Jump to content
Brian Enos's Forums... Maku mozo!

TacticalReload

Classifieds
  • Content Count

    337
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About TacticalReload

  • Rank
    Sees Sights

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Jacksonville, Florida
  • Real Name
    Steve Fuller

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I've had bad luck with Lone Wolf parts, including a G35 9mm conversion barrel.
  2. I bought 5000 SP at a gun show in the area three months ago. I think it was $30 / 1k. I was hoping that it was a sign that they were becoming more available, but the same vendor didn't have any this time around.
  3. I've always found S&W customer service it be incredibly friendly and polite... as well as totally unhelpful during at least your first two or three attempts.
  4. I've thought about picking up for use with one in a ZEV slide withe a ZEV barrel... but I found someone online who said the slide wouldn't fully close when he used a factory slide and aftermarket barrel (I don't recall the brand of the barrel). He had to shave down the extractor a bit to get it to fully close. After I read that in conjunction with Apex's warning, I figured I would stick with the OEM extractor until I started experiencing problems.
  5. Have you bought one of the "tuned" connectors from him (not in a kit)? I'm curious what they look like... the Classic-GM kit I got from him had a connector that was thinned out considerably so it was a lot skinnier. I'm wondering if these are the same ones that he sells separatly.
  6. Yeah, definitely figure out first if you prefer lighter / creepy... or heavier / crisper. Think about it like pushing a wheelbarrow up a hill. The shallower the slope, the easier it is to push it up; but you have to push it farther to the same amount of elevation. A steep hill lifts the load more abruptly, but it's a lot harder to push. In my experience, factory Glock triggers have so much creep in them that the lighter pull makes it more smoothly rolling. It's not like you're losing a very crisp factory break anyway.
  7. It would appear based on the information that is on the Zev website and from what I've seen online and in person on some Zev frames, it depends on the frame size. On full-sized frames (17, 22, 34, etc.), the bottom of the frame isn't modified and you can put a magwell on it later. On the compact-sized frames (19, 23), you need to send your magwell in with the gun at the time the grip is modified so it can be done around the magwell. http://www.zevtechnologies.com/Grip-Service
  8. Do a search here for the M&P accuracy and Apex barrel thread(s). The issue was a LOT more complicated than twist rate.
  9. Perhaps. I find it hard to believe that any quality metal framed pistol could be produced for less than a comparable quality plastic pistol. However, with the M9A3, there would be no cost (time, money, resources) spent on training new armorers or retraining soldiers or buying new parts or holsters or mags because the old ones aren't compatible. Regardless, time moves on and the M9 had to be replaced eventually. I suppose that anytime a company other than Glock gets a big award, it's good for the firearms industry because it keeps competition alive and well. I don't think this will have an overwhelming effect on the LE market since SIG just lost the FBI award to Glock (after the P320 supposedly failed the trial... or so says the internet) and LE seems to be very confident in the decisions of the Feds based on the mass migration from 9mm to .40 and then from the .40 back to 9mm again.
  10. That's probably the only legit beef with the gun along with the function and location of the manual safety. Both of these issues could have been remedied with the M9A3.
  11. I am very, very curious about this myself. It could also explain the interesting timing of the SIG line of ammo. As we mentioned previously, I think the old M9 pistols were just that... old. From what I hear, they were never really subject to much PMCS. I think they took this opportunity to add features that they think they would like instead of ordering more M9s. I hate to think about how many tax dollars was spent on this evaluation process and how much more is going to be spent purely on logistical factors related to the change over. The contract is supposedly for $580 million and includes the guns, accessories, training, parts, etc. Seems like kind of a lot... $2000-3000 per gun. If they ordered more brand new M9 pistols or maybe the M9A1 or M9A3, they could have continued to use existing parts, accessories, mags, etc. and wouldn't have had to train anyone else. Oh well. Good for SIG... bad for us.
  12. My thoughts? Buy one now if you want one. Buy all the parts you think you'll need, as well, because it's likely you won't be able to find them soon. Supposedly the initial order is for something like 200k+ guns. I have other thoughts, mainly wondering why Uncle Sam felt that it was warranted to spend so many of our tax dollars switching from a perfectly serviceable handgun... but that's for another thread, I suppose. I do predict, however, that we are going to start to hear grumblings before too long from people complaining about how the P320 is a POS... just like they did when the M9 went into service. Folks don't like change.
  13. It looks like the Apex parts are the same ones for the original M&P that also work in the 2.0. This leads me to believe that there aren't a lot of differences between the two guns, which kind of is a let down. Hopefully some here will get their hands on one and give a thorough side-by-side comparison soon.
  14. I was guessing that it's only present on the manual safety models due to state regulations. I could be wrong. I agree 100%. If I were to guess, I'd say that it probably was an accuracy thing. We'll probably never know. However, the MHS trials had very strict accuracy requirements. IIRC, it's something like 90% of shots within 4" group at 50 yards. I'd be surprised if box-stock Glocks could consistently do that. Yeah... it only took 11 years to recontour the slide, throw in an extra backstrap, and embed a steel frame into the dust cover. ;-) Seriously though, I think that these guns had to be submitted to the military trials like a year ago. Ruger released the American Pistol the the public almost exactly a year ago after developing it for the MHS trials (despite deciding not to bother submitting it after all) and that was a ground up brand new gun. The M&P 2.0 appears to be very incrementally modified over version 1.0.
  15. From what I've seen online, it's embedded into the plastic. The gun really looks almost identical in most ways that really matter... at least from pics and videos.
×
×
  • Create New...