Fantom919

I prefer a flat surace for a left side grip instead of the contour on the scales or boogies so I use a DAA thick grip and apply silicon carbide to it. Definitely the most grippy and rough I've ever used.

Here's my data from today's chrono run. I have 2 CZ accushadows (CZ1 and CZ2) and 1 CTS LSP (Tac Sport slide so longer barrel). CZ2 has historically had a faster barrel than CZ1. All rounds are loaded to 1.15 OAL with 147gr Zero JHP 3.5gr CZ1 High: Low: Ave.: S.D.: PF 898.9 864.6 878.1 9.2 129080.7 CZ2 High: Low: Ave.: S.D.: pf 912.2 862 888 13.5 130536 CTS High: Low: Ave.: S.D.: pf 920.6 888.7 905.7 9.9 133137.9 3.8gr CZ1 High: Low: Ave.: S.D.: pf 952.2 906 926.27 10.9 136161 CZ2 High: Low: Ave.: S.D.: pf 940.6 922.5 932.665 5.1463 137101 CTS High: Low: Ave.: S.D.: pf 961 944.5 951.6 4.4 139885 4.0gr CZ1 High: Low: Ave.: S.D.: pf 989.3 946.1 958.7 10 140928 CZ2 High: Low: Ave.: S.D.: pf 982.3 950.1 965.8 7.5 141972 CTS High: Low: Ave.: S.D.: pf 999.4 970.6 979.9 6.8 144045 Everything shot a little faster than what I expected from what others had posted. Some strings had some extremely good SD while others not so much. I'd say overall SD is better than Titegroup from what I've seen. Based on the FPS differences at different charge weights, I'm getting roughly 15FPS faster per .1 gr which is maybe just a tad lower than TG. I'd probably shoot for 3.6 to be way safe since I have no idea how this power reacts to temperature and elevation. One thing I did notice was that when I compared off hand accuracy at 25 yards with the 3.8gr to my current match load (Same bullet and OAL, 3.45gr TG 134pf), the Prima V was not as accurate as the Titegroup. To be honest I never really understood how one powder could be more or less accurate (and still don't) but the results repeated themselves. Obviously I'm the biggest factor so I'll try and get someone else to shoot and confirm. Anyone else compare accuracy in powders? In any case, for the time being I'll stick with TG for my match loads and use this powder for my practice moly practice rounds. Should help reduce the smoke and high heat of TG. (Do a few back to back bill drills and the gun gets hot quick!)

Hmm interesting. I have a hair clipper zip tied to my powder holder and was hoping that would settle the powder while I poured it. Now I'm wondering if the different sized pebbles and the vibration will make the smaller and larger ones separate top to bottom.

What kind of deviations in grains are you guys getting? I started to shoot for 3.4 then it slowly crept up to 3.5 and seemed to finally level at 3.54 to 3.62. Fairly inconsistent from what I've seen from Titegroup but SD in velocity will be the true test.

Oh wow. I'm running zero JHPS at 1.15. I'll probably have to bump it up and try 3.4, 3.6 and 3.8.

I'm going to try 3.2, 3.4, 3.6. I'll probably just try with the JHPs since they're slower. I just load the molys with the same amount of powder for practice. I'm also perfectly fine shooting a bit hotter. I think I was at 135 pf at area 2 which was fine for me haha

Just got a 11 lbs of this same batch yesterday. Going to try and load up and test some 147 zero jhp and 147 bayou. It will be through 2 accu shadows and a cts lsp so hopefully we'll get a bit more cz barrel data in the mix.

That's part of the push to get me to moly only. Less powder and ideally less recoil with the same pf. Do people really notice a big difference in say 6pf? I'm thinking the benefit is fairly negligible.

The only downside I see that bayous weigh varies more than a JHP. I haven't done an accuracy test out to 25 yards or anything like that before, although I'll give it a try next time I hit the range. Anyone else compare JHP to bayou or similar comparison?

Anyone else have an update on this? I just ordered 10 lbs and was thinking of moving away from TG but this is a but concerning. Like others have said, this is not uncommon so maybe it's just what is expected

Give it a try! I just got mine but have not had a chance to work up a lighter load for it. Chrono comparison data between my long slide and accushadows looks like I should be able to safely drop by .2 of a grain of titegroup. It's definitely a different feeling during recoil compared to my sp01s. I don't think my sights get back on target as fast and maybe more muzzle dip, but this is with very limited testing and using hotter loads than necessary. (Chrono'd loads wet 139 pf with 147 zero jhp and 147 pf with 147 bayou moly) I've heard people say this would make sense since the lsp is essentially moving 2 oz of frame weight to the slide which is moving mass. Just out of curiosity, I weighed the top end of my STI Sentry 1911 in 9mm and it came to a little over 20 oz vs the lsp 17.5 oz. Maybe the bare slide weight is still lighter (didn't have time to check) but all of the talk of having a very heavy top end and reciprocating mass seems to be even more amplified on my 1911 (and higher bore axis). Yet shooting the 1911 doesn't seem like it promotes more muzzle dip...too much thinking probably. Just need to pick one I like and run with it haha

Yes definitely. I guess that's what my concern was. What can I do if an RO says I'm reshaping the grip since I'm sure jb weld and grit will be thicker than grip tape. I guess the answer would be to just nit risk it..

Hmm very possible since the normal TS frame is wider. Maybe Stuart can chime in here? I sent Stuart a cz75 SA frame and bought the TS upper and had them fit it so I'm not sure what was required. It's the closest I can get to a California LSP haha

Thanks that's what I figured. Has anyone over questioned something like jb weld on a frame for this purpose before? I've added some to my grip panels already and have not hear any issues from anyone concerning it.

Yes it's a tac sport top end. These will have a CTS roll mark but from what I'm told, they are the same as the TS slide dimensionally. Weight is right around 42 oz. I put some broken down weights and accushadow comparison below. Slide with barrel and plastic guide rod plug is 17.45 oz. Accushadow slide with barrel and guide rod bushing comes in at 16.36 oz. Guide rod weight .79 oz. Accushadow guide rod weight .54 oz. Frame weight with my grips is 19.4 oz. Frame weight of accushadow with same grips is 21.78 oz. Mag with base pad is around 3.8 to 4 ounces. Total gun weight the LSP comes in a little ligher than my accushadow.

Sorry to dig up this older thread but I was wondering if it's okay to put jb weld and SiCa on the front strap and back strap of my cz frame? This would be for Production. The cts lsp uses a frame that has no checkering on the front and back strap and the smooth service causes any grip tape I put on to move around when it's hot outside. My concern would be that someome interprets this as changing the profile of the frame since a layer of jb weld might be thicker than a piece of grip tape. The rules say glue and SiCa would be the same as grip tape but obviously not super defined. (This change would assume I'd still make weight of course.) Thanks!

Does anyone use moly coated bullets for major matches? Currently I use Bayous for practice and Zeros for match. I know the bayous can use less powder and still make pf but I keep them the powder charge the same so I can get similar recoil feel (really hope point of impact isn't affected much by this.)

Thanks for doing all the testing for the rest of us. Maybe Stuart will have some other options for the mecgar mags as well.

How are the cz ones able to hit 23? Is it the different spring and follower?

http://www.riflegear.com/p-6638-cz-75-ts-orange-9mm.aspx Looks like they have a bunch unless the website is off. They're a legit store out here in CA and are constant supporters of getting us quality guns and dealing with the laws correctly. If I didn't live in CA I would have already picked one of these up. Hopefully you guys can at least grab one. Good luck.

So I loaded 8 mags with 11 rounds each and none of them got caught in the mag catch clot which is encouraging but still concerning. It seems like the first 6 rounds load fairly easily and then then the 7th round requires a lot more force. This pattern is also apparent with my 147 moly's loaded to the same oal. I'm thinking of doing a test with an oal of 1.1 but thinking this may actually be worse since the shorter length may allow the bullet to tip up at a steeper angle. Thoughts anyone?

Thanks for all the help everyone. I'll try a few things but I think I'll have to go find another bullet. Any other 147gr jhp's out there?

Yes I can see the ridge of the jhp in the mag catch slot. If I push on it with my thumb, it slip off the ledge of the slot and unlock it allowing everything to act as normal. I'll have to take a picture after work but I do have measurement data of just the bullet for MG 124 and Zero 147. I measured 10 samples each MG 124: min: .578 max: .5795 Zero 147: min: .6715 max: .6725 Difference is about .010 so I lose a little bit more case volume with the 147 bullet as well.

Sorry to clarify 5 was an estimate. When I've loaded to 10 or 11 rounds you can feel there us a lot of binding going on but it does not catch in the mag catch slot. In the few tests of done of shooting and hand cycling ammo, it typically occurs if I load 12 or more. I had tried 14 round and about 75% of the time, the nose of the bullet would catch that slot. I'm thinking that maybe as I load more, the force on the bottom round causse it to move forward in the mag. It also defiitely has to do with the ridges in the jhp round. If these were round nose, I don't think I would see the same problem. This is also supported by the fact that the flat point bayou 147's don't get jammed. The mags that have the issue are all cz factory 18Rd sp01 mags. I have 8 mags that i tried yeaterday and they all have this issue. I just replaced the mag spring to wolf springs last night as well and both old and new spring exhibit the same issue. I didn't have a chance to measure the mecgar mags with a caliper to see if then spacing is different. When loading the mecgar mags, I don't feel the same binding or resistance as I do in the CZ mag. Sorry to clarify, my MG 124 jhp load is loaded to 1.08. I have 2 accushadows and both accept these OALs.

Thanks for the input guys. I was surprised as well to find that the shape of this bullet allowed me to hit 1.19 when I did the plunk test. I did this on 10 different rounds with mixed head stamps. min 1.1845 max 1.1915 with std dev at .0031. I decided to load to 1.15 since my moly coated bayous ar at 1.15. I'll try 1.125. right now my load is over 3.4gr of TG.