Timbonez

What model(s) were you considering?

That's the kind of girl you bring home to meet mom.

I'm sorry, I don't speak Spanish.

No problem. Ruger did their research before they built their own 1911. I assume it probably helps that the casting plant they own, Pine Tree Casting, supplies Caspian's frames. The internal parts are MIM, which is typical for a 1911 pistol in its price range. I have no opinion of MIM either way. There are strong, well built examples of MIM, and there are garbage pieces of MIM. Realize that many modern handguns outside of the 1911 realm use MIM to no ill effect. It really depends on the manufacturer and their QC. You get what you pay for, and if you decide to buy something like a Colt its quality will be higher than the Ruger. That's not to say the Ruger won't be a functional handgun. If you're looking for a high quality production 1911, Colt is your best bet. Springfield Armory also makes a good production 1911. I'll let you know how the Ruger works out.

I bought the full size about a month and a half ago. With the ammo situation and most of my remaining .45 being HPs, I've only put 292 rounds through it. It is the least expensive 1911 I own as all of my others are Colts, Nighthawks, and Wilson Combat. With so few rounds through it I can't give you an honest assesment, but the construction is sound. The magazines it comes with are decent, but I use higher quality ones. FMJ and HPs fed fine through the pistol. When I can get more .45 ammo at cheaper prices, I'll shoot it more and give a better write up.

Torch, read the FBI study posted by M2 in his first response. http://www.firearmstactical.com/pdf/fbi-hwfe.pdf

I don't disagree with you, but even the Handgun Wounding Factors and Effectiveness says that penetration is the most critical part of bullet effectiveness when it comes to handgun calibers. This assumes that a shot to the brain is not made. Penetration and then permanent cavity, with temporary cavity playing a minor if any role, are the order. I would throw shot placement in front of all of those. The modern service calibers have more than adequate penetration. Looking at how modern high quality hollowpoints perform in 9mm, .40 S&W, and .45 ACP the difference in expansion is very minimal. All else being equal, the 9mm is going to be easier to shoot - especially with one handed only shooting, cheaper to shoot, and hold more ammo all in a smaller form factor. The .45 ACP is my favorite handgun caliber and it's what I've chosen to carry, but I realize what I'm sacrificing for a minimal increase in expansion. ETA: I'm not saying 9mm is better, but neither is the larger caliber necessarily.

Smokin, I believe you are referring to the Marshall & Sanow study, which has been widely discredited. I was recommending that Torch look for a more scientific explanation of terminal ballistics. Look up Dr. Martin Fackler. Another choice is Dr. Gary K. Roberts (a DDS of all things). He was in the USNR and studied wound ballistics. He is pretty active on various firearms forums, and you can also find some of his research posted online.

You need to research more about terminal ballistics. This "knockdown" word you throw around is a myth. It's akin to those folks that claim even if you only hit a bad guy in the hand with a .45 it will still knock them down on their ass. With modern bullet technology, the performance disparity between the common service calibers is negligible. With that out of the way, the M&P was originally designed around the 40 S&W and is an excellent choice.

Very nice, FS. What firearms were you using? The pistol looked like a G34/35.

There are much better forums that provide much better information than AR15.com. I do, however, agree with you about the EE. I've sold a couple of things there, and I've also searched for some items; most of them being reasonably priced.

I've heard good things about the SP2022, and it is one of the few models SIG did right. It's an underrated firearm that deserves more recognition. What caliber did you get?

Are they real Magpul PMAGs? What brand AR-15s are they using? Sent from my DROID BIONIC using Tapatalk 2

The action spring mine came with was undersprung and caused some short stroke issues early on. I replaced it with a correct weight spring and it ran just fine. Again, this was in 2008 and I only put just over 1,000 through it. Their barrels are hammer forged, which is a plus in my book.

I have a M6A1 upper that I purchased in 2008. I put a little over a thousand rounds through it and forgot about it. They make quality rifles, but I believe a traditional DI AR-15 is a better choice. Regardless, you should enjoy your rifle and I'm sure it will serve you well.

Does he pump her full of lead?

Looking forward to it.

I recommend you focus on using iron sights before jumping on the RDS bandwagon. Daniel Defense and Troy both make great front and rear sights. Since your rifle has a railed gas block... Troy makes a front sight specific for mounting on gas blocks, since a gas block is not in the same plane as the rail on your upper receiver. http://troyind.com/ https://danieldefense.com/ If you do go the red dot route, I recommend an Aimpoint over an EoTech. I have an Aimpoint Comp M4s and an EoTech 512. In the grand scheme of things, either company's product will serve you well, but the Aimpoint is superior in durability, battery life, and functionality. I do like the reticle better on the EoTech, however. I don't have any advice to give on magnified optics since I don't run them on my AR-15s. Your barrel is 1:9 twist, so it should run well with bullet weights up to and including 69gr. Anything above that, and the bullet might keyhole after it's left the barrel. This is due to stabilization. Both of my rifles are 1:7 twist, and I've had great success with 55gr FMJ ammo from Wolf and the ubiquitous XM193. There are some who don't like Wolf, but it's cheap, and it works. Both of those attributes keep me shooting. There are other bullet types to explore from varmint loads to bullet types designed for social encounters (soft point and open tip match). The following links are threads posted by Dr. Gary Roberts, a former Navy ballistician. http://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?4344-5-56-mm-Duty-Loads http://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?4343-5-56-mm-55-gr-M193-Terminal-Performance-Thoughts MX on AR-15s is no more difficult than on an AK type rifle. Many regard the AR -15 as unreliable, which is untrue. Keep you bolt and bolt carrier lubricated and you won't have trouble for thousands of rounds, assuming it is an AR-15 built by a quality manufacturer. You can clean the chamber, bore, bolt, bolt carrier, and the insides of the upper and lower every thousand rounds or so if you're anal about keeping the rifle clean. This should take 15 minutes at the most. Don't over clean your bore. I would run a brush once... maybe twice down the bore (chamber to muzzle) followed by a few patches to pick up the extra carbon. http://www.slip2000.com/blog/s-w-a-t-magazine-filthy-14/ ETA: On closer inspection of the picture of the S&W ORC, it does appear that the gas block is in the same plane as the upper receiver, which would negate the need for the special height front sight. I would confirm this with S&W though. ETA2: Quoted wrong person.

Him him.

Brick, nice review. Have you considered handloading? It would make shooting .44 special a lot more economical, especially for range use. Sent from my DROID BIONIC using Tapatalk 2

Outstanding choice for a first AR. You can't go wrong with BCM. Sent from my DROID BIONIC using Tapatalk 2

Todd Green recently started his long term test of a custom Springfield 1911 built to Scott Warren's specs. It's chambered in 9mm and is a huge change from what Todd has shot in the past. His previous long term tests have been a S&W M&P 9mm, HK P30, HK 45, and Glock 17 Gen4. He worked for Beretta and SIG a while back and now is a highly regarded pistol instructor. Anyway, here is the link to his blog, specifically the latest article for the test: http://pistol-training.com/archives/6942 Additionally, here is a link to the thread in his forum regarding his test: http://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?4772-2012-13-PTC-Test-Guns-Springfield-9mm-1911 I have enjoyed reading his endurance tests over the past few years as they provide some very insightful information on each pistol he has shot. Granted each is a sample size of one, but his tests are quite unique in that he shoots a massive amount of ammo through them in a relatively short period of time. It sure is a lot more shooting than all of us shoot. I guess when your job is to shoot and instruct, it kind of goes with the territory. He also gives a lot of information on the gear he uses with each particular pistol, specific modifications that suit his tastes, and an all around thorough explanation of the gun and its performance in the many drills he shoots. His forum has a wealth of knowledge and his blog always has, what I believe to be, good advice.

Colt has won the Marine Corps M45 MARSOC contract. A modified version of their 1911 Rail Gun will become the M45. http://militarytimes...done-deal/#more The original solicitation is very specific to a 1911 pattern pistol. https://www.fbo.gov/?s=opportunity&mode=form&tab=core&id=b363ec929bda1631f9d80eebb9335f36&_cview=0 Not necessarily a good thing considering the problems during testing. More info can be found here, with photos, starting on page 10 of the thread: http://m4carbine.net...t=72301&page=10

Nice write up, Brick. I always enjoy your thorough reviews.

The reason why you have heard nothing but good things is that, like I said before, it is in the top 3 most popular AR makers. People who buy those rifles hear from a friend how awesome it is and then they buy one themselves. These are the same people who will likely only put 1000-2000 rounds, in 100 round installments, through the rifle. Detaching yourself from hearsay and doing a little research on each brand will reveal how different each manufacturer puts together their rifles and which ones follow the technical data package set out by the Army. While following the TDP and being mil-spec is not the be all and end all of making a quality rifle, it creates a minimum baseline that all manufacturers should strive for. RRA, Bushmaster, and DPMS fall short of many of the requirements spelled out in the TDP. In particular, RRA: uses a weaker steel for their barrel (4140), only chrome lines particular models' barrels, doesn't parkerize under the front sight post, uses a commercial receiver extension rather than a mil-spec one, uses a commercial bolt carrier instead of a full auto one, 1:9 twist rate instead of 1:7, etc. They are cutting corners. It doesn't make sense to buy a rifle that is similarly priced to rifles that are superior. In the grand scheme of things, though, most people would probably be fine with a one of those more popular brands. In general, the shooting community doesn't actually shoot enough to notice the difference or run into malfunctions. That is why I said you should hold onto your RRA and enjoy shooting it. It will more than likely serve you well, but there are superior ARs. Right now, I own a Noveske and a LWRC mated to a no-name lower (trying to sell the LWRC). If I could do it all over again, I would probably buy a Noveske again or a Colt 6920. To answer the rest of your post, I think sticking with irons and a RDS is the best course of action. That would be best suited for home defense where your possible engagement ranges are very short (unless you live on a ranch or in Orange County). Later on you can always buy a magnifier for your RDS or buy a magnified optic.