Carlos

Hit a rough patch at work & have been too busy to shoot, let alone get any further on this project or post pics. Hope to change that over the holidays. However, quick update: In the spirit of keeping this project low-cost and showing that some low-grade parts can be re-worked at home, I planned to use a gun-show hammer that looks a lot like a Commander hammer. I planned to copy the Koenig lightweight speed hammer w/ some mill work. At the last minute, a friend offered what I think is a used Wilson combat skeletonized hammer that someone had damaged by trying to cut the hooks too shallow. Gunsmiths will disagree, but I have learned from others and have seen that if you cut the hooks below 16 to 18 thou, the gun will follow. This hammer was cut to about 10 thou and had to be replaced. Otherwise, it was fine. Simple fix?: re-cut it back to 20 thou on the mill. Its a simple 90 degree cut and it should have worked (emphasis added). However, once installed in the gun, the hammer would not catch half the time and it followed the other half. - and this was during hand-cycling. Needless to say, it was NOT time for test-firing. At the start of this thread, Chuck D. posted the following caution about Safari Arms/Olympic 1911 single stack castings - which this casting appears to be: " Way back when (mid '80's) I purchased 3 Safari Arms frames for various projects. When the first one was being worked on...the 'smith discovered the slide stop pin hole to be machined in the wrong spot. Ditto with the hammer pin hole. After MUCH arguing with the factory. They were all returned for a refund. I would suggest that you check the pin locations especially with the "D" stamping on the frame...it may stand for a bit more than defects in the finish. Your frame may be o.k. but I would check it before you start." ChuckD. Wise suggestion. To check, I borrowed a hammer/sear fitting jig made by Wilson Combat. This jig is simply a small steel plate w/ 2 pins that mimic the position of the hammer and sear pins when they are installed though a 1911 frame. Its purpose is to allow a gunsmith to visually inspect how the hammer and sear will contact each other inside of the gun. But -in my case it served another purpose - it verified that the holes in my frame were machined out of spec! Good grief. The "following" problem I was having with this frame was likely due to the holes being in the wrong spot and was probably compounded by using a re-cycled/re-cut hammer. So, in an effort to salvage the project, it was back to the gun-show special hammer that cost me all of $14. Viola! No more following (at least during hand-cycling). The hammer caught every time! Disconnector worked too. The project lives on after all. Now, about those lightening cuts I have planned: hammer steel tends to be very very hard and I expect to eat up some of my spendy carbide end mills re-working it into the Koenig hammer. Nonetheless, that task is next on the list. After that, I just need to finish up the checkering, make some grips, black-parkerize the carbon-steel parts and its off to the range to see what sort of monster I have created. Until then, D.C. Johnson

Try this site: it has been done & w/ pictures: www.strictlyIPSC.com

Hmm - mags are 16 rnd - which makes them latest Generation and Mec-Gar builds them for CZ. Too few rounds for mags to be out of spec. Ammo is factory. I can only come up w/ 2 possible solutions 1) return it to CZ as this should not occur w/ new mags & factory ammo or 2) don't take this wrong, but, how clean is the gun? CZs run very tight tolerances and they ARE, frankly, sensitive to dirt in the mags, behind the extractor and in the chamber. I clean all 3 areas and the rule on mags is this: if the mag touches the ground outdoors, I take it apart & clean it before the next stage (just like a limited gun). The CZ is not built like a Glock in that respect. Dirty CZ extractor/chamber and mags might account for the problems you describe. Please let us know how you resolve this issue.

Great advice! I hope to make this match - time permiting. I am please to see that there will now be a second ICORE club here in Virginia (the other one is here: www.shootersparadise.com). The Orchard (aka North Mountain) is one of the nicer venues to shoot around here; it feels a little like a golf-course (only w/ more noise). Will have to dust off the 625 and load up some .45ACP. Regards, Douglas Johnson

Outstanding custom! In the past, John was using triggers made by Lightning Strike, but they were supposed to be discontinued and the one on the gun above may have been made in-house by SJC, along w/ their mag wells. The trigger he produces has a crisp feel unlike any other Glock I have ever felt. Definitely worth every cent. Steve shot a on our squad earlier this season and the guns are definitely up to the task. Been a while since I talked w/ those guys (my job has been hell). What capacity are the .40 Limited mags running these days?

9mm Major?

On second thought - lets just leave things the way they are and have "all things-revolver" in one place.

Excellent! Thanks Raul - I love Quickload data. Good to know that I have a viable candidate for a new .40 powder.

Worst part of being an R.O. is having to issue a D.Q. Luckily, my first two D.Q.s were dropped, loaded guns (race holsters & either turn and draw or seated start). At least they were obvious ones. Its the call on a 180 break that I really dread. D.Q.s suck any way you slice them.

Also, your OAL of 1.120" is NOT the recommended OAL, rather, it is the MINIMUM SAFE OAL. You asked: "Questions: 1. What is an acceptable tolerance on OAL for both safety and performance?" If you are interested in both safety and best feeding performance (depending on gun design) you might want to load as long as 1.135 to 1.150" for guns which were originally designed around the shorter 9mm platform - specifically, .40 caliber Glocks. Some other 9mm-length .40 cal guns include Berettas, XDs, Sigs, etc., but NOT the common STI/SV versions of the 1911 (actually 2011s); the latter can handle .40 loaded almost to 10mm OALS. However, 1.135 to 1.150 should work in almost all .40s. Besides being more reliable as to feeding in Glocks, the longer OAL will offer LOWER pressures and greater margin of safety in case of a set-back.

Had big problems w/ the Montana Gold 200 grn flat nose (sort of a .45 "soft point"); I loaded them to 1.240 - which was well w/in the Minimum/maximum OAL for .45 and the 200 grn jacketed bullet. That bullet not only touched the rifling in my .45, it would not let the round fully chamber at that length. I used them up in my 625 (a .45 ACP revolver). Shot great in that gun. However, watch out for that bullet in an autoloader. It is NOT interchangeable w/ a SWC or a RN of similar weight as far as OAL.

We have a small ICORE section of our club's forum for the monthly ICORE match. Go to Forum section here: www.shootersparadise.com But why not have a section on be.com? Seems at least as relevant as the Clays section.

All sear springs wear out eventually, but I found that the TriGlide's Ti spring does not last as long as traditional springs. Does make for a light trigger pull w/ proper angles/honing of course.

Good point. Why NOT institute the same 3 lb trigger pull minimum for Limited? Is anyone against it and if so, could you explain why? BTW - I still see no need for a trigger pull in Production (and long waits at the chrono stages). Thus, I am against it unless we adopt it as part of full IPSC rules for Production and all other divisions.

Excellent chart - thanks! Looks like the data I was looking for is: .40 S&W Cal.: 180 grn Sierra JHP @ MINIMUM OAL of 1.125 (or more), Solo 1000 4.3 to 4.8 grns; max velocity 980 FPS (176 PF) at pressure of 28,100 C.U.P. Looks like I have a new load to test out. If accuracy is there, I am in.

Sounds like this company: http://www.sageinternationalltd.com/si/wepmod/wepmod.html Anyone know the 411 on these guys?

Any response? I loaded 4.5 of single-base Solo 1000 under some 180 grain Star FMJs loaded to 1.150" and they shot soft but did not have a chrono handy so I've no idea about PF - they were hitting close to POA along w/ some major ammo. I use Federal primers - which flatten w/ most all loads - so I can't tell about pressure. Any word from the factory? PS - I have some OLD 9mm data out of an old "9mm load book" for 124s & solo 1000. Great powder for .45 ACP and the S&W 625.

Glock 17, ISMI 13 lb and stock recoil rod w/ end cap removed. No coils cut. Wolf reduced power striker spring & Glock 3.5. Good aftermarket sights & you are ready to go.

+1 to your comments on the safety of the powder. However, I'll disagree here. N105 runs just fine in my swiss cheesed gun Its just too damn expensive Agree on the expense! Let me explain my "does not mix" comment - I found my N105 loads (over 11 grns w/ a 115) produced a lot more blast than N350 loads when I ran a few through a friends hybrid gun. Have not tried a whole match w/ a hybrid & N105 - just my old non-swiss open blastomatic. Once used to the blast, its probably fine in all .38 variants. Certainly is safe stuff.

I don't know for sure about the CZ Champion. I think it is made using a standard size CZ frame. You could check with Matt Mink, he would know for sure. Chris CZ Champion = SMALL cz frame and mags. I.e., max OAL = 1.160". Same size as old Springfield P9 and most current CZ 9mm incl. SP-01, CZ75/85. NOTE: the new Tactical Sport = mid sized CZ mag. & not interchangeable w/ small framed guns. The CZ 97B .45 uses "large" frame CZ mags.

Hot major loads with N105 = very safe. It burns so slow that I have never seen pressure signs w/ it - in fact the primers look like I was shooting minor loads out of my 9 supercomp. I doubt you could fit enough into a supercomp case to make an unsafe load w/ this stuff. I compress it a bunch. Trick is to use a 2-step crimp process w/ the seater doign the 1st step and a 2nd crimp die finishing the work. Also, I found N105 does NOT mix well w/ hybrid ports. Same the N105 for your guns with NO hybrid holes.

I have the nearly identical CZ "Standard IPSC" for sale in the classified section. Here is the link: http://www.brianenos.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=41442 and, there are some CZ Tactical Sport/Standard IPSC accessories and a holster available for sale through this site: www.ghostholster.com and, more info on these two sites: www.czforum.com and www.czshooters.com Finally, check out www.strictlyIPSC.com too. Gun is still for sale as of today (Monday 11/20).

If you take the slides/barrels off, then compare side by side, you will be shocked. CZ frame is heavy, and all steel and on par with an STI Limited gun. S&W frame weighs nothing. Surpisingly, both work very well for our sport. However, I strongly prefer the CZ for USPSA due to its weight and trigger that seems to mimic my STI/SV once the first shot is fired. For CCW, I carry a gun almost the same size and geometry as the S&W, the Steyr M40. Maybe they will make a slightly larger S&W along the lines of the Glock 34/35 or XD Tactical.

Solo 1000 is Single base (like Vihta Vouri). Clays is double base. I find the cleanest powders to be single base run at the optimal pressure (usually high - like N320 in 40 major w/ a heavy bullet). I load Solo 1000 in 9mm and 40 also w/ great results. AND it keeps the 625 really clean even though the Major 230 grn load is not exactly high pressure. Good stuff; hope they continue making it.

So Henning Walgren took 2nd place in Limited. What gun did he use? Was it sort of like THIS gun ? BTW - as you can see, I still have that gun posted for sale in the Classified section. Anybody want to buy my backup gun or what? This design, whether the Tanfoglio or CZ version, can win in Limited we now know.