tortuga

Range Report - Good news, Bad News Good news: Dropped by the range today after a USPSA match to dial things in. After lapping in the slide and a LOT of fitting on the sear/slide interface it seemed ready for a range test. There was a still a bit of bind when the slide was all the way to the rear but it seemed like it would work itself out. I am trying to avoid removing any more material than necessary. When this occurred, a light tap on the slide seemed to be enough to allow it to return to battery consistently. Loaded and fired 1 round a few times to make sure it wouldn't double, then two rounds a few more times. Then the first 5 round group at 25 yards off an improvised rest - Ta Da! The card at 3 3/8" x 2 1/8 " covers the group, at this point I am pretty stoked. with my eyesight, the lateral dispersion is NOT the gun. All groups had about the same aspect - 2x as wide as high. The trigger feels fantastic, Thanks CGW. The load is a 20 year old batch of 200g FP lead bullets loaded major for a 610 revolver, I can only assume that dialing one in for this pistol would show better results. Recoil is pretty soft for a major load, I could shoot this all day. Shot a few more groups to get the feel and dial in the sights a bit. No FTF so far - this is important, read on. From the first round fired I was checking the slide/frame lineup to make sure the thing was in battery, as it had been hanging up at the rear of the slide movement. After 40-50 rounds I stopped looking at it from the side and checking for battery and just made sure the slide was forward. At some point after shooting some groups and popping some steel swingers ..... BOOM. Powder in face, smoking gun in hand. After a quick system check ( all digits, limbs, eyeballs, bystanders, bodily fluids accounted for) I examined the pistol. It appeared to have fired while out of battery to a small extent, roughly the depth of the rim was still out of the chamber. Checked it all out after getting it apart and no damage appeared to have been done. At this point I believe there are two major issues I need to investigate: - Why did it fail to go into battery ( Pretty sure it was related to a FTF issue caused by the cerakote on the bottom of the slide) - Why did it fire out of battery ( Got a theory on that too, will compare slide/trigger bar fitment in a few and report back - I need to compare the TS slide to the CZ75 slide and see if the trigger bar cuts are different)

CGW seems ok; CZ-USA has an announcment up that they were having trouble with the web store. Says it is back up, but not for me either.

So I find myself wanting to shoot limited, and while I love the CZ line I don't want to go to make the investment in a Tac Sport, I'd rather pick up parts for the Glock line that I can play around with a little more and will have more interchangeable parts from one Glock to the next. I do have a Glock 20, will be picking up a .40 barrel for it next week. Thinking about picking up a long slide at the same time. Reading through the forum it appears that there were several threads going about the long slide option but nothing recent. I really like long slides; even put a tac sport upper on one of my 75B pistols. One of my first USPSA pistols was a 17L. Any reason this died off? Did the long slide ever get officially approved for Limited? Am I trying to make a wheel rounder?

FWIW, I shot a bunch of 200 grain loads that I had originally put together for a S&W 610 in my 75B .40 and they were pretty mild compared to loads with lighter bullets. And John, you need to man up ya pansy

So it was bugging me that nobody could explain the difference between the sear cages. Talked to CZ custom and CGW as well, they couldn't tell me why you would need a different cage for .40 vs 9MM. As it turns out, I bought some Azoom snap caps to test the feeding on my CZ75-TS hybrid and it was all revealed. Now this is going to be a "no-s&*t" moment once you see the picture, but trust me nobody that sells parts could explain it. I give to you, a precision-made .40 snap-cap in a .40 mag inserted in a CZ75SA frame: The cutout on the bottom of the ejector is higher to accomodate the .40 rim diameter. I told you, no s&*t sherlock. If you put a .40 round in a .40 mag in a pistol with a 9MM ejector, it will hit the bottom of the ejector (verified in my SP-01 Shadow) and it kicks the nose of the cartridge up. Once the slide moves the cartridge forward and the rim clears the ejector, the nose drops and hits the feed ramp head on. FWIW the .40 mag/.40 Ejector feeds in the 75BSA/TS hybrid. Whoo Hoo.

I think it is ready for a range test. Finished fitting everything together, I didn't expect to have so much trouble with the top of the sear cage rubbing on the slide, but at least I got plenty of practice with taking it apart and putting it back together. Ended up using the .40 sear cage as I don't have another .40 top end left, just a 75BSA 9MM upper that will go on the 75B .40 frame along with a Kadet. Weighs in a 39 ounces with an empty SP-01 mag, 2 oz. less than the SP-01 Shadow. Trigger feels great, sights look great, feel is great. Damn I hope this thing runs. Should find out on Saturday.

I think all of the differences have been noted in the thread. My question would be, what do you want to do with it? If you want to shoot production, I'd definitely recommend the Shadow.

So moving onward - found some interesting stuff. Not sure what to think yet, but the sear cage on the .40 was different and would not fit the 9MM 75B SA frame well. I got it to go in but it was a bitch to get back out and the safetys wouldn't fit right. Called CGW and CZC today and both said they didn't know of a different cage for the two, but the ejector cut and front cut are the same on both of my 9MM guns and different on the .40. Huh. Fitted the new CGW sear in the 75BSA cage and put the frame together with the CGW hammer. Damn that combo is nice, HUGE improvement over stock. I have some before and after video to show the difference - creep is all but gone - but have to edit it before posting if anyone is interested. The last (I hope) issue seems to be that the slide is rubbing on the sear cage. I think it is mostly built-up coating and will buff/lap out, but it is enough of a bind to keep the gun from cycling. The pic shows where it is binding up. I think I need to remove the coating on the slide where the hammer will ride as well and polish that surface, it is going to wear off eventually anyway.

Combination of things; I didn't want to farm the work out, but didn't feel that I could do a clean job on the slide with the tools I have on hand. It is a job for a mill, and would ruin the cerakote on the slide. Also, I figured the frame was pretty much dedicated to this slide. Actually the frame doesn't look wierd with the standard slide on it. How often do you look at a pistol from the muzzle end anyway? Also it would pretty much ruin the value of the slide, and as I haven't shot it yet I would rather preserve that.

I guess I am confused. The cage from both look identical with the exception of a cut on the top front by the end of the sear spring. The .75B .40 cage has is flat, the 75BSA cage has a cut at the front. Is that the clearance cutout you are referring to? The pics on the CZCustom site show the tumbler style cages as flat and the D style cages with the cut, with no reference to caliber. Both of the cages shown in the pic are tumbler style. Edit - I forgot to compare it to the cage on my SP-01 Shadow. Cut in front, matches the 9MM CZ75-SA. The ejector is also different for the 9MM cages, it is the same profile on top but extends down more; if you looked at it head on, the front of the ejector is higher from top to bottom on the 9MM cages.

Got the slide on. Ended up having to remove quite a bit of material from the dust cover - the raised portion is almost gone on the sides, the bottom is still relatively thick. I went slow and tried to remove as little as possible. The slide fit is TIGHT. Knocked the cerakote on the slide rails down and cleaned the poly off the frame until I could get it to slide a little, then lapped it in with a mixture of JB compound and gun oil. It is probably close to where it will function and feels like one solid piece of metal. Going to try the barrel fit after a break for a refreshing beverage.

CGW has lighter springs for the FPB, with that spring and some polishing of the lifter itself it feels a lot better.

Maybe I am looking at this backwards. It might make more sense to take the material off of the slide than the frame - that way it would fit on another frame and I wouldn't be thinning out the dust cover. There seems to be plenty of meat on the slide in that area, and it could be done on a mill. Downside would be that it has a new Cerakote finish.

Your post must have been cut off - I am sure you meant to say "Good find, here is what you need to do next, before the dremel tool come out to play...."

At times like this, it is good to know that someone is behind you. And no, I didn't get it from that source, it was a once-in-a-blue-moon post on another forum.

Here goes nothing - Scored a .40 TS top end due to my fine trading skills and luck. Mostly luck. It ALMOST fits on a standard 75B frame, looks like the dust cover will have to be relieved a bit. Not going to do too much to this frame as it is destined to go on a 75BSA frame that should be in my hands in a few days. Also have CGW goodness to install, comp hammer/sear, springs,pins, etc.. The idea is to get the sight radius and other benefits of the long slide format - LPA sights! - and still be able to use my CZ75 series parts, holsters, mags, etc.. Wish me luck, and thanks to kneelingatlas for some tech tips already.

I am starting to think that the problem might be related to my grip. I'll experiment with that. I tend to grip the pistol like I would a wheelgun ,with the trigger under the first joint of my finger. This would also explain why I didn't think the DA pull was a big deal as that makes a huge difference in leverage as opposed to using the tip of your finger. As I am going to monkey around with a SA pistol that grip just won't work as it makes the safety difficult to work as well. I am going to try a more thumb-forward towards target kind of grip. I will also hang up the wheelguns for a bit. This is worse than golf. Sometimes when you find yourself standing out alone from the field, it is because you know something they do not. More often it is the other way around.

For some reason I am compelled to do this, so I have a few questions. 1. Is it necessary to change the sear cage from a 9mm to a .40 to get the right ejector? I could have sworn I saw the 9MM ejector and .40 ejector listed separately on CZ-USA, but CZ-Custom just lists a sear cage for the CZ75 without reference to caliber. 2. I ordered a hammer/sear kit from CGW, and from what I have read main spring weight is not that big an issue in SA. Unless a stiffer spring affects SA trigger pull by increasing the friction on the sear considerably I'll stay up around 15 lbs. Any comments on that? Anything else I should think about? I am basically going to take the top off my 75B .40 and swap it with the SA, then use the B frame for a Kadet. Will dink around with sights and such, but mainly interested in the trigger and reliability right now. Edit: Wow, just went to visit the new 75BSA (transferred to my FFL, 10 day wait started) and the trigger is horrible, lots of gritty, creepy badness after the initial takeup. I was really surpised as it was much worse than my bone stock 75B .40 . Added a FBL spacer to the order, might as well ditch that as it will be a comp gun only.

Sorry bud, but welcome to the club! If you look at the mag release on this pic it shows the "D" style release, this is the same frame cut on the SP-01, SA, etc. as far as I can tell. The standard 75B in polycoat is the only one that doesn't have it.

Unfortunately you guys are probably right about production rules; kind of of a drag as the base CZ75B is the only one on the list with the small mag release. I'll confess to the club match director if I have to use it in production. I would love to find out that I am missing something here and there is a better way to drop a magazine. The "0" style mag release on the stock 75B requires a much bigger shift in my grip to release the mag. The pic shows the difference between the Shadow and the 75B at the point where the mag actually drops. The ink mark is for reference - it is where the beavertail sits when in firing position.

Currently shooting a Sp-01 Shadow in Production. I would like to put a .40 together for L10, and it would be nice if it could function as a backup for production. I have a 75B-SA in 9mm and a 75B .40 to work with so far, and will swap parts around as needed. Ideally the L10 rig would use the SA frame to get a better mag release. I really don't mind the DA pull on the shadow, and as I can run cocked-and-locked in L10, is there any reason to keep it SA only? From what I can tell so far a good trigger job should make the DA/SA about the same as an SA when the hammer is cocked. If I turn the SA frame into a DA/SA than I could use it in Production should the Shadow have any issues.

I think you will find that the transition from the Glock is actually easier than from another SA gun. Also helps if you are used to shooting revolver. Personally a DA first shot comes more naturally to me than a first shot in SA with safety on. Probably due to more wheelgun than semi over the years. Once you get a feel for the reset for SA you are going to love it. FWIW I campaigned a 17L, 22 and 24 but switched to a SP-01 shadow recently and haven't looked back.

I think there is some confusion over OAL numbers. This might be due to my loading for varmint rifles more than anything else, but here goes; The OAL to fit in a magazine is pretty much fixed; it fits, or it doesn't. Might load, might not. The OAL of the load is going to chamber or not depending on where the ogive of the bullet meets the throat. By this I mean the point where the bullet begins to taper down towards the nose. The distance from the tip of the bullet to the ogive changes depending on the profile of the bullet. Picture a full wadcutter - no ogive, full cylinder. Now picture a VLD rifle bullet - lots of taper from the point to where the bullet's full profile starts. I guess what I am trying to say is that OAL doesn't seem to be a magic number as a short stubby bullet can have the same OAL as a longer tapered bullet but one works and one doesn't.

One school of thought is that this is a sign of light primer seating, first strike seats it and second gets it done. When you say blazer brass, were these blazer factory or reloads using blazer brass?

I think this is just a sign of the times - Stuart and the gang were fantastic when I was trying to figure out what to order with my Shadow in mid-december, and communication was great through the entire process. Lately it has been tougher to get through but I think they are just getting pounded with work, orders and email/voicemail. Same-day reply might not be an option for them but you should get an answer soon.