Jump to content
Brian Enos's Forums... Maku mozo!

tbarker13

Classifieds
  • Content Count

    521
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About tbarker13

  • Rank
    Calls Shots

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://www.timbarker.com

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Orlando, Florida
  • Real Name
    Tim Barker

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Interesting David. I really don't want to increase the PF on this thing. Really like the way it's running right now. May just have to put up with a little cosmetic damage to the optic.
  2. Interesting thread - given that my Gen 4 MOS has very quickly beat up my SRO. I've put less than 1,000 rounds through it, but already the leading edges of the SRO are showing a lot of finish erosion. Guess I can give the apex extractor a try.
  3. Tried using rear fibers in my earlier USPSA days. But as several others have mentioned, those rear fibers can be distracting. Now, I just use plain black rear sights. Much better for me.
  4. Interesting. Didn't realized the Dawson's and Brownells were the same.
  5. Try buying one of each that you are considering and test them.
  6. For me, it has always been Dawson. I find them easier to seat than the Tripps or Wilson when loaded to 10. And, at least in my experiences, the Tripps do not fall free during reloads unless they are essentially empty. It's easy to see why if you look at the way the mags are cut at the top - the Tripp has a deeper cut than the Dawsons, allowing the second bullet down to be pushed forward just enough to make the mag hang up - and not drop free. Not a big deal if you are going to use it for IDPA, where most of your reloads would be at slide lock. For USPSA, I found the Tripps to be unusable.
  7. That's an excuse to buy another slide - or gun.
  8. At some point, being closer to the slide is an advantage. I don't know what that point is. On my G19, with co-witnessed sights, I think it makes a difference.
  9. Exactly. Might not be a huge difference. But there is a difference.
  10. I don't doubt it, based on my own experience of overtightening screws in an aluminum plate on my CZ. Wasn't paying close enough attention and managed to strip the screw holes. Found out the hard way when the optic flew off the gun during a stage run.
  11. Started shooting a Glock 19 with an SRO this past week. Put about 700 rounds through it between a practice session and a USPSA match - shooting it just for fun and practice with a potential carry gun. Love the combo. I can't say, however, that it was all the different from the DPP I used to use on my Shadows. Just got tired of sending the DPPs back to the factory for repairs. Whether or not this SRO proves to be more reliable remains to be seen. But based on the video referenced above, I'm not planning on dropping the gun from shoulder height onto pavement. And it makes me think it might not be my choice if I were actually going use it as a carry gun.
  12. Are the MOS plates aluminum? That could make a difference.
  13. Going to put another vote for a milled slide. I've done both with my CZs. Prefer the milled option. Working on a Glock 17 project now. Going to go milled.
  14. You might consider contacting DW's customer service about the gun - if it's shooting so far to the left that you can't adjust the sights enough to compensate. That shouldn't be happening. It's been a few years since I had any dealings with them, but they were easy to work with - and really seemed eager to stand behind the quality of their guns.
  15. Well, just cleared the up mystery. Just talked to Cajun. Apparently, the serrations on the Bull Shadow cut deeply enough into the slide that there's not enough room to do a direct mount - even with smaller screws. So, if you want to direct mount, it sounds like the Shadow II is the way to go. Sort of makes me wish I'd gone that route - as I'd rather avoid the aluminum mounting plate. But too late now.
×
×
  • Create New...