03Aug04 Good marks for Kel-Tec: I acquired a Kel-Tec 380Auto pistol several weeks ago. Gregg Garrett at Comp-Tac make a wonderful neck holster for me and has since added it to his standard line. The pistol had an extraction problem, however, and I ultimately had to return it to the manufacturer. Kel-Tec turned it around in three days, and it now works perfectly. I carry it with Cor-Bon 90grHP, and it cycles it without a problem. As a backup gun, the little Kel-Tec has a lot going for it. I carry it routinely, and, as I discovered for myself, Kel-Tec's customer service is wonderful. I don't care how good a gun is, if the manufacturer doesn't take care of its customers, I, for one, have no interest in it. Good show, Kel-Tec! /John

03Aug04 A friend recently did penetration tests of pistol, shotgun, and rifle rounds at an old school that was being demolished. Construction dated from the 1960s. Exterior walls were twelve-inch cinderblock. Interior walls were eight-inch cinderblock. We've all seen demonstrations where the demonstrator places a single cinderblock on a stump and than shoots through it with 308 rifle rounds and 12ga slugs. The result is a good deal different when the cinderblock being shot is cemented into a wall. We discovered that 12ga slugs, both standard (Foster) and reduced-recoil, failed to penetrate even the eight-inch wall. Standard 223 failed to penetrate too, as would be expected, but 308 and 7.62X39 didn't penetrate either! Cinderblock walls, so common in institutional construction, provide a more robust barrier than any of us thought. We have nothing in our standard inventory that will reliably shoot through one. /John

03Aug04

Enlightenment on the subject of penetration, from a mechanical engineer:

"Your penetration test results are not surprising. 'Penetra tion' of a single, unsupported cinderblock via a rifle round is actually a fracture fa ilure, followed by 'penetration.' Conversely, built and cemented in to a wall, each block reinforces the next, and blocks under compression are much stronger that a single block sitting by itself. Under such conditions, blocks are exceptionally resistant to fracture and resultant penetration, as you disco vered.

Your quip is an excellent illustration of the axiom: 'Test procedure defines the result.' If one doesn't anticipate attempting penetration of a single block, sitting by itself on a stump, then such a test or 'demonstrat ion' would appear to be irrelevant. The closer to reality the test, the more legitimate the results."

Comment: My friend is right. We must be careful not to be deceived by test s and demonstrations that are designed merely to impress, rather than inform.

/John