lumberjack149
-
Posts
64 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Forums
Profiles
Events
Store
Posts posted by lumberjack149
-
-
The 19x with MOS is the glock 45, if thats your preference
-
It runs fine with my stock Gen 5 34
-
yes, that is one option. Below is a website i bought off of that carry quite a few different shapes and then as you said you could fill the remaining voids with powder if you wanted.
https://www.maximum-velocity.com/product-category/pinewood-derby-weight/tungsten-weight/
-
Yes, it weighed just over 40oz with an empty magpul mag inserted when i weighed it at the SC state match.
It started out just like this thread as far as i was just trying to add a few more ounces to a CO gun for the heck of it. I learned that you could easily add 3oz to 7oz to a glock but i really couldnt think of much beyond that (2oz over stock weight with an extended 1/4" thick tungsten guide rod and then 3 to 5 oz in the grip depending on what type of tungsten you used and how permanent it was). I then i read a thread on the sig 320's and about what some people have done to the grips as far as chopping them up and adding tungsten and putting them back together and i figured what the heck, i enjoy tinkering and the worse that can happen is i ruin a frame.
I shoot my glocks with a medium size grip so i wanted to make sure when i was done that it was still a medium size grip. I used the extra backstraps i had laying around and i made a template on the grip size and i could always take measurement off my other glocks as i went. The first thing i did was chop away most of the back grip area with the exceptions of a few small strips of plastic left (to give something to attach to and help keep the basic grip shape). I then went layer by layer with tungsten plates, blocks (two different sizes), and small scrap pieces of tungsten to build up the basic shape of the grip (solid tungsten adds up very quickly). Before i started, I also roughed up the plastic surface pretty good, made small little attachment points in the plastic for the putty to tie into, and tied small stainless wire into the plastic to kind of act like rebar. All the tungsten layers are held together by devcon steel putty (slow setting stuff). I took quite a few different evening getting the basic shape of the grip built back up but once that was done i did lots of skim coats and then sanding to get the final shape i wanted (devcon steel putty mixed with tungsten powder since this part was just cosmetic and not structural). I then covered it all with a silicon carbide grip job so you cant tell anything was changed unless you pick up the gun. I forget the exact weight break down but it has a tungsten guide rod and some weight is in the lower part of the grip on the left and right hand side where it flares out slightly on the gen 5's where i just made it a small transition from mid grip to where it flares out and then the rest is where i cut the back part of the grip out and built it back up.
I did this 6 months ago and i only have 3,500rds through it since then so we will see how it holds up long term.
-
There is a decent difference in weight between using tungsten powder and tungsten shapes (spheres, blocks, plates, etc). I would recommended using as many of the shapes as you can fit in the grip instead of powder. Not that i think it matters on performance (i just like tinkering), i was able to get my CO glock up to 40oz by getting creative and playing around with tungsten.
-
-
I have been shooting one for a couple years now and from how i read the rules, you should be fine
-
-
i deleted this post so i didnt drag this thread into the aftermarket trigger conversation
-
20 hours ago, Cy Soto said:
I am not saying that this is an overstatement but what I will say is that 2" groups at 25yds are better than what many finely-tuned 1911's are capable of and almost unheard of out of most polymer pistols.
I agree with you and expected a comment like this but that was my point when the comment at the top was joking on glocks and "define accuracy". I would agree with him on some of the older plastic pistols, as i had an M&P with an accuracy problems (7" groups until it got an apex barrel) and an old glock 17L i use to own wouldnt shoot better than 5". I guess i did exaggerate some with the usually around 2" statement which is a very tall order but i have shot a few groups under 2" (luck or potential accurracy of the pistol?). I also stated 5 shot groups which is better than 3 shot groups but you still sometimes get lucky vs. 10 shot groups.
I was surprised to find out that the gen 5 accuracy improvement was real vs. some of the other marketing items on the gen 5.
-
22 hours ago, mwc said:
That's good to hear. Would you mind sharing the load you use?
Factory federal 150gr syntech stuff
-
Yes, in my experience. With my gen 3's my groups at 25yds varied between 3-4" depending on the gun and the day ( sand bags, red dot, 5 shot groups). Both my gen 5's (34 and 17) shoot better than that. They are consistently less than 3" and usually around 2".
-
its the common gen 4/5 to gen 3 guide rod adapter. This is for the 0.275" diameter gen 3 guide rods that use the Wolff recoil springs.
-
i am using the gen4/gen 5 adaptor and the jentra ultra heavy tungsten guide rod i bought through NDZ
-
in my gen 5 34 the factory spring setup weighed 0.7oz, the extended stainless guide rod with wolff spring weighed 1.23oz, and the tungsten extended guide rod with wolff spring weighed 2.6oz
-
Both good guns. I've shot both and the only bad thing I have to say about either is the 2.0 takes more concentration to reload quickly as the opening is smaller than the original m&p and quite a bit smaller than the Glocks grip/magwell.
-
Wolff.
On my gen 3 I run 13# recoil w/ 4.5# striker. When I tried this on my gen 5 it was questionable on keeping the gun in battery when pulling the trigger
-
On 4/3/2018 at 9:50 AM, NWfront said:
Anyone else noticing a need to run a slightly heavier spring in the Gen 5 to get the same results? I think the new longer guide rod is reducing a bit of spring preload.
Yes, I've had this same experience
-
On 3/13/2018 at 11:06 AM, Agent #1911 said:
Is the Gen 5 34 MOS approved in production division? I do see G34 MOS on the list but not sure if its for all generations
I would assume its legal now since it was on both Glock's and USPSA's facebook page saying it was legal for carry optics and production
-
7 hours ago, Explosiveo said:
Extended mag release on the gen 3 is SO much better. For me that is reason enough to prefer it for competition. Using a gen 4 right now due to having a MOS model and being able to put my preferred red dot on it but I've gone through 3-4 different extended mag releases and still haven't found one that compaires.
Agreed, that is why i modified my own to fit my needs. I took the factory one and roughed up the surface with sandpaper, then drilled anchor holes into the face of it, then made a mold with tape on the edges, and then filled up the mold with JB weld plastic bonder. After it dried, i dremeled the excess putty back down to match the same height in the rear as my gen 3 factory extended mag release and then profiled it to almost flush in the front part of the release.
-
I would go with gen 5 unless a gen 3 fits your hand perfectly, I see no reason to consider a gen 4. I tried a gen 4 a few years back and didnt care for the trigger compared to my gen 3. I have stuck with the gen 3 because i liked the trigger but the grip has always been a little large for me where i couldnt easily reach the mag and slide release but i got use to it.
I bought the gen 5 17 when it first came out and i recently bought the gen 5 34 (new CO gun). I now prefer the gen 5 because it as a trigger similiar to my gen 3 (i put a 4.5 # striker spring in it and the rest is factory), it fits my hand better (reaching mag and slide release), is slightly more accurate, and the factory magwell is a nice bonus. I did add some material to the factory mag release due to the recent rule changes and it makes it even easier to hit.
-
I find my gen 5 easier to reload vs. my gen 3 but i also internally beveled the cut out area you are talking about
-
It works with my gen 5.
-
On 7/31/2017 at 11:56 AM, wtturn said:
Curious if anyone else has experienced this.
I have used the +5/6 pads (140mm) in both .40 mags and 9mm and found the included TTI springs caused malfunctions due to insufficient spring power. Failure to feed and once a disastrous binding of the follower which left the rounds piled up every which way inside the mag body.
I had this same exact problem at a match last month. That said, I have had the mags for 3yrs now and they have worked great (the problem mag was used only for matches). Before the match I was thinking I should clean them and change springs since its never been done.
Everything looked normal and clean when I took the mags apart so I changed out springs and seems to have fixed the problem.
TACCOM 10/16 Super Feed Barrel - pretty great!
in Pistol Caliber Carbine
Posted
+1 more that is really happy with this barrel.
I shot it against a 16" ULW taccom and a 16" JP barrel/brake and this 10/16" barrel and i think it might become my new preference (and it looks neat). The uppers were all shot on the same lower which is a PSA with a taccom 3 stage buffer system. My informal testing consisted of shooting a bunch of pairs on paper at 10yds as quick as i could pull the trigger in all kinds of positions (leans, ports, moving, etc). Before i put this 10/16 upper together this week, i preferred my 16" JP barrel/brake combo over my 16" ULW taccom upper since the 16" ULW upper was too jumpy for me. This 10/16 upper feels very similar to handling my 16" ULW upper as far as being light weight but shoots as flat as my 16" JP barrel (maybe flatter but i need more testing). For a handguard i used a 10" alg V0 that was on clearance for $40 and then cut an angle on the end to clear the gas ports.