BallisticianX

**Custom M&P open upper sold!

My Tanfo V12 likes 124 gr Zero FMJ. The best powder I tested was HS-6 and 8.4 gr makes 170 pf. Its also lethally accurate. OAL is 1.140" and thats as long as my barrel will take.

Jim will get it running. Jim worked on all of my guns, he knows the brand. He sold me my first 5 Tanfoglios. Im glad to hear that....now that I have some concrete hope in closure to this I might get some sleep tonight lol

HS-6 still has a firm following among racegunners. Funny thing is some guys used to swear by Win 540 and when they discontinued it moved on to 3n37 as they thought they had no choice. I had a guy tell me this 2 months ago that if he could find 540 he would jump on it as its his all time favorite. So I enlightened him to the fact that Win 540 was sold under the Hodgden brand as.....wait for it..here it comes...HS-6. He had the deer in the headlight look for a few seconds. I thought everyone knew that, apparently not lol. I could make a killing putting "540" labels on my HS-6 stockpile

I feel the HS-6 was the best path for Major in this V12 version. High charge weights equal larger gas volume of which is needed especially with these hybrid guns. It was comfortable and felt mild and the gun stayed flat. The primers showed less signs of pressure than the other powders I experimented with so that will be easier on the gun. It leads me to believe HS-6 produces low chamber pressures but produces high muzzle pressure of which is just what you want. Also it was very accurate. If it wasn't for this extraction problem the gun is outstanding for open major competition. Of course longevity is still the question and only time will tell.

As a last ditch effort to fix this thing I sent it to Jim at J&L Gunsmithing in Virginia on the recommendation of Hennings. Jim says he can get it working no problem...I hope so or I am going to have a Heart attack!

Side mounts are not an option, it will block all peripheral vision to the left. Then you will have to constantly battle overswinging if you have to transition left. That is why you dont see many guys run them. Because of the drop off in popularity the demand fell and woolah they are cheaper mounts than any upright configuration. As far as $3000 STI's having the same issue your right. The difference is its an easy fix with adjustments and a wide array of specialty parts in the worst case. This is not the case with Tanfoglio. As I stated before the tanfoglio ejector is designed around 40 and 38 super so it is shorter to alot for the length of the cases. Not to mention the larger headstamp area to contact on both. No effort was put forth to enhance the part to perfectly match it to the shorter and smaller headstamped 9mm. The 9mm is the black sheep as they just throw a 9mm barrel in the gun and hope for the best. For $2k I would expect more effort and tuning to create a reliable platform for each individual caliber. The shorter 9mm should be getting kicked off sooner than it does so it does not have excessive dwell time relying on the extractor to hold it in place under the force of slide cycling. Because of this excessive time in the extractor the case can slide around changing the ejector contact to the case and thats how inconsistant extraction angles are caused. With my c-more mount removed I can see casings flying at 1 o'clock to 4 o'clock both far and near at will. Tanfoglio views the the 9mm is an acceptable platform to just throw together with existing parts just to produce an additional option. In Europe it is unlawful to sell a 9x19 so they focus on other calibers as is is their main consumer marketplace. 9mm is only produced for the US market that is not a major outlet for thanks to lack of marketing and a Horrible importer. SO without sales demand their is no R&D or upgrade demand. It comes down to Tanfoglio could basically care less....no money in it! I wish I would have figured this out prior to having to experience it for myself.

I ran a few minor loads out of the "factory ammunition barrel" that came with the package and did not have issues but I didnt run it much that way.

I cant afford to take much of a loss but Im open to offers to mull over.

I also bought 5 mag pouches/holders but I cant consider that a loss as I can use them with other staggered magazines.

I bought Hennings checkered grips, hennings extended firing pin, hennings cone fit guide rod, five K-9 mags, five base pads, five grams springs & followers, EGW sear and hammer, DAA holster, recoil and main spring packs, sidewinder racker handle, and C-More mount. $1084.73 to be exact and that does not include shipping charges. As far as a 90 degree mount goes, yes it would cure it. I dont consider it a viable option though. I do not like the 90 degree mounts as it cuts off peripheral vision to the left and with the absence of a blast shield the glass gets filthy in no time with the ports on this thing. I am not going to bother with that. Just replacing one aggravation with another.

Any recomendation would be welcomed. I have built may guns and never encountered such a challenge before.

So after owning my Gold Team Eric 2007 in 9mm for a week and a half I can honestly say I hate it. It is a jam o matic to say the least. THis thing ejects cases up at 1 o'clock and are subsequently hitting the mount and bounce back in the ejection port. I have tried tuning the extractor, trying different recoil springs, different loads, and eventually called EAA to speak to thier Gunsmith (I use that title loosely). After 2 days of leaving msg's he finally calls me back and frankly came off as not caring and was no help. HE said to try different springs and good luck basically. Due to the design of the ejector being a molded part of the sear housing there isnt much to be done to adjust it. You can only change the angle on the ejector nose and that does nothing. THe 9mm model of this gun uses all the same generic parts as the 38 super and 40. I'm sorry but you cant build a pistol to perform at the high levels of competition with retrofitting any old part for any old caliber. FOr the money you spend on this gold custom each part should be made to specific dimensions based on the best possible results to each intended caliber. SO here I sit with a $2k gun and $1k of accessories that is useless to use for it's intended purpose. EAA has the worst customer service and I dont foresee any help from them that if I can even get ahold of anyone past the recoptionist. I am going to push a refund as I dont want any part of continuing ownership of this sub-par money pit it has become!!

After playing around I settled on 8.4 gr of HS-6 behind the Zero 124 FMJ with a 10lb recoil spring. A fairly soft round without any pressure signs and comes in at 170pf in my V12. The dot tracks well and its super accurate. With the 10lb recoil spring it returns to the target real quick. I played around with auto comp and made major with 7.0 gr 168 pf but found it to be sharper and dot tracking was not as good. The dot would not come back down as easily and seemed to hang high. My silhouette load of 7.8 gr made major 167ish pf and tracked well and was equally as soft but the flattend primers turned me off of this powder. I ran it at a match this past weekend and it was very accurate and easy to shoot. THe only issue I encountered was an occassional spent case dropping back into the chamber area getting jammed between the slide and barrel hood with a half srtipped off round beneathe it. So the slide is going rearward enough to grab a new round but some how not ejecting the spent case clear of the gun. THis happened once in every 20 rounds or so with different magazines. I dont beleive this is caused from the load but rather a tuning problem I have to explore. The extractor seems to hold the round nice and tight and there has been no failure to feed so far so I am pretty sure its not the extractor. I did notice dents in the underside of my red dot mount where cases are hitting there. I might have cases bouncing back in from that contact. I need a high speed camera to see how it happens I suppose.

So After some further charge weight tweaking, recoil spring evaluation, and dot tracking tests I settled on the HS-6 powder at 8.4 gr for a 170 pf with a 10lb recoil spring. I found it soft and tracked very well. I downloaded the previous 7.5 gr (and blistering) AC load to 7.0 gr and it made 168 pf but still feels sharp and the dot would not settle back down and stayed up high. Did not prefer the feel of AC so I eliminated it as a contender. As I mentioned before the Sil at 7.8 gr also felt mild (on par with the HS-6) but showed more pressure signs with the most flattening of the primers than the other two so I decided to eliminate it as a contender. The HS-6 load is also very accurate and proved such at a match where I broke in my Tanfo yesterday. The classifier (CM 08-01) had 2 of it's 4 targets at 35 yards and that will certainly root out how well its accuracy is. All targets required 6 shots and I was impressed as each 35 yard target scored 5 alpha 1 charlie, all center right where the dot was when I cracked them off. Of course I had some other issues, namely a spent case dropping back in the chamber getting pinched between the slide and the barrel with a half stripped off new round beneath it. This happened one on each stage except the classifier by the grace of god. So I can say its occurance rate is one in every 20 rounds or so. Now I have to figure that out!

I wanted to share a difference I found with the full size C-more plastic and aluminum bodies. I have used Plastic C-mores for years with zero issues. When I bought my Tanfoglio Gold Team I heeded some advice from a fellow open shooter to put an aluminum C- more on it as the plastic bodies have been known to crack after repeated battering from open guns. When I got the aluminum one I put it on a double sided mount (7 screws to attach) with a forward cant and proceeded to sight it in. During my sight in session I eventually bottomed out on elevation adjustment and the pistol was still hitting 4-5" low at 15 and 20 yards. So I mounted up one of my plastic bodied units I bought 5-6 years ago (and known to work) to determine if I had a sight or mount/gun issue. The plastic body unit zeroed no problem with a lot of elevation adjustment to spare. Called C-more and ended up sending the Aluminum one back for an exchange. I got the new one and tried it and this time was able to zero it but there is not a lot of elevation left to play with. When zeroed the gap in the upper and lower body of the lens housing is spread open considerably on the aluminum one whereas on the plastic unit the two halves are almost parallel when zeroed on this gun. I have determined there is some geometry difference between the two bodies, they can not be built the same at all. I think the lens housing affixes the glass at a different angle between the two. I spoke to C-more about this and they said it is possible the aluminum housing with the need of a machining operation to create the lens seat may be different versus the plastic unit where the lens seat is at set dimension right out of the mold. I asked C-more if the lens angle design changed at all across the board as my plastic one is 6ish years old and he said no. He went on to tell me the only change made to the plastic bodies since 6 years ago was to add material near the windage adjustment screw area to cure the cracks that were common there. Have any of you ever experienced this same situation? I am curious to know, chime in if you have a similar case or explanation.

I am looking to get some more goodies from Henning, namely the flat trigger. He also told me that he is working with a barrel company to introduce a better barrel. He did not have specifics on for what guns or configurations. I will keep an eye on that development hoping a no poppled and better comp version is in the works for the gold custom eric. Speaking of the basepads and grams guts, mine all fit perfectly and works good with the K9 mags...except for occasionally my gold custom will come to slide lock with one round left in the mag. I cant figure out how though. The follower appears low enough to not make contact with the slide stop. One thing I did notice is that the low profile grams follower with the lack of any anti tilt legs does nose up the last round against the feed lips. I suspect the nose of the round is popping up just for an instant giving the follower just enough contact to lock it back and the round resettles down making it look ok. I plan on bending down that first coil of mag spring where the follower sits to reduce the thrust on the nose of the follower. We shall see.....

Unless your looking for mags for a the small frame v12 the new Mec-Gar anti-friction K9 mags for large frame tanfo's are in stock right now at Numerich Gun Parts Corp, 9mm/17 rd is $18.95 Their P# 1431840, 38 super/17 rd is $23.95 their P# 1431750. Gun Parts is about 8 miles from me and of course I can't legally buy them here in the Communist republic of NY thanks to furor Cuomo.

I run 8 moa on my open pistols and Revolvers for everything other than bullseye shooting. I had a 6 and a 4. The 4 washes out bad on bright New England days. The 6 was ok but not as bright and noticeable as the 8. Another plus to the 8 is when your battery starts to die (always at a match of course) the 8 will be more noticeable and still usable as it starts to dim as compared to anything smaller.

Carver Comps all the way on an M&P!! If interested I have a custom open complete upper for an M&P9 I want to sell. It's a 4.25" slide, lightening cuts which includes shaving off the hideous safety warnings on the sides, bead blasted for an entire stainless finish, top of slide left dull to reduce glare and sides polished, KKM barrel, Carver 4 port comp, springer precision slide racker handle, Leupold Delta point slide ride dovetail adapter installed and comes with the c-more adapter plate to attach either an RT2 or STS2. 16lb ISMI spring and guiderod, reduced power striker spring ( yes striker included), Apex no fail extractor, and apex striker block. All you will have to do is attach a dot and install on your gun and shoot major. It has 1200 rounds through it and no problems. I got 1" groups at 20 yards with 6.7gr of Auto comp under a Zero 125 JHP @ 1.115" oal for a 168 pf. Ill throw in aprox 100 rounds of that loaded ammo $400 shipped to a new home.

I agree, take a look at what you can modify on the magwell itself before tinkering with the pads. I made this mistake on 10-8 pads on an M&P with a magwell. About 4 matches later a mag hitting hard pack stone on a stage broke the lips off the pad ultimately disassembling the mag for easy cleaning LOL.

I am in the middle of load development for my recently acquired Gold Team Custom 9mm V12. Here is what I got so far; All loads with Zero 124 FMJ, Win SP primers, & OAL of 1.140" (as long as I can go with the throat) Silhouette: 7.8 gr, makes 168 pf HS-6: 8.0 gr, makes 169 pf AutoComp: 7.5 gr, makes 181 pf (surprised me with my chrono readings but if felt accordingly!) When I get the chance I will reduce charge to a 170 pf to compare to the other 2. Sil & HS-6 were almost identical to perceived recoil and feel. I give the slight edge to HS-6 for feel at the moment. Primer flattening was was more pronounced with the Sil and slightly better with the AC and HS-6 left the primer with the slightest roundness to the edge. I was surprised that the AC wasn't flattened right out with how violent that load felt. I am going to do some dot tracking tests when I can compare all 3 at about that 170 pf mark. So far I am favoring the HS-6 with the little bit of shooting I did comparing it to the Sil.

I am a new member of the Tanfo Gold Team owners club. I got the 9mm v12. I did some upgrades and started in on load development for major. I knew what I was up against with the popple hole orchard on this thing. I have found that making major is not such the "mission impossible" I saw some others claim it to be. I have 3 powders at my disposal; Win AC, HS-6, & Silhouette. I knew 6.7 gr of AC over a 125 Zero JHP made major in my M&P open rig and it would require more with the tanfo. All of my development is with the 124 Zero FMJ as I found the tanfo's have a shallow throat and the 125 hp's need to be loaded short to pass the plunk test. OAL with the 124 fmj are 1.145" for all loads as that is as long as I can go and I'm using Win SP primers. I used info from this forum on the tanfo's to get my starting points for each powder. I started with sil at 7.5 gr and got a 162.4 pf with avg velocity at 1310fps. I worked up in 1/10th increments to 7.8 gr with an avg of 1354 for a 167 pf. 7.8 gr leaves about an 1/8" to 3/16" of unfilled case. Next I loaded HS-6 and started at 8.0 gr and got an avg of 1358 for a 168 pf. 8.0 gr leaves 3/16" + of empty case Lastly I loaded some AC and loaded at 7.5 gr. I got wowed as the 2 shots (did not want to proceed) avg 1459 for 181 pf. 7.5 gr left a little more available space than the HS-6. This load was sharp as you would expect and violent. I will down load it when I have time to get an equal comparison to the other two loads. ( I rechecked the forum for AC loads and saw 7.2 gr mentioned so I must have mistakenly recalled 7.5) The Sil load was comfortable as was the HS-6. Though they were both close I almost give the edge to HS-6 for being a hair more mild. Some dot tracking tests at a latter time will decide which one I prefer. As far as pressure signs I checked primer condition( a mere reference as variables such as pocket tightness/primer movement come in to play) Out of the above 3 loads the Sil showed the most primer flattening, followed by the AC and least was HS-6. This only proves that burn rates (as these are all close to one another) does not always mean similiar characteristics. It comes down to the the powders design with what other materials are added, double or single based, and temperature variables that can make powders have drastically different characteristics. I have high hopes for HS-6 as I am liking what I saw and felt. I will give AC a less dose and see where it stands. The sil felt nice but the primer flattening indicates the possibility of higher chamber pressures and that again supports me leaning more towards the HS-6.

I got the Henning basepads (long) and they fit beautifully on the new Mec-Gar mags and seat in the gun perfectly, not to tight nor to loose. I did notice that the mag release is stiff on the Tanfo's and can make for some resistance when seating a mag. I cut off two coils if I remember correctly (don't hold me to that as I cut it little by little to not go to far) and it made for a much smoother insertion. If you are interested in doing the same watch his video on how to dissassemble the gun beacuase you will need to completely strip the frame of components to get out the mag release.

I recently aquired a Tanfo Gold Team in 9mm. A friend of mine has one in .40 and turned me to Henning for any upgrades I desire. So I ordered about $500 worth of stuff. I will admit there is no consistancy as to when they will answer the phone. This is simply because he is a one man shop trying to bang out product and the lady is most likely running errands etc. Typical small shop stuff and quite understandable. But when they do answer they go above and beyond to help you. As far as a post I saw saying thier order was slow to ship I am happy to say my expereince was quite contrary. I got my order within 2-3 days. If you own a Tanfo there is no better place to go for quality parts and help.