Racinready300ex

The MPA's I've handled seem decent. They don't feel as nice as some of the more expensive custom guns, but they shouldn't. I know a few people with them, most have been trouble free. One person had issues with slide not locking back on the last shot. I know here we'll say that doesn't matter, but he's a IDPA shooter and told them the gun was for IDPA. For $4k I'd expect that key feature to work on a gun that needs it. The did fix it for him. Same gun is also supposed to have the most aggressive grip and it clearly is not. Not sure what the out come of that will be.

I'd assume it's a pretty short list of manufactures you'd recommend.

I'd change the GR solely because taking it apart it would bug me. I'd rather have a one piece with a paper clip, or a tool less GR. +1 to RJH, I'd start with it stock. I'd also ditch the slide glide. At least if it's cold there, it's okay in a few places when the weather is warm.

Jeff Abernathy of Tommy Gunz has been posting a bunch on social media of ones he's worked on. I've had him do some work on 2011's for me in the past and have known a few people that used him for full builds. He seems pretty good.

The number of posts will always be a small % of the views. Any one person commenting on this thread could easily account for 20 or more views. A active thread it isn't crazy for someone to come back a couple times a day to read new posts, the views can add up fast.

I'd think when shooting fast more over cock would be better. Kind of creating a dwell time for the sear to get in place and wait for the hammer. IDK, first I've heard of over cocking. I mean I've noticed the hammer over cocks, just never thought of it as a thing that might need to be adjusted.

Interesting,... Unrelated to trigger but I'd bet doing that makes the gun easier to "air rack" lol

How would the sear escape? There is a spring holding pressure on it. Unless the sear spring is set really light.

I imagine each of those things could be it's own thread with lots of ideas. Page 10 of a LO discussion may not be idea. I'm all for getting a thread of course though. lol

I don't understand wanting the division at all, slide or frame mounted. I'd assume overall the popularity of slide mount optics comes from them being more practical overall.

But, the scores don't reflect any real difference in CO and Open. So shoehorning another division in between them IMO doesn't seem needed. Only requiring one shot per target I can't see frame mounting helping. After you fire, your eyes go to the next target and wait for the dot, unless you're transitioning in under .06 the slide will be in battery and waiting for you to get the gun over there. With no power factor it's not surprising comps aren't making massive differences either. I don't really have a dog in the fight either, I also find the discussion interesting and want to understand the logic behind adding this division.

Why though? Why does a completely different game need to pick up a new division because USPSA did? Why doesn't USPSA have all the divisions that SCSA does? I don't think that's a smart way to structure divisions. Both games should be way more methodical about it then just "genie is out of the bottle". But that's certainly not a strong suite of the legacy BOD.

I wasn't trying to say they do. But, I'm also not exactly sure how we can compare two divisions in the sport with out ever actually comparing how people finish while shooting those divisions. I'm certainly open to suggestion.

Which is why I said it's to keep cost down. Cutting for something that fits is going to be cheaper than developing a plate system to allow a RMR or other optics. They likely had the price point in mind the whole time and needed to hit it. I'm sure this helped.

I never noticed that one lol. Yeah I was trying to say on occasion CO shooters have finished with a better score than anyone else in the match when you combine all the divisions. Way easier to say that then the other thing.

I don't know where fantasy came from, and I can't get that to let me edit it. lol Read between the lines you'll figure it out...probably.

Occasionally you'll see a CO guy be a fantasy division in a division at majors. Not really crazy at all at the local level. 5 or 6 you saw seems totally reasonable. Certainly going to be stage and shooter dependent. The more we push partials and distance the more the gains of the comp and frame mounted dot will help. Obviously major becomes a bigger thing as shot difficulty ramps up, that's the biggest think in Opens corner.

So 5-7% then

I'm pretty sure it was like 35 then raised to 45, before effectively being eliminated.

The EPS carry is the same window as the 407k, the Plain EPS is the bigger window of the 407C if that helps.

The holosun EPS isn't a bad optic and should fit that cut with a bigger window then the EPS carry or 507k's. Makes a good rainy match setup. I'm assuming they went with this cut just to keep the cost down vs a plate system. I bet a plate comes out to at least convert to RMR footprint.

These sound pretty interesting to me too. Let us know how it performs.

I believe at that point then can just decide to keep it provisional another year. IIRC YML said they would consider it a success if it was like 5% of activity which it exceeded right out of the gate. The only reason I could see it not becoming a division as is, at this point would be the shake up on the BOD. With A6 and A8 being new, A1, A4 resigning and needing to be replaced, A3 getting removed. Most of the BOD will be new since LO was last voted on. So who knows what they'll want to do.

Wasn't he also part of the design team on the gun? Or at least seems to take some credit for that. So, he's not the first source I'd go to to ask about flaws in the design. It's a bit of a conflict of interest.

My prodigy had the slide coating built up in the firing pin channel. It was enough that it was kind of hard to get the pin out. Pretty easy to clean up. That may be all your problem is. You can break pretty much any ejector in a 2011 if you try hard enough.