robertbank

Does the conp help? I have been looking for one for my FX9 We are not seeing them up here yet.

I have the 18.5" carbine with a complete 10" upper. I use both up here in Canada shooting IDPA PCC Division. We also shoot steel matches loosely resembling US Steel shoots, The gun shoots flawlessly using either upper. Mine is very picky when it comes to locking back after the last round. None of my Glock OEM mags will lock back the boli. One version of the Korean 10/33 round mags work fine. I have not read any solution yet that is a universal fix. I do believe the issue involves the mag springs,the mag follower and the cut out in the mag for the mag release. The latter determines how far the mag body rises in the gun. I have the Gen2 version of the FX9. If there is a cure please let me know. I enjoy shooting the gun. Mine has been reliable as the sunrise with all my reloads and factory ammo. I do experience bulged cases with my gun. The bulge was most evident using the stock buffer and spring combo. Cases experienced a circular bulge large enough to prevent resizing and I did experience one burst case with one factory 125 gr cartridge. I now run a 6oz buffer and AR spring with 3 quarters. This seems to have delayed the bolt e enough to reduce/end the case bulging. I did talk to Freedom Ordnance about this and they seemed be pretty ambivalent about the issue, my solution does add a bit more felt recoil ut is a solution of sorts. If any of you folks know of a better solution please feel free to chime in. Lastly, the village idiot sitting in our Prime Minister"s office has legislation in progress to ban the FX9, along with over 400 pages of other semi-auto rifles and shotguns. God only knows where it will end. One way or another I will be shooting this carbine either at our range or ....well never mind. There is a lot of empty spaces up here in the Great White North. Take Care Canada Bob

I have kept my Victory stock. Early on I had jam after jam due to the ejector positioning from the factory. My gunsmith raised the ejector up a bit and pinched it inward a smidge and it has run flawlessly since. Great for rimfire events. I match it with a Marlin Papoose that I acquired this spring. The latter is one sweet carbine making it fit well with the Victory. Take Care Bob

Mike they might have just made the minimum caliber to be 9MM for the sport. I am finding more and more IDPA to be just a reflection of IPSC/USPSA. The 2022 RB is much improved though the gremlins run pretty deep when it comes to writing a rulebook. CCP Division is so like ESP I often wonder why we need it. A M&P FS can be made to fit in the IDPA box simply by sanding down the mag base on an angle. For a sport that claims to be "International" the absence of metric measurements is odd to say the least. The US runs away from the crown in 1776 yet there those who continue to use measurements based upon the length the King's appendages. LOL. IDPA might want to take take a lesson from the US military and move over to the metric system.] or at least provide metric equivalents. We do after all use 9MM and 10 MM guns. :>) Take Care Bob

Is there been an explanation as to why SSP went to 15 rounds. It seems to me IDPA, being a sport, ought to test reloading skills as well as the ability to shoot quickly and accurately. I have never heard any discussions where the 10 round limitation was an issue. Stages over 11 rounds forced a reload. Now only those stages over 16 rounds ie 17 ir 18 round stages will require a reload. . Not sure if that makes for progress in the sport. The term IPSC Light can be heard at my club when the new rule book came out. Has anyone got a decent dependable and accurate 9MM load at close to the 105 minimum now allowed for in CCP. I mean really. Out of my 4,25"/106MM barrels I struggle to get below 115pf. Even at that level the recoil level is not significantly reduced when compared to say a load running at 130PF. I get the fact the 380 shooters may struggle to get to 125 with their guns. That said not sure why anyone would want to carry the 380 pistols for self-defense either. For me, I guess a move to loading 115 grain bullets might be a way to get down to 105PF. Take Care Bob

You have that sport and actually play it. In the US it is called USPSA and every where else IPSC. You should add Cover Garments to your list.... Why bother with mag limits at all? Get rid of the plastic box and call it good. Even better eliminate those silly Divisions as well. While all this is going on get rid of the walls and fault lines on stages, set the shooting distance to be 25 meters and set time limits to engage targets. We could call the sport "Free Pistol". I am betting most would gravitate to the .22 Short to absolutely remove recoil. There fixed IDPA. Make Athens the HQ and call it the Olympic Free Pistol..... Take Care Bob

Why was the mag capacity for SSP raised to 15 rounds? Was it to make a political statement? California, Mass., NY Washington and the Great White NOrth all have 10 rd limitations on pistol mags. What is the gain? You reduce the number of reloads SSP shooters will have to do for stages 16 rds or less. Gain? Part of the skills we learn under the stress of the timer is reloading. Does it reflect the average real life shoot outs of3 rds or less or whatwver the US present rates of fire are...probably not but hell this is a sport first and foremost is it not? In my travels across Canada and have talked to any number of shooters across the US I cannot remember one conversation where any shooter said, "Gee IDPA would be so much better if we could only use 15 rd mag capacity for SSP. Not one! Yet here we are. Maybe someone can explain where the gain was. I can't believe American shooters found it any more difficult counting to 10 than it will be to count to 15 even taking into account five more digits. :>). Up here life is easier we don't have to know how to count to 10 the Gov't mandates 10 round limitations so we just load until we can't push another round into the mag. Then some weak and somewhat slow individual gets nailed because he starts with nine rounds. LOL......don't ask! Take Care Bob

What I cannot understand is how is it that the country that put a man on the moon births a wonderful sport administered by folks who are incapable of producing a well written rule book. eg We are told told: "A.1.3.3 Removable grips may be changed to another style or material that is similar to factory configuration and do not weigh more than 2.00 oz. more than the factory standard weight for that model. Grip modules are not considered removable grips for this division." Further down we are told: "A.1.3.6 Frames may be replaced with identical frames from the same manufacturer." When does a grip module for the Sig 320 become part of or become the frame or does it ever? I ask because I recently installed a Wilson Combat grip module on my Sig 320 Xfive. Does that put me in ESP? The magazine or Ammunition Carriers " 8.6.2.3 Magazine carriers must be worn in a location on the belt so that the magazine is completely concealed.. No mention in this section as to how moon clip or speed loaders are to be placed other than than all equipment must be concealed per 8.7.1. If I have missed anything or there are sections which address my points raised please let me know. I do hope my initial observation regarding writing a rule book is wrong but given the history of IDPA rule writing since 2005..... I suspect there is more of this. Take Care Bob

I put a Vortex Sparc11 mounted on the factory rail on my PCC and have no issues with the comb height. What's the advantage of the RMR style sights that seem to mount higher? Take Care Bob

I load all my 124/125 gr bullets to an OAL of 1.10. I have never had any issues with any of my 9MM pistols or carbines. My Ruger PCC has only about 200 rounds through it shooting 124 - 147 gr hand loads and factory with no issues. I think at 1.135 you are really loading a very long bullet. Any reason why? Take Care Bob

I think you are right. To get the best result you do have to read the stage and figure out the best plan for you to shoot the stage. Up until now, IDPA was more drafted. The stage procedure did not allow for really any variance on how the stage was shot. The thinking was if everyone shoots the stage the same way the winner will be the best shooter. Lately, this type of thinking has lost favour among some who prefer the USPSA/IPSC concept you describe. Both work I enjoy both, though for personal reasons I shoot more IDPA. In my opinion I think it is nice to have both. It gives us all choices. Over the past few years IDPA has moved a lot closer to IPSC style shooting. Some like this change others not so much. Right now the scoring method is the most significant difference between the sports. With the 1 point/1 second time penalty now used in IDPA the sport really does favour accuracy. IDPA stages are shorter and take less time to shoot so you can ill afford to add seconds to your score. IPSC requires accuracy and speed. If you are fast enough you can afford to take the odd Charlie and still do well. IDPA not so much. MsDV8 overstates the issue she runs into a bit. We don't often run stages where the amount of shots required changes during the stage. If there is a change it virtually always occurs at the start of the stage. I would be the first to admit I do not shoot IPSC well. I seem to have settled into the idea you start on the left and you move to the right shooting as you go. This works sometimes but most of the time there are better ways and I admire those who can read stages as well as they do. It takes skill. Take Care Bob

Sure looks like it.

Yes you can replace internal parts in IDPA with facotory parts from other factory guns which is your plan and your gun would be fine for SSP or ESP. I would guess more competitive in SSP. From observation, all the part swaps and mods allowed in ESP that you cannot do in SSP have little to no effect on shooters scoring. One only has to look at the scores at the US Nationals and the difference in results if any between SSP and ESP. They do make us all feel good and I am as much of a gun whore as the next guy. At the end of the day I amafraid it is still the same shooter. jI had a 1988 CZ 85 Combat that has a zillion rounds through it. It had the nicest trigger I have ever pulled. Sweet as it was it also had the round cut dovetail adjustable rear sight and I could not find a replacement so I sold it. Not the smartest thing I have done but it is what it is. Take care Bob ps I have a relatively new Shadow in the safe and it has one of the worst triggers I have pulled. CZ has thrown all their efforts on the 2. The Shadow I have not is not the one I had several years ago.

The last time a stock gun won anything in IPSC Production was when Bob Vogel took on the CZ Factory and won Production Division with a stock Glock 17. Well he did change the sights. For the CZ wannabees , no he did not do any internal work on the gun. I am told the gun was went over with a fine tooth comb after he won., not that CZ would have ensured such an inspection took place! Talent wins, period. My experience falls from IDPA mostly. It has been my observation that most folks would be better off spending their hard earned money on practice ammo and quality instruction then the latest and greatest spring set up or sears from various other models of essentially the same gun. But alas Alpha males are not so inclined....btw I hear the new steel PPQ is on it's way to Canada. Nothing like time and the absence of $2,000 Cdn to keep me away from becoming a Master. Well anything is possible....right Rob? Take Care Bob

Well if nothing else you could always use the gun in ESP. in IDPA. That said, the CZ75 Transitional frame is not identical to the Shadow frame. The gun you created by marrying the two would be fine for ESP but miss the mark for SSP as it is not a gun made by CZ. My take anyway. There are lots of Shadows floating around up here used. I get the US market is different and Shadows might be a bit harder to find. Take care Bob