These methods may include various popular sports drinks as well as "Supplement Charge," a substance with a remarkably similar description to that of Oral IV. To wit, both include these phrases in their advertising:

- Increases oxygen uptake at the cellular level
- Raises osmotic pressure level of cells to keep them strong
- Increases body enzyme production
- Enhance uptake of vitamins, macro minerals, proteins and other essential nutrients from natural food sources or dietary supplements

Other claims are similar, yet worded differently. Both descriptions also reference ions or ionic charges, crystalloid electrolytes, and other identical or nearly-identical phrases. Furthermore, both are intended to be mixed in small amounts with water. Supplement Charge, however, is much cheaper, at approximately $15 for enough fluid to "treat" 30 16-ounce bottles of water, while Oral IV is sold at the same price per package, although each package will only "treat" 4 16-ounce bottles of water.

If you are interested in helping me with this study, know that it will involve mild physical exercise and a urine test. I don't yet have a timeline, but will be discussing this with those who email andrew@vuurwapenconcepts.com about the test.

Ishapore 2A in 7.62x51 on the left, No4 Mk1 in .303 on the right. These bolt action rifles differ from most rifles of the type produced today in that they "cock on close," as the bolt is being pushed forward, rather than as the bolt is unlocked and pulled to the rear. They are smoother and faster to operate than the vast majority of modern, off-the-shelf bolt action rifles.

Left side of No4 Mk1 action. The barrel of this rifle is essentially shot out and I will be replacing it with something interesting, perhaps a .375 of some sort.

Right side of No4 Mk1 action. I really like Enfields; I grew up shooting my dad's sporterized No1, which his mother/my grandmother purchased many years ago for $8.95. It is accurate, light, and reliable. My dad killed a bear with it at point blank range.

Business end of the No4. It's a good thing that I have the bayonet, since the barrel is shot out. I never know when I might need to impale something.

Right side of the Ishapore 2A action. This is a fine rifle which fires a widely available cartridge from a detachable magazine with a decent capacity (12 rounds, although 10 round mags are also available).

I have used the Ishapore in several 600 yard matches. Using .308 Win Federal Gold Medal Match 168gr BTHP, I have fired higher scores with this rifle than a Weatherby Mark V Ultra Lightweight and an LWRC REPR using the same ammunition. The sights are adjustable to 2000 meters, but I have only used it out to 600 yards. I wouldn't be very confident with a .308 at 2000 meters...

I am interested in the way things used to be made versus the way they are made today. While the processes which brought this rifle to "life" are antiquated, the result is no less effective than a modern, rack-grade bolt action 7.62x51mm/.308 Win rifle, and in some ways the Ishapore is superior. One possible exception would be optic mounting, but that is more of a design than a manufacturing issue.

I need a bayonet for my Ishapore. Correction, I don't have a bayonet for my Ishapore.

Everyone's like, "OMG ZOMBIES!" and I'm all, "Vampires are the real threat."

Thanks for reading. As mentioned previously, I wish that new production Enfield pattern rifles in various calibers were available.

Last year, during the 24 Hour Sniper Adventure Challenge, I used a packet, or four tubes, of Oral IV. I also consumed at least twenty liters of water, most of which was infused with Squinchers electrolyte powder. I felt no immediate boost when I used the Oral IV tubes (which I did not mix with water but instead drank as a discrete unit), which I used rather randomly throughout the event. I did notice that I felt weaker at the end of the event, several hours after I had run out of Squinchers powder and was using water alone. This may also be partially due to the fact that I had just hiked 30+ miles without sleep over what was essentially mountainous terrain. Oh, and it was uphill both ways, although there was no snow.

The author hydrating near the beginning of the event.

Thus concludes my experiences with Oral IV.

When dealing with heat casualties as a Corpsman, I always preferred to have conscious patients who could keep fluids down drink water and/or Gatorade. I found that this was at least as effective in returning someone to near-full-health as spending the time to drop an IV in them - and the one time I had upwards of a dozen people badly needing fluid replacement out of twenty-six guys, I could only take the time to put a liter of LR (lactated ringers) in the most serious casualties.

In other words, my entirely anecdotal experiences have led me to believe that drinking water and keeping electrolytes in your system - giving your body the materials to replenish itself the way your genetic makeup intended - is the best way to keep yourself from being taken out of the fight or competition via dehydration. Other sciency-type articles have been written about this. Oral IV does not appear to aid this process in any material fashion.

Overall, it was a study in contrast.

This dilapidated building was across the street (literally) from a world-class medical clinic, just down the road from the American University of Beirut, and in front of that modern apartment building under construction.

Farther east, a very cosmopolitan street that would have been at home in the trendy part of any Western European city, lined with shops and crawling with stylish people, lay not very far from a huge - and beautiful - mosque.

This, the Mohammad Al-Amin Mosque, was probably one of the most beautiful buildings I have ever seen in my life. It reminded me of the "Blue Mosque" in Fallujah, except this one didn't have bullet holes.

In the shadow of the giant mosque lay a tiny church. I would've investigated further, but this area was fenced off - this is as close as I could approach.

The mosque was rather close to several construction projects which looked positively third world in quality and design. Within a short walk was the Four Seasons (no, I wasn't staying there).

I was on my way to a concert at a church, and encountered this shopping area as I reached my destination. It offered top fashion brands and was several hundred yards past a very seedy and mostly abandoned part of town in which dirty, smelly men gave me the evil eye.

Inside the church - at which I arrived late because I was photographing stray cats - hundreds of people had packed themselves in to see the famous composer Abdel Rahman El Bacha perform.

I had to sit on the floor behind a pillar for most of the concert, but that was just fine; the acoustics were wonderful and I spent most of my time listening to his music with my eyes closed.

After the concert, I went to a strange bar atop a strange restaurant, inside which I was clearly not very welcome, and had a subpar grasshopper. I can't blame them, it may very well have been the first grasshopper ordered in the country since the Lebanese Civil War.

Passing by the big mosque again, I encountered Roman ruins near the aforementioned cosmopolitan street.

Remarkably well preserved baths. I sent one photo to an archaeologist friend and she identified where I was within minutes. I guess there aren't many of these around any more.

The next morning, I awoke before sunrise and wandered off to find things to take photographs of and eat, not necessarily in that order.

This fisherman seemed to be relatively content to have me photograph him for a few minutes.

I then fed my pita addiction while enjoying a spectacular view of those huge rocks, the sea, and aircraft landing at the international airport.

Another long walk was the Beirut National Museum, which had been essentially destroyed during the civil war. It showcased a breathtaking (to me) assortment of artifacts spanning thousands of years of human history. I had the entire place to myself. In the gift shop, I bought postcards and sent them to a few people who requested a postcard from Lebanon on the blog's Facebook page. It took over a month for them to arrive.

Not far from my hotel, this (used?) car dealer had some pretty fancy rides sitting on a street that had seen better days. Along with the latest fashions, large portions of Beirut seemed obsessed with showing off how well-to-do they were... as they stepped through trash and muddy water and sometimes animal fecal matter which littered much of the city's streets.

One thing not shown in these photos is the extremely heavy security presence; comparable to that of Tunisia during the Arab Spring revolt. Several months before my visit, the Lebanese intelligence minister had been killed in a massive car bomb attack. Some of the soldiers and police were polite and conversational with me; others were condescending or even openly hostile towards my presence. Many military posts consisted of bombed-out, bullet-riddled buildings in the middle of otherwise rather nice areas of town.

After spending a considerable amount of time in the city, I could see why Beirut was the stuff of legends. But I found the Lebanese countryside to be far more welcoming and attractive. See my photos of Lebanon's historical sites for more on that topic.

This is not the model followed by many other firearm-related blogs. I have no disdain whatsoever for those who post more than I do, but I do take issue with people who blow hot air when they should be listening and learning.

Yes, I venture into dangerous territory here, but there are some websites which focus on producing a massive volume of content at the risk of sacrificing quality, basic journalistic principles, and even common sense. I've written about guns.com before, and after reading a few things over the last few days, I have some comments about "TTAG" (The Truth About Guns) as well.

In response to a short article - part of a series - by Tim Lau on Modern Service Weapons about the Colt M45 CQBP handgun, TTAG lifted a few paragraphs from the article and commented sarcastically about both Mr. Lau's comments on 1911 reliability and 10-8's decision to not publish their function test protocol for the 1911. On the surface, the latter point seems to have merit - why wouldn't they publish the protocol? But they explain it in a way that makes sense to me - the test outside of its proper context is meaningless.

I understood immediately. It is important to step back and understand all factors relating to the performance of a firearm. Years of experience with the observation of a certain firearm are not easily compressed into a 500 or 1000 word blog post. Mr. Lau and Mr. Hilton choose to observe their test protocol firsthand, and I fully believe that they are in the right when they do so.

Of course, if one does not know the background of Tim Lau and Hilton Yam, it sounds suspicious. This is where that "journalistic integrity" thing comes in: if TTAG had bothered to mention that MSW is run by a pair of guys who teach courses specific to the 1911, their readers might have seen the comments about 1911 reliability in a different light. Similarly, their expertise regarding the 1911 platform explains their development of a test protocol specifically related to that firearm, and their decision not to release that protocol would have been, at the very least, better understood, if not fully accepted by all.

But that wouldn't have gotten very much traffic, so instead, TTAG chose to stir up their reader base by publishing a few paragraphs from an article, accompanied by cryptic and snide remarks about the source. Naturally, the people who choose to read TTAG attacked Mr. Lau on a variety of fronts (Ironically, one of the commenters pointed to some of my previous work as an example of how things should be done).

TTAG then doubled down on their retardation by publishing a comment which could have easily been written in 1992 - a further attack on Mr. Lau and that one paragraph about the 1911 - as a separate blog post. It, naturally, received lots of admiration from the TTAG faithful, who again ignored the fact that Mr. Lau is a subject matter expert on the 1911. I don't always agree with what Mr. Lau or Mr. Hilton say or do, but I do respect their experience and opinions.

Keep in mind that TTAG is the same website which published an article about why people shouldn't use ARs for self defense - written by someone with literally zero background in the offensive or defensive use of any type of firearm... which brings me back to my opening thoughts.

There are firearm-related blogs which yearn for mass appeal and end up being purveyors of garbage. I've written about this before, and I am sure that I will do so again. I don't expect this article to have any major impact. I don't expect my work to have the mass appeal of TTAG or Guns.com. Frankly, I don't want that. But if I've educated a few people about how dangerous it is to confuse enthusiasm for expertise, I will have succeeded.

No, I'm not going to name it.

It's the perfect AR-15 (for me), and here's why.

- The heart of any AR is the barrel. This rifle has a Centurion Arms 16" lightweight midlength barrel. It's not as light as an A1 profile barrel, but it is lighter than "government" or standard profile barrels. More important, it shoots groups that are highly competitive with my White Oak Armament stainless match barrel, although the Centurion is much lighter. It's capable of hitting point targets well past the oft-published maximum effective range of the M16 (550m). Also the midlength is handy as far as where I like to place my hand on the firearm.

- The front sight base is of the fixed type and is taper pinned in place. A pinned front sight base/gas block will stay in place until the end of days, which is important if you want your rifle to function properly. Furthermore, if the barrel moves relative to the handguard, the front sight will move with the barrel, not the handguard.

- The bolt carrier group is M16 weight/profile, hard chromed, and was properly tested/inspected before shipment. Spike's Tactical used to sell hard chrome BCGs before they switched to nickel boron. I have two of them and I'll never let them go (until they break). Hard chrome is far easier to clean than either phosphate or nickel boron. The M16 weight carrier is what the system was designed to operate with. It's this mass moving at a specific velocity that magazines are designed to feed rounds in front of. Moving to lighter carriers will sacrifice reliability in adverse conditions or extreme temperature ranges.

-  The receiver extension tube and buffer/spring are the Vltor A5 type. This system more closely approximates the performance (control and reliability) of a fixed stock/rifle buffer and spring, but allows length of pull adjustments. If I could make one change to the M16A4 used by the Marine Corps, it would be a change to the A5 recoil system. Normally the longer and heavier EMod stock would be used with an A5, but I'm using an IMod because I don't need the weight of the EMod.

- The muzzle device is an A2 because I want a balance of muzzle flash reduction and blast/muzzle signature reduction.

- The charging handle is the Rainier Arms/AXTS Raptor because it's easy to use with either hand and regardless of the method by which I manipulate the charging handle latch, but it does not protrude away from the rifle in a way that would cause it to snag on gear. It also enables more effective malfunction clearing than other types of charging handles I've used.

- The handguard is made by Apex; functionally, what I need from an AR handguard is to protect the gas tube and keep my hand from burning. The Apex handguard does this. It's also lightweight and "grippy" and gives me a few QD socket options. I don't like the way it installs - it's kind of a pain in the butt, really - but once it's there, it's there. It's also a good size and shape (round). If I want to add rails for lights and stuff, I can, but right now I haven't because I don't need them.

- The trigger is a Geissele SSA-E. I use a lot of stock triggers and think they're a lot more useful than some might think, but it is really hard to beat the SSA-E. I like the Rock River two stage as well, but of late I haven't seen them as regularly available as the Geissele.

- The optic is an Aimpoint CompM3 in a GDI mount. I also have a Trijicon TA02 - better known as the "battery ACOG" - in a GDI mount. Because the GDI mounts return to zero within .01 MOA, I can swap the red dot and ACOG back and forth to my heart's content (one-handed!) without worrying about anything unnecessary. The Aimpoint and ACOG are as durable and reliable as you can ask of a firearm accessory, both offering long battery life. I am not normally a fan of the 4x32 ACOG eye relief and this one is no different, but the adjustable illumination is really neat and I somewhat prefer the crosshair reticle for distance shooting.

- The magazine is a Lancer L5 (loaded with 30 rounds of Prvi 75gr BTHP, thanks AIM!), which is durable, reliable, and lets me see how much ammo I have left. It fits in all mag pouches. Also it looks cool.

- The rear sight and pistol grip are Magpul. Thus they are well made and affordable. I highly doubt that I will actually need to use the MBUS rear sight, but it doesn't break when you hit stuff with the rifle, which is important.

So that's my idea of the perfect AR-15. As photographed (loaded), it weighs 8 pounds 7.6 ounces. Unloaded it weighs 7 pounds 6.2 ounces. It's what I plan to use for the 2013 24 Hour Sniper Adventure Challenge, and it's a rifle I plan on owning for a very long time.

It took two years for me to get high speed video of the Vector, but I see nothing which changes my mind. I am not shown firing it on video, although I did shoot it numerous times. The two shooters in this video are physically strong, experienced in the use of firearms, and doing their best to keep the weapon on target.

The operating system is supposed to reduce muzzle climb through the reciprocating components moving down at an angle instead of back towards the shooter. It's also claimed that the system will reduce recoil.

What I felt and observed is that the weapon jumps up and down in an arcing motion as the shooter fires it. If a strong shooter using good technique fires the weapon, the muzzle will stay close to being on target - but this is hardly a property unique to the Vector. The motion of the firearm is rather violent and causes the upper and lower halves of the Vector to briefly separate from one another and the variable power optic to flex. With +P ammunition, this motion was so violent as to cause the magazine to fall out of the weapon numerous times.

The cumulation of all this movement is a rather sharp shock delivered to the shooter, requiring a very brief pause before the sights or optic can be reacquired and the weapon fired again. In the end, it does not matter if the weapon comes up at an angle or makes a tiny rainbow motion - there is still a small period of time during which the shooter will be unable to put a round on target, and I am not convinced that the KRISS Vector reduces this time period by any margin.

As one student said, "Judging by the type of people that attended, its clear that your blog and other work has attracted a levelheaded and intelligent group of followers. Everyone was courteous and I didn't see any clashing of egos."

I asked for their honest opinions, and will summarize/compile them here in the interests of brevity. If any students wish to comment on this post, they are welcome to do so (some already have).

The stuff everyone liked:

- Taking high speed video of each student on the range and reviewing it in front of the whole class back at the lodge really helped everyone improve their manipulation and understanding of the firearm. Here's a sample of most of the group, although each student was filmed individually as well.

- Chronographing each rifle/ammo combination, as well as taking photos of the muzzle flash of each, was educational/useful/enlightening.

BattleComp claims that their muzzle devices produce flash comparable to that of the A2. This is untrue.

- Many students had no idea that they were capable of shooting as far as they ended up doing so (depending on rifle, ammo, and shooter, 500 to 900 yards). Everyone was shooting an AR-15 in 5.56/.223.
- Shooter/spotter drills with the target unknown until the timer buzzed were very useful.
- Reloading and target transition portions of the course greatly improved the shooters' efficiency with the firearm.
- Everyone seemed to love the range and the lodge.
- The group was great and everyone got along swimmingly.

Students gained experience not only from shooting, but from spotting.

The recommendations for improvement:

- There was a lot of downtime, especially on the first day. Some of this couldn't be helped, as we only had one high speed video camera and one chronograph. However, we'll definitely be cutting down on this in the future, organizing the curriculum so that there are multiple training evolutions occurring at once.
- Including items such as a shooting mat or binoculars on the recommended gear list would be nice.

The gravel wasn't so bad...well...

- Incorporate a more rigorous final test/drill/competition/exam/feedback. This was originally planned, but would have resulted in a lot more downtime as our planned course could only have been used by one shooter at a time. We will, however, be incorporating this into the curriculum in the future.
- We had some technical difficulties with vehicles, although they did not present a major obstacle to the course or to the shooters getting range time.

Riding in the back of pickup trucks wasn't so bad...well...

If I may, here are a few accolades from students:

- "I felt like it was a good use of my time, I learned a LOT and I enjoyed myself."
- "Overall I know I learned a lot more about myself as a shooter. And your high speed video definitely helped everyone diagnose issues they wouldn't have otherwise seen. Nice job."
- "I want to say thanks for putting on such a great course. I've been through a good number of schools and classes in the military that were just miserable. Yours was a good balance of seriousness and relaxation to make it very enjoyable."
- "I had a great time shooting with you guys. The drive was long as all hell, but I loved the location and learned that my shooting platform while standing sucks and my reloads are inefficient and full of fail."
- "They gave us practical information throughout the course, with explanations of the positive and negative of why something is done. Both Jim and Andrew have a wealth of knowledge and an ability to teach."
- "(I) learned an enormous amount in a very short period of time."
- "I really enjoyed the class.  I thought you guys did a great job especially for it being the first time you put this together. It was educational, challenging, and it was also a good time."

I have two photos of Julie Goloski-Golob. This one of her (right) with some foreign-looking girl (left), and one of her laughing after comparing belly sizes with Rob Leatham (Mrs. Goloski-Golob was in her third trimester of pregnancy). This photograph was more flattering. Plus, I'd rather not upset two world-class shooters at the same time.

In one of the finest examples of how bad my memory is, I started talking to her about a year ago regarding her book SHOOT. I read the book when it came out and found it to be an easily accessible introduction to firearms and the shooting sports. I wanted her opinion on a number of topics, so I sent her a list of five questions relating to shooting. She responded to my questions an embarrassingly long time ago, and I forgot to post her answers. One of my questions wasn't worded very well (it had to do with competition vs. military trainers), leaving us with only four; without further ado, here are my questions and her answers.

Andrew: Do you think competition shooting is relevant to those who have no interest in actually participating in competition shooting? Why or why not?

Julie: I think competition shooting is definitely relevant to those who choose not to compete the same way Olympic swimmers and chefs are relevant to those who swim or cook recreationally. Whether it's Michael Phelps or Julia Child, those who practice and excel at their craft have much to offer enthusiasts. The same can be said for those who work diligently to improve their shooting skills in competition.

Competition shooters are constantly pushing the envelope when it comes to speed and precision. These shooters are doing things with firearms that would be considered an incredible run twenty years ago. An example would be the El Presidente drill (http://www.uspsa.org/classifiers/99-11.pdf). Back in the day a 10 second El Prez run was considered top notch. Today, using a Production Division gun (a striker fired or double action gun with few modifications from stock) and scoring all A-zone hits, a 10 second run today would be a C-class level score, a national percentage between 55 and 60%.

Competition shooters also have a lot to offer when it comes to intense durability testing as well as research and development. Let's face it. Shooters tend to send a lot of rounds down range! If something doesn't work well, or doesn't hold up to the rigors of an intense day of training, a competition shooter is likely to discover it. Look at red dot optics as an example. Use of these little wonders were introduced into shooting sports and at first were plagued with reliability issues. Competitors started out with heavy, bulky dots, some as large as soda cans. Putting them through the paces in matches, shooters proved that this sort of sighting system is faster than using traditional iron sights.

Andrew: If you could identify one element of pistol shooting as being more important than any other, what would it be?

Julie: Taking speed out of it and just assessing pure shooting down to the fundamental level, the ability to shoot an accurate shot with a pistol comes down to being able put the sights on the target and keep them there until the shot breaks. You can have a horrendous grip and be standing on one foot and still shoot an accurate shot, but if the sights aren't on target when the gun goes bang it won't happen. So the most important aspect of being able to score a good hit comes down to the ability to engage the trigger in such a way that the sight picture stays on target until the bullet exits the barrel.

Andrew: Do competition shooters mostly use the same styles and techniques, with victory in competition coming down to an individual's skill (or luck), or are there an array of techniques/styles/stances/etc which some shooters find give them an edge?

Julie: At first glance, to some it may appear that competition shooters use all the same styles and techniques. Most competition shooters in practical shooting sports are using the isosceles stance and the basic skills of draws, reloads, one-handed shooting, etc. all look very similar when you break things down to that level. There are subtle differences in style though based on athleticism, strength and body type.

Travis Tomasie and Dave Sevigny, with their athletic backgrounds in soccer and hockey, are especially good when it comes to footwork. Todd Jarrett and Max Michel have incredible twitch reflexes and their hand-eye speed make them super fast on draws and reloads. Bob Vogel and JJ Racaza are strong and flexible and that allows them to be both aggressive and controlled. Then there are the legends like Rob Leatham and Jerry Miculek who have worked so hard for so long, they can draw on hundreds of thousands of rounds of experience. Unlike other sports where the majority of successful players are close to the same height and build, shooters represent a much wider spectrum. The best shooters play to their strengths and work on their weaknesses in order to win.

Andrew: Do you call it a "slide stop" or a "slide release" - and if someone calls it a "slide release," are they in the wrong?

Julie: I never really thought of it! I think I probably use both terms depending on what I am describing. I use "slide release" when I am talking about slide-lock reloads. I refer to the part as a slide stop when I talk about the slide locking to the rear. I don't view one as being correct or incorrect. To me, both terms are interchangeable.

--

Thank you, ma'am, for your patience and your well-thought-out answers.