Walküre

All with a 124gr CMJ. 5" Tanfoglio Custom, no holes, 4-port comp 9.5gr 3N38 @ 1.260" for 174 PF 4.5" Tanfoglio Gold Team, 12 holes, 2-port comp 10.2gr 3N38 @ 1.250" for 170 PF 10.7gr N105 @ 1.250" for 170 PF I was running 3N38 for quite a while until recently - I decided to start looking at other powders when it got hard to get last year, and have just switched this year. It's a great powder, but like all VV, it can be pricey and isn't as easily available as certain others.

With the plastic grips though, which is my point. Running all of the fancy bits will get hard on the full-size. You could probably put the grips on yours with the right mag, but you'll be really close. A small variation between scales could put it over in that case; far closer than I myself ever like to run anything (whether it be gun on the scale or ammo over the chrono).

Do you actually have one set up? I am extremely skeptical of people making these statements, given my personal experience, and the fact that it seems every one of these remarks has been made without actually having weighed all of the prospective pieces, let alone actually have an actual pistol set up that way. My Compact set up for CO now weighs in at 44.55oz. It is currently wearing a set of VZs, which are comparable in weight to the aluminum scale grips (if anything, the VZs are actually lighter). Note that the scale grips are only marginally lighter than the CZC thin aluminum, and both are on the higher end of the weight scale. A full-size will be able to make weight, but you are going to have to play with the parts and/or mags to make it - you won't be able to just use whatever you'd like. 44.55 ounces? Isn't the current max weight 35 ounces? Did you have a typo? Oops. Yeah, typo - should have been 34.55oz.

Do you actually have one set up? I am extremely skeptical of people making these statements, given my personal experience, and the fact that it seems every one of these remarks has been made without actually having weighed all of the prospective pieces, let alone actually have an actual pistol set up that way. My Compact set up for CO now weighs in at 34.55oz. It is currently wearing a set of VZs, which are comparable in weight to the aluminum scale grips (if anything, the VZs are actually lighter). Note that the scale grips are only marginally lighter than the CZC thin aluminum, and both are on the higher end of the weight scale. A full-size will be able to make weight, but you are going to have to play with the parts and/or mags to make it - you won't be able to just use whatever you'd like.

I still prefer the 6 MOA dot on my Open gun (which wears a traditional C-More), but the 7.5 triangle works well enough. It tends to over-bloom quite a bit in indoor or low-light conditions. I'll take it, as that at least means it remains visible throughout the whole range of lighting conditions, which is very important on an always-on, auto-adjusting optic.

I don't know of any. But you would have to have the tools on you, and you'd have to be mindful of both sweeping yourself and the 180 (as usual).

If it fell, but rotated as/after it fell, I would call it good. If it rotated without falling, REF, plain an simple. If a plate moves at all - other than falling from a hit to the plate itself - REF. How so? They seem to just be hinged plates to me - and therefore "plates" - just as one would find on many typical plate racks. Just without the guards and a rather unstable mount, which of course makes a less-than-ideal target. Very much so; in fact, I wouldn't want to use them without a means of properly fixing them in place so they couldn't rotate. Hinged plates alone aren't the problem here (though they can be at times, that's another discussion), but rather the stands they are on.

I often see thoughts along these lines this stated. (And with the "WO" comments and all...) As if CO is only a "newbies" division or something, or that it is somehow super cheap to enter, or doesn't attract those of us who already shoot Open. All of which is completely wrong.

When my Shadow was new, it wouldn't cycle 100% with a 10# spring; it would occasionally end up slightly out of battery. I ran a 12# for a long time. Years later, I'm able to run a 10# and now do so. I don't know that I would go down to a 9#.

The Mec-Gar AFC mags (17-rounders) are distinctly different from the OEM magazines (16-rounders) - they actually have a different shape, which can be seen pretty clearly if you put them back-to-back. Their dimensions will definitely be different, and so any specified dimensions for the factory mags won't necessarily be useful in "fixing" the AFC mags. Note that Mec-Gar 16-rounders (blued OEM type) should be identical, so if those are causing problems (and not the AFCs), then getting proper dimensions for real CZ mags could prove useful. ETA - Or put "18-rounders" in place of "16-rounder" and "19-rounder" for "17-rounder" - the SP-01 factory mags, for which I know of no aftermarket source, are the same contour as the 16s, with 18s just having a longer tube and wrap-around pad. The MG 19s are simply their 17s with a +2 basepad, having identical AFC tubes.

Putting it on a separate mount, I would think you'd be fine, but you would be gaining quite a bit of height and some additional weight. I believe a RMR mounts with #6 screws, which would leave only 0.030" on each side (a normal CZ slide being 0.930" wide). That's not much material at all for the case of a direct mount.

Looks like plenty of material to me; there have also been a number of CZ Open blasters around with DPs mounted that way for a while, and I never heard of any failures in that mode. But that was exactly my concern regarding a RMR, as it appears to have a wider spacing for its mounting screws.

It is exactly at the forward edge of the FPB cut, actually just edging into it, at the same depth as the extent of the cut. There is still a decent gap between the front of the optic and the extractor pin, so no interference there at all. You could potentially slide the optic a little more forward to get more depth. On the other hand, if it were any further rearward, then the optic would be the only thing holding the block in, as the part of the slide over the FPB would be milled away. With a bottom-loading-battery optic (like my Deltapoint), I don't think that would be the best idea (as you would then have moving parts pressing against the battery), but it would probably be okay for those optics that are top- or side-loading. Sure, I would've liked it a bit further back, but to me it's worth it to not have to worry about interfering with the FPB (or anything else). I think the height is absolutely fine and have absolutely zero complaints in that regard. I really don't care one way or another if it were that little bit lower or not. Regarding an RMR... what is the actual CTC measurement for its mounting bolts? I've always got the impression that the RMR has the widest "stance" of any of the popular choices as far as mounting is concerned - it sure looks that way. It would seem to me that the mounting demands might actually be a bit too wide for a standard CZ slide, but I haven't had the chance to compare in person nor could I find any definitive numbers when I was deciding what route to take.

CZ 75 Compact Leupold Deltapoint 33.1-33.4 oz depending on the magazine.

Not yet in its final form - going to be getting some other grips for sure, and haven't settled on which mags to run. Pictured with a factory 16-rounder using a factory SP-01 basepad.

Pictures please. Who did the slide milling? Pistol is currently back at my local smith for follow-up on some action work after a couple of light strikes today, so I can't get pictures. Also was waiting to take photos until I actually have it in its "final form" with new grips and all. I ended up having Tooth & Nail Armory do the milling; they also supplied the Deltapoint, which really sealed the deal.

If you do want to use it for USPSA, IPSC, or IDPA, then there are definitely divisions that require DA. If you were to convert to SAO, you would lose the ability to compete in USPSA/IPSC Production division and IDPA SSP division. In USPSA, you would be relegated to Limited (or L10), and in IPSC, you would be shooting Standard. I believe that a SAO SP-01 would be ineligible for use in IDPA at all, as the full-length dustcover is normally not permitted in ESP, except on pistols that can also qualify for SSP (which would require DA/SA). If you don't care about being competitive, only plan on using it in outlaw matches, or are just going to be blasting away at the range, then converting it to SAO is a fine idea.

I did not. However, I have a second Compact - I just weighed it, and in the same configuration (same grips, same mag), it comes out at 32.8 oz. So running a Deltapoint, it appears you can nearly break even.

My Compact top end is done. As it sits, it all weighs in at 33 oz even. That is still with factory plastic grips and a plastic guide rod, but with a SP-01 magazine. I may have to go to using 16- or 14-rounders instead of the 18s depending on how those two items end up working out. A bit more can be taken off of the slide for an 85C - as the optic could sit lower, the FPB on my Compact limiting the depth - but that would not really be that much. And the 85C slide is going to be heavier than a 75B slide to start with, so it's probably a wash. But remember that I'm running a Compact, and I'm already at 33 oz, with a 85C will have both a heavier frame and a heavier slide (owing to it being full size).

Go shoot a DA revolver for a while. In all seriousness, after shooting a revolver for local IDPA stuff for a while, it's reached the point where I don't even blink at the DA on a totally stock new production 75B.

Maybe this one? http://czcustom.com/CZ-Competition-Rear-Sight-1.aspx That looks very tall too. That's what I run and have had no issues. As posted earlier, mine sounds to be quite a bit lower than the OP. He was getting around 0.352" above the slide whereas mine is only 0.265" (though it can be tricky to measure that dimension alone, so numbers might be a bit off).

Interesting. Back when I had a V12 Gold Team, I had to run ridiculous amounts of powder just to make major, and the gun wasn't even close to being flat. Some numbers for perspective: The Gold Team V12 took 10.2gr of 3N38 to make just barely over 170PF, what I consider my minimum "safe" major target PF. My current no-holes custom with 9.8gr of 3N38 yields 184PF+, way overkill, and nearly half a grain less powder. Based on both personal and second-hand experience, I would be very concerned trying to make major PF out of a GT V12 with anything but custom handloads.

If you declared Major, then you would be limited to 6 in Revo and 8 in SS; more than that and you would be moved to Open. This is why it pays to double-check ALL of your info when checking in at registration.

I measured the rear sight from the top of the slide: measurements are in inches and only approximate as the sight orientation doesn't allow for easy measurement from the top of the slide: Using Frankford arsenal calipers I get 0.352 from the slide top to the top of the read sight. That's considerably taller than mine, which is about 0.265" above the slide. (I actually measured it by the total height of the slide + sight, then minus the slide itself - you are correct that attempting to measure it directly may be hard depending on the sight you use.)

Do you have a set of calipers available to check the actual height of the rear sight (from the top flat of the slide)?