tim_w

Will a Ruger SP101 2.25' 5 shot fit in the IDPA BUG-R box? Ruger lists parallel length as 7.2" The box while 6.5" x 4.625" x 1.375" is just a couple thou shy of 8" from opposing corners. It would sure be nice to have that longer grip. Otherwise I am planning on running a 640 pro even though my gorilla hands leave me with a pinkie flying solo.

Just saw this is a shadow so it has that shorter throat. Should be fine but check any with 147 go plunk. Also that's a 1:10 or 16 twist barrel? Can't recall offhand. You may find around 4.8gr N320 to be your best 115HAP load. Play with the oal just a tiny bit given your short throat Not sure how long you can go. Power pistol and WSF(5.3gr of wsf was a good 115hap) is quite popular as well but second to the VV overall but doubt you can not get screaming accuracy from any of those. The HAP & XTP are considered the gold standard. The xtp being top by a very small edge. Many of these guys test off ransom rests. Some of the less frugal guys will shoot the 147gr xtp @25yd for a soft shooting high accuracy load. 4.2gr wsf has worked well @ 1.151. Many guys more frugal like the 115 ZERO CONICAL as you can sometimes get them for around $100/2k for $0.05/bullet great deal for a jhp or 147 JFP.

If you are shooting official bullseye then you have short line 25y and long line 50y course of fire. While accuracy is paramount we mainly concentrate on the longline load and tend to go lightly and softer as shortline is easier. The 115 HAP is definitely the bullet or the xtp of same weight for absolute ultimate accuracy i.e. 50y load. The powder you want is VV N340 not 320 For max accuracy slow powders with snappy pressure vel in the 1225 range New brass or brass set thru a push thru die. Coke shaped cases do not achieve the very best accuracy. Starline or lapua brass but the loads I use are off starline cases. 115 HAP Starline Case VV N340 4.9-5.4gr (best usually around 5.3gr) 1.100 COAL 0.375 crimp Win Primer 5" Barrel Vel 1230-1240fps Well setup gun 1.0" & under @ 50yd If this is just indoor pistol league type 25yd then you can get way with lighter loads like 3.8-4.2 gr n320 or 4.3 power pistol play with COAL 1.090-1.115 depend on setup you may need to swap recoil springs. This load from your tests looks good. Maybe play with COAL and if not already use a 0.375 crim. Changing recoil springs can help tune the feel for you as long as it functions. Hornady HAP 115gn, 4.1gn 1119-1135fps, SD 5.7 Bench rest: 1 5/8” Freestyle: 2” From shooting 3gun and IPSCA going to Bullseye the stance and single grip takes time. The first time I saw what a real top bullseye gun and load could do at 50yd rested it was an eye opener. Seeing sub 1" for 10 shots @50yd iis Impressive to say the least. Watched a guy tuning his 50yd match load put 10 into 3/4". Snappier for 25yd but accurate and n320 load 115HAP 4.8gr n320 1.090-1.100 .375 crimp CCI Primer Starline brass Ideal most controllable recoil load that will get you to 1'-1.25" rested. Good luck You could go over to https://www.bullseyeforum.net Do some searches or join and ask question. They are a super helpful bunch.

You sure they weigh the same as the stock I is a short dust cover and the II is a FL dust cover ? Not to mention the SI has a tradition barrel profile and the SII has the beefer cone. I know you loose a 1/4" in barrel length so maybe that does not work out to much increase but the DC difference I would think surely would. Its gotta be worth 3-4 oz no? Then again I have been wrong plenty before so........at least I am getting good at something LOL

Elgin and Jay, Thank you guys very much. That is what I was looking for. Wanted to see what it would take to make them work to have options. Your right those EGD look great. Wish I could have both those looks and the grip friction like the Lok. But performance before looks is usually the way I go. Talking about the frames sure can be confusing as full size or comp frames do not give proper description because of how they have used the frames in various models. Competition frame would work if it was not for the Witness Elite Match which is one of the two with a short dust cover rounded trigger guard frame. And two of the Stock models have the comp and some use cone barrels and others do not etc. Its all a mix and match of various specs. SA Only DA/SA Rail no rail cone traditional barrel profile etc... There are many more square TG, FLDC frame models so the others are the scarcer ones in terms of offered models. Only the Elite Match and Stock I have the short dust cover and rounded trigger guard. The prior with rail and SA only with cone barrel. The former sans rail, in DA/SA, with trad barrel profile. So no other consistency I can tell other than the obvious on the frame i.e DC and TG profiles. So the two different "series" of full size frame Tanfoglio are : 1: FLDC/STG Frames - Full length dust covers: that all have the square trigger guard and cone barrels both DA/SA and SA only. 2: SLDC/RTG Frames - short length dust covers: that are all rounded trigger guards and traditional barrel profiles available both DA/SA and SA Only. I have rather large hands so any of the grips feel good enough for me. But sometimes you get that perfect fit and if the frame fits your hand well to its soooo sweet. Feels like an extension of your hand and locks in with no pressure points at all. Had a 1911 like that. I guess for only two models the SDC RTG are a low enough number the selection is rather limited aftermarket. I wonder if someone would send in a gun to say LOK and let him work up the proper specs for the CNC if they would start offering them? It would only cost them programing time which they already have most of the spec dimensions in. If I had a duty sidearm I think I would rather have the SDC RTG with the light rail frame vs the FLDC/STG These days I think if I was allowed I would have it milled for a RDS as well.

Are the fire control parts the same in the Compact steel witness and the full size witness such as the Stock Series? Hammer Sear Trigger Bolo etc?

Can someone that maybe has both post a pic of what the mis-match grips look like on the match vs standard TG frames? Where the gaps are etc?

Great thanks

is it just the pic angle and shadowing or does it look like the rear lug is dragging upon the slide for some distance as its lowering and unlocking? The lugs are not clearing the slide as it unlocks and lowers? Looks like the 12oclock +/-5min to each side on the lug is dragging. Maybe its just the image?

JE85, THANK YOU!!!! That right there is awesome measurement info. Exactly what is needed to know what needs to be done. Great!!

I have been considering one of the Patriot barrels myself. Do not fret the barrel fitting on these guns. It is much simpler than on a 1911. Tech its even easier that a gunsmith fit on some of the striker fired guns. Your experience you will have no issues at all. Have actually been thinking about looking at one of the 40 cal barrels and use my 10mm reamer to get a nice match 10mm barrel for mine. I get fairly good groups but I am one of those always looking for more and I like my tools to fit to tight tolerances. What can I say I like consistency. Its not practical in terms of competition and cost return but I am an accuracy guy and still enjoy bullseye type shooting. The only thing in using a reamer is taking a chance of having a small step depending on their reamer spec and wear vs mine. Usually not an issue though. Glad recutting the crown got your some more accuracy. Follow what others have recommended and your game plan seem solid. I have found having my loads COAL just enough to clean the lands so it just makes the "plunk" test (about the same jump you posted unless I measure each round). That and just barely enough crimp to take the flare away yields best accuracy. That's been my experience anyways but others may have differing experiences. The other thing with 9mm is for best accuracy use new cases. I always seem to be the best accuracy in both 9mm and 45 using new cases. Usually starline and sometimes if I am lucky I find lapua for a decent price but its rare.

I have got to think there are some tolerance issues going on as too many people running the same ammo and spring combos some no issues ever others all sorts of sporadic issues. Glad the spring seems to have taken care of your issues.

I have never considered to set up a M&P for open but seeing yours makes me really want to take my Pro Core Gen1 and make it a 9mm major. I normally do not like the look of the add on for open but your open gun looks great. I like how low that 90° mount gets you cmore. Did you tighten the slide to frame fit given the frame mount? Not to hijack this thread further so... Do you have a thread link where you go into the specs etc on your build?

miss post wrong thread oops

What you can see from the different recipes that seem to work is Any grease on the rails and any oil where needed and to keep her running. LOL I can not tell you how many times my firearms lube meant nothing more than going to the automotive section at Walmart. LOL Hell I bet I could get away with the filtered lard we just rendered from the cow we butchered for the yr. Personally what I prefer because it makes me feel better in low temps and all conditions is Xf7 grease and Slip 2K EWL oil. Its the combo that works great in all my guns handguns and ARs bolt alike. In the ARs and other gas guns it makes cleaning up bcg and pistons a breeze. No chipping away at high rd count carbon build up. Just swipes off when I put that light base coat of grease.

Will that reliably set off Win primers as well as Fed? I have always worried about the decreased DA hammer stroke. Your mod to the bolo seems to address that which gives me high hope it works with Win primers as well. Be nice to have such a light smooth DA that works with primers other than perfectly seated Feds Only. Then again all I have to do to cure by DA pull bitching is one range session with one of my J frames or if I am feeling extremely abusive one of the 22 MAG versions. Nothing a like a 15lb DA to make a smooth 7-8lb DA to feel like Gods gift. LOL

Je85, So is the main difference in fitment between SPO1 and Shad2 the depth (length) of the post that goes thru the body to lock the slide to frame with the notch at where the flat end and the round continues or is it the tab. It seems that way in the comparison pictures but I have seen pic that end up not being visual accurate enough because of photo angle shadows etc... Which part of the slide stop dimension is holding the Shadow2 slide stop out from the frame body in your pic? I hope that is not too confusing to understand the parts of the slide stop I am referencing. It seems that is what you are saying in your post with the comparison I just want to be clear as that seems like a fairly simple mod to do with a file if you needed to. My only question would be if the offset (the gap between frame and slide stop) is larger/wider than the notch width it self. If not would the notch needing to be slightly wider cause issues or a loose fit? I hope that makes sense. A person would have to file the end tip shorter and then recut the notch. But if the amount needed to shorten the end is less than the width of the notch you could end up with a larger notch width depending how the part fit. If that is not an issue it seems like a fairly simple mod. with a couple files or a mill.

Wow do you feel better now? Way to be so helpful!?! Seriously is that how you talk to people that ask for help in your life? Are you that rude to people face to face? Ever consider the op may have just made a mistake in naming CZ since he had mentioned them given its a clone or maybe does not understand the relationship between CZ and Tango (which is none other than Tango being based off the CZ design.) Maybe asking questions about his typical group sizes he is capable of vs just about flat out accusing him of having no idea about any of in a very sarcastic way from some perceived position of superiority? I do believe the OP stated he could shoot very tight groups with his Canik which should indicate he has enough skill to shoot better groups. Of course someone could always ask how it was shooting those groups but then where the fun in that when you can just be insulting and rude!?! Maybe I am missing it but please show me where the Op has done anything to show arrogance or lack of appreciation for the help given etc??? Was it when it thanked the responders with actual recommendations and took and applied those recommendations? People said to try larger bullet sizes and he stated to be proceeding to do that and was thankful for the recommendation. Was it when you stated he had tried all the popular bullet weights on a few different range sessions. In the same post he gave clear evidence he was capable of much better groups with other guns? Was it when he mentioned checking the barrel and noticing the crown was bad and then showed he has at least certain level of experience given he recrowned his barrel and stated in a manor that he was familiar with the process?? Was it when he politely asked for help for info on how to fully disassemble his gun? OR was it just the one mistake he made in his comments asking about what the manf of the barrel would do if the barrel was proven defective but made a mistake in the name of the manf?? Oh yes was a arrogant jerk lets just his S#@T for that. That covers EVERY post you made in response to the OP. Well other than the one you edited out and if your other comments are any indication that would have been a real peach as well.

Ok thanks. I was only looking at the weights and knew others using the forward set kits had achieved very light pulls. But I had also seen posts around the net of people not being able to go near that low. I do know that Randy specifically stated when first testing out the 2.0 that he could get pull weights lower than he ever could get the 1.0 without getting flutter. Then you had people using the DCAEK triggers etc and trying to use the comp spring kits and not being able to bring trigger pulls down as low as the 1.0 because of the increased bearing surface and friction of the 2.0 and its larger frame rails etc. All the back and forth because of the different kits and parts is what confused me about what people were saying. Hence my question above. Thanks for the tip to search for the chart on APEX pulls weight combos. I have done similar as you plan for your 2.0 but I still had a 1.0 5" CORE 9. It's the poster boy for being fully Apex'd. Flat Face Alum Forward Set Kit, Extractor, their gunsmith fit barrel. First I tighten up slide to frame but not 1911 match tight as that effects the barrel lug fit. Polished everything that touched anything. I do agree though its amazing what a good polish job alone can do to the feel of a trigger. Just got done doing a few J frame for some people. Polished everything up before I even made a spring change and it was night and day difference. Swear S&W must be trying on purpose to make triggers a gritty, heavy, and uneven as possible. None of them would even register on the trigger pull tester. They were all over 13lb and my guess is one of them was 15+. The all time worst trigger I ever pulled on was a j frame 22 mag they are still producing. It could give you a finger cramp after a few mins of shooting. LOL Do not even want to guess the trigger pull on that thing. Putting the large round in a brand new mag too less pressure.

Just want to point out that the aussie barrel is not a match barrel its a standard factory barrel that had to be increased in length a tiny amount to make it legal for private ownership in oppressive countries like Aus and I think Denmark, They were offered for sale separately as well as in the Shadows from CZ HQ CZ USA as well as other vendors such as CZC etc. Nothing special about that barrel other than a less tight bushing fit because of the extended length thru the bushing, Given they are no longer available a factory barrel would be a comparable barrel. The AUS barrel was only 0.225 longer. Others that got them it was a look thing not performance. It is not a custom/match barrel. The guns accu-shadow that got a match barrel was teh Accu-Shadow Black and that barre was USA made. My guess is it was a KKM barrel but that's only a educated guess. IIRC the Aus barrels were first offered in 2011 and stopped 2015 ish? The barrel being factory vs match custom is critical to the value Rob@ CZC was offering in the replacement. If I thought I had a barsto gunsmith fitted barrel and someone offered me a basic glock barrel as a replacement is very different from I had a 1/4" longer glock factory barrel and those are no longer available so the company offered me a free standard length barrel even though it was all out of warranty. Apples vs Oranges. A gun clearly out of 3 yr warranty on a second owner possibly unfired and presently lightly fired I think offering a barrel of quality and perf which is the closet thing presently available comparable sure seems like a honest effort to "make it right". But then its subjective as I would not expect a company to offer completely free parts for a out of warranty item regardless of the use prior. Maybe discounted rate etc. As I said its subjective. I know people that are never happy unless they think they are getting the business at a loss. After all did not you say the other factory barrels from the your other CZ fit and had great accuracy proving that this aus barrel was bad. If that is the case then it would be reasonable to expect the same thing from the new factory replacement barrel. I have no doubt that when you get your gun back from CGW it will run like a sewing machine and put a hole where its aimed. I would either CZC or CGW without reservation. They both have a very long track record of fantastic guns and support.

IMHO its had to beat the Delta Point Pro. Its durable with a large clear window. Even if you have a core which they tech do not fit with the nice recessed plates all it takes is 3 passes with a file on the front of the DPP just the very edge and it fits and with it sitting nice and low. A pass with a alum black pen and you can not even tell. Way better that the small green windowed RMR and sits much lower than using the dedicated plate or the dove tail mount. Never going to understand peoples apprehension of doing this most basic of mods that has no effect on function or warranty and looks only when its not mounted. Even unmounted you have to look closely to tell if you take your time with the filler marker. Of course if its a M2.0 then I would just mill the slide for the DPP specifically.

In the 2.0 the difference in ejection force (slide velocity) and lower recoil spring lb rating per PF is from the longer thicker frame rails. This creates an issue for those wanting to use light weight recoil springs for their minor PF and lesser loads. You have to keep a minimal opposing ratio of recoil spring and striker spring force. So to go lower in recoil spring eventually requires a lighter striker spring or you can end up with the slide not fully closing and or misfires or out of battery situations. But some people have even reported needing to use extra power striker springs to get reliable primer ignition from the harder cup primers. This tipping point is from loads with greater PF ratings in the 2.0 versus what is typical in the 1.0 versions. I think some of this can be helped by more wear in. But as the root cause to the dif in this area from 1.0 to 2.0 seems to be in increased friction from more surface contact area between frame and slide rails a obvious possible way to address this is to reduce that friction. Further SW does not use square and flat frame rails but curved of more correctly ovoid shaped rail tabs (egg shape). This may help mitigate debris in the channels causing reliability issues but IMO its sloppy and can cause uneven and binding points with all the slop given typical plastic gun tolerances. IMO this can be improved thru polishing the frame rails which are integrated into the removable parts of the sear and locking blocks. Followed by polishing the slide rail channels and ensuring there are no burrs etc as well as any parts of the polymer frame binding the slide. Simichrome Polish is popular which has particle sizes of 8-10 micron which is equal to roughly 1700-1900 grit. Then going to maybe standard Flitz which has a particle size of 3-3.5 microns which is equal to about 6000 grit. I believe both products use aluminum oxide as the abrasive particles. Finish up with Mother's Mag & Aluminum Polish which has a magnesium oxide particle of a minute 0.05 microns or 200K+ grit in a petroleum base mixture. It leaves one of the smoothest surfaces I have been able to produce. There are also adhesive backed polishing foils that go from 100-6000 grit in selection that could be used on square rod that fits inside the slide channel. As well micro mesh sheets that can go up to 12K grit. Many people wrongly assume or parrot that Flitz is abrasive free when the topic comes up which its not. They do not openly advertised its grit size which required a call over to Germany to get in contact with their chemist dept to get the actual info. What we really need is for a manf to address this weakness and short coming of striker fired handgun design where we are limited by the direct inline opposition of the striker vs recoil spring forces. In this area hammer fired handguns are superior as the forces are not inline but offset angles using the mechanical advantages of fulcrums . This allows for greater "tunablity" ( is that even a word?) and trigger weights which can lead to superior trigger pull quality and recoil tuning. Maybe some sort of mix of the two basic designs for a next gen system? Got to shake the rust off the engineerfu part of my brain as I have some ideas that at least on the surface seem viable. SW got closer than glock by a good portion as really the M&P with a tuned trigger bar and sear is for all intensive purposes a SA firing handgun. You really could not call it DA at all and even partial set striker is stretching things when the 2% final movement is more about contact point tension than any real effect on striker impact force performance.

Was it a feeding ramp from mag issue or was it that the COAL was too long for the chamber? If the latter that is interesting. What bullet and what was your old load COAL and the new? I would have figured they would have kept the same chamber specs. Then so much is outsourced these days who knows. IIRC the slides are outsourced machined or at least they were in the 1.0 from what I read. Actually that could also explain some of the accuracy improvement. As it would have less jump to engage the lands. Some I think were so long that the bullet had no case support by the time it engaged the rifling on some loads.

I think if I get a 2.0 I may just put my 1.0 slide on and see how the barrel fits to the block. I do have an extra 5" Apex gunsmith barrel so depending I could fit it. The issue is according to Randy Lee the 2.0 slide is suppose to be beefed up in the rear around the ejection port and breech to prevent or minimize slide stretch. I thought the slide was thinner but I guess thats up front. I wish we have more access to aftermarket slides like the "always perfect" plastic gun guys have. I only know of one manf of aftermarket and they are all the standard length not the 5". I also wanted to wait for a RDS ready slide version from SW.

It depends what makes you feel better about it and what that may or may not be worth to you vs the cost and time. I prefer to know my gun is shooting the best it can so I know anything less is me and what I need to improve. I am a bit of nerd in this fashion I look at numbers and science. I want things as good as they can get within reason. With all the money I will spend on ammo over the life of the barrel. The barrel cost is not even a blip on the screen of the budget. But others see at as that much more ammo they could buy or make. Its personal choice. If your gun from a good rest with a good shooter and load can do 2" for 5 @ 25 yds I would only get the gunsmith fit barrel if you get one. Honestly I would never get or recommend anything less as I do not see the point when you are spending that kind of money not to take a couple hours and fit it. Not to mention you could be stuck doing it anyways with the semi drop in just less strokes. But I know from Randy and the numerous targets he has posted over the years since the barrels were released that if you handload you can almost certainly get 1" groups @ 25 from the gunsmith and in fact he has had a number of them do very close that from 50 yd. That right there is good bullseye gun territory. To be clear this is from a ransom rest. But you do have to load for accuracy. Meaning JHPs and good powered etc . Not just the cheapest lead or coated bullett loaded to PF with whatever powder to practice with where you call anything under 4" good enough. IIRC the ASYM load was hitting that top kind of accuracy level from the barrel when Randy was testing prior to release. Randy stated they used SB 115 as their main test ammo and it was very accurate and relatively cheap and the barrel seemed to really like it. For me I like the idea of having a great trigger better than any other poly framed gun and then having accuracy as good as some of the better bullseye guns. That for me inspires confidence for me in my gun and knowing what its capable of. Also have never had any reliability issues either not that I am dragging it thru mud and not cleaning it for thousands upon thousands of rounds. For a load I always have good luck with for shooting tiny holes on top of each other even out to 50 yards. 115 HAP Starline Case (NEW) 4.6gr VV N340 Win primers 1.130 COAL Crimp 0.375" just enough to touch the bullet evenly and take the bell out of the case. Vel around 1100-1125 seems the sweet spot. I shoot a 5" ProCORE But anywhere from 4.5-5.0 grains and 1.100-1.135 COAL seems to work well depending on the gun. CFE is also a great powder if VVs 330 340 are hard to find.