text:
By Brian Belko via wideopenspaces.com
Americans own a lot of guns. That doesn't come as a surprise to anyone, but the thing that may surprise you is just how those numbers compare with those of other countries. The sheer amount of firepower owned in each state is pretty impressive. Find your state on the gun infographic below and see where it stacks up . . .
The folks at the Movoto Real Estate Blog did some research to create this gun infographic. It's eye-opening to see just how much firepower the different states have when compared to other countries.
The top three states in gun ownership are California, Texas, and New York and those three states compare favorably to some pretty big countries in firepower. California has almost as many guns as China. Texas is comparable to Germany. And New York nearly matches Pakistan's firepower.
These numbers show that guns and their owners are here to stay. Still, the debate about gun "safety" laws will continue to rage.
100 Responses to How Much Firepower Does Your State Have?
As a south african, I am impressed. Can somebody explain how New York and California can have such restrictive gun laws with so many gun owners?
They don't. The survey takes an estimate of all the guns in the US per person and then distributed them per capita around the country. It's a wild fantasy.
This. I'm rather disappointed in TTAG for this. Movoto even said point-blank that they used the method you described, which doesn't account for restrictions or interest in ownership.
I think Indiana has a lot more guns than what this report states.
I used to have a lot of guns until my boating accident.
Without a shadow of a doubt. I don't know 1 person that isn't armed in Indiana. Most have MULTIPLE guns. Mine are measured in the dozens.
I knew something seemed fishy, it seemed that all the ratios seemed similar across the states.
Fantasy? I am a gun owner and I have more than one. I collected them because of the individual sports that I participate in. But in the event of a natural or man made disaster I have a few people that I trust whom I plan to arm for mutual self defense.
Yes, looks like there are 88.8% as many guns as people in each of the 50 states. That's about as useless as a stat can get.
And as false.
Absolutely misleading. Arizona has more guns than New York, I'm guessing.
CBS did a study and for theirs they used "registered guns." That's probably an even worse methodology.
I can blow this survey out with my personal family and friends . No where near accurate and they can't actually get a real count to make a survey worth printing considering all the hand me downs and numbers of guns purchased prior to the 1990's .
Worthless dribble .
Getting a count would be impossible, since registering gun owners is not allowed!
Bingo. This is total BS. Notice that in every state, guns owned = exactly .888 times state population. Texans actually own approximately 51 million guns. NOT 22 million as claimed here. Sorry.
There are 8+ million gun owners in CA. Which means there are 22+ million non gun owners in CA. With that apparent disparity in voting strength and the rampant corruption in our state ,gov it really isn't any wonder we have such crappy gun laws.
But, we're #1. Those of us that own guns in CA are overachievers.
F Yeah! I know I have around 50 firearms in my collection – roughly (if you know exactly how many you have, you don't have nearly enough). So I am definitely one that gives California fire power. Safely. And proudly so.
From a beaten but not broken gun owner in upstate New York, keep up the good fight.
While it's more difficult today to purchase a firearm in those states, it still can be done. Years ago, they didn't have to jump through so may hoops, wait as long or pay as many fees so may of the guns owned have been accumulating for years. Those 33 million CA firearms weren't just purchased in the last ten years or so. That said, the ability for many of those firearm owners to "legally posses" them outside of the home (i.e. carry them) is not too likely in a lot of areas of those states.
Not sure about NY, but CA until recently had no special ID card necessary to purchase firearms. In the early 90s they introduced the handgun safety certificate, a very very basic questionnare you had to score 80% on to get a scrap of paper that said you were allowed to buy handguns, and was initially good for life. Then it became a once every 5 years thing, now it may be every other year you have to renew. It was administered by FFLs who had paid the vigorish to Sack'o'tomatoes to be allowed to administer the test for $25.
Now, it applies to all guns, long arms and handguns. As long as the handgun or long arm is not banned by name or feature, and the handgun is on the roster, you pay, do a NICS check, then wait 10 days to the minute to take possession of your firearm.
It's a hassle, but not an insurmountable one. Yet.
This speaks volumes to how actual CA residents feel vs. the filth that the pols in LA and Sack'o'tomatoes are vomiting forth at regular intervals with regards to gun ownership.
New York City has very restrictive licensing for all guns, and the handgun permit process is quite painful, though not as bad, elsewhere in the state as well, but the long guns are easy to buy outside NYC. California purchasing laws are not a big deal.
Here is one place with recent ownership rate statistics: http://www.businessinsider.com/gun-ownership-by-state-2015-7
I suspect the reported percentages are gun-owning households, not individuals, but I would need to chase it down further to clarify that.
The violation of the 2nd Amendment and NYS constitution of this act is blatant, and it demonstrates the depth and longevity of New York corruption.
Yours is such a typical, under informed, xian, right-wing-gun-nut, feeble minded sheeple type of response that there should be filters on Internet boards like this to prevent your idiotic drivel from ever being displayed. It's the same ignorant vomit that all the moronic, xian NRA zombies always spew forth when you feel the need to express an opinion. The problem is that it's not your opinion. You obviously don't have or are incapable of forming your own opinion so you just flap your lips and regurgitate whatever crap you can remember that the last xian idiot plopped down within earshot of you and somehow you remembered it. I'm surprised you didn't quote the bible here because I'm sure that you've been told about how god wrote the bible to protect our nation from immigrants and politicians who want to take away your god given right to own guns. Please die before you procreate, we've enough idiots in this world already.
someone's automated computer response software is malfunctioning. nonsense, followed by more nonsense. it is always so easy to tell.
I mean this in the most Southern way possible:
Jay, bless your heart.
Restrictive gun laws apply mainly to handguns, and not rifles and shotguns. There are a lot of hunters in Upstate New York, for example.
In California the restrictions mainly are time-constraints and magazine capacity, not quantity — and California as a Western state with the Gold Rush history has a lot of places where gun-ownership is practically historically required – not to mention the very large hunting-areas. And my guess is that the actual number is quite a bit under-reported. Most CA gun-owners I know have more than two or even three.
PA representing in the top 5! We really do cling to our guns and religion. That might be the only true thing the traitor in the White House has ever said.
Being from Pa I certainly don't cling to any religion, but I know what you mean. The only thing I cling to is my family. That is why I have guns.
I've said for years, slice off Philly, Pittsburgh and their surrounding counties and PA would slide right in between Georgia and Alabama.
We don't talk the same but we'd get along just fine.
Perhaps we might arrange a swap to exchange the residents of Metro Atlanta for the residents of rural Penn?
Okay, let me get this straight. First, the site used a SWISS estimate of total gun ownership in the US (88.8 guns per 100 people). Then, it simply took the population of each state and multiplied it by .888 to determine the number of guns therein.
Pardon me, but this is a total load of crap.
Good catch. And you would be correct…..load of crap. If the anti gun crowd would use statistics like that, we'd be going ape$h!T on them about now. Just wasted 10 minutes of my life I won't get back.
You nailed it. Beyond the percentage sham, we in the US don't have an accurate estimate but some Swiss group has it covered? Oh please can we get more lies about guns and opinions about them from other countries? We all love it so much because we don't get enough of the lies here. The whole thing ranks pretty high among gun related lies and un-formation.
You are onto it. I swear I've seen this graphic before with the same flawed 88% number, before.
But some of those countries have nukes. I demand parity!
The problem with nukes is that you have to maintain them. They're not like guns, where you can keep them lubed, clean, in a nice dry place and they're ready for action anywhere from one day to once century from now.
Noooo. With nukes, you have to remember that your fissile material is degrading as it sits there on the shelf. Consider, for example, a boosted fission weapon. Let's reckon on a plutonium sphere design with tritium injected into the core as it is being compressed into criticality. Well, your tritium has a half-life of 12.7 years, which means that you regularly need to get some new tritium put into the reservoir every few years in order to maintain the design's projected neutron flux in the explosion. It's all work, work, work, polishing, shining, updating…. year after year.
Well that's a common area with guns: needing to replace Tritium after a while.
Yeah, I'm due, gonna start checking Tues. As I recall, it's not on a nuke, tho.
Early H-bomb experiments used liquid (cryogenic) Tritium, can you imagine how bright that stuff was right before it got *really* bright?
An entertaining read for the curious is:
Plutonium: A History of the World's Most Dangerous Element
Elemental Pu has some fun properties like spontaneously catching fire. Inert atmosphere always, people…
An excellent read is also:
"Atomic Accidents: A History of Nuclear Meltdowns and Disasters: From the Ozark Mountains to Fukushima"
This one covers some ugly Russian criticality accidents, as well as western ones.
The photo section in the back is excellent. A few shots of the Rocky Flats Plutonium fire.
Here in Texas we have the Pantex plant and uranium in South Texas.
My guess is that like here in CT the power at the poll is controlled by the democrat party. CT has lotsa guns per capita yet some of the most restrictive rules in the nation. democrats rule the roost and run roughshod over our state and American Constitution…unions, one party rule, apathy….
This table is bogus. CA, Texas, NH, VT and Maine all have the same percentage of guns divided by population, 88.8%. I wanted to put each state into a spreadsheet to see how they compared but it would not copy & paste.
Which goes to show you, they don't really know how many guns are in each state.
And they don't like that.
It's also none of their business.
I bet we're gonna hear, *this week*, a plan to increase their knowledge about who owns what! I will not comply.
If you go to original article and read the methodology, these number have no bearing at all on how many guns are in each of the states. They merely took the nationwide estimate of 270 million guns and distributed that evenly across the population. Then they compared the state populations to different countries.
Meh, nobody will have any hard numbers until there is full registration. Even, then there will still be millions of "undocumented" firearms.
270 million, huh? When was that, given that more than 22 million were sold in the past 2 months?
Exactly. The last estimate I read was 300+ million and climbing rapidly. Then they divide the number evenly between the states. That makes no sense and invalidates most of the comments typed here.
A theoretical match to England and Wales.
I'm not sure if that's good or an embarrassment….
Well they have 56 million to our 3.8 so I think it says just how bad they suck.
The estimate for # of guns owned in Wyoming is absurdly low. Absurdly. That's probably less than one-third of the actual guns owned in this state.
The .gov and .prog dorks can think whatever they want, but there is no way on Earth that Wisconsin has fewer guns than residents. I would not be shocked to learn that the real ratio is two to one, or better. And, to borrow a turn of phrase from our Southern friends, Lord willin' and the lakes don't drain, we'll never know.
Not directly on point, but every year come deer season the story makes the rounds on the local media outlets that Wisconsin's deer hunters become the eighth largest army in the world.
Didn't you guys have a lake actually drain up there a few years ago? Just sayin……..
Yay>Illinois=Yemen! I'm thinkin' the Land Of Lincoln # may be a mite low. Massive gun ownership downstate in the hunting/outdoorsy culture. And "illicit" Chiraq shite…every blade of grass indeed.
What a waste of a good topic. It would be cool to see estimates of actual guns per state by population, but not this peanut butter spread approach.
Well, we already knew from the housing melt-down that realtors, mortgage lenders and bankers engage in mathematical onanism writ most large…
DG, I do believe the term "mathematical onanism" wins you the Internetz today.
"These numbers show that guns and their owners are here to stay. Still, the debate about gun safety laws will continue to rage."
Did you really say that? "gun safety laws"?
Bad math…bad data as others have mentioned. Didn't TTAG run this same article a few months ago? Pretty sure you did.
The number of guns in several states nearly equals total population. Since there is such a contest regarding gun ownership, one must conclude that there is no correlation between the number of guns, and the population count. Else, the voting block of gun owners would be so overwhelming there would be no political appetite for restrictions on guns. Pen mighter than the sword?
Florida does not even have 1 gun / citizen. This simply will not do.
I was mad that Alaska didn't have guns that outnumbered citizens. Then I read the methodology. All is right with the world again.
The method of "data gathering" makes the resulting information false and useless. I'm surprised to see it published here.
Haha, it's only fitting that NJ is closest to Italy. That'sa nice'a pistola!
Didn't we do this a few months ago? How did this get reposted?
Nobody knows how many firearms are in the United States, much less by State.
There are likely 400 million firearms in the US, or damn near that number. Which is way more than one per person.
I can understand not wanting to do any work on a Sunday, and I'd rather visit your site and see nothing new than read a rubbish article like this. Come on, TTAG, you folks are better than this.
According to FBI NICS data, Indiana has added about 2.6 million firearms to the private supply (counting only non-NFA handguns and long guns), in the past 10 years alone.
To claim that Indiana has a total supply of only 5.7 million is simply absurd.
This is cute but horse shit. South Africa is on there 6 times with 6 different totals.
Kleck pretty much started trying actual data on how many 'civilian' guns there are in the US; his 1997 book "Targeting Guns" shows a 1994 estimated total of 235 million. (Gee, almost 20 years old already …) That table 3.1 has brief notes on the data sources.
Then, there are the BATF reports on manufacturing and import/export here: https://www.atf.gov/resource-center/data-statistics 2007 – 2014 are available there.
If one takes Kleck's data and drops it into Excel, and then tells Excel to project the line (I've done this), it comes out to about 1 gun per person.
But no method of getting the distribution more finely than the whole country seems, to me, to be useful.
FBI publishes state-by-state annual NICS data. One could use those data to formulate some assumptions, and then use those assumptions to come up with reasonable, weighted distributions of firearms by state. It wouldn't be perfect, but it would likely be more accurate than this nonsense.
There are some known bugs in that attempt. For example, Kentucky seems to run NICS on all of their CCW holders, every month.
And, of course, that excludes transactions that occurred before NICS was required on some transfers (all those old family guns) as well as NICS-exempt transactions in states where that is legal (No-FFL required, that is).
Picking on CA, since that's where I live, we don't even use NICS – we have a sort-of equivalent. And, since substantially all of our transfers must use an FFL, we can't tell if a sale is a new gun swelling the ranks, or an old gun finding a home with a new owner.
FBI breaks out NICS check by type. I assume monthly permit checks in KY would show up as "permit" type, not as a handgun purchase, long gun purchase, or "other" purchase type.
And while it is true that you can't extrapolate data, you can use NICS data to make assumptions about pre-NICS baseline data.
The stats here are probably fairly BS but if they are somewhere in the ball park does it mean we have more than those countries added together? Ye Ha!!
This is a disappointing article. I thought someone actually took the time to figure out real world numbers for each state, as the title advertised. The article is useless and misleading. Take is down, please.
Then somebody is lying about gun control.
Maybe only the people who say they are trying to improve gun safety…for the children ?
NY and blue state areas need to be disarmed. If they give up quietly, that'll be nice, but we'll prepare otherwise.
@Chip Bennett
"And while it is true that you can't extrapolate data, you can use NICS data to make assumptions about pre-NICS baseline data."
I would be interested to learn how that might work. Can you point to a reference?
So, this is way over-simplified, for purposes of example:
State A and State B have the same population (say, 100). At some point, assume a baseline amount of per capita firearms (say, 0.75). Thus, at the baseline, a total population of 200 has a a total number of firearms of 150. Assuming all is equal, State A would have 75 firearms, and State B would have 75 firearms.
However, data available (e.g. NICS) after that baseline point-in-time indicate that State A acquires firearms at twice the rate, per capita, as State B. (Say those numbers are 0.5/10 years, vs. 0.25/10 years.)
So, make an assumption that State A and State B acquired firearms at approximately the same rate, per capita, prior to available data, and therefore have commensurately more firearms as of the baseline. If that were the case, then State A would have twice as many firearms as State B at the baseline (i.e. State A would have 1.0 firearms per capita (100 firearms), and State B would have 0.5 firearms per capita (50 firearms)).
Now, that would be a pretty fragile assumption, so add in a generous margin of error, since you don't actually know the rate of firearm acquisition prior to the baseline. Pick your poison here. Cut the weighting in half (State A 87.5 firearms, State B 62.5 firearms). Cut the weighting by an order of magnitude (State A 80 firearms, State B 70 firearms).
(There's a lot more math that would go into deciding that weighting; again: way over-simplified here.)
So, now you have a weighted baseline. To that, you can add the known quantity (based on NICS data) of purchases by State A and State B since the baseline.
Thank you.
I think you have set up the problem correctly, but I disagree that pre-NICS rates can be validly estimated using NICS numbers. There are confounding factors, and I don't believe those can be quantified and applied to the calculation.
NICS was implemented for 1999, replacing the more general 1993 background check required by the Brady Bill.
1998 had us 4 years into the Federal 'assault weapons ban'. I think political considerations changed the rates post-1998. (More particularly, I think the rates changed significantly in 2011.)
NICS data – https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/nics/reports/nics_firearm_checks_-_year_by_state_type.pdf
One could make the argument that the rates change based on the policies of the president and his party; CA's early NICS numbers were around 800K/year until 2001, then sagged into the 600-500K range 2002-2006, then back up to 800K in 07, nearly 800 in 08 and 09, 900K in 11, and 1100, 1300, 1400 and 1700 through 2015.
But, pre-Clinton, that really did not seem to matter; there were few serious attempts to limit a lot of guns before then.
Does any of this matter? Since the number of guns in the hands of the public does not equate in any fashion to the number of individual gun owners, nor to the number of gun owners who believe in limited government and constitutional originalism, nor to the number of pro-gun people who vote, what can we actually learn from analyzing fuzzy data about gun buying?
I think you have set up the problem correctly, but I disagree that pre-NICS rates can be validly estimated using NICS numbers. There are confounding factors, and I don't believe those can be quantified and applied to the calculation.
Absolutely, and all of that is buried in the over-simplification. If you want to be more accurate, you can try to account for the various, confounding factors. But while the pre-NICS relative per-capita state private firearms ownership cannot be perfectly described by using NICS data, those data can certainly be used to make some justifiable assumptions (such as the per capita private firearm ownership of, say, Wyoming being higher than that of, say, New Jersey).
But, even if you take pre-NICS per capita private firearm ownership to be the same for every state, two points:
1) You can accurately measure the change in relative per capita private firearm ownership, post-NICS. There is no reason to assume that all states currently have the same per capita firearm ownership.
2) Just based on NICS data, it is fairly safe to assume that most estimates of total private firearm ownership are too low – perhaps, way too low.
I am absolutely SHOCKED :0 that an anti-gun business would manipulate statistics about firearms in order to distort public opinion.
Good catch, various posters on the false survey data.
Bad move, RF on posting this without more homework. Thats an unforced error,
but the silver lining is the intelligentsia here points out how useless are the sources quoted by the lying Left.
Another example of the unique value of the wise readership of TTAG.
No way California has more firearms than the Faroe Islands.
Stupid survey, stupid "stats," I think less of your site for posting this.
If NY has that many damn firearms, (D)head Schumer should start his disarmament there. If he succeeds, then we should start the next civil war then.
Otherwise, don't let him disarm your state first, because he'll move on to his dictator phase then.
As I've said, America has more private arms that all of the armies of all of the nations of the world. Combined. There is a reason that in spite of the anti's pushes, the federal government treads very carefully on this subject.
We shall soon see how much the government fears the liberationists in Oregon ranchland.
7.8 million guns out of 8.9 million residents in nj? Yeah right, I'll guess it's around 1 million.
The problem with both the stats and your conclusion is that we have no idea from the data, how many guns per owner, and the distribution (politically and geographically) of those owners. The total legal guns in the country may be exactly the same number of total occupants of the country, but what does that tell us? Only that they drink a lot of coffee in Brazil (parable).
Here in NY, if you cut out NYC, the state's population is easily cut in half, but the number of guns per capita would also double, as well. Not a lot of people in "the city" own guns. Upstate is a different story.
Looks like Nevada can invade bordering States just about any time they want.
Sorry, this is totally meaningless. Author took the population of each state and multiplied it by the NATIONAL AVERAGE guns per person. For any state, take total population and multiply by .888 to get the number in this table. This then = B.S. According to "Texas Politics Today, 2013-2014" by Maxwell, Crain and Santos, p 25 (with references cited in the article) "Texans own approximately 51 million firearms." NOT 22 million. About 2 per person. Which seems about right to me, living in Texas.
"see just how much firepower the different states have when compared to other countries."
I live in Connecticut, and according to the map, CT has about the same "firepower" as Ukraine.
Piffle. This is major-league, deliberate misrepresentation. And, btw, here is Ukraine's real firepower:
The numbers are certainly interesting. But I fail to see the point of comparing those numbers to countries. It's not like Alabama needs to be prepared to fight off an invasion from Spain. It's local crimes that motivate many to own guns.
What the numbers do indicate is the sheer folly of thinking that, with close to one gun per citizen, we can stop gun-related crime by ridding this country of guns. That is a bit like trying to prevent traffic accidents by getting rid of cars and trucks.
–Michael W. Perry, author of Chesterton on War and Peace


text:
On a 160 acre estate, Stonebarn is set amongst lush forest, trufferie, rivers and dams in the picturesque region of Pemberton.
Combining luxury and natural beauty in WA's South West Pemberton region, Stonebarn offers a unique wedding venue and accommodation for 12 with breathtaking views of the forest, trufflerie and river.
Stonebarn is a large commercial truffle producer in the West Australian food and wine region of Manjimup – the heart of Australian truffle country.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
"The Hall of Fame will induct three new members in Cooperstown, N.Y., this summer — the umpire Hank O'Day, the owner Jacob Ruppert and a catcher, Deacon White. All three died in the 1930s and were voted in by the veterans committee in December. As a result, baseball will hold its annual Hall of Fame ceremony next July in an awkward context — without a single living honoree on stage."
Voters Shut Out Hall of Fame Candidates
Current Status: Published (4)
Seeded on Wed Jan 9, 2013 11:26 AM
keyboard shortcuts: V vote up article J next comment K previous comment


text:
Milwaukee | SKU: T26654 | Model: 2497-22
M12 12-Volt Cordless Lithium-Ion 2-Tool Combo Kit Hammer Drill and Impact Driver
Price: $179.00
Recently Added ×
You May Also Like
Milwaukee 2497-22 - M12 12-Volt Cordless Lithium-Ion 2-Tool Combo Kit Hammer Drill and Impact Driver
Need it fast? Please call 1-800-523-4777 or click the chat button to speak with one of our service agents to expedite this order.
Free shipping within the Contiguous United States.
Act Fast!
Sales of this outlet item are limited to quantity on hand.
The 2497-22 M12 Cordless 2-Tool Combo Kit includes the 3/8" Hammer Drill Driver and the 1/4" Hex Impact Driver (2450-20). The innovative M12 cordless system is designed to deliver the power and torque required for professional applications, in a size that reaches the tightest and toughest places. Powered by RED LITHIUM, the M12 cordless system offers unmatched power, speed, and tool belt portability. The Hammer Drill Driver delivers best-in-class 275 in-lb. of peak torque, 0-400 / 0-1,500 RPM, & 0-22,500 BPM at just 2.8 lb., and the Hex Impact Driver delivers best-in-class 850 in-lbs. of torque at only 2.3 lbs. and 0-2000 RPM for fast driving. Also includes 2 Red Lithium batteries, charger, and a contractor bag.
Please note: due to the high incident of fraudulent transactions with orders containing name brand products, orders for this item must ship to the billing address.
Accessories and Related Items: View All
You May Also Like:
Customers who purchased this item also purchased:
Animation for T26654


text:
03547325, Trim
Please help our community — upload your photos of 03547325.
This is a trim for Cadillac cars. This trim fits 8 General Motors car models which have been manufactured for US market. This part is genuine General Motors part with GM OEM part number 03547325.
This trim has manufacturer's warranty and 100% fits for General Motors cars. Trim is made of top quality materials, it passed not only all manufacturer's tests but also General Motors quality control and, has to endure rough road conditions over a long time.
In spite of higher price of genuine parts buying GM genuine trim will be a smart decision, because you will be absolutely sure that GM genuine trim will serve you longer and will provide maximum safety and performance.
Rear window panel (blue)
Browse to find other vehicles 03547325 trim fits
Parts related to 03547325 trim:
- Trim 03547324
- Trim 03547327
- Trim 03547328
- Trim 03547329
- Clip 09722397
- Bolt 11515758
- Connector 12085536
- Connector 12110047
Share this page with your friends
URL for EMail, IM etc.:
For blogs and web-sites:
BB-code for web-boards and forums:


text:
Bravo's "Top Chef" Takes Over Texas
Every Wednesday night foodies across the country turn off the phones, open a bottle of wine and tune in to Bravo to watch "Top Chef." Imagine our delight here in the Lone Star State when Bravo decided to do a special series right here in Texas!
Rock Stars Making Critically Acclaimed Wine – Who Knew
Rock Stars with their own clothing lines? Yep!
Rock Stars with their own brand of Tequila? You betcha!
Rock Stars with their own line of... wine? (Insert record-scratch sound effect here.) Wine has become all the rage these days, and even some of our favorite musicians are jumping on board! Here are just a few noteworthy wines with some serious talent behind them.
Want a New Idea for Butternut Squash?
Tis the season for winter squashes, but how do you prepare them without getting into a rut?
This recipe is a favorite of mine that I came up with on one of those "clean-out-the-refrigerator" days and has turned into something that I crave in the Winter and Fall and love to serve to guests.
Baby, It's Cold Outside! Warm Up With This Yummy Tortilla Soup!
When the weather turns cold, I turn to comfort food. Foods that are hot, cheesy and induce a 3-hour nap always fit the bill and make my Winter feel luxurious. This is the first recipe that I make every year when the weather gets cold. It's perfect for weekends and tastes even better leftover. It is super-easy, uses ingredients you probably already have in your pantry and serves 6 very generous servings.


text:
A Bioequivalence Study of Tobramycin and Prednisolone Acetate Compared to PredForte
This study has been completed.
Bausch & Lomb Incorporated
Information provided by (Responsible Party):
Bausch & Lomb Incorporated
ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier:
First received: September 13, 2005
Last updated: March 13, 2013
Last verified: March 2013
- Full Text View
- Tabular View
- No Study Results Posted
- Disclaimer
- How to Read a Study Record
The purpose of this study is to demonstrate the bioequivalence of the combination test agent, prednisolone acetate 1.0% and tobramycin 0.3% ophthalmic suspension compared to PredForte (prednisolone acetate 1.0%) ophthalmic suspension. Bioequivalence will be measured by comparing aqueous humor concentrations of prednisolone acetate.
|Eye Infections Postoperative Complications
|Drug: Prednisolone and Tobramycin Drug: Prednisolone
|Phase 3
|Study Type:
|Study Design:
|Allocation: Randomized
Intervention Model: Parallel Assignment
Masking: Double Blind (Participant, Investigator)
Primary Purpose: Treatment
|Official Title:
|A Multi-Center, Randomized, Double Masked, Bioequivalence Study of Tobramycin and Prednisolone Acetate (0.3/1.0%, ISTA) Ophthalmic Suspension Compared to PredForte (1.0% Prednisolone Acetate, Allergan) Ophthalmic Suspension
Resource links provided by NLM:
MedlinePlus related topics: Eye Infections
Drug Information available for: Prednisolone Prednisolone acetate Methylprednisolone acetate Methylprednisolone Prednisolone sodium phosphate Prednisolone phosphate Prednisolone sodium succinate Methylprednisolone sodium succinate Tobramycin Tobramycin sulfateU.S. FDA Resources
Further study details as provided by Bausch & Lomb Incorporated:
Primary Outcome Measures:
- Bioequivalence will be measured by comparing aqueous humor concentrations of prednisolone acetate at various time points [ Time Frame: 2 days ]Comparison of aqueous humor concentrations of prednisolone acetate at various time points
|Estimated Enrollment:
|Study Start Date:
|July 2005
|Study Completion Date:
|October 2005
|Primary Completion Date:
|October 2005 (Final data collection date for primary outcome measure)
|Assigned Interventions
Experimental: Prednisolone and Tobramycin
Prednisolone acetate 1.0% and tobramycin 0.3% ophthalmic suspension. One drop of test agent will be instilled in the inferior cul de sac of the operative eye prior to cataract extraction.
|Drug: Prednisolone and Tobramycin
Active Comparator: Prednisolone
Prednisolone acetate 1.0% ophthalmic suspension. One drop of test agent will be instilled in the inferior cul de sac of the operative eye prior to cataract extraction.
Drug: Prednisolone
Other Name: Pred Forte
|Ages Eligible for Study:
|18 Years and older (Adult, Senior)
|Sexes Eligible for Study:
|Accepts Healthy Volunteers:
Inclusion Criteria:
- Bilateral cataract surgery
- Avoid disallowed medications throughout study
Exclusion Criteria:
- Contraindications to the use of the test agents
- Known allergy or sensitivity to the test agents or components
- History of steroid response following topical administration of corticosteroids in the eye
- Wore contact lenses 48 hours prior to Visit 1
- An intraocular pressure that is greater than 22 mmHg or less than 5 mmHg in either eye
- Any significant illness that could be expected to interfere with study
- Used ophthalmic, topical or systemic corticosteroids or an immunomodulator for 7 days prior to surgery
Contacts and Locations
Choosing to participate in a study is an important personal decision. Talk with your doctor and family members or friends about deciding to join a study. To learn more about this study, you or your doctor may contact the study research staff using the Contacts provided below. For general information, see Learn About Clinical Studies.
Please refer to this study by its ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00198523
Please refer to this study by its ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00198523
|United States, Kansas
|Donald E. Beahm, MD
|Great Bend, Kansas, United States, 67530
|United States, Massachusetts
|Cornea Consultants/Laser Eye Consultants of Boston
|Boston, Massachusetts, United States, 02114
|United States, Michigan
|Great Lakes Eye Care
|St. Joseph, Michigan, United States, 49085
|United States, New Hampshire
|Eyesight Ophthalmic Services, PA
|Portsmouth, New Hampshire, United States, 03801
|United States, Texas
|Texan Eye Care PA
|Austin, Texas, United States, 78705
|Houston Eye Associates
|Houston, Texas, United States, 77025
Sponsors and Collaborators
Bausch & Lomb Incorporated
|Study Director:
|Tim McNamara, PharmD
|ISTA Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
More Information
Keywords provided by Bausch & Lomb Incorporated:
Additional relevant MeSH terms:
ClinicalTrials.gov processed this record on July 21, 2017
|Responsible Party:
|Bausch & Lomb Incorporated
|ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier:
|NCT00198523 History of Changes
|Other Study ID Numbers:
|Study First Received:
|September 13, 2005
|Last Updated:
|March 13, 2013
Keywords provided by Bausch & Lomb Incorporated:
Cataract Extraction
Anti-Bacterial Agents
Additional relevant MeSH terms:
Postoperative Complications
Eye Infections
Pathologic Processes
Eye Diseases
Prednisolone acetate
Methylprednisolone acetate
Methylprednisolone Hemisuccinate
Prednisolone hemisuccinate
Prednisolone phosphate
Anti-Inflammatory Agents
Hormones, Hormone Substitutes, and Hormone Antagonists
Physiological Effects of Drugs
Antineoplastic Agents, Hormonal
Antineoplastic Agents
Autonomic Agents
Peripheral Nervous System Agents
Gastrointestinal Agents
Neuroprotective Agents
Protective Agents
Anti-Bacterial Agents
Anti-Infective Agents
ClinicalTrials.gov processed this record on July 21, 2017


text:
Box Score (PDF)
PRINCETON, N.J. -The first time the Penn and Princeton men's basketball teams played this season, on January 30, the Quakers knocked off the Tigers, 82-67.
What was lost amid that result was that Princeton shot nearly 58 percent from the field.
On Tuesday night at the Tigers' Jadwin Gym, Princeton shot better that that -- the Tigers hit at a 58.3 percent clip. That, plus a quick start, proved to be more than Penn could overcome and the Quakers fell in the regular-season finale, 62-52.
It was a brutal way to end what has been a magical ride for Penn over these last several weeks. With the loss, the Quakers' Ivy League championship hopes were dashed -- they finish the season 11-3 in the league, second behind 12-2 Harvard. A Penn win would have made the Red and Blue co-champions, and forced a one-game playoff that would have been this weekend.
At 19-12 overall, Penn's chances of playing in the postseason remain relatively strong. The NCAA Tournament is clearly out; the NIT is probably remote, as well. However, in this day and age there are also the College Basketball Invitational (CBI) and CollegeInsider.com Tournament (CIT). Penn's postseason fate will be determinedon Sunday night.
Princeton (19-11, 10-4 Ivy) ended the season with a four-game winning streak and eight wins in its last nine contests. The postseason is still very much a possibility for the Tigers, as well.
To say that the first half was a struggle for Penn would be an understatement. The Quakers came out ice cold from the field, and for the most part it was one shot and back on defense. As a result, with 4:18 left in the first half the score was 23-6 in favor of Princeton.
Thankfully, Zack Rosen -- who suffered a miserable start Tuesday night -- got things going. He hit consecutive jumpers, one from beyond the arc, then added two more buckets after a Rob Belcore layup. When Rosen's fifth bucket went down with only seconds left before halftime, the deficit was suddenly a manageable 10 points (27-17) as the teams went to the locker rooms.
Penn then got a steal on Princeton's initial possession of the second half, from which the Quakers came down and Miles Cartwright nailed a three-pointer from the right corner. Just like that, the Red and Blue was within single digits of the Tigers for the first time since the 9:18 mark of the opening stanza. However, Princeton steadied as Brendan Connolly scored almost immediately for the Tigers.
It was still 34-24 out of the first media timeout, but Penn had a run ahead. Belcore started it with a trey from the right corner, and then Cartwright followed by hitting the Quakers' first two free throws of the night. After two more stops, Rosen drove and missed a layup, but Fran Dougherty sailed in among the Princeton defenders and put it back to make the score 34-31. That forced a Princeton timeout with 12:15 left.
Princeton struggled on its next possession, but Cartwright bailed them out with a foul and Hummer made the Quakers pay with a short jumper. Rosen then missed a layup in traffic, and T.J. Bray shook into the lane and hit a layup that pushed the Tigers' lead back to seven.
Rosen kept coming back for Penn, hitting three-pointers on consecutive possessions, but Princeton answered both times -- first with a Saunders bucket, then a Hummer fallaway pop along the right baseline.
It was still a nine-point game with just over three minutes left when Belcore stole the ball from Hummer near midcourt. His layup at the other end hit the backboard and was blocked by Hummer, scoring the bucketto make the score 48-41 as the game moved toits final media timeout with 2:57 to play.
As it turned out, that would be Penn's last gasp. Princeton scored the game's next five points and that pretty much sealed the deal.
Rosen ended up leading all scorers with 19 points, but he was 8-of-24 from the field and had an uncharacteristic seven turnovers while dishing off just one assist. Cartwright had 11 points, while Belcore filled the box score with nine points, five rebounds, three assists and four steals. Dougherty had eight points and led Penn with seven boards.
For Princeton, Hummer had a double-double (18 points, 10 rebounds) while Douglas Davis scored 12 points and Saunders added 10.
Penn-Princeton Game Notes: Penn and Princeton split their season series, and the Tigers beat the Quakers for the sixth time in seven meetings ... Penn now leads the all-time series, 123-103 ... Penn scored 17 points in the first half, a low for any half this season ... Penn set a low for the Jerome Allen coaching era with three free-throw attempts, and tied an Allen-era low with two makes ... Princeton tied opponent highs this season with eight blocked shots and 20 turnovers, and tied an opponent low with 36 field-goal attempts ... Princeton's 58.3 field-goal percentage was the second-best by a Penn opponent this season, behind only Pitt (58.5 on Nov. 25) ... Senior guard Zack Rosen led Penn with 19 points, the seventh straight game and 20th time this season he has led the team in that category ... Rosen has scored in double figures in 15 straight games, 29 of 31 this season, and 89 times in his career ... Sophomore guard Mile Cartwright was the only other player in double figures, with 11 points; it was his 14th double-digit scoring game this season ... Cartwright also tied a season/career high with three steals ... Sophomore center Fran Dougherty played a season-high 30 minutes and led Penn with seven rebounds, one shy of his season/career best ... Dougherty has led Penn in boards in three of the last four games and five of the last nine ... Dougherty is averaging 5.3 rebounds per game over Penn's last nine contests ... Senior forward Rob Belcore tied a season/career high with four steals ... Freshman center Henry Brooks tied a season/career high with two steals.
Single-Season Record Book Watch: Senior guard Zack Rosen has played 1,181 minutes this season, the program's single-season record ... Rosen has 161 assists, one shy of the record shared by David Klatsky (2000-01) and Ibrahim Jaaber (2006-07) ... Rosen has made 31 starts, one behind the record set in 2001-02 by Koko Archibong, Tim Begley, Jeff Schiffner and Ugonna Onyekwe ... Rosen has scored 575 points, which is seventh on the single-season list and the most by a Penn player since Tony Price scored 633 in 1978-79 ... Rosen has 72 three-point baskets, tied for eighth with Garett Kreitz (1996-97) and the most since Tim Begley hit 76 in 2004-05 ... Senior forward Rob Belcore has 56 steals, tied for seventh with Ira Bowman (1994-95) and the most since Ibrahim Jaaber had 90 in 2006-07 ...
All-Time Record Book Watch: Senior guard Zack Rosen hadone assist, giving him 576 for his career which is the program's all-time record ... Rosen has started 113 games in his career which is tied with Tim Begley (2002-05) for the program record ... Rosen played all 40 minutes, giving him4,120 for his career which is also a program mark ... Rosen has 1,686 career points which puts him third on Penn's all-time scoring list. (Ugonna Onyekwe is second, with 1,762 points from 2000-03.) ... Senior guard Tyler Bernardini has 1,456 career points which puts him 10th on Penn's all-time scoring list. (Current head coach Jerome Allen is ninth, with 1,488 points from 1992-95.) ... Rosen has 222 career three-point field goals which is third all-time. (Matt Maloney is second with 244 from 1993-95.) ... Bernardini has 199 career treys, which ties him with Garett Kreitz (1995-98) for sixth all-time ... Rosen has made 412 career foul shots which is fifth all-time. (Ernie Beck is fourth, with 419 made free throws from 1951-53.) ... Rosen has 151 career steals which is fourth all-time (Maloney is third, with 157 from 1993-95), while Bernardini has 132 steals which is ninth (Paul Chambers from 1989-92 and Shawn Trice from 1992-95 are tied for seventh with 134.) ... Bernardini has made 101 career starts which is tied with Michael Jordan and Geoff Owens are tied for fifth all-time ... Bernardini has played 3,275 career minutes which is seventh all-time. (Jaaber is sixth, with 3,569 minutes from 2004-07.)
Download: Rave Report.pdf


text:
Today's economic calendar includes data on inflation, manufacturing, production, and consumer sentiment.
Consumer prices for February will be released at 8:30 a.m. ET. A reading of 0.5 percent is expected, up from zero in the previous month. Excluding food and energy, the consensus forecast is 0.2 percent, down from the previous month's 0.3 percent.
The Empire State Manufacturing Survey is also scheduled for 8:30 a.m. ET. Analysts estimate that the March figure will come in at 10 even, down slightly from the previous months' 10.04.
Industrial production and manufacturing data for February follows at 9:15 a.m. ET. The consensus estimate for production is 0.5 percent, up from -0.1 percent in the previous month. Analysts are expecting 0.3 percent for manufacturing, up from -0.4 percent in the last report.
The University of Michigan will release its consumer sentiment index for March at 9:55 a.m. ET. The consensus forecast is 77.5, just below the previous month's 77.6 level.
More From optionMONSTER
Today's economic calendar includes data on inflation, manufacturing, production, and consumer sentiment.


text:
The firm of Allen J. Katz is primarily a litigation firm representing individuals, and various business entities throughout central and southern Maryland.
Address: 316 East Diamond, Gaithersburg, MD 20877
Phone: 301.840.8007
Creating Value in Legal Services
Address: 15204 Omega Drive, Ste. 210, Rockville, MD 20850
Phone: (301) 258-1033
Exceptional Legal Service at Bethesda, Maryland Estate Planning, Probate and Elder Law Firm
Address: 6616 Radnor Rd., Bethesda, MD 20817
Phone: 301-229-3735
Maryland Estate Law Firm
Address: 751 Rockville Pike, Suite 7, Rockville, MD 20852
Phone: 301-217-0505
Maryland and D.C. Estate Planning & Administration Attorneys
Address: 6010 Executive Boulevard, Suite 900, Rockville, MD 20852
Phone: 301-984-4790
Compassionate Bethesda, Maryland Attorney Committed to Excellence
Address: 4520 East-West Highway, Suite 700, Bethesda, MD 20814
Phone: 3016524462
Clients say, "The Friendly, Caring Law Firm."
Address: 8311 Wisconsin Ave., Suite B-12, Bethesda, MD 20814
Phone: (301) 654-5112
Address: 11777 Parklawn Drive Suite 200A, Rockville, MD 20852
Phone: (240) 614-4442
Law Firm in Bethesda, MD
Address: 4816 Moorland Lane, Bethesda, MD 20814
Phone: 301-986-9030
Address: 7315 Wisconsin Ave., Suite 800 West, Bethesada, MD 20814
Phone: 301-961-8590
WE PROTECT YOU! In the areas of Bankruptcy, Wills, Estates, Real Estate, Foreclosure and Debt Consolidation. SEE BELOW for appointments & SPECIAL PROMOS
Specializing in transactional work - real estate, probate, estate planning, title, TOPA, investments and private lending, real estate sales brokerage.


text:
GiantsPipeline: Your name is being rumored for a possible call-up to the Giants. Is there any truth to those rumors?
Eric Surkamp: I haven't heard anything. Obviously that would be a dream come true, but you can't really worry about that too much. You gotta stay focused here and control what you can control. If you lose focus, you'll start scuffling here and then you won't have that opportunity down the road.
GP: So the Giants are in the midst of a pennant race. If you were called up, would you be ready to help with a postseason run?
ES: Yeah, I mean, obviously it would be exciting. I'm sure I'd be a little nervous, a little butterflies in my stomach before I got out there. But I think for your first couple of years in the big leagues it's always going to be exciting every time you go out there. Facing the best guys in baseball is something you grow up wanting to do. You're in double-A now and at the beginning of the year you don't realize how close you really are to the big leagues and then injuries and stuff like that happen, you put together a good year here and it's like, all the sudden, your name's getting tossed around. It's cool. It's exciting.
GP: Who were your favorite teams or players growing up?
ES: I grew up a Reds fan. Ken Griffey Jr. and Barry Larkin went to my high school so I was always fans of them. Big Griffey fan my whole life. But as far as pitchers go, being a lefty I like to watch lefties. Andy Pettitte was always a guy I loved to watch. Right now in baseball, every time Cliff Lee's on, Jon Lester, guys like that, I try to pay attention and learn a couple things.
GP: How's your pickoff move?
ES: Well, I got called on a balk last night [laughs]. It's alright. It definitely could get better. I think I picked a few guys off this year, but it's not quite as good as Pettitte and them.
GP: You've been pretty much in the top echelon of pitchers in the Eastern League this year. Who have you enjoyed competing against as a pitcher?
ES: I was talking to a couple of guys today about it. The lineup that the Bowie Baysox ran out there last night was, I thought, probably the best lineup we faced so far this year. Joe Mahoney wasn't there earlier in the year when we played them. [They have] a couple of guys in there that have some pop, that can knock the ball out of the park. But each team probably has two or three guys that you think, hey, this guy could definitely hurt you.
GP: Have you been able to pitch against any of the other top pitchers in the league? When [the Baysox's] Steve Johnson was here, or even Mike Ballard, they seemed to pitch well against you. What about the guys from the Trenton Thunder?
ES: I've only actually pitched against Bowie twice. I faced [Trenton's] Manny Banuelos earlier in the year -- that was pretty cool. I can't remember if I lined up with Dellin Betances or not. But we faced [Tigers pitching prospect] Jacob Turner when he was up in Erie. I'm trying to think who else I lined up with. I don't think there's anyone else really.
GP: Do you get any extra adrenaline when you're going up against a top pitcher?
ES: To be honest I try to pitch every game the same. I try to pitch like it's a zero-zero game no matter if we're up, if we're down or whatever. You just hold the lead and try not to let anybody score.
GP: Is this team capable of winning the Eastern League?
ES: Yeah, I think we are. We've been scuffling a little bit as of late. But there are twenty games left. I think we're a game-and-a-half back of second place. We can sneak into second, hey, maybe even win the division. Once you get into the playoffs anything can happen.
GP: What's it like working with pitching coach Ross Grimsley?
ES: He's an awesome pitching coach, especially being left-handed. He was never really a guy that threw very hard and neither am I. I just pick his brain when we're in the bullpen, just have him help me out with different pitches. It's always good to have a left-handed pitching coach. I've been lucky to have a left-handed pitching coach my first two years with him and Steve Kline. I think it's really helped me out.
GP: What's your at-bat song?
ES: It's Return of the Mack right now, but I didn't even pick it. My old roommate Daryl Maday picked it out for me.
GP: Do you have an at-bat song in mind for when you go to the majors?
ES: I don't, to be honest. I listen to music but I'm not a guy that's super into music or anything like that. It doesn't really matter to me. I'll pick whatever's popular.
GP: You seem to have helped your own cause a few times this year at the plate. Are you comfortable at the plate?
ES: Yeah. I guess right now, your first year batting, you don't feel any pressure. You're having fun up there. For the most part you're getting fastballs. These past couple games they've started mixing it up, throwing you off-speed stuff. But I just try to get a pitch in the middle of the plate and try to put a bat on it.
GP: What's the difference between a three hit, ten strikeout shutout versus a three run, five inning performance?
ES: Probably, honestly, a matter of 5 to 10 pitches -- if you make those pitches differently. You're gonna throw good pitches a lot of games, but the pitches that really matter are when you have first and second like [Tuesday] night and leave a ball over the plate 1-0 to Mahoney and he hits a double and all the sudden two runs score. If I throw a better pitch in that situation, groundball double play or something like that. So I think it's just really executing your pitches in situations that you need to.
GP: When you're warming up on a given day before a start do you have a feeling of how you're going to pitch?
ES: Not really. So far this year my body's felt good and everything like that. I try to do the same thing all week long, try to have that same feeling every fifth or sixth day. It's been a little difficult this year going from a five-man rotation to a six-man rotation. And then you have an off day in there and all the sudden it's seven days in between your outings. It's almost like you're going back to college ball again. I just try to stay fine tuned in the bullpen and stuff like that.
GP: You were hurt a little bit earlier this season. You feeling fine now?
ES: Yeah, I'm feeling fine. I think it was just a fluke thing. Something started bugging me running, and honestly if I was playing on an American League team I probably wouldn't have missed a start. But I was going to have to hit and they didn't want me to have to try to leg anything out on the infield or anything like that.


text:
Jeannette gets win despite scoreless first
Jeannette missed its first 25 shots from the field, didn't score in the first quarter, and remarkably found a way to win.
You did not read that wrong.
Jeannette advanced to the WPIAL semifinals for the first time in school history, rallying to defeat South Fayette, 44-40, on Friday night at Baldwin High School. Jeannette will next play Beaver, which upset No. 3 Greensburg Central Catholic, 57-51, in the Class AA playoffs last night.
"We played horrible," Jeannette senior guard Kayla Cook said. "We didn't practice well all week, and we played that way. Our defense won this game."
Jeannette trailed 8-0 after one quarter and was down 13-1 early in the second quarter before mounting a comeback. But Jeannette's full-court press forced South Fayette into 11 second-quarter turnovers, and Jeannette crawled back to within 16-10 at halftime. South Fayette finished with 26 turnovers.
"I was amazed we shot so poorly," Jeannette coach Janine Vertacnik said. "I would have been concerned (more) if we were down 20 and we missed our first 25 shots."
Jeannette's first field goal of the game came with 1:57 left in the first half when Cook hit a driving layup. Cook finished with 18 points and 11 rebounds.
"I thought our zone defense gave them problems in the first half," South Fayette coach Matt Bacco said. "We knew it was only a matter of time before they'd start making plays. We were playing the odds that they'd miss from the outside."
Cook took over in the third quarter, scoring 13 points, as Jeannette forged to a 25-23 lead.
"We knew if we continued to play defense and (could) keep them under 50, we'd have a shot," Vertacnik said. "I knew Kayla was ready to take over. She carried us in the third quarter, and Ciara (Gregory) finished the deal."
Gregory, who finished with 14 points, scored 12 points in the fourth quarter. She hit a couple big 3-pointers, but her follow with 37.3 second left gave Jeannette a 42-40 lead. Her bucket with 10.6 seconds left sealed the victory.
"Ciara had been struggling, and she needed a game like this," Vertacnik said. "We knew she was ready for a big game."
After shooting so poorly for much of the game, numerous Jayhawks hit big hoops in the fourth quarter. That included Shanae Daye, who hit a 3-pointer to tie the score at 40, and Shanice Cook, who hit a basket. Kayla Cook didn't score in the fourth quarter.
Jeannette, which was 16 for 63, was 8 for 13 from the field in the fourth quarter.
Gregory's effort countered a strong effort by Lizzy King, who scored 17 of her game-high 20 points in the second half.
"We were rushing our shots in the first half, and our self-esteem was down," Cook said. "We pulled together at halftime and got it done. I'm glad we're not playing Greensburg Central Catholic because I wanted to play someone different. I had a feeling they'd lose."
Vertacnik wasn't too disappointed Beaver won either.
"I'd rather play someone different," Vertacnik said. "We'll just have to play a lot better."


text:
F-Zero GX
Review by Turbo Speed
"Who's ever heard of a wheel?"
It all started in late 1990. The SNES (Super Nintendo Entertainment System) was born to challenge Sega's Genesis. The SNES was a popular system with many games. One of these was F-Zero. It was a popular racing game released in November 1990 that sold millions. Then in 1998, Nintendo removed F-Zero from the shadows by releasing F-Zero X on Nintendo 64. F-Zero X sold fairly well in stores.
But that's the only the past. This is now. In 2003, F-Zero GX was finally released. F-Zero GX is simply put a must own title for Gamecube. In fact, you shouldn't even be reading this review. You should just run to the store and buy this game. Or better yet, go to a friend's house and steal it against his will. You will thank me later.
Gameplay 10/10
The control depends on what kind of machine (car) you are using. Each machine has strengths and weaknesses. One car can turn well but isn't very fast. That other one could go very fast, but turns like a car with all its tires flat.
If you don't like the selection of machines, you can save points earned in Grand Prix to buy parts that make up a machine. To make a machine, you need a Pod (determines smoothness of control), a body (determines weight), and turbines (determines overall speed). You can also change the color of your parts on your machine to your liking, create an emblem (personal symbol) to paint onto your machine and pick who will be the driver. The possibilities are endless!
The tracks are well designed too. The tracks have also been categorized from easy (Ruby Cup Tracks) to hard (Emerald Cup Tracks) with normal difficulty in between (Sapphire Cup Tracks) to satisfy any range of difficulty. If you thought F-Zero X was far too easy or you repeatedly threw your Nintendo 64 controller at the wall because F-Zero X was just way too hard to enjoy, you will love how the tracks are categorized and divided.
If you somehow manage to get bored after playing later on, don't worry! If you have quarters and there's an arcade close by, you can take your memory card with you and look for F-Zero AX to link up to for secret tracks, secret drivers, and other secret features to load onto your memory card and own forever. In case you're wondering, this is the only Gamecube game programmed to connect to the Arcade version (Sorry, no Game Boy Advance connectivity).
The characters are great too. You will now be able to learn about your favorite driver in Grand Prix. However, how you can learn anything is a secret you will have to figure out on your own.
Gameplay 10/10
F-Zero GX has achieved perfection in gameplay. If you like the idea of making a completely unique machine, this game is for you. If you like to know how difficult some tracks are before you race on them, this game is for you. If you like the innovation of linking up with an arcade machine, this game is for you! If you like all of the above, this game is definitely for you! Need I say more?
Story 9/10
The story is an entirely different mode from Grand Prix and helps reveal Captain Falcon's true colors. You will be very interested at seeing the story unfold. There's only one drawback: you need to save those points that I mentioned earlier to purchase the next chapters. You will play and beat one part of the story just to see "The next chapter is now available at the shop!" You know what else? The next chapter is always more expensive than the last! Hope you're a patient gamer! You may need to start playing Grand Prix for hours for all the necessary points! You can also change a chapter to hard mode once you beat it. Who knows what beating hard mode will get you?
Story 9/10
Don't worry, Grand Prix is still entertaining! Patience will be rewarded with another chapter in the main story! The story will always have you on the edge of your seats for days. If you like suspenseful stories that keep you guessing, this game is for you!
Graphics 10/10
The graphics in this game actually redefine the meaning of beautiful and all of its synonyms! The tracks are great and beautifully designed. The machines are well designed. You can see the shine and some scratches on some of them. Nothing gets choppy or slows down. None of the graphics are ever jagged at any point! F-Zero GX is a grand stash of eye candy that you will treasure for years to come.
Graphics 10/10
You may be staring for days! No, scratch that! You WILL be staring for days! The graphics are just that well designed and detailed! If you're still reading this review, stop and go to the store and buy this game now! Or better yet, steal it like I suggested earlier!
Music and Sound 8/10
The music suits the game and each track well. You might not even notice the music in the background because you will be too busy having fun racing and winning points to buy more parts for a custom made machine or another chapter in story mode. The sound is a little lackluster. The voices sound slurred and metallic. You won't be able to make out what the characters are saying in story mode most of the time because of the bad voice audio. The other minor sound effects, on the other hand, suit the game well.
Music and Sound 8/10
I don't have much to say about the sound, but you may not even care. You will be far too busy racing and having fun racing and earning points!
Replay Value 10/10
Like I said earlier, you can still earn points for custom parts for your machine or more chapters to earn in story mode! Remember that patience will be rewarded with more story chapters and more machine parts! Don't get me started on linking your memory card to F-Zero AX!
Buy or Rent?
Remember what I said about going to your friends house and stealing this game against his will? That's the money saving method! If you own it already and don't like it, make it a Frisbee for your cat! I don't really care.
F-Zero GX!
- You can make your own racing machine!
- Graphics are awesome.
- You can learn about your favorite racer in Grand Prix mode.
Atari Karts...
- The bad voice effects.
- Normal mode in Story mode is hard enough!
My Grand Total 9/10
Reviewer's Rating: 4.5 - Outstanding
Originally Posted: 01/01/04, Updated 07/20/04
Got Your Own Opinion?
Submit a review and let your voice be heard.