jkh@jade.BERKELEY.EDU (Jordan K. Hubbard) (03/09/87)
Article: 3:13 A while back I posted a request for information about the AMT "backup." I would like to thank the people who replied. It was, in general, a most unfavorable review..... I am still looking for a small .380 semi-auto.... someone suggested that I consider the Colt "Mustang." I finally located one, but in calling around to compare prices, I was told by on store owner that it was a "piece of junk." The problem, they insisted was that "it won't feed, and if it won't feed, we won't carry it." They also insisted that the design was "a bunch of compromises", and that most small .380's have feed problems. Does anyone have any recommendations/comments? Thanks. -- Joe Maybee ...tektronix!pogo!maybee (503)-685-3572 Tektronix, Inc., P.O. Box 1000, MS 63-356 Wilsonville, OR 97070
jkh@jade.UUCP (03/21/87)
In-Reply-To: your article <2728@jade.BERKELEY.EDU> News-Path: ucbvax!jade!jkh re: .380 I think the guy who knocked the Colt Mustang was bull-**ing you. The local range owner said theirs feeds very reliably (although, as with any auto, you may have to choose certain types of bullets to make sure -- some have problems with hollow-points.) In fact, he said it was much better than the .380 government model. Is Colt still on strike? The Mustang is a very popular model as a police backup, and maybe he can't get any. (And therefore those grapes were sour anyway...) The Walther PPK is universally praised as a well-made, accurate, reliable gun. It seems to hold up to abuse rather well. But it ain't cheap. (about $400)
jkh@jade.UUCP (03/21/87)
> A while back I posted a request for information about the AMT "backup." > I would like to thank the people who replied. It was, in general, a most > unfavorable review..... > > I am still looking for a small .380 semi-auto.... someone suggested that I > consider the Colt "Mustang." > > I finally located one, but in calling around to compare prices, I was > told by on store owner that it was a "piece of junk." The problem, they > insisted was that "it won't feed, and if it won't feed, we won't carry it." > > They also insisted that the design was "a bunch of compromises", and > that most small .380's have feed problems. > > Does anyone have any recommendations/comments? > > Joe Maybee The Colt Mustang is mechanically identical to the Colt Government Model .380 -- the difference is the Mustang is shorter in barrel and butt. My experience with my Colt Government Model .380 is that some brands of hollow points do not feed reliably (Winchester Silvertip and PMC), but other brands of hollow point (Remington and Federal) and all brands of full metal jacket feed reliably. Of course, this problem is common to most semiautos -- individual differences in guns (not even a particular model) can cause some hollow points to feed reliably and others not. It's possible that the store owner feels that a gun that doesn't feed Winchester Silvertips is a "piece of junk" because these are supposed to be the hot tip in self-defense ammo right now, and he may feel that .380 FMJ isn't a useful round. Buy the Mustang. Clayton E. Cramer
jkh@jade.UUCP (03/21/87)
Actually, I've heard that the OMC is junk. Most of the small stainless
guns, stainless autos in general, have problems because the metal galls
and robs the slide of a lot of recoil energy.
In general small autos and even things like .45 ACPs have problems. I have
two Gold Cups, very lovingly honed and polished and used only at the range
with full power loads which hang up a good deal.
If you're thinking of this for a defense gun or a house gun I'd recommend
a revolver instead. I've just never owned an autoloader that didn't hang
from time to time. Hell, at the IPSC world's the guns of most of the top
ten finishers had misfeeds or ejection failures, including World Champ Rob
Leatham. He's just so good that a couple of gun failures couldn't stop him.
If a $2500 custom pistol can't be reliable.....
Good luck with your choice, regardless of the action type (just because I'm
a reliability freak...)
Frankjkh@jade.UUCP (03/21/87)
In article <2728@jade.BERKELEY.EDU> jkh@jade.BERKELEY.EDU (Jordan K. Hubbard) writes: >A while back I posted a request for information about the AMT "backup." >I would like to thank the people who replied. It was, in general, a most >unfavorable review..... Sorry, I din't see your original request (our news feed is a bit funny on this group). I have a Backup and have the following experience: first 100 rounds 3 failures to feed. Since then ~2000 rounds, no failures from the original or the spare (3rd party) magazine. Admitedly I haven't shot anything more threatening than paper, but it goes bang when I pull the trigger, which is desirable in a gun of this type. I'm thinking about getting one in 22 to shoot when I don't feel like spending a lot on ammo. Even loading my own, the cost of cases is fairly high, and the ejection is positive (ie. if you shoot outside in grass you lose a lot of cases). -- bill davidsen sixhub \ ihnp4!seismo!rochester!steinmetz -> crdos1!davidsen chinet / ARPA: davidsen%crdos1.uucp@ge-crd.ARPA (or davidsen@ge-crd.ARPA)