Tom C

Daaaannnnnnnggggggggggg! Nice

I eagerly await your video.-ld you honestly think JM just walked up and knew exactly where to aim a pistol to hit a balloon at 1000 yards? Absolutely not Sarge. I do suspect he had the math worked out well ahead of his first attempt (of course how many attempts before he commited to video is something we don't know). To me the impressive thing is that he did it without the benefit of a rest. Excellent control.

Plastic is a complete misnomer. The most popularly manufactured firearms that might be refered to as "plastic" are no more plastic than clips are magazines. It's appreciated that some people prefer metal over polymer...but refering to a polymer as plastic is about as accurate as refering to metal firearms as recycled beer cans. Thank you for putting up with my rant. Tango Charlie out.....

What it really comes down to is, what works for you. The index finger on the trigger guard doesn't work fo me BUT I've seen too many good to outstanding shooters use the index finger/trigger guard technique and tear up the targets. If it works...use it...If it doesn't work...try something else.

I use Grip Master but I also "curl" stressing my wrists using moderate weights.

Welcome. I have similar issues re: "seeing" the front sight. I wear reading glasses I selected for their ability to allow me to see the font sight clearly. I'm also a "C" Production shooter but I'm 60...not 45. lol

Earlier I posted "I hate Illinois gun laws". Having put Illinois behind me I LOVE making correct decisions. Left my self defense firearm home...Heard on the news about a Pennsylvania woman driving into new Jersey with her licensed weapon (and CHL), got stopped for swerving and owned up to her having her weapon. She was arrested. Here's hoping the Governor of N.J. steps in to help her. Yes she was careless but come on folks.....this is...or used to be America. I'm glad I left my S.D.W. home this last trip.

True enough you can improve lockup by improving the slide to frame fit but that is not the typical "fix" for these types of problems in Glocks. Most time the problem is the locking block followed by one of any number of issues with the barrel. While seldom necessary, if you have a Glock Armorer in your area I'd take the weapon and a sample target to him/her (include some the unused ammunition from the box used to shoot this group) and have them give it a once over. Yes there are costs involved but if you are not comfortable doing work on a Glock for yourself, an Armorer becomes a resonable compromise. And FYI...I am NOT a Glock Armorer but have one close by and his detail skills have kept my Glock in the "game" for well over 100,000 rounds with no change in accuracy.

If your plan is to use the Glock 17 or 34 for competition only the 34 is probably the better choice. What makes the decision in the end would be, using the ammunition you plan to use in competition, which one gives you the "better grouping" at 25 yards shooting a 1 second or quicker cadence. Tango Charlie out.

I was just reading the posts regarding the USPSA RO scandal. Such a shame an RO took such inappropriate actions. I do not believe this particular issue is systemic in the shooting sports and hope the USPSA members who were impacted and or upset by the RO's actions recover their trust in their shooting sport. I know I know, this is an IDPA site but this is no time for gloating or jeering. It's a time to live and let live. Shoot the sport you like, enjoy the sport you like. For most of us it's for fun anyway.

Not only are you taking that idea too literally, whoever "coined" that phrase is 100% wrong. You MUST interact with the firearm and its recoil for it to "return" to it's original position. Mike Seeklander has some excellent videos dealing with grip and control (as seen above). You do not need the strength of body builder to manage recoil. It's how we manage that recoil

In the local matches I have shot where movement was in the written briefing and read to all shooters, and the shooter does NOT move, the SO PE finger pops out and NOTHING is said during the shoot. After the range is safe the SO announces the time and any PE's if needed. At that time the SO explains what the shooter did wrong.

What if they are missing one index finger? lmao..Yea...I knew what ya meant. Surrender, fingers touching ears (if using plugs), fingers touching hearing protectors (if wearing the more classic ear muff style).

Chuck, now you have me curious. IF...(have to start the question with if) GOF gets an answer regarding membership numbers from IDPA HQ, will you accept those numbers or be dismissive of them? And if you are dismissive of the numbers (assuming GOF is able to provide any) then who do we believe and why?

"To change course would be an admittance that IDPA is a SPORT and possesses a COMPETITIVE aspect to participation" Yes sir. IDPA has rules (some make sense, some don't) so it has to be a sport and, since it has shooter rankings (Novice, marksman, sharpshooter etc) it has to have competative aspects to participation. Personally, I have no idea if IDPA will crash and burn as a sport, I hope it will survive. I have my own opinions about why IDPA was formed BUT I think they are not appropriate for this forum. As for me, using IDPA as I do, I feel I've learned more about myself and my handgun shooting IDPA even though the round counts are fewer than USPSA. To me it's tomatos, tomatoes. I enjoy shooting and I enjoy the social aspects of IDPA much as I did USPSA and I'll probably find myself doing double duty in the future. This time though, I'll shoot USPSA with my Glock 19 as opposed to my Glock 34. In either sport the only one I'm competing against is me. If we are shooting, we are learning.

When I served as section coordinator in Area 4 we used the RFID displays for the crowd but, at that time, the only official time came off the timer in the RO's hand (yea, I didn't read all posts so forgive me if I'm rehashing anything). It was my understanding that, when scoring went electronic the timer info including time was downloaded and, till people were satisfied with the systems performence, a printout would be made. I've since stopped shooting USPSA and moved to IDPA..blemishes and all, but subject brought up in this thread should bother all honest people. I remember witnessing some shooters getting "better" treatment than others...in both venues. To be honest, I've had some calls at local matches go my way when they really shouldn't have. I don't believe the "nods" at local matches are systemic (I sure hope not anyway). As shooters, regardless of sport, we have to police ourselves and strive to always keep it clean. BTW...I might be rejoining USPSA in the near future. To me if I'm shooting I'm learning, and I do love shooting, handguns especially.

I track my match to match performence on an excel spread sheet looking mostly at My points down as, due to bad knees, speed is not a place I expect to see dramatic improvement. My effort is to reduce points down closer to a par with the better shooters of that given match.

I was at the neighborhood gun store yesterday afternoon and had occasion to handle a Glock 42. The front site is, indeed, now a threaded installation but the front site material is still plastic. Not entirely damnable but, being who I am I prefer it be metalic over plastic (front site that is). Bad? No. Could be better? Yes.

Ya know.\, I've never thought of my Glock 19 as an accuracy (tack driver) tool but as a self defense tool. To that end I practice with it at 15 yards and, at that range range and running between 0.5 sec and 1 sec cadence, I keep 100 rounds in a 4 inch (center mass) group. And yes, save the changing of the Glock sights to Trigicon night sights, my Glock 19 is, in all other respects, stock. I do also use it in IDPA and hold my own out to 35 yards.

I wear Bi-Focals and, try as I might, can not get a satisfactory front sight picture. I keep two pairs of readers (main and backup) in my shooting bag and, when competing, I switch between readers for shooting and bi-focals for normal wear. Doing this I personally have had no issues with my eyes making the transition and find picking up the front sight quite easy. Bottom line...This works for me. You find what works for you and stick with it.

Detail question Chase. What distance is she shooting her Sig at? If she's relatively new to 9mm, ya might consider 5-7 yards for confidence building. Is she shooting the first round double action or is she shooting the single action pull across the board? We all have our opinion and I'm not sayin mine are necessarily right for her but, I have worked with a number of female shooters and have drawn on some of Mike Seeklanders videos as teaching aids. M.S. is pretty sharp and spot on with a number of his drills. Between his videos and some "coaching" I've turned out some fair to decent female shooters.

I think that's normal. Wish I could look at it directly. I like the idea of using a second gun to diagnose. I checked this (recoil spring drops a little) on my Glock. I found my recoil springs drops a little as well. It's only had failures to go to battery when I milked the slide.

So let's make sure we understand this situation. This is a brand new firearm and before you fired even one round down range you took it apart and modified it thus you have no baseline performence to know what the firearm was doing before you "improved" it. This, in all cases with any new firearm, is a fundamental error. Yes Glocks are pretty darned easy firearms to work with/on and, because of this, they are easy to make mistakes with as well. Assuming you called Glock, how did they respond to this issue? It's always good to close the loop when a problem is discussed.

When i bought my Glock 19 (gen 3) back in the 90's, the front sight was simply pressed in. The result was many Glocks used in competition had the front post (sight) knock completely out of the slide and the rear, adjustable, sight was really cheezy (IMHO). I replaced it's sights with Trijicon night sights, front sight loc-tited in place, rear sight added a negligable amount of site radius. I have no experience with the new sites from Glock so my recomendation for replacing Glocks sites is based on ancient (in terms of firearms technology) history. The new sites (Gen 4) may well be perfectly functional.

Much as Glock tries, their Q.C. is only as good as the inspector on the line at the time and the combinations of tolerances of the parts. You might have a Glock that, regardless of the truisms out there, shoots no matter what you do to it. If that's the case...rock on. A slight thining of the breachface within the +/- tolerances allowed, a striker at the max length of the tolerances...It's impossible to know without going to some rather extreme lengths to analyze all factors. Be happy, shoot often.