl is enormous. {You could find a slow powder that could put that bullet as flat as can be} All other things being equal, if you get that bullet moving FAST, the potential for accuracy may climb as well.

Heavy pure lead HBWC loaded backward was a big topic of discussion back in the day. There was a mold for 180, the idea was to use a VERY fast SB powder to compensate for a short barrel (sound familiar?). (Hornady actually made a pure lead commercial HBWC that was so soft & so deep it seemed like a mistake but would expand to a nightmarish degree in soft tissue.) There was also an old police round that Lyman made a mold for that had a very large hollow cavity. It was a 200gr RN; but loaded backward......It may do something serious w/ today's powders.