promtcy

Pretty sure the two I have for my Pro Customs are Cheeley's. I did buy them quite a few years ago. I know Taran Tactical is making 2011 magwells, wouldn't hurt to ask them if they might fit. I don't know the grip screw size or thread right off hand and I've yet to replace any parts other than a mag release, which I bought from Dawson. I understand most of the SVI trigger stuff works.

Check with Dawson and Cheely Custom Gunworks.

I've been using SPS mags for a P18.9 and a P16.40 for years. They fit and work perfect. At the time you could buy the tubes and the springs with followers for around $70 U.S. Then I put TTI 7G basepads for STI/SVI on them to fit the USPSA gauge. So I got perfect fitting reliable mags for around $110 each. rtl's experience with shipping is about the same as mine. I think it took 2 1/2 to 3 weeks. Be aware that many credit card companies will automatically block anything from Spain so you may have to call your CC company either before or after and then have SPS run it again. They are used to it but it will add a couple days for emails to go back and forth, etc. I highly doubt you'll get 17 in the mag. Yikes, SPS have increased the shipping quite a bit. Looks to be about $141 with shipping for one mag. If you are ordering two or more the shipping stays the same so that makes it more affordable at $115 per mag. Another option is SVI/Infinity. $135 a mag though, not sure about shipping. I think Travis Tomasie used to run them in his Limited gun. You'd have to contact them about fit and capacity. SVI 140 You could also try making the feed lips wider and see if that cures your nosediving. The recommended way is to use what are called "Chain Pliers". There are other ways to do it though and some mags are softer than others. For what it's worth I've never had to readjust the feed lips on my SPS mags even though they get dropped on the ground constantly.

Awesome, have to try that. Thanks

Thanks for the replies. I just don't understand why they made the notch so shallow. With the stock sights you can actually see the top of the rail when aiming, that's just weird. Maybe that's the reason for the shallow notch but why not just put taller sights on it? Doesn't make sense to me. I get that they needed a short rear sight because of the rail. It's just a bad design, imho. I looked at the Williams and they appear to be the same except they have the fiber optic in the rear sight as well. I really wish I had thought to ask Volquartsen about the notch depth before I ordered theirs. I have a Williams "Eagle Eye" rear peep, it replaces the blade on the stock Ruger sight. Seemed logical since most of the targets in Steel Challenge are round. Never tried it on any practice stages though. I took the rail off and with that peep it seems to work except it has to be raised quite a bit. Which means the elevation screw ends up loose and it moves sometimes. I also realized putting the gun in the bag upside down means it compresses the rear sight and the screw will loosen up. It was laying in the bottom of my bag from the drive home. With the way the stock rear sight is made in order to make it deeper you would have to file an awful lot of material. It's a whole piece, it's not just the blade. I finally found a machine shop that will cut the stock rear sight blade for me. Still have to solve the elevation screw issue though. Might have to get a shorter front sight or stiffer spring to keep tension on the elevation screw because with it high the detent ball comes out of place. Ruger told me the way they keep the detent ball in place is with grease. Another part of it that from my perspective is a bad design.

I have a Ruger MKIV 22/45 Lite that I'm sort of struggling with. The depth of the rear sight notch is very shallow. I can't see much of the front sight. With a TK front sight on it which has a .060 fiber in it the bottom of the fiber optic is just barely visible. I bought a Volquartsen rear sight for it and had them widen the rear notch for me, but it has the same depth issue. I didn't ask about the notch depth when I talked to them. When I look at the Volquartsen guns on the website it looks like the rear blade is taller. My double stack 1911's notch depth is .130, the Volquartsen and the Ruger rear sight have a notch depth of .080. Because of the design it's not really feasible to make the notch any deeper, I'd need a taller rear blade. So is anyone shooting a Ruger MKIV 22/45 Lite with iron sights and if so is it a problem? Another quick question, has anyone tried a rear peep sight for Steel Challenge?

As most have said, depends on what you are doing. Bob Vogel used to run a .150 wide rear notch with a .117 wide front. Not sure if that's changed. I've run a .150 wide rear notch with a .125 wide front for steel challenge rimfire pistol. For pure accuracy you probably want less daylight. Depends on your eyes too. Most rear sight notches I've seen for Para's (I have two Pro Customs) are .110 wide, most front sights are .100 or .110 wide. I'd be interested in knowing what combinations you find. Do you know if it's LPA or Bomar rear sight on it now? I can't remember what the old Para's had.

The two stock mags I have don't have spacers in them.

I emailed back and forth with a rep from Boombah a few months back and was told that they are designing a new trail shoe. Obviously that hasn't happened, I'll email them next week to see. They have a training store about 4 miles from me. The new Turf's look like they would work for most surfaces. They are actually pretty similar to the Trails on the inside portion of the sole. They look like they don't have the same drop as the Trail/Hellcats. Also seems like the bottom is more flat.

I have a MKIV 22/45 Lite with the VQ accurizing kit and the TK flat trigger. Love it. Installed it in a friends gun as well. The TK trigger has pre-travel and over travel adjustments. The plastic on the over travel screw doesn't like brake cleaner. I shoot double stack Para 1911's with 2.5lb triggers and the break on the VQ/TK combo is more crisp than my 1911's.

I do as well, that's why I was asking. I do it initially seated with my arms supported but not the gun. Then I stand and do something like the doubles drill to see where I'm hitting. Although I've been setting mine up to shoot a tick low at 15 yds because I can't seem to put together really good groups at 20.

When you guys zero are you standing, seated, supported, unsupported?

Awesome, thanks!!!

Ha, shot this today as our range had it set up for an all classifier match this weekend. Shooting Limited Major my times looked more like the hit factors I'm seeing here.

It does seem the rear sight options for any model 22/45 are limited. I bought a MKIV 22/45 Lite in January and I'm looking at taking an extra rear sight I bought from Volquartsen's eBay store to a machine shop and have them cut it to .125 width and also cut it deeper. Right now it's .110 wide and it's the new style. I've got a Dawson .100 wide front sight on it. The old style MKIV rear sight was supposedly .125 wide. I don't think it will fit the MKIII. I was shooting a Beretta Neos with a .125 wide front sight. The rear sight blade is plastic so I filed it and ended up at .155 wide and also ended up filing it deeper as well. I compared both guns recently shooting a plate rack and I'm more consistently accurate with the Neos sight setup. Hopefully getting more air gap around the front sight will help. The Ruger rear sight notches are just too narrow and short. Volquartsen lists their rear sight as .110 wide. I'm going to try and get it done next week so I'll post my thoughts on it when I get a chance to shoot it.