Bucky

I am strongly in favor of Leaving L-10 the way it is. It solves another US specific problem. State prohibitions. By purchasing 10 round magazines, I can safely bring my Wide Body STI in one of the 5+ states that have magazine capacity restrictions and shoot a competition in L-10. In 2002, New Jersey held the Area 8 Factory Gun Championship (L-10, Production, Revolver). This was the first tournament level match of its kind. It was done because New Jersey has a 15 round magazine capacity restriction. -- Bucky. PS: As a side note, HERE are the guns shot by those who answered the questionaire.

The factory bumper pads sold by both Beretta and Langdon are nice, being that they are factory and come with my Elite, they are "legal" for use in USPSA production division. Keep in mind, though, they are prone to breakage. I've broken 3 already in two years. The most unusual occured at the IDPA PA state championship. I got done shooting a stage. Someone handed me the magazine back and the base pad was bent 45 degrees downward away from the mag. Lucky for me it didn't break completely and have the rounds fall out. Hmm, I wonder how IDPA would clarify that as "leaving ammunition behind". For $20 a pop, you'd think they'd be made a bit better. Oh yeah, they come in red and blue now too.

Flex, Thanks for being the voice of reason! Bucky.

Pat, Give a guy a little power and it goes to his head! Must be that LOUD SV. Bucky.

While for most Glock sales, competition shooters are an extremely small percentage of sales, I would imagine that sales of the Glock 34 and 35, specifically, would be a somewhat higher percentage.

I'm a huge movie buff and gotta get in on this. The first few are easy, then it gets tough. 1. Halloween I and II -Both take place the same night. (Favorite movie, favorite day... got married on Halloween) 2. Friday the 13th 3. Scream 4. Scary Movie 5. Airplane 6. Raiders of the Lost Arc. 7. For Your Eyes Only 8. Terminator 9. Magnum Force (imagine that, Hollywood revolvers that only hold 6 rounds) 10. Die Hard (First one).

All the originals were arguably great movies. Some of the sequels are a bit chessy, but I love it. Can't get enough and I can't wait to see Freddy vs. Jason this Friday. ~bucky~

Sometimes people lock out topics after only a couple days. And reviewing them, it doesn't seem like there is any logical reason to do so (name calling, repitition, off topic, etc.). And at times, it doesn't seem all angles have covered. Why do moderators do this? Is there a policy on this and where can I view it! Bucky Pollard.

Vinnie had asked a question about the cost of compliance say USPSA restricted production to 5", leaving out the Glock G34 or IPSC going to the box, allowing the G34. I missed the 3 day window (a gripe I'll post elsewhere), but I have two points I want to add that I didn't see mentioned in the thread. 1. If USPSA moves to the 5" rule, how will that make Glock feel? It is my understanding that Glock specifically designed this gun to fit the box. Will they be miffed that a rule changed severly lower the demand for a now how selling item? Glock is a VERY generous sponsor to this sport and it would be shame to loose them. 2. If IPSC went to the "box", how critical is it for everyone to upgrade from a G17 to a G34? Your casual (less serious) shooters, I'm sure, would continue to compete with their existing equipment. Recently USPSA started allowing long slide S_Is in Limited. While admittedly they shoot softer, I don't see everyone (including me) running out to upgrade. In this scenario, the cost could potentially be $0.00. - Bucky Pollard.

I have the MMC sights on my Colt .45. I am probably going to change them in the near future. The problem is that the ears on the rear sight become confused with the top of the sight itself causing "misjudgements" in elevation.

Back when I shot Caspian, I wanted a flat trigger but the EGW E-Trigger was way to long for my small hands. No problem, EGW cut me a custom one from a blank and pinned it to my stock trigger bow. This was years ago, but I am sure he can still make you anything you want.

Brian, I was just perusing through the Safariland catalog and they have a picture of both the 5182 and the 560. Seems the 5182 has a cut out in the front which would allow you to start drawing the gun forward, much earlier. This would seem to be advantageous. Why do you feel the 560 is a better model? Also, how does the one size fits all work? It seems that the profile of a Glock would be much different than that of a Beretta. Can't understand how a holster can be designed to fit both without some severe compromises. Thanks, Bucky.

Well, the bottom line in the Glock vs. S_I debate.... you really need to own BOTH!!! ... and perhaps several of each. Tell your spouse that I said it was ok. - Bucky

While small equipment advantages are no substitue for skill and practice, every little bit helps. Also, Clays got a real bad reputation back when the PF was 175 and people were using 200 grain bullets. I am very comfortable with 180s at 168.4 pf. Probably 9 out of 10 limited shooters in our local area are using this setup without incident. I will concede that I would NOT use Clays to make the old (175) pf. Also, I won't use Clays to make current major in the Glock, although my Clays minor .40 load shoots lighter than any 9mm combination I've tried. - Bucky.

The difference (to me anyway) between Clays and any other powder I've tried (and there have been a LOT) is huge. All the others were very close, but Clays was worlds softer. A local GM friend of mine was using N320. I let him try my loads and he switched immediately. Bucky.

Joe, It's not as fast as Clays, and not as high of pressure. My point was only that an S_I can most likely take more of a beating and higher pressure and abuse than a Glock. I certainly don't want to do a one versus the other, 'cause I love them both. The Glock is awesome, and with "Proper" ammunition, will last forever. For those of you thinking about getting one, I certainly recommend the Model 35 over the Model 22. It seem doesn't seem like much on paper, but I've shot them side by side and the longer barrel and lighter slide is much nicer in my Opinion. Fact is, I'd love to shoot a G35 in Limited but I just can do as well with it as my STI. I had all intentions of using one at the A8 but backed out at the last minute. Oh yeah, one last thing. I don't get the "Tite Group" craze. I've tried it on several occasions in different .40s and I just think it's way too snappy. I like the plushness of Clays. But then recoil is a somewhat subjective issue. -- Bucky.

If Brazo's won't do it to your slide, try the EGW lightening stripes. Lots of Jersey guys have this on their limited guns. It looks much cooler with a flat topped slide, this picture doesn't do it justice. I'll see if I can post a better pic tonight. EGW's web site says the mod is $100 to your slide. -- Bucky.

On the contrary, try shooting some of the .40 loads using fast burning powders (like Clays) that many of us shoot through S_I's in a Glock and see how many rounds you get through it! Bucky.

Brian, Sorry, I've been off line for a few. I am moving in a month. Once I get settled, perhaps I can ship the barrel and comp to you along with return postage and you can tell me how accurately you can duplicate it? Thank, Bucky.

BrianH, How exact can you duplicate this comp? Would it be done on a Mill, CNC or EDM? Can it be the same material? I know someone who tried to duplicate it on a milling machine and it was not the same. TIA, Bucky.

Years ago (1996-1997?) I purchased a comp from a friend who won it at an Area match. He has no idea who makes it. Turns out to be the best comp I've ever used. I'd really love to find another one, but no one seems to know who's it is. It has 4 top ports and two side cuts in the front two ports on either side of the comp. The side cuts are angled radically to the rear. The comp is made of stainless steel. More pictures can be found Here. Sorry the top pics are blurry, my digital camera is old. Thanks in advance, Bucky Pollard

Duane, Obvious to you and I perhaps, but I did overhear some talk of people considering it. There opinion seemed that if they got away with it, it was gaming. I was just pointing out that this wasn't the case. Bucky.

I think this was said in jest, but I just wanted to clarify one thing. This is not gaming, it is cheating. Gaming is when you are able to find a short cut on a stage that falls withing the guidelines of the rules. Blatent disregard of the rules regardless of whether or not you get caught, is not the same.

Nope, just wasn't aware this was there. Most like, 'cause I wasn't paying attention. I'm going to mozey on over there later as I have some issues with steel calibration procedure ... as many do know. Thanks for the tip! Bucky Pollard (always including <almost> real name.)

Hmm, several thoughts: 1. Does the match booklet override the current rule book? Had the pf been below 125 (unfortunately not the case) it is not allowed per the rule book. 2. If a shooter is allowed to shoot a 125.01 pf, is he to be penalized by steel calibrated at 135? 3. Had this been advertised before hand, would competitors have loaded hotter for this match. 4. Should the calibration process / rule itself be rewritten to provide "room for error". Note we have built in room for error in chrono'ing. This is why we use up to 8 rounds, and not just two (one for weight, one for velocity). 5. Has any consideration been given as to power factor and it's effect on steel in different configurations, i.e. does a 130 pf round of 115 grains perform the same as the same pf with a 147 grain bullet. Again, I thought overall it was a good match and kudo's to ALL the ROs that worked their butts off in the heat and still managed to be kind and put up with us and show us a good time. Just - I'd like to see more consideration given to this at next years match - especially since this particular division promote shooting minor. -- Bucky.