The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > Hogan's Alley > Handguns: General Handgun Forum

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old November 5, 2000, 02:47 PM   #1
thanatos
Member
 
Join Date: August 23, 2000
Location: West Linn, OR USA
Posts: 44
For about twenty years now, I have wanted to find something that could combine the power of my S&W 29's, the size and handling of my 1911's, and the magazine capacity of my P-35's.

Talked with Johnny Rowland a couple of nights ago, and he tells me that he is getting 1600+ fps w/ a 185grn bullet out of a 4.25" Commander barrel ~ 1,000 lb/ft energy. Have this craving to build a .460 Rowland / ParaOrdnance P-14, using a P-13 slide to keep the compensated barrel down to a length that can be carried concealed.

Anyone have any experience with the .460???
thanatos is offline  
Old November 5, 2000, 03:13 PM   #2
Cheapo
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 19, 1998
Posts: 986
A friend has let me fire several loads in both a 1911 and a Glock converted for this beauty.

I love it. Haven't accuracy tested it, but once I learned where the group impact was, it appeared I was getting 10-inch totally offhand groups on 100-yard rocks.

I like it much better on the 1911. Large-frame Glocks are too deep in the grip, front-to-back, for my hands.

With the comp on either gun, it's much like shooting my moose loads in .357 Magnum. Harder recoil impulse, but about the same or slightly less muzzle flip.
Cheapo is offline  
Old November 5, 2000, 06:17 PM   #3
JMBrowning
Junior member
 
Join Date: November 3, 2000
Location: Jonesboro,GA
Posts: 92
I converted an old Argentine-manufactured (DGFM-FMAP) Colt to .460 Rowland about a year ago.Good thing-the gun has a very strong frame and slide.

I've fired it quite a bit,and Johnny didn't lie.It does equal .44 Magnum ballistics.My favorite round is a Hornady 185 gr. XTP with 18.8 gr. of AA#7,which chronographs at around 1550 fps.A good defense load is a Hornady 230 gr. XTP with 15.7 gr. of AA#7,at around 1350 fps.

The above is with a 5-inch barrel;I guess it's available in the 4.25" barrel,now,huh?It wasn't when I made mine.

The thing is a cannon-very accurate,but you think that the slide is going to depart the frame and head for the moon when you fire it,though.

------------------
If it ain't broke,don't fix it!
JMBrowning is offline  
Old November 5, 2000, 10:05 PM   #4
Henry Bowman
Junior member
 
Join Date: April 27, 2000
Location: AK
Posts: 139
I should title this response "Reinventing The Wheel" in commenting on the "new" 460 (.451-.452) Roland which is a rip off of the old .451 Detonics ain't it? I can't remember whether Dean Grinnel had his .45 Super articles published but it's been a long time ago. We've got much better powder choices these days to keep the pressures down and I've loaded my share of Supers using all sorts of recipes but always had a problem with the recoil of the Supers and accuracy falls off when you push bullets much past 1000fps in my 1911s. It's certainly not the equal of any .44 Rem Mag I shoot in any case, factory fodder should run a 240-250 @ 1500fps and handloads with LBT 330s run @1300fps. That gentlemen is the .44 Mag I've been shooting since the late 50s. If one needs a tool that's an autoloader in the power range of the .44 Mag then I'd suggest the LAR Grizzley (discontinued now) in .44 Mag or .45 Win Mag or the .50ae and Desert Eagle's .44 Mag or .50ae. These guns were designed to run at the higher magnum pressures that the smaller 1911 was not. 1911s break slide stops regularly runing loads under 22,000cup and also regulary shear barrel lugs and links under heavy use. These are some of the reasons I have for not carrying the Super in a carry gun. A compensator on a carry gun? Ya gotta be kidding me. Regards, henry
Henry Bowman is offline  
Old November 6, 2000, 10:40 AM   #5
thanatos
Member
 
Join Date: August 23, 2000
Location: West Linn, OR USA
Posts: 44
What I was looking for was more in the line of constructive critique, not a flame. I would expect that the next paragraph would tell me that your 296cid flathead Merc used to spin 6,000rpm all day, and would literally blow these furrin' thingies off the road today.
The .44 RemMag ammo commercially available today is not the equal of what we were shooting a quarter of a century ago, and you have to handload to get back to those levels. The M29's I had 10 yrs ago were destroyed by 240grn ammo chron'd @ 1600 fps, but the later 629 was stronger, and its lockwork survived w/o complaint. The motorcycles I raced professionally, internationally 20yrs ago were not as fast as the bikes they sell off the showroom floor today. Time marches on, and things improve.

I cannot tell you the c.u.p. of the Corbon +P's that I shoot regularly, but in over 10,000 rounds through my Para P-14, I have never experienced stripped barrel lugs, slide stop failure, etc. Do you think metalurgy has improved, maybe? What the Detonics did (admittedly ahead of its time) is not necessarily relevant to the Johnny Rowland developed round, and I don't recall anyone claiming that his work (in conjunction w/ Clark's and Accurate) is revolutionary, more evolutionary.

If you have personal experience with this round and related parts, I am anxious to hear of those experiences.

I have no use for a laser, nor a red dot tube on a carry gun, and a compensator at the end of a 5" barrel is a bit excessive for me, but perhaps a comp on a 4.25" barrel is back within reason IF IT WORKS? People thought I was crazy when I carried a 5" M629 concealed, but a Desert Eagle in any caliber is a bit beyond the edge.

If you have personal experience with the current incarnation of this idea, I would enjoy your perspectives; if not, perhaps memories of that flathead Merc should be sufficient...

p.s. > I do not recall claiming that Rowland's round could be loaded hotter than what you can do with a .44 Mag, only that it is in the territory of what is commercially available (and the gun is in a smaller physical package).

[This message has been edited by thanatos (edited November 06, 2000).]

ArmySon, you can put in your .02 worth any time?!?

[This message has been edited by thanatos (edited November 06, 2000).]
thanatos is offline  
Old November 6, 2000, 11:22 AM   #6
ArmySon
Staff Alumnus
 
Join Date: April 14, 2000
Posts: 2,926
There's nothing wrong with a compensator on a carry gun. Yes the flash would be excessive. However, the flash is several inches above the gun. If you're moving and firing correctly in night conditions, and using the correct sight picture, the flash is no worse then a non-comp gun.

Now on the subject of the .460 Rowland. Indeed you can load a .44 MAG much hotter. However, the .460 is damn close ballistics wise to commerically available .44 mag rounds. Add that with less recoil and less muzzle flip, it's a great caliber.

I'm not sure who makes a kit for the 4.25" barrel. Like I stated in our email, mine came from Clark Custom. Brass was ordered from Starline. The rest of the details, OAL, Pressure, etc was in the email I sent you.
ArmySon is offline  
Old November 6, 2000, 11:25 AM   #7
ArmySon
Staff Alumnus
 
Join Date: April 14, 2000
Posts: 2,926
To clarify my post, my kit was for a government slide (5" barrel).
ArmySon is offline  
Old November 6, 2000, 12:03 PM   #8
Gunslinger
Junior member
 
Join Date: January 5, 1999
Location: Springfield, Missouri
Posts: 2,105
The only thing I have seen in .460 was one of the Mec Tech 1911 carbines owned by pack_rat. Granted we are comparing apples to oranges but the accuracy was impressive. We are talking AR15 .223 groups out of a 16" barreled carbine in a pistol caliber.
Gunslinger is offline  
Old November 6, 2000, 05:30 PM   #9
Henry Bowman
Junior member
 
Join Date: April 27, 2000
Location: AK
Posts: 139
Greetings again thanatos, sorry if the info sounded like a flame as it wasn't intended. I've got an old Para with a Colt Commander top end and a Clark comp with the top and side ports that controls the added pressure extremely well (less flip than with ball!) but the flames and blast can be hairy in a speed rock draw with compensators. IME 1911s require regular maintinance, extractors and slide locks do break even on the new crop of clones. You mentioned better metals available? I've been buying all the "latest" IPSC gidgets and widgets for years now and have not seen any vast improvements on Brownings design. The 1911 is still the action I favor over the new crop of Glocks-SIGs-Berettas-whatevers. My quest for the ultimate parallels yours, I built several Paras into 10mms and compared them with similiar .45 Supers then discovered that in full supported chambers the .45acp could be loaded to levels equaling the Roland/Super with AA-7. The weight of the gun becomes a big factor for me, the high caps ya know? Last time I checked Nowlin made a short comp that could be used on your pet project, I dunno about the Mercury comparison to 1911s? Both are old designs, didn't someone come up with a fixed barrel gas operated 1911 conversion? No lead though dang it, I used to use trimmed back .45 Win Mags for the Supers BTW. Commercially available .460 roland? I havn't seen any ever here. Motorcycles??? Hmmm, Harleys and 1911s? Very similiar, no? I believe we're of like mind here thanatos, you did mention the souped up Merc eh? Remember Leathams 9X25s? The best smiths couldn't keep those guns together running those pressures and the Super/Roland has a larger case head which increases the wear and tear over the same pressure in a smaller case head. henry
Henry Bowman is offline  
Old November 6, 2000, 05:50 PM   #10
JMBrowning
Junior member
 
Join Date: November 3, 2000
Location: Jonesboro,GA
Posts: 92
Please note that Detonics went out of business.

I've fired quite a few rounds through my Rowland and about 75 gillion through my .45 Supers-never have had a broken slide stop or sheared lower barrel feet.That's a new one on me!

------------------
If it ain't broke,don't fix it!
JMBrowning is offline  
Old November 6, 2000, 10:44 PM   #11
EQUALIZER
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 12, 1999
Posts: 657
Thanatos,

I know what you're looking for, because I've been looking for the same thing. Without a doubt, I found it. Its the Gas Gun. Network Custom perfected a gas delayed blowback barrel system that will work on any govt model 1911. I plan to write a review as soon as I find the time, but here's a couple of things that I experienced:

Got to shoot 45 ACP/Supers (same outside dimensions) 200grs @ 1402fps!!! That's verified by chronograph. For the load, it had VERY soft recoil. I'll take an educated guess and say that follow up shots would be at least twice as quick, with similar loads, as the 460 Roland, or any other heavy double spring kits out there.

Nothing against the Roland. Its a nice bottle necked cartridge, but if you reload and like to shoot 45ACP, you can use the same gas barrel for both w/ no degredation of accuracy. But if you like the 460, he can chamber it in any caliber you like. Unlike the heavy spring kit, the Gas Gun barrel system doesn't need a comp. to shoot hot and will preserve your 1911 from wearing out so soon. I plan to try out some 165 gr prototypes from Sierra @ 1600fps out of the gas gun barrel when I get a chance to go back! I'm told they are even milder than the 200gr @ 1400fps that I got to try.

The barrel is fixed, so the accuracy potential is there if you do your part. No "caa-chunk", but rather one smooth, unobstructed movement when you rack the slide since the barrel doesn't tilt. Henry Bowman's right about shearing locking lugs, links and pins with lots of hot loads in 1911 barrels. This barrel does away with all locking lugs, and the link 'n pin combination. It doesn't move around and have the lugs, or moving parts to sheer.

An additional special Ti alloy also helps to act as a unique buffer.

You don't NEED a big frame to shoot these loads with this system it seems. Your familiar 1911 is still the same, except it performs like a whole different animal as to the recoil impulses, AND range of loads that you can reliably use. Forget having to turn your cocking serations into heavy cheese/finger graters that leave you bloody from using extra heavy 30+lb recoil springs! This system uses standard weight recoil springs.

Got to shoot hot 9x23 WIN from a gas barrel chambered for the round. Muzzel rise and recovery for follow up shots was quicker than the 9mm SIG I'm used to shooting. I was shooting loads that were undoubtedly up into rifle-pressures, but no visable pressure signs. Chamber supports the brass, in both ramped and unramped models, extra well. I checked them out pretty thoroughly. I'm not trying to sound maucho, but the recoil was really quite pleasant. And hey!, No big comps hanging off the end; but there WAS a beautiful comp he milled into the barrel of a Ultimate chambered in 45 ACP. Those 45 Supers kept it straight and level. The Ultimate is the top model that takes the place of the front upper portion of the slide. If you look closely you can see the seem, but the barrel that takes up the space where the slide was makes it look like a normal 1911, (except for the ports/baffels of course). The one without the porting looked like a normal slide, but when I saw someone else shoot it, I could hardly see the movement of the slide going into and out of battery. It was just too fast. The other model doesn't have that slide modification, and is lighter.

I've decided to save my change. Want to get at least one. Then, get a multicaliber gas gun, eventually. Sorry for the length, but I get carried away when I think about that shooting session. If you, or anyone else has any questions, email me: Here first-equalizer@gunsnet.net If you can't get me there, try equalizerplus@netscape.net I'll be happy to help if I can.

Best regards,

Eq


[This message has been edited by EQUALIZER (edited November 06, 2000).]
EQUALIZER is offline  
Old November 7, 2000, 12:39 AM   #12
thanatos
Member
 
Join Date: August 23, 2000
Location: West Linn, OR USA
Posts: 44
Henry > Perhaps I've spent too much time on the AK-47.net forum, and everything I post seems to get flamed by certain individuals whose heads are stuck in an anotomically inappropriate position, needing a plexiotomy, if you know what I mean, so that the offender might see the light of day. Perhaps I got a bit sensitive and defensive???

I do not claim to have the answers, just lots of questions before I commit to building one of these on a Para P-14 frame. Rowland told me that the bullets need to be seated a bit deeper (shorter oal) to load into a Para magazine. ArmySon Emailed me that he and his friends have built these guns on Kimber frames, so he definitely knows MUCH more than me about what is going on with them. I've only seen the pictures and read the magazines articles, then talked w/ Johnny Rowland on the phone. Clark's is advertising $280 for their kits.

Johnny Rowland and Clark's both stated that Clark's is building 4.25 barrels (+ comp) for the Commanders and Para P-13's. Clark's WAS building barrels for the Springfield Compacts, but could not keep the 4" barreled action working reliably (their statement, not mine). I'm not real excited about a comp on the end of a 5" barrel, so I'm groping for ideas. My Para P-14 is physically about as big as I want to carry anymore - not interested in the least about a Desert Eagle, etc. Used to carry a 9" barrel Redhawk - I don't care to dress heavy enough to conceal one of those again. Trenchcoats (etc) seem to be out of fashion after Columbine.

The .460 Rowland is not a bottle necked case, but a straight case .059" longer than a .45acp - same oal length as .45acp - thicker side walls and stronger base. Georgia Arms is supposed to have commercial ammo available. Starline is building brass. Accurate No. 7 is their powder of choice.

By the way > I was never into Harleys. I road raced 2-stroke Grand Prix bikes, mostly TZ Yamahas because that was what I could make a living with (like most everyone else). I was retired (by my advancing old age) before the radial slicks came out (that dates me), and the all time lap records which I held on TZ-250s have been broken by 600cc production bikes. Now we all know how archaic I am!!! (That and remembering riding in my uncles '31 Model A coupe with one of those 296 Mercs, ported and relieved, 4 Strombergs, chopped, channeled, Z'd frame, etc, etc, etc.)

[This message has been edited by thanatos (edited November 07, 2000).]
thanatos is offline  
Old November 7, 2000, 01:00 AM   #13
thanatos
Member
 
Join Date: August 23, 2000
Location: West Linn, OR USA
Posts: 44
Oops! I just got an Email from Clark's ~ no P-13 barrels. 4.25" non-ramps barrels only. Looks like I misunderstood (or wishful thinking got the best of me!).
thanatos is offline  
Old November 7, 2000, 09:31 PM   #14
Henry Bowman
Junior member
 
Join Date: April 27, 2000
Location: AK
Posts: 139
I read through your posts again and got to thinking, does the P-13 slide have full travel on the full size frame? I've tried Colt Commanders on the full size Paras and had reliability problems because of the slides short throw. I'll try to explain, looking down on the breech face with the side retracted fully you'll notice that the full sized slide breechface will go about .300 past the disconnector while the commander barely clears the disconnector. I'd lean towards the full sized slide cut back to a bit shorter than a commander then a cone comp that hopefully be found with the proper length to suit your needs and a front sight on the comp for the needed sight radius. With a good comp you won't need the 26-30lb recoil spring and control is amazingly easy in my comped Para kit gun. I've also pondered this combo on the SVI or STI titaium gun but of late the moneys not there for another project. Back when the short slide comp guns were the rage in IPSC we discovered using a full sized recoil guide and spring helped control the slide speed and reliability. Clarks reverse spring plug hangs out some but it's still under the comp. nor beyoynd it. Good idea to ponder, I've gotten attached to my Kimber Pro Carry and like the small package. See ya, henry
Henry Bowman is offline  
Old November 8, 2000, 01:27 AM   #15
thanatos
Member
 
Join Date: August 23, 2000
Location: West Linn, OR USA
Posts: 44
Haven't gotten far enough along to actually purchase the slide yet ~ still pondering, although with the screwed up registration BS measure passing this evening in Oregon, I'm going to have to jump VERY quickly if I do this.
Clark's is not building a ramped 4.25" barrel w/ the compensator, so the point may well be moot. Rowland told me that the comp is the key, and it's patented (?). They are using a 24 lb recoil spring w/ 5" barrel, 18.5 lb spring with stainless guns (more stiction?). My Para P-14 is using a 23 lb spring & functions perfectly w/ 185 grn Corbons, ejects brass about 8' from the gun. Leads me to think that their comp must be rather effective (?).
Fitting beavertail grip safeties, stoning triggers, etc is the limit of my experience ~ have never fitted a barrel: I am definitely not a qualified 'smith. Have to think this through before I lunge.
thanatos is offline  
Old November 8, 2000, 03:00 AM   #16
Henry Bowman
Junior member
 
Join Date: April 27, 2000
Location: AK
Posts: 139
I'd thought that Clarks offered a drop in replacement barrel with ramp for the Para? I did a good amount of business with the Clarks back in the single stack IPSC days, too bad about Jim Sr. It might be worth calling Jimmie Jr about, I don't know the Roland chap. It's been years since I was down there last to see them and I remember watching Jim Sr blushing when I asked him to autograph a few hats to take back to my store in Colorado. He was a gentleman of the highest order not prone to the egotistical crap we get from some other "big" name smiths. Did ya know that they used to sell log cabin kits? Maybe I'll drag the wife to New Orleans this winter and make a little detour way up north, they used to have an amazing selection of guns for sale up front. Ready made customs as well as some exotic trade in stuff. Why the Roland over the .45 Super? Handloads/custom loadings can take the .45acp up to very close to Super/Roland velocities. A tight full supported chamber and high dosages of AA-7 gave me 230s@1200 and 200H&Gs@1400fps. I used a Colt Combat Elite and a five shot FA 97 to work up loads in mixed lots of very used brass just to prove what I'd already learned when hotloading the old .45 Colt. Most brass is plenty strong for 40,000cup but the chambers gotta support the brass and must'nt be oversized. Pick up Jerry Kuhnhausens Service Manual for the Colt Automatic, it's well woth the few bucks and i'll see if i can scare up a P-13 to stare at. Did ya know that the 10mm can be loaded up too? 200s@1400fps, same old problem..Henry
Henry Bowman is offline  
Old November 8, 2000, 09:51 AM   #17
thanatos
Member
 
Join Date: August 23, 2000
Location: West Linn, OR USA
Posts: 44
They keep telling me that the comp is the key to everything, that it is different from their other comps. I was hoping that someone who had actually assembled one of them could confirm/disprove that statement. I have never had a comp on a handgun, only rifles ~ am looking for advice before I invest alot of money into a bad idea.
I would just as soon get rid of the barrel bushing.
I pretty much want to stick to a high capacity frame, and since I have a dozen magazine for my Para P-14, that is the format I want to stay with. (Obviously, assembling a new magazine would turn me into a homocidal stalking of preschoolers.)
Was not aware that anyone built a full supported barrel for the Para's ~ kind of alters the picture a little, wouldn't it? I am more of an assembler than a gunsmith; having the correct parts to start with is necessary for my skills (or the lack thereof) and experience.
thanatos is offline  
Old November 8, 2000, 11:29 AM   #18
MBG
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 19, 2000
Location: Northern VA
Posts: 170
Jumping into the discussion late;

I recently purchased a Mech Tech carbine in 460 Roland, but have not test fired it in 460 yet. (I know, not exactly what you are asking.) But I plan to do a side by side comparison with the 45 APC, and I will report on the difference through the 16" barrel. Ultimately, I think the Mech Tech will find a permanent home on top of my P-14.

Also, I was flipping through my Brownells' catalog a month ago, and recall seeing a number of drop in 460 configurations listed. Check their on-line site to see what is available.
http://brownells.com/

Marty
MBG is offline  
Old November 8, 2000, 02:38 PM   #19
EQUALIZER
Senior Member
 
Join Date: September 12, 1999
Posts: 657
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Henry Bowman:
Why the Roland over the .45 Super? Handloads/custom loadings can take the .45acp up to very close to Super/Roland velocities. A tight full supported chamber and high dosages of AA-7 gave me 230s@1200 and 200H&Gs@1400fps. I used a Colt Combat Elite and a five shot FA 97 to work up loads in mixed lots of very used brass just to prove what I'd already learned when hotloading the old .45 Colt. Most brass is plenty strong for 40,000cup but the chambers gotta support the brass and must'nt be oversized.[/quote]

Sorry, you were right, Thanatos, about the dimensions of the 460. If you want to go with that, I'd go with it. I've been looking for the same. Besides what Henry wrote here, I decided to go with a 45 ACP/Super chamber mainly because of a) Cheaper ACP brass for practice...I'm always loosing the stuff. b) I'm told that the 460 is pretty accurate, but the ACP out of the 460 isn't something to use for bullseye. Other than that, it sounds like a winner. Don't let us talk you out of it. If you are willing to accept those minor drawbacks for the benefits, that's the caliber for you. As to Henry's comment about pressures, FWIW that gas barrel supports the chamber, ramped AND non-ramped barrels, better than any that I've ever seen. It allows for safer shooting of hot loads and doesn't need a compensator off the end of it to dampen recoil. It can be chambered for any caliber compatable w/the 1911 platform, even 460R, in case you were wondering. Best wishes w/you project!

eq

[This message has been edited by EQUALIZER (edited November 08, 2000).]
EQUALIZER is offline  
Old November 9, 2000, 12:28 AM   #20
ladywarrior
Junior Member
 
Join Date: July 27, 2000
Location: Vista, CA USA
Posts: 10
I was going to rebarrel a Glock 21 with this round, and after I talked to several very knowedgeable gunsmiths and barrel makers, I decided not to. They said that it was too powerful for a G21, especially without a comp. So I had my G21 rebarreled for the .40 super. One of the people I talked to was Irv Stone at Barsto Precision--well known makers of custom bbls. Just my $.02 worth.
ladywarrior is offline  
Old November 9, 2000, 01:16 AM   #21
Henry Bowman
Junior member
 
Join Date: April 27, 2000
Location: AK
Posts: 139
Hmmm, Marty (MBG)!! What's the Meck tech? I gather it's a top end conversion for the 1911 lower that gives a carbine size to ole slabsides. Arguement for the uses of this device aside, as a gun nut I gotta know what sort of action it uses. Any lock up or if it's a blow back I'd be very leary with pressures that high. I once tried some Supers in a MAC-10, it was fun but not purty. Cyclic felt like it went from 850 to 1600....lot's of adjectives to describe that one. A MAC in .45 is a handfull anyhoo and with Supers I lost some lights up in the range deflectors. I decided not to try them on the Thompson, that fancy friction blow back brass rubbing bolt breaking on regular ammo but still luv it machine would bust it's bolt again. Sorry for the ramble Marty, but that spring weight thing ya know? If the springs willl allow plain jane G.I. Ball then what happens when we double the pressure.? henry
Henry Bowman is offline  
Old November 9, 2000, 12:47 PM   #22
MBG
Senior Member
 
Join Date: January 19, 2000
Location: Northern VA
Posts: 170
Henry,

The Mech Tech is a carbine conversion unit designed for the 1911 frame. It can go on top of any 70 or 80's series, and it fits the wide Para-Ordinance or Kimber Polymers with a small feed ramp. The upper has a standard weaver rail, with no fixed sights. I put a Tasco red dot on top of mine. The unit is available in a variety of rounds, and the manufacture is developing a version for the Glock.

I bought mine from AKJ Concealco. (See http://www.concealco.com/ccu.html for additional information.) AKJ also has a page on the 460 round, linked at the bottom of the page.

The device uses a straight blowback system and has a 16 1/4 inch barrel. The only slide lock on the device is used for lining up the upper and the lower halves for assembly. It does not lock back on last round, and I would be very wary about putting fingers in the ejector port without holding the handle back. The ejector port is on the right side, and spits brass out horizontally. It is well made and fitted, but a little front heavy. However, the stock is a simple steel frame, and if you like you can add weight to the back to balance it. I don’t know what the spring weight is, but it is much heavier than the 18.5 lb spring in my Colt.

I have put about 250 rounds of 45 APC through mine. (230 grain FMJ.) The only hiccups; on two occasions, the brass bounced off the lane wall at the range and popped into the ejector port. On both occasions, the brass was head out, and had been punctured by the extractor. (I heard the brass hit the Plexiglas, so I am fairly certain these were not internal jams.) Perceived recoil with the 45 is very light, and I was drawing 3” circles at 100 ft free hand. (Well, two handed at any rate.)

I just picked up 100 rnds of 460 from Georgia Arms, so they are next at the range.

Hope this helps,

Marty

Oh, yeah. The Mech Tech a LOT of fun to shoot, and it makes everyone else at the range green with envy.

[This message has been edited by MBG (edited November 09, 2000).]
MBG is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:06 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2014 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.11845 seconds with 7 queries