ck1

Are the Marschal grips thinner then the factory plastics? (just got an sp-01 for idpa use and will run the plastics for now, interested in the Marschal's though...)

Thanks guys. Looks like I may just have to get used to what's available... if anyone knows the rear notch width that'd still be helpful. I know CZs aren't that popular but I had no idea that aftermarket sights for them were this limited, seems the ones offered are pretty traditional in that they pretty much stick to the classic Bomar/LPA type of thing (1911/2011's seem to as well I guess), never really thought about the Warren/Sevigny type ratios (.115" front, wide .150" rear notch) as a Glock-only type thing but after searching around I guess they kind of are, seems strange to me, they're super-fast (and super popular on Glocks in games) and would've thought they'd be a match made in heaven on guns that tend to be a little more inherently accurate and forgiving like the SP-01s and 1911/2011s... eerw, what plain black front are you referring to?

Just picked up an SP-01 (standard non-decocker version) that I plan on shooting in IDPA, did a trigger job, got rid of 99% of the hammer-camming, can't feel the FPB, and have it breaking really sweet already... springs to make it even a hair better and grips to make weight for SSP are on the way. I chose the standard as I'm more of an IDPAer and it's easier and cheaper to make weight with the standard one than with the Shadow, and also 'cause I didn't really like the Shadow's sight picture or care for the extended controls and figure I'll just upgrade/change what I want as I get used to it, scored it like-new with the factory Meprolight night sights (bright in the dark, but wide-as-hell and pretty lame otherwise). I'm coming over from the darkside, and as a longtime Glock shooter I'm finding I've been fairly spoiled as far as sight choices are concerned as I'm finding there are virtually no options for the CZs out there that I can locate... I'm looking for something similar to what I run on my Glocks, which is a .115" front with a wider .150" rear notch, not a fan of FOs and would prefer plain black irons with a serrated front blade, but thus far, looks as though it's the competition rears and FO fronts from czcustoms or nothing... can anyone point me in the right direction towards some sights I may have missed? and if it's going to have to be those (ones from czcustoms), anyone know the specs on those rears (specifically the rear notch width), and can they be opened up if I need to go that route? thanks in advance.

Well said. I'd put this spin on it: I would say that maybe the only way a Witness would be safe to carry C&L'd is if carried in a kydex holster that was formed with the safety in the "ON SAFE" position that makes it impossible for the safety to accidentally get bumped off inadvertently.

I'd like one too. Possible to make any more?

Can someone please post pics and share any info (experiences, where to buy, etc) on the newer and supposedly improved 9mm Match Rear-Spacer Mags for the Elite Match? Thinking of picking another one of these pistols up if it's now possible to get mags in 9mm that aren't a nosedive nightmare. Please, I don't need any info on IPSC/USPSA mag solutions as I'm not looking to use the gun for that, I don't need info about how to load 20-22rds or whatever, and am not looking for info on which spring/follower/mag body to use... strictly just looking for info on the newer supposedly more reliable rear-spacer factory mags that have been talked about. TIA.

Yeah, I'd tend to agree that dominance and variance in different people's eyesight plays a definite role in how easy it is for an individual to adjust to shooting with both eyes open That said, in my case I wear contacts and both of my eyes are really really close in their prescriptions, so close in fact that my Doctor actually asked if I'd prefer to just use the same prescription in both eyes for convenience-sake. Since for me that leaves my non-dominant eye ever so slightly weaker I'm sure it probably helps me avoid seeing double more than most as in-effect I've got built-in "tape over the weak eye" all the time.

Learning to shoot both eyes open made the biggest improvement in my overall shooting ability compared to everything/anything else, I highly recommend taking the time to force yourself to learn it and get used to it. Squinting your non-dominant eye or using the opaque tape over it is a good training method, but in time your brain will just stop seeing the two sets of sights and you'll be all set... Just like good trigger-control, good grip, etc. it's counter-intuitive at first and takes some time but it's totally worth it.

I've owned all those parts and tried them all or separately and in different combos... Not absolute rules, but here's what I found, YMMV: (1) the lighter power plunger spring doesn't do a whole lot but works with all the combos so might as well use it.... (2) reduced power striker springs (especially a Glockworx one which is lighter than a Wolff 4lb) when used with a stronger trigger-spring makes for a sucky reset, (3) the Glockworx 2lb race connectors are sketchy at best, I ordered 2, neither feels quite right or is really much lighter than a 3.5lb connector, just feels messed up, I wouldn't run one, they got pulled out and will stay out, (4) lighter connectors used with a heavier trigger-spring make for a slightly lighter trigger over just using the connector, but you get weaker reset as an expense, best to stick with the stock trigger-spring if you decide to use the 3.5 connector, (5) the stronger trigger-spring works well with the stock 5.5lb connector, takes off a little weight and removes some slack, short and stays crisp, sometimes a heavier trigger isn't necessarily a worse trigger... (6) if you want to avoid light strikes just set the reduced power striker spring off to the side and save it for if you ever decide to buy a lightened striker (otherwise forget it IMHO), but if you are going to be shooting Federal primers exclusively you'll probably be ok and in that case the reduced power striker spring will work with both the 3.5 and stock 5.5 connectors (just remember that a 3.5connector always means more travel and more mush, a 5.5 is heavier, but shorter and crisper). FWIW, I've been running the little-if-ever-mentioned Ghost "Ranger" 4.5 connector (they're the only people who make a truly in-between 4.5 as far as I know) with a heavier trigger-spring and reduced plunger spring for over a year now, and that, combined with the usual polishing has yielded the best all-around Glock trigger I've ever gotten... fairly light, but more importantly slop-free, short, and crisp (dare I say close to 1911-like, especially when breaking from reset), and the stock striker spring sets off even the crappiest ammo I can find.

The low-left affliction is like the new Glock-shooters right of passage... hang in there. Really concentrate on pressing the trigger so it's moving perfectly straight-back (at first it'll probably feel almost as though you are pulling back diagonally towards your right shoulder, it'll become more natural feeling in time), dry-fire this way about a zillion times to make it muscle-memory and remind yourself that the Glock's lightness will not forgive trigger-press glitches that a heavier da/sa gun will. The other big thing is your grip, do some research and really dial-in a consistent and repeatable thumbs-forward grip, if your support-hand wrist feels weird canted/rolled outward then you're probably doing it right, just like the trigger-press it's counter-intuitive at first but will become normal after enough reps. Do these things and I think you'll find your POI moving to where you want it to be, hang in there it can be frustrating, remind yourself that dry-fire costs nothing and you'll get it.

I realize - or assume, anyway - that you're being humorous, but just in case there are people out there who took you seriously, it's worth noting that Glock didn't just "clip some coils" off the original assembly to create the 02 assembly. This is a obviously a new, uncut spring - at least the large spring that I can see, I'm not quite willing to prise the thing apart to also examine the little spring, as well. Duane, I wasn't joking, the 02 spring I was sent was exactly the same as the original except 2-4 coils (depending on how you count them) were fairly obviously clipped off the larger outside spring and then poorly ground down a bit. There were at least 4 other pics up on glocktalk from different guys showing the same thing... I wouldn't doubt that they're in some form of real production by now as this was 3 months ago, but it was pretty obvious that it wasn't an assembly that was cooked-up or tuned to be 9mm specific through a bunch of R&D and testing like you'd find in a recent H&K or something, it was a hastily made cut-down, and while the spring-strength at lock-up was reduced the slide-speed/strength seemed unchanged... still wasn't right IMO. I hope you're right and they're better now, but even as a Glock disciple, I'll be waiting a long time until I buy another gen4 that's for sure. Reports like the OP's of them coming apart and a few other reports I've read of the dual-recoil assemblies coming apart while installed and seizing up guys guns to the point where pins have to come out of them to get them broken down, and then the rumors (just rumors for now) of possible pending agency lawsuits because of this all add up to be very unsettling. I wouldn't carry one with that recoil assembly in there, let's not sugar-coat it, it's just plain flimsy and feels like it's very possible to break one under normal assembly/disassembly. BTW, I don't really want to start a flame war type thread here on whether or not the gen4's are good-to-go or just no good, and while I don't believe everything I read on the internet by any means I'll just say that there sure is a lot of chatter out there of guys having issues with them (and in my case I experienced my own and consider 5000+rds an honest enough chance to convince), and all the posts that inevitably show up of guys saying theirs are just great and run just fine don't sway me much as that's what they're supposed to do... after all, a posting of a Glock running 100% shouldn't really be a surprise to anybody, yet recently for some reason in the gen4's case it's worth note... I hope in your review you mention how many Glockers out there are pissed that Glock couldn't stop themselves after the grip-size, texture, and mag release (ergonomic updates), and had to go further and mess with the super-proven and reliable design we've all come to know and love, there have already been too many articles written that start out "gee whiz, glock sure didn't change very much for the new gen4's...", they changed the recoil-assembly which changes the whole Browning tilting barrel design... that's huge, maybe too much actually.

For me the Defoor set is better, but think that's partly because for the past few months i've been all about the "back-to-basics" approach with the all-black irons, the thinner .115" front and narrower notch is better for me as my shots at distance were my weakest area, and, I happen to be in the camp that doesn't think night sights are an absolute necessity, YMMV... They teach you that the light bars and alignment is what's important, not gimmicks. As far as low-light is concerned, if you're looking through the sights they're either the best thing ever (more light in front than behind you) or kinda harder to find but still pretty good (more ambient light behind you), if you can't find 'em you can't make your target and probably should't be shooting, close-in under SD/SHTF instances it's 100% index and training, not sights IMHO. All-black irons are super crisp and are actually very fast if you give them a chance, I'm a believer now for sure. The Hack set-up is great too, could be very slightly faster and easier to pick up but not by nearly as much as you might think if you've never shot all-black's before, but it's a wider overall picture so shots at say 15-25+ yards are tougher with that wide front. Guess if I was going to use tritium I'd get their Defoor rear and their .125 trit front (GL-400 + Gl-112T I think) to have a bomb all-around set-up. Get the taller GL-401 rear if you want POI to be at the top of the front blade instead of at the dot.

FWIW, I put 5000rds through my gen4 g17 before I gave up on it... I liked the new mag release, the SF grip, and the RTF3 texture too, but just too many failures to excuse. Wouldn't you know, went back to a gen3 and after 5000+rds not a single stoppage...

I don't know if clipping some coils off the original assembly and then stamping "02" on them makes them exactly "9mm appropriate"... From my experience and from what I've read from user reports from guys who've shot them, most find the "02" spring only makes the guns maybe slightly more reliable at the expense of feeling crappier than the first assembly. IMHO the new gen4 dual-spring assembly stinks, just makes the guns finicky and creates a weak point, and the reports that are starting to surface of them coming apart and/or sometimes locking up guy's guns is kind of frightening, not to mention very un-glock-like. I don't think they've fixed anything, the lighter 02 spring is just a band-aid at this point...

Here's a link to a useful thread from another forum where guys posted pics of a bunch of different sight set-ups, should help you get an idea of what's out there: http://m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=58048

I had somebody else fire teh gun to make sure it wasn't me... same thing, low and left Not to sound like a broken record here, but: don't just have anyone shoot it, have an experienced Glock shooter shoot it. Heavier guns like 1911's, Sig's, Beretta's, etc. are WAY more forgiving to shoot and really don't reveal some of the little hitches in technique that Glock's and some other polymer handguns are just not tolerant of, it took me months and takes some longer to really figure it out through lots of dry-fire and working out one's grip to get Glocks to not hit left (or right in a Lefty's case). Also, bench it, and take as much care as you can to make sure the trigger gets pulled 100% straight-back when you do (I've seen many guys pull 'em left even while benching them so watch out). DO NOT drift the sights until you do this and really verify where it's actually hitting as 99.9% of Glocks are just fine and it's the shooters who need the adjusting... There's a reason why there are literally thousands upon thousands of posts out there about Glock's hitting left or low-left, consider Occam's razor, Glock is not sending out that many faulty guns...

Think you'll find the Warren/Sevigny's are pretty much the standard as far as Glock competition sights go, but the Dawson set-ups and a few of the Heinie sets are great too, for whatever reason they cost more than Ameriglo's but they're all up at the same quality standards. The Ameriglo Defoor set I use is actually the same exact widths/ratios as the Warren/Sevigny comp's, just not as tall off the slide which I prefer since I find them better for carry, also they've got a more traditional glock rear profile which I like (oh, and they're cheaper, but it's not about saving the $20 bucks or so, Ameriglo's are just a good deal).

They're great, WAY better than stock (anything is though). Those have a really thin front (.090) but they'll probably work great on a shorter G19. I use the Defoor set which is the same rear with a .115 wide front on a G17 and they kick ass (set GT-505). FWIW, depending on what ammo you'll be using you might want to get the set for the 20,21's (GT-501) with the taller rear if you want your POI to hit at the top of the blade, I mostly shoot 115gr stuff from wallymart and 124gr +P Gold Dots for carry and every set of Ameriglo's I've had (5 sets) hit low for me at a "drive the dot" POI, with all-black irons that gets annoying IMHO, YMMV.

I had a gen4 G17 for around 5,000rds before I got sick of the nagging issues and got rid of it, probably had around 25-30 malfs and lost total confidence in it. I probably shot like 30,000rds through gen3 G17's before I got the gen4, and just over 5,000 since going back to a gen3 and haven't had a single issue that wasn't related to bad ammo. IMO, since it's really the only change function-wise, softer recoil or not, the gen4 dual-spring should be pulled out, thrown in the trash, and replaced with the jager or another aftermarket rod that uses the "old" spring asap if you plan on keeping it... FWIW, last time I was at my LGS (since I'm friends with some of the guys that work there) we took out 6 different gen4's g17's and g22's with the same springs in them: racking them side-by-side every single one was quite different feeling than the next one, and not by just a little either, might help explain why some run fine and others like crap.

Those look awesome! That is exactly what I need. Glad to be of help. FWIW, If you want them to hit at the top of the the front blade order the version for the .45/10mm's, otherwise your POI will be the center of the dot. They're a .140" wide front but matched to the .180" rear notch they're the same light-bar ratio as Warren/Sevigny Compition's, just wider (you loose a little bit of precision out past 15 yards or so but in closer that orange dot is super-duper-fast and you've got the tritium).

The Ameriglo Hackathorn set is killer. They're sold out for a reason... http://www.ameriglo.net/catalog/sights/pistol-sights/glock/special-combinations

I wouldn't say that they would disappoint with factory ammo, but they will be more impressive with the handloads or factory (Atlanta Arms) that most of us use. .45 is less likely to run properly in a 2011 than .40 is...no question. A LOT of stock 2011 guns run just fine with factory OAL ammo, and most that don't will with just a little work. Cleaning mags...yeah, price of doing business, but it takes all of maybe 30 seconds to clean a mag and it's rare you have more than two to clean. That's good time to gather your thoughts after each stage...important stuff. R, Yeah... Didn't say I still didn't want one, just seeing that it's a more involved "relationship" is all. Think for me my plan is to jump on a good used set-up of gun and mags that has already been worn in by another shooter for me, I'd far and away prefer that to buying brand new actually as while I'm willing to deal with the extra attention required to get the benefits of the slicker piece, I'd rather have most of the kinks already ironed out for me...

This is funny to me as I just had this same conversation the other day with a guy I know who I had no idea was a M or even was a shooter... Anyways, I've been kicking around the thought of picking up an STI/SVI coming from a Glock too, and from what i can tell it seems the honest truth is that if the reloading set-up isn't a go then the new gun is going to disappoint... just can't snap up whatever wallymart has got on the shelf and head to a match with those guns cleaning your mags once a year like you can with a Glock. I've been told that .45 or .38 super may run factory stuff 'cause they're longer cases, but even then it still sounds very iffy... Thinking reloading and mag maintenance goes with the territory to get those nice triggers unfortunately.

FWIW, I started using a hand-grip exerciser recently (along with a weighted training mag for dry-fire) and have already noticed an improvement seeing my sights come back on target after only a little over a week just leaving it around the house and just picking it up a few times a day... I'm thinking a little improved weak-hand strength goes a long long way as I shot a match this weekend and I actually found that while I was controlling the gun much better shot to shot and tracking my sights better than ever, I was also shooting much more relaxed overall, and while time seemed to slow-down for me seeing the sightslift and come back on target, my splits were faster and I was getting good hits. Since without any conscious effort my normal relaxed/static weak-hand grip is now stronger, it seems to be allowing me to pay more focused attention to the sights coming back while the gun behaves itself better for me. That Manny stuff about the "Stoppers" and "Floaters" is priceless, finally seeing that regularly means my work is starting to pay off. Knowing where the sights are at exactly depends on the target, tougher ones means stopping them, fast doubles and triples can happen with less patience on the easier ones.

The Sevigny Comps are six-o'clock hold, should be center/top-half of a 6" plate at 25 yards if you put the plate right on the top of the front blade, 2-3" inchs high at 10 yards sounds about right if you're looking to hit at the top of the front blade (depending on the load that can mess with some guys as POI will vary with what ammo you're using, not sure what your "preferred load" is so YMMV)... Takes some getting used to but is pretty cool, I'm more of a fan of hitting at the top of the blade myself, since I don't reload and just use whatever wallymart has on the shelf, but if I were rolling my own I'd shoot 'em for a while and see if I warmed up to where they hit before switching out the front, who knows, you might dig it, seems to work for that shooting robot Sevigny.