Walküre

Correct, the test targets from CZ-UB are, to my knowledge, simply test-firing targets to check for function and maybe verify rough zero. They are not really representative of what kind of accuracy the pistol is capable of. I have seen some really whacked-out looking factory test targets, with the pistols really being just as good as those with much better-looking test targets. The CZC test targets are more likely to be a good gauge of accuracy, though as noted, the distance isn't given and I don't recall what they run them at. I will say that the CZC target for my TS looks about like what I can do from a sandbag on the bench at 25yd.

Did he ever attempt to, I don't know, contact the manufacturer to see what they had to say regarding this?

Actually, not quite. Not all factory 9mm is created equal. For example, Remington UMC "green box" is notoriously on the low end of the power scale; it will quite often go sub-minor if you are shooting a shorter barreled pistol (like a Glock 19 or similar), and can cut it pretty close even with a full size. To just buy some off-the-shelf ammo and expect it to make PF out of anything is not particularly wise. Now, if this were ammo of a make and type that previously made PF but didn't on this occasion, then I understand the frustration. I don't chrono every lot of ammo I reload, and wouldn't expect to need to chrono every lot of commercial ammo either. Once I've got a good average, I only periodically recheck, if it all. (But I also don't skirt too close to the edge, either.)

Yes, it is still far too early. As stated, some people who already had what would've been expected to be legal guns turn out to be excluded under the provisional rules. The rest of us, who may have been tossing around the idea, still have to get guns built. I held off on having one built in part to see what the proposed rules would be. I will be shooting it before the end of the year, but just how long until I will be shooting it, I don't know And also, some clubs weren't geared up to recognize it yet (see in the other thread about clubs making September their first monthly match to recognize CO). I believe there was some debate concerning division codes in Practiscore or some such until just recently that complicated matters; though I may be mistaken there, as I don't set up stats for any of the local matches and haven't followed things quite that closely.

Those are still pretty heavy - 1.48 oz, over twice the stock plastic grips. (The CZC aluminum grips are 1.65 oz. The stock plastic grips are 0.70 oz, and the rubber ones are 2.25 oz.)

The aluminum grips add significant weight. I still have a set lying around - putting them on my 75Bs pushes them well over the 35oz limit. The normal weight-loss grips are either plastic or super-thin wood. One of the big remaining variables, of course, is how much weight is actually lost in milling for an optic. For the 85C or a Shadow, we could probably get a ideas, as I have seen Shadows out there with dots mounted. For a B model, it appears we still have yet to conclusively determine how much we can even mill out of one. (There's some guesses, but I have yet to find anybody that has actually done it or had it done.) ETA : I just went and got numbers for the other remaining unknown - FPB versus non-FPB. I don't have a 85C, but I do have both a normal SP-01 and a SP-01 Shadow. The Shadow slide assembly is heavier by 0.35 oz - presumably, an 85C slide is heavier than a 75B slide by the same amount.

These are standard 75Bs, so no difference in the frame. If anything, an 85C will be heavier owing to the lack of a FPB. If I feel like it later, I'll take apart my two SP-01s to get some real-world numbers on the difference in weight between a FPB slide and a FPB-less slide. One of those 75Bs had wood, and the other stock plastic grips. I grabbed the wood one and reweighed it without any grips at all - 33.8 oz. Keep in mind those weights are with a flush-fit mag; an SP-01 mag will be heavier, and using custom basepads would add even more. I know the IDPA guys sometimes use the limited-capacity 10 rounders as they are even lighter, having a shorter metal tube with plastic filler. And that's kind of my point - one could probably make weight with the full-size, but it will be a constant struggle, and you would likely be a bit worried each time you had to weigh in at chrono, as even a slight unexpected variation in the match scale could push you over. I would prefer to be able to use whatever mags and basepads I want, whatever grips I want, and go into chrono knowing that I'm well under the weight. Similar to my personal preference for managing weight in SS and making PF overall. BTW - One full-size, all-steel CZ could make weight for this with little or no problem - the original. My short-rail weighs in around 33 oz. But I would never desecrate one of those precious pistols.

It's going to be really, really close. I just took two of my normal 75Bs and put them on the scale with an unloaded mag. One is right at 35 oz and the other is 34.8 oz.

Has anybody had a B-series pistol milled for an optic? I know I've seen people get non-Bs milled, but not ever any Bs. I am concerned that the FPB may limit how far down one can mill the cutout for the optic. I am seriously considering picking up another 75 Compact and having it milled, but don't want to waste the money if I can't actually accomplish that. I would likely be going with a Deltapoint (would like a RMR, but no way is that going to fit on a traditional CZ slide). IMO, it's going to be quite hard to make weight with a full size frame - and probably impossible with a full size everything (plastic guns excluded). My personal 75 Compact weighs in at 33.8 oz with an unloaded mag. Depending on the choice of optic and the amount of milling performed, that's going to be running pretty darn close to the edge.

Very likely. At 4% less powder, my no-holes gun was still making 8% more PF than my old V12. (Haven't yet had a chance to work the charge down any more for the new gun.)

9.8gr of 3N38 under a 124gr Berrys HBRN-TP @ 1.260" OAL for 184 PF. By contrast, my V12 only gave 170 PF for 10.2gr of 3N38; that's actually why I have the load I have, instead of something lighter. I haven't even tried anything lighter, because I thought that 9.8gr would be my starting point. I may work up some lighter 3N38 loads to see how those behave, but I'm very quickly running out of 3N38. As I know that 9.8gr works, I'm sticking with it for the next couple of batches to be sure I have a trusted load ready for the first major matches of the year. With the current powder situation, I am getting ready to work up some loads with HS6 and WAC as alternatives. WAC is available locally at the moment so I picked up a pound the other day, and a friend has graciously given me some HS6 to try out. Depending on what those act like, I may switch my standard load over sooner rather than later.

The whole setup is WAY better than the Gold Team V12 I used to have - way more comfortable to shoot, and flatter as well. Also needs significantly less powder to make PF.

Finally took some photos of my Open gun: Started life as a Limited in .38 Super; now tuned for SuperComp and wearing a C-More on a DoubleTap mount. Top end and misc machine work was done by Rich out at Canyon Creek. Final tweaking/tuning done by CGS, a local smith I use for a lot of different things.

Finally got initial chrono data on my new blaster... Tanfoglio Custom 5", no holes, 4-port comp 124gr Berrys HBRN-TP 1.260" OAL 9.8gr 3N38 184 PF And contrast that with my old gun: Tanfoglio Gold Team "V12" 4.5", 12 holes, 2-port comp 124gr Montana Gold CMJ 1.250" OAL 10.2gr 3N38 170 PF Heavier 3N38 loads in the new gun do not get flatter; I may try to work up some slightly lighter ones and see how those fare, given that I appear to have plenty of room to work down at my current PF. I hadn't prepared anything lighter as I wasn't expecting getting such a substantially higher velocity out of the new gun. (Though of course it makes sense.) Other notes: I have compared 3N38 to N105 in both of these guns. In my old gun, there wasn't much noticeable difference, other than needing more powder in N105. In the new gun, there is quite a difference. The N105 is a lot more violent at lower PF levels, but flattens out when you really start pushing it up to 190+ PF. However, that takes a lot more of a (generally) more-expensive powder, and isn't really that much better than my current 3N38 load. Plus, at that power level, I'm running the risk of stripping the plating off of these bullets. As such, I'm not inclined to switch away from 3N38 in favor of N105 any time soon. I did just pick up some Autocomp, so I'll see how that stacks up in the near future.

Anybody have a Henning ConeFit "long" guide rod that would be willing to trade for a lightly-used short version of the same? Found that I still had mine from when I had a V12, but it used the short length, while my new Open gun is based on a Limited and uses the long length.

Yeah, but this was "I'll need to take it to my bench grinder" level of oversize, not "minor fitting required" oversize. If that's the case, so be it, but that's not was it was made to sound like.

Precisely; I wouldn't be modifying the pistol at all. It's just that a good amount of material seems to need to be removed from the racker in order to make the racker fit into the normal Tanfo dovetail. The discrepancy seems far more than I expected when I saw people saying here you could use 2011 rackers; on the sample I tried, it was not something that could have been resolved with just a few quick passes of a file.

Resurrecting this again to bring up the supposed compatibility with 2011 rackers. I tried the racker from my friend's TruBor, and it's not even close to fitting the dovetail in my Tanfo (which started its life as a recent-production Limited). While one could probably be made to work, it would appear to need quite a bit of material removed to fit the Tanfo dovetail. Is it really the same case across the board?

Just one? I have two of them. They are indeed 28 reloadable, at least with SC or similar rimless brass. So far, I have not been able to get them to run with more than 26 using normal Super.

I have no problems with those lengths in terms of just basic chambering/cycling in either my new blaster or my old V12, but they will make a difference for full-mag feeding - especially when considering Super (semi-rimmed) and not Super Comp (rimless). I can run SC down around 1.240" without issues, but I have to keep normal Super out at 1.250". (OAL with a MG 124gr CMJ RN.)

And it would be way more comfortable to shoot as well. I used to have a V12. It was downright abusive to shoot; I can't imagine the punishment the ROs must have been taking. I just got my new gun from Rich (@Canyon Creek) this past week - no more holes for me, just a nice comp. I have yet to shoot it in a match, but so far, I'm really, really liking it. It is pleasingly comfortable to shoot and is probably just as flat, if not more so, than that V12. (I also have yet to chrono it, but I'm guessing that my old loads are now way overkill, and I'm thinking some of the "lighter" loads I made up are probably going to make major out of this one just fine.) (And sorry, no good pics just yet.)

I have broken two slide stops now in my TS. The first one actually caused no issues - there was enough pin that the gun was still running just fine. Shooting it, I never perceived when it broke (and actually don't know the exact timing.) The second caused a premature lockback, but after that portion was discarded (fell out), the gun was still hand-cycling fine. (It did the lockback thing on the very last shot in the stage; it's possible that it actually broke on a shot or two prior.) That pistol has many tens of thousands of rounds through it. My current loads are ~173 PF, but I also ran factory for at least a few thousand (closer to ~180PF). I run 12# recoil springs with no buffers. I have not broken a slide stop in any of my normal ("small-frame") CZs, nor in a Tanfo (but honestly I haven't shot Tanfos a whole lot - to be changing soon, when my new Open gun is done).

I actually liked the stock racker on my Gold Team; also tried a sidewinder, but I liked the stock one just fine. (And I'm right-handed). (Oh, and if anybody wants to get rid of their stocker that's just lying around, I'd gladly take it off your hands... currently having a new Open Tanfo built.)

Just one of the many benefits to being staff.

Yeah, I didn't have a chance at all to get away from my stage and do any photography either Saturday or Sunday. I do have some shots of ROs on Friday, but I've been so busy lately I haven't even looked at those myself yet.