Carlos

Excellent comments to date; I concur. THe civility of this forum is what diferentiates it from some of the more hostile forums out there; I hope BE.com can be preserved as someplace civil for the exchange of useful information on competition. Perhaps moderator action will keep the barbarians at the gate.

My thoughts: plus P under the SAMMI spec is not all that hot compared to what is shot in Europe where they use the CIP soecifications and 9mm Major has been alowed in open forever. The hotter European limits on sporting ammo explain why early Vihta Vouri reloading manuals had hot 9mm data which was later watered down for the litigation-happy US market (and that is coming from a lawyer!). Ask Clark about this - he has done destructive testing on amny guns and can tell you that you have a wide safety margin within SAMMI specs. Europe seems to recognize that you can use hot 9mm all day long in a modern gun of good quality such as a European Walther P99 (not sure about S&W's version) or a Glock 9mm. Bad candidtates for hot 9mm would be the US made Hi-Piont cheapos or the old Astra 600 9mm blowbacks sold all over the US by Sarco among others. I have an old 400 in 9mm Largo that I load for - with appropriate ammo for an antique gun. Others might not be so cautious. Our US spec plus P is safe to use in your gun. Will it ever break someday? Shoot enough of ANY ammo and it will eventualy break. Ijn the mean time, just shoot it.

Or the 5R riflinf currently used in Mike Rock and Obermeyer barrels - there ia a bit in Glen Zediker's AR book on this form of rifleing. It is superior to regular cut rifleing - not sure what added expense it would take a company to produce it though.

KAL - unless you are intent on the .40 S&W, buy your wife a better gun for production: A G-17 or 19 in 9x19mm. I got one of the GSSF 17s for $398 and installed a 3.5lb connector that I already had as well as a Glock extended slide stop. Will be using hard CCI primers (in 9mm Blazer ammo) so I left out the reduced power striker. I got this for my own use but also to introduce my girlfriend to USPSA/IPSC w/ something simple and reliable. Why the 17 and not the G 34/35? None other than Eric Lund - one of the top 20 in class and formerly local instructor/State Trooper/allaround bad-ass, tried out the Glocks and favored the 17 - plus at $398 it was less expensive fro me to buy new than a 34/35 and I had the extra production parts laying around. Support is not an issue w/ the 9mm in production division where the powerfactor is only 125 and most folks use factory ammo anyway. I think the supported chamber issue has been blown out of proportion and led to the 1911, as well as the Glock, getting an undeserved bad rap. Unless you are loading to major or beyond, don't worry about it.

Can't blame Glock; they build for police and military applications and they specifically discourage ever using reloaded ammo in their guns - its right in the owners manual that comes w/ every new and re-furbished gun they sell. I doubt they could make the relaibility claims they do if they tightened up all their .40 chambers - you just do not see 1911 makers advertise their guns by showing color photos of the gun being dipped in mud and frozen in blocks of ice - then fired without cleaning. Face it, the glock is designed first as a military, police and self defense gun that works 100% - not a match gun w/ a tight match chamber - we just use it as a match gun (yeah, yeah, I know about the 34 and 35 and the 17L). Point is, boycot Glock and they might just stick to police and export sales (and likely still make a profit). Agree w. L9x25 that reloaders are the problem. I reload .45, 9x23 and 9mm. I never count the number of firings on each casing because I am lazy like most high volume pistol cal. reloaders. What result? I have split dozens and dozens of cases - I never once noticed anything until I later found the split case. I have NEVER had a case head seperation. When .40s KB, they suffer case head seperation. The brass wears in a different way than lower pressure casings - that is just a fact. Sure, re-working the glock bulge w/ a case-pro or a Lee U die accelerates the wear on a .40 case and leads to a seperation sooner, but the fact remains that in you reload a .40 casing too many times w/ fast, soft, IPSC suitable powder, it is going to seperate on you. You HAVE to count loadings and live w/ the fact that you will have to throw out brass after a time - which means that most guys will likely leave it on the ground someplace for some poor sap to pick up and reload for his gun. Look, I reload for rifle too and I do not like to "retire" brass; but I'd rather do that than have 55,000 PSI cut loose a few inches from my face. I count reloadings and expect my rifle brass to wear out over time. Now, as for brass improvements, you likely found on the net that the early "Federal" marked brass caused most of the trouble whereas the latest stuff w/ "FC" had less of a problem. Between major maker's improvements made thus far, and Starline's answer, there seems to be a solution already. True, case capacity is less w/ +P style brass in other calibers, but would it pose a danger in the .40? Put another way, would the thicker Starline brass cause a pressure problem or seperation w/ your current load?

BigLoad - please look into this. Do a search on "9mm" on the forum topics that deal with 3gun; I bought a 9mm AR-15 for 3 gun use w/ the understanding that 300 yard plate shots were not going to happen, but for 150 yards and in, the 9mm might be viable. Fact is, most 3 gun matches are all very close targets since ranges rarely have more than 100 yards for rifles - around here anyway. Maybe guys out west have lotsa places to put 300 yard ranges but that's well outside of Area 8. Anyway, I now realize that reloads w/ the AR-15 in 9mm are slow and that either the MecTec upper conversion unit or the Kel Tec would be faster since the reload motion would be similar to reloading the handguns we all started with. Now the 40, that is another beast all together. If you could somehow load 10mm into those same pistol mags - and if the Kel-tec could take it after reaming to 10 mm, you might have a potent recipe w/ a faster reload potential than a .223 AR. Problem will be that even at velocities approaching 2000 fps out od a 10mm rifle w/ light bullets, it will be harder to hit those rare 300 yard plates than it currently is w. a .223 - it will take so much longer for the slug to get there that your aiming will have to be that much more precise - ever play around w/ match air rifles? You do your part w/ the followthrough and they are accurate as hell. Try to rush and your accuract goes down the tubes. Ever rush at a 3 gun match? Still - neat idea; what are we without inovation?

Agree 100% W. Pat and Detlef; "could" we do it? Sure. Should we? NO! Not looking to build an open gun in .224 BOZ.

Yeah, I bought a Winchester over the Remington because Winchester was present at big matches and they came out w/ an IPSC/USPSA specific gun before Remington did. TO some extent, I'll buy whatever works, but the manfacturers have to understand that if they do not support our sport, we WILL buy from their competition. Thanks, Remington, and welcome on board; you are going to enjoy this ride!!

Pat is right about glocks and light loads - you could lighten the spring but flirt w/ disaster (see Dale Rhea's articles on Glock triggers - may be over on http://www.glocktalk.com). However, if you can get it to work, I think a 90 grain bullet might be just the ticket in GSSF - you could not use it in USPSA (115grn limit) or IPSC (120 something limit) but GSSF appears open to gaming. Of course, its a series designed for causual competitors so extreme gaming may not be in "the spirit". Then again, if open class is not about modification and "gaming", what class is??

A top national match gunsmith (John Holliger at White Oak Precision) uses RRA parts to build his match winning ARs. While I machine my own lowers, I bought an impressive White Oak upper. RRA manufactures at the tighter end of the specifications and their parts allow a better fit than some companies that go w/ min spec. (i.e. loose, reliable and inaccurate). RRA is reliable AND accurate. Ignore the flap about scope rails; anything you buy from RRA today is 100% in spec.

I'd give EGW a call if you do not see what you want - they had a Lee U die for mi in a cal. not listed on the site. The home machinists out there might also try trimming back the die steel to expose more of the carbide ring - the steel is hard and the ring very brittle and crack prone so watch out.

Worked at the gunshop Sat. and we received some HS2000s (AKA XDs) so I put one (XD9) on top of a Glock to copare: 1st, its the same size as a Glock 19, not a 17 or 34. Second, if you line up the bores, the Glock 19 gives you a slightly higher grip than the XD9. Difference is slight though. As for trigger, well, the Glock's trigger re-set is significantly shorter than the XD. I still like the XD as a new design and think it has potential. Just pointing out what I discovered. Who is winning w/ the XD?

Attempted pin shooting w/ disasterous results; I am no longer welcome at any of the local bowling alleys. If I have paid to rent the lane for 1 hour, why can't use it as I see fit? Where does it say I have to use a bowling ball Some people are too sensitive. Sheesh. So how do you guys manage to shoot bowling pins?

Agree w/ comment on less noise w/ Clays in .45 over TG in .45 - did not really notice until I shot it indoors; made the .45 sound more like an open gun! Actually, not that big of a difference but it was there. Thought I heard that TG had a high percentage of nitrocellulose - soething like 37% - which might account for the noise. As for shooting quality in .45 ACP w/ 200 grn plated bullets and at the same velocity, I found all other characteristics of Clays and TG to be nearly identical. The only differences were soot left by TG and noise. Did you notice that TG tented to leave soot in a "U" shaped pattern down one side of the outside of the case? Looks like pressures were too low to properly seal the case mouth.

Thank you Vince: I think you can confirm that the REST OF THE WORLD has not experienced exploding 9x19s and disasterous lawsuits from major 9mm - what indeed has all the fuss been about? A secret rule now rescinded? The only thing keeping reasonable length major 9mm out of US competition since 1990 seems to have been the influence of that has-been old man, Jeff Cooper (thanks for getting us started, Jeff; now sit down and shut up you old fart) and the dinosaurs that still insist on following his advice to the letter. Hey, I've had fun shooting the L10 game w/ a .45 - so why the U.S. attitude when it came to open class? While I'm at it, lets add Major/minor to production or dump PF all together. Rant mode off.

DougC is on the money - try 310 since it is faster and should not leave behind as much of the residue you currently find; Barring that, try straight Clays as it is VERY clean. Cannot recomend Titegroup in .45 since I found it quite dirty in .45 while its one of the cleanest in .40 Cal (must be something about the higher pressures of the .40). Let us know what you find. -the REAL Doug C.

If I suspect a competitor intentionally dislodged hearing protection during a course of fire in order to get an unfair re-shoot, my response is simple: "If you are finished, unload and show clear." No re-shoot, score it as is. Every Referee/ro must make judgement calls and in close cases it is never easy. Cheating is not to be tolerated.

Bull is the way to go - if a bushing offered an advantage, wouldn't Brian have one on his limited gun? There are only one or two makers who's bull barrels are large enough diameter to fit a Para - do a search on Para to find out which one.

I took a long time before taking the plunge into shooting IPSC - it seemed intimidating and that was starting w/ a glock! Nothing to be intimidated about however; I now look at USPSA a bit like a round of golf: enjoyable time outdoors on the weekend w/ friends doing something I like - shooting. I know I'll never beat Tiger Woods; won't even come close. I may be a better golfer than the week before - but that matters to other people not at all. With shooting, IPSC will provide a personal challenge to you: can I transition from target to target faster? Can I get the gun off the table quicker? Can I get both of those A-zone hits at 25 yards, 35, more? How will I deal with a stage I have never seen nor practiced before? If improving your overall handgunning skill is important to you, give IPSC a try. Alternatively, try out IDPA - I personally don't shoot IDPA, but in the end, it all adds up to trigger time and that can make the difference in your skill. Same goes for GSSF, steel, and to the extent it still exists, pins (I started out as a pin shooter). What are your plans for this weekend?

Do a search on Glocktalk - there is additional info there. BTW, some 1911s can also be fired underwater (.45ACP probably) anyone remember the GunsandAmmo article from the early 80s showing a guy in a swiming pool in scuba gear shooting a 1911? Not something I feel the need to try - no matter how "tactical" it is.

Another place to start would be Jeff Maass' website for 9x21 data (a google search should reveal its location ). Take a look at the endnot data; much of it lists loads for OAL longer than SAAMI max OAL and longer than will function in many purpose built 9x19 magazines. Within reason, anything the 9x21 can stand, the 9x19 should be able to take.

IrishLad - welcome and thanks for asking. Where do you shoot? BrianH - thanks for saying it out loud. Let the Cooper crowd go play in L10 or the IDPA classes for 1911s; reality is that other designs besides the .45 1911 now exist - some people even believe that the gun industry might just have made an improvement or two in handgun design since the turn of the century (the 1900 turn, not the Y2k turn mind you). D. Your milage may vary. Top experts do NOT agree . . . (Edited by Carlos at 11:55 am on Nov. 19, 2002)

Hi Newguy and welcome. Interesting that N350 was dirty at low pressure - I found the same thing w/ Hodgdon's Titegroup: very clean at high pressure (like .40 Cal major loads) but dirty in low pressure loads (like .45 165PF major). What powder are you using now?

Have had bad experience w/ Botach as have others - see http://www.glocktalk.com under "Smart Shopper" forum. Agree that South African PMP and Military Surplus are both good - expect the mil spec stuff to have crimped primers. Thats it for 55 grn stuff - for SS109, IMI is one of the best deals out there & is a good balance between price and accuracy - for me anyway. You decide what works in your rifle. What rifle are you shooting? Bushmaster? Which one?

Hi John - N350 is far too slow for use in a .45 for anything besides maybe rifle use. For softer recoil (a big benefit in IPSC or IDPA use where the power factors are easily met by the .45), you will want to use a faster powder like N320 or even N310. Alternatively, you could use Hodgdon straight Clays (quite fast) or the old standby Win 231 (though its quite dirty compared to Hodgdion or V V). I once loaded some 200 grn plated H&G68 SWCs over V V 340 (just a bit faster than 350) for use in a friend's .45 open gun of yester-year - a Caspian .45 w/ a compensator, a mag well, and "high cap magazines" (10 shot each). This was once the hot setup in IPSC and I wanted to try it with a slow burning powder to get the comp working and N340 was what I had on hand - gawd did it kick! I woudl be surprised if the old .45 single chamber comps took out 20% of the recoil! Do a search on the reloading forum on "45" and see what powder guys are useing - bet that most of it will be fast.