EP-72 -SIG P320 Drop Controversy, Stolen Gun-Valor, Ringed Bulls

Episode 72 of the John1911 Podcast is now live.


  • The SIG P320 Drop Failures.
  • Ed Brown Battle-Worn Finish?
  • Hillary Clinton: Preacher or psychopath?
  • SP1 Project Acquired.
  • Will Freeze hunt in Texas?
  • What percentage of service dogs are really scams?
  • Buying a new range: Bulls on parade.
  • Russian S-200 warheads pop at the junkyard.

Marky & Freeze


“Shooting Guns & Having Fun

    • MickeyG


      • The appeal is there since it’s “new” and unique to your eye. Eventually when you see 1000 of them, it will look like any other mass produced paint job.


        • MickeyG

          Yeah, I should have said, “nice weapon”, regardless of its paint job. 🙂

          • Actually I even said on pod I think the finish looks neat.


    • Keith1911

      Ed Brown the man is a complete asshole!

      • I disagree. The ONLY thing Ed Brown Senior has ever, ever, ever done to anybody is…tell…them…no.

        But between you and me, he’s not involved in EB Products operations anymore. The sons, and John May, run it. Which is why you see all these options, red dots, shake-n-bake finishes, etc.

        Back in the day, Ed would not do things he didn’t believe in or thought wouldn’t work well. So he would tell people no.

        And here’s his logic: “I’m not putting that gun out into the market with my name on it”.

        Ed has never said boo to anyone. So this MEME about him has gotten way out of control.



        P.S. Those gun forums, and Youtube trolls, are the worst and I recommend distancing oneself from them.

        • Keith1911

          I’m not going on hearsay, I’m speaking from experience. A few years ago I worked a crap-ton of overtime, sold a couple firearms I hadn’t touched in years, and saved my money. I picked up a brand new Ed Brown Kobra Carry, something I had wanted since the first time I saw one in a gun mag years before. About a month after I got it the front sight tritium vial fell out. I called their customer service and explained what had happened, they arranged pickup and the pistol went back. They called me after they got it back and said yes that was a defect and that they’ll fix it. I told the guy that I wasn’t too crazy about the white dot sights and do they offer a different set. He said no they don’t have a different one but had used 10-8 before and if I wanted they would only charge me for the sights and not the labor since the old front sight was defective. I agreed and a week or so later got a call and was told it was all done and asked how I’d like to pay for the sights and I gave my cc number.

          Fast forward a few months I bought another set of 10-8 sights for another gun and noticed something wasn’t right about the front sight on my EB. I looked closer and lo and behold they were different. I sent them an email with a pic of the two sights and asked what happened. Got a response from something like “Ed@EdBrown.com” that yeah they didn’t put the 10-8 front sight on because of a five thousands difference in height, because they “knew better”. I know they know more than I do, but I’m not a noob. They could have told me that when they figured it out when installing the new ones or when the took my money. I then asked for my money back because they didn’t do what they said they did and the front sight was more than double the cost of the rear sight. He said that I wasn’t getting my money back because it was an “installation charge”. I looked at the receipt I still had and it clearly lists “10-8 front sight $ 10-8 rear sight $ Installation no charge because of warranty”. I pointed this out and got nothing. I called in and asked about my refund and was rudely told “talk to our lawyer”, CLICK. I talked to some legal friends and was told I was correct, I called back and was told, “No your lawyer can talk to our lawyer” CLICK.

          I said f them and promptly traded it off. Just as a contrast I had a problem with the finish on a 10/22 and called Ruger about it. They promptly saw that there was a problem, paid for shipping AND the packing materials for me to ship it to them and get it fixed. I’m sorry but when someone spends $3k on a pistol they should get good customer service and not get lied to.

          • Fair enough.

            But you can see threads of the Ed Brown philosophy smack in the middle of your story.

            I would also assume the gun must have shot to POI and the sights regulated.

            Things have changed at EB I would guess from the catalogue offerings.

            But back when Ed was running the show, you didn’t just buy a gun, you bought his opinion.

            His way.


          • Keith1911

            Looking back on it I can understand what their reasons for it. My problem is the way it was handled. I also knew that I would never get any customer service from them again so why would I want to keep the pistol.

    • Keith1911
      • That’s a good looking gun. LB I think. It’s a good start on wear.



        • Keith1911

          Thanks. This pistol what was part of the trade on the EB that I sold off in the story below. It’s the 1911 I use most often and pretty much the one I use for teaching and taking classes. Since I live in the People’s Republic of Commiefornia in a county that isn’t CCW friendly I can’t carry a pistol every day.

          • That sucks. But keep rocking on with the Baer.


  • Jeff

    Look I know you guys are REALLY anti Pot, but why the heck is it a Schedule 1 Drug ? That classification from what I understand prevents may things, one is R&D with it.
    I’d love to have something that is not Opioud base. In the military I found out the hard way and if it was not for this E7 who noticed my situation I would be dead.
    Yea, deathly allergic to them LOL Had to have shoulder surgery and god did it SUCK !
    I would love to see an alternative ..

    • I think saying we are “anti-pot” is probably an overstatement.

      While we don’t personally choose to smoke pot, we aren’t for it being banned like cocaine.

      But we do recognize that a lot of the arguments the “pot lobby” pushes for legalization are actually bullshit. Which only serves to misinform everyone and undercut their desired goals.

      On the same token, “refer madness” was even more bullshit.

      As for research limitations based off the schedule, that is also an overstatement. I know for a fact some of the more reputable pharma companies actually possess items such as coke, heroine and the like for research.

      It’s just MUCH more tightly controlled with limited amounts, chain of custody records, and BATFE/FDA compliance regulations.

      So in short, yes. A boutique business would have a very, very hard time getting the licenses to handle such scheduled items. And on balance, that does keep the research community for such items very small.