redkow97

bought a 9mm carbine with my lunch money instead.  Still interested in the 22lr wheel gun.  Held a Ruger single 10 and the Heritage 6 shooter.  You can feel the difference in quality, but the ruger is $400 more expensive.  I might just buy two of the Heritage revolvers and really cowboy it up!  

I didn't come here to debate whether or not @Tpoppa can ride, or how fast he can ride.  I commented to preempt the people who were going to call him whatever they were going to call him, because he didn't love the track. 

I don't claim to understand that, but we don't have to be so militant about our disagreement...  We could post up three objectively attractive women, and debate all day about how they "rank" for us personally.  Riding styles aren't that much different.  There is something to enjoy every time you put a leg over a bike.

that doesn't just go for the track, btw. 

I know a lot of us have followed Danimal's adventure thread.  I remember him saying that some of the guys at his Chinese bike group ride were "white-knuckling" the stuff that he was having fun with.  He had fun because he was skillful enough to find it enjoyable.  Others didn't, and were more stressed than entertained.

There are more crashes at track days.  I think that's to be expected when you get a bunch of egos together and tell them, "it's not a race," and then set them loose 25 at a time.  Mid Ohio makes things even worse with the track surface being so slick until after lunch.  I tend to think people take more risks at trackdays because they have an inflated sense of safety. 

I guess I understand how people could find lapping a circuit boring, but it also provides 60 or 70 opportunities to get each corner right, and string together a full lap of getting it all right.  If that's not your brand of fun, then track days won't be enjoyable.

But you're inviting people to call bullshit on you...  "I just didn't have that much fun" is going to be turned around on you.  "You didn't have fun because you weren't as good at it as you expected."  Only you know whether or not that's true.

Time is a valuable commodity for all of us, but life changes shift around how much free time we have, and when we can utilize it.

I was never an 'epic street ride' guy.  And that's probably for the best, since I didn't know what I was doing, and may have very well gotten myself hurt riding over my head.  I booked 5 track days before I'd ever turned one lap on a race track.  I did about 10 days that first season, bought a track-only bike, and sold my street bike in the couple of years that followed.  Upgraded track bikes, crashed it, fixed it, sold it, and bought my XR100.  Had a couple of short-term street bikes along side the XR in the garage, but never really rode them.

It's just such a production to go on a street ride...  You have to get all geared up, just like at the track, except you also have to consider where you're going and what your'e doing when you get there. 

It got to a point where I couldn't (and still can't) devote an entire day (or weekend) to riding.  That's as much based on the time commitment as the costs involved.  There are plenty of days that I still wish I could just take a ride, but I know I wouldn't do it often enough to make it worth while.

for me, riding has become a catch-22 situation.  I enjoy the small bikes on kart tracks, but I don't enjoy having to drive 100+ miles, trailering the bike in order to ride.  So I think, "i'll get a street bike."  But I don't have fun riding on the street, because it's dangerous, full of debris, and the bigger, heavier bikes hurt more to crash and cost more to operate.  Plus I'd have to ride close to 100 miles to get to any decent roads anyway.

the only thing I haven't tried is dualsport riding.  Slabbing it a ways to to explore fire roads, and the like.  

Mountain biking has become more physically beneficial, and I can spread out the time better, with trails a lot closer than good riding roads or race tracks.  When my kids are old enough to spend time with me at the track, I'd like to think I'll get back into racing.  But then we're doubling or tripling the cost of a race weekend once they're on 50's or 100's...  And there's no guarantee they'll enjoy riding anyway. 

I think every parent wants their kid to enjoy the things they enjoy, but I'm not out golfing with my dad on weekends, and while I can sew a button on my shirt just fine, I'm not making clothes for my kids with my mom either.

What it boils down to is that I enjoy riding a lot - but I romanticize it as well.  Anticipating a big ride almost makes the actual event a let-down.  Especially when you think about the stuff you're missing at home.

16 hours ago, Tpoppa said:

http://www.news5cleveland.com/news/national/nra-calls-for-a-review-of-device-used-in-las-vegas-shooting-that-increases-a-gun-s-firepower

"The NRA believes that devices designed to allow semi-automatic rifles to function like fully-automatic rifles should be subject to additional regulations," the statement reads.

I saw that yesterday.  I'm surprised and impressed.  They should hire me to write their press releases.

Spartan's pricing used to be downright insane for a custom-fit suit.  They're still well-priced, but I'm kicking myself for not buying a custom fit 4 years ago.

Keep in mind that there are people who will do alterations to off-the-rack suits.  I believe Barnacle Bill would do that.  Not sure if he has retired though.  But don't write off the possibility of having a $200 suit from Todd (for example) altered to fit the way it should for another $200.  That's still money well spent for those who don't have an "off-the-rack" build.

@RidersDiscount is welcome to correct me on this if I'm talking out of my ass, but their entry level suits ($500-$600) are still great quality suits - they just aren't necessarily built to crash 15 times without repairs.  They'll still save your skin (and bones) if you go down at a track day - you're just more likely to need repairs to that suit sooner than the ultra high-quality models that are lighter, and meant to withstand a lot more use than casual trackday riders will likely put them through.

5 hours ago, Tonik said:

How many mass shootings were there in Australia on the last 21 years? How many in the US in the last 21 years?

First of all, let's try to play nice, and start where we can agree:  Everyone would like to eliminate mass shootings (or all shootings, if that's possible) from our future.  We're simply disagreeing on how to accomplish that goal.  Fair statement?

Doing nothing is not acceptable, neither from a humanitarian perspective, nor from a political perspective.  Framed as apathy or optimism, doing nothing is perhaps the most dangerous option for those who support the second amendment.  Propose a solution that gun owners can live with.  Be the reasonable side, and offer some kind of compromise, or be forever labeled as callous rednecks. 

The same needs to be true on the opposing side of the debate.  Un-inventing the gun isn't a realistic "solution."  Repealing the second amendment is highly improbable.  So what compromises does that leave?

My personal opinion on this is that the 2nd Amendment guarantees the right to own firearms, but not rapid-fire accessories like a bump-stock or a trigger crank.  I'm sure there are gun enthusiasts who enjoy both, but I don't think 2A extends to such ACCESSORIES, because they're not firearms.  The gun lobby should be leading the charge to prohibit the manufacture and sale of such items.  Yes, criminals will still obtain or make them if they want to badly enough, but at least it will be mildly more difficult.

I also support mental health evaluations and/or more in-depth background checks.  I don't take great issue with a reasonable (30 days or fewer) waiting period on new firearm purchases to facilitate said evaluation.  I believe someone else suggested that your MH evaluation be 'good' for a number of years, and renewable, like a carry permit.

I don't have an issue with limiting the number of firearms a non-dealer can purchase in a given year.  I'm sure there would be debate as to what that limit would be, but I've read reports that this shooter amassed 40 rifles in the span of a couple of years...  That seems like it would have been a red flag, if it had been tracked.

As for copying Australia, @Tonik I would theoretically support that idea IF the second amendment were somehow repealed.  With that said, I don't think you can possibly scale-up Australia's policy to work effectively in the United States.  If Australia's gun problem was a flaming piece of chicken someone left on the grill, America's gun problem is a full-blown house fire.  The garden hose Australia used ain't gonna cut it for America.

Some quick stats on Australia and the US:

Australia's population: 24,700,000
USA population: 325,000,000  (the USA is 13 times more populous, but less than 1,000,000 more square mileage.  Population density of Australia = 8.3 people per square mile, on average.  Population density of the USA = 85.6 people per square mile, on average.  As I'll calculate below, that density increases DRASTICALLY in U.S. cities, which we have many more of, and where the majority of American gun violence takes place)

5 largest Australian cities:

Sydney: 5,000,000
Melbourne: 4,700,000
Brisbane: 2,400,000
Perth: 2,000,000
Adelaide: 1,300,000

5 largest cities in the USA:

New York: 8,500,000
Los Angeles: 3,900,000
Chicago: 2,700,000
Houston: 2,300,000
Phoenix: 1,600,000

(and for good measure, I'll throw in some cities in Ohio for the sake of comparison: Columbus = 860,000; Cleveland = 385,000; Parma = 79,000; Youngstown = 65,000)

...and now we look at population DENSITY

 New York = 27,016 people per square mile
Chicago = 11,868 people per square mile
Los Angeles = 7,758 people per square mile
CLEVELAND = 4,666 people per quare mile

Sydney = 1,053 people per square mile.
Melbourne = 4,593 people per square mile
Brisbane = 385 people per square mile

(i'm sick of pulling population and square mileage stats from the internet, but is this trend becoming clear?)

Cleveland (fucking Cleveland), which is dropping city residents like you can hardly imagine, is more densely populated than the most densely populated major Australian city.   So let's be realistic about implementing Australian gun policies in the United States.  The Australian government bought-back some 600,000 guns from its citizens.  There are an estimated 310,000,000 privately owned firearms in the United States.  The scope of a program that emulates Australia's model would be immense, and ridiculously expensive.

I hope they uncover something that explains the motive as well, but I'm not optimistic that will happen.

I'd like to hear what the live-in girlfriend has to say.  Otherwise, i'm guessing this guy was a loner.  "He played $100 a hand video poker."  Video poker, because he didn't want to talk to a dealer or other players?

I just found conversion sleeves for the Taurus Judge, lmao.

I'm not rushing out to buy a Judge, but it's pretty cool that you could, in theory, buy 1 handgun, and adapter sleeves for 9mm, 45 ACP, 22lr, and shoot them all (albeit without great accuracy) from the same frame.

2 minutes ago, MidgetTodd said:

His arsenal has zero to do with it. I promise you my "arsenal" and my quantity of ammo on hand makes his look like a kids nerf gun game yet I have zero intention of illegal activities or of killing anyone other than someone who wishes to do me harm first. 

 

Second. 

The more that comes out about this guy the more I start to think it was a set up. 

The guy is not the type and had no reason or motive and had a great and wealthy life. I'm not convinced there's not a lot more to this

How "conspiracy brother" are you getting on this?   I would entertain the possibility that he acted under duress, or that someone stole his firearms and kidnapped him before executing him, but shit like government concocted "false flag" events are too far-fetched for my taste.

7 minutes ago, Bubba said:

  No one--including a specialist in mental health--could have predicted this. 

I think you're overstating your position here.  I understand that there were no reported "red flags" by any friends or family members, and the clarity of hindsight is always going to give people pause as to what they should have noticed, but unless this guy actually went through some kind of mental health evaluation, I don't think it's fair to say what it would or would not have predicted.

I don't have a major issue with government supplemented (did I just type that?) MH evaluations for people purchasing firearms.  That said, I have grave concerns about that system being ripe for abuse.  You're putting someone's constitutional right in the hands of a subjective evaluator.  There would have to be an appeals process for people who are rejected, and a vetting process for the MH personnel to confirm they're performing valid evaluations, and not just pushing their own agenda.

You're also going to have to regulate private party sales MUCH more strictly.  I expect this will occur in the same way vehicles are titled, requiring a notarized transaction, with the notary needing proof of a background check, MH eval, etc. before he or she will execute the paperwork.

5 minutes ago, bowdog said:

Give me tougher background checks and mental health evaluations before you start telling me that guns are the problem.

I think a lot of people would view that attitude as a monumental step in the right direction.  I wish the NRA (I'm not a member, if that's relevant) would come out and be the ones to propose such a measure, rather than coming across as so extremely right-wing.

Reports are saying bump-stock, and not trigger crank, as I expected. 

In either case, I have a hard time defending them.  People can call me "weak" for saying so, but I don't see any need, or practical legal use for equipment that increases the rate of fire by that degree.

It's a slippery slope to be sure.   I hate rationalizing restrictions because "it doesn't negatively impact me."  People want to limit the number of guns an individual can own to 10 (or whatever)?  "No problem.  I don't have room in the safe for more than 10."  But allowing the erosion of freedom based on it not being  YOUR freedom is a dangerous precedent.  With that said, I'm growing more sympathetic to the people asking, "how the fuck did this guy have that kind of arsenal???"

Shitty days to be a responsible gun owner.

I just confirmed it was the leader I edged out at the line (by 6" or less).  His time is listed at 31:12, mine is 31:11

But it shows my first lap as 8:09, so maybe the clusterfuck wasn't as severe as strava was leading me to believe.

Found results. 35/46 is actually better than i expected.  I feel like I could have been in the top 30, if I'd started more aggressively.

http://www.sfwtiming.com/results/2017CX/4-Hiram/2017-10-01-Hiram-R4-Mens Cat 4_5-r4-.html?raceCat=M Cat 4/5 (Men)

Yeah, I enjoyed the course.  The loose dirt on some of the cambered sections and the tight switchbacks were tough.  I've really noticed that some of the road guys suck at that stuff.  I guess some of the MTB guys do too.

I had seen 2 laps to go displayed, and then didn't realize the leader was catching me, and they changed it to 0 laps to go.  I would have made a better "sprint" rather than pacing for another lap.  The start of the cat 4/5 races is so shitty.  You're either being held up, or holding up someone else.   The first tight turn is a clusterfuck.

If you're interested in one, i would get it ordered before they confirm that jackoff in Las Vegas was using one to shoot at that concert...

I'm sure this will piss some people off, but I think responsible firearms owners and enthusiasts need to be leading the charge to make rapid-fire accessories like this much more difficult to obtain, or outright illegal.

I've fired a fully-automatic carbine (at a range, under police supervision), and frankly, while thrilling (for 10 seconds or so), I didn't find it the least bit enjoyable.   I'm sure I could learn to hold the rifle down better and stay on target, but I can't think of any scenario (not even the zombie apocalypse) where I wouldn't prefer semi-auto. 

Honda's are always described as "more forgiving," which is the nice way of saying they don't have razor sharp handling.  I liked my '03.  It felt more stable than the R6 i took out on demo rides.  Never rode the Kawasaki, but (aside from the oil change issue noted), I have heard very few complaints.  If you want a slipper clutch that badly (personally, I wouldn't consider that essential, but once you have one, you won't be able to go back to life w/o one...), the ZX6 is the better choice.  Aftermarket slippers on the Honda will take it out of certain race classes, which can hurt resale potential even if you're not racing it.  The next owner might want to.

/$.02

My strava times tell the whole story.  First lap was like 17:00, and my subsequent laps were all between 6:40 and 7:40ish.   The starting gate clusterfuck is really unfortunate, and the guys at the back of the pack seem to want to dismount on the steep uphill switchbacks while everyone is tight.    I was literally second-to-last when the last guy ran into my back tire.  He went down.  I had slowed because the guy ahead of me nearly went down.

I also suck at re-clipping in when other people stop in front of me and block the course, forcing me to dismount...  I realize that's part of CX, but I am much quicker riding it all than trying to hike until I can re-clip.  Frustrating.

Once I had some room, I did okay, but the damage was done.  I was pacing for another lap when the leader caught up to me.  We sprinted to the line together.  I was the first rider to finish a lap down.  Makes me that much angrier that traffic tripled the time on my first lap, because I obviously had the fitness to avoid being lapped...

Oh well.  I did make a nice pass on the outside in some sketchy grass/loose dirt.  The rear started to slide out on me, but I collected it and powered up the hill, staying in front of the guy I'd passed on the outside.   I was describing this sequence of events to my wife, and said, "so that was kind of badass."  My 3 yr old chimes in, "no, that was GOOD-ass!"  We couldn't help but laugh.

what makes it shitty?

On 9/26/2017 at 8:55 AM, Tpoppa said:

Parts availability is an issue.  For example, they are belt drive, and the belts aren't still being manufactured.       

There are chain conversions for them.  Maybe use the parts issue as a bargaining chip and see if you can work some cash into it on top of your trade?

I always liked the Buells.  Even the XBs.  Never owned one, for some of the reasons above, but also because the owners seem to way overvalue them...

2 hours ago, max power said:

My brother has one. It's a garbage gun.

You're the first person I've found who has said so.   Don't get me wrong, there are plenty of people on the Ruger forums talking about how shitty the Heritage guns are compared to a single six or single ten, but it costs $120...  It's a toy.  Granted, it's a toy I'd like to last a good long time, but I'm not going to be putting thousands of rounds at a time through a single-action revolver.

@MidgetTodd's point about barrel weight is well taken, and I would agree that a more modern gun is more relevant, but there's a high level of safety with a SA revolver that is annoyingly tedious to replicate in something like an SR22. 

does your brother want to part with his? 

I'm buying a single action revolver. To play with, and eventually teach my girls to shoot. 

Heritage arms makes a colt clone (with some modern inprovements, like a safety) for $120-$150

my only questions are:

4.75 or 6.5" barrel?  I'm thinking 6.5, since I'll never carry this, and it will be more fun to be able to shoot accurately. 

Do I bother paying the extra $30 for the 22 magnum cylinder?  I'm thinking no. I don't keep 22 mag in my cabinet, and it costs as much as 9mm. If I needed a more powerful round, I would reach for a different gun, not the higher velocity cylinder. 

Thoughts?

there are 6 and 9 round models.  The choice seems obvious, but the 9 round is closer to $300. Wtf??? 6 is enough.