cpty1

Yep, I have and love it. The only place I still use liquid is at the connector lube point. I use a generous amount of SG on the slide rails, frame rails, barrel lug, recoil rod, and spring. SG really smooths the gun up nicely.

Just a word of caution for the Glock guys. Since the head on the front sight screw is somewhat out of proportion to the size of the threaded screw shaft, it is very easy to twist the head completely off that screw. Not a good thing.

Singlestack, I knew you weren't disagreeing, but since Itlian Stalion speculated on why the DQ was ruled, I figured I'd chime in since I had, shall we say, first hand knowledge. I agree even had the gun dropped a DQ might have been in order, but in that case at least I would have had an alternative to a DQ to consider where otherwise I did not.

I was the RO who DQ'd the competitor that Singlestack mentioned. The only issue in my mind at the time, and now, and the reason for the DQ was that the 180 was severely broken. It wasn't a lateral 180 sweep; the weapon ended up perpendicular to the 180, pointing up range directly at the gallery. I always give the shooter the benefit of the doubt but didn't have a choice in this matter. The unload and show clear command was given and confirmed, so if the shooter hadn't pinned the weapon against his leg, thereby pointing it uprange, and just let it hit the ground, I would have determined the gun just fell out of the holster, and I, as RO, could have picked up the unloaded weapon and it would have been a much happier ending.

Way to go Swede! Most excellent! Good thing you weren't shooting a real gun...huh?

Shot this one recently with a Glock 34, production division. Nothing felt really great nor bad about the run, just a decent smooth run. 50 points 7.61 seconds 6.5703 HF Geez. Turned out to be 65.868%. I was expecting a much higher percentage on this one. (Edited by cpty1 at 5:03 am on Dec. 13, 2002)

There was no website information listed. These are simply targets sized to have a 4 to 1 distance ratio, so when set up at 3 yards they are sized to appear as standard size targets would appear at 12 yards. I like them because you have a known distance ratio so front sight to target relationship is just as it would be on full size targets at various ranges; A, B, C and D scoring zones are visible, and since the back of each target is white you can set up no-shoot scenarios as well. Some time ago, I had cut out my own dry fire targets of various sizes, but I like the C & M system much better. There were 10 targets and 6 popper targets in the kit. The kit was $16.95 which included shipping. Contact information is: C & M Target Systems P.O. Box 67913 Albuquerque NM 87193-7913 You can also call Charlie at 505-899-1188. He asked that no one call before 9 am or after 6 pm Mountain time. (Edited by cpty1 at 5:45 pm on Nov. 12, 2002)

I've got the contact information at home. Let me check and I'll let you know. I know there is an address and phone number listed but can't remember if there was a web site option also.

A few weeks ago I dropped a check in the mail to C & M Target Systems for one of their dry fire kits. Didn't think much about it for several days; wasn't expecting the kit to arrive at that point anyway. Well, a few nights later, I get a call from Charlie at C & M. He just called to let me know that he had been out of town for a few days and that my kit would be in the mail soon. I was, and still am surprised that he took the time to call to assure me everything was being taken care of. I received the kit about three days later and have been having a ball ever since setting up various scenarios which add some variety to my dry fire routine. C & M is a class outfit with the kind of customer service, that unfortunately, you just don't see much anymore.

Shot this classifier this weekend for the first time ever. Shot it with a Glock 34, production division. All those reloads with production gear was wild. Anyway: 20.24 seconds 95 points 4.6937 HF Went left to right on all the runs. Draw and reloads were OK. I did fire two extra rounds on the far left target because I called one shot a D and wasn't sure at all about the other one.

I've always thought that the lighter an action breaks, the less opportunity a shooter would have to disturb the sight alignment prior to breaking the shot. Seems this would hold true for any handgun, Glock or otherwise, and for shooters who slap the trigger, and those who don't. My $0.02.

Sounds like you may prefer the 5 pound connector over the 3.5. In my experience, the 3.5 connector provides a lighter break but has more creep, whereas the 5 pound connector obviously needs more pressure to break, but breaks much more cleanly than the 3.5. Get a 5 pound connector, take a dremel and some Simichrome or jeweler's rouge, and polish the connector, trigger bar tab, firing pin, and firing pin safety plunger at their contact points until they shine like chrome; put in a reduced power firing pin spring, and I think you'll like the results. If you don't...no harm done and you can go back to your original configuration. The polished parts will just smooth things up for you.

Shot this one at the Georgia USPSA Championship this weekend. Time: 20.29 Points: 113 HF: 5.5692 Probably much too conservative on this one, but I had already shot a couple of stages poorly at this match and my last few classifier entries have been horrible. So my plan was to make sure all the hits were there. Shot it just like Bonedaddy mentions above and agree that position 3 was uncomfortable to say the least. Seemed like I lost lots of time at that position, but needed that much time to be sure of the hit. Beginning to think a good option (for right handers) might be supporting yourself with your strong hand on the horizontal bar and shooting position three weak hand. We also had a couple of guys drop to kneeling initially and shoot just over, then under the bar on strings 1 and 2. USPSA Percentage: 84.382 (Edited by cpty1 at 12:24 pm on Nov. 15, 2002)

Thank you Jon. Sorry to hear about your gun problems. I went looking for you at one point Sunday without success. I shot on Friday and only RO'd on Sunday due to my son's doubleheader baseball game on Saturday. I finished higher than I anticipated based on the way I shot. I tanked the grenade stage and had mikes on two other stages. Ten stages can leave a lot of room for error I suppose, and apparently a lot of shooters had problems of one sort or another. Hope to meet you soon. Good to see Eric Sites again and congrats to Singlestack for his finish also.

I won't try to convince anyone the Glock is better than a S_I, but the Glock advantages would be weight, price, operational simplicity, reliability without major investments in mag tuning, etc. If the above are none issues, the S_I is probably the better choice.

Good to hear you got that wander lust out of your system.

Don't let the DQ get you down. I've seen some of the really greats DQ. It happens to about everyone sooner or later. Learn from it and move on.

There was an article about kydex holsters in "Front Sight" a while back. The holster reviewed was the type/model (according to the article) that David uses. I've already trashed the mag, maybe this will jog someone's memory. Mine's not too good.

Hey, hey...don't be talking bad about them Glocks.

I was just curious because I'd heard of the thing with Sevigny, knew TDean had some trouble with his Glock, and I had a problem with the 35 at my last local match. Was wondering if some sort of conspiracy was beginning.

Yes, looks like a fun match. Several huge (36 round) field courses and that stage where you can stack shots.....don't see that much anymore.

Patches, I enjoyed your post for the content, but especially for that "High A Class Bream Fisherman" tag line. That's a good one. Thanks for the laugh.

Someone posted earlier that David was having some trouble at the RGNs with his Glock. Anybody find out for sure what happened?

My thoughts: 1. sounds like the gun will be used primarily for competition, so it depends on which division you plan to shoot. If USPSA limited, you will need hi-cap mags, if you shoot Lim-10 or production, the 10 rounders are all you'll need. 2. depends on whether you want the extra weight or not. Most people prefer the heavier brass magwells. I prefer and use the ligher aluminum well. 3. Lightning Strike and, I think also, Arredondo make whats called +0 pads, which extend the length for reloading ease but don't add capacity. Keep in mind if you shoot USPSA production, you can't use even the +0 extensions. 4. You can replace the guide rod and be legal in all USPSA divisions. Many people leave the guide rod stock, but I've always preferred a metal rod. I like the noncaptured model because I use a lighter recoil spring than stock. Many also use a tungsten rod for a bit of extra weight out front. I have one, but probably wouldn't spend the extra money next time, and just get the full length stainless rod. 5. Everything mentioned above with the exception of the mags is available at http://www.brownells.com Good luck with the 35.

If the gun is to be used strictly for competition I would go with a 34. If you think the gun would ever be used for concealed carry also, I would go with the 17. You'll find the 17 a little cheaper, and probably more easily found for sale used also as compared to the 34. I think the 34 is a better competition gun due to the longer barrel, longer sight radius, and some of the extras like extended releases and catches that the 17 doesn't have standard. However, like anything, opinions vary in this respect. Take a hard look at both before making your decision.