Jump to content
Brian Enos's Forums... Maku mozo!


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by IHAVEGAS

  1. 36 minutes ago, waktasz said:

    Sell it on gunbroker and lose $50-100 rather than dump more money than that into it which may or may not fix it. 



    If I could make myself pass along a problem to another enthusiast I would have done that - seems to be what happens based on me buying two (did I mention I'm an idiot?) turds that way. 


  2. 19 hours ago, Endall said:

    What was ballpark cost without shipping?

    Somewhere around $375 if they do the work I think. 


    Note, the ammo that is accurate and feeds reliably with your old barrel may not be best for the PD barrel. 


    My nickel. I would never buy another new Tanfo sight unseen, unless I had someone I trusted examine it before committing to the deal. This gun and a stock 2 40 caliber of mine were both apparently Monday morning manufactured, should have learned the lesson the first time. 

  3. https://bayoubullets.net/38-357-124-gr-rn/


    With 160's , win brass, U-die and just crimping enough to bring the brass back to the bullet I almost do not have any issues with bullets walking - never had a known issue while shooting but have seen them get longer if say I shot 6 or 7 and left 1 in the clip. .


    Am switching to the 125's - thought being that the critical contact area between brass and bullet will not change (tapered brass) and the inertia of the bullet in the brass under recoil (m*v) will be reduced by about 22%. Time will tell. Could be that the change to the recoil impulse using lighter bullets at the same power factor will work against me. 

  4. Seems like this one is going to end up ok.


    With a PD barrel fit by their gunsmiths the slide feels tighter fit to the frame than the slides on my other Tanfo's. It is not, putting the oem barrel back in or just playing with the barrel out allows you to feel the slide to frame slop.


    If you very gently ease the slide closed it will stop as shown. 



    On the first range trip I ran the first 10 rounds through it ok and after that I had two or three FTF's on every loaded to 10 round magazine. I also was disappointed with accuracy. Not fun. 


    Replaced the recoil spring I had been using (9lb I think) with the oem recoil spring. Tried it again today, shot only about 50 rounds, no ftf, accuracy seemed like it will be fine for USPSA/IDPA with a little sorting out of what it wants to shoot and a bit more break in. I use 20 yard head shots as my accuracy gauge, if I can get 10 for 10 freehand (when I don't screw up) I call that good. 

  5. On 7/1/2021 at 6:58 AM, SGT_Schultz said:

    I cut a little slack to new shooters.  None to those who should know better.  Don't like it?  Too bad.  The lesson is best taught by consistent and fair application of the rules.


    Consistent and fair by definition means everybody gets whacked or nobody gets whacked, when to be inconsistent and unfair is where things get dicey.

    I try tp protect new shooters before they screw up but don't treat rule infractions differently with different shooters, not saying that is a better philosophy than anyone else's. 

  6. 9 hours ago, robertg5322 said:

    This is so true it's funny. So many tiny parts, tiny springs, "secret" levers (the detent to get the thumb safety all the way in), it makes you wonder about the mind of the cat who designed the gun.


    I agree that you need guidance to learn the little tricks (use a closely sized slave pin when replacing the sear - a tiny Philips works great for positioning the sear spring - etc) , but to me it seems like after you have read the guidance and done it a few times you have sort of paid the price of admission and after that working on the safety style CZ's is no big deal and I think it is fun (sick mind?) . Have never touched a decocker style gun.

  7. 2 hours ago, Blackstone45 said:

    So basically, there's no reason why the Shadow 2, a gun made for production division, doesn't have a decocker?


    Demand would need to justify the cost of cataloging and inventory, which might be pretty hard on a designed for competition right out of the box production gun. I think the subset of competition shooters serious enough to pay above $1000 for a competition gun but uncomfortable with lowering the hammer on a typical CZ or revolver might be very small. 



  8. 20 hours ago, Flea said:



    Are the grip ergonomics identical between the 2 guns? Close? I typically wear a SM or Med glove. Can the 75 be tuned to the same extent that most people do to the Shadow? Any reasons not to get the 75? Any insights would be appreciated. 


    For me (6'1", probably average size hands for height) the ergo's are very different, no brand similarity at all. I sold a fully tuned SP01 and got the shadow 2, found that the 2 pointed high for me, felt nose heavy to me, and although the trigger was much better than the SP01 out of the box I ended up doing all the same things (sear, springs, disco, hammer, polish-polish-polish) to get it as good as my SP01 was. 

    Sold the S2 and got an SP01 Shadow and I'm happy again.

    It all gets down to personal preferences or hand size, they are both good. If I was you I would do what it takes to allow me to lay hands on an SP01 and then decide. 


    Oh, SP01 vs SP01 Shadow, I would not sweat the difference. You can get a great trigger on either. 


  9. 55 minutes ago, Drillbit said:

    Once again, reviving an old post.  

    I had Pinnacle Performance cut my 929 to 5".  If I would have had two of them, I would have the other cut to 4.25" just for IDPA.

    Their rules say you can have an 8 shooter but only load six.  I would not have a problem clicking on two empty chambers.... I count.


    I can click on 2 empty chambers faster than I can insure the empty spots are correctly oriented during a reload, but either would be slow. 

  10. On 6/5/2021 at 5:03 PM, motosapiens said:

    it's pretty much the assumption of *any* thread asking what gun I should buy. All I did was report my experience with the 2 guns in question.


    Agreed. Gun to gun consistency is often assumed, no experience with DW here, my experience with Ruger is that they will no hassle warranty it if it is not within their specs but quality control is more similar to mass production than to custom. 

  11. On 3/15/2021 at 1:14 AM, Bakerjd said:

    Between the two and only those two, PM9 hands down. I've shot both and IMO the PM9 is the better gun. I currently have a PM9 and a BUL Trophy SAW SS 9mm. Between those two it's a hard choice. Currently I'm liking the BUL better but that may he because it's new and is the tri tone model. And came with lots of extras. 


    On 3/15/2021 at 3:43 PM, motosapiens said:

    I had a pm9 for a few years.  nice tight accurate gun. slide is a bit heavy for a 9mm imho.

    I just got a ruger koenig 45 a couple months ago (prize table), and it is a little nicer in every respect. 


    The implicit assumption that all PM9's or R.Koenig guns are the same quality might be a bold assumption. 

  12. 13 minutes ago, motosapiens said:

    the rules say an RO running shooters should also be paying careful attention to the pcc unbagging area? Hmmm. Perhaps my post was unclear.

    Or perhaps you are both right. Any sport - rules should be enforced, any sport - referees have to prioritize where to focus their attention and what actions (bagging - scoring - starting next shooter) can be done simultaneously. 

  13. It seems like one of those accidents waiting to happen things. The table looked like safety tables do at a lot of ranges, it might be really easy to make the mistake of treating it like a safety table.


    Not saying the dq is not the shooters fault, but maybe a sign at the table "PCC staging only" or some other similar caution would not be a terrible idea? 



  14. Different strokes. I like the Lee because the decaping assembly is less prone to pin breakage, C-clip breakage is not an issue and it seems less prone to primers holding onto the pin and being pulled back into the brass. The primers pulling back didn't happen often but when it did it usually messed up the plastic finger on the bottom of the primer tube on my 1050 and it was a pain in the butt to get back going, Dillon's advice was to deform their pin a bit and they mentioned a particular brand of primer that was more prone to the issue. Manually resetting the pin was never a problem for me, I keep the nut tight enough that the pin does not slip unless there is something inside the brass that would be prone to breaking a pin if it did not slip.


    Not poo pooing your solution, you know what works for you,  just noting a different preference. 

  15. 1 hour ago, ysrracer said:

    When I was a kid, Monster Speaker Cable was all the rage. I used Radio Shack cable.


    It worked fine.


    Subjective judgement without blind testing sells a lot of really expensive stereo stuff, on the bright side it no longer sells a lot of medicines. Medicine adds in the newspapers from way back when are interesting. 


    1 hour ago, SnipTheDog said:

     There's perceived value for a thing and then there's the price for that thing. 

     And raising the price often drives up perceived value. But when there is an honest testing method value judgements can change, https://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2016/05/24/479163882/the-judgment-of-paris-the-blind-taste-test-that-decanted-the-wine-world


  16. 1 hour ago, Cherokeewind said:

    Sounds like good news:)


    It is nice when things start to make sense :) . 


    My best guess on the hammer spring making the problem come back is that the shock of the hammer dropping allowed the pawl to wedge in place a bit worse, that might be baloney but the rest of the problem I think I understand now.

  17. Update, last I hope.


    With the gun 100% together I still had the problem, I have no idea why putting the hammer spring back in made a difference.


    The two positions of the cylinder where I had issues were positions where the pawl was contacting the star sooner than the other 6 positions. I concluded that by pulling the trigger very slowly and seeing a difference in how far the cylinder rotated versus the timing of the cylinder latch. 


    I noticed also that the star could be rotated more in the cylinder when the cylinder was empty - the empty brass and moon clip reduce free play which seems to explain why I could get binding of the star/pawl with the spent brass/clip installed but could not get things to bind otherwise


    Put an angle on the upper left portion of the pawl and polished the heck out of it. Can not get the gun to fail again. 



  18. 12 hours ago, MWP said:

    I’ll trade you one for a 929...


    929 is working now, too much time and money invested to get it that way to be able to justify (or want to) start over. 

  19. 2 hours ago, Fishbreath said:

    Now that's a fascinating finding. I wonder if maybe it's a pawl/ratchet fit issue, then? That's about the only thing I can think of that would be affected by having empties in the cylinder (thus constraining the cylinder's forward/back position more than if it didn't have anything in it).



     Between you and Cherokeewind I think you have fixed the problem for me.

    With the hammer removed I still had the issue, noticed it was on two spots of the cylinder only. After several pulls of the trigger (it is easy to get a lot of pulls with no hammer spring) the sticking went from 100% in two spots to maybe 70% and it required less force to pull the trigger forward when it did stick.

    Very carefully removed some material from the arched underside of the pawl with the Dremel and a small diameter stone and then polished it. 

    Seems ok now, time will tell. Probably just my imagination but the trigger seems smoother throughout (polished a few other points while I had thing apart). 


  • Create New...