al503

Many were enlarging the mag catch hole upwards on the new style SV mags so they could seat it in non SV frames. This basically makes the mag sit lower so you wouldn't have the interference issue. Now, whether that is the correct way to make the new style SV mags work is a different question. I got a couple of the new SV mags for practice only (this was before MBX and now STI came out with their new mags) and enlarged the mag catch hole. They work without a hitch. I honestly don't know about the Dawson mag release. If I were you, I might consider filing down your existing mag release very slightly.

Exactly. The only real force the ejector should be subject to is longitudinal with only the empty brass rim hitting it. Just go slow and remove material only where you need to.

Before changing out the mag release, I would relieve the underside of the ejector until neither the case or the magazine lip touches it. Just conjecture but it could be the round pushing up and out on the bottom of the ejector as it's being stripped from the magazine. Hope that made sense. Regardless of the bending issue, there should be some daylight between the ejector and the mag lips/ammo.

Have you tried putting a loaded mag and checking for clearance? It could be the case hitting the ejector.

I've used both. No issues with either.

They are great bullets. Very consistent and very accurate. Price is competitive/reasonable. I've shot 9mm 125 and 147, and the .40's in 155 and 185 grain. Absolutely no fouling that won't come with a few passes with a nylon bore brush. No scrubbing or solvent required. The only drawback is that they smoke more (including the new Gen 2 coating) than the other brands, which is why I don't use them. There are other brands that are just as accurate that smoke noticeably less.

WST strictly based on accuracy. Its the most accurate powder in both 9mm and .40 in every single one of my pistols. (Others I've tried: N320, Solo1000, titegroup, e3, clays, Prima V.)

If you're shooting 9mm or .45, that's getting into Dan Wesson territory. PM9 is $1380 on GB all day. Although you can still find some Trojans on GB for $1200, at $1500 MSRP, street price is going to be around $1350. I'd take the DW. Easy choice IMHO.

I had a similar issue with an older build last year. This was on a dovetail sight. I put 5 very small dimples with some green loctite and it worked out great.

Have you thought about taking a small center punch and putting a couple of dimples in the bottom of the sight?

I'm thinking the same thing. I'd get a 10 and 11 lb recoil spring and a 17 lb mainspring and test them out. The weight of the mainspring will also affect how the slide cycles.

Just heard back from Blade-tech and they don't make a holster for this model.

I saw Mr. Kelley's video on the CZ 75 CTS LS-P, which gave me the itch to shoot production again. I was wondering what you all were using for a holster? I sent an inquiry to Blade-tech as always had good luck with them.

I'm going to buck the trend here and say that as long as the barrel isn't ported, it won't be too hard to make major. It'll probably be similar to a pistol with a longer barrel that has barrel ports. My two 'full length' 9 major pistols from two different well-known smiths are actually only ~4.5" long. One has 4 small poppleholes and the other doesn't. Most of the time, they're only about 2PF different with the same loads. With that said, unless you can try a 4" and a 5" bbl before you buy, I would agree that the longer barrel is probably the safest way to go. I wouldn't shy away from a good deal on a shorter pistol, either.

Congrats. Always good to hear someone who's happy with their new pistol.

My barrels have enough freebore so I load them out to about 1.2" with 125 zeros and 1.21" with MG 124's. Never had an issue at that length with them lengthening. When I first started loading 3n38, the smith who built the pistol recommended 1.155" because I was using his mags with spacers. OAL was not very consistent because of the compressed load.

They are definitely more expensive but many already own them. Another disadvantage would be capacity. With glock mags with the right extensions, IE, you can get over 40 rounds. With a 170mm and a plus 2/3, you'll most likely get only 32-33 rounds max. Probably wouldn't make a difference in 90+% of stages, but...

It could be the twist rate of your bbl. If you have a lower twist rate, like 1/32, your barrel will probably shoot lighter bullets more accurately. With that said, all barrels shoot differently. Some will be accurate regardless of what you're shooting and some will be very finicky. The only way to find out is to experiment like you're doing right now.

I started out using it as a place to consistently rest the thumb. When I tried to use it to control the flip, the front site would not go straight up and down. Now, the more I've shot with it, the more I find myself using it to control the flip and actually putting a lot of downforce on it.

Pressure is going to spike with such a short OAL. Regardless of the powder you settle on using, you might consider loading longer than what the manuals list. I try to load as long as the mags/barrel chamber/case neck tension will allow, to keep the initial pressure spike as low as possible. Unless you're loading for a very short freebore like some CZ's, you should be able to load a lot longer than 1.069".

I love the 43 and its my current carry. It is extremely accurate and carries noticeably smaller than a 19. I've carried the 43, 19, and a 1911 CCO. No comparison in comfort especially for appendix carry. Unless something weird happens, the 19 and CCO won't get any more carry time.

It's just another available way to fine tune the pistol the way you want it. You can minimize or increase the effects of having or not having a radius in a lot of different ways. IE, a stronger hammer/mainspring will reduce the effects of a radiused FPS. A variable recoil spring (lighter at the start of compression) might also give you some of the effects of a radius without actually putting a radius on the FPS. With a radiused FPS, there will be less resistance to the slide unlocking. Depending on a myriad of factors, this might help the shooter keep the pistol flatter v. flipping more right at the beginning of the recoil impulse. But if they're also using a very light recoil spring as well, it might lead to a lot of flip when the slide hits the frame (recoil spring tunnel and spring plug hits the head of the guide rod). If you look at some slow motion vids on recoil, some will show very little flip until the end of the stroke when slide meets frame..

I cut out some golf club head contact tape. Any contact changes it from white to blue. I suppose you could use regular tape (masking/painter's/duct) tape as well and check for signs of contact.

What weight you run depends on several different things including: 1. Slide to frame fit. 2. Hammer spring weight. 3. Is the bottom of the firing pin stop radiused or not. 4. Slide and even the barrel/comp weight. 5. How efficient your comp and barrel holes (if you have them) are. Even your choice of lube will have some effect. I run the heaviest spring I can where the recoil spring tunnel still makes contact with the head of the guide rod during recoil. Right or wrong, it feels like the slide cycles faster, there's less wear and tear on the pistol, and the pistol will be a little more tolerant of slightly out of spec ammo and dirt build up.

I'm using 200 grain blue bullets with WST at 1.22" If blue bullets made a 220 grain bullet, I'd use that as I like the softer recoil of the heavier bullets. 200 and 220 grain x-treme bullets were awesome in a previous pistol I sold. They did not work, accuracy wise, in my current pistols. You should be fine with either 200 or 220 grain bullets at your OAL with WSF. You might be a little cautious if you use a faster powder, though. If you look at the length of the bullet itself and how deeply a 220 grain bullet has to be seated at 1.165", there could be a large initial pressure spike.