kneelingatlas

This is it right here Once I started doing this I couldn't believe I ever measured one drop at a time. Another big time saver was when I realized I could remove the failsafe rod, work the powder drop manually and dump 20-30 charges in a few seconds before weighing my first ten.

Don't worry about pumping up the load, just drop the spring weight, I have run 130pf 9mm loads in my Hunter using an 8# recoil spring. Henning even sells 6# recoil springs. The Hunter recoil system is the same length as the long slide models so you can use the same springs without a problem; in fact I use the same springs for all my CZ75 pattern pistols except the compacts, those need a shorter spring.

That analogy went right over my head! Maybe I've been sober too long The OP was not asking for a method to predict velocities from squib to kaboom, just within the range he's interested in.

Bizarre, I've never seen anything like it (and I have more than a dozen).

It makes perfect sense if he still has the stock hammer. Tuning the DA pull requires a completely different approach than tuning the SA pull; a light SA is almost completely dependent on the length and angle of the hammer hooks. The SA shot breaks when the sear slips off the hammer hooks, but the DA shot breaks when the disco slips off the trigger bar so they're two separate mechanisms. The hammer spring and trigger return springs have a huge effect on the DA pull weight, have little effect on the SA pull, the SA pull is all about the hammer.

Gump, yours was from the old machinist, if I'm not mistaken Henning moved to a new location this year and either got set up with a new machinist or brought it in house. Obviously something is a little off... I ordered three yesterday so I'll report back once they show up.

Match? Base model? I know nothing of the sort

Trust me, just try it

You should not file the humps to get the trigger to reset, try backing out both adjustment screws all the way.

Yes or sell them and get what you need.

It sounds like the followers you have are for 38/10/45, not 9/40; you can cut them to fit. If you call Bevin Grams he'll get you what you need.

Dave, the answer to the question you've asked is yes, for the most part. I've collected quite a bit of data from my chrono sessions and have found that within the useful range of a given powder you can guess pretty accurately using a linear relationship between charge weight and velocity. John Morris just wants to argue Most of what I load is not listed in any manuals, so I can't comment on their accuracy.

As it sits now is fine, thanks

I'd love to know if it's not too much hassle.

That's pretty sweet lookin' How much does it weigh?!?

I've progressed a little further on my design: The baffles in the comp are pretty thick, so I think I can cheat out the second port a little bigger than factory which should help, then I think seven 4mm holes should do the trick The slide is already under 11oz, so I'm not sure how aggressive I want to get taking weight out of it, maybe even replace the slots with some ball cuts which don't go all the way though... I definitely want to clean up the rear sight cut area though: maybe take off the rear serrations like my Hunter as well.

That's pretty great Gump My boys are a few years younger but I look forward to shooting with them.

Just the color as far as I know.

The CM mag well will fit the TS.

Since adding the third port is going to be especially challenging, as well as removing the comp without destroying it, I'm dreaming up a new, easier plan: mill out the front port (maybe a hair bigger than the V12), then drill the four V ports in the comp (since the blanks are already there), then start drilling holes at 12:00 evenly spaced going back through the slide, once I'm happy with the 12:00 holes, I'll mill a slot ~6.8mm wide to match the V slots on the comp. The way I figure it one 3mm 12:00 hole should provide the same down force as two 3mm holes at 45 degrees so with the two ports in comp, four V holes in the comp and four 12:00 holes in the slide, it should perform just like the V12. The area of a 3mm hole is 7sqmm but the area of a 4mm hole is 12.5sqmm, so if I make the holes 4mm instead of 3mm like the V12, I should get nearly double the gas's out of each hole. So if my math holds true, I should be able to equal the V12 with 4 4mm holes in the comp and 2 4mm holes at 12:00 so maybe I'll do 3 4mm holes at 12:00 just for good measure

Alright, so I fit my new barrel to my slide tonight:

Thanks, fixed it

In my experience the size of the first port seems to have more influence on the effectiveness than the number of ports. The best comps I have have a first port ~0.45" long. Here's a cool thread on the science of comps: http://www.brianenos.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=186687&hl=ports

Ok for starters let's talk about terminology: "muzzle flip" "muzzle rise" are terms used to describe the vertical motion of the pistol hinged at the wrists, "straight back push", "slap in the hand", or "recoil" (this is a tough one since it's used interchangeably with muzzle flip) are used to describe the horizontal motion of the pistol. I use muzzle flip and recoil. Barrel ports (or "Popple Holes") release combustion gasses behind the bullet as it moves down the barrel, effectively pushing the pistol down to combat muzzle flip. The downside to these ports is that since the bullet is still engaged in the rifling in the barrel, you trade velocity for this down force. Compensator ports not only combat muzzle flip by directing gasses upward, but also combat recoil on the horizontal plane because the expanding gasses slam into the baffles effectively pulling the pistol forward. The bullet is already free of the rifling by the time gasses are escaping the comp, so the velocity is unaffected. The comp sounds like a much better option right? The downside to a comp is that it makes the pistol longer and heavier; some builders fight this by using titanium or aluminum to make the comp lighter. Many guns are build using a combination of ports in the barrel and in the comp, but every shooter has different preferences and so the approach varies: