Whitefish

The +3/+4 basepad that Taylor Freelance already makes for the Glock 22 rd 40 mag to give it a 25 rd capacity also works on the 24 rd 9 mag. The stock 22 rd 40 mag is identical in length to the new 24 rd 9mm mag. The TF basepad gives me a reloadable capacity of 28 rds in the 9 mag (25 rds in the 40 mag) and fits the gauge for 171.25 just like it was intended to do for the 40 mag. The new 24 rd mag with +3/+4 basepad installed is virtually identical in length to a 17 rd 9 mag with a +12 TF basepad installed without having to worry about the transition between the basepad and mag that can cause issues. Works great for my open Glock 17.

Notice that I said "pretty much cured" the issue. I still get the odd ejected 9 case hitting the optic from time to time, but I was able to "almost" eliminate it. It was worth the effort. Eliminating it altogether seems to pretty much be a unicorn with Glocks with slide mounted optics. I figured with the tolerances, variances, and design inherent in Glocks that is as good as it is going to get. Re-contouring the end of the ejector to change the trajectory of ejected brass might be the next big project.

I chased that issue with ejected brass hitting the optic in several CO Glocks, both Gen 3 and Gen 4. I now use Apex extractors in all of them along with replacing the Gen 3 ejectors with the "improved" Gen 4 ejectors in the Gen 3's. That, combined with a no lighter than a 13 lb recoil spring, seems to have pretty much cured the the issue of ejected brass hitting the optic. I run a 14 lb Wolff recoil spring on a Wolff steel guide rod in two Gen 3 Glock 17's used for CO and a 14 lb Wolff recoil spring on a Jager extended heavy guide rod in a Gen 3 Glock 34, also for CO. I run a 13 lb ISMI flat wire recoil spring on a Jager guide rod in a Gen 4 Glock 17 that was also used for CO until I took the optic off and put it on the Gen 3 G34 to experiment with the longer gun. My CO load is right at 133 pf out of the G17's and close to 134.5 pf out of the G34. Cannot say which of the "cures" was most effective, as I did them all at one time. I can say that the same combination of cures also worked in my Gen 3 G17 open gun at the 172 pf load I run it at.

What barrel you go with might ultimately depend on what weight bullet you intend to use - heavy or lighter. Sometimes the twist rate does make a difference in the accuracy of a given bullet and profile. BarSto uses a 1 in 16 twist rate. S3F uses a 1 in 10 twist rate in their 9 mm barrels - when I checked. KKM does not say for sure, but I think it is in the area of 1 in 16 or 1 in 18. One you did not name that I have had very good luck with is Jarvis in Montana. Jarvis makes their Glock barrels out of 4140 CM instead of stainless steel like the other 3 do and I think they are also a 1 in 16 twist. Briley is another option if you don't mind fitting the barrel hood, lower lug, and short chambered - stainless and 1 in 16 twist. Properly fitted, Briley yields very good results. https://jarvis-custom.com/collections/barrels-1/products/glock-pistol-barrels I have used all but S3F and all have far outperformed the shooter. ?

Since the barrel and slide have some miles on them now, perhaps the 34 barrel in the 35 slide (and breech face) is moving around just enough to move the hood slightly side to side to the point where even a new extractor will not bite correctly on the case rim (or is biting on it too much). Both the hood dimension and the actual barrel o.d. are smaller on a 34 barrel which could allow movement. Even the tightest fit barrels will develop some slop in lock-up over time and this one started life on the small side for a 35 slide. This could cause extraction and/or feeding issues if the extractor hook is now interfering when feeding a new round or extracting a spent case. It would not have to be much to cause the issues you have described. The hood dimension on the rear of the 34 barrel is much smaller than the hood on a 35 barrel (or a 40-9 conversion barrel), in addition to the actual barrel o.d being less, and even though it worked for a while, with wear it may not work any longer. Personally, I think you have been fortunate that it worked at all from the get go. Even some 40-9 conversion barrels can be picky/finicky about the extractor and the ejector, requiring both a 9 extractor and 9 ejector when running 9. You could try a 9 ejector in addition to the 9 extractor and see if that helps. Personally, I would bite the bullet and either get a 34 slide so even the "mature" barrel will fit correctly or a 40-9 conversion barrel meant to fit correctly in the 35 slide. In either case, use both a 9 extractor and 9 ejector. If you know someone with a 40-9 conversion barrel or a 34 slide, sweet talk them into allowing you to try one or both and see if that cures your issues.

In my experience, that dream was a nightmare. Shot with an open shooter with a 9x25 open gun back in the day and the experience can only be described as brutal. You did not want to be in the same county when he shot, let alone the same bay. My recollection is that a steady diet of shooting that caliber in open lead to cracked molars and/or stress fractures in the elbow. Interest in 9x25 rather quickly dwindled because of the sheer brutality and the fact that you were down rounds to 38 Super guns.

Sure looks like an over-pressured round to do that kind damage. I would check the trigger shoe and trigger bar for signs of damage. With those bent and broken pins, the trigger bar could have been tweaked/bent and/or the pivot hole on the shoe damaged. Check the frame in the area of the locking block for signs of stress or cracking and take a good look at the barrel and lugs to make sure it is ok and not cracked. It could even have rounded out the frame holes for the trigger and locking block pins when the damage occurred. Without seeing the gun, it is tough to tell the extent of the damage, so I am just pointing out the worst case to check on so it does not come back to bite later.

Forgot to add that the Carver magwell works with the TTI base pads with the push pin retainer without modification, unlike the SJC and Dawson which both need work on the back underside of the magwell to allow room for the basepad pin.

Another alternative would be Carver's stainless steel magwell. It weighs 5.9 oz with brass mounting plug, so not quite as heavy as the brass SJC, but slightly heavier than the one Dawson used to make. I just checked and Carver gets $155 for either the Gen 3 or Gen 4 models.

35 rounds sounds about right for the follower to be sticking right at the junction of the mag and base pad/extension. You will probably have to work on the back of the follower and perhaps the rear top of the extension to get the follower to slide by that junction - same as on the TF +10 base pad for many. The spring will eventually take a set and settle in, so I would not be concerned about that.

The Glock factory 24 round 9mm mag is too long to be CO legal, by a good bit. It appears to be identical in length to the Glock factory 22 round mag for 40, so would only be legal for open. We just discussed this under a topic in USPSA shooting. For what it is worth, the 24 round 9 mag appears to be a bit of a unicorn anyway. Glockmeister has them now, but they are/were listed at $35 on sale. Midway does not even have them in stock yet and it appears they will be close to $40 when they do come in. That price will probably come down some as more are available.

You could do that, but the resulting length of the mag is much too long for even open division, so not legal for any "pistol" division with the TF +10 on the 24 rd mag. The only division where that combination of a 24 rd mag and a TF +10 basepad would be legal is PCC (original question was about CO) and then, you would still be short of the 31 round Glock 18 mags with a TF +10 where shooters are getting 41 rounds. I just put a TTI +3 basepad on a 31 rd mag with the factory spring and am getting 34 rounds reloadable and do not have to worry about the sometimes troublesome transition to a TF +10. I could even use the TTI +6 on the 31 round mag and get at least 36 rounds with the stock mag spring. I doubt if the stock spring in the 24 rounder is long enough to even work with a TF +10, so you would have to swap out the stock mag spring to the 18 or 19 coil spring meant for the 31/33 rd mag anyway.

Saw that ad and wondered myself. Not having one in hand, I would guess it is the same length as the 22 rd 40 mag Glock has made for quite some time now. Seems about right for two more rounds in 9mm. The 22 round 40 mag is too long for 141.25, but it does make a decent open mag with the addition of the specific basepad Taylor Freelance made for that purpose. It does fit the gauge at 171.25 for open with the basepad installed and I can squeeze 25 rounds of 40 in it, 24 reloadable. Stands to reason the 24 round 9mm mag would make a decent big stick with the same basepad and probably get 28 rounds in it. So, you are out of luck for CO, but probably ok if you want to try open with the TF basepad.

Thanks! Senior moment - forgot to mention that is exactly what I did at the suggestion of DK after I called him. Oops. Forgive me, it was a while back! Bending the TTI connector out slightly at the top did make the reset snappier, but still not where the Vanek triggers with Glock and Lone Wolf connectors are. I was leary of bending it out at the top too much based on the variability inherent in Glock triggers and my innate talent for screwing up such things, so I stopped while I was ahead. I just walked in to my reloading room and dry fired the the G17 Gen 4 with the DK trigger and TTI connector, and a G34 Gen 4 with a Vanek trigger and Glock minus connector to reaffirm my recollection. The Vanek is noticeably snappier on the reset, but the DK works just fine and the reset is acceptable with the slightly tweaked TTI connector. Some of that I just chalk up to differences in gun tolerances.

Oh, and if it makes a difference, the G17 with the DK trigger and TTI connector is a Gen 4.

My experience is about the same. I have a DK Custom Trigger in a G17 from back when he was using the TTI connector. There is a somewhat lesser click on the reset, but not really as audible and sharp feeling as the Vanek triggers I have in other Glocks where Charlie used either a minus Glock factory or Lone Wolf connector. The different reset got my attention when I installed that DK trigger, but I do not recall having reliability issues with the connector or trigger. That said, all work fine and are about the same trigger pull weight, just a little different in feel. If it bothers you or you depend on that audible sharp click reset when shooting, you might want to look at one of the other connectors out there. Hope that helps. You might want to ask Taran about it if you still have concerns.

Oh, and I went with monovision soft contact lenses with my right eye corrected to be able to see the front sight and my left eye corrected for distance. That is full time - shooting and non-shooting. Seems to work just fine for me or as fine as it is going to get these days. In addition, I wear low power readers for reading and computer work. I vote for one set and no changing, but (bias) carrying around an extra contact lens for my right eye and changing it depending on the stage would be a royal pain in the butt, not to mention it would probably just confuse me (more). Oops!

Note to self. Next time, hide Mike's readers when he is not shooting (and not looking). That ought to take care of that whole 1st overall/match winner thing he has going. BTW - Congratulations on that!

My recollection is that it was called the Limcat Turbo comp. Have not seen one in quite some time. I also recall that Ralph Arredondo used to make a comp that was quite similar in design, but that was also years ago.

I stand corrected on that, but I am not even sure that 2 year electronic component warranty is correct anymore when I dug into it. While the DPP manual says there is a 2 year warranty for electronic components not covered under the lifetime warranty (I looked in mine), Leupold's website now says those electronic components not covered under the lifetime warranty are covered by a 5 year warranty and lists the very same items that are under the two year warranty in the manual. In all honesty, I have never had Leupold refuse to repair or replace a sight, so it is always best to call the company and talk to customer service. As for the Vortex sights, I looked at them, read reviews, talked to shooters who own them, and decided to pay once and cry once on the more expensive red dots.

Yes, DeltaPoint Pro's are more $$, but as with anything else, you generally get the quality you are willing to pay for. While the DPP is currently $399.99 from most vendors, I have seen them for $350 or less, including here on the Enos Classifieds. As far as a 2-yr warranty, your information is incorrect. The DPP has a lifetime warranty per the company. Here is the information from Leupold's website: "Covered by the Leupold Golden Ring Full Lifetime Warranty; electronics covered by the Leupold Golden Ring Electronics Warranty."

I have used them in the past, both for Doctor sights, but the design is the same. My experience is that they don't take a lot of abuse before breaking, especially the top. The built-in nipples for the sight mounting screws are not all that robust and I have actually broken them (twice) when I inadvertently bumped the sight on a prop in the middle of a stage. Did not think it was that hard, but I was not able to finish either match because the sight was loose, with no way to tighten it. I take responsibility for the bumping, but the breakage was still disconcerting. JoJo was good about it and actually "fixed" the first one with heli-coil in place of the nipples so that I could re-mount the sight. I did not bother sending the second one back to JoJo. The JV mount puts the sight low to the slide and I liked that - just take care not to bump up against anything.

I have the Apex extractor installed in my Gen 3 Glock 17 set up for carry optics. The slide is stock Glock and the barrel is a BarSto semi-fit barrel. Everything functions as it should, nothing is hitting, and there is a small amount of clearance between the extractor and the barrel hood which you can see with the barrel and slide in lock-up. I just pulled the slide and checked the clearance with a strong flashlight and the "eye" test. I can see where clearance might be an issue depending on the tolerances of the slide and barrel, but BarSto barrels are generally about as "robust" as you will find. Your experience may vary.

Right now I'm using 7.7 gr 3N37 with 125 Zero because that is what powder I have. I had 6.8 - 6.9 gr WAC before with both 125 Zero and 124 MG JHP's. I've used 6.8 gr N340 and 6.8 gr WSF in the past. All make major in my G17 with a Jager 4 port comp. Start under that and work your way up looking for pressure signs with the jacketed JHP's - none in mine, but your's may vary. Barrels will differ in velocity and pressure, so exercise caution.

I am able to load Zero 125 JHP's and MG 124 JHP's to 1.145" OAL in Glock 9mm mags. Any longer than 1.150 and it becomes an adventure in reliability, so I backed it off for a little cushion and called 1.145 good. My open 9 major Glock 17 has a gunsmith fit KKM barrel and the mags all have +5 base pads.