Triggerbender

Thanks Darrell, still can't open the thing Fire Fox won't let it go

Jacketed with an open base.

Been searching the forum on these and found some info and looking for more. I am leaning toward trying the 125Gr. RN in a Glock 34 with TG because that is what I have right now. Results, power factor, accuracy, leading or anything you have I would like to hear. Thanks. I have been to their site, it does not have a whole bunch if info on it. Are those shipped prices? Unless it is in the video that I can't watch because of dial up and DSL not available where I live Darrell if you read this I found an old post where you said you had a spread sheet for these in a G34. and I could not get it, if you still have it I am sure a lot of people would love to see it besides me Thanks.

Good idea. Bad idea. The problem is that the plastic rear sight is so fragile that the process of knocking it out will damage the sight so severely there's no way it will survive being reinstalled. It just comes apart. Ask me how I know. I must not be using a big enough hammer. I have successfully done it many times and moved the same sight from one Glock to another. I found in my many yrs. of tinkering that Glock factory sights without exception to be the easiest to remove and replace without damage of any so far.

Not trying to hijack the thread, but would it be safe to assume this would also work on a Glock 17? Should be good to go most all Glocks use the same sights. The G36 seems to be the exception, it always seem to be listed separate.

Knock out the rear sight and turn it around in the dovetail, instant black sight Use front of your choice, something narrower. Ameriglo has them at a reasonable price point.

I've been looking at handguards myself and am not having much luck finding information about the weights of various handguards. I would assume that the carbon fiber versions are the lightest, but the vented aluminum may be as light or lighter. Not sure where to look to find the info. http://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=3&f=12&t=172238

That actually looks like a good option. DPMS also has a stock with something like that built in. But it does make it difficult to do quick adjustments. For carbine length buffers, the Magpul ACS looks pretty good and the ACE M4 SOCOM (long) looks pretty good for rifle length buffers. But until I have a better idea what's going to work for me, I may just get one of these. This is the Sierra model, a few bucks cheaper than the Accuracy Speaks. It will work on an A1/A2 stock, giving a wide range of adj. The only difference between the two is the butt pad is more aggressive on the Sierra, I have both. http://www.sinclairintl.com/product/5733/AR-15-Buttstocks

YUP, been there now throw in drop and cant and it makes a whole new game of it. More drop makes it so you can hold your head in a more upright position with less length. Takes the "stock crawling" out of the mix. You can get a good cheek weld with out having to inch your face up the stock. The adj. Accuracy Speaks Butt ass. on an A2 is still the best fit for me when I don't want adjustability on the run. Cant, length and drop all adj. Spent many hours and dollars as a shotgun shooter to find the exact stock specs that work best for me and like my rifles pretty much the same and the AR platform is the easiest rifle to alter without being a full on stockmaker.

OLY ARMS used to make a nylon 1in. spacer that I used with an A1 length stock works for me. The ACE fixed stock and a spacer would get you approx 1/2 in longer than an A2 without the pad and you could still add the pad for another 1/2 in. You might want to buy a cheap recoil pad and rig it on your A2 just to see how it works out for you before you get all spendy. I found a full inch to be a bit much, could get away with it on a bench or prone but not so much offhand and 3gun type stuff.

Have some others throw out their measurements. I measured mine all at the heel to receiver. Rec to end of stock 10.5in. on the A2. Rec to end of stock 11.5in. on the CTR extended with pad. Rec to end of stock 11.0in. on the M4 extended no pad. Measured the buffer tubes and they are both commercial, from the rec to the longest part of the tube is 7.25in. Magpuls could be shorter I guess??? Went and looked to see what tube I had on the CTR and it was a CAA commercial tube. With rifle buffer the adj butt pads would do it.

I have the same issues. Like SB said CTR. Is the easiest way to go. My CTR fully extended with rubber butt pad on a 6pos. tube (not a Magpul tube standard commercial M4 I got some place) measures close to a full inch longer than an A2. I run it between full out and 1 notch in. Depending on shooting position and optic. I also have a standard M4 6pos. that I fit a standard recoil pad to that I run between full and 1 notch in. My A2s have either Sierra or Accuracy speaks adj. butt assemblies that I set and forget, not made to be adj. on the run. The ACE fixed stock is A1 length without the pad, with the 1/2in. pad it is slightly shorter than an A2. They do make a 1in. pad for it. I also find their stocks do not have enough drop at the toe so I fabbed up some plates that I drilled and tapped for the pad to bolt to that extend the pull, drop the heel and toe and change the cant to fit me. Now they are like a well fit shotgun plug and play. I also have an A1 stock with an OLY Arms 1in. extension that goes between the receiver and the stock on my M16 clone that works perfect for me. They used to make them in two sizes 5/8 and 1in. Not sure if they still do. Oly also used to make a longer tube for carbine style stocks if they still do I think it was 1in. longer also if my rememberer is working. Good luck!

This is what I found when looking into it. http://www.frfrogspad.com/miscellq.htm#duplicate

This answered alot of my ?????????? when I was starting my research. All of them as a matter of fact and I use the link to Sierra load data for the AR alot also on that Page http://www.6mmbr.com/223Rem.html

My experience exactly with the Millet, I handled one on another shooters rifle and found that also. The OLD Simmons was good in that area and why I asked the original question knowing they don't make that exact model any more and the one they now make to replace it is nowhere near the same in any way (size,shape,style,construction or country of origin) other than it does have a Pro Diamond reticle which is larger by the way and less than sub standard in quality I know this because when I ordered the old original part number I was sent this P.O.S. that broke almost immediately. Sent it back to Simmons in hopes of getting what I ordered. No make no more!

Our club used to reclaim it, clean it and add some graphite. Was slightly deformed 8,9 and 7.5 shot and had a few small rocks in it. I pretty much only used for skeet. Probably would not want to use it on trap any farther than the 16yd. line. I used to pan each bag for rocks before using it after I found a score line in my K-80 barrel apparently got between the petals of the wad.

OK, here we go. Simmons used to make a shotgun scope that was well regarded by some, the Pro Diamond 1.5x5. I like the size but have never seen the Weaver V3 1x3 in person and am not sure if the 3 power would be enough for me. Are there any others out there that would be in the same ballpark as the old Pro Diamond? Before I go with the Weaver. Thanks.

I was taught when dry firing a 1911 style weapon with a fine trigger job to hold the trigger back in the fired position, rack slide, then release trigger. When you use that method the sear nose is not being dragged over the half cock/safety hooks and hammer hooks on its way to being cocked reducing wear on the sear angles and edges keeping it crisp longer. That being said with the metals we have today and a proper trigger job I really don't know how much wear and tear it actually causes. Also taught not to drop a slide on an unloaded chamber.

They don't build em like that anymore!!!!!!!!! A true American spirit. Gods Speed to you sir. Sorry for your loss. I had a couple "TUFF'"old guys in my life and miss them daily.

http://www.ar15.com/content/page.html?id=471 http://www.ar15.com/content/page.html?id=422 These are not mine, I am thinking about rigging some thing up and leaning toward the drill press or rigging up a couple tired Makitas I have with a couple LEE trimmers.

Read an article in American Handgunner about their going out of business. It stated they would continue to supply replacement parts. It said to correspond with: Bo-Mar Company 6136 State Highway 300 Longview, Texas 75604 Might be worth a letter or looking up a phone no. Good Luck!

Of the comps I have tried. For quiet in order MSTN Q comp, Nordic, DTNC/AK Concepts then the Miculek (way louder).

Take them to the club and add them to the 22 cases and scrap brass the the youth division accumulate and sell for scrap to buy more 22 ammo.

That's good to hear, I am still bummed I could not get what I ordered. Are you going to loose the shipping both ways? Hope not. I have to try to call tomorrow.

This is what I found after close inspection and serious fiddling. IF you have a "KCI" mag to compare them to please do. The KHANS I got are not even close is what got me cranked up. This is why I ordered KCI, not these!! Mine would not hand cycle out of the box, the back of the liner hit my ejectors and I was afraid if you slapped one in there hard it would break or bend the ejector. Looking at the feed lips the release point is later on the KHAN (longer feed lips by .080/.090in.) compared to your Glock also on the ones I got the feed lips were all tapered from the back .345in. to the front .330in. or less, giving nose down feeds, factory mag is .335in. back to .345in. front. Backasswards!!! All my the KHANS when loaded point the nose of the bullet to the right. Looking at the left side of the mag body at the nose of the follower compared to your Glock the mag body has a big round rib in it compared to a flatter one on a Glock, a genuine KCI is exactly like your Glock. In a tight chambered gun, like with an after market barrel the KHAN feed lips will give you fits. I took the file to two of the mags and shaped the rear of the liner like a Factory Glock or KCI mag and bent the lips the to proper dimension and seem to work in my factory Glocks at this point and sort of work in one with an aftermarket barrel as I have not cut the release point back on the lips yet. A genuine KCI G19 is identical to a Glock and run flawless. The KHAN castings are not sharp and clean on the follower or body, unlike the KCI or GLOCK. If you get lucky and these work in your gun it is because of the Glock reliability factor and not the mags. IMHO! PASS if you are looking for KCI or Glock quality. I have yet to hear from seller and guessing probably won't, I realize this is a busy busy time for these guys but I tend to buy more from people who respond to e-mail questions.