Monday, May 07, 2012

___________s Suck!

Apparently, the thing to do these days, especially if you're a bald shooting instructor with a Brand Name®©™ and a goatee, is to release a YouTube video declaring that _______s Suck!

By using "sucks" in the title, everyone will know that you're hip and edgy. You'll increase attention to your Brand Name®©™ as hundreds of owners of ________ flock to your FaceBook/YouTube/MySpace/LiveJournal/Geocities page to rebut your slanderous accusations against their beloved _______.

The best part? Your nuthuggers will be inspired to buy more tee shirts and ball caps, all the clicking will drive up your ad rates, and the pièce de résistance is that none of those people who own _______ were likely to come to your class, anyway, so you don't risk any damage to your own bottom line!

Brilliant!

41 comments:

SGB said...

He's an idiot.

Tam said...

Hardly.

It's quite savvy from a marketing standpoint, if not my cup of tea.

Jay G said...

Hey! I don't have a Brand Name®©™! Where do I get me one?

Frank W. James said...

Who ya talking about? Pincus or Yeager? Or did I miss there was another one of these 'enlightened' firearms educators?...

All The Best,
Frank W. James

perlhaqr said...

Kinda makes me wanna make a meta video.

"Everything which is not the thing which I endorse sucks!"

And then I remember that I don't even have the gumption to work on projects I actually want to work on.

Mossyrock said...

I have to wonder...does said instructor offer a class in remedial handbrake engagement or transmission shifting? How about running away like a 9 year old girl and leaving your team mates to die? Does he offer THAT class? If so, he is eminently qualified....

Rustmeister said...

Never heard of him.

Firehand said...

Have no idea who did what(I've GOT to get in the loop one of these days), but it does seem to be The Thing for some people

God, Gals, Guns, Grub said...

I'll have to try that "sucks" word... maybe somebody will notice my blog...

On second thought... nah...

Dann in Ohio

Anonymous said...

Pat Yates, who sold his design to Detonics, examines the difficulties of producing a cut-down 1911: "How the Detonics .45 Came About,.."

Relevant section--"Evolution into the Detonics Design: Over the next few months I worked on the gun when time permitted, making it into what I wanted as a very carryable .45 and addressing feeding issues. This was in 1972 or early '73. By late 1973 I had evolved the design into what I wanted and persuaded it to feed a few loads quite reliably. (As any of you who own and shoot one know, even the production Detonics Combat Masters are cranky feeders."

http://www.biggerhammer.net/detonics/detonics_history_patyates.html

I love my children but they are cranky feeders, too. Perhaps it's caused by the lack of length to their digestive tracts. ;^)

Pincus is to be commended for calling attention to the...ahem, "shortcomings" of diminutive 1911s. I am a devoted fan of this design, but a lot of authoritative voices have spoken out against cutting them to less-than--Commander length.

MALTHUS

Jay G said...

I dunno. My Colt 1991A1 Compact has been disgustingly reliable with pretty much any load run through it.

Of course, the "white" sights came off using the +Ps, so maybe there *is* something there... ;)

Anonymous said...

I thought all firearm instructors under the age of 50 were bald with goatees, except Jeff Gonzales.

Gerry

Angus McThag said...

Hey!

I'm bald.

I have a goatee!

I need to see if TT33SUCKS.com is available...

LawDog said...

I'm guessing the blank in question is "3-inch and sub-3-inch 1911s"?

Bubblehead Les. said...

Hmm. Must have missed that YouTube Screed. But there's just so many of them out there....

Jeff said...

OK, finally saw the video.

Tam, you make a great point about this guy but he does kind of have a point about the compact 1911s.

I still EDC my SA Micro Compact 45 but I'm getting ready to switch over to a P225 because I don't totally trust my micro.(still testing ammo and whatnot)

Besides the occasional jams, I've had the recoil spring assembly puke its guts out the front of the gun one time while shooting ball ammo. (FWIW it shot about 3 rounds with minor problems after the bits had departed the gun)

The fact that he was probably at a reasonably high round count between cleanings most likely had something to do with his problems, I've had pretty good luck with a clean and properly lubed gun.

Rob Pincus said...

Disappointing commentary from you, Tam... you should know better. I don't need the publicity and I don't even sell ball caps (they could cover up my baldness.. duh!)

You've had an open invitation to train with me for a decade or so.. with any gun you think is worthy, yet you sit on the porch and prefer to comment with contributing.

Meanwhile, here is what she is talking about: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2P0edDYdqXU

Sigman said...

Call me a knuckle dragger but I don't see the need to go below Commander length barrels. The holster and how you dress determines how well a pistol hides IMHO,

Sigman said...

BTW, I LOVE how Pincus outed himself (or maybe I was just late to the party)

DirtCrashr said...

I'm pretty bald but definitely not bald-pretty. I'm not sure a goatee would help unless I had a bigger nose and chin to match, symmetry is all in the profile and mine is kinda short and chinless like earthworm Jim.
Do short Glocks have feed problems or only the Gen4 ones until they get TehFix?

The Raving Prophet said...

I just want to know in what situation, EXACTLY, I would be dumping 1000+ rounds through my Sig Ultra (which has been 100% over its first couple hundred rounds), especially without downtime for cleaning.

I can understand those conversations for rifles, but not for pistols. If your subcompact carry pistol is going to need that kind of capability, I don't see me (or most anybody else) living through the experience. Sure, a 3" may not be as capable as a 5", but that's hardly news. When somebody posts a rant like that on YouTube, it smacks more of ublicity stunt than any actual productive discussion. I couldn't care less how much trigger time the shooter may have had. It is every bit as fanciful a scenario as zombies.

Jerry said...

"If your subcompact carry pistol is going to need that kind of capability, I don't see me (or most anybody else) living through the experience." Exactly. What is the point? Why own a gun, if it don't what it needs to do?

S3ymour said...

To say that your pistol is reliable and shouldn't be expected to have to be reliable throught the course of 1000+ rounds is like saying your car which only breaks down every 100 miles is reliable because you don't expect to drive more than 5 miles in a given day. The fact is that tons of people buy these high end sub compact 1911's expecting for them to function reliably and they don't. Besides if your gun truly is reliable, take Rob's offer of almost $1000 worth of free training if it doesn't malfunction during the course. Sounds like a reasonable offer to me!

Jonathan Rodriguez said...

I trust Rob as I have read his books watched his videos and attended his classes. He is top of the line and wouldn't resort to the cowardice displayed by the author. Reliability is a major part of shooting. If you can't count on your gun when you need to, lights out. Rob is a super informed teacher and is such because he is on the range everyday in a different situation with completely different people. He is a fine man who is constantly building himself a valuable company. GO ROB!

Anonymous said...

It's awesome that Pincus called you on your bullshit. He's openly invited you to put up or shut up, and you just sit back and badmouth him. If you really believe the crap that flows out of your face hole then you should attend one of his courses and show him.

He uses empirical evidence to design his training modules, and he offers advice based on what works and what doesn't work. If something sucks, he says that is sucks. If something works, he says that it works. Period.

Show up to one of his classes or STFU. Seriously.

-Hogan

Will said...

DirtCrashr:

the short Glocks do have a feed problem, in that they push the bullet into the case when it impacts the feed ramp. They don't often stop at this point, but the bullet is almost guaranteed to have some setback after making it into the chamber. This is why you don't want to be re-chambering the same round in the little Glocks, especially in .40sw
This quirk is the genesis of the Glock Kaboom!

The Raving Prophet said...

The point was, S3ymour, if 200 rounds are over an order of magnitude more than what the gun will ever be expected to do under stress and without a good cleaning/lubing, and it does that flawlessly, why push for a thousand? You can say the other designs suck because 10K is beyond them. The question is what is a reasonable expectation. 200 flawless at a throw is good enough for any carry situation I might face... Well beyond it, actually.

Anonymous said...

Maybe all you industry pukes don't like the outting Rob gave the Kimber. Rob is a straight talking no bullshit instructor. I'm the guy with the $1000 boat anchor, (small Boat that is). If I had seen this before buying you bet I never would have made that purchase. Fighting the problem thru the first day of class only gave me a lot of practice at clearing the malfunctions. Day two Rob let me use a 9mm M&P. What fun it is to train with something reliable. You short 1911 guys can make all the rationalizations you want and you can all keep them too. My 1911 days are done. All you Rob haters haven't got a clue what this man is about. Get some balls and go train with him.

Tam said...

...and thus is my point proven about "______ Sucks!" and nuthuggers.

FWIW, I don't think much of 3" 1911s, and carry an M&P 9 these days myself. I also don't have any problem that I am aware of with Rob as a trainer or a person.

Tam said...

...also: "industry pukes", LOL!

I promise you that my daily driver has not a single manufacturer's logo anywhere on it.

David Williams said...

My experience since 1978 tells me I am better off carrying a striker fired pistol. Started with 1911s in US Army. PD job carried S7W Model 10s with 158 grain round nose plus p rounds. My department switched to Glocks in 1987.

I am not sure why this degenerated into personal attacks but facts are facts.

You can call me a nuthugger anyday because the nuthuggers use the facts, training and equipment to win the gunfights. And winning the gunfights is all I care about. I have had to do it several times in real life, on the streets, not on the porch.

Tam said...

"I am better off carrying a striker fired pistol."

Huh. And has somebody suggested you weren't?

Man, the hit dog really does yelp.

SteveG said...

I've used and relied on ____s of some variation for 27 years. I don't think they are God's gift to defensive weaponcraft nor do I recommend them to new shooters. However, if someone is willing to take the time to learn to operate and properly maintain the ____ I won't tell them their choice sucks either. I do try to steer them away from the ones with a barrel shorter than 4" though.

Will said...

Actually, the Officers size 1911 (3 1/2") can be 100% reliable, both in steel and aluminum frames. At least mine have been, through multiple classes, and many 1000's of rounds. My steel one will feed empty cases (good for surprise malfunction drills). They are not factory original, as a couple areas need work to bring them to a reliable condition.

I'm going to have to examine the internals of the 3" Kimber vs the 3.5" guns to see what they have done. The 3.5" design changes vs the 5" were radical, and I suspect the engineers picked that size as the practical limits of the required angular swing of the chamber end of the 1911. Which could explain the feeding problems the 3" guns seem to have. Offhand, I'm thinking the gunmakers might have to revisit JMB's original double swinging links barrel design for these short barrels.

Frankly, it's not the slide length that needs to be shortened, but the grip frame. Even a bobtail mod would be a measurable improvement on concealability of these small 1911's.

David Williams said...

Tam,

I never even heard of you until today so maybe I don't understand your level of experience and expertise. I mean this as a serious question since you seem to sling personal attacks.

What experience, education, or training do you have that gives credence to your opinions?

Like I said, I didn't hear of your before today and don't know anything about you. You could very well have some experience I would like to learn from. What is is, please?

Tam said...

I'm unclear on what opinions you think I'm offering?

How much (and what type) experience does it take to be amused by hyperbole?

David Williams said...

Your original post is full of opinion, in my opinion. I aksed the question what yyour experience is because you may well be VERY EXPERIENED and I may learn something from you. So again the question is:

What experience, education, or training do you have that gives credence to your opinions?

If you choose to deflect again, I willtake that as prima facie evidence that you have no experience. I have also cut and pasted your original post to use as reference to your "opinions"

Apparently, the thing to do these days, especially if you're a bald shooting instructor with a Brand Name®©™ and a goatee, is to release a YouTube video declaring that _______s Suck!

By using "sucks" in the title, everyone will know that you're hip and edgy. You'll increase attention to your Brand Name®©™ as hundreds of owners of ________ flock to your FaceBook/YouTube/MySpace/LiveJournal/Geocities page to rebut your slanderous accusations against their beloved _______.

The best part? Your nuthuggers will be inspired to buy more tee shirts and ball caps, all the clicking will drive up your ad rates, and the pièce de résistance is that none of those people who own _______ were likely to come to your class, anyway, so you don't risk any damage to your own bottom line!

Brilliant!

Tam said...

I recollect what I wrote just fine. After all, I wrote it. (And even if I'd forgotten, it's right there at the top of the page, but thanks anyway.)

The only opinion I see expressed there is that publicity- and marketing-savvy instructors know that presenting controversial topics in a provocative or inflammatory manner will drive eyeballs and business.

I fail to see what "experience, education, or training" is required for me to hold that opinion.

David Williams said...

OK. No experience. Nothing to offer me. I will get off the porch and run with the big dogs. Good night and be safe.

Jay G said...

It's like the points just make themselves!

Montie said...

Gee Tam,

You really stirred up a shitstorm this time!

For all of you guys just coming here for the first time, don't get so butthurt. I guess the point of 'teh snark' is just too esoteric for you to grasp.

I'm quite sure that Rob is more than capable of defending himself in scenarios involving words as well as those involving guns. Do you think Rob's comment here would have included the remark about a standing invitation to come train with him for more than a decade, if he and Tam did not know of and respect each other?