robport

I was interested in the Tanfoglio's too, but the information on EAA's web site stopped me from looking into it. All we have is IDPA close, so I have to have something legal for that. The elite match is shown on the EAA site as 44 ounces, so it needs to go on a diet. I also believe it's single action only, so no SSP anyway. The Stock 1 Cone barrel. It's DA/SA, so if not for the cone barrel, would probably make it into SSP. The Stock 2 Cone barrel and full dust cover, but it's DA/SA, so if not for the cone barrel, it might have made it. The elite limited pro 9" long (1/4 too long for the box)...maybe cut 1/4 inch off that long tail. Anyways, I don't think any of them are legal out of the box. You can use the regular Witness and it's a nice gun, but it lacks the glamour of the others. We have a few that compete with them, and a local gunsmith that knows them well, but I haven't talked to them about how they made them legal yet.

I recently looked for an SSP specific plastic gun under $800. CZ would have been an option, but I didn't want to learn two trigger pulls right now. I wanted a longer sight radius than my XDM 4.5, which I sold to finance it. These were my options and my reasoning for my choice: Glock 34 just wouldn't fit my hand and dealers wouldn't let me try different backstraps. Can do trigger job for $20 in parts. Needed sights for my tastes. M&P Pro 5" An option. The OOB price makes up for the $160 in parts for the needed trigger work. Sights good. Springfield XDM 5.25" Close, needs about $100 for the trigger. Amazing accessories, but I used the mag pouch for my old 4.5" and nothing else though. Sights were fine. Fn longslide Needs sights. Aftermarket stuff just not there yet. Grip was actually too aggressive for me and left an impression in my palm for 20 minutes (it was cold though). Walther PPQ 5" Needed sights. Trigger best of the bunch and usable as is IMO. Best ergonomic grip also IMO. I ended up with the Walther. Added new sights and a Talon grip. The great ergonomics, I found, actually made it a little hard to hold when the hands were sweaty. The Talon grip completely fixed that though.

Yeah, I really liked some of those Tanfoglios but gave up and went for another plastic gun Some guys at my club run modified Tanfoglios. I believe they are some type of higher end Frankengun made from several.models and they run them in ESP. We have a local gunsmith that works them, but I don't know what he put together to make them legal. It seems that at least one feature or dimension per model keeps them from meeting IDPA rules when stock. We have someone running an elite match every now and then and he does real well too. I believe that one is too heavy. The closest one is the limited pro, but that shows as too long for the box. With as much experience as that company has with competition, you would think they would have an IDPA legal gun, wouldn't you?

It's none of my business but I would be interested to hear why you picked a conical or bull barrel...knowing you shoot IDPA? I'm guessing we are talking about the X-Caliber with the conical barrel? I know the x-Caliber is USPSA production legal, but the conical barrel isn't for IDPA. Is it really that much of an advantage? I just went through the IDPA SSP/ESP gun search myself and I knocked the X-Caliber and most Tanfoglios off my list because of a barrel, full length dust cover, weight or OAL. The ROI I talked to told me it was the same reason that you can't use exotic metals for the guide rod...to limit what people can do money-wise to artificially control muzzle flip (thus gaining an advantage). ...keeps the price of the arms race within some kind of limit. At some point, I'm sure someone would try putting spent uranium near the muzzle for balance...lol. ...or maybe it really is, "because Wilson Combat doesn't make one"...but I really believe that is just a derogatory urban legend used as a bullying technique with IDPA HQ in mind..or simply an over-told joke, you take your pick. ...but good luck getting an answer. I'm still waiting on an answer on a sight question from May 2014.

I also very recently slapped a talon grip (rubber model) on my PPQ because I was having slight trouble when my hand got sweaty. Not only did it eliminate that problem, but it feels amazing, especially with the existing ergonomic contours. Definitely a worthwhile upgrade.

I boosted it up .2 grains and while it was all in the 130's, the spread is huge. From what I've read elsewhere, I also am thinking Bullseye may just be too fast for 147 grain bullets. I ran some of my lighter rounds through again and at 92 degrees F, their average PF was low enough that it would worry me. It did great with very little deviation at 40 degrees, Ok with a little more spread at 62 degrees, and not so great at 92 degrees. My logs are telling me to drop back to 124 grain and use the recipe I used with them, but I can't get them in time. I've had trouble finding powder this last year and have used Bullseye, Autocomp, HP-38, , even 800X, basically whatever I could find that you could locate a recipe for. Oh well, I think this time, I'm just going to wimp out again and bring commercial 115 grain ammo.

Thanks for the advice. The most frustrating thing was that it was only one round in my data set that really killed the standard deviation. Otherwise, I wouldn't have even worried about it. I've boosted up a test batch a little and am going to try again. Worst case, if I can't get enough ingredients for enough new rounds, I'll just use commercial ones. Thanks again.

Yup, I'm no expert, but the way our IDPA director explained it to me (and the way I read it) it still has to be legal in SSP to make it into ESP with the exception. It can't make in with the exception and then be modified. Then it wouldn't be legal in SSP anymore, the exception no longer applies and so would its legality. You can always ask the folks at IDPA directly...but good luck getting an answer. I never got an answer on the question I asked (13 months, but it's a moot point for me now). Maybe they are answering stuff now though, with the rule changes being made and all.

I've been slowly eliminating the use of store bought ammo in favor of my reloads. I'm about ready to go to a match where I think I will be chronoed, but I really have very limited experience (almost none) in sanctioned matches. it will be (quietly), an IDPA match (sorry, I know people on here don't like them, but we don't have USPSA anywhere close to here.) I'm running 147 grain plated bullets at an average speed of 881 ft per second, which should be 129.5 power factor (3.1 grains Bullseye, test at 63 degrees). My standard deviation though, is 20, so I guess I'm running with about a 4% chance (if my memory of math is correct) of hitting 124 PF. I would think that would be good enough. Do I need to worry about temperature, humidity changes, or anything else? Do they usually test rounds before you shoot or after you start? Any advice? Thanks in advance,

The only way to get it into ESP is through the SSP exception, since ESP explicitly doesn't allow the long dust cover. To use the SSP to ESP exception, it would have to be legal in SSP. The slide cut for the new sight makes it illegal for SSP, so you can't use the exception. Technically though, it's still the dust cover that keeps it out of ESP. At least that's how that rule was explained to me.

I have one. It is very easy to use. Definitely, use the app. It works and stores your data for later. You can also email it to yourself to get it to another computer. It's a little hard to configure at first (not intuitive software), so play with the options before you show up on the range. I do all my shooting indoors, so getting the right light is difficult. I currently use 4 small cheap portable LED lights, but really, I need to improve on that. I have to shoot pretty close to the unit to get it to read right now. If you are using it indoors, get the light set for it,

Yeah....I enjoyed it, but it's a long video game sequence. Run here, shoot/run over/burn these bad guys, run over here, shoot/run over/burn these other bad guys, plot twist- we have to run over there shoot/run over/burn these first bad guys.again...repeat. You just shut your mind off and enjoy the visuals.

I guess you can run a hot range, since it's not an IDPA sanctioned match. After you finish with a stage, what does the RSO do? Does he (or she) tell you to holster and declare the range safe, since you aren't unloading and showing clear? At the place I shoot, they run a cold range with hot bays. They usually load one person per stage (usually four stages) all at once and after each person shoots, unload him or her until the stages are reset again. The range is completely cold while the stages are reset. The RSO's follow the IDPA range commands and they use certified IDPA SO's, even for the unsanctioned matches if they are referred to as IDPA.

8.2.1.1. Handguns permitted for use in SSP must: 8.2.1.1.1. Have a minimum annual production of 2,000 units. Discontinued models must have had a total production of 20,000 units. 8.2.1.1.2. Be semi-automatic. 8.2.1.1.3. Be double action, double action only, or striker fired. 8.2.1.1.4. Be 9mm (9x19) or larger caliber. 8.2.1.1.5. The unloaded firearm with the heaviest magazine must weigh 43.00 oz/1219.0 grams or less. 8.2.1.1.6. The firearm with the largest magazine inserted must fit in the IDPA gun test box measuring 8 ¾” x 6” x 1 5/8”. AS long as it meets the weight limit, will fit in the box, and has the 2000 unit production, I would think it should be fine if unaltered. You might want to verify it's thickness (1 5/8" max) with the safety/safeties or check it with a box. The Glock 34 and Springfield XDM 5.25 both have slide lightening cuts, and so does the Walther PPQ. Those don't seem to have a problem being run in IDPA. Aftermarket changes would be a different story though. If concerned about it, I would contact the match director to make sure.

At least that's not as bad as the video the IDPA letter was based on....that was really dangerous! I had something similar happen to me once though. I was fixing a stuck prop, behind a barrier when the RO called people to the line. He didn't have them load and make ready, but that was close enough for me. I don't know if he was going to check my spot and in his defense, he was still in front of the line, so wouldn't have had them load yet anyway. My manly voice (ok, I screamed like a little girl) broke his concentration and I think it scared him much more than me. I'm not saying he wouldn't have caught it before he loaded them, but it happens, people get distracted. RO's have to go the bathroom or check our admin table or talk to someone about a PE. The scorekeeper and the others in the squad (especially the other people taping) share in that responsibility or at least should. Now, if I'm taping or fixing a prop, I make sure I'm visible to the RO until everyone else is too.

For anyone looking, I just bought one of these: http://www.511tactical.com/range-vest-189042.html Haven't used it to compete yet, but they certainly dropped the price again.

What he said. I had this problem with a RIA 22TCM that I'm using as a cheap man's 2011 (comes with 9mm barrel). The magazines for that are 38 super magazines, but run 9mm. I had to do several things to make it run, but the most effective was loading longer, polishing the feed ramp (not really a ramp for me, but the first part of the barrel contacted) and modifying the magazine feed lips. From what I can tell, a 9mm cartridge wasn't meant for a 1911 design. The geometry of the loading system has to be just right to feed effectively. Remember, you are stuffing something in a barrel bore at much more of an angle with a 1911. The barrel doesn't tip up for easier loading, like a plastic gun. It remains horizontal. I'm definitely no expert, but just from what I've learned the hard way, I would check the magazine feed lips first for the double feeds (I also had that problem on a Para expert, but in .45 ACP). By the way, I'm running a 10lb spring and 147 grain reloads at 130 PF in the RIA. You might be well served by purchasing a spring pack from wolf and try to see what works best...that is, what allows you to bring your sights back on target the quickest for the particular ammo you are using. Lots of things happen when we try to go fast and you may just be experiencing it during a match because you are more careful about taking your time during practice, especially with slamming the magazine in the pistol...just a guess though.

I too tried the micro charge bar and ended up with throwing no powder about 4% of the time. I have no idea why. I went back to disks and had no more trouble. The charge bar may work fine on larger charges where it's opening is as large as the feed opening. I was dealing in the 3.1 grain range with Bullseye. On the other issue, you aren't really selling your Loadmaster for $20...right? I'm assuming that was for the charge bar?

Thanks for the response. The mental picture I get with those proportions look natural to me. Your experience is really appreciated. Since Dawson guarantees their sights shoot to POA and it's shooting 4 inches high at 20 yards (not a bad grouping though), I'm going to see if they can replace the front with a taller and thinner one. I'm not good enough to hold different sight pictures according to distance. I really don't want to have to stop and think when the buzzer goes off. Heck, I have enough trouble with mental errors, especially when I get asked questions on the way to the line...lol Last time, I designed the course of fire and it was a disaster...everyone keep asking what my intentions were on this stage or that...while I was loading and trying to get ready to shoot. At least that's my excuse. At least they seemed to like the course. Thanks again for your insight.

A little experimentation with my new sights suggests that my formula is very close. I need a smaller front or a wider back. This might be very good for bullseye though.

1.160

I'm a little rusty on my geometry, but I would guess, that using this rule, it would be something like: (width of front sight) = (width of rear sight opening)*(distance of front sight to eye)/(2*(distance rear sight to eye)) Someone should confirm that before using it though. I guess I should explain this formula a little. To do this, you need to mathematically get the rear sight and the front sight in the same plane. I tried to project the rear sight opening size to the front sight distance by a simple proportion. The circumference of the circle, starting at the eye (actually the optic nerve, but why quibble with a half inch or so) is linear with radius, so that should work. I divided it by two because, with the above rule, the front sight takes up half the larger apparent size of the rear sight opening. If the rear sight is say .150 wide and is 23 inches away from the eye, it will look like it's about .196 at 30 inches (for this example, the sight radius is 7 inches.) Half of that is .098, which would be the optimal size by this rule. I wish I had this rule of thumb last week, because my new sights, that should be in today, are nowhere near that. I should have bought a much smaller front sight....oh well, I may get it right next time.

3.2 grains of bullseye with the same Xtreme 147 rn. About 130 PF. 887 average with a STD of 16 feet per second. out of a 5" walther ppQ. It was about 125 through my 22TCM RIA (9mm barrel).

I went back to the disks too and also became more diligent about looking at each charge again...haven't seen a low or missing charge since.

This is probably a very easy question for you course designers out there but it seems to keep being a subject of confusion and contention at the matches I attend (at least for us common folk). What does this statement mean? "Tactical Sequence may not be combined with Tactical Priority (near-to-far or from cover) on the same targets." Does "on the same targets" mean exactly what it says (target grouping) or are they trying to say on the same stage? A recent example we saw had two layers of two targets 6 feet one inch apart and the instruction was to shoot them all in tactical sequence. What would the proper way to shoot that or is it simply an illegal stage since they aren't equal threat (which is also a requirement for tactical sequence)? Can I tell the shooter to shoot the first two targets of a stage in tactical sequence, then the rest of the targets in a stage in tactical priority? Maybe I'm overthinking this.