BallisticianX

I couldn't agree more man. How are the ranges looking in watervliet? buried? I have to assume they are. I haven't been there since the last USPSA match back in November. I am not a member there so I can not give an accurate assessment. Though I am sure they are in the same condition as my club here in Saugerties, NY......snowed in lol.

I reading all these responses there are a lot of good points. I stated in my review I understand some "tweaking" is always necesary to a gun if your a serious shooter with define preferences. But to pay extra for advertised upgrades and not get them is a point that can not be contested. Don't tell me its a fitted action if it is not, don't proclaim its a better barrel when you can't even crown it, and don't charge me more for all the addressed details that are NOT ADDRESSED! Its one thing to tweak and a complete other to repair!

Well if there's one thing I know for sure you will never see another review from me on a Performance Center Firearm as I will never throw my money way on them again! Ill buy a standard model and just know to expect to do the work right from the get go without any surprises

As far as the cylinder throats being .357 vs. .355...that is a minor issue that can be overcome with the right bullet/load combination. A .356 bullet will be the fix if nothing else. I have a 686 cylinder honed out to .3585 and it shot .357 bullets very accurately. The barrel bore diameter is much more critical in the accuracy aspect of the gun. I am not sure what the S&W spec is and have not slugged my barrel but as long as it is .355 or .356 it should be fine. I plan on feeding it .356 Hi-Tek coated bullets anyway.

It seems like this might be the norm for the performance center output. A lot of hype with little return. I have relayed my concerns to S&W but it fell on deaf ears. Also may I add I am a Ford Fan too

Another great revolver Gunsmith is Mark Hartshorne of Pinnacle High Performance in Pennsylvania. Years ago before I learned and refined my own gunsmithing skills I picked up a used custom built 686 revo he was selling. It was smooth and crisper than anything I ever ran before. For years and 100's of thousands rounds later I used that revo for ICORE right up until recently without a problem. Still just as smooth and tight as the day I got it from him. I also sent him my factory 586 for a action job and target hammer & trigger install. Fantastic and smooth as glass on ice and crisper than fresh lettuce! He knows what he is doing and reasonable rates as well. Thats my recomendation based on my experiences.

After a long wait I finally got my hands on a 929 to use in place of my custom 686 plus for ICORE Open class. I decided to give you all a detailed report. It is a lengthy write up but a review should be to include all you should know. Soooo... lets begin: I was excited about finally upgrading to an 8 shot from a 7. Also happy thinking alot of the usual tuning work to make a revolver competition ready would already be done as advertised. Specifically a smooth fitted Performance center action, chamfered charge holes, and a sharp broach cut barrel. Before I describe what I found let me say it is unrealistic to expect that even a performance center gun would be comprable to a full custom worked gun. I expected to do some little detail work. But in the great words of Jerry Reed "Brother I didn't know it was gonna that much"...After inserting some snap caps and running the action in both single and double I found it to be... well unexpectedly rough and a heavy pull. In single action the "clicks" were not define and sharp but rather dull as if there was cotton packed in the action. The pull weight to break the hammer was a bit heavier than expected but not overly horrible. In double action it was gritty and rough like dragging plastic across 80 grit with a stacking up pull. For a comparible reference my 1987 made model 36 untouched from the factory was crisper and more pleasant on the trigger finger. So after disassembling the action I found very little evidence of any fitting what so ever. The only contact surfaces between the hammer and sears that was even touched was the single action sear hook on the trigger body and the double action sear on the hammer. They were both rough ground to the spec'd angle but left unstoned and rough! All other contacting trigger to hammer surfaces were untouched. When I say untouched I mean the mating points were riding on the flash (the excess material that oozes out the mold seam in the MIM (aka cintering) process) of the hammer and trigger. Also the rebound slide surfaces were rough with uneven surfaces. The frame surfaces where the rebound slide rides was also left as a horribly rough machined surface. There were more resistance prone surfaces in this thing than any other Smith revo I have ever seen. Couple that with a grossly heavy mainspring and 18lb rebound spring you better have a strong trigger finger. So after a complete stoning with a fine india stone to break the flash followed by a hard Arkansas (white) stone to all mating surfaces and inner frame including the burrs on the side plate. Then lightening the mainspring and a replacement 12-13lb rebound spring the action was smooth, crisp, and non stacking. Now it clicks like breaking glass and cycles without bruising my finger!! On a side note, contrary to popular belief, the MIM process creates a very dense and hard part that is very durable. It is just as durable and in most cases more durable than just a color case hardening. I bobbed the hammer, smoothed & rounded the trigger. A die grinder was necessary to cut off the hammer spur as a hack saw was futile to the job whereas Ive hacksawed color case hardened hammers easily. Now onto the Cylinder. To advertise it had chamfered charge holes is not untrue but a stretch on the implied result. The only chamfering was on the extractor that emconpasses 40% of the charge hole edge. The other 60% of the charge hole is of the actual cylinder and left untouched. It was a sharp 90 degree edge that was quite sharp. Sharp enough to shear copper or lead by just dropping in a moonclip when they did drop in cleanly. During test moonclip reloads with dummy rounds the edges of the case mouths hung up on that edge more often than not despite a normal taper crimp. So a full chamfer is a must here. Forget the hand chamfer tools here. To get good results cutting titanium you need a carbide cutter run at higher spindle speeds with a constant oil bath to prevent overheating the poor heat disapating Ti. If no mill or fixtures at your disposal your sending it out for this work....HSS cutters on hand run tools are OUT!! The cylinder was also quite hard to open. The centerpin lacked a good radius on the tip and was heavily marred and marked up. The Center pin tip looked like the end of a worn out end mill. To add to that the bolt (aka cylinder catch) was short stroked and could barely push the centerpin out enough to clear the latch hole. I'm here to tell you it was a bastadrly beast to pop open. Forget popping it open with just your index finger of your strong hand for those stage start reloads off the bench. After dressing the center pin tip radius up + a polish and giving the bolt some additional forward movement it opened smoothly as it should. I have to mention this is also the first time I ever had to address the centerpin and bolt marriage on a smith. Additionally the cylinder turned on the yoke like a brake drume on over adjusted break shoes. After polishing out the drag marks on the yoke it was able to spin tightly and effortlesly. Now lets adress the barrel...yeah theres more! The forcing cone is cut and left rough as hell. ALmost looks like tapered pipe threads in there. I know this is a contested issue as to whether or not it is critical to the accuracy. My opinion is if its not as good as it could be it is certainly not going to help the issue. So a cleaner cut on the forcing cone is something easy to achieve and should therefore be expected from the factory. So I am contemplating dressing it up or just recut to a taylor style..TBD. Now the crown....its deplorable to say the least. The recessed 90 cut left a rough marred surface I would be ashamed of. Also the lands are left with curled in burred edges at the crown. This is indicative to a dull cutter used on the crown after the barrel was brached. Makes you wonder how long there pushing there tooling to save a buck? In an effort to reduce chattering when re-crowning I shot a cylinder worth of stiff jacketed bullets to knock them down. It sheared off and deposited enough lead and guilding metal in the crowns recess to swage a full 17 HMR projectile. So I re-cut the crown with an 11 degree cut and chamfered the bore to crown edge with a brass button and 500 grit lapping compound. Ok thats the mechanical now onto the astetics. The finish was well done and matched between all stainless parts. I have to say the chrome plating on the hammer and trigger are an ok to match the rest of the gun but become less than pleasing as they marr easily. In short order it gives the hammer and trigger a toy cap gun look actually. A stainless set bead blasted would be more astetically fitting and better matching. Of course a matte polished stainless finish to the whole gun would be a nice upgrade to its looks but that is a matter of opinion and not the end of the world here. The side plate mates well as does the yoke to the frame. But the air gap between the barrel underlug and frame was a bit hard to accept...a tighter fit would be nice. As my preference I would also like to see a relief cut to the bottom of the left side blast shield/shroud. It would eliviate any interference with a moonclip load. Very little clearance between the path to the charge hole and that shield potruding out. As far as weight and handling goes its positive there. The 929 is considerably lighter than one might think by the mass of this beast thanks in part to the Titanium cylinder. It moves quick and easily during transitions. The balance is quite good and not nose heavy as it might appear at first glance. The longer barrel is a welcomed aspect for those of you who will be using the iron sights for a forgiving sight radius. In conclusion my thoughts are that this revolver has alot going for it for competitive use. Good balance, easy to drive, and manipulate. WIth a "finally tuned action"..(yes I meant "finally" as in not having it when you expected and waiting to get it...my dig of a joke) it is as smooth and crisp as any fine worked revolver out there. The 9mm (9x19) brings distinct advantages to the table with with it's vast availability and choices, small case volume for more uniform ignition shot to shot, short case for reliable extraction and charging in speed loads, low recoil, and of course the flexibility of 8 rounds. As far as accuracy goes I have not extensively tested it yet as my attention has been on working out the variables that would hinder accuracy results. That coupled with living in the Anarctic region of the Northeast has detered me from venturing out to the range. Not easy to comfortably shoot for precision when your dressed like the younger brother from "A Christmas Story". I will report back on that when it warms up. Anyway I believe this is the most versatile and most capable revolver platform ever available for revolver run & gun to date. It unfortunately requires some work to achieve its potential out of the box. It does not by any means live up to the results expected from the performance center. To put it plainly the extra cost associated to the moniker is simply not reflected into what you get. All in all the lack of addresed detail for the pricepoint is its only downfall really. The durability and capability are there just needing to be brought out with some work. So to advertise it is "competition ready out of the box" is not the case. I would re-coin it's slogan to "the ultimate competition revolver thats almost there out of the box" Thank you for reading my detailed review and I hope this helps in getting to know this new kid on the block. I am looking forward to your comments!

I originally started the project for steel and was going to experiment with WAC as I have a good supply. I am also well aware of the SCSA ammo requirements. I have been shooting USPSA, ICORE, and SCSA for years. In the back of my mind I figured I would run this gun in USPSA also. I am just unfamiliar with the characteristics of WAC and with experimentation I have learned what your saying. I wanted to use a powder for light loads that gave something for the comp to work with. I have since scrapped WAC for light steel loads. I will use my go to powder for the 38, .45 and minor 9's.....dependable titegroup. I loaded the 12 remaining MG 115's I had left over with 7.0 gr of WAC for a USPSA major load. Little light yet but put 3 shots touching at 20 yards. I tried BERRY's and EXTREME plated pills with loads at 150ish pf and they flew all over. Regardless of what they say for usable velocity, standard plated bullets lose accuracy over 1100fps at least in all my guns!! I wasn't surprised with the extreme bullets grouping like crap. Every one I ever tried does. The Berry's have always shot great in my standard 9's and my regular go to in my ICORE revo. So.....I am curious to try some of the berry's heavy plate concave base bullets to see if they shoot good for hotter loads and how they compare to the MG's. They make them just for hot rod opens guns. Anyone ever use them?

Well three years later it still runs reliable and without a single problem.

Before you load Pyrodex P or other black powder substitutes in a center fire pistol consider this. Every time you fire a semi or a revolver with smokeless you get burnt powder residue all over the gun and works its way into every nook and cranny of your gun, including the internals. With the lower pressured black powder and pyrodex you will get more residue buildup than smokeless. As before mentioned Pyrodex and most substitutes, though less concentration than true black powder, still contain some form of sulphate. Presence of Sulphate or Sulfer draws water vapor from the air and the vapor reacts with the sulfer and woolah, ya got your self some mild sulfuric acid. Next comes the corrosion that works quick ....Rust on steroids!! . So I ask you do you want that risk of ruining a gun from the inside out with only conventional cleaning you normally would do or....after every time you use it do a complete tear down cleaning of the firearm to prevent it? Not worth the risk or extra work. I had a cap and ball revolver and in short order offed it. A complete pain in the arse to clean and dirty as all hell. Don't get me wrong I like to shoot traditional patched round ball rifles. The single shot rifle is easier to clean and much less parts than a modern firearm to collect crud.

That is unfortunate. But when a trigger job is done whatever gets stoned or changed to obtain the desired feel can of course change the dynamics of the system. In your case it sounds like somewhere along the line a considerable amount of material was removed from the hammer and/or sear to change the position it catches.

I am going to try some 124's again with a hotter load. The 115's over 6.5 gr WAC are moving along at 1300fps (150ish pf) and no signs of pressure concerns. My current dilemma now is I only have plated pills in my arsenal. Weary about going any higher with them. The 115's I have are extreme bullets and they say max 1500 fps but recommend staying around 1200 and at 1300 I see no considerable fouling. The 124's are Berry's and they warn nothing over 1250fps...... They both offer heavy plated bullets for comp major loads and I am going to have to get some before I go any further. The heavy plated bullets are a cheaper buy than MG or Prec. Delta jacketed so I will start with them.

I recently turned a spare FS M&P9 slide into an open top end. My original intention was to create an open gun for Steel shooting using minor pf. In order to get the comp to work and not just be a fancy muzzle decoration I decided to use WAC powder I have in my stock. I don't have any other powders in the suitable burn rate to utilize the comp anyway. So with hitting my target point of 140 and now into 150 I am experiencing a decent amount of singed powder kernels in the chamber and bore. Of course this is not wanted and want to eliminate it. So I posted a topic in the reloading section about it. Though I have been reloading for 25 years for conventional pistol & rifle I am new to the open gun world and loading for it. So after some responses and further load testing I believe WAC may be just one of those powders that needs ramped up powder charges to get a clean burn. With that epiphany I am now considering just turning it up and loading to major. My concern is the M&P platforms ability to handle this rigorous task. Not so much if it will take the rigors out of the gate but more so how long it will handle it over time before failure and accuracy problems........ SO share your experiences with doing it, how long you have used an M&P with major, how many rounds so far, what problems or parts that needed replacement etc??? The more info the merrier! I need to ease my troubled mind or confirm my reservations and move on.....I need gun closure with this relationship lol MY build info: M&P9 FS Slide lightening cuts and sides milled down a bit for weight reduction KKM Precision Barrel (1 in 20 twist) Carver 3 port comp 11lb Wolff recoil spring with non-encapsulated guide rod Apex competition action spring kit Worked trigger group to 3lbs eliminating over travel and reset distance. Thank you for any input you may have.

Oh and as far as dies to use, Dillon and Hornady are all I use in the progressives for straight wall stuff and they have been flawless. They both have the wide mouths required for progressive press operations. I myself have gone almost exclusively to the hornady dies. I really like there seating die with the alignment sleeve. It eliminates bullet bulge and loads very concentric ammo... and at a considerably less price than other alignment sleeve die sets. If you wanna pony up more money on bling Redding makes some dies designed for progressives and though I havent used them I imagine they are going to be damn good as they have a reputation for precision and quality that I can attest to that with there rifle dies. For single stage deployment I use only Redding and Forster dies. I stay away from Lee and RCBS for anything. Lee, though it works, is just barely good enough to work most of the time and in alot of cases are crude in design and dimensional consistancy. There Factory Crimp die is probably the best contribution they ever made to the reloading world, I never had the need to use one myself but only hear good things about it, so Ill give em that.. RCBS, in the past was good. Now I think there quest for cutting costs have resulted in a quality slide and I had alot of problems with stuff I have used in the recent years.

I have always seated and crimped seperately when loading lead or plated bullets without a cannelure or crimp groove. As already pointed out it damages the bullet as the crimp is being applied while the bullet is still moving to the desired length. For a cast lead pill this shears lead off and pinches it in the case mouth. Therefore it relocates as a deposit in the bore and causes deficiency in the accuracy dept but more so becomes a downright pain in the a$$ to clean the bore. With plated bullets it can pierce the thin copper plating and cause sepperation and unstable bullet flight and as a bonus that unwanted lead deposit buildup thats so fun to remove. Now with roll crimping a jacketed bullet with a cannelure for magnums using one die for both operations is something I do regularly. The cannelure eliminates the shearing problem for the most part as it is a recessed surface and thus more forgiving, with proper adjustment of where the crimp lands in the cannelure. Not to mention I do my magnums in small batches on a single stage press and it makes for a more convenient process. I am yet to exibit the type of problems I have experienced with the before mentioned lead and plated bullets with regard to shearing in jacketed bullets with a cannelure. Simotaneous seat/crimping on a Jacketed cannelure has no effect on accuracy in the least either. My .44 mag loads in my scoped Ruger Super Blackhawk shoots quarter sized 3 shot groups at 50 yards, 2" at 100yds (Lil Gun in the .44 mag is magic).

s All of your loading experience is hindering your adventurous spirit! 6.5 WAC with a 115 is nothing. You need to get up to about 7.4-7.6 to get that extreme up to clean burning MAJOR speed. I load MG 115 JHP with 7.8 @1.165. Gets me about 174 PF which works my Cheely Comp really well. I have been up to 8 grains but didn't see any improvement so I backed it down a few ticks. Heck, I typically run 7.2-7.4 with a 121. Turn it up!! I have been mulling over "turning it up". But remember I am using a dishwasher safe tupperware pistol here. Despite assurances from Bobby Carver that the M&P9 platform will hold up just fine to the rigors of major I still have my reservations. Coupled with the guy at KKM telling me it wont last 6 months feeding it a steady diet of Major loads. Even though the M&P9 has been used for Major for something like 2-3 years now I still feel the practice is in it infancy and has not been done long enough for conclusive proof that the gun will last. So the powerful emotion of preserving my investment fueled by paranioa and contridictions has been overcoming my adventurous spirit! This gun is my first experience with a polymer platform. So my own expereince is lacking and have not used it long enough to become confident in its capabilities. I despised plastic guns for the longest time but gave in. Only because I wanted a cheap alternative to the .45 for IDPA and USPSA and sought a 9mm. My wallet could not afford the STI 1911 Trojan in 9mm I wanted so woolah I went plastic and chose the M&P. I chose it after srutinizing and comparing all options as it pointed and felt the best. Now here I am with a spare slide, a dream, and a supply of WAC..... lol.

My old Production/ESP load was 4.2 gr of Titegroup under a 115gr Extreme RN plated bullet. As of this past June I changed to 4.0 gr of Titegroup under a 124 gr Berry's FP (more of a truncated cone profile). This load chrono's at 1020fps avg. out of my M&P9 FS 4.25" and 1045fps avg out of the M&P9L 5" both using a KKM barrel. Groups were about the same between both guns, 1.250" at 25 yards. TItegroup is a fine propellant and is one of my favorites. It is my go to for practical shooting in the 9mm minor, 38 Special, and .45acp. I also use it behind 200gr Coated LSWC in the 45acp for 170 pf without any problems as before mentioned. Asa side note I have found the following nuances with the 9mm in the M&P; I found both the M&P factory barrel as well as the KKM barrels preferred bullets at .356" versus .355: Anything I tried at .355" could not do better than 2.5" at 25yds. Also I saw a tightening of groups whenever I used a FP profile bullet versus the RN profile of the same weight and brand. This does not surprise me actually. Most FP's or HP's shoot better than there RN counterparts due to more surface of the bullet to ride the bore, better chance to "self center" itself in the bore to remain balanced in flight. Good luck, pay attention to everything your doing at the bench, dont get distracted with anything and check check check and you will be fine. Titegroup in the 9mm is not something to be freightened about (your M&P has a fully supported barrel and a dillon will not double charge all by itself).....

I tried 115 gr Extreme plated pills and am up to 6.5 grains. Im still getting the singed kernels.....

That movie is the official training aid for my local PD lol

I have some 115's I could try. I do understand the physics around the point you make and is certainly worth trying. The reason I went with 124's is I like the KKM barrels in the M&P. IMO they are the single most impactful addition you can make to an M&P to improve accuracy. I have employed 3 of them in different M&P's and they shrunk groups down considerably compared to factory and Storm Lake. I have tried both 115's and 124's out of them all and I always get the best accuracy out of them with 124 pills, though the 115's arent bad. The KKM uses a 1 in 20" twist rate so anything heavier than 124's start to destabilize. No matter anything heavier than that from what I understand reduces comp effectiveness in 9mm with required reduced powder charges etc. With such a slow rate of twist there is minimal resistance to atribute to pressure rise. WIth that consideration I figured I would just use the proven 124 for accuracy and a little more time in the barrel to better utilize the slower powder. I have 25+ years at the bench but is has been with conventional pistol recipe's and precision benchrest rifle. So the compensator adds a new dynamic that though I can wrap my head around the scientifics of it there are alot of little variables that effect it that you would only be aware of from applied experience. That is an area I lack right now. Before I start using a bullet I am not sure of I wanted to rule out the variables of the powder itself to see if I cant make a bullet I know is accurate work. I foresee alot of test firing in my future lol

Hello all, Been awhile since I posted rather than just read but I want to pick your brains. I am embarking on developing 9mm loads for a compensated 9mm "open gun" built on the M&P platform. My intension of this build is for a Steel gun rather than USPSA competitions, although it may develop into that too. I know the M&P is not the optimum "open" platform but I had one for IDPA ESP use and a spare slide and time on my hands...enough said. So my target point is about a 140-150 pf with a 124 Berry's plated for steel while getting the comp to work enough to fufill its purpose. Here are the gun specs in case you want them to digest; M&P9 platform FS slide length, slide lightening cuts and some weight reduction done. KKM Precision fully supported Barrel Carver 3 port comp Non encapsulated guide rod with 11lb wolff spring Slide ride mounted Delta point (not the C.O.R.E. its a dovetail mount from Leupold) Compensated auto's are a new venture for me. My reloading has been for standard auto's and ported revo's. But I have a full understanding of the science around them and the general idea for tuning. That said for load development I chose to try Win AC powder as it seems to be a favorite to produce the desired gas volume and higher muzzle pressure while keeping chamber pressure to safe levels. So I loaded 5.5 grains behind the 124 plated pill with a fed standard GM match small pistol primer and chronoed. 8 shots with a low of 1101 and high of 1139fps (139 pf avg.) No problems with the gun, fed and ejected flawlessly and happy with the functioning. The comp seemed to keep the gun reasonably flat and the recoil was felt pushing straight into my palm. I want to increase the charge and test the feel as I work up etc. I want a bit more improvement on muzzle rise so going a bit hotter for more gas etc is my next step. BUT...always a "but", there was a considerable amount of singed powder kernels in the bore and in the chamber. So with my minimal experience with this propellant my question is.....Is this is normal for this stuff? Or is this one of those niche powders that only becomes clean when pushed hot (like I have found with 231 or unique) or is the flashpoint of AC higher requiring a hotter primer. I know generally speaking the slower the powder the higher the flashpoint due to increased concentration of retardents present but there are always exceptions looming in the chemistry of propellants. So some of you have been through this already I am sure. SO before I go any further any experience with this powders characteristics or ignition requirements will be much appreciated. I dont want to wast my precious and seemingly irreplaceable components seeking the answer if it is already known. Thanks for any input!

My trigger work was put through it's paces Saturday. I put another 130 rounds of .22LR through the TacSol conversion at a local Steel Challenge match. It worked flawlessly and felt great. So I have to cal this trigger job a success. A few of the other shooters wanted to give my gun a try. They all were admiring it's flashy appearance with all my added on polished stainless hardware. (People are like cats, were attracted to shiny things!)Everyone who fired it were very impressed with how it felt and shot. I also had a good day and ended up taking High Overall score of all competitors. It was a great day and I'm very proud of all the time and work I have in this pistol.

I in fact am using a STI sear spring, of which looks identical to a colt mainspring. As far as my range testing after my re-work, it went well. I put through about 80 rounds of .45 and another 100 .22Lr with my TacSol 2211 conversion installed on my frame. Everything fired, no hammer follow, and all pulls of the trigger felt consistent. My dad put a couple rounds through it and said that one of his trigger pulls tripped easier than the others, not sure what happened. I didn't experience any light pulls myself. As a matter of fact the trigger feels exactly the same whether I just manually cock the hammer, rack the slide, or drop it from slide lock. Before I re-worked my trigger the feel and pull weight was noticeably different between all three of those conditions. I am happy, but still intend to upgrade to a EGW sear and after some use I will see just how good my work really is, as for right now I'm feeling pretty good about it. I'm very proud of this gun, I've done alot of upgrading to it and educated myself on the 1911 quite alot.

I cut the hammer hooks to .019". Some of the reference materials said to cut them to .020" and others said .018", so I split the difference and did .019". Now, Wide45, I checked my engagement and there was favoritism to one side of the sear. I stoned the sear to even it out and ended up with alot of creep. Not only could you feel it I also could see the hammer creeping forward during the trigger pull. It would learch a little forward and then stop just before the sear broke. So I took it apart and on a hunch I increased the angle on my jig. What I mean is; I backed out the the stop on my ed brown jig a little bit. This hinges the sear more towards it's back side. This causes the angle to be cut a little more into the front side of the sear nose. I re-stoned my secondary angle so it only cut about a third of the way into the finished primary angle surface. I checked and corrected for even sear to hammer engagement by use of a sharpie. After doing this the creep is less, not totaly gone but ok. The hammer now stays in place until it breaks, no more slight movement forward when pulling the trigger. I tested the function with alot of racking the slide at speed with no problems. When I release the slide from slide lock with a weak grip the hammer follows every now and then, if I have a firm grip it won't follow. When droping slide lock on dummy loads out of the magazine it won't follow either. I attribute this occasional hammer follow with a weak grip to inertia of the gun lunging forward and the trigger staying at rest bumping the sear. I increased the tension on the disconnector spring leg and it seemed to clear up. I will be heading to the range shortly to test it again. I will be ordering a sear from EGW soon. I will also look into a magnifier of some sort also. That will give me some piece of mind. So I will let you know how my range testing goes. I hope it goes well but my fear that I may have cut the sear down to much is looming in my head.

I decided to do a trigger job on my 1911 (STI Spartan) out of necessity rather than recreation. I will explain why and how I did it so you have the full understanding of my process to help you critique and possibly answer my questions at the end. I had a problem with hammer follow and 3 shot bursts. I returned the gun for service and though I got a properly functioning gun back, it had a much heavier spongy pull than when it was new. So being a poor man as of late I could not afford to have a trigger done by a reputable gunsmith and pay for shipping etc (there aren't any "good" ones near me). So after hours of reading up, watching videos, and saving a couple bucks I decided to tackle the endeavor myself. I have done some general "smithing" work on guns for years but do not claim to be a pro at any rate. So to the point; I purchased a Fusion brand "hi-impact" stainless commander hammer, Fusion brand match stainless sear, and Ed Brown sear jig. I also procured new stones from Fusion; medium india stone and fine ceramic stone. I lightly stoned/polished all metal to metal contact points (sear and hammer sides, sear and dis-connector matting points etc.). I stoned smooth the hammer hooks to a sharp 90 degrees and adjusted the hook height to .019". I dressed the sear primary angle using the Ed Brown jig until I had contact to the entire surface of the nose and was mirror smooth. I then cut the secondary by way of riding the stone against the back of the sear nose and using the bottom of the sear(the top of the shelf coming off of the sear hooks)as a guide. I initially cut the secondary or relief angle so it cut into a 1/3 of finished primary angle surface. To reduce creep I continued to stone a little more secondary angle a tad at a time until it was gone. The finished secondary angle is now just under half way into the primary angle surface. I adjusted the sear and dis-connector spring legs with a little more bend on the dis-connector versus the sear leg to obtain a 3.75 lb. pull. I tested the function by dry racking the slide at speed for about an hour and a few slide lock releases(I know that's not healthy but needs to be checked) with no hammer follow. I went to the range and fired 130 rounds with no problems. My question is; how many rounds should be fired to break in this new sear and hammer relationship to confirm the safety and reliability of the job? Also has anyone used the Fusion Hammer and sear? What are your opinions of there durability and quality? I am a perfectionist and will always wonder if the result of my work is the best it could be. I tend to over worry and over test my work. In this case I just want a general limit of satisfactory testing so I don't wear it out before I'm confident lol. I also hope my choice of Fusion Brand components is not going to hurt me in the long run. I heard alot of good things about them, but am unsure of there actual durability and hardness as compared to the EGW parts I could not afford right now. Any thoughts are greatly appreciated.