barrysuperhawk

I started out just using a regular AR carbine case, but I wanted more pockets. Then I started using a take down shotgun hard case, and it worked better, but it was awkward, and I hated taking my PCC apart every time because its always so dirty. Not having a case that can contain my PCC while assembled is also awkward at some matches with less progressive attitudes... I think I want a discrete case of some type, but I am torn between the longer ones that still scream GUN CASE!!! and the shorter ones that require disassembly. So, what do y'all haul your PCC's around in?

I ended up using a stock Glock 9mm follower (older, not pointy) and I get 43 (no closed bolt reload) or 42 re loadable on closed bolt. Right now I am just using a stretched stock ETS spring, but I get weak feeding for the last few rounds. I will probably swap in one of the TACCOM 36 coil springs even though I may lose a round or two...

At least Angel's reasoning makes a little sense. Most of the people that want to screw with HM rules by allowing this or that into it only want to because they dislike the class or feel the need to boost attendance in an intentionally limited class. One problem I see, over and over however, is the special snowflake concept (forgive me) of "BUT I WANT to shoot in [whatever class] but I don't have [required equipment] so you need to change the RULES of [whatever class] to accommodate me" outlook. Some MD's cave in to that mentality, and you get the hodgepodge of rules that we currently see. Can you imagine if Nascar started allowing euro spec rally cars in their races?

I shot this game for almost 20 years after having nothing that advice before I actually took it to heart

I use Safariland and Bladetech gear mostly, and my current 9mm PCC pouch is a Safariland paddle with a Bladetech DOH attachment, and a Bladetech double mag pouch. I picked a safariland paddle because it is the strongest, most stable paddle I have ever found, and since I shoot alot in street clothes, I don't have to carry a dedicated gunbelt rig. I have had to re-train myself to NOT grab the end / base pad but instead to drab about mid-magazine. I also have a Safariland open top triple, but I have never been able to get it to adjust so the middle mag is draw-able... For the .45 it's much harder because Grease gun mags don't fit in anything. For a while I tried to use FN57 nylon mag pouches, but they sucked, so now I just run a couple of big ass magnets...

"if you are shooting all A's you are shooting too slow" "Move your feet" (a reference to the shooters that run, stop , plant, settle, shoot, then run again.) You CAN miss fast enough to win, but you have to miss quite quickly indeed.. (told to me after a GM beat me, with a mike, but also cut 3 seconds off my time (12 sec run vs 15 sec)

I was getting failures to feed with the stock recoil spring that I attributed to the cases being slightly rougher and more abrasive thus providing more resistance against the feed lips of the mag when the gun was not pristinely clean. When I switched to a JP spring, it was too strong for the loads, and I would get bolt over base jams. The federal Aluminum is worse though. It is weak, and has an abrasive case too, and the case is also weak.

I vote for the basement. I reloaded on a converted microwave cart for years...

I already am using the JP 308 spring, which is much thicker and stronger than the stock spring

Dumb question, is there an internal difference (depth) between .milspec buffer tubes and commercial?

I am worried I might have to machine my BHO a bit, but otherwise I am happy. When I lock open now, the 308 carbine spring seems to be at 100% mechanical compression and I am just able to barley get it to engage. I am going to see if I can convince Phase 5 to maybe machine one special for me with alot more meat on the business end since it is ONLY used for locking open during administrative loading and unloading, so I would like to move the point at which it physically engages the bolt a bit forward in the gun, and maybe shape the engagement area to be a bit more solid rather than just a point. Maybe there is a market for that...

Ok, I have a range report, without pictures or video, sorry. First off, the JP carbine spring next to the stock ATI spring, holy crap! Much MUCH heavier and stronger!!! I guess I never really thought about how much heavier .308 springs would have to be, or ever cleaned the 308's that I have on the same day as the 223's to be able to compare. I run a phase 5 bolt catch because it simplifies the unload and show clear process, and now it takes a bit of effort to actually lock the bolt open. One of the other competitors that shoots PCC had had his CMMG buffer self destruct on him a couple weeks ago, so when I took mine out, I noticed that it was pretty beat up too. So, since our weekly league had it's classifier night on the 2nd of NOV, I signed up twice for CM-99 Melody Line . The first run was with the bone stock ATI parts, and then for the second run I installed a JP bolt, Blitzkrieg buffer, and the JP 308 carbine spring. I cut .7 seconds off my time the second time around with identical hits (9A, 3C) While there are no douple taps on Melody line, I think that was as close of a head to head victory for the new parts as one could ask for. This week we had a different match, with 4 headshot double taps, 4 full size targets, and a 6 plate rack. I ran it twice, and subjectively felt that the dot tracked alot smoother. On the first run I used 100 round (non-crimped primer) WWB 9mm 115's. On the second run, for grins I used Winchester Ranger 124 +p Q4362 which is noticibly hotter even in the PCC. It recoiled harder but maybe the extra oomph actually made the comp work a bit because my scores were virtually identical. I will have to shoot it more, and maybe do a couple more back to back parts swap matches, but I think this combo is a winner so far.

I got a JP Carbine spring...in fact it just arrived today. So, JP bolt, JP spring, and Blitzkreig buffer... Testing to follow.

OK, so possibly they were using contract overrun brass for WWB?

Er. that is the difference that I was trying to illustrate. 9mm NATO is 124 gr and comes in 50 round boxes. What I bought is the 115gr 200 round value pack from wally world. This: NOT this: The head stamps on my wally world ammo are identical to the NATO pictured above, INCLUDING the crimped primer, but with a 115 gr bullet.

Ok, I caught a sale on Blitzkreig's own website, so I have a Blitzkreig buffer and a JP spring on the way and will report the differences. I have also noticed something very interesting, the WWB 9mm 115 we all know and love is DIFFERENT when it comes in a 200 round pack. I bought 5 of these from a wally world and every one has a nato cross, crimped primer case and "WCC 17" head stamp. They are also noticibly hotter than the standard no crimp "win 9mm luger" head stamped 115's. I noticed the head stamps right off, but when shooting a mixed mag, I get the bang, bang, BANG, bang, BANG bad enough that the RO asked if I was shooting different ammo. I have not had a chance to chrono...

Well, it seemed the organizers wanted a dumbed-down USPSA style format, and they got it.

the absolute irony of this is I had a RCBS powder measure then I got rid of a couple of years ago because I figured I'd never use it again since I don't do any more single stage loading As far as the locations of the powders, that's a direct quote from the other dude, most of those powders I've never bought or tried.. as far as powders that I have already, I've got a Miss Mash leftover from when everybody was panicked couple of pounds of CFE couple of pounds of benchmark about a half a pound of Varget. I've got a bit more reloader 15 and some BLC 2 but I don't have enough of any one powder to do this deal. The last time I did this it was 2500 rounds of Hornady 155 Amax's over blc2, and with the exception of the fact that I had not learned to segregate the LC brass from everything else I was very happy with the results, and I shot from that "lot" for quite a while. This time around I'm going with 155 Sierra match Kings, and the only variation I intend on is probably 10% Less in the LC brass that I have, and that stuff will be set aside. I suppose I could use the LC brass to soak up the random lots of powder, but I just hate having 175 of this load and 220 of that load and so on.

Since I am coming to the end of my last bulk reloading marathon stash, this winter is going to be another round of Loading .308 until my arm falls off. I am going to be loading Sierra 155's again, since they are the most generally accurate in all of my guns (16" AR, 18" AR, m1a, 20" AR, 24" AR, 24" Bolt, FAL). I have experimented with different powders in the interim, only to end up with several varieties that just flat didn't work in my Dillon powder measure, and others that despite being within book tolerances REALLY did not like some of my guns. So, since I am kinda low on powder, and I am not locked into any given load I am starting from scratch on my powder choice. I found this post on another site from 2011 by someone calling themselves Frankenmauser: This seems to bear out my experiences, in that it seems as I go down the list my metering consistency goes to hell, with some of the results being +/- several grains out of my Dillon. One of the anomalies is Varget. It should be similar to 322 or benchmark, but it was awfukl. It may be the most accurate powder in the world, but it is useless if I cant get it to meter well. If I have to spend another couple hundred on a different powder measure and adapters, is it really worth it? (My mind is not really made up on this point, so if it IS worth it, convince me.) So, what I would like to do in this thread is build a more up-to-date list of the best and worst powders based on metering consistency out of a DILLON powder measure, then Match those choices up with the calibers I load and decide which powder I am going to buy enough of to make the hazmat worth it...

Ok, so is there a difference between the hydraulic buffers? Is the blitzkrieg better than any of the other choices, or is that just what you have?

Okay I will try to summarize. Point number one don't shoot 115's, point number two shoot 124s, point number three use the tacom adjustable buffer and a rifle spring and tune is necessary. I think I am going to go with a heavier spring first, and see if I can tell a difference. ( mostly because I already have them laying around and thus don't need to buy anything). One of my fellow Shooters blew up is buffer tonight, apparently he had a carbine buffer and a standard spring in it and the rubber part of the carbine buffer mushroomed out and split and locked the gun up. So I'm going to look very closely at my buffer when I pull it out to see if there's any damage on it. Personally I don't want to give up on the 115es because they're so darn cheap. Does anyone know if there's someplace making an SJC or better style brake for a 9mm? Does a 9mm even have enough poof at the end of its Barrel to make it break work?

Well I promise to publish any solutions I come up with if they're not online already

Actually I have not called him yet, mostly because I'm really bad about remembering to call during business hours, it's usually 7:30 pm during the week, or when I'm in the middle of something else that I think "oh yeah I need to call"

I went with a 26" barrel and like it much better than I thought I would. I was worried it would be too long, being used to a 20" barrel previously. The only concern I might have is the stages where you have to maneuver in tight quarters for example (fast forward to 25:40):

The 2 guns are a high profile DPMS .308 upper and a long action Savage. The high profile upper was what gave me the idea because it takes regular height rings, and I have a plan for the MOA difference, too. Back in the day before mil-dots or ranging reticles became popular one thing a shooter could do is zero the top post of the 30/30 reticle at 100 yards. That would give the shooter a poor mans BDC with 3 aiming points, the top, the cross and the bottom post. Then all one had to do is figure out what ranges the other two points corresponded to. Not perfect, but in some cases much more accurate than trying to dial the elevation - especially with a cheaper scope that would hold zero but not track especially well or did not have turrets. The 20 moa rail on the bolt gun is the is the key. Lets pretend that in my magical world both of these guns are 100% mechanically identical (no, really, pretend) the difference between the zeros will be 20MOA. Thus with this reticle: a dead center zero for the DPMS ought to be mechanically identical to the 20 MOA line (just above the <--.75 in the picture) Thus, with a bit of testing, I should be able to figure out roughly where my zeros are, and be able to dial myself at least on paper without a shot after I test the swap and shoot a couple of times. Neither of these are go-to-war guns and if I ever find a competition for them, I will be well and verified on my zero long before my cold bore shot.