priler

...and where/how exactly are we supposed to get a small framed stock 2 here in the USA?

do the dawson sights have a set screw?

actually i found that rsrgroup a while back and realized it's not a new importer. i think your thinking of I.F.G. italian firearms group.(tanfoglio,pedersoli,fair,sabatti) ...but they don't seem to be set up yet,..if ever.

thanks Nealio. one of the first things i thought about in your previous post about this,was that it would be a great idea or possibly even necessary to install a wolff extra strength spring but i don't think wolff has these for the mec-gars yet. do you know if a spring from an older witness mag will work on the new mec-gar? if so,the wolff extra strength they have now may work. the CZ75s can be had at +10% or +15% instead of just +5%.

i think the witness classic are pretty good guns and excellent value at the selling price. i also like the way they fit my hand a bit better than a cz75. however,there is no way i would compare them to a limited.your comparing a performance center gun to a standard production one. if you do decide to go this route,just make sure you like the front sight which is part of the slide and not dove-tailed. you're going to have to come up with something if you want to change it. i don't think the post is even big enough to drill.

what i want to know is,why wouldn't para fit those BETTER parts on the limiteds. i mean specifically the EB national match bushing and the C&S hammer,sear and disconnector. it makes no sence given the purpose of the limiteds exept for cost cutting. in fact,imo,they belong there more than they do on the tactical.

NICE! thank you Nealio. have you tested at the range yet?

i would use the last two holes already on there to judge how far down three more round would be,then use a drill bit about the size as the holes already there.then take off any rough edges.if bare metal comes up,maybe a tiny bit of paint. given the importance of the follower not snagging,well,i guess it's important. i'm not sure if the last round would be to the left or right of the mag body,but i would drill the hole on the side that the round goes.also,i think i would prefer the hole to be a little farther down than the center of the 20th round,that way you can tell it's number 20 coming in.it's hard to tell if you put 20 or 21 if the hole is completely covered. also,apply only a light force to drill the hole slowly,don't apply too much pressure,..you don't want to bend or deform the mag body,even the slightest bit. take your time. on loading 21 rounds with the slide open,..i'd be careful how far down to push #20 in order to load #21. it's really more of an excercise/issue to see what's the fastest way to get 20+1. when pushing down #1 through #19,with either your fingers or an uplula,how far won't be as critical as #20(so the follower doesn't snag).(then again,some mag loaders can push the rounds quite a ways in,so a bit of judgement and experimenting may be needed) thanks PHX.

i wanted to ask one more thing PHX. have you tried loading 21 rounds and with an open slide,inserting the mag and releasing slide. in other words,if you load 21 rds with a closed slide,the follower will bind because the slide is pushing on the top round causing the follower to move farther down but with an open slide it won't. have you been able to confirm this? with 20 rds,it should be no problem either way. also,have you thought of making a witness hole for the 20th round?

well,according to another gentlemen in a thread around here,the mec-gar mags have that marking according to caliber.for example,if it's a 10mm mag,it will have "K10". K9,as yours ,are 9mm and so on. my "move" towards tanfoglio is going to be a small but sizable investment and i don't like surprises.i'm having a hard time as it is thinking of these pistols as "sporting" instead of as "tools" for which utter reliability is an absolute must. i've already been wrong as to exactly what "small frame" and "large frame" actually means in tanfoglio lingo,even though in my hands i was right. my transition to "sporting" and participating in local events has caused a massive internal debate as i don't wish to sacrifice the years of practise with what i actually carry and my efficiency with that. anyway.... i see,so the spacer is there but it's wider than on the previous mag and covers the back pretty much end to end. that's a definite improvement and in combination with the new follower should make for increased reliability. i bet that on the old mag,if you press inward on the follower along it's edges,the follower would tilt a little but if you do the same on the mec-gar,the follower would simply move downward perpendicular to the mag body. this is the same thing as on the walther mags i mentioned. with mec-gar,it's all about reliability. it's surprising how long it's taken seeing how mec-gar is italian too. thanks for the info PHX,i appreciate that. as to creating a spacer in the base pad,i would probably try some type of industrial metal adhesive before using rivets but making the spacer from aluminum is a good idea. i would also relegate these mags(as such modified)for pure sporting use and not for anything defensive(just in case). i would think that the dimensions,and in particular,where one spacer meets the other,would be extremely critical for reliability,including any gap. perhaps making them as close as posible to the other and taking off a tiny amount on the edges where the two spacers meet and applying some type of fairly permanent lubricant there so that the follower moves smoothly from one spacer to the other,might be a good idea,i don't know.given how mag parts all come together,this can be difficult. 20 rds with perfectly reliable mags is good though,i agree with you,..but i'm learning fast that,in competition,if there's some advantage to exploit,someone will.

very nice PHX. i do have a couple of questions though. first,the link that you provide to midway is for the old 18 rd mags. the new mec-gar 9mm 17 rd mag has the part number MGWIT9SFAFC. i suppose it's possible that midway simply hasn't changed the information and if you order,you get the new mec-gar 17 rounder. it does have "K9" on it so.... also,thanks for the pictures. so for sure,the new mec-gar 9mm mag does NOT have a spacer. nice. looks like the back end is thicker,so the whole back end IS a spacer. secondly,your saying you installed the H-141 base pad but left the stock mec-gar spring and follower in place and got 20 rounds? is this correct. i just want to get my facts straight. i understand what you mean about the follower. the walther p99 use to come with 16 rd s&w mags but then they moved to a mec-gar 15 rd mag and the follower had longer legs and a larger overall follower that really keeps the top rounds in optimum position more positively(and no doubt helps keep the spring from coming closer to binding). mec-gar to the rescue. please let us know if you do any modification(that's reliable) to get 21/22 rounds without the follower sticking. (perhaps it's the H-141 that should already come modified to this mag,i dunno)

yes,a witness classic 1 is a standard service pistol on a small frame. the classic 2 is a large frame. ...but no,it's not what i'm looking for. thanks,appreciate it.

is there any way at all to buy or order a small frame tanfoglio elite stock 2 in 9mm here in the USA?(or any other of the elites for that matter) it bugs me to no end knowing that just over the border in canada these exist and that we here in the USA have to deal with what eaa DECIDES to import. i really wish that eaa would just simply die and go away. i would not be interested in conversion kits for this stock 2. a small or large frame elite of a specific model,are exactly the same gun,..so if eaa is already importing the model,they should have no problem importing the small frame.(from a legal point of view) do any of you americans own a small frame elite,and if so,how did you get it? also,the issue is not small hands.i have medium to large hands.the issue is better trigger control and a better feel in your hands.if you want to know what i mean,hold in your hand,back to back,an armalite ar-24,witness classic 1 or ria/armscor map1 and then your elite.any of these cheap three will put to shame how your expensive elite feels in your hand and the type of trigger technique i use in DA mode for no lateral/horizontal pulling. i would also not be interested in changing to SAO or drastically modifying the grip on this particular buy. thanks.

thanks for sharing BritinUSA. yeah,when i read about that new italian group it made me think of the possibilities in the near future. small frame huh? i don't think i've ever seen a small frame limited pro,i'm thinking it doesn't exist. 9mm is what i prefer right now.

i'd like to ask the collective here a few questions on the witness elite series.most of them pertain to quality. first off,the frames of the elites are cast just like the standard full size steel,correct?they are not from solid steel milled,correct? what about MIM parts inside,which i think they are,i'm correct? i don't ask this to debate or argue the merits of each,i just want to know. for those of you that have put tens of thousands of rounds through your elite,how is it holding up? have the clearances stayed the same? was the barrel fitted nicely? slide to frame? have you noticed the POI open up over time? how about the smaller parts staying together nicely,like the "supersights" and everything else? how about the chrome,any problems with that? any general problems you can relate over long term usage would be greatly appreciated. while generally i've heard mostly good reports from most,i've also heard a few QC and inconsistency problems too.there was even a gentleman from italy that posted on this forum reporting about a lack of QC and stating lots of folks in europe have found it better to go in a different direction(CZ)and that tanfoglio has hand picked examples for big name shooters. is there any truth to this? are the ones going to "regular" european customers any different from what we get here in the USA? does the expression "hit or miss" apply to the EAA witness elites? do ALL of them truly get tanfoglio's performance center full attention? .....or,number of accessories aside,as far as QC and long term durability and consistency,is one better off going to cz,like a shadow or whatever?(i know cz frames are cast,that's not necessarily the issue) i realize these are not shooting discipline questions but i figure most of you put more rounds through yours in one year than lot of other people put in 20 years. these questions pertain to what eaa/tanfoglio is offering right now brand new or thereabout,just in case anything has changed over the years.