Got The Touch!

[Lisa]

And it's the same number (5) as my other one, so I guess they kept me down for the same one. :) I can't wait to read it again. It'll be like a new book because I haven't read it since I was about 16.

Lisa

[Tim Hatch]

And it's the same number (5) as my other one, so I guess they kept me down for the same one. :) I can't wait to read it again. It'll be like a new book because I haven't read it since I was about 16.

Lisa

Cool! Enjoy it! On a selfish note, that means mine is on the way...
:cool:

[Scott Hajek]

From the Shocklines Weekly Newsletter:

The second book in F. Paul Wilson's limited edition reissue of the Adversary Cycle is out -- "The Touch" (it was originally the third book in the series, but Wilson rejiggered the order of the books to fit with his original vision and revision of the books).

rejiggered?

[fpw]

Swell. Where are my copies?

[jimbow8]

Have you been rejiggering again, Paul? What have we told you about that?

[Shocklines.com]

We JUST got in our first batch of "Touch" for Shocklines.com and we'll be sending out a large amount of copies on Monday (those waiting for personal inscriptions will be a little longer).

The book looks amazing. Congrats Paul!

Matt
http://www.shocklines.com

[Biggles]

We JUST got in our first batch of "Touch" for Shocklines.com and we'll be sending out a large amount of copies on Monday (those waiting for personal inscriptions will be a little longer).

The book looks amazing. Congrats Paul!

Matt
http://www.shocklines.com

Just the man I need to contact! I dropped the ball on subscribing to the entire Adversary Cycle. Can I still do so (and if so, can I still get the same numbered books)? Please PM me with info (or post it if you wish).

Thanks!

[Biggles]

And it's the same number (5) as my other one, so I guess they kept me down for the same one. :)

Lisa

5? Were you waiting in line to sign up?

[Shocklines.com]

Yup, if you order the series through us at Shocklines.com, you can still get matching numbers for the whole series -- that will be the case as long as the first book, The Keep, is still in print (although I don't know how much longer that will be).

You can see all the F. Paul Wilson books we carry here:

http://store.yahoo.net/shocklines/bookbyfpaulw.html

Matt
http://www.shocklines.com

[Biggles]

Yup, if you order the series through us at Shocklines.com, you can still get matching numbers for the whole series -- that will be the case as long as the first book, The Keep, is still in print (although I don't know how much longer that will be).

You can see all the F. Paul Wilson books we carry here:

http://store.yahoo.net/shocklines/bookbyfpaulw.html

Matt
http://www.shocklines.com

Matt, I just ordered all 6 online. Is number 666 still available? Or 999?

[jimbow8]

Or 999?
Great! Another dyslexic Satanist! "I worship Luficer, Beezibubs, 999 !"

[Biggles]

Great! Another dyslexic Satanist! "I worship Luficer, Beezibubs, 999 !"

Actually, I'm not a satanist, but given the similarities between "the Otherness" and Hell, "the One" and Satan, those numbers would work. It's not like Miroslav Satan is my favorite hockey player or anything. If were a satanist, I'd wear one of Miro's jerseys. BTW, shouldn't Satan be playing for the Devils instead of the Sabres?

[Tim Hatch]

Actually, I'm not a satanist, but given the similarities between "the Otherness" and Hell, "the One" and Satan, those numbers would work. It's not like Miroslav Satan is my favorite hockey player or anything. If were a satanist, I'd wear one of Miro's jerseys. BTW, shouldn't Satan be playing for the Devils instead of the Sabres?

Being an Avalanche fan, I'm sure that satan plays for the Red Wings. Also, that's where the Otherness sinkhole just opened up! Hmmm...
;)

[Lisa]

5? Were you waiting in line to sign up?

No, I guess the Borderlands lady just liked me. :D

Lisa

[Biggles]

No, I guess the Borderlands lady just liked me. :D

Lisa

You're a stinker. But I love you anyway, your Highness.

[Biggles]

Being an Avalanche fan, I'm sure that satan plays for the Red Wings. Also, that's where the Otherness sinkhole just opened up! Hmmm...
;)

Being a Pittsburgher, I'm sure the other Satan plays for the Browns and the Flyers, but Miroslav Satan still plays for the Sabres, I believe.

[Tim Hatch]

Well, I got copy #31. It's a beaut.

Lisa, wanna trade? I'll throw in a copy of _The Keep_ on VHS. :D

[Lisa]

Lisa, wanna trade? I'll throw in a copy of _The Keep_ on VHS. :D

No thanks, Tim. I've already burned my quota of KEEP tapes for the month.

Lisa

[Scott Hajek]

Got my copy yesterday, 282.

Did you notice which picture is on the back?

[topol_sheap]

just waiting for my 285 ;) Heard from Overlook last week to say they had it in stock... so waiting in London for it:)

Hello everyone (again!) it's a nice new board!

TOps

[Lisa]

Got my copy yesterday, 282.

Did you notice which picture is on the back?

Ha, YES, I did notice that. I was going to post something about it but forgot.

Lisa

[Biggles]

Ha, YES, I did notice that. I was going to post something about it but forgot.

Lisa

So are you going to spill the beans, or is this an inside joke? :confused:

[Lisa]

So are you going to spill the beans, or is this an inside joke? :confused:

It's the photo we were all imitating at the GU-3. The one from the LIM program.

See: http://www.ghosts.org/rj/gu3/fpwimit.html

Lisa

[Biggles]

It's the photo we were all imitating at the GU-3. The one from the LIM program.

See: http://www.ghosts.org/rj/gu3/fpwimit.html

Lisa

Oh that one. I think you got Paul's expression down best. Why didn't he have a new picture taken anyway?

[Shocklines.com]

Matt, I just ordered all 6 online. Is number 666 still available? Or 999?

I apologize for posting this late. Believe it or not, #666 was one of the very first requests we received from someone last year when these books were first announced. Not sure if #999 is still available -- I can check with the publisher for you. But I know #666 is gone.

Matt
Shocklines.com (http://www.shocklines.com)

[Biggles]

I apologize for posting this late. Believe it or not, #666 was one of the very first requests we received from someone last year when these books were first announced. Not sure if #999 is still available -- I can check with the publisher for you. But I know #666 is gone.

Matt
Shocklines.com (http://www.shocklines.com)


I'll bet it was Sal Roma. Did he charge it to his Otherness Express Card?

[fpw]

Got my author copies yesterday. They look great. Kindo of fun putting them side by side and watching the mural take shape.

Elizabeth just emailed me the scanned files for THE TOMB / RAKOSHI. Now I have to find time to edit them.

[SteveBlack]

Got my #298 today from Overlook!
Very much looking forward to getting their limited hardback of The Last Rakosh!
FPW - are you signing TLR??

cheers
Steve

[Ken Valentine]

Got my author copies yesterday. They look great. Kindo of fun putting them side by side and watching the mural take shape.

Elizabeth just emailed me the scanned files for THE TOMB / RAKOSHI. Now I have to find time to edit them.


Just what does the editing consist of? Can you correct small errors? If so, there is one scene where a couple of words ought to be changed in a firearms description.

Ken V.

[fpw]

Just what does the editing consist of? Can you correct small errors? If so, there is one scene where a couple of words ought to be changed in a firearms description.

Probably more than one. Lay it on me.

[fpw]

FPW - are you signing TLR??

That's the deal.

[fpw]

Just what does the editing consist of? Can you correct small errors?

I can correct anything. The problem with scanning is resolution. The scan of DYDEETOWN WORLD turned every "clone" into "done." Get the picture?

[Lisa]

I can correct anything. The problem with scanning is resolution. The scan of DYDEETOWN WORLD turned every "clone" into "done." Get the picture?

Aha! That would explain an error I found in The Keep where it said "modem" instead of "modern."

Lisa

[Marc]

Aha! That would explain an error I found in The Keep where it said "modem" instead of "modern."


That was also in the paperback edition. I'm at work right now so I can't look my copy and find out what printing it was though.

[Ken Valentine]

Probably more than one. Lay it on me.


The scene in The Tomb where Jack is showing Bati how to use the revolver, and tells her, "It's double action, you've got to cock the hammer." (Going from memory here.)

If it's double action, you don't have to cock the hammer.

Also Jack loads only five rounds into his Security Six .357 Magnum. The gun has a transfer bar system which keeps the hammer back, and the firing pin away from the primer -- it's very safe to load all six. The old "hammer down on an empty chamber" technique is an unnecessary carry over from the 1870's, and even then it wasn't necessary if you let the hammer down between the cartridge rims when loading.

That doesn't need to be changed as it could simply be one of Jack's personal idiosyncracies

You can skip the following if you wish.

With single action, the hammer has only one movement: it moves forward to fire the round. To get to that position, the hammer must be manually cocked . . . as in every western movie you have ever seen.

With double action, the hammer has two movements when the trigger is pulled: it first moves back, then it snaps forward.

Most revolvers have both options, you can manually cock it and have a short light trigger pull, or you can have the longer harder double action trigger pull. The first is more accurate, the second will give you very fast repeat shots.

Some competition revolvers are DAO . . . Double Action Only.

Some automatics have both as well. A double action first shot, and all the rest are single action as the slide cocks the hammer. A good example of this is the Smith & Wesson Model 39, 9mm auto. Also the Beretta 92 FS. The Colt 45 ACP auto is single action only.

Ken V.

[Biggles]

Some automatics have both as well. A double action first shot, and all the rest are single action as the slide cocks the hammer. A good example of this is the Smith & Wesson Model 39, 9mm auto. Also the Beretta 92 FS. The Colt 45 ACP auto is single action only.

Ken V.

Of course Jack's current semi-automatic of choice is the Glock 19, with the "safe action" as Glock calls it. Knowing Jack, I'm sure he has the light, 3.5 lb., trigger as opposed to the heavier triggers cops have due to liability concerns. The safe-action is as light as a single action, but is striker fired, so you really can't compare it to conventional single or double action. Jack would have the original 15 round magazines with the plus 2 floorplates (as I do) for 17 rounds, plus he would keep one up the spout for 18 total, nu? The important thing to remember with a Glock (and my only criticism) is that if you have a mis-fire and want to try to fire the same round again, you must retract the slide about .12 inches to reset the striker.

[jimbow8]

If it's double action, you don't have to cock the hammer.

With single action, the hammer has only one movement: it moves forward to fire the round. To get to that position, the hammer must be manually cocked . . . as in every western movie you have ever seen.

With double action, the hammer has two movements when the trigger is pulled: it first moves back, then it snaps forward.

Some automatics have both as well. A double action first shot, and all the rest are single action as the slide cocks the hammer. A good example of this is the Smith & Wesson Model 39, 9mm auto. Also the Beretta 92 FS. The Colt 45 ACP auto is single action only.

Ken V.
I am not knowledgeable in weapons, but this doesn't sound right to me.

Single Action (SA) = Hammer must be cocked manually; trigger causes hammer to strike.

Double Action (DA) = Trigger causes hammer to cock and then to strike forward.

I think I have that part correct, but then you say that some automatics have both, DA first shot and SA for the rest (can just pull trigger for first shot but have to manually cock all the remaining shots). Isn't that backwards? It seems counter-intuitive to me. Shouldn't it be - cock the first shot and then all remaining can just be fired with the trigger? Or am I totally wrong? Am I thinking of chambering the first round from a clip? Man, I gotta learn me some gun stuff if I'm gonna fit in with this crowd!

[Biggles]

I am not knowledgeable in weapons, but this doesn't sound right to me.

Single Action (SA) = Hammer must be cocked manually; trigger causes hammer to strike.

Double Action (DA) = Trigger causes hammer to cock and then to strike forward.

I think I have that part correct, but then you say that some automatics have both, DA first shot and SA for the rest (can just pull trigger for first shot but have to manually cock all the remaining shots). Isn't that backwards? It seems counter-intuitive to me. Shouldn't it be - cock the first shot and then all remaining can just be fired with the trigger? Or am I totally wrong? Am I thinking of chambering the first round from a clip? Man, I gotta learn me some gun stuff if I'm gonna fit in with this crowd!


Let me try to 'splain. The classic single action auto you would be familiar with is the M1911 Colt .45 or Browning Hi Power 9mm. With a round in the chamber and the hammer down, squeezing the trigger does nothing, because there's no cocking action. You must pull the hammer back (cock it) for the first shot, then squeeze the trigger. (If no round is chambered, racking the slide on a loaded magazine will both cock the hammer and chamber a round). For the second shot, the slide has come back in recoil, cocking the hammer, then moved back forward under tension from the recoil spring, chambering a fresh round. Since the hammer is already cocked again, you need only squeeze the trigger.

Now let's take a classic DA/SA semi-auto, a Walther P-38. With a round chambered, you can either fire it double action, squeezing the trigger in a long stroke that first cocks the hammer back then releases it to fire, or you can fire it single action by manually cocking it with your thumb then squeezing the trigger to release the hammer and fire it. There may be circumstances where one way is preferable to the other (speed vs. accuracy considerations).

With a DA/SA, the second shot may be fired SA because the slide recocked the hammer when it came back under recoil. Most DA/SA autos have a decocker lever that releases the hammer while blocking it from the firing pin, allowing you to reholster the weapon without undue concern about an accidental discharge severing your femoral artery and causing rapid exsanguination. :-)

[Ken Valentine]

Of course Jack's current semi-automatic of choice is the Glock 19, with the "safe action" as Glock calls it. Knowing Jack, I'm sure he has the light, 3.5 lb., trigger as opposed to the heavier triggers cops have due to liability concerns. The safe-action is as light as a single action, but is striker fired, so you really can't compare it to conventional single or double action. Jack would have the original 15 round magazines with the plus 2 floorplates (as I do) for 17 rounds, plus he would keep one up the spout for 18 total, nu? The important thing to remember with a Glock (and my only criticism) is that if you have a mis-fire and want to try to fire the same round again, you must retract the slide about .12 inches to reset the striker.

I know how Glock's work . . . that's why I don't own one. Even with the heavy trigger, cops tend to shoot themselves rather frequently with glocks. Which is why Joe Cominoli in Syracuse, NY has come out with an external safety for them.

Well, that's one of the reasons. The other reasons are:

1) The plastic frame. The reason they use a plastic frame was once explained to me by a little bird . . . "CHEEP!" For high production, plastic is the way to go. And thermo-molded plastic as Glock uses is the "cheep-est." If it doesn't mold right it can be ground up and reused. Ruger on the other hand uses a thermo-set plastic with fiber reenforcement . . . extremely strong and tough. So tough in fact that the Ruger slide actually runs on the plastic rails. The Ruger frame will far out last a hard anodized aluminum frame . . . but not a steel frame. The other reason I prefer a steel frame is the weight.

When KT Ordinance announced that they were going to make a steel frame for the Beretta 92, I was ecstatic. When they changed their minds and decided to make them out of aluminum I turned around, walked away, and never looked back. I want a gun that will last, because when I shoot, 25,000 rounds a year from one gun is not uncommon.

2) Glock has a polygonal barrel. It doesn't work well with cast bullets . . .wildly inaccurate. Bullets have to be either jacketed, or copper washed to work in a Glock. My bullets cost me 5.00 dollars in materials, and an hours work per 1,000. Compared to say $60.00 plus shipping for good quality jacketed bullets from Montana Gold Bullet Company.

Granted, I could get a Bar-Sto rifled barrel for a Glock, but why bother when:

3) I don't like the grip angle of the glock. When I -- as I did years ago -- reach the point there I can look at a spot on the wall, close my eyes, draw from a surrender position, open my eyes, and find the sights lined up on my target, the last thing I need is to get a gun with a very different grip angle.

Glocks are perfect for many people . . . I'm just not one of them.

Ken V.

[Biggles]

I know how Glock's work . . . that's why I don't own one. Even with the heavy trigger, cops tend to shoot themselves rather frequently with glocks. Which is why Joe Cominoli in Syracuse, NY has come out with an external safety for them.

Well, that's one of the reasons. The other reasons are:

1) The plastic frame. The reason they use a plastic frame was once explained to me by a little bird . . . "CHEEP!" For high production, plastic is the way to go. And thermo-molded plastic as Glock uses is the "cheep-est." If it doesn't mold right it can be ground up and reused. Ruger on the other hand uses a thermo-set plastic with fiber reenforcement . . . extremely strong and tough. So tough in fact that the Ruger slide actually runs on the plastic rails. The Ruger frame will far out last a hard anodized aluminum frame . . . but not a steel frame. The other reason I prefer a steel frame is the weight.

When KT Ordinance announced that they were going to make a steel frame for the Beretta 92, I was ecstatic. When they changed their minds and decided to make them out of aluminum I turned around, walked away, and never looked back. I want a gun that will last, because when I shoot, 25,000 rounds a year from one gun is not uncommon.

2) Glock has a polygonal barrel. It doesn't work well with cast bullets . . .wildly inaccurate. Bullets have to be either jacketed, or copper washed to work in a Glock. My bullets cost me 5.00 dollars in materials, and an hours work per 1,000. Compared to say $60.00 plus shipping for good quality jacketed bullets from Montana Gold Bullet Company.

Granted, I could get a Bar-Sto rifled barrel for a Glock, but why bother when:

3) I don't like the grip angle of the glock. When I -- as I did years ago -- reach the point there I can look at a spot on the wall, close my eyes, draw from a surrender position, open my eyes, and find the sights lined up on my target, the last thing I need is to get a gun with a very different grip angle.

Glocks are perfect for many people . . . I'm just not one of them.

Ken V.

And now for the counter-point:

First of all, cops aren't, by and large, very good with guns. When I was on the bench I shot the qualification course with the county cops every six months and always scored in the top 10%, even with my Walther PP and its heavy DA trigger. With my Glocks and my Taurus PT92, I always shot expert. Cops are always having accidental discharges, primarily, IMHO, because they only practice at qualification time. If I'm ever out and about when a shootout begins, I'm gonna duck and cover as much in fear of the cops' marksmanship as anything. An external safety may be necessary for cops, but my finger never touches the trigger until I'm on target.

Your other points:

1. Can't agree more about Ruger. I've owned more Rugers than any other brand, and Rugers are uniformly high quality and great value. That said, my Glocks are durable, dependable and accurate. They're also light enough to carry easily. To me weight is a detriment in a carry weapon.

2. The polygonal rifling increases muzzle velocity, which I like in a short-barrelled weapon. I don't reload and only shoot jacketed bullets, so my considerations are different from yours, which I don't dispute.

3. I've done my best work with a Glock, so the grip angle doesn't bother me, but I know that YMMV in this area.

My suggestion to others is try everything and stick with what you like. There's a lot to choose from out there.

[Ken Valentine]

My suggestion to others is try everything and stick with what you like. There's a lot to choose from out there.

And the reason there is so much to choose from is because everybody is different.

I've got a couple of SIG's in the shop right now. A 220, and a 220 ST. So many people put after market Hogue grips on them, that the factory now puts them on as original equipment. The owner and I both detest them. Hogue grips have a sticky feel to them which a lot of people seem to like. So while I'm fitting new sights, Henry is out trying to find the old-style grips . . . or at least something more suitable.

And when these are finished, I've got three brand new Springfield Government Models coming in for extensive modification . . . red ramp the front sights, round off all the sharp edges on the rear sights, matching trigger jobs on all three, different triggers, beaver tail grip safety's, different mainspring housings, machine the frames and install mag well funnels, and get rid of those damned titanium firing pins. Three days worth of work which will probably take me a month as I can't put in but an hour or so a day.

To make a long story short, some people can't find anything that suits them properly . . . right out of the box. And quite often it's easier to make the gun fit the shooter than the shooter fit the gun.

Ken V.

[fpw]

Aha! That would explain an error I found in The Keep where it said "modem" instead of "modern."

Yeah, it does look like "modem" but it's not. I did a search of the text and "modem" got no hits. "Modern" did, but I couldn't see a divide between the "r" and the "n." That's a problem with serif fonts like Times New Roman. (modern vs. modern)

[Ken Valentine]

Yeah, it does look like "modem" but it's not. I did a search of the text and "modem" got no hits. "Modern" did, but I couldn't see a divide between the "r" and the "n." That's a problem with serif fonts like Times New Roman. (modern vs. modern)

One of the reasons I use a bright light to read by, and . . . er, reading glasses.

Ken - with the fossilized eye beans - V.