GJM

Mine is just a few days old. With no magazine in the pistol, I can easily drop the slide, using my dominant right thumb, to depress the slide stop. With an empty magazine in the pistol, I can not depress the slide stop. With a magazine in with live ammo, or a snap cap, I can easily depress the slide stop with my dominant thumb.

I bet in three days you will be mostly there. If it excites you it is all good, and you will have plenty of time to decide what you want to do before your major matches. By chance, I picked up a P10F yesterday at CZ Custom, put a DP Pro on it last night, and shot it today a bit while mostly shooting my CO Shadow. The P10F is a great shooter, and draws and transitions better for me than the Shadow, but doesn’t split as well. It seems like a low drama pistol, with a more forgiving trigger/shooter interface than a Glock. Even if you reserve it for shooting Steel Challenge, rainy days, or perking your interest up from time to time, it is cheap fun.

There is no upgraded board yet. I start testing a prototype in the next week or so, to see if the fix works.

Just got back from range, shooting a DP Pro, and when I “post flighted” the optic, this is what I found. Another one headed back to Oregon.

There are two common problems with the DP Pro, and Leupold is working on both. The problems are a failure of the motion detector, which then does not “wake the dot up,” and the “+” that locates the battery slipping. When the + slips down, the dot starts intermittent and ultimately hard fails. Hopefully the fixes work, and quickly find their way to production units. Until then, you can look in your battery compartment and see if the + is well centered, or has started moving which indicates imminent failure. Here is the + with slight migration.

Between my wife, me and two friends who seriously shoot CO, we have broken 27 Delta Point Pros in the last 18 months. Still, there is no better alternative, although we are messing with a RMS Shield, Holosun 507 and eagerly awaiting the Acro.

So, as I understand it, reading appendix A1, level 1 matches must follow USPSA rules. Spinners are not permitted steel targets since they require more than one hit to score. The problem is the match director and other club officer both shoot PCC, and one of them designed the stage, so they are unlikely to be sympathetic.

Sorry for being so dense, but looking here, I am not seeing this at 1.1.5.1? https://uspsa.org/documents/rules/2019_USPSA_Competition_Rules.pdf

It would be greatly appreciated if you could point me to that section of the rules?

Is that true for a USPSA Level one club match?

A PCC guy set up a stage at our local USPSA match today, that included: At 35 yards, two steel and three paper at 35 yards, with two of the paper targets stacked making a partial with no delineation between the two paper targets. An identical array on the other side of the bay at 35 yards. Two spinners at 15 yards with a 30 second penalty for failing to spin each, later reduced to three procedurals each for failing to spin, since they couldn’t figure out how to do penalty seconds on the pad. Shooting CO, I spun both and made basically A hits on the 35 yard targets, although at a lot slower pace than the PCC shooters, but it was a bloodbath for most of the pistol shooters, especially the less skilled ones. I heard extreme frustration expressed by numerous experienced pistol shooters, and I can’t imagine what the newer pistol shooters were thinking. Comments from some of the PCC shooters were along the lines of “how great to be able to challenge PCC shooters.” This kind of stuff can drive a big wedge between PCC and the rest of the pistol divisions.

Currently, most of us get results from local matches by going to PractiScore. The default presentation is combined overall results with all divisions. You can select just a single division, but to my knowledge, can not deselect PCC so you have, for example, just the pistol divisions combined. Since the different divisions can be thin at a local match, folks often look at combined results. I would like it if PractiScore gave the option of seeing just the pistol divisions combined, with PCC separate. Ideally, they would also provide the ability to combine whatever divisions you wanted and see overall placement. A PCC shooter, for example, could then see just PCC since they often say they only compete with other PCC shooters. If they wanted to, they could also combine PCC and Open. A CO shooter might want to combine CO and Limited. Not sure why this flexibility would harm anyone. It would also reduce the incentive for pistol shooters to mess with PCC shooters or PCC shooters to mess with pistol shooters in stage design, since high overall on PractiScore would no longer only be all divisions combined.

Just to be clear, I like PCC. I still shoot it as one of my two divisions in Steel Challenge, and I have a bunch of friends who are PCC. What I am interested in discussing, is how PCC interacts with the rest of our sport, and what incentives we may be providing to shoot PCC over pistol divisions, by how we present the results. I believe that shooting pistols is the core of USPSA, but others may disagree. I don’t believe that USPSA is intentionally encouraging people to pick PCC over the pistol divisions, but that may be an unintended consequence of how we now show results.

I am starting to believe that reporting PCC results out as a separate USPSA match may be the best long term approach for allowing PCC and the other USPSA pistol divisions to coexist. i shot PCC back in 2017 when it first started, really enjoyed it and learned a lot. It was a time when CO was ten rounds, and PCC helped me see faster, move faster, and learn a different approach to the game than Production. I stopped when I was that “proverbial” one classifier from GM, as I didn’t want a PCC classification to affect my pistol classifications. Fast forward a few years, and PCC has been around long enough that you can see how it is impacting our sport. For some shooters, besides the seeing and moving faster part, a large appeal is that PCC allows them to finish higher overall in local matches. I get that at major matches, high overall is irrelevant, but at local matches there isn’t enough competition in each division, so most are duking it out for high overall or as high as you can be in overall match. This is where the problem starts. Shooters that ordinarily would shoot a pistol, get pulled into PCC to finish higher, and stage designers can create stages that help or penalize PCC as a way of increasing or reducing the gap between PCC and pistol. This sets up conflict over stage design. But, the bigger problem for the long term health of our sport, is that many shooters are losing their pistol skills. Then when they try to start shooting a pistol again, they do so horribly they run back to their PCC. It is almost like them having to go through withdrawal from a drug addiction. Now, if we reported PCC as a completely separate match, it would take away conflicts over PCC friendly/unfriendly stages, and eliminate the incentive of higher overall placement which causes our members to abandon the core of our sport — which is pistol skills. Long term, this seems like a way of allowing PCC to coexist with the other divisions, and preserve the core of our sport, which is shooting pistols.

I have a G45 with a DP Pro, as well as G17 and 34 Glocks with the DP Pro, both MOS and direct milled by Primary. While I like how the dot tracks on the short 19 length slide, overall I consistently shoot better with the 34. Same thing has been reported to me by two other friends that tried a shorter slide, then returned to a 34 for CO.

I have always found the Q5 grip a bit short, dimensionally closer to a G19 then the G17/34 length I prefer. I realize that would require new magazines, but for a dedicated gaming gun, I think that would have been worthwhile. Very interested in the new beaver tail design, as the rear corner of the Q5/PPQ frame whacks the base of my dominant thumb.

I got the new MPX Competition model a few days ago. Timney trigger is heavier than the Timney trigger in my existing MPX. Lighter weight is noticeable, although I have the Lancer handguard on my current MPX. First range session today, and I easily got a 510C zeroed. Used a 30 round OEM mag, 30 plus Taran and 30 plus the TF 20, and experienced no stoppages using American Eagle 115 factory. This was good, as previous MPX rifles have required a break in period. No idea about whether the gas system was modified, and I didn’t take it apart further than replacing the charging handle.

I bought two 140mm MBX base pads and they only hold 20 rounds.

I would run an OEM RSA. In my Gen 4 34 CO pistols, I started having problems with failures to ignite. After a lot of messing with things, I figured out the 13 pound after market spring I was using was allowing my thumb to occasionally retatrd the slide slightly. In my case this could result in a FTF, but I could see how it could also allow what you are experiencing. Since the change back to OEM, zero problems.

https://www.osagecountyguns.com/sig-sauer-rmpx-16b-9.html

I had a G34 light strike problem that ultimately came back to an after market, lighter recoil spring. At times, my thumb would contact the slide, keeping it so slightly out of battery, and leading to a light strike. Went away with the OEM RSA.

Dot goes intermittent, ultimately completely fails.

With the DP Pro, it seems like I am breaking more optics with the MOS and Walther Q5 multi optic mount systems than with direct milled installations. My theory is a direct milled installation, like what Primary does, supports the optic better. Two buddies are having similar experiences.

Not sure on CO. Calculating my last four on record, a 89.3269 on 06-10 would become a 81.0776, a 80.4881 on 09-02 would be a 76.5099, a 77.0690 on 08-03 would be a 71.6295, and a 76.1006 on 03-05 would be a 76.1014. Not exactly seeing the downward adjustment in CO hit factors. It is a clue when we only have 8 GMs in CO, and Nils and Hwansik are M class.

CZ has been very nice to deal with. When I call, I get a live person quickly, and they have paid shipping without even me asking them. The first of my two pistols is on the way back from CZ after repair, with the following note on the email advising me the pistol is being shipped: Work Performed: Polished extractor and adjusted slide stop. Test fired good with 115 gr S&B FMJ using all 3 magazines.