User:Dennis/sandbox
Contents |
S&W 351
| Smith & Wesson Model 351 | |
|---|---|
| Type | Revolver |
| Land of Origin | United States |
| Specifications | |
| Frame | Aluminum alloy J-frame |
| Length | 6.25" |
| Barrel length | 1.875" |
| Weight | 10.8 oz |
| Width | 1.3" |
| Height | 4.2" |
| Cartridge | .22 WMR |
| Action | DAO (351 C) Single/Double Action (351PD) |
| Trigger pull | 11 lbs. |
| Chambers | 7 |
|
| |
| Muzzle velocity | 1029 fps[1] |
| Sights | fixed open |
| Production History | |
| Manufacturer | Smith & Wesson |
| Unit Cost | 351C: US$689 351 PD: US$759 (MSRP 2015) |
Beretta Pico
| Beretta Pico | |
|---|---|
| Type | Pistol |
| Land of Origin | USA |
| Specifications | |
| Length | 5.1" |
| Barrel length | 2.7" |
| Weight | 11.5 oz |
| Cartridge | .380 ACP |
| Action | Recoil-operated DAO |
|
| |
| Feed | 6-round magazine |
| Sights | removable/adjustable |
| Production History | |
| Manufacturer | Beretta USA |
| Unit Cost | US$399 (MSRP 2013) |
The Pico follows Beretta’s successful introduction of the slightly larger 9mm Nano in 2011 and shares many of the Nano’s design characteristics, but not all. Unlike most small DAOs, the Pico is fired by a conventional hammer instead of a striker, has restrike capability and does not have a magazine-disconnect safety. By contrast, the Nano is striker-fired with a slide-activated pre-load and does not have a restrike trigger mechanism. The Pico’s DAO system does not store any energy until the trigger is pulled, eliminating the potential of accidental discharge if the pistol is dropped.
When the Pico trigger is pulled, the trigger bar rotates the hammer to the rear. As full trigger travel is reached, the chassis cams the trigger bar out of engagement and releases the hammer. The hammer travels forward under tension and strikes the firing pin. The firing pin travels forward under inertia. After the firing pin reaches its full forward position, the firing pin return spring rebounds the firing pin to a neutral position. Thus, the Pico does not require any drop safety built into the trigger itself to stop the trigger from traveling rearward should the gun be dropped onto a hard surface.
The Pico has the same cam-ramp, tilt-barrel, recoil-operated mechanism any John Browning fan will instantly recognize. When the pistol is fired, recoil energy causes the barrel and slide assembly to move to the rear. After a short distance, the barrel is forced down and stopped by the operation of the barrel cam and disconnect pin interface. The slide continues its rearward travel under inertia, extracting the fired case from the barrel and kicking it out through the ejection port. The recoil spring then pushes the slide forward, feeding the next cartridge from the magazine into the chamber. Continued forward movement causes the barrel cam to raise the barrel into its locked position.
Beretta makes something of a big deal about the fact the Pico’s barrel only tilts up 1.4 degrees when the handgun is fired, which is claimed to increase feeding reliability for cartridges coming from the magazine into the chamber. Company engineers will also tell you that felt recoil is notably reduced because of this minimal barrel tilt. I can’t really speak knowledgeably to the physics involved on that point, but I do know that the Pico was remarkably pleasant to handle and quick to recover on target in my firing review, even with the hottest .380 loads.
Like the Nano, the Pico’s slide is designed to remain open after the last round has been fired. Unlike the Nano, however, the Pico employs a very low-profile slide-release lever for closing a locked-back slide, while the Nano has no external slide latch lever at all (requiring the slide to be pulled to the rear and released). The only way to lock open the Nano’s slide is by putting an empty magazine in the gun and pulling back the slide. The external slide catch is snag-free, adds no width to the gun and can be engaged manually to lock back the slide without a magazine.
The Pico has an easily removable single-column magazine that allows for rapid reloading. Standard magazine capacity is six rounds. Each Pico comes with two magazines, one with a flush-fit basepad and one with an extended basepad hook that allows an all-fingers grip on the gun. The magazine-release lever is fully ambidextrous and operates by a straight-down (not inward) push from the thumb of the firing hand, meaning it cannot be accidentally released from grip side-pressure or a misplaced finger on either side of the pistol.
The Pico’s grip frame is constructed from the same glass-fiber-reinforced technopolymer as the Nano, with rounded, snag-free surfaces to ensure trouble-free holster insertion and extraction. The ergonomic grip design features an optimal grip angle for sight alignment. It looks more “straight up and down” than the classic Model 1911 angle, but the deep curve of the upper rear part of the grip is contoured such that, in my hand, it points just as naturally for me as does a 1911. Both the front and rear grip surfaces feature a comfortable textured surface to ensure a firm hold.
The Pico also has what I consider to be “real” sights. Unlike many other small .380s, the high-visibility three-dot “Interchangeable Low Profile” system is designed for quick target acquisition and a crisp sight picture. The rear and front sights can be easily removed by a (supplied) 1.5mm hex wrench for replacement with other types (or heights) of sights. Trijicon is providing night sights for the gun, so standard — or tritium — sights will be available as factory options.
The Pico is one of the smallest, lightest, thinnest concealed carry .380s in existence. It’s less than three-quarters of an inch thick, with no protruding buttons or levers. It weighs only 111/2 ounces empty, including the flat-base magazine (a birthday-party helium balloon will float it). Overall length is 5.1 inches, and its height at the rear sight (with flat-base magazine) is just four inches. The Pico leaves no excuse for ever answering “No” to the question, “Is that a pistol in your pocket?”
Options Abound The mechanical heart of the Pico is its stainless steel internal subchassis, which is the only serialized part of the pistol. This means, under federal law, that this little steel parts-mechanism holder is the only part that is actually defined as “a firearm” and is the only part of the Pico that is regulated by law. Not the barrel, not the slide, not the grip frame. This means that any other component can be exchanged or customized without affecting the serialized part. So you can swap barrels and have a different-caliber “gun.”
And you can swap grip frames. Entirely. Just by following the detailed instructions in the owner’s manual. Don’t like black? How about Flat Dark Earth, white, pink or even purple? Beretta offers them all as aftermarket accessories in three different styles. Want a laser? A weapon light? Beretta has designed two other types of Pico frames in cooperation with LaserMax. One integrates a laser; the other integrates a white light. By integrating the laser and the light into the frames themselves, the result is a much smaller and more carry-convenient package than an external accessory-rail laser or light could ever provide.
The Pico is designed to be fieldstripped quickly and simply, thanks to that well-illustrated owner’s manual, which also includes clear instructions for more advanced disassembly as well. Reassembly is easy and basically intuitive, since incorrect reassembly is, essentially, prevented by the distinctive, simple design. However, what you don’t want to do is go fiddling around inside the serialized subchassis or screw around with the trigger pull, because that will void the warranty.
The Pico is designed for unobtrusive carry, featuring a low-profile slide-release lever and a width of .725 inch.
A Pocket ProtectorI put our review sample through its paces as soon as I opened the box, firing a series of groups at 50-foot, street-width “defense distance” and reviewing its ballistics with five commercial .380 loads commonly used in small, concealed carry .380s. How did it shoot? Like you’d expect any Beretta to shoot: accurately and reliably. For a point-and-shoot, close-up crisis pistol, I’ve always figured that being able to dump a full magazine into a coffee saucer shooting unsupported at about 25 feet in a hurry was more than good enough. The Pico beat that standard in spades.
How did it handle? Very comfortably. The recoil-spring tension was less stiff than many other small pistols, making the slide easily operable for shooters of lesser hand strength without diminishing functional reliability at all. The grip fits my average-size hand naturally, and its sleek, projection-free profile and sides make it ideal for inside-the-waistband or inside-the-pocket CCW holsters. I personally prefer the extension-pad magazine for a full-hand grasp, but even with the “deep concealment” flat-pad magazine, the ergonomic configuration and mild recoil make the Pico easy to grab and shoot.
Made entirely in the USA (the “BU” in the official model name stands for “Beretta USA”), the Pico is scheduled to begin shipping to dealers in the fourth quarter of this year. In addition to the two magazines and the owner’s manual, each gun will ship with a soft-sided, zippered carry case and safety lock. For such a small gun, the Pico offers a surprising set of features at a very reasonable cost. And for not much additional cash, an owner can have a few extra frames; laser or weapon-light capability; night sights; or even swap calibers.
I liked the Beretta Pico better than I expected to. It is a minimalist concealed carry tool, no frills, no protruding levers, no bells or whistles. It’s slim and sleek in the extreme, with a clean, smooth trigger pull. It’s as convenient to carry as your wallet. When its $399 MSRP translates into real-world street price (once the world returns to normal), it’s going to give all the other palm-size .380s on the market a real challenge. I’d definitely carry it.
Oh, about that name. “Pico” is not Italian for “little,” though it might as well be. “Pico” is actually the internationally recognized metric prefix for one-trillionth of a unit (10 to the -12th power), as in a “Picometer.” A “Nanometer” is one billionth of a meter. So, in the world of science and engineering, a Pico-unit is one size smaller than a Nano-unit. And now you know the rest of the story ….
| Load | Bullet wt. (gr) | Muzzle Velocity | Standard Deviation | Average group (in.) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Barnes TAC-XPD | 80 | 844 | 7 | 2.63 |
| Federal Hydra-Shok | 90 | 913 | 6 | 2.5 |
| Hornady CD FTX | 90 | 860 | 6 | 2.25 |
| Rem. Golden Saber | 102 | 863 | 18 | 2.68 |
| Winchewster PDX1 | 95 | 829 | 14 | 2.83 |
Colt Mustang XSP
| Colt Mustang XSP | |
|---|---|
| Type | pistol |
| Land of Origin | USA |
| Specifications | |
| Frame | polymer w/ blackened stainless slide |
| Length | 5.6" |
| Barrel length | 2.75" |
| Weight | 11.8 oz |
| Cartridge | .380 ACP |
| Trigger pull | 5 lbs |
|
| |
| Sights | Front: dovetail blade Rear: drift-adjustable square-notch |
| Production History | |
| Manufacturer | Colt's Manufacturing Company |
| Unit Cost | US$649 (MSRP 2013) |
When interviewing Greg Rozum, director of product engineering at Colt, about the new Pocketlite, I was told that this was just the first of many planned Mustang models. I never really gave a thought to what next model of Mustang Colt would introduce, but if I had, on my short list of possibles would have been both a DAO model and one with a polymer frame. Enter the Colt Mustang XSP.
Tweaks to the Template Colt could have introduced a polymer-frame Mustang without changing anything in the design, and they would have people lining up to buy them simply because it says “Colt” on the side. I am happy to say they did not do that. In fact, this is the Mustang Colt should have introduced first. Everything about it is better. The dimensions of the Mustang XSP are the same (length, height, depth), and it’s still a 6+1 single-action .380, but with the polymer frame it’s more than an ounce lighter than the Pocketlite. However, the numbers do not tell the whole story here.
First, the XSP is all black, but it won’t rust in your pocket. The slide and barrel are machined out of solid stainless steel bar stock, then given a blackened finish. Next, even the serrations on the slide have been improved when compared with the original Mustangs and the Pocketlite. The serrations are wider and deeper, providing a more aggressive gripping surface. In case you’re wondering what “XSP” stands for (my guess was “XTra Special Polymer”), RJ Contorno of Colt explained, “XSP is sort of a carry-over from our XSE series of pistols. The XSE line is a line with many upgrades from our standard line, such as dovetailed front and rear sights, ambidextrous safeties, undercut triggerguard, etc. We changed the ‘E’ to a ‘P’ simply because the new Mustang has a polymer grip frame.”
While both the Pocketlite and XSP have the same dovetailed notch rear sight, the XSP has a better front sight. One of the mediocre aspects of the Pocketlite was the nonserrated ramp front sight, which was part of the slide. Considering that the slide is stainless, that made the front sight hard to pick up under certain lighting conditions. The XSP has a dovetailed front sight with a sharp angle to it (it’s not quite a post). Admittedly, the sights are small, but when combined with the crisp, five-pound single-action trigger, I was able to shoot this .380 as well as some full-size guns. The other advantage of dovetailed sights? You can replace them (I wouldn’t be surprised to see some version of the XS Big Dot for the XSP soon).
On to the major change: the frame. The big news isn’t really that the frame of the XSP is made from polymer. It’s that the versatility of polymer has allowed the engineers to design a frame that has been tweaked and improved in half a dozen ways. The front and back of the Pocketlite were a little smooth for my taste, even though felt recoil in the pistol wasn’t bad at all. The front and rear of the XSP’s grip are textured with little raised cubes (sort of reverse checkering). The triggerguard is square, and, in fact, the front of the triggerguard even has a bit of a hook. Combine that with the tiny accessory rail on the front of the frame and I’m sure we’ll be seeing lasers specifically designed for the XSP very shortly.
The XSP benefits from an undercut triggerguard as well. This is something I see on a lot of competition 1911s, and it allows the shooter to get his hand higher on the gun. How much higher? Maybe an eighth of an inch on the XSP vs. the Pocketlite. While an eighth of an inch isn’t much, if you’ve got thick fingers and are always fighting to get two of them on pocket guns, that might be all that you need.
The grips are all one piece to the frame, and they have been relieved on the left side to provide better access to the noticeably enlarged magazine release. It doesn’t stick out any farther, but the diameter has been increased from ¼ to 5/16s of an inch. That doesn’t sound like a lot, but you’d be surprised — it increases the area by 50 percent (trust me, I did the math so you don’t have to).
Not only does the XSP come with an ambidextrous thumb safety, but the contour of the safety has been changed slightly as well. When engaged, the top of the safety matches the curve of the frame, and the ledge on the lever has been moved down slightly when compared with that of the Pocketlite. The safety’s ledge has also been narrowed when compared with that of the Pocketlite. It sticks out from the frame about one millimeter less. This I don’t like. That safety is something that will need to be disengaged before the pistol can fire, which means it should be large enough to manipulate under stress. I’m guessing Colt did this because the ambi nature of the safety means that the other side of the safety digs into the index-finger knuckle when it is disengaged. I would rather they move the ledge farther up the body of the safety and widen it.
To provide some contrast to the black slide and frame, the hammer, magazine release, thumb safety and slide release are all natural stainless. The pistol comes with two stainless steel magazines, the same kind as provided with the Pocketlite (they’ll fit all original Colt .380s). The trigger of the XSP is blackened aluminum, and the pistol has a full-length polymer guide rod.
FullscreenColt Mustang XSP Review
Picture 1 of 11
Next Up: The Best Subcompact 9mm On The Market Click Here to View the Next Gallery
To the Range
Like it or not, our opinions often tend to be influenced by others. When Shari, my long-suffering contact at my FFL (Double Action Indoor Range), called me to let me know I had a new Colt in, she expressed a few heartfelt opinions. “My God, is it ugly,” she told me. “The grip texture, the frame … ugh.” Shari sees more guns than the prop handler on a Michael Bay movie, so, understandably, I was actually biased against the new Mustang before I even opened the box and took a look.
But when I did crack open the blue box and unwrap this “hideous” new pistol, I actually liked it. In fact, the longer I handled it, the more I liked it. Beauty is in the eye of the gunholder. I prefer the XSP to the Mustang Pocketlite, both in looks and features, and I like the Pocketlite just fine. The XSP grip seems to fill my hand better, and I like the looks and feel of the squared triggerguard better than the original round one. Plus, the ambidextrous safety is a step up. The two Mustangs appear to be only distant relatives, so chances are that if you don’t like the looks of one, you’ll like the other.
Trigger pull on my sample gun was a crisp five pounds. While it looks like a 1911 trigger, the trigger on the Mustang actually pivots (although there is not much movement). It has a short reset, too, which means shooting quickly is much easier than if the pistol had been burdened with a long DAO pull.
Based on my experience test-driving the new Pocketlite last year, I was looking forward to shooting the XSP. The Pocketlite only weighed 121/2 ounces, and I was expecting a snappy gun. What I got was the opposite. It was so soft-shooting that my 10-year-old son was doing full magazine dumps as fast as he could pull the trigger, getting pie-plate-size groups at seven yards. My kids and I put 200 rounds through the Pocketlite in an hour and had nothing but fun, no sore hands to be found. I think this has as much to do with not having to fight the trigger each time to make the gun go off as anything else.
I assumed I’d have the same experience with the XSP, for while it is a bit lighter than the Pocketlite, my experience has shown that polymer frames tend to soak up more recoil forces than metal. I actually had a Pocketlite on hand for comparison, so I was able to shoot it and the XSP side by side.
Shooting a gun the size of the XSP with two hands makes you feel equal parts silly and giant-size. I don’t have large hands, and with both of them on the gun, it still came close to disappearing. Felt recoil is the same between the Pocketlite and the XSP, which means not bad at all for a .380. The XSP shot to point of aim out to 15 yards, and the good sights and trigger meant I could shoot up to the pistol’s ability. It preferred Hornady’s 90-grain Critical Defense ammo, and one miraculous five-shot group at 15 yards was a mere 1.2 inches (although most were substantially larger). I did have three stovepipe jams in the first 30 rounds, but after that the pistol ran smoothly no matter what I fed it.
Final Thoughts Some people want to jump all over Colt for “finally” introducing a polymer-frame .380 after Ruger has sold 19 gazillion LCPs. Not to step on any toes, but I don’t own an LCP for two reasons: the trigger pull and the sights (to stretch the definition of the term). Guns this size are usually going to be used at conversational distances, we’re often told, so sights are irrelevant. Well, they are. Right up until they’re not. And if the circumstances it’s most likely to be used in involve short range and high stress, why would I deliberately carry a pistol that is equipped with a long, heavy trigger that precludes any sort of rapid, accurate fire?
The Mustang XSP is small and concealable. It’s got a great trigger and an ambi safety, but for a long time I’ve been conflicted as to how I’d actually carry any single-action “pocket” gun. I don’t want to see a single-action pistol with no grip safety bouncing around in a pocket, much less a purse, as thumb safeties get knocked off. A pistol going off in your pocket will ruin your whole day, which is why so many of them have long, heavy, horrible triggers. The XSP seems too small to carry on a belt without looking silly. After much thought and a simple process of elimination, I think the best carry option would be in a pocket in a purpose-built holster that keeps the pistol oriented properly while covering the triggerguard, so even if the safety gets bumped off, nothing can get to the trigger. I had a Safariland Model 25 meant for an LCP with a Crimson Trace laser on hand that fit the XSP acceptably, and I carried the pistol for a few days in it. This holster is polymer wrapped in suede, so it keeps its shape, protects the trigger, yet won’t pull out of your pocket when you draw the gun. I imagine by the time you read this, several holster makers will be putting out models specifically designed for the XSP.
To be honest, the price tag of $649 is a bit steep for a polymer-frame gun of this size, even one with a stainless slide. Yes, I like it, and it is in the price range of the SIG P238, but the SIG has a metal frame, and metal is more expensive. The Mustang XSP is a definite improvement on the design, but until Colt drops the suggested price a bit (to something that starts with a “5”) many people won’t even give it a look, and that’s a shame, for they’ll be missing out on a significant upgrade to the Mustang name.
| Load | Bullet Wt. (gr) |
Avg. Velocity (fps) |
Standard Deviation |
Avg. Group (in.) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hornady XTP | 90 | 904 | 21 | 2.5 |
| Hornady FTX | 90 | 838 | 22 | 2.1 |
| Black Hills FMJ | 95 | 884 | 12 | 2.9 |
| Corbon DPX | 80 | 915 | 25 | 3.3 |
