KevinB

I've been a Glock certified armorer for about 10 years now. The bumps on the Gen 4 trigger bars are there to facilitate a left-handed set up on the mag release. I run conservative in my advice, and I always tell folks that it the gun is going to be used in a left-hand configuration and carried for duty/self-defense, keep the gen 4 bar.

When my G35 started doing that, it was because the rear of the striker had worn down in comparison to the back of the trigger bar (called the anvil, I think) and it would just barely catch the striker and releasing the trigger would cause the striker to slip off the back of the trigger bar and go bang. On the plus side, It wasn't full auto and my splits were insane. Yes, I replaced the striker (which seemed to be the most worn of the two parts).

http://www.torontosun.com/2017/06/12/vancouver-man-dies-after-shooting-himself-during-pistol-contest-at-gun-range Does anyone have any information on this event? The only details I can find are not specific.

My knifemaking buddies say that in order for the metal to get hot enough to have that effect it would be melting the holster. That was my concern as well a while back (there's even a thread around here on it) and one of the forum members here recommended using aluminum plates to suck the heat out. That's what I do now and it works like a charm.

Talked to STI's guys just now, and they contradicted the Titegroup claim, as does my years of experience with that powder in those guns. I would love to hear what the recurring problems are with the Titegroup/STI mix. Man, I'm creeping up on 100 posts. I need to slack off.

You're seriously going to drop a line that one of the most popular manufacturers of guns for USPSA recommends not using one of the most popular powders in our sport and not look into it further and update us? I have shot titegroup for a decade with no issue, unless there was an issue I missed. I did crack a slide on my STI, but the guru conducting the autopsy said it was due to someone jacking up the hard chroming process. I'm already calling Bowen today on a sight issue, so I may throw in a web search on it or a call to STI. BTW, went through training in Charleston for a few months. Great food around there!

I'll give them a call this week. It's been on my mind for some reason!

Thanks for the responses! I looked at filing the notch, but it's VERY short to begin with. I could file it down to the assembly and still not see the whole gold bead. I did see the references to the Bowen sights, but not a lot of guidance on which I would need for my .250 front (I'm really trying not to buy another ~75.00 part). I tried looking for factory options, but perhaps my Search-fu was weak then because I didn't come up with anything useful. I'll continue my search and post if I come up with anything.

I have a factory 5" 629 .44 that I bought a .250" gold bead front sight for. I could have gone taller but I have had a hard time finding holsters for tall front sights so I went with the shorter one. In any case, with the factory rear sight blade I can only see half of the gold bead when I hold a proper sight picture. I have read several threads on a similar or same topic but none directly answered the my question, which is: What are my options for a rear blade or sight assembly that will have a deep enough notch to see that gold bead I paid a lot for!? I can upload a photo of the rear sight assembly if necessary.

I'm shooting a Glock 35, so loading long isn't an option. I was posting on two threads about this so I may have missed one with the resolution, but I've been loading to 1.130 (which in actual practice gives me 1.128-1.132) with 4.8 grains of N320 which puts me at 914 - 944 (30 extreme spread) with my 180 grain XTreme bullets. Shoots really soft! I'm using a past-its-prime KKM barrel which needs replacing for now, but the problem got solved.

I didn't, but Xtreme is a great bullet and I'd really surprised if they were out of spec. All I can say is "gremlins."

My technique is solid. Been reloading 20+ years and have an eye for detail. That being said, I lengthened it out a bit and added a tenth of a grain of powder and the magic did happen. My ES went to 20 and it's bouncing between 926 and 946 and has the same felt recoil (to me) as Titegroup going 875. There is magic in that bottle, it just took some chanting to make it happen!

I feel your pain. I just switched to N320 to try it out after hearing how great it was. I'm experiencing big spreads over a 5-8 round string on my chrono, which I am talking about on another thread on here. Still getting it worked out.

I agree it will be slightly different, but if it has that much inconsistency with that much attention to detail, it will just be worse when I loosen the controls.

I zeroed the scale to a check weight I took to a pharmaceutical lab and had the weight confirmed (legit check weights are outside my budget and it's cheaper to buy a few packs of low grade check weights and toss the ones that are too far off) and made sure the lighting on the scale created no shadows but was far enough away not to heat it up before using a magnifying glass to check the lines' alignment on the scale. I am a USPSA guy with the soul of a benchrest shooter. I like the balance beam because if the load is within the margin of error on the electronic, it won't always roll the number up or down. On a balance beam, I get an idea of where it is in small increments by where the lines are lining up. I am using Xtreme's 180 grain heavy plated bullets with Winchester primers. I always hand weigh my test ammo and then knock them out on a 650. On any prog press, there will be variations in the OAL, and I noticed the velocity difference was pretty big between 1.125 and 1.130. I work a rotating schedule, so this is my Monday and I will have to wait until my next days off to nail down the problem. When I find it, I will say "Of course, dummy, you should have thought of that to begin with!"