Home » Blogs » Radetec Now Shipping Round-Counting Grips for Handguns

Radetec Now Shipping Round-Counting Grips for Handguns

Foghorn - comments No comments

P1010794

If you’re like me, you can never remember how many rounds you have left in your magazines. I know that I should know, but I don’t. For those similarly afflicted, Radetec has started shipping a round counting grip system that will check your ammo levels every time you fire a shot and let you know how many trigger pulls are left until the gun runs dry. There are three versions: one with a single light that lets you know when there are three rounds left, a two digit display (above) that shows the total round count, and an AR-15 version for standard magazines. Prices are $160, $170 and $195 respectively. They’ve given us one to try so we’ll let you know how it works… as soon as I get some free time.

0 thoughts on “Radetec Now Shipping Round-Counting Grips for Handguns”

  1. I had no idea Sean Penn was pro gun, but he is an idiot in many other ways.
    Give up my guns for a woman? No, I would just lie to her to get her, then tell her I still have them

    Reply
  2. A striker-fired, polymer framed, single-stack 9MM that is easy to conceal?

    What a silly idea, they should have chambered in .380 ACP!!! :p

    Reply
  3. With your focus on the target and your front sight, and the distances and scenarios in which handguns are employed, isn’t this a bit useless? If you have the time to look at your counter, shouldn’t you be done shooting what you were shooting at?

    I guess I just see this as “tacti-cool” instead of “tactical”, and look forward to seeing some wanna be gun fighter at the range telling me how important it is.

    “A” for innovation, but a total round counter for a rifle would be better (I.e. Rounds expended), in reference to preventative maintenance

    Reply
  4. A small step, but an important one. For those not familiar with the law in California, the sheriffs of the various counties are authorized to issue CCWs; however, the sheriffs may delegate that function to various city police departments. What the LASD did, as part of a concerted run around for CCW applicants, was to require a filing with the city first, and then with the SD if that app was denied. Of course, the denial by one agency (the City) was grounds for a denial by the Sheriff’s Office, meaning you apply twice, pay twice, and get denied twice. The app alone is $150, and that does not include the 16 hrs of training or the (theoretically discretionary) requirement of a mental health exam. Add to that, LAPD has been sued TWICE for failing to post information or provide copies of applications, AND the LAPD Chief of Police has never seen a CCW app that he could not deny. (The Chief is of the opinion that more guns =ore gun crime, and therefore it is in the public interest to deny applications for permits. He, or the officer responsible for reviewing applications, testified under oath that he/they knew of no studies supporting their belief; it must be just plain “common sense.”) Parenthetically, as of September 2011–the last year for which I have stats–there were exactly 220 civilian CCWs issue for all of Los Angeles county, including every city within the county that separately issued such licenses, out of a population of 7.5 million.

    Reply
  5. The 416SD is a absolute blast to shoot, and if you are saying the KEYMOD is backwards, that is how they are currently being distributed and used.

    Reply
  6. Sometimes I must think that Mr. Metcalf, and some others who have lived in highly gun-restrictive places, have been effectively brainwashed into thinking that restrictions are reasonable, even if those persons are relatively pro-gun.

    Just because a law, or belief, or policy has “always been that way” or “been that way for as long as I can remember” does not make it correct, moral or justified.

    Slavery had been the way of the world for quite a while, until people finally started to abolish it. Oppression of people based on their race or gender has been the way of the world apparently forever … that doesn’t make those things right.

    Regulations that restrict the right of self-defense are not legitimate. This is not to say people should not get training regarding firearms – they absolutely should. But it is not up to the government to determine what is and is not acceptable in order to exercise the right of self-defense.

    Lest we forget, the right of self-defense includes defending oneself FROM the government. It is not up to them to determine whether or not we may defend ourselves, and how we choose to do so.

    Reply

Leave a Comment