cpa5oh

Here's my first CZ

I think the skills learned in action pistol games probably have a pretty high correlation to your ability to use a pistol if you ever had to in real life. I know there aren't alot of 'tactics' involved in USPSA style shooting games, but I can't really imagine a situation where a civilian would ever use 'tactics' - in today's politically charged atmosphere, you can get charged with murder for shooting someone that broke into your house...and if you've got a reloading setup and are an avid shooter, some prosecutor would be wanting to make a case that you've been itching to shoot at someone...so you gotta retreat rather than some offensive tactical siege where you're making use of cover and advancing. On the other hand, if there's absolutely no ability to retreat (or you've retreated as far as you possibly can,) and you're sure you're in danger, it's all going to be about how fast you can deliver a shot that neutralizes your attacker...which is what action pistol games are all about. And I find it hard to believe that the average thug is going to beat a decent action pistol competitor at delivering a shot on target. Just my opinion...and I'm no expert on defensive use of a handgun by any means.

To update - I loaded up 30 rounds and went to the range. The ones I loaded at 1.6 OAL with 4.8 to 4.9 grains of W231 worked in both guns except for 1 light strike in the CZ...the ones I loaded at 1.45 OAL with 4.5 to 4.6 grains of W231 worked flawlessly in the CZ but I had some feeding issues with the Glock 34 (spent case ejected fine but the next round kinda went in diagonally nose up and got stuck till I cleared it.) So I've loaded up 100 rounds at 4.5 to 4.6 grains at 1.60 OAL - I think that's gonna work in both guns. If it works, I'm all set - then once I use the components I have maybe I'll play around with something more along the lines of what you guys use in your competition guns. Thank you for all of your helpful replies!

I loaded up 30 cartridges with minor differences and headed to the range...the 5 I loaded with Federal primers (used a Lee hand prime tool so as to not take chances with the 1000 and Federal primers) all went bang...of the 25 I loaded with Winchester primers, all but 1 went bang (and when I fired it the second time it went off.) So it appears that it was a seating issue...maybe I thought I was pushing the lever all the way but was not. I just loaded 100 rounds and will take them to an action pistol practice on Thursday - hopefully these ones will all go off without any light strikes, and if that happens, I'm a happy man that can load his own rounds! And maybe once I get through the components I have on hand I'll try something more along the lines of what you guys are using for competition. Thank you all for your help.

Only problem for me is that I don't think the primer seating with the lee is adjustable...I've read that and it seems like the handle can only move so far on the downstroke that seats the primers...anything short of a full stroke clearly doesn't seat the primers. Then again, me not figuring this out means I'm missing something so Im gonna check all that has been suggested.

One thing I can think of is are you lubing your cases? If you are, some lube may be getting into the flash hole. I had that happen when I first started reloading and didn't pay attentnion to how I lubed the cases. This may be ignorance on my part, but how would changing brands of primers make you need a different press? One would think that the primer brands are interchangeable in any sort of setup as long as they are the same type (i.e. small or large pistol/rifle). What press are you using? I am not lubing my cases as I have a carbide sizing die. As for the primers and needing a better press...apparently Lee does not want people using Federal primers in their presses because they more easily ignite versus other brands, if a primer ignites on a Lee press, it could light the entire tray of primers up. I've read alot of thread about the Lee 1000 and Federal primers and half of them end up saying follow the manufacturers instructions and the other half say it isn't an issue (with some saying that Lee doesn't like Federal primers because of a personal issue he has with them not sending him any free primers to test in his machines...sounds like some unbelievable third grade stuff so I don't know about that.) I'm just being cautious and following safety instructions...

This is kind of a follow up to another thread I made about 9mm reloads with 115grain bullets... I've been shooting Winchester white box and Remington UMC 9mm factory ammo out of both a Glock 34 with competition spring kit and CZ 85 combat with lightened spring kit and I've had no ignition issues (only had ignition issues with TulAmmo, which I understand has extra hard primers.) Then I load ammo myself for the first time using Winchester primers and and I get probably 25% or greater light strikes. People say switch to Federal primers, and I will if that's the only thing that I can do (would require me to get a better press or a hand primer...but that's okay) - but what doesn't make sense is how Winchester white box and Remington UMC fires without incident in both of the above mentioned guns...I assume Winchester uses their own primers in their factory ammo...why would I be struggling to get ignition using their primers in my reloads? The primers appear to be seating fine (though I do not deprime before I clean my brass...that kinda defeats the purpose of a progressive press it seems.) My press is not adjustable for primer depth but for sure the primers are set into the bottom of the case relative to the bottom of the case itself. I don't think the loads I was using (which were light as explained to me in the other thread) would cause light strikes...also don't think that overall length and crimp have any affect on ignition either...

Thank you for all of the replies! First thing - the loads being too low. I've loaded 5 rounds each of the following: - same overall length as I had (about 1.165) at 4.5 to 4.6 grains of W231 - same overall length as I had (about 1.165) at 4.8 to 4.9 grains of W231 - 1.145 overall length at 4.5 to 4.6 grains of W231 I'll try them in that order. Hopefully one of those will solve the ejection/feeding issues that must've been caused by the light loads. Second thing - the light strikes. I've got 1,000 Winchester primers...and I could get Federal primers if necessary...but the thing I don't understand is that I have no problems whatsoever shooting Winchester White Box or Remington (the yellow bulk pack) ammo in either the Glock 34 or the CZ. I'm not understanding why I'd need to go to Federal primers in my reloads when it would seem to me that Winchester uses their own primers in their cartridges? I have to read more about the crimp...at the crimp area I'm getting measurements of right around .378...I have to play with the adjustment because I don't understand if a tighter crimp would reduce that measurement or not.

I've just got involved with USPSA (have three matches of experience.) Everyone has been telling me to reload so that I could shoot more and I finally gave in when I went to two Walmarts and could only find 200 pieces of Winchester white box 9mm. So I went to Cabela's yesterday morning and bought a press, brass cleaner, manuals, scale, bullets, primers and powder. I got 115 grain round nose plated Berry's bullets (they were cheap and were recommended by the Cabela's employee.) I got Winchester small pistol primers and Winchester 231 powder (also on recommendation of the Cabela's employee...seemed to know what he was talking about.) Spent the whole day setting up, finally got 30 rounds done, went to the range and was having light strikes and failures to push the slide all the way back (in both a CZ 85 combat with Cajun Gun Works's ultralight kit and Glock 34 with competition spring kit.) None of the books I have show any load data for 115 gr FMJ bullets let alone plated lead round nose. The guy at Cabela's told me to use the load data for jacketed hollow points at 115 gr...that was a failure as described above (I was using 4.1-4.3 grains of the W231 with an overall length of 1.165, which is the same as the Winchester white box overall length.) I searched all last night and this morning and am not finding any load data on 115 gr fmj or plated round nos bullets. Anybody have any thoughts on where I go from here? I assume the light strikes are purely primer/spring related and the failure to ejects were because my loads were too light...not sure how overall length exactly fits in (my understanding is that if I go shorter in overall length that would effectively raise the load.) So I could go up a few grains and try again or reduce overall length a little bit...and that's the plan unless I get any recommendations here. Anyone have any thoughts on what I should try next (or if my plan is proper?) Alternatively, if someone would give me a recipe that is commonly used in USPSA production for guns modified such as mine with reliability right now as the main focus, I'd appreciate it...I'd order the bullets, powder, primer and make some cartridges at that overall length. (I can't believe that, with all of the 115 gr factory bullets sold at the stores, that I can't find load data in any of my books or online.)

I'm not interested in a trade since this 34 is basically what I learned to compete in action pistol with, but I'd be interested in a purchase. Let me know what the condition is and the price on the Stock. (I sent you a pm as well.)

Is that rear sight going to work with an 85C?

What does that mean? Does it mean the Blade-Tech Quad pouch is no longer legal in Production next year? Nope. Just as legal as they were before (depended on distance from belt). Each mag is individually retained. "Double" mag pouches (like this: http://shootersconnectionstore.com/CR-Speed-DOUBLE-Versa-Mag-Pouch-P1668.aspx) aren't affected in any way by this new rule, correct? Just that you aren't allowed to have a mag stuck to a magnet, right?

Glock race guns built with the products on the links you guys have shared are competitive? I thought it would take 3-4 grand to get involved with those open guns...now I'm interested.

Slightly off topic...but does anyone know what it costs to turn a Glock into an Open capable gun? Is it less expensive than buying a $3-$4K race gun?

That's amazing to watch.

Got the answer from Hi-Viz about how wide their front sight is - .125".

I'm not sure I follow this logic. The issue with light strikes comes from an insufficient strike to the primer. If the primer does not ignite, the amount of powder doesn't even come into play. Both factory ammo and reloads offer the same available options for primers. The only potential difference that I see that could affect light strikes in reloaded vs factory would be an increased possibility of having a high primer. You are more likely you are to have a light strike with a high primer. No logic involved on my part...but you cleared it up!

All this talk about light strikes is only an issue if you're reloading and shooting lightened loads, correct? So if you're shooting factory loads, something like the Glockworx Competition Spring Kit shouldn't be an issue, right?

Me too...is the Hi Viz a thin front blade sight? Looks like it might not be that thin... I've got three options: - hi viz front sight, stock 85 combat rear (which is adjustable) - cz custom front sight, stock 85 combat rear (which is adjustable) - cz custom front and rear sights (rear is not adjustable) Anybody have any thoughts on what would work best for my 85 combat?

Trying to figure out what to do for my 85 combat as far as sights...if came with an adjustable rear sight, so I was thinking of going with either a front sight from cz-custom (thin one with a red fiber optic rod) or a Hi-Viz red fiber optic. Anybody have any thoughts on which of these I should go with...or another suggestion altogether. For some reason, sights make a big difference with my shooting. I put a Dawson fiber optic front sight on a Rock Island 1911 and instantly shot it better than without. I put a Dawson adjustable rear and fiber optic front on my Glock 34 and instantly shot it better as well. Seems my eyes like the fiber optic on a thin blade. I do like the idea of the adjustable rear, then again I'm new to action pistol and very new to CZ's so I'll go with whatever you experienced guys recommend. Thanks! Dan

To me the trigger on the CZ's feel a lot mushier and more vague. Yeah - I picked up the CZ 85 combat yesterday and the trigger doesn't feel anywhere as good as the Witness's. To update this thread - I got a price of $80 to "put a fiber optic rod through the existing/stock front sight" and $285 to machine the stock front sight off and machine something into the slide to allow it to accept aftermarket sights. The reason for the high price on the latter is that the slide would need to be re-coated. Rather than spend $285, I'd probably just go ahead and get a new gun...but I'm considering it. You can also order a Witness Match (Long Slide) top end for about $285. (Look at the EAA sight for the conversion kits.) That's an interesting option...I take it I wouldn't be legal in production with that, though?

To me the trigger on the CZ's feel a lot mushier and more vague. Yeah - I picked up the CZ 85 combat yesterday and the trigger doesn't feel anywhere as good as the Witness's. To update this thread - I got a price of $80 to "put a fiber optic rod through the existing/stock front sight" and $285 to machine the stock front sight off and machine something into the slide to allow it to accept aftermarket sights. The reason for the high price on the latter is that the slide would need to be re-coated. Rather than spend $285, I'd probably just go ahead and get a new gun...but I'm considering it.

I was practicing putting the hammer down and noticed something... If I release the trigger before the hammer goes all the way down, it doesn't quite go all the way down. Close, but not all the way. The trigger pull is about the same as with the hammer all the way down - double action and heavy. So there doesn't seem to be any performance advantage while there is a safety advantage - no chance of me sending a round downrange unexpectedly. Anybody have any thoughts on that? As for the trigger...I'm looking at a kit from cajungunworks that'll hopefully help significantly. If that doesn't do well maybe I could try a Bill Springfield trigger job - though there may not be any benefit to that with the kit. Thanks for the replies they have been extremely helpful.

Thank you for the clarification, guys! I had read that rule and frankly was hoping I wasn't understanding things right...but I guess it isn't so bad given the safety doesn't have to be on. The rule does kinda put the CZ's and other guns with an exposed hammer at a disadvantage...trigger on my new CZ feels great...in single action...double action it's gonna be hard to keep it online. Only thing that is scary is the possibility of the hammer slipping on my thumb and sending off an unintentional shot...

I was at a USPSA practice at my local club and for the first time I shot a gun other than my Glock 34 - an EAA Witness. I think when I read through the rule-book that I learned that, after get the "make ready" call from the starter, I've got to put a mag in, rack the slide, manually de-cock the hammer, put the safety on, then holster and wait for the "shooter are you ready" call. That's how I understand what I've read, but the part I'm not sure about is whether I really have to de-cock the hammer - and nobody at the USPSA practice was really sure if I had to do that or not...most thought that, since the gun doesn't have a de-cocker, that I don't have to start with the hammer down - just with the safety on. I'm hoping that everyone is correct - I don't like the idea of manually de-cocking right before I start...seems like that's asking for that hammer to slip from my thumb when I de-cock and send cartridge down range accidentally. Could someone please clarify whether I've got to manually de-cock the hammer? Thanks, Dan