Carlos

Done: pictures away. Please let me know if they arrive intact. Thanks, D.

Somehow the photos came out 75x100 pixels & much of the text was lost. The question originally was: "Can a $450 Grizzly or Homier mini mill do the job in making those mill cuts onto a quality made slide? Should I just save up for a bigger milling machine that's over 1k dollars. Are the mill/lathe combo machines any good? Looking for inputs from the guys that actually have gone this route..." I have gone that route. I agree with the professional machinists that have posted that a U.S. made mill, used or new, is clearly a supperior machine. They will generally tell you to buy the biggest machine you can for ease of use, faster per-piece production time, greater number of work pieces per employee-hour, etc. These guys are professionals & I highly respect their profession - I also consider many of them to be true artists. New, one would expect to pay between $5,000 and $10,000. Buying a used mill is also a good option but one had better know how to adjust it & keep it running if buying used. Good advice, but its beyond the scope of the inquiry. I have never had access to a full commercial machine shop & I expect that most of the members here also lack access. I also lack the workspace for a full sized Bridgeport. Even if I had the space, I am not going to pay $5,000 for a few small jobs. That leaves me paying the machinists; not a bad route if you have the money. The other option is to do what will usually amount to about $500 worth of small project work at home on a mini mill. I own and have used a homier/harbor frieght mini-mill and they will work very very well - as well as any Bridgeport - if one is careful, skilled with one's hands, and you take your time. I know they will disagree with this, but how many of them really tried to make a mini-mill work? If I had a Bridgeport or Laguns, I would not bother with a mini mill either. However, you have one advantage over a machinist since you are not under the same production demands that the machinist is under. They do not have time to adjust-out the play in the ways or do a practice cut in a piece of scrap to check the final dimensions. I do. I work on guns because I enjoy it. I also damand perfect results (or as close as I can get). Yes, there is a lot more backlash in a mini mill than there is on a Bridgeport. Yes, the professionals are correct about the ways - there is a fair amount of play in the mini-mill ways. However, most if not all of it can be tuned out if you take your time. A chinese mini mill is not practical for professional use. It is practical & just as good for the home gunsmith on a budget. I guese I would ask that the professional machinist here take another look at the websites I listed; the proof is there w/ photos (much better photos than I can manage). You just have to look. Again, my point is: Bridgeport: best possible way to go given the space and money; mini-mill: do-able for the home gunsmith. What can these mills do for the USPSA/IDPA shooter? I have done: Nowlin/Wilson bridge cutting for a ramped/supported Schuemman barrel, flat topping a slide, slide rail cutting, 1911 slide dovetail cutting, removing the "finger groove" on a Safari Arms/Oly style 1911 frame, and every operation to take a 0% complete AR-15 forging to 100% complete. A home-gunsmithing friend has used his for grip making (CZ and 1911) reverse-plug cutting, dovetail cutting, as well as all the other jobs I have done.

I have a Chinese mini mill and it can work very well for most conceivable pistol smithing jobs as well as most rifle work other than barreling. What is optimal? A $15,000 Bridgeport of course; and the rest of the machine shop to support it. I never had a shop class in high school or access to such machinery, so I make do with a $400 Homier/Harbor Freight mini mill and another $400 or so in tooling/accessories. Backlash? Yep - but EVERY machine has some backlash & a good machinist learns to take out the backlash as a routine part of machining. Here are a couple of pictures (I hope these show up!) I learned much about how to machine my own firearms receivers from raw materials on this site: www.roderuscustom.tzo.com Yes you read that correctly, I make the receiver myself & yes it is legal & OK w/ the ATF - much like brewing your own beer at home. Yes,I know "you can buy beer at a store so why bother?" That is not the point. Take a look at Frank Roderus site or at www.cncgunsmithing.com for a look at what is possible.

I wish I knew of another option but it looks like EAA is it for now. I could be wrong - you might also ask over on www.czforum.com in the "clone" section. If you are looking for anything beyond the lowest level Tanfoglios (which EAA has dubbed "witness") I would call them directly. Since you are seeking "the Limited, Limited Custom HC, or the Stock/Buzz version" then you might ask EAA about their "Silver Team and Gold Team" guns.

How about a Glock take-off on the old Colt 1911/ .22 (Ace maybe?) that was designed to make the .22 recoil more like a larger caliber? Here is the idea: a Glock 17 sized/weight .22 that recoils just like a 9mm G17? Perfect practice gun it would seem to me. Add in a 20 round magazine & it might be a lot of fun.

"The MD club would be a good choice or even Erie. This way we don't lose a big match and Dave finally gets a break. " I agree. I voted for MD/Thurmont. The club is an under-appreciated, premier facility that may be relatively new to the action shooting sports (USPSA/IDPA & Cowboy) but that has taken to them like a duck to water. It is actually a long established trap club with what seems to be approx. 1/2 to 2/3rd of a mile of trap houses in addition to the bays. It runs next to a river & is a beautiful piece of land. There are camper hook-ups and maybe the club could arrange to lease some of those for a weekend. This place deserves a look. I practiced there this weekend & they now have approx 8 bays and are always adding more. There is a large full-facility club house. Its easy to get to being just at the 70/270 split. As time goes by, the USPSA club there (Maryland Practical Shooters Association) just seems to get better & better. Seems to me it has everything needed for an excellent large match.

"there are a couple of serious safety issues. First there the obvious that a gun with the hammer resting on the firing pin can be a safety issue by itself. Not all guns have a firing pin block. Second, my CZ manual clearly states that if I manually decock my gun I should only drop it to half cock. Thus USPSA asks me break the safety rules as recommened by the manufacturer." Great point Vlad! I also shoot a CZ, though not a 75. Rather I shoot an 85 Combat - as in "Combat shooting sports/competition model"; it is a dedicated IPSC/USPSA gun that comes with adjustable sights only. Since it is only meant for competition, it lacks a Series 80 safety/firing pin safety that comes standard on the CZ 75 (just like an SV/STI: no Series 80 safety). Lowering the hammer all the way down on a CZ would rest the hammer right on the pin & might even push the pin against the primer. I won't do it. Frankly, I think it is unsafe gun handling to do so. I only shoot USPSA and so far, no RO has had a problem with me shooting the gun as it was intended: hammer fully down on the half-cock notch. It is the same fashion that every Sig starts off in Production Division. I understand that the current IPSC rule would not 1/2 cock on the CZ. However, I believe both USPSA and IPSC should make the Sig & the CZ start in the same place: on the 1/2 cock notch. Your thoughts?

"In France there is a 2 kilos/person limit." I strictly follow the laws so if I lived in France, I guese I'd only have 2 kilos but -my wife would have 2 kilos -kids: 2 kilos each -granny: 2 kilos -dog: 2 kilos -cat: maybe 1.5 kilo Seriously, sorry to hear of such ridiculous laws. When I lived in the People's Republic of Maryland, there was a 4 lb law but I understand that law was revoked, so Marylanders can now possess 8 lb (about 3.6 kilos) kegs, (in the US, powder is often sold 8 lbs at a time). C.

I shot on the same squad w/ driver8M3 & agree completely with his comments. In my opinion, this was the best match of the summer! Fantastic job guys; every aspect of this match was well thought out, meticulously planned, and professionally executed. It did not matter to me that my personal performance was mediocre; I still enjoyed this match immensely thanks to the staff. I will certainly be back next year. Regards, C.

"Ruger P90 series, 9mm. It was my first semiauto handgun and I couldn't hit the side of a barn with it. It had the worst DA trigger I have ever encountered " My 1st 9mm also - actually a P85 - ; it was ungawdly heavy & trigger was TERRIBLE (DA and SA). Glad it went away. While I did not own one, my brother was talked into a S&W Smegma (or is that Sigma?) - a cheap knock off of the Glock. Unlike my Glock, the S&W jammed like crazy & did not shoot well at all; not to mention a crappy grip/trigger design. I like Smith revolvers over most other brands & I shot a cool old Model 39 once, but the smegma was & is, crap.

The "stop flange" for the larger diameter spring broke clean around the base - it left behind what looks like a washer & allowed the larger spring to act as the only spring acting on the slide. I need to send it in to STI for a replacement.

Don't forget Rock River Arms; I have always been pleased with the quality of their parts.

Gorilla wrote: "Check to make sure that the trigger shoe isn't loose on the bow. This allows the bow to flex which causes some bad stuff... just like what you're describing." EXACTLY what happend to my tri-glide trigger bow! It can be peened back tight. Never had a problem w/ hammer follow (hammer falling to 1/2 cock). I run an SV lower; it should be nearly identical to your SPS lower. The hammer follow is likely caused in part by a weak leaf spring; may want to take a look at that too. D.

I first saw the Tanfoglio-in-a-Caspian rumor spread by the French shooter Eric Grauffel on his website forum here: http://grauffel.free.fr He also believes that Tanfoglio magazines (EAA is the US importer for some, though not all, Tanfoglio products) can be modified to work in Caspian high capacity frames. He shoots a Tanfoglio & has done quite well with it; I suppose he is in a position to know. I also understand that Caspian tubes here in the US can be a little hard to come by. I do hope all this non sense goes away in a few weeks.

"are the mags different than regular CZ75 mags? " Yes, they are different. They do not share a magazine body with either the 75/85 series 40/9mm mags or the larger CZ-97B .45ACP magazine. "they must be to get 16 40 cal in them with no pads.. with the sunset of the stupid crime law, i assume CZ will start selling regular mags(they will all be High Cap)" I asked the CZ rep about the very few pre-ban magazines floating around the US that seem to fit this gun; we had both heard rumors that before the 94 ban, Tanfoglio had made a certain model of magazine that would work in the Standard IPSC; as to where to source these, I haven't a clue. RE possible sunset, CZ's rep would only go so far as to say CZ-USA is well aware of the possibilities. These really are fine guns with great potential in USPSA Limited were the correct magazines available.

Hi Rob! I would strongly suggest NOT using that length w/ 147s in 9mm. Why? Because, it will leave very little space inside the case. Is that length listed in a book? Yes - but probably it is listed as the MINIMUM OAL; too many reloaders see the listed MINIMUM OAL and mistake that number for the optimal OAL. Leaving that little room in the case may raise pressure w/o benefit and it leaves less safety margin in the even the bullet sets back. Besides, most of my guns feed better at longer OAL. So, if you do not use the listed MINIMUM OAL, how do you select the optimal OAL? That depends on you goals: accuracy, feed reliability, or both? Both of course! Short answer: I load to the longest OAL as I can WITHOUT hitting the rifling and of course still being able to fit/feed reliably from the magazines. What length is that? Generally, 1.155 Max. I use between 1.140 and 1.155 w/ 147s. You can play w/ OAL for ultimate accuracy, but for my purposes in USPSA/IDPA, 1.155 is accurate enough. Also, you will need to check the OAL w/ your 9mm, but in general, an OAL that will allow you to load 6 or 7 rounds in a magazine w/o hitting the front of the magazine will not ordinarily touch the rifling & SHOULD be safe - BUT CHECK THIS IN YOUR GUN TO BE 100% sure. Good luck & please let us know what you discover; chrono data, gun, feed/accuracy, etc. C.

Good photos & more opinions HERE http://www.roderuscustom.tzo.com/cgi-bin/i...t=ST;f=10;t=476 I vote not to pin. Works fine for many of the top shooters & their gunsmiths must have a reason for leaving it unpinned (top gunsmiths: feel free to give away your trade secrets here for free; we won't tell anyone, promise!!). True, maybe you could loose the ejector upon disassembly, but I just don't seem to loose parts (even small parts) very often. To each his own.

Just got back from Area 8 championship that was sponsored in part by CZ-USA. No new word on either factory or custom IPSC/USPSA parts available here. However, they did say that CZ-USA is well aware that the stupid 10-round magazine law may expire in September. While it would be premature for them to plan for an even that may, or may not happen, it is their hope that the .40 Standard IPSC will make headway as a competitive USPSA Limited Division handgun. I also asked them how the 85 Combat is doing in USPSA; apparently, it has a big following, particularly on the west coast. After having shot Glocks, Steyrs, Sigs, and CZ-75Bs in Production division, my choice is the 85 Combat for its excellent trigger & accuracy.

Tried it, it works & at lower major, is a very very safe load (i.e. no primer flattening or pressure signs). Compared to a 165PF load with N320, perceived recoil is a lot heavier & there is more muzzle blast. I found the extra recoil seemed to slow me down; the extra blast was distracting. Otherwise fine. D.

Todd Sindelar may not be a house-hold name in USPSA (yet) but he should be; he shot into the top 10 in Production at the last Factory Gun Nationals & made GM in '04; you will be hard pressed to find anyone in USPSA as helpful, thoughtful & kind as Todd; just look out when the buzzer goes off; he is as fast as all get-out w/ that Glock 22.

Bullseye is quite fast & should shoot VERY soft w/ a 147; not the cleanest stuff out there but at least it was recently reformulated to be a little better. You could do worse! C.

"as im scared of clays and 147s in the 9mm." Been there & tried it & I agree with you; I didn't like the look of the primers. THe only load for 147s & straight Clays I could find was out of an old Lyman manual and it specified lead 147s, not TMJs like the Speer, Berry's, Ranier, or WestCoasts that I was using. Since lead bullets require the lowest powder weights of any bullets, I used the lead data & backed off slightly. Soft shooting, but the primers were quite flat. I would not try this again w/ jacket or TMJ/electroplated. Your coated Precision 147s might be a better bet with Clays as they are closer to lead in performance. If I am going to risk pressures like I experienced with Clays, I would rather do it with a very consistent, single-base powder like V V N310 loaded to JUST over minor PF. Better still, you can get nearly as soft (if not the same) load from using N320 and it will give you a wider margin of safety. Published loads for 147s and V V powder start at N 330 burning rate. The N330 load is also quite good & obviously safe in V V's eyes. THese light 147 grn handloads are heads and shoulders above store-bought, factory loaded 9x19mm w/ 115 grn. bullets. Try both & see for yourself.

When I shot .45, straight Clays was great; if you shoot 200 grn TMJ/jacketed, you may need to exceed Hodgdon's book load to make major. If you are not comfortable with that, you might try VV N310 or even N320,

Glock 34/17 & the SA XD-9 (aka Croatian made HS 2000) offer an advantage in terms of sheer simplicity for the beginner; just load & holster & wait for the beep. Trigger pull is always the same. Advantage for the new shooter: concentrate on the good hits needed for Production Division. Both guns have proven reliable for me. Blazer should be fine in either gun; I shoot with Team Blazer at selected GSSF events (we won the team event in Waldorf, '04). Short of reloading, I think Blazer & Glock are a fine mix. What about the rest of the gun field? For whatever reason, I do not shoot as well in USPSA with a Glock. Not sure why but I do better with a gun not mentioned so far: the CZ-75B/ CZ-85 Combat (very similar). My choice for a non-Glock/XD would be: 1)CZ-85 Combat / CZ75B/ EAA full size / Jericho 941/ IMI Eagle (Magnum Research) 2)Beretta 3)Sig Just my personal preference; if you rate these guns differently, then great. I think all of these guns have placed in the top 10 at the USPSA Factory gun Nationals at one time or another since Production DIvision was created; all should be capable guns for the beginner. Dark horse entries: Don't count out the Steyr M9; these are on closeout CHEAP! They have also been used to shoot into Master class by Air FOrce SHooting Team member Tom Freeman. Great gun! There is even a new model Steyr called the Steyr M1-A in 9mm that should be even better. Sadly, I seem to shoot my Steyrs about like I shoot a Glock (not so good). Does not mean they are bad, just that I have difficulty shooting them. You will also likely hear about the Para Ord LDA 9mm for USPSA. Have not shot one in competition. I rarely see these last 2 guns used in Area 8. Maybe more popular elsewhere. Regards, Douglas TY-44934 NROI RO USPSA/IDPA/GSSF www.shootersparadise.com

"Same powder, different name" looks like a great topic to pin at the top of the reloading section! I read here on the forum that Universal and the new formula of Unique had something in common; was it Jeff Maass that suggested the comparrison? I do not recall. I brought the idea up on glocktalk in '03 & was branded a heretic! Isn't there a Ramshot powder that was formerly sold by Winchester? This could be a very useful FAQ. C.