ericf

good advice

Are there any opinions regarding "American Select"? I saw one user post that he liked the combination. And The burn rate seems to be on par with Tightgroup. What say you? Any negatives? Sorry to continue asking these questions, But I dont like having the 20/20 hindsight of regrets.

Anyone have experience with AA5 and Lead? From reading the load data, AA5 appears to occupy a middle ground for both 9mm and .45. Sorry, I'm still trying to educate myself via others opinions. I do value the mass experiences that are available from this forum. I realize that I may still be whipping on the proverbial dead horse. If so, my apologies are extended. AA5 opinions please!

There are a few mentions of HP38. And it has load data for both 9mm and .45. What has been the experience with this powder? Clean, accurate, smoke? I do like tightgroup, Snappy and accurate (for me). But for indoors, it's a little on the overly smokey side. Thanks

Accuracy does count. But I'm using this for the IPSC / IDPA games. The smokey issue only arises when shooting at indoor matches. Not so much from me, but out of concern for others. And As far as I know, there hasnt been any complaining, but it is a little annoying. My main concern is for others. I think I may give the S1000 or AA2 a try. It seems that S1000 has quite a following on this forum. I need to do a search for the AA2 and get the opinions of others. Bullseye used to be the powder I used back in the day (.38 spec). (probably before most were born). It too was smokey. But not like this TG. I just tossed a few LBS. of Bullseye that was 35+ years old. It appeared alright, but had a rancid smell.

I use TG for both my 125gr Lead Rnd nose (9mm) as well as my 200 grn SWC (.45). It does work well, as long as your outdoors. I thought of switching (adding) Universal clays to my choices (it too will load both cal.), but have read here that it isn't smokeless (with lead). Universal MAY smoke Less than TG. But is it enough to justify the switch. Is there really any powder when combined in a load with lead bullets that is smokeless, or is it just some may smoke less.?

I routinely purchase shooting glasses from a local safety supply place. I live near the shipping industrial areas, and glasses are cheap ($3.95), and of a good quality. They are cheap enough that when scratched up, toss them out. And I'm hard on glasses. The safety retailer told me of a safety glasses similar to what I wear and like (wrap around style) that would work. They have the bifocal on both lenses in the top 1/3 of the lens all the way across, rather than the bottom inside quadrant. Suppose to be utilized by Mechanics and such that have to be constantly looking upwards at details. However in searching, I couldn't find them. The Optx was the closest thing I could find for our application. My fear is the water that holds them in place on the lens drying. I have bought a generic clear water based gel to hopefully prevent them from falling out during a match. I hope my brain can adjust. I'd have preferred a 1 diopter rather than a 1.25, because as of now when just practicing drawing and sighting the pistol, I have problems. We'll see. (pun). Thanks, Eric

preface, The front sight is suppose to be the focal point before the trigger is released. It's suppose to be crystal clear and the target slightly out of focus. However, on those of us with the older eyes, reading glasses (or cheaters) become a necessity for eye focus within the arms length. This fact was brought to my attention when I was trying to determine if a front sight change would provide any benefit. I have to use glasses for details to come into focus when cleaning the pistols. Then I saw that, " Wow, the sight is really in focus " When wearing the cheaters. I have started a search for safety glasses that had bifocals built in. They are out there and they aren't too expensive. But the bifocal portion isn't placed well (for shooting). In searching I found these. http://optx2020.com/p-38-hydrotac-stick-on-bifocal-2-pair-offer.aspx Has anyone tried to use bifocals or close corrective lenses for shooting?? I was intending on using just one corrective lens for the dominant eye only. The main drawback, the target becomes very blurry. And there is a slight need (for me) to squint the weak eye (uncorrected) to prevent orientation problems. The orientation troubles will pass (I think) as I get used to the correction. The dominant eye will be corrected for close in clarity (sights), and the weak eye will be uncorrected for distant clarity. I'm not sure if the brain can get used to this. But my spouse has a contact that she wears in one eye for reading and the other eye is uncorrected for distant vision. Same sort of situation, but not for shooting sports. She said the brain adjusts quickly. I'm not sure if this is the answer or not. I have perfect distant vision, and, uncorrected, I can see the front sight, It's just not absolutely crystal clear. Advise please

My son just gave me a Dawson front .180 X .100 F/O sight. (Birthday) Problem is that I really wanted to change the rear sight first, then consider the height/width requirements for the front. I'm not sure about doing this in reverse. The OEM sights are the Fixed tritium. Rear sight is .375 X .125 notch,,, front is .180 X .120. POI with the factory sights is directly behind the front dot. (obscured distant target) I'd prefer POI to be at the top of the blade or "splitting the target" if that is possible given the front sight. What rear sight will now work with this Dawson .180 front? Is the Dawson - Novak "adjustable" the only option? or is there a fixed that will achieve the desired sight picture I'm not sure about profile/appearance and strength of the Adj. rear sight. I think I may have to go with the adj. rear sight or exchange the front once the rear is placed. Advice???

I haven't had the chance to examine the rules again for IDPA , But for $$$ purposes, wouldn't it be possible to just buy three G30 / G21 mags and a couple of belt mag holders? I believe all Glock mags are caliber compatible. And it should still meet size requirements. Also, OWB holster is a needed item if you are going to have fun on a regular basis. I too am new to this sport. I have never seen an IWB holster being utilized for a match. Just my .02

Good point, My thoughts were that the increased weight, recoil, of the .45 may benefit me when going to the 9mm as far as handling is concerned. but, you have a valid argument. I still like the .45. But now My old accessories are 20 years from the past. very outdated. I didn't desire to re-buy more current stuff if it held no benefits. Other than the fun motive

Looking at this in a logical format, Would it be correct to ASSUME, That becoming proficient at single stack (.45), concerning gun handling, recoil, reloads, and sight recovery, that the shooter would greatly improve with shooting production (M&P pro 9mm)? To expand, I have started shooting IDPA with the Pro, but was thinking on getting back into USPSA (ipsc) shooting a TRP in single stack. I used to shoot in a limited division about 20 years ago when there were only two divisions. I used a worked over Gold Cup and safari speed holster. Though I don't think the speed holster can be used in single stack. My thoughts were that it (shooting both) would help with my improvements in handling, speed, and recovery, especially in the minor divisions. But then I don't want to introduce variables that will cause confusion and be more detrimental than helpful. Are my assumptions misplaced?

You may find that the 6# spring is still too much for the standard velocity match ammo. I had to cut even more off the Wolf 6# to get things reliable in my 41. Hopefully yours will be fine. Mine needed even less spring.

I too have troubles with the "hidden and protected" mag release. But wanted to retain using the thumb. I took a small knife and slightly (stress slightly) removed, and re contoured the raised area that protects the grip most aspect of the release. I removed about 2/3 mm from the elevation of the ridge. It exposed the mag button significantly. especially the hidden / sheltered half.