cpty1

I suppose you would call the wear normal because it does occur on most, if not all the tungsten rods. Everyone I know, including myself, who has a tungsten rod has experienced the wear you describe. The wear takes place rather quickly but stops after a certain point. At least it did in my case. Because the diameter of the rod is reduced in that particular area, I'm sure it's more prone to breakage at that point. The fact that it wears at all means there is more stress in that area. I have about 12,000 rounds through a gun with a tungsten rod. It hasn't broken yet but I can't say I'd be suprised if it broke tomorrow. It looks pretty rough. Someone else with more rounds through one might provide some insight into longevity from their perspective.

I notice a difference as I change from the Glock 34 to the 35. Even though the actions break the same, same sights, etc, the recoil and timing of the two different platforms to me are different and require a period of adjustment from one to the other.

Thanks David, and BTW, congrats on being listed in the top 3 GM production division shooters in the country!

"Good afternoon, this is your captain speaking. As you prepare for landing with your seat backs up and your tray tables secure, would the person who found the air marshall's pistol in the restroom please press the attendant button? We will gladly retrieve the weapon from you and unite it with the rightful yet misguided owner. And as always, we thank you for flying with us today."

Congrats Swede. Was that shot fired from retention or a traditional IPSC up and out to the target?

Yep, think you're right about Merle. I'd be careful about kicking him too, before AMU he was one of those guys the military would drop into the nasty and forget about for a couple of weeks.

I find it interesting as to the many different ways shooters approach disappearing targets, at least when match design allows for multiple choice when it comes to what or how much is engaged after the activator yet before the activatee. One thing that impressed me about the FGN design was there were several stages where a large number of targets could be engaged after the activator. In particular was the stage where you started on one knee with your hands on a "car" (don't remember the stage number) but at the end of the stage a shooter could potentially engage the activator, then opt to shoot three more pieces of steel and two static targets with two rounds each before engaging the disappearing target. It was interesting in my squad alone to see the varying approaches on this stage as to what and how much was shot after the activator. I don't think anyone could have shot everything back there prior to the drop turner, but the option was there and if anyone did it they were flat smokin'! I also usually try to time what I can shoot before a target disappears but don't really go to the extent of breaking that time down into split and transition times to the tenths of a second. I do see merit in that method however, I find myself sometimes being aware of the disappearing target's position with my peripheral vision but my best results are always those where I have no knowledge of the disappearing targets position until I index there and it's right where it needs to be for just long enough to get two good hits on it. Ah, that's a good feeling.

If memory serves, the Z model has part of the tube reduced in size to more facilitate use of the Rogers technique, which allows the weak hand to hold the light but still assist in gripping the weapon.

David, was just curious about something. You mentioned being more stable and able to move out of position better with a weak foot forward stance. Does your weak foot forward stance align with your natural point of aim or differ from your NPA stance? Thanks in advance.

Shot this one Saturday, limited division with a Glock 35. Comstock was 8.2171 with 53 points and a time of 6.45. Whacked a D that I wish I hadn't. Nothing felt exceptionally good or bad about the performance. Based on previous posts this will probably be a low to mid master score, but I will edit when USPSA posts the score so we can know for sure. Later update: 88.356% per USPSA (Edited by cpty1 at 7:35 am on Nov. 8, 2002)

I believe that the elimination of all that pressure you've been putting on yourself to make master will allow you to achieve that goal a lot quicker than you would have otherwise.

For me it was always a little quicker to reload as I dropped to my knees, then go prone; instead of doing the reload then going prone with the left hand between the feet method which is the method I usually use to get prone if no reload is involved. However, YMMV.

I'm not posting to offer advice, but to tell you we're about six weeks ahead of you in the acquistion of a new pup and I wish you well. After 14 years with a lab, I'd forgotten how demanding a new pup can be. My 10 year old son decided he wanted a Basset puppy after our lab died and our lives haven't been the same since. Good luck.

One thing I was surprised at as I watched Todd gear up for the Top 8 shootoff was his holster was a paddle type holster. I'm sure he probably used the same holster in the match as he did the shootoffs. I was just surprised that it was a paddle holster.

Thank you Travis, and to you as well. Good luck in Bend.

I think I got Bill today, though neither one of us shot very well. Bill had smaller problems on 3 or 4 stages, whereas I totally trashed one but shot the others pretty well. I think my timing withe gun is still a bit off in moving from the 9 to the 40.

IMO, just because someone cleans a course doesn't mean they shot it too slow. Granted you can be too deliberate and thereby shoot all As, but a clean score in and of itself does not mean the shooter was shooting too slow.

Great idea Travis. I would love to see each division have it's own nationals. Let's face it, were it not for the breakout of the Lim-10 and production divisions from open and limited this year, once again, there would have been no where near as much participation at the GM level. Even though a lot of people would like to see it happen, I doubt it ever will.

You guys are something else. Right now, I'm leaning towards shooting limited for a while. Shot limited at a local match last week and it was kinda fun getting to use a fast holster and firing 20 rounds before having to reload.

There's an interesting book review in todays Wall Street Journal about "Guns and Violence - The English Experience" by Joyce Lee Malcolm. Ms. Malcolm is a history professor who compares the views and experiences of the U.S. and England as it relates to gun ownership and gun control. I found some of the verbage used by Kimberley Strassel who wrote the review quite to the point - "ever since England started severely regulating guns in the middle of the 20th century, its rates of violent crime have been on the rise"; "Armed crime, never a problem in England, has become one."; and lastly...."Even the most hardened anti-gunners - my friends included - will want to read "Guns and Violence," if only to see what ammunition their opponents now possess." This book might be a good read.

I'm presently using a Safariland inner and outer competition belt, an Uncle Mike's kydex holster and Fobus kydex double mag holders.

Patrick, if you haven't already, you should post your request over on glocktalk. I've seen some pics over there of some pretty rad Glocks. Your request would get in front of a lot more Glock shooters over there also.

TDean, glad you weren't hurt. IMO, sounds like you were lucky you weren't hurt worse than you were. I've always been afraid of the 550s due to the manual indexing operation. Always been afraid I'd doublecharge a case and kablooey.

I have put approximately 15,000 rounds at a 168 PF through my stock G35 barrel with no trouble whatsoever. I use plated bullets but do not use the faster/higher pressure powders.

Not to mention very creative. Love the pig.