muncie21

Now that helps. If this is an issue with a single bullet profile (my previous assumption was this occurred with all ammo) it's going to be OAL or bullet geometry related, almost guaranteed, as case, mags and gun geometry are all pretty much constants. Since there are lots of folks shooting blue bullets in TSO's my wager would be on the OAL. I don't use blue, so can't provide any guidance there. My BBI loads are around 1.12-1.13.

I run grams guts in all my TSO mags (.40 & 9mm) and don't have the issue you have. Couple of things I'd checkout before changing mags/followers. 1) Remove the magwell and grips and see if this changes anything. 2) With slide locked back, insert a loaded mag and see if the shell case is hitting the ejector, preventing the mag from full seating 3) Check mag release to see if there are any burrs or irregularities that would prevent the mag from seating correctly. 4) If this is a newer TSO with the removable mag release paddle (like the S2) check to see if the paddle making contact with anything

The reason the pin is shiny is because it dropped down far enough to rub slightly when as the slide moved back/forth.

What cartridge did you test this with? On my 650, with either 9mm or .40 a 1/3 pull of the handle doesn't get the case close enough to the power drop to activate it. On the 650 the case is used to activate the powder drop, together with the handle being in the down position. I can picture a tall case being able to active the powder drop at 1/3 pull, but not your typical pistol case; maybe I'm overlooking something....

@22h most seating dies that I've used can also be adjusted to crimp/de-bell/remove taper in the same station. While this can be done, it's more straight forward/simple to seat in one station and remove the bell/crimp in a separate station. Since I seat and crimp/de-bell in two station, I really can't help with your specific issue. There are people that do this, so don't give up hope, it may just take some time as most folks I know use 2 separate stations for these activities. Good luck!

Lee markets two different Factory Crimp Dies (FCD) one for pistol calibers and another for rifle calibers. The design of the dies is also very different. These two factors (perhaps there are others also) leads to a lot of confusion when crimp dies are discussed, especially the Lee brand. Rifle FCD Pistol FCD

I have had the same issue with 9mm cases. It didn't happen all the time and switching to a lee sizing die (from Dillon) fixed the issue.

Do you have a chrono to verify the difference in PF/velocity between 3.2 and 3.0gr? Aside from using a chrono to get a somewhat accurate measurement, I cannot comment on TG as I use a different powder. 1.08 is not unreasonable for a CZ. My TSO requires an OAL of 1.08-1.09 for some 9mm bullet profiles to plunk/spin.

So you're keeping the Shadow 5 & 6 for yourself and only selling off the 'old' stuff...

I shot Area 8 and like a few others that actually shot the match mention, the RO wasn't as close to the 180 as the picture/video make it seem, at least not when my squad shot that stage. For those that weren't there, a sketch from the match book is below. While not 100% accurate it gives you and idea of where the shooter needed to stand in order to hit the targets on the left, while standing in the box on the right side.

Curious if you're shooting the .400 or the .401 bullets in .40 from BBI.

Another vote for the Vibra prime. Fills up a primer tube in about 10-seconds.

You can pickup Taylor Tactical springs for 2011s on Stoeger's web site. I ordered a set, but haven't had a chance to test them out yet.

Some people use the CZC extended safety, which has more of a 'rocker switch' action. Instead of putting your thumb under the safety to engage, you push down on the rear of the safety.

Looks to be a standard 2011 grip screw and bushing. Any of the vendors that sell 2011 parts will likely have them. Be prepared to spend more than the cost of the screw/bushing , for shipping.

My $0.02 Either- a) The springs springs in the mags that don't lock back are slightly weaker/short. Unlikely, but easy enough to test using the mags that do lock back b) the 'notch' on the mags that don't lock back is cut slightly lower than on the ones that work. More likely, but harder to test as it won't take much of a difference in placement between working and not working. So it will be harder to 'eye ball' the mags to see the difference.

Not all parts get the 5% discount. MBX 2011 mags are one of the ones that don't, at least as of today.

Here's the process I use on my 650 when developing new loads. 1) Rough set dies and create several dummy rounds 2) Measure overall length (OAL) then case gauge them 3) Confirm these dummies cycle through the gun manually, headspace properly & plunk/spin in the barrel 4) Confirm OAL hasn't changed because of hand cycling through the pistol. 5) Determine starting powder drop. Desert T provided some good suggestions. 6) Rather than weigh each case, I tare a lightweight container and cycle 10 drops into it, weigh the result and divide by 10. This gives you an good estimate of the charge weight for each round. 7) Repeat step 6 two additional times to confirm consistent drops. 10 ) Load 10 rounds of each charge weight. For our sport, I typically increase in increments of 0.2 grains. 11) Shoot 2 strings of 5 rounds each across the chrono, starting with the lightest charge weight. 12) Recover shell casings and inspect spent case and primer. This is especially important when working with non-standard/published loads like 9 major. 13) Once you're satisfied, move on to the next higher rung of your ladder. One could spend a lot of time in the above 'do loop' however the point of diminishing returns comes pretty quick, considering the size of the typical USPSA/IDPA target and the distances they are shot at.

I used to verify the readings on my cheap electronic scales with my beam scale. After doing this a few hundred times, and seeing the values were pretty darn close, I packed up the beam scale and now use 2 cheap scales (at the same time) to verify my powder drops. If both scales read within a couple hundredths of a grain of each other, I'm pretty confident the weight is accurate within a few tenths. I don't need better accuracy than that for this sport and the loads I shoot.

The info from IMSI makes a lot of sense. Thanks for sharing the link.

I suspect the scale's native precision is 0.01 grams, which is 0.15 grains. Since the scale is only displaying 1 decimal in grains (0.x) the readings can be +/- 0.2 (0.15 grains, rounded up) difference and still be within scale tolerance. Remember this isn't a precision balance we are dealing with here.

I run an 11# recoil spring so for me the slide speed is noticeably slower shooting 147s at the same power factor as a 135 or 124 bullet.

That's the FA branded one. There's a generic one that's similar. Link here Here's another cheap scale that I've had good luck with- Link At this price level you're getting similar quality (IMO) so it's kind of a crap shoot. Just make sure you're getting one that measures at least 2 decimals in grams, which will be ~0.2 grains. Which means your measured value could be off by +/- 0.2 grains. There are cheap scales that claim to measure in increments of 0.001 grams (~0.02 grains) however I'm skeptical if this third decimal is actually that useful/accurate.

If you're powder funnel is getting that beat up after only 6000 rounds, something's not right.

I have, and have shot both, in USPSA limited division. Neither pistol made me progress to GM Both are very capable pistols, seems to be a matter of personal preference.