Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - gmau

Pages: [1] 2
1
I had green TFO sights on my Glock 34.  I really liked how they looked but was annoyed at how it shot high enough that it was noticeable at 25yds at the bullseye range.  Also I didn't like how the length of the front sight causes it to hang over the open portion of the top of the 34 slide.

Figuring these two issues stemmed from the sights being optimized for a G17, my solution was to keep the rear TFO sight and get a replacement fiber optic front sight that was a different height.  I can try to look up the exact one I went with if you're interested (taller front sight, but not sure by how much), but it completely solved the alignment problem that I was having and no longer overhangs the slide opening.  The front sight is slightly narrower, red (contrasting the rear green), and doesn't have the Tritium of the TFO, but I love it for shooting at the range.

Ultimately very pleased with the final solution.

edit:  Found my invoice.  Front sight is Dawson Precision Part#019-003 .225 Tall x .125 Wide  Direct from Dawson Precision almost 3 years ago for $43 including shipping.
2
Legal and Activism / Re: Upgrades to a potential self-defense weapon
« on: January 22, 2016, 03:11:27 PM »
I've heard such speculation before regarding gun modifications.  I've also heard similar discussion on ammo choices and people going with what the local PD uses.  However, I never could decide for myself how much of that was speculation and how much was from "real life" experiences.

One of my best friends is a former prosecuting attorney.  Since he moved on from that job, he's developed quite an interest in firearms, particularly for defensive use.  I admit that I helped in that regard. . .  ;D

Anyways, back on topic.  I'll talk with him about this next time I see him.  I know his Sig is stock with a Streamlight.  He also has a used Glock 19 that came with a Ghost trigger and Trijicon HD sights.  Since getting the gun, he changed out the extractor and the ejector because he was getting stove-pipes and brass to the face.  Not sure if he swapped out the action spring as well.  We went to the range recently and whatever he changed out seems to have resolved his issues.  In my mind, the changes were all about ensuring that the gun functions properly.  For triggers, as long as they aren't monkeyed with to be super light, then I would think it wouldn't be an issue.  That said, you never know. . .

Just curious, but why'd you change the safety plunger? Was the spring the action spring?  If you still have the stock action spring, I could use a spare for my 34.  Hehe  ;)

Thanks for offering to check.  A former prosecutor's opinion would definitely be welcome.

I'm not sure of the proper names for the springs, but I've changed ALL of the coiled ones.  Combined with the Ghost Evo Elite trigger (which I like a lot better than the Ghost Rocket which I also have) the trigger pull is night and day different.  Relatively cheap upgrades too as I got a whole set of different spring weights to replace each spring for fine tuning for not much money at all.  I do intend to keep all the stock stuff, just in case I ever want to return it to stock though...  Downside to all the spring tuning is that the trigger safety doesn't always function properly as the trigger does not always return all the way forward to engage it.  Finger off the trigger anyway right?  Pull weight is around 3.5 lbs, I think.

I got the gold/titanium safety plunger and reduced safety plunger spring on a bit of a whim after reading too much internet.  Supposedly, it being lighter would smooth the trigger further as the trigger bar (?) had an easier time depressing the plunger.  Honestly I don't think I could tell the difference on that change, but I left it in anyway. 
3
Legal and Activism / Upgrades to a potential self-defense weapon
« on: January 22, 2016, 02:09:09 PM »
I have a Glock 34 that I've made a bunch of changes to (Ghost Evo Trigger, Springs, Safety Plunger, etc) and it really has improved how much I enjoy shooting it.

I've heard that those kinds of upgrades could/would be held against me in a situation where I ended up using that gun in self defense as the argument might go something like, "you made changes to the gun to make it more deadly."

To avoid that problem, I recently got a Glock 19 that I was intending on keeping completely stock.  Shooting it over the weekend though, I am reminded on how different stock is, and I really don't like it.

My question is whether you guys think doing something as small as swapping the stock trigger connector that came with my Glock 19 (5.5lbs) with the spare trigger connector that came with my G34 (4.5lbs) would be considered an "upgrade" along the lines of what I was originally worried about.  I'm not even sure if the difference will be that significant, but was thinking it might make me like the 19 more and might be ok since this is an original Glock part. 

This whole line of concern is quite annoying to me, but I'm hoping some of you out there had some insight that what may be in the minds of prosecutors who go after people who take action in self defense.

4
General Discussion / Re: You guys are NOT going to believe this
« on: January 20, 2014, 01:46:10 PM »
I talked to Tony at the pistol range last Sunday (the last day it was open) and he offered that the current plan was to indeed only allow 100yd shooting at the rifle range after these changes.

After these "repairs" are completed, they hoped for a Phase 2 where additional changes would be made to allow for shooting at distances other than 100yds.  He added that Phase 2 would require permits (unlike the emergency repairs they're doing now?) and actual range design changes so a 6 MONTH timeframe would probably be optimistic.

I really hope Mayor Caldwell, the Parks Director Robinson, and any other party that has a say in this understands just how limiting and significantly negative shooting at only 100yds is.  Hopefully we can let them try to hit a target at 100yds on a windy day with iron sights and a .22lr so they can realize that such a final outcome is unacceptable and Phase 2 needs to be fast tracked as much as possible.

We need someone to be sure common sense and logic are represented in this situation (if not for the limited repairs then at least for Phase 2), whether that's from the HRA, Mike Muramoto, another representative from the grassroots movement, or hopefully all of the above. 

While I do give major kudos to the Mayor and his team for responding in what I do believe is an as fast as reasonably possible timeframe for these initial repairs, I fear they may not understand what the limitations will do and the importance of getting this right soon.  People who don't actually shoot will probably figure, "the range is back open, it's all good now for the shooters."  If the limitations are implemented as indicated, I would strongly disagree, and don't believe for a second that such limitations are actually necessary to improve safety.

Baby steps are fine, as long as it's not a couple of baby steps- and then live with rules that make no sense "because."

5
I believe .223 has a maximum range of 1.5 miles, so could go over the mountain.  Even 22lr could go 1.5 miles, if you believe the writing on the ammo box.

Any ballistics experts out there know at what range .22LR or .223 ceases to be dangerous in terms of those bullets' horizontal velocity?  I'm assuming since you have to shoot up, the downward velocity can be no more than terminal velocity (and not dangerous- see mythbusters).  And in order to shoot over the mountain, you're already significantly reducing the horizontal velocity that the bullet was travelling initially.  My gut tells me there' no way a .22LR is dangerous at the range.  Not sure about a .223.

Of course according to Mike Muramoto, the only bullets found out in the houses were 30 cal or so.  Sure I'd like to shoot my .308 again, but why not let me shoot my 10/22 while I wait for these people to get their act together.

6
problem is, common sense went out the window a long time ago
the reason they are going back to the original design considerations is that if they go beyond the original design and something goes wrong, the city is LIABLE

mac, I know I'm not arguing with you, and I don't doubt that's the argument/excuse that may be put out there, but I don't see how it justifies the decision.  Someone designed KHSC 60 some years ago (or whatever it is) and I imagine there aren't many people who would like to accept the liability of any design changes, but there must be some standards or some agency that can be used/paid to update/approve the other uses that have been going on safely for decades.

Really, if they need to make changes, how hard is it to throw some dirt out at 50 yds so you can place your targets (taller if necessary) so they're right in line with the 100yd berm?

Liability?  I know 2 wrongs don't make a right, but there's a ton of liability for the state continuing to allow people to go hike an unauthorized and unmaintained trail above a shooting range too.  If a sign telling people not to trespass up there is sufficient liability prevention, so should a sign that says don't shoot your rifle over koko head.

To try and keep this constructive, does anyone know who could/would certify a range like this to acceptable safety standards?

7
Why not open the range to calibers less than 30 cal (or some power limitation) in the meantime since not all rounds could even physically possibly reach the residential areas in question?

I understand (sort of) the guilty before proven innocent attitude in the name of safety, but how about an actual attempt and update as to the investigation on whether the bullets came from the range, via ricochet or otherwise?  If not a ricochet (which physics suggests is unlikely), the safety changes while all well and good, probably aren't really truly an improvement in preventing large caliber negligent discharges into the air.

Taking away shooting at 50 yards is even worse to me than not being able to shoot at less than 25 yds at the pistol range.  Whatever the original design considerations were, how about some common sense in realizing that with the right guidelines this can obviously be done safely.

Anyone think I'm missing something?  I'm trying to figure out the logic behind the rules that they have, but think there are superior alternatives out there to these additional senselessly restrictive rules.  Very upsetting.
8
87, 89, 92?
is 10% ethanol ok?
or do we have to get the kind from the harbor or selected gas stations that has no ethanol?

edited to add:
asking because i want to bring a small gas can of gas for them to use and i don't want to get bad stuff
others of us who are prepared sometimes have a few gallons stashed away in their car or house and may want to donate it so they can rotate it out
just don't want to screw anybody's stuff up because they volunteered to clean the range
i know that smaller motors are affected the most

Hey Mac-
Just so you know, they have Ethanol Free Gas at the closest gas station to the range - the 76 on Lunalilo right by Hawaii National Bank.  It's usually the same price as E10 92 which is WAY cheaper than what the harbors charge (in particular those guys at Ala Wai that have been gouging me for years).

I have three 5 gallon gas cans that have only seen ethanol free gas if this project is still on and we need some.

9
If Mike Muramoto and the team are open to suggestions, the ultimate thing on my wish list would be the ability to setup pistol frames at 10-15 yards.  Not sure if there is some reason why they would deem this unsafe, or if it won't be possible as the pistol range won't be closed, but in case they are willing to listen, that would make a HUGE difference to me and the people I go shooting with.  I know too many people who get discouraged at their inability to get consistent hits at 25yds, especially when starting out.

Am guessing we may not want to get too pushy about "changes" but I'm sure we could come up with a way for this to be done safely.  Maybe that means wood bases to hold the frames, smaller specifically constructed frames (no bolts?), whatever...

Would be excited to chip in and help however possible for such additional changes as well as help along with the group.



 

10
Reloading / Re: For those that order from Precision Delta.........
« on: July 20, 2013, 08:46:40 PM »
"Patience little grasshopper."  Wait time is several months if you miss their production cycle for your caliber/bullet.

Finally delivered 7/18, so my 2000 bullets took 4 months and a week, coming without warning.  Now I just wish I had ordered more...

11
General Discussion / Re: How's the line at HPD?
« on: July 04, 2013, 01:39:30 AM »
Picked up my permit at 10:30am - no line.  Registered at 12:45 - no line.  Less than 10 min for each visit.

12
I have a person beef with the company over unethical business practices.

Mind sharing either here or over PM?  I think it's clear they raised prices during the panic, but I have a feeling you're referring to something else...
13
Legal and Activism / Re: long rifle permit = pistol permit
« on: June 26, 2013, 02:21:23 PM »
I've found most people who "know their wayaround a pistol" need to take another safety class.  There are very few people who would not benefit from a beginner safety class.  I took part of one while I was at Sig Academy for more information and refresher.

BTW, I'm not trying to pitch OGC's class over any other.  I didn't take Chris' (Funtimes) class, but I hear it's great too.   :thumbsup:  From what I understand, we are pretty lucky to have multiple people who put on good classes.
14
Legal and Activism / Re: long rifle permit = pistol permit
« on: June 26, 2013, 02:15:24 PM »
Well, I've owned a handgun since the tender age of  21, been shooting them since I was ten... and I found it kinda silly that to add to my collection  after moving to hawaii that I would need to take a special  (expensive) class.   It turned out I could register my (bought new off the line in 98' ) out of state handgun without any of the permiting  mumbo jumbo, but since I wanted to hunt here anyway, I took hunters ed and killed two birds with one rock, just in case I wanted to buy another handgun.
The pistol class just wasnt going to teach me anything I didnt already know about how to safely own, operate, and store a handgun, and at the time... 250 dollars could buy a lot of ammo.
In reality, everything I really needed to know about guns was taught to me by my dad, he also taught me such other valuable practical lessons like, how to clean a fish, change a tire, light a campfire without matches, and aways wear a rubber... when I was a kid - the way it should be

Pretty sad that even some of the shooting community is brainwashed to the point that they agree that in order to exercise the right to bear arms, that a citizen be made to take an expensive class. Everything a person needs to know about a gun can be found in it's manual, everything they need to know about how to be proficient with it can be learned for free at a good range, if you strike up a conversation with a friendly old salt shooter. My dad taught me how to shoot, some rangemaster at jackson arms in cali taught me a better grip, and trigger pull and helped me shoot better,
Heck, when my mini 30 arrived, the ffl that did the transfer showed me that a sharp blow to the butt of the rifle when the bolt is locked back can release it and chamber a round if you have a hot mag in it...(thats in the manual by the way)  Ive passed this kind knowledge on to other shooters... the way it should be.

Snuffalupaus, you sound like the perfect candidate for the hunters ed class- background in shooting and want a hunting license.  I don't know what the OP's background is, but I know many people who take the handgun class learn some valuable information there. 

In an ideal world, I don't think such classes should be required, because ideally anyone doing so without a class would be doing it because they either already have experience, or a solid plan on how to educate themselves on safety and legal issues.

Understanding that this is not an ideal world (and seeing how some newbs behave on the range), I do have mixed feelings about showing some level of proficiency before purchasing a handgun.

That debate aside, my main point was for anyone who needed/wanted to learn something about firearms and were trying to choose between a handgun class and hunter's ed, I can say again, with confidence, that you aren't going to learn much about guns from hunter's ed.

I know prices vary, but when I took the OGC class it was only $120 and I got $20 off of my gun purchase.  I think that would be money well spent for any person new to guns.
15
Legal and Activism / Re: long rifle permit = pistol permit
« on: June 24, 2013, 12:15:36 PM »
This is the way to do it if you already  know your wayaround a pistol.  (no offense to you guys that offer handgun safety courses)  :shaka:
Unless you are total noob to hanguns... then you may want to attend a real deal handgun course.  :thumbsup:

No offense to the good people that teach the hunter's education classes (some are my friends) but after taking that hunter's ed class for kicks last year, there is NO WAY what is covered is anywhere near enough for me to feel ok with its graduates purchasing a gun.  At the class we did not get to handle firearms.  They passed around snap caps as examples of ammo.  Zero actual touching, dry firing, or range time.  That class should NOT be good enough to get a permit for a handgun, if it is the state's desire to have some firearms knowledge before getting a permit.  The hunter's ed class is also a couple of days and takes way longer.  I would agree with snuffalupagus that the hunter's ed class would be the way to go IF you already know a fair amount about guns and have shot quite a bit, AND you also intend to hunt.  Absent those 2 qualifications, pay the money to some of the good guys giving pistol classes where you can try different types of guns before you buy.

I took the OGC class for my handgun permit and Eugene and the team did a great job.  I heard the class at Magnum Firearms was actually good (pre-ownership trouble) and I know shootingsolutionshi on here gives a great class as well.

16
Reloading / Re: For those that order from Precision Delta.........
« on: May 31, 2013, 03:14:27 PM »
Still no delivery from PD after placing my order 3/12...
17
Reloading / Re: Availability of Lee 4 hole turret locally
« on: May 28, 2013, 05:30:07 PM »
Anyone seen or is selling a Lee 4 hole turret locally.  Just looking only for the turret because its sold out online.   :shaka:

About a month ago I was surprised to find out that Windward Gun Shop had them in stock despite being sold out everywhere online.  I got 2 and they had more left.  They were also for a good price too.  Cheaper in person than online with shipping too!
18
General Discussion / Re: How's the line at HPD?
« on: April 26, 2013, 10:43:36 PM »
Made 2 visits today. 

Permit pick up visit arrived at 11:50, line was about 6 people long.  Out of there in 15 min.

Registration visit arrived at 1:15, line was about 10 people long.  Took 45 min as for whatever reason the line didn't move for 20 min at one point.  They did call for permit pickups once.  Once it started moving again, it was a fast registration.

Not bad for a Friday, I'd say.
19
Deals and Sales / Re: Primary Arms sale
« on: April 25, 2013, 10:38:26 AM »
http://www.primaryarms.com/Bushnell_Trophy_TRS25_Red_Dot_Sight_1x25mm_3_p/bs731303.htm?utm_source=bronto&utm_medium=email&utm_term=Image+-+Bushnell+Rebate&utm_content=Get+Your+Rifle+Ready+for+Summer+with+Primary+Arms&utm_campaign=2013+April+2

The Bushness Trophy TRS-25 Red Dot is a particularly good deal.  $70 after rebate is the cheapest I've seen by itself, plus you get a free riser to properly mount to an AR.

20
General Discussion / Re: CCW class in Hawaii
« on: April 23, 2013, 10:14:13 AM »

http://concealedcarryacademy.com/gs/index.php

A fellow 2a Hawaii member found this and we were wondering if anyone had any experience with this course (or something simliar).

It seems almost too good to be true- watch a 90 min video online, take a 20 question quiz, fill out some paperwork, pay some money, and get the right to concealed carry in 35 states with the AZ and VA non-resident permits.

Looking at the reciprocity list, not sure why you would want the VA one once you have the AZ one as the AZ covers everything you get from VA as well and it's cheaper.

Not sure if a course like this is actually a good idea as you may actually want more instruction than this, and I'm sure it's not specific enough about the CCW laws of each state that you'll be earning the right to carry in, but this might seem to be a good way to get the job done if you already have some experience or wanted to do this cheaply from Hawaii.
Pages: [1] 2