Walküre

This is what I've always done, and never had any issues. I didn't find the fit to be off when I first got them either. The only change I've made since is that to run Tanfo mags in the same pouches, I added a layer of cork backing to the inserts. (Tanfo mags are slightly thinner than TS mags.) This allows me to run both platforms out of the same rig, just backing off the tension more for the CZ.

I would think that you would have a lot more options in 9x21, since it's really just 9x19 with a longer case (same nominal OAL). Super on the other hand is a lot longer, and many platforms aren't made to accommodate it. (e.g., there are no .38S CZs - the only one with a frame long enough would be the 97B.) If we were talking Open, then I would say .38S - but I prefer .38S for an Open gun even in a country were I could choose to run 9x19 Major.

I think factory is something like 15# for the .40. I run a 12# in mine.

IMO, the aesthetics of the Combat II are killer... of course, nowhere near the perfection of the real CZ 75 (short-rail), but way sexier than a normal full-length-rail SP-01. If these were around, I would have bought one for sure instead of the SP-01 Shadow I run now.

A bit late to the party, I know... just got wind of this, as I was on my annual winter hiatus from shooting... To do so otherwise kills DA/SA guns. Purely stock ones. That goes against everything that Production is supposed to be - especially if the rule is based entirely on being to enforce that ideal. Example : I have an all-original 1978-dated CZ 75. Its SA pull is just a hair less than 3# by my gage. That is a box-stock pistol that would not meet the requirement if it were applied to all trigger pulls and not just the first (DA) pull. CZs are still pretty inexpensive. Not cheap like they used to be, but certainly not expensive. A regular 75B will run you less than $500. People like to look at the SP-01 Shadow, which is around $800 for the off-the-shelf model and $1200 for the Angus-tuned model, but it really doesn't buy you a ton over a regular CZ. The lack of a FPB is the real draw, and that can be had in an 85 Combat for $550. I do shoot an SP-01 Shadow, but that's because I didn't have an objection to spending the money for the small things I wanted - the upswept beavertail, heavier build to be more like my Limited gun, 75B-SA-style safeties, and no FPB.

Just double-checked... while USPSA Production uses a box, IPSC Production doesn't. (This makes sense, given that IPSC's stricter Production rules prevent using or adding things that would make it too big anyway.) The CZ 75 Tactical Sports, CZ's purpose-built USPSA Limited / IPSC Standard gun. Putting TS sights on a regular CZ would require milling the new rear cut, so if you're shooting IPSC, then TS sights aren't an option for Production.

I've been kicking around the idea of asking Angus & crew to put a set of TS sights on my Shadow. I'm not sure if it would still fit the box, though... been a while since I've had the Shadow in "the box", anybody have a good idea of how much leeway there is with the competition sights + factory SP-01 mags? Think the nice-and-super-tall TS rear would still fit? As for fronts, I run a serrated black front on my Shadow - a stock plain-black TS front that I cut to appropriate size, thinned very slightly, and serrated myself. I am probably going to replace it with a thinner serrated black front from Dawson if I don't try to put something like the TS rear on there. (The one on there isn't much thinner than normal; I got sick of trying to thin it down after a while.)

Interesting, as my mags - which are NOT using Grams internals - rarely ever engage slide lock. (While I pretty much never go empty in a stage, I run mags dry a lot during practice drills, load development, etc.) (My TS mags, that is.)

I never had any problems getting 20 using the CZC extensions. I have one mag that will take 21, but I don't load it that way any more (it didn't stay in the gun very well with 21+1). On that note... once you get them taking 20+1 (as they should), make sure to knock off the inside edge of the magazine body all around the bottom with a file; before I did that, my followers (and/or springs) would occasionally catch when transitioning from the extension to the body, causing the ever-infamous "salt shaker" phenomenon. Doesn't need to be much, just enough to help smooth that transition.

Great match, though I myself didn't do so well. Lots of stupid mistakes, as what come after not shooting a major match since May and only running Production again for about a month since April. Uploaded a few action shots of myself: http://www.flickr.com/photos/69192854@N05/sets/72157628007938418/

Not a Dawson - my TS (and my Shadow) uses a stock CZ black front, trimmed and serrated myself. I run fixed rears on everything; stock TS rear on my TS, and a CZC competition on my Shadow.

Not sure... the current sight on my TS is 0.215", but that's from the top of the slide, so it is about 0.270" total, if Dawson measure them that way. (Which they seem to, based on Strick's measurements.) A-C is not the measurement from the top of the slide - A-B is. The dovetail (B-C) is within the slide, as that is how the sight is mounted and retained. Yep you are right, it was .205. Sorry about that. D'oh, I didn't even look at your numbers either, which didn't add up. That's what I get for posting right before running out the door. Which means Dawson measures the height-above-slide, which would mean that their 0.215" is appropriate for a TS. This also makes sense when I double-checked on CZC - they measure total height, and I recall that Dawson and CZC use different (or "opposite", if you will) measurements.

Not sure... the current sight on my TS is 0.215", but that's from the top of the slide, so it is about 0.270" total, if Dawson measure them that way. (Which they seem to, based on Strick's measurements.) A-C is not the measurement from the top of the slide - A-B is. The dovetail (B-C) is within the slide, as that is how the sight is mounted and retained.

All of the "normal" current production CZs are dovetailed up front - just a longitudinal cut instead of transverse.

A couple of things: #1 - Remember that DA/SAs have a distinct advantage in IPSC and correspondingly have higher numbers there. (CZ platforms especially are go-to guns for IPSC Production.) #2 - Though DA/SAs are a very small minority in USPSA, that minority is growing. As I said, I used to be the only CZ shooter at a match, with maybe only a few more DA/SA shooters with SIGs or Berettas. Now, more CZs are starting to show up. I've seen a few more SIGs lately too than in years past, but the increase there isn't as much as on the CZ front. There isn't a trend to the point where people are switching over in any numbers, but there is a trend to the point where people seem to be experimenting more with DA/SAs in Production - especially with CZs.

Well, we want to see if it fits in the box (lengthwise), so measure from the muzzle to the rear-most point (which should be the tip of the beavertail), with the measurement line parallel to the bore.

Presumably, it's the same finish as the frame on the TS. The finish on my TS has held up rather well, especially given the amount of use and abuse it's had.

That 3" barrel will probably put you right at the cusp for PF. For reference my USP has a 3.6" bbl. Good to know, thanks. Get a chrono, or ask around for somebody local to let you use theirs. Far too many variables involved to take a guess, especially when shooting minor. (If you're shooting major and you don't make it, at least you'll still be shooting for score...) For some comparisons, here's data from my 4.5" CZ 75 SP-01 Shadow: 124gr FMJ (unknown mfg) / Winchester WSP / 1.150" OAL / 4.6gr WW231 = 128 PF 124gr MG CMJ / Winchester WSP / 1.150" OAL / 4.7gr WW231 = 135 PF

Get rid of the shok buffers if you have them in the gun. They cause the slide to short stroke. As far as ammo, I like 165 Precision Deltas over 6.6 grains of Longshot loaded to an OAL of 1.125-1.130. Like Burning Squirrels said, if you get longer that 1.135 the slide starts to get a little sluggish. Yep, stick to shorter factory-like lengths. My TS load is a 180gr MG CMJ over 5.2gr of Universal @ 1.130" OAL. Also try to stick to rounder FP-type bullet profiles; my TS feeds rounder stuff 100%, but throws fits with sharper edged TC-type bullets.

I'd say that there is a certain type of "trend" for sure. We definitely aren't trending in the sense that CZs will take over; the major players are going to remain plastic wonder pistols for the foreseeable future. But there does seem to be growing interest in heavy, DA/SA platforms like the CZ. More CZs are definitely starting to show up at matches. It used to be that I was often the only CZ shooter at a match. Now I'll see at least another Shadow or SP-01, if not several. I've even seen another TS shooter, at the Indiana sectional last year.

Looking at my TS, Shadow, and a standard 75B, that might work, but I'm not even sure about that combination. Looks to me like a longer-beavertailed frame (like a SA or Shadow) probably is a tad too long, but the standard frame might just barely fit. david s, could you measure the OAL of your hybrid - or better yet, place it in a box of the appropriate length?

That only applies to the mass of the slide. Lightening your frame - like, say, having a short dustcover instead of a full-length one - does nothing to affect the action, just the overall weight. I for one run heavy guns in all divisions. I run a standard TS in Limited, and have zero desire to ever have the dustcover cut down a la the CZC "CTS" treatment. I run a 75 SP-01 Shadow in Production, and don't have any desire to run a 75 Shadow instead. (I would prefer to run something with the qualities of an original pre-B short-rail, but unfortunately, the only thing that fits the bill is an original short-rail.) ETA - Oh, and though I don't want to cut down the frame of my TS, I have often considered sending out the slide to be lightened - to reduce moving mass during cycling.

1.150" OAL should be fine. I load 124gr MG CMJs to 1.150" with no problems in any of my CZs. (I was previously loading a bit longer, 1.165", but one of my standard 75Bs started having occasional issues. No problems from the Shadow or Compact, though, which are the two CZs I care about most. I switched down to 1.150" so that the one load would run in everything.)

Yes. You have to modify it slightly to fit - the front edge needs to be filed back, and the overhang needs to be reduced (again, just filing it down some was fine). However, it sits so low that you need up with a teeny-tiny nub of a front sight to zero it. I gave it up and went to the fixed factory sight because I was having trouble picking up the tiny front at speed; if it was just taller (and by a rather substantial amount, mind you) it would be really nice.

Mine will be in the mail tomorrow...