ClangClang

If there's anything I've learned from reading gun "reviews" it's that you need to take their gushing enthusiasm about every new item on the market with a massive grain of salt. Let's wait and see just how good/light the trigger on the Alien actually is. It's super exciting though, and the first major innovation in pistols since striker-fired tupperware in the 70's. And while I agree in principle about the concerns being raised in this thread, I'm not sure they'll actually have any practical effect on scores. It's pretty easy to see shooting a tuned Shadow 2 "should" give someone a distinct advantage over shooting a Glock 17, yet Glock shooters still routinely beat guys with $2500 custom Production pistols. Ultimately, the trigger has (IMHO) the least impact on a person's scores out of every "feature" of a gun. The huge delta in scores between Production and Limited is really caused by mag capacity and the addition of a magwell - fewer and faster reloads. You see it time and time again.... people try out the new "hot" item and then report back here on the forum that they absolutely "love" their new gun/slide/optic/trigger/sear/whatever but under further investigation their splits/transitions/scores/hit factors don't really change. Assuming the claims on the Alien wind up being true, does it offer a competitive advantage over other Production guns? Absolutely. Dow the Alien belong in Limited? Probably. Will it make any difference on scores? Doubtful. Winners are still gonna win. Everyone else will fall in behind according to their talent/skill/effort/practice.

No need to get hung up on barrel length. The overall barrel length of a gun doesn't affect mechanical accuracy, only velocity. That won't have any measurable effect on groups at 25-50 yards. In fact, shorter barrels can often be more accurate because they are stiffer and therefore suffer from less barrel whip (although that is primarily related to rifles, not pistols, but it's an interesting point to consider). CZ has Optics Ready models coming out soon (ish) but they will be quite expensive. It will probably be cheaper to send your slide to have it machined for an optic. CZ Custom offers a machining package to fit various adapter plates for different optics and they also have a plate that has a rear iron sight (so you can switch between irons and optics by just changing 2 screws). People seem to be very happy with that system but I've never personally tried it. I have sent 4 slides to @PrimaryBruce who runs Primary Machine to have them direct milled for optics (1 Glock w/RMR, 3 CZs w/ DPPs) and been very happy with their work. There is a used Accushadow available right now in the Classifieds board. That would be a fantastic gun - check out the test target. You could have it sent to CZ Custom or Primary Machine to have it milled for an optic and still come in around $1500 all told.

I'm only saying the TSO is "good enough" when compared to the Accu-series Shadows, which have been a bit more accurate for me than the TSO, but it's obviously splitting hairs. I've owned a TSO and an Accushadow. OP doesn't compete, he shoots for accuracy/groups on paper on a static range. So my post was directing him towards some more target-oriented guns which will likely serve him better.

Hi Chet, the 9mm TSO is designed specifically towards competitive "practical shooting" i.e. 3-gun, Steel Challenge, USPSA matches, etc. If I read between the lines of your posts, it seems like you are primarily target shooting at static paper and you are most interested in the absolute most accurate pistol possible. The majority of users here on the BrianEnos forums focus on practical shooting competitions where accuracy is important, but other factors are far more critical. Virtually any quality gun produced today is "accurate enough" for USPSA, but things like followup shots, reloads, etc are far more critical. The TSO and Range Officer will likely have a very similar trigger. The RO might even be a little bit better as a 1911, however both will be very light, very short, single action triggers and it will really be about preference. Accuracy will be similar although again, the RO might be a little better. However, compared to the RO, the TSO will offer much faster follow up shots, faster reloads, triple the magazine capacity, and less perceived recoil. If you are after the most accurate hammer-fired 9mm steel frame pistol, you would probably be better off looking at the "AccuShadow" or "Shadow 2 Accu" from www.czcustom.com. They are both custom tuned pistols with a barrel bushing, are DA/SA, and will have fantastic triggers with polished internals. Either of them would probably be more accurate than a stock TSO, and they would use the same magazines as your 75B. For the TSO, you would need all new mags. Another option outside of CZ would be the Sig P210 Target. It is an SAO target pistol and reported to be highly accurate, but I've never shot one so I can't say for sure. Any pistol with a red dot optic will be more accurate at distance than iron sights. Especially with a small red dot (1-3 MOA). You just have to decide whether you prefer optics or iron sights.

This is why I prefer the DPP - huge window. There are some very interesting (on paper) dots now from Sig and Holosun, but I haven't yet had the opportunity to see them in person.

Here in the US, most people choose barrel length on rifles based on legality issues. The minimum barrel length on a rifle is 16" unless you want to jump through some hoops, bureaucratic paperwork, and pay a $200 tax stamp to have the rifle approved as a Short Barreled Rifle. So for anyone who likes to play with their gear and change things up, the logical choice would be a 16". Then you can have an unwelded brake and remove/install it any time. If we buy the 14.5" version, the brake must be welded on permanently. So even though the 14.5" swings maybe 5% faster. many Americans would choose the 16" for convenience. I don't know what laws you deal with in the EU that may or may not influence your choice, but generally speaking, shorter is preferable for a PCC. Go 14.5".

The added weight *can* make a difference, but it's completely dependent on the unique combination of the frame, slide, optic, ammo, spring, and any other factors influencing the issue. Most of the time, guns are sprung to work within a wide enough range to account for most commercial ammo, so small variations in slide weight don't affect reliability, but once in a while, you can have an issue. Usually a FTE. These are still typically remedied with a different recoil spring.

I can only comment on the CZ's as they are the only 10 rounders that I've got, but the 10th round is as easy as the first to load, and they don't require any additional force to seat whatsoever. I shoot both Prod and CO (same frame, different uppers) and my reload force is identical no matter which mags I'm using.

I have 10 round CZ mags for matches when shooting Prod. It's just one less thing to think about and potentially screw up. It happens - just look above.

@MemphisMechanic I do not believe that pictured frame would be legal in Carry Optics. Appendix D7, Sec. 21.4 states "Grips may not be modified to create a thumb rest or beavertail." I read that to mean that the support-hand thumb area on the frame can be stippled for friction, but cutting any sort of ledge which creates a positive incut upon which the thumb would rest would be prohibited.

At that level, you also need to move like a GM. There are many "paper GMs" who have fast hands but can't move. I don't remember where I saw it, but there's a video from some major (Nationals last year?) of a side-by-side composite of JJ Racazza's runs compared to someone else from the Super Squad. The buzzer goes off at the same time in both videos, but JJ is so far ahead of the other shooter within mere seconds. It's incredible. His splits and transitions are fractionally faster, but his movement from position to position is why he is "next level."

It's the profile of the driver head.

JP makes some of the finest AR pattern rifles on the market. Only you can say whether or not a factory build will be worth it. Do you have the budget (don't forget about a quality 1-6 optic, sling, load bearing gear, etc)? Can you wait 4-6 months for delivery? If not, do you have all the tools and skills necessary to build from parts? Do you have the skills required to trouble shoot any reliability issues after the build? If so, go ahead and build it. RnG is rougher on gear than any other shooting discipline short of going to war. I place reliability and durability as the single most important feature. I've done over a dozen RnG matches and been an RO at more than half- I've watched hundreds of competitors come through my stages... I see SO MANY GUNS go down at matches. Word of warning: be careful about tuning your gun to the bleeding edge of reliability/performance/accuracy. Most of the guns I see have trouble are either race guns, skeletonized, or some other "enhancement" that their owners eventually wind up regretting. Also, for RnG, lighter is better. FWIW. I shoot a KAC SR15 with a quality brake. Rock solid, dead reliable, and still hammers 0.15 splits.

Total thread derailment here, but your statement above leads me to believe you aren't dryfiring correctly, or at least not getting the most benefit out of your dryfire as you could. You shouldn't be dryfiring in DA, or recocking every time for SA. That's not a good use of your time. Do a search on some threads about dryfire training regimens, or better yet, just go get Ben Stoeger's book Dryfire Reloaded. Now back to your regularly scheduled programming.

The pin tends to walk out unless you keep the sight installed. The pin needs the tension from the sight base to stay in place.