johnbu

While waiting, post pics of the firing pin and safety. Curious to see how it messed up. Gross shade tree grinding, wear, ?

Glad you unstuck it. I'd be putting a new fp spring in and probably more pending close inspection.

Wild guess, but try manipulating the firing pin safety up/down and rotate while turning the firing pin and gently pulling it w needle nose pliers. It might have driven past the stop on the pin.

That's cool! Glad my post got one of these unicorns a good home. So.... can I shoot it?

Ouch!

No, don't have square deal, 550, 650 or anything blue ;(. I nurse rounds around a lee loadmaster. Hey, it works! More often than not.

I don't think there are any such critters. You can find 80% frames for 1911s, but never heard of one for a cz75

Did you score? I had it in my cart, and my heart said F yes, but the cc said NFW.

http://www.hinterlandoutfitters.com/witness-stock-pistol-600605-walnut-grips-chrome-finish-sights-p-33950.html 9mm And me w no $$$ thought there might be interest here

I have an led work light. And for my press, inline list at $39

Also a good thing to aim high on the chrono with a mouse fart like that! I "did the math" and figured the bullet hit the ground about 30' out and 90' short of the target! That's why we look into the cases before seating the bullet!

I'm having to load 147 gr precision bullets down to 1.075 for a storm lake xdm barrel. I did a matrix of loads and lengths to feel safe-ish there. But a couple more grains and down to 1.030 were still good, so should be good to go. Always check your loads w your barrel!

Redo the plunk test, that bullet profile sounds like it wants tobe shorter.

I've killed deer with his little brother the 454 casull. Hornady 300 gr JHP. Going to full 460 sw is a bit "over the top" for deer at pistol ranges. At least ranges that I can hit with open sights! I'd stick with the higher weight 300 gr JHP bullets and just follow the recipe using w296 in casull cases or the 460 (which will be a lot hotter).

When you get this for a 147gr 9mm load, the power may (possibly) be too low. I caught a short drop of ETR7 and wanted to see what the result would be. Knowing it might squib in advance. Measured the powder at 0.9gr on a 3.2gr target(yikes). Shot it and it just sort of did the cap gun sound and I removed the barrel to push out the bullet... but no bullet. Looked at the chrono and saw that 56 fps. LOL.

Heavy bullets with small amounts of fast powders seem to give the lightest flat recoil in non-ported guns.

I assume you determined max oal for thar barrel?

Full auto? I would suspect the sear and or hammer wear

I'm not interested enough to look into it. Thicker probably means harder but i dont want to speak with any certainty since its not definite. Only CCI could say with 100% certainty. I do think it's worth looking into before using them. From wiki So flexural rigidity is impacted as the cube of the thickness. So a few thousanths makes is much more stiff. Ie, difficult to set off.

List 979

Ouch! They sure jacked the prices up.

Nifty diy set up. Has all the hallmarks of genius. Simple, cheap, direct, effective. I like it!

I'm afraid residual baby oil would affect the primer or powder reliability. Or if they would gurgle butt and drop a load out the stinky end

I did about 8-900 rounds on a lee single stage. Took about 2 hours to do 100 rounds, not counting setup, ckean up etc. And it's BORING trying to crank out ammo in half way decent volume. Now with a progressive for pistol rounds, I can crank out 3-400 rounds in an hour session going at an easy relaxed pace.

Only can be determined experimentally. Gather up the top 20 firearm model candidates, shoot each one 1000 rounds for familiarization and break in. Then shoot an easy, medium, hard and long stage each a minimum ofthree times (better would be 10+) with each gun in random order. Determine overall mean time for each stage then calculate mean and range for each gun by stage. Determine deviation from grand mean for each gun by stage. Evaluate the best guns to determine why they are best, mod all guns to emulate those "best" features and perform a typical slick up / tune up / tweek and repeat the stage runs and calculations / evaluations. Then (finally) perform a best known set of mods to each and repeat the tests. Naturally, all failures during all runs would be tracked and incorporated into the final evaluation. Oh, each gun would need to be provided in calibers 9, 38s and 40 with ammo provided in major and minor. That would tell you what model is "best" in each caliber in box stock, typical modded and fully modded condition. But, that result would only be totally valid for the shooter that performed the evaluation. So, the whole thing would need to be repeated with 30+ different shooters. But nobody wants to know that bad! Do they?