I put a few hundred rounds of defensive ammo through it before i deem it reliable with no malfunctions either ammo or firearm related. Then I continue to hone my skills to keep sharp
1 Like
A bit of trivia, I went to a range in Northern Utah, Unloaded my EDC Mag in about 3 seconds. The RSO came over, pointed at rule #5 “At least one seconds time between shots…”. Surprised me but after that I complied.
2 Likes
Well their rules, makes no sense if you are capable. I could see where some might not be. You are guest so obey the rules. Interesting.
2 Likes
That’s why I don’t go to any state or dnr run ranges any more. Even when they have pistol lanes or areas, the rules are clearly not intended to allow practice that is relevant to self defense.
I once, when told to slow down at one of them, asked why… Got the answer…okay…and noted that my target had a better group than every other person there (who were all shooting slow, and shorter distance). I think he was friends with some of the others.
3 Likes
I think a lot of this is tied to the rising cost of running a range. A lot of towns are adding regulations to try to push ranges as far away as they can, and insurance costs are skyrocketing. We’ve lost a lot of good ranges in my area. Those that have survived have had to re-evaluate their risk tolerance.
There’s a private club I’ve been to that’s out in the hills on unnamed dirt roads. They know who their members are and their rules allow for speed shooting, draw/fire, etc. so long as the other rules are followed. On the flip side, the local gun stores in town have a lot of new shooters in their ranges, and their rules are much more strict. I’ll go there sometimes for the convenience or maybe a private class, but they’re generally not good places to practice self-defense shooting.
3 Likes
My 2-cents… At least 500 rounds and two range days with cleanings with no jams. Then at least 20 rounds with carry ammo to confirm no feed issues with self-defense ammo.
1 Like
Thing is that, in my experience, the new/inexperienced or know-it-all (but don’t) shooters aren’t dangerous (to other people anyway) as a result of “rapid fire”, but rather, muzzle awareness/control and trigger finger discipline. I’m more likely to get a gun pointed at me, loaded gun pointed at me, or gun pointed at me with finger on the trigger, at the more restrictive ranges than I am at the ones (by me) that allow rapid fire and/or drawing from the holster.
That same range I referenced above I ended up in an argument with somebody the last time I was willing to go there because he pointed his revolver right at me and said it was okay because it had just been unloaded. Couldn’t get the RSO out of his shack for that, but he comes out as soon as you fire 2 shots within 2 seconds of each other.
Unfortunately when government money and whatnot gets involved, we don’t really get to vote with our wallets and business on these issues. ’
I do what I can and am a member at a range that allows rapidly rapid fire, but has an RSO on the line that is active at making sure people maintain the four rules…but it is the most expensive option, costing way more than using the DNR range with an annual pass or hunting license. Can’t have it all I guess.
2 Likes
It is a monkey see, monkey do situation. You may be able to empty your mag into a 7" circle at 25 yds. But when the newbee 2 lanes down tries it - after seeing you do it - 2/3 of his rounds go into either the floor or the equipment in the ceiling. Average replacement cost for a trolley assembly is around $800.
2 Likes
There you go, huh?
I think it’s important to notice that what makes one of these ranges safer than another is not the different rules or the different RSO, but the different clientele. Unsafe shooters require more restriction to provide safety for others. Might not have to be more expensive, but there are a lot of reasons why it could.
1 Like
I don’t know…I think the presence of an active RSO is what makes the biggest difference. The ones that come in looking like tourists are likely to get some free help from the RSO before they even fire a shot, and in fact the RSO likely got a radio heads up from the counter that a new shooter was on the way. Makes a huge difference. And the buddies who are showing off for each other, or just having fun and shooting each others guns, will get a reminder about the proper way to move shooters between benches, and how to get a gun to or from the bag (on the line) instead of having to get a handgun out on the back wall and then walk it up
2 Likes
Without any experience with such things, I would expect an active and competent safety program to be a huge benefit — but much more so with the inexperienced, incompetent, or infantile shooters.
Careful and competent shooters who understand their own responsibilities and limitations don’t really need a safety officer or prohibition of essential practices — do they? Posting of local ground rules, a facility orientation, and someone to call if something weird comes up should suffice.
That’s my point about clientele — one group really requires effective RSO and support; the other really doesn’t; but not everyone sorts themselves into the correct group. Probably it’s more expensive to run a quality show, and to deal effectively with the clinkers.
But the thing about restrictive rules is that even a good lifeguard cannot count on being able to intercede quickly, safely, and effectively every time if somebody starts shooting up the fixtures with wild rapid fire, or shooting their toes off playing holster games, or having nutty YouTube things they want to cosplay. So, instead of trying to stop the train after things get subjectively out of hand, they make “rules” to objectively interrupt potential problems before things get wild. Not that different really than managing risk at any pool or gym — maybe peer supervision, maybe skill qualification, maybe intense oversight.
1 Like
That may be an accurate assessment. I can’t help but feel like that is putting a lot of weight on the safety of the equipment without taking into consideration the safety of the people, as in, the shooters and their training so they can better handle a potential future defensive gun use, or even the proverbial innocent bystander when said shooter does use a firearm in defense later on…and now they miss because they haven’t ever been able to practice for it.
I wonder, does anybody have any insight on any kind of tangible, objective data regarding how much “safer” a range is, to people, when so called rapid fire is not allowed?
1 Like
Different for different guns and shooters. For me, I will not put a gun on my hip until 500 rounds have gone through the gun.
2 Likes
It’s been so long since a new gun gave me any heartburn that I don’t even sweat it much anymore. My personal test is I have several ammo cans of my “mixed leftovers”. When I have leftover ammo in a box I just dump it into one of these cans and mix them up with the rest. The cans contain a blend of FMJs and just about every profile of SD HPs out there including +P ammo.
When I get a new gun, I fully load all the magazines I bought for it and I intend to carry with that gun with ammo from the leftover cans and let them sit for a few days so the springs will set.
Then I’ll take a can to the range and start running all the mags using the blended ammo. If I can successfully run every magazine with every profile thought the gun at 100% twice, I’m good to go.
This test has not failed me yet.
8 Likes
I recently installed a short reset trigger for my canik tp9 sf I won’t carry it because I function tested the trigger safety it slips past the bite of the detent and will fire with stress pressure ( an involuntary amount of pressure that will discharge the firearm) as it has no functional trigger safety it’s drop safe but not trigger safe. Anything that makes unsafe to draw from concealed makes it unreliable to me imo be it holster ( too tight /loose) extended mag releases( engaging and dropping the mag ) , hair triggers ,( boom too soon) untuned recoil springs( weak slide return stroke /strong slide return stroke ) (failure to feed/stovepipe and short stroke issues ) each one is a point and cannot be combined with say a bad mag cause your out of the fight.
I own a MKIV and it is definitely a pain to disassemble. I enjoy shooting it, but it is picky about ammo.
1 Like
I thought the Mark IV had the one-button takedown.
1 Like
Totally agree. For civilian magazines, I found that early polymer magazines would fail as soon as the feed lips melted and deformed. So now I only buy OEM (for my Ruger Mini-14), MAGPUL for Military use (apparently a lot of other Army guys I served with thought this way too), and only highly-reviewed/rated aftermarket magazines for my personal ARs and pistols.
Just a little PSA here: steel GI mags with aftermarket .458 SOCOM followers work really well, and are cheaper than buying “purpose made” .458 SOCOM magazines.
4 Likes
How old are those? I remember aluminum ones.
1 Like
I mistakenly stated Mark IV when it should have been Ruger MKIII Target Hunter.
Thanks for reminding me.
The Mark III was so frustrating that I finally sold it.
I replaced it with a reliable Beretta M9_ .22.
It isnt as accurateat the range, but it is reliable.
I have fired 1,000 rounds with it.
1 Like