phucheneh

It sure looks like they're using the standard CZ front sight design, albeit with a set screw instead of a pin. I would think CZ sights could be modded to fit (drill/tap a hole, assuming you have the room in from of the sight blade). That would open up your options considerably. Otherwise, you're pretty much stuck with Sphinx's factory offerings...200 bucks just seems awful steep for a sight upgrade. That said, it looks like a nifty design, but also completely non-serviceable. What happens if the that hollow fiber insert gets cracked? Additionally, the overall diameter of the fiber compared to the size of the front sight seems like it's too large. Big fiber tends to kind of 'bloom' and make getting a precise sight picture more difficult. All just conjecture, though. I doubt you'll find much from Sphinx owners yet, but maybe you can find some opinions from owners of their Glock version- https://www.google.com/search?q=H.A.L.O+H3F&oq=H.A.L.O+H3F&aqs=chrome..69i57j69i61l2&sourceid=chrome&es_sm=122&ie=UTF-8

I have the .140 Dawson front with the .230 rear on my P1 and it works fine. The issue is that Dawson states that their rear sight (available in only one height) requires a .180 front, which is flat wrong. I know of no options that would work with their .180 or .195 fronts, unless maybe STI offered some really tall rear sights (I know I remember seeing stuff besides the basic rounded rear GP sight). The .140 or .150 is going to be what you want.

I checked yesterday and found the Q100 was already on the product page- http://www.grandpower.eu/kategoria-15-clanok-489-detail-q100-#ad-image-0

Why not just adjust the rear to where you want it, then measure your height and see if perhaps it's possible to create the same POI with a fixed rear sight?

Oh, and Nick- are you sure your mag catch is working right? Or that you're not having issues with specific mags? I'm not noticing any difference between the catch in mine and that of my mk7. If you mean the rotation of the button, it has always been there. It's just hard to notice with the stock mk7 button (but I did realize how it worked when I installed the extended button I got from Dawson). The only difference for me is that, for reasons I have yet to identify, some of my mags will not drop free in the mk7...it's not a catch issue; some of the bodies just fit the magwell a little tighter, it seems. They're all OEM GP mags with the red follower, too. As far as modding the gun, I'm not sure to whom you're referring- the only modifications that I've seen anyone make are the removal of the part beneath the hammer spring, and then there's me, who was AFAIK the only one wise and/or stupid enough to try cutting the spring instead. ;D I would agree with the sentiment that nothing else in these guns should really be touched. I don't think there are any real gains to be made from polishing, and yes, the gun is great out of the box. Hammer springs are IMO just usually worth tuning in a hammer-fired gun, given the gains that can be made with relative ease and no real drawbacks, assuming you ensure that you still have plenty of hammer inertia to spare. Like I said, I clipped enough off mine to take a half pound of the SA and much more off the DA, and it still lights the hardest primers I can find reliably.

Uhm, took my friends and their daughter shooting for the first time and after being drilled on safety and practicing dry at home for about 45 minutes they haven't had issues: I wasn't implying the gun was unsafe, or that there was ANY reason that anyone should be kept from shooting it. Far from it...if anything, a novice is probably safer and should do great with it, assuming proper teaching/supervision. In my case, it was simply that someone was so used to guns with SA triggers in the 4-6lb range. Not to mention, triggers that stacked up a little before snapping hard. The gentle roll of my ~2lb X-Cal simply caught them by surprise. That was my main point; some may not realize that even those with a lot of shooting experience should be reminded that this trigger is both light and has a different feel than most. Anyway, on the topic of 'is the X-Cal worth three times the price of a K100'...I'm gonna be the dissenting opinion and say no, it is not. But that's NOT the X-Cal's fault...it's a wonderful gun, and worthy of the ~$900 street price. The issue is that the K100 is easily worth 500-600. Lowest street price on the mk12's is about 500, I think, and that's still a great deal. What you get there, versus what you get in other common $500 pistols...e.g. the bottom rung of CZ-75's (not counting P07/P09, which are also relative bargains at $400 or less), Witness steels, Beretta 92 variants, ect...I think the GP is worth every bit of what anyone would pay for any of the other 'usual suspects' when it comes to entry-level hammer-fired production pistols. At that price, the X-Cal is 180% of the K100 price, rather than 300%...quite a difference, really. So, like I said, my answer is 'no,' but it's ONLY because the mk7 is SO underpriced. I think it's a no-brainer to give the mk7 K100 a chance and decide if you like the platform enough to buy the X-Cal...and I think most people will, but personally I like to get my feet wet with a low-cost gun before dropping serious money on the high-end model, assuming such is possible. I just don't see how anyone with 300 bucks to spare could feel remorse at having the K100 around as either a backup IPSC/IPDA gun, or an HD gun, or 'truck gun,' or whatever.

That's a great freaking price. Like I said, it would've been a 'buy' for me at 350 if it's really nice. I was wondering if a Tanfo enthusiast might pay more just 'cause it's kinda unique...I guess the answer is, if they were out there, the seller definitely couldn't find them, heh. The 15rd Mecgar mags (what a compact Canik comes with) will definitely not work. At least, not well...too long. I can't comment on if modern small-frame Tanfo mags will work- seems like I've heard the older ones are different in some way.

I hate this thread. I envy some of you guys SO much. Some of the things I watch you put together are just the epitome of what I would spend my spare time doing if I had the firearms/parts. And, well, a mill + the know-how to really utilize it.

I have no use for that many magazines, yet I am somehow still jealous of that pic. I'm also intrigued by the grip choice...I never see anybody using that backstrap, and it is definitely the least natural to me. The stock one feels very 'CZ,' the big one is more 1911. The pictured one is the only one I've never actually shot with...perhaps I should give it a fair shake.

But why would you feel that you need to shoot a CCW as well as a competition gun? Sure, you want to be as proficient with your carry weapon as possible, but in the end, it is a 'worst case scenario' weapon that you hope you never have to use; and if you do, you're going to be shooting a person inside of ten yards; not a target at thirty. A carry gun is made of trade-offs, whereas something you compete with has little to none- you can have easy access, a light trigger, a lack of redundant safety mechanisms, plenty of size and weight, ect. In a carry gun, I want concealment, safety, and ease of use. For me, that's a P290, 'cause it's tiny, but has decent accuracy and competent sights, and the trigger is DAO without being obscenely heavy. I don't want a manual safety on a carry gun, and I don't want a short, light trigger. DAO or a decocked SA/DA seems like the obvious choice to me, but you're comfortable with a Glock or XD, more power to you. Carrying a cocked and locked 1911 just because that's what you like to compete with, though? Seems silly to me.

They make dovetail adapters that fit the contour of the slide. A friend of mine has a Leupold Deltapoint that came with a whole slew of bases and dovetail adapters; couldn't tell you if the same would be available for your Vortex, though.

Good gravy, those prices... For the standard steel guns or a Match, you can buy a whole other gun for the price of their caliber kits.

If you drilled the polymer to the OD of the trigger pin head, you wouldn't be compromising anything. I don't really think the trigger pin is meant to retain the block, though. The front and rear blocks both slide down into grooves in the polymer, which keeps them from moving back and forth, and then are both locked in by a single roll pin. I would say there's more stress on the rear block, and aside from the one roll pin, it only has the sear cage (which itself is retained by the safety lever) to help keep it in place. Since all my measuring devices are locked up at my work, all I can do it eyeball a poly frame next to a ruler...but I gotta say, it looks like .89" is pretty close. The block inside the frame is definitely no wider than 15/16".

When I said the trigger pin should be the same, I was just thinking about the diameter and the width of the metal block. I forgot that the Henning pin had an external head/nut rather than being staked in place or some such. My suspicion is that if you drilled out the polymer on both sides and allowed the ends of the pin to sit flush against the trigger block, it may work. When in doubt, though, pull out the micrometer (or dial caliper). I don't have one on hand, or I'd give you the width for a steel frame.

Would anyone mind sharing a pic of their modded slide stop, just so I could get an idea of exactly how much material I should be removing? My Grand Powers have ruined me for guns that don't auto-forward.

Can it be 'adapted'? Sure; you can make anything work with enough effort. As far as a straight swap, I've always been under the impression that the internals are largely the same as the steel guns. The only difference I know of is that the slides on the poly models are a bit longer at the rear- I have a slide off a poly gun on a steel frame, and it has some overhang at the rear. Doesn't impact function; they just made them a little longer to fill space on the back of the chunkier P frame. I've swapped triggers around; even experimented with Tanfo triggers in more direct CZ clones (aluminum-framed Caniks...the Tanfo triggers are a hair too wide for their frames). Between a Tanfo steel and a Tanfo poly, the triggers seem to be identical. I don't see why you wouldn't be able to swap in the Henning trigger; the hole for your trigger bar should be the same, and the hole for the trigger pin is the same, though you'll be reaming it to accept the Henning solid trigger pin. Only issue I could see is if the surfaces that the pre/over-travel screws engage with are not the same. The poly guns seem to see a lot more competition use in Europe; they have dedicated models, as opposed to the US, which are only available in the plain-jane equivalent to the regular 'Witness Steel' series. I gotta think they will take most all of the same upgrades. I'd bet a call to Henning would clear up this question pretty quick; if not, I will say that I'm planning on ordering a flat trigger for my Jericho, and will be happy to test fit it to a poly gun first, just to satisfy my own curiosity.

I'm figuring anyone who's curious about the X-Cal has already found videos of it in action...but just in case, here's a video I recorded yesterday: I wasn't really trying to demonstrate the gun; it was more for my own purposes (i.e. to see if I could pick out any kind of flinching or other obvious mistakes). But it really illustrates how soft that thing shoots, especially for its light weight. I was gripping pretty lightly there, even...strong hand is fairly relaxed, and weak hand is really doing nothing but stabilizing my shakiness. edit: Also, I got a GREAT reminder to be careful who you hand this gun to. A buddy of mine actually ND'd it. He has as much shooting experience as I do, and has quite a large collection of H&K .45's, including some with trigger work. Way, way different triggers on those guns (heavier, yes, but not 'bad,' just different). 'ND' might be a bit of a strong word; there was no danger, gun was at the ready and pointed downrange. It was just one of those moments where you go 'wait...you were NOT ready for that to go bang, were you?' 2lb pistol triggers are no joke.

Odd that those are coming with the red spring now. I wonder if Eagle would mail you the stock X-Cal spring, or one of the blue flat-wounds (if they have them)? I think a CZ or Tanfoglio spring, clipped as necessary, would do the job just fine, of course. Anyhoo, I got my X-Cal out again yesterday and got some more rounds down it. Academy had Monarch ammo back in stock, so I tried using some of it. It was brass-cased; I don't know if the primers are the same as their steel-cased (hardest primers I've ever seen in commercial 9mm; hard than Tula, even), but they are still quite hard. As a point of comparison, my SD gun is a Sig P290, which is totally fine with any quality ammo...all SD JHP's work fine, Winchester White Box, Federal/American Eagle, ect all work fine. I've had like one or two light strikes with Blazer. Monarch ALWAYS, without fail, takes two hits to go bang. My X-Cal (with the shortened hammer spring) had one light strike out of a 50rnd box of Monarch. Then switched to Blazer, which was flawless. Was surprised and impressed...my hammer is SO easy to manipulate, yet it still has enough inertia for 100% reliability with all but the worst of ammo.

Thank you Canuck for following up with me on the rear sight issue- if he hadn't PM'd me, I would have kept putting off calling Eagle. I get SO anxious about 'customer service' calls because they tend to result in epic frustration. This was a complete 180* from that. I did go ahead and register my gun through the link at the top of this page: https://grandpower.eagleimportsinc.com/grandpower/warranty/ Which was very simple and shouldn't require anything other than your serial. Seems like a good idea, just in case anyone ever does need real warranty service (i.e. has to mail gun). Then I called (the 731 number on the 'Contact' page) and told the lady who answered what my problem was. I specified that it was the X-Cal with the Elliason sight, she basically said 'yup, we've got those,' asked for my serial and my mailing address, and told me the new sight would be in the mail on Monday. Bing bang boom done. Took less than five minutes. There's no way I could ask for better customer service than that.

Just to be clear, let me expand upon the previous two posts- The X-Cal hammer/sear mech is unique from the rest of the GP line in both the mk7 and mk12 models. Whether there were any changes between mk7 and mk12 X-Cal (or between ml7 and mk12 K100), I really do not know. There are a few obvious things, like the takedown system, and AFAIK all the mk12 GP's being imported into the US have the serrated trigger (I had thought this was X-Cal only, but I've seen P11's and other models with it). At a basic, fundamental level, though, the mk7 should function the same as its mk12 counterpart. That said, here's what you get in a K100, whether mk7 or mk12: -A single-action rivaling the Walther PPQ. 4-5lbs, very crisp, with ridiculously short travel and reset. We're talking about ~2mm from break to stop, and the same amount back out to reset. -Double-action that you will not equal outside of a tuned CZ. No slop, no grit, no stacking. 7-8lbs. -Total weight similar to a Glock 17 or other common fullsize polymer service pistols. Yet the GP's slide rides on a CNC'd internal receiver; not a few tiny chunks of metal embedded in the poly frame. -Recoil as soft as all-steel fullsize pistols -Extreme reliability. I have yet to hear of a single failure with the mechanics of a mk6, mk7, or mk12 gun.* *With two exceptions: 1) STI-branded mk6's broke hammers (of custom STI design), and 2) EXTREME amounts of dryfiring without a snapcap can wear the roll pin that retains the firing pin, leading to a sticking firing pin. CZ's have the exact same 'problem,' which is easily remedied with a snap cap (...or by not dry-firing the gun a hundred thousand times. ) P.S. I am not a representative of GP. I just really, really like their guns and like to spread the word.

Somehow JG seems to have gotten more Mk7 K100's. $299 http://www.jgsales.com/grand-power-k100-mk7-semi-auto-pistol,-9mm,-full-size-frame,-new.-p-58147.html If anyone is on the fence about trying a GP, you're insane if you don't buy one. PLEASE buy them before I buy another gun I don't need just because the deal is painfully good.

I could see the X-Cal barrel being called 'cone style.' ...but you'd have to call the K100 the same. Bushingless barrels having a bit of taper to them isn't exactly anything new or revolutionary. It's just a way to help actions cycle reliably while still allowing for tight lock-up. As for bull barrel, I would have to think they have an appendix or something the qualifies such terms. If not, their rules are meaningless.

I myself am curious of the stock spring rates. There can't be more than 1-2 pounds difference between the wire springs; as I said either in this thread or another, I cannot perceive any functional difference in them. Just the slightly different free heights. The red spring, though, is serious stuff. Gotta be 18lb+, I'd think, just comparing it to other guns with known rates. I bet the blue one in my mk7 is in the 14-16 range. Steve, did your gun come only with the red spring? Did you look underneath the foam liner for extra goodies? When I picked my X-Cal up, I was disappointed to find no extras...then someone there chimed in with 'check under the foam.' ...it took until them for me to realize that there were also a couple things in my mk7 box, too. Namely, the shorter front sight I had always thought the gun needed...

I thought all competition classes, IPSC and IPDA both, were always either fully decocked or cocked and safed? Is there something that requires safing a decocked gun?

These differences don't seem to have anything to do with IMI vs IWI. The appear to have occured some time before the name change...here's my slide-safetied IMI, which I believe is circa ~2000 or a little later. edit: oh, and this one has polygonal rifling, in case anyone wondered. Seems like I heard they stopped that on the later ones.