TRUBL

one of the earlier ones.....we used to offer them both ways, now only with slots

good choice!! Follow up to the ARMA Spec recoil system 9mm, the one I received......you can not tell the difference between the first and second stage......I mean ZERO!! Again.....nice concept, crappy application. I truely believe that the 2nd stage needs a spring that is about 5 to 8 pounds stronger than what is supplied with the system. Anyone one else have that system?.....try this, pull it out of your weapon.....close your eyes, push down on the system to collapse it......I'll bet you can't feel the second stage. BUT.....if you do, I'd like to know.

The Ruger Hand Guard that TACCOM sells, has MLOCK slots.......any rail sections or attachments that are made for MLOCK slots will work with the TACCOM Ruger HG.

Unfortunately, their ramp only comes back .100" and does not support the magazine......TACCOM's feed ramp comes back .170" and does support the magazine. The Glock feed ramp is a great solution for 'standard' barrels and should be in stock very soon. 1316 barrels, I understand are about a week or so out.

Over here at TACCOm, we procure our competitors parts for comparison from time to time......the other day we got in a Arma SPec 9mm recoil system. On the looks alone, very nice and a decent design. AND....the price is right for sure. We've not tried it in a PCC as of yet, but the one thing we noticed right off is that we feel the that the main recoil spring seems too light. I'm pretty confident that it will work fine for factory 147s, but I would like to see a heavier spring for 124s and 115s (personally). Buffer weight, mmmmmmight be a little on the light side but at almost 20 ounces total for the bolt/buffer combined that should be ok. Of course, being the salesman and owner of TACCOM, I'm gonna tell you that our set is waaaaaay better......but int he end, you get to decide whats best for your set up and I'm totally ok with that. I'm just trying to give information so you can make a wise choice. I think that with near min PF loads it may be an economical set up. In your set up.....you may be sending eveything back way too fast and not giving enough dwell time on the dissconnect. Not a real fan of Timney triggers, have always found that I get a hard trigger slap on the reset in PCC weapons.......if you are experiencing that, I can see why you'd get doubles.....looking at a different set up for the trigger may be in order. On the bolt.......that seems to be the wild card here. If it's aJP or TACCOM, those bolts will pretty much work with any decent trigger out there. The geomtry of depth of the ramp is very similar to the std 556 bolt carriers. Again.....speed of bolt can be an issue. As to addressing your problem, all speculative as I am not there. I'd check for some issues like trigger slap and overall feel of the firearm in recoil.....if seems hard or fast.....you have a buffer issue to address. You may also want to look at the trigger or possibly the the bolt. Only suggestions.....again, if I was there, it would be an easy diagnosis. Not being there......I can only give pointers on what to look for. Ammo as described should not be an issue if it's doing what is advertised......but you can always try another ammo too.

https://www.midwayusa.com/product/939197390 Holds the weapon, holds the mags and holds the ammo......grab and go

It's been tested on customers magazines for about 6 months now......zero issues

Did you ever do it?

get the 1316 barrel, you will be MUCHO happier

Actually, of all those splices that we made back in the day......the one for the Sig MPX by far was the best!!......the major flaw back then was the fact that no one actually made a spring long enoguh and you needed to 'splice' the springs too. If you put one together and it worked.....it would continue to work until the springs wore out (which was pretty quick, if you kept loading it up to 60 rounds). I do still have a few mags that are spliced and with the longer spring that we now have, they still work 100%. We (TACCOM) just did not want to become known for 3D printed parts, so we went away from that style of manufacture......we still have one 3D printer that we use only for prototyping new product when needed.

I wonder why I did not see that......well, first we were out of springs, now we are out of bodies, I think we will have more in a week or so.

No sir.....the brake is threaded 5/8-24

There is no splice anymore from TACCOM.....it's an extension only.

its a peel washer

Couple weeks actually.....till then, run a factory std. carbine buffer, carbine spring and about $3.00 worth of quarters in the back end.......you'll be suprised at how that set up actually feels for being so low cost.

nope.....get the taccom HG for the ruger pc carbine. 4 ounce lighter than the factory forearm and made to work with the taccom rail

BOOOO HIIIISSSSSS.........I know people have good luck with the ETS, I've not been able to get any ETS mag to run, except the 45acp mags.

still lighter than a comperable aluminum extension too!!

Just an FYI......on the TACCOM extension. While not the most beautiful extension on the market, we went with Delrin so that the rounds flow better in the extension (brass and aluminum do not play well together when it comes to friction). AND......I believe that the TACCOM extension is the only estension that still allows for the factory follower to be used intact and allow for LRBHO, which may or may not be a big deal for competition use, especially whne you have 51+ rounds at your disposal.

As a rule......HUGE extensions for the Glock magazines are typically not the problem if they do not work with the factory glock magazine. The factory mag was never designed to feed shells thru the bottom....period. Once you prep your follower and magazine....load 36 to 40 rounds in the mag....if it is slow pushing the rounds up, use another magazine. Found this to be true with ours (TACCOM), TF and MBX.....in all cases, the problem has always been the magazine and not the extension. I made 4 extended magazine 2 years ago.....went thru 6 mags to get 4 to work. And.....those 4 mags are still working to this day. For the most part, I only load 40 rounds in them, rarely more and only if I have to. Last year I did have to replace the spring on one mag and once I did that....it came back to functioning 100%. Once you get the mag/extension to function......I'd suggest not to take it apart. Consider the assembly one HUGE magazine. Clean it as one. If your magazine does start to fail......my experience has been.....replace the spring, it's worn out. Tim

Ours will work.....should be about two weeks

Interesting. When the ATF talks under 16".....for a rifle, it IS illegal, unless you have the SBR Stamp. Where as the ATF rules state that an extension (making the barrel 16" long) that is pinned/covered welded, is a legal 16" barrel. But I sorta get what you are saying......none the less, our 1016 and 1316 are legal 16" barrels in the eyes of the ATF, I see no reason to change my statements . ANd the reason we do this is to make barrels that do not need special stamps, yet give the best preformance for the 9mm round in terms of recoil reduction and dot bounce. As for IPSC.....they get to determine what ever they want, their game, their rules, they tend to do what they see fit. You do bring up a point.

So unless they do something really stupid.....which they have been known to do A LOT.......our 1016 barrel IS 16"......it's just a 10" barrel with a pinned and welded muzzle brake that makes it a legal 16" rifle barrel in the USA.

Well....our's is 10", but yes. I have had some customers put a longer aluminum HG on.....not sure if they put any shields in place or not.

Here at TACCOM....we've found that a 5.25" has such a fast impulse that a brake really does not show any improvement on dot bounce and Getting the recoil system set does more than a brake does for felt recoil.....and to that end, we've kept with that length barrel for the 16" UWL barrels. We've since come out with a 1016 barrel and a 1316 barrel......10" and 13" respectively with pinned and welded brakes to make them 16" legal. It appears that the optimal length for the brake to work for least amount of dot bounce is in that range.....giving the nod to the 10" length. The problem with a 10" barrel/brake is hand guard length. We've been able to fashion our Carbon Fiber Hand guard to 11", but some like it longer than that. The 1316 barrel allows for a 13" carbon fiber hand guard, which is only 1" shorter than our standard 14" hand guard. Overall.....both of the new barrels have been able to use the gas much more efficiently than a 16" or even our older 14.5" barrels that we've had in the past. If you look up '9mm by the inch'......you will see that velocity loss in a 10" or 13" barrel is insignicant. And to be honest, there really isn't much lost in a 5.25" barrel either....like maybe 100fps and that for the most part is the same hold over at just about any distance out to 100yds.