YVK

Placebo effects, by definition, means there is a positive outcome from an intervention that doesn't have an active component designed to elicit such outcome. It doesn't mean there is a physiologic beneficial effect. A classic example would be an anti-inflammatory pain med placebo when patients report improvement in pain but when objective markers of inflammation are checked, nothing is changed. Anyway, we've taken this thread on a tangent enough so I'll stop. Thanks for the discussion.

Yes, you would have to design a study with identically looking and feeling socks with and without compression etc, but you'd first have to prove that they are beneficial at all to begin with. Call my placebo statement an opinion based on prescribing compression socks and stockings for over a decade of cardiovascular medicine practice.

Placebo effect can be observed with any applied intervention, be that a medication, device (such as compression stockings), or sham surgery. You don't have to think that you're wearing the compression stockings but in fact have regular socks on to experience it. In fact, in this scenario you can't experience placebo effect at all since you're not applying the intervention. However, you can be wearing the compression socks and believe that they are doing something for you while in fact they aren't, which is a placebo effect.

Does it allow to attach the optic of your choice, or only the one that came with it? If you wanted to put an SRO or RTS on it, could you do it?

I am not sure I totally understand the question. Of course you are wearing them, they don't do anything for your "circulation" as long as you don't have a venous insufficiency, other than keeping you warmer or protecting from UV light.. They are just long, and often times uncomfortable socks. If people feel that they are more comfortable and they think they do something, I've no argument. Physiologically, performance enhancement gear they are not. I still wear mine at matches but mostly to keep the dirt away from my legs if I plan to go somewhere after the match.

Don't want to speak for GJM but I think what he said was that the USPSA data he posted reflects competitive use distribution. Not proof of intent. I've had SRO on my carry gun and wouldn't hesitate to carry it concealed. I just found it slightly too big. My carry guns have RMRs on them which are the best compromise of duty grade, concealment, and battery life for me. RMRs, however, are not competitive at higher levels of USPSA performance. We can use up a lot of bandwidths arguing this point; the better way of settling it is going out, shooting matches, and posting results.

It was a placebo effect. External compression, or venous compression socks, are used to help with venous insufficiency which manifests in leg swelling. For any given degree of venous dysfunction it will be more easily brought out in tall people, overweight people, people with some cardiac and pulmonary problems, or people who are on their feet and upright for extended periods of time. If your veins are working normally, you don't get any additional physiologic benefit. If your veins are not coping, your benefit would be less swelling. Some folks get pain with swelling so they may help with that too. That's about it. The only benefit that I could perceive wearing them was keeping my legs warmer, which may help with performance under some circumstances. Note that with the gravity it is normal for feet to be slightly swollen by the end of the day if you had been upright. Some quote 10% shoe size increase. The night-out shoes are best to be tried on before buying in the evening. The negative side of those is that if you overdo the degree of compression and actually worsen the venous return from superficial veins. In medical practice we have different compression pressures available and we try to gestimate venous pressure in each patient and go just above that.

As a background: my first gun ever was HK with a paddle, I started to compete with HK with a paddle, i am very comfortable operating it with my trigger finger which is the way it is intended. On a big scheme of things, it doesn't matter as much. HK fanboys will tell you that paddle is faster and you don't need to change your grip to drop the mag. The former is not true as dropping the mag is not a rate limiting step when doing a reload. Grip change is indeed minimal but so it is for me with a number of button guns. I know some people who cant get their trigger finger to the paddle well. I also know a former HK team member who had an ND by hitting trigger instead of a paddle. Overall, for a carry / duty I prefer paddle due to a complete ambidexterity. For competition I prefer button, if anything, for a crossover with my other game guns.

That's the question that I've had too. I have a couple of Nerd inner belts and I like them. I just have hard time figuring out how a ratcheting belt would work if it is firmly attached to a stiff inner belt like Nerd. Wouldn't the inner belt prevent further tightening? I've been looking at the Atlas belt for some time, and I can't understand how it would work without bunching up a softer inner belt or fighting against a stiffer one.

I found some M4 x 16 screws and they worked considerably better than the OEM R3M screws. Threaded with some resistance but went in and out fine, without stripping anything. Will need to trim the length but seems like I am back in business. Moderators, you can nuke this thread unless you want to leave it in for reference.

That's the first close up pics of F4E setup that I've seen. Thanks for posting, Wrecks. Looks like they machined for a removable insert that widens the base and allows for an adapter-less attachment.

The CZC plate is flat and is longer than both. In other words, there was no interference. The problem was with tightening optic screws down. Too much resistance. Given that the plate is aluminum and has been known to get stripped, I didn't want to force it without checking first.

We know that the two optics have the same footprint. Does anyone know if they have the same thread on mounting screws? I tried to mount a Romeo3Max on my Shadow 2 through a CZC adapter plate. I aborted the attempt after having significant resistance affixing the Romeo3 to the plate, which is a C-More RTS plate. It did feel that the threads or size were not compatible.

Charlie, this is an interesting question but without a definitive answer. You're asking for a perception of value, and everyone has their own system of values. I am typing this from a hotel where I am staying for the TPC class, a certificate for which I won randomly at the Magnus Cup. A gun on my bed stand is a Glock 19 that I won a certificate for at the the area match. So here I am, at least $1300 beneficiary of random prizes system, and it doesn't matter to me. In other words, it doesn't impact me emotionally, promotionally, or financially. This is solely based on my value system, where the most valuable thing to me is my time, where physical mementos don't hold a candle to memories and experiences, and where my financial state of affairs makes the prize system unneeded. Others may have different value sets, and I doubt there will be a clear winner of an opinion here.

Do you know what's that optic adapter, and what are quality adapter options for B92s? I see some stuff on amazon, seems like everything is dovetail mounted, which I am not a fan of.

That's not unique to SROs. I did have something like that at the Nationals, not just a second dot but even extra lines etc. Interestingly, with the SRO I could not see them if my dot was aimed at a target. They all seemed to be located on the periphery and I only saw them if I twisted the optic off axis. With a DPP during my last match I had four dots over one target. My second DPP has a big halo when aimed against the sun. I think it is a systematic problem with open emitter optics. I tried the plaster trick and it didn't stay on in recoil.

Best I can say it that in a circle of owners of both sights who I personally know, I don't know anyone who hasn't had problems with both sights. The most common issues with DPPs are the migration of a battery contact and motion sensor problems, though the latter is less relevant for competition. The SROs have had issues with elevation adjustment screws losing their position and issues with the dot disappearing or even not appearing at all, out of box. I know a lot more people/instances of DPPs going down than SROs, but it is also a function of DPP being around for longer time and being more prevalent. Personal experience is limited to about 15-18,000 rounds through three DPPs and maybe 2200 rounds through one SRO within last year. One of DPPs broke twice within 8000 rounds, other optics have been OK. SRO is theoretically a more desirable optic, given the window size and all. That said, I've not found a measurable performance difference. I just shot a four day class alternating between the two and the optic didn't seem to matter much.

My experience too. I've Henning, CZC, and Springer pads and I can get 23 in but I've had enough functioning issues to stay away from 23.

I've used them on my RMRs since there is no fully enclosed battery compartment, applying it over the base of the optic/battery. Never thought of using it on the DPP.

Heavy rain in northern Utah today, btw. I hope this doesn't move south. Now a sidetrack, for which I apologize. Does anybody know if Uber/Lyft are reasonably reliable in St George? Don't need it to get to the range, it is for my wife to move around the town.

I had feeding problems occur when I went down to 10 lbs on my Primary slide. No issue with 11 or 12. I use the former.

Did you get your straight plate?

I am generally not a good mover but I do think that my fall at the Nats has impacted on, pun intended, how deliberate my movement became after. That was a very violent fall, breaking mag pouches that didn't even directly impact the ground and giving me a decent hematoma on the shin. I do believe that confidence in being able to handle a fall has a decent downstream effect. Not if your legs are bent and you're falling in the direction of your strong hand, which is what happened with me this Sunday. The only thing that I think I could've done better was not to break the impact with the elbow but the shoulder.

I don't see this being discussed, and cursory search didn't bring out much so I thought I'll bring it up. Two years ago I DQ'd midway through my first Nationals after a fall. Pushed too hard, lost the exact direction, overcorrected, and wiped out too fast to think of how to retain the gun. Today, in practice, fell again falling out of position going to my right (right handed shooter). Handled it better this time, didn't drop anything, muzzle in a safe direction etc. I was relatively low to the ground and broke the fall with strong hand elbow. Scratches are minimal but with the direction of the impact I now have what probably is a mild acromioclavicular sprain. Had to stop practice shortly after due to pain in the muscles around the shoulder joint with the recoil. I am sure it is a minor injury and I'll be back to norm in several days but that got me thinking. Does anybody work on this, admittedly unpleasant, skill of falling with a gun? I mean, this stuff is bound to happen, are we hoping that individual reaction and athleticism will help, or are there techniques and tips worth talking about?

I've three Shadow 2 slides with top windows, side windows, and recoil tunnel windows cut by four different outfits. I guess I'll see which one holds up the best. Round counts range from barely anything to modest so far.