boo radley

FWIW -- SSP - MA ESP - EX Have only shot a single classifier, in March 07. I'm going to get reclassified in ESP, as I'd like to shoot an ESP-specific gun in the Carolina Cup. I've never shot this match, and would like to. Steve King IDPA# A26809

I have installed two Ice magwells. One on my G-22 and one on my 35 and both went on in less than 5 minutes. I have heard of others having to shave plastic but have not ran into it myself. JoeD explained last month to me about the 2 different frame size in the Glock family of the medium frame such as the 34/34 17/22.. maybe that's the answer to some fitting issues.. Weird -- I didn't think there was a bit of difference between 3rd generation, small frame Glocks. What is the difference? Regardless, the magwell is a gray zone, IMO, in Glocks and IDPA. Even if the Dawson fit the box, and (my vague memory is it didn't) it secures with a brass plug that adds weight -- even the lighter of the models. So then you have to reconcile the plug with this rule: "B. Add-on weights for a competitive advantage (this includes, but is not limited to, weighted magazines, tungsten guide rods, brass magazine wells, weighted grips)."

OK -- jump ahead a couple weeks. Eagle 5.0 9mm. I'm beginning to run into problems. Problem 1: Stock STI 126mm magazine tubes with Dawson wedge basepads. With the factory magazine springs and 38 super followers, I could not get the slide to reliably lock back. To correct this issue, I replaced the guts with some left-over 140mm springs and followers, and slightly opened the magazine lips. However, I'm encountering the occasional double-feed, which really sucks. Could this be from running without a spacer? Did I open the magazine lips too wide, and -- if so -- is it really this tricky to get consistent slide-lock?? Problem 2: Stock STI 126mm magazine tube. Glued-in a metal spacer, and put in a brand-new Grams 11-coil 9mm spring kit. When I rack the slide, on a loaded magazine, even with just 1 round in it, the magazine goes flying out the bottom, and nothing chambers. If I rack the slide with no rounds in the magazine, the slide locks open for sure, which is good.

Very, very nice. I only watched you shoot for two stages (grin), but no joke -- I thought you were shooting LIMITED, until today. Very smooth and fluid shooting, man.

Oh, no freakin' way, man! That's bloody terrible. You must have been stunned. Did you know you had swept yourself? I'm sure sorry.

My drive home was only just under 7 hours, but I'm betting it was less cheerful. DQ'd on only the 2nd stage of the match (stage 4), when I got on the trigger a little too early, transitioning into an array. My fault, no doubt, but it stings. Otherwise a great match and nice facility. I think I'm snake-bit at this match -- the first two times I entered I had to drop out at the very last minute because of work emergencies. Now, this. <sigh>

I, too, have a hard time understanding how anyone thinks Tiger "checks-out" mentally, in matches, if the going gets rough, or otherwise...Personally, I'm amazed he hasn't gone screaming and crazy into the night, when the Golf Gods allow the unknown to grab a major. And it's refreshing to see some anger and spite and glee given the usual robot-like Tour player. People laud Leatham's dominance, and rightfully so, but the talent base of practical shooting is microscopic compared to golf. Didn't we have this conversation, already? Fishing slow, Tightloop?

<checking....what squad am I in??> OK. Safe.

+ a bunch! I make them do it again, I sure won't feel sorry for them when they get DQ because they didn't take the time to SHOW clear. I had a RO the other day fumbling through the range commands. He got "if finished unload and show clear" So I'm sitting there showing clear and he couldn't remember the rest...I helped him along lol. Chatting up the peanut gallery drives me nuts. When me and the score keeper and the shooter are scoring the targets and we get done and me, the score keeper and the shooter are the only ones pasting targets doesn't make me real happy. Yup. Other bad habits are talking extremely loudly while the shooter is at "stand-by" or loudly commenting on stage performance while he or she is shooting. Electronic ears are a mixed blessing, and some folks are as loud as mules. Also - my personal pet peeve - not giving the on-deck shooter the stage. Even at major matches, I can't count the number of times I've been on deck, and bumped into a shooter farther down the order, who's squatting in front of a port as I'm doing my run-thru, or playing with the starting position props, or whatever. Other bad habits -- not being a sportsman. Yeah, so you got screwed with a procedural, or your gun broke, or you came up minor at the chrono, and are going to burn the MD's house down, you're so angry. Take a minute, vent, but then MOVE ON AND AT LEAST PRETEND TO BE CHEERFUL. I mean, what -- you might not get a pack of Shokbuff's and a $12 plaque? Please.

I believe Precisions are excellent bullets, as were Masterblasters, Bear Creek, etc, but I'm done with 'em. They are cheaper. The powder needed for smoke-free rounds, like n320, is not, however. The other powders like Solo or Ramshot I have no experience with, and/or are hard to find. I do not like shooting Titegroup with moly bullets. I have no idea where all that smoke is coming from -- burning moly? Is that safe to inhale? Finally, they aren't immediately available. A case of Montana Gold 180 JHP's costs dearly, yet the bullets are excellent, and work beautifully with Titegroup. So while the MG's run ~$20/k more, it's more like only $12/k if you figure in the powder savings (n320 vs. TG). So it costs $3 or $4 more for a major match to shoot a premium bullet.

I can tell you what's NOT good for awareness -- a long, stressful drive or flight. A noisy and cheap motel. Too much alcohol. Very little sleep. Of course these are the very conditions a major match seems to guarantee. <sigh>

Recently bought a Dawson front sight, and I'd like to replace the stock sight on my STI Eagle. I've read Brazos' How-To and the instructions with the sight, and just have a couple q's. 1) Dawson instructions say to knock-out from R --> L and install from L to R assuming gun oriented in shooting position. True? Does it make a difference? 2) Can I just knock out the existing front sight? Or do I need to heat/freeze the slide first? 3) Do you actually fit and center the new sight completely, before drifting it back out, applying Loctite and reinstalling? It seems to me for the best fit, I'd just want to get it started, *then* apply the Loctite, and punch into place. 4) Any tricks to centering the sight where the old one was centered? I was thinking about putting a tiny scratch on the muzzle, or using masking tape on the slide and marking the center line.... Thx all

I agree with all your points. But it would be disingenuous to explain IDPA's immutable classification system as stemming from a deep understanding of "dynamic absolute order." I shouldn't have been sarcastic in my use of the word "perfect," but the point remains -- it's not logically defensible to create a system with meaningful labels, then ignore subsequent data that might argue for revision....I suspect it's simply a business decision: the return on revising the system simply isn't worth the work and expense. <shrug>

That may well be. But apparently nothing has changed in at least 6+ years to warrant IDPA's revising the thresholds. I guess they were perfect then, and thus perfect now.

That is the truth. However, I think it's a complex. Many of the posts here, yours included, are of the nature: "I am competitve in all things," etc. Yet in my experience, many of these people are not competitive in all things, but merely selectively so. How many athletes will work themselves sick on the practice fields, wake up at 4:30 to shoot hoops, or whatever, yet are marginal (at best) students? Why not be competitive in the classroom, too? Or in anything that's not perceived as 'fun'? I've met people that are downright obnoxiously competitive a**holes in league softball/bowling/golf, whatever, yet they have zero competitive drive in being a better parent, or spouse or provider. It's an interesting subject.

I'm no apologist for IDPA, but I don't see how this rule can be removed without completely changing the 'principals.' Seriously -- if you remove the rule, folks WILL throw another shot solely to arrive at a more advantageous slide-lock (albeit now with a clear conscious). If you're going to permit that...why maintain any of the fiction that you're engaging a scenario? It would be like allowing you to selectively load magazines with different numbers of rounds.... I think JoeD's other suggestion is completely effective -- just make all paper targets Limited -- but how popular would that be? It's a weird rule, because it's objectively unenforceable, first, and second, there's a perception that other shooters are violating it (and some do), and thus "getting one over on the rest of us," which really does drive people bat-sh*t. Certainly in USPSA, as well, we have a number of niggling equipment rules that are, for all practical purposes, unenforceable as well, but we grumble and comply, because they COULD be enforced if someone wanted to strip down the pistol, examine parts, etc.

No doubt the rule book should have been written differently (maybe *very* differently), and the clause about round-dumping included in the definition of Vickers Count. But it's either disingenuous, or simple, to fail to associate the two, only because they're separated by a number of pages.

I think the rules say: "Shoot all you want, but don't shoot an extra shot(s) only for the purpose of gaining an advantage on the reload." But then, I'm also paraphrasing. I understand the rule and I understand why it's unenforceable, but it is what it is. Good course design makes it much of a moot point. And -- programming an unnecessary shot is also a distraction and can back-fire badly, and at minimum it will always cost a split.

I just got done chrono'ing a bunch of stuff, in preparation for A6, and just in general, since I hate the process. 6" SVI (which has a slowish barrel, it seems): Bullet: 180gr JHP Montana Gold Powder: n320 OAL: 1.180" 4.8gr: 157pf 5.0gr: 167pf 5.2gr: 171pf Fireant is right about just dropping a lighter bullet on the load -- I have some Zero 165gr FMJ's, and I put one on top of the 5.0gr of n320 load, and it came out to 151pf, and felt great. Also shot some of my .40 minor loads -- 180gr around 135-140pf feel like shit in this gun; bizarre, really - k-chunk, k-chunk, k-chunk.... As another data-point: Winchester White Box 165gr FMJ's came in around 170pf. Snappy. Chrono'd with a very nice Oehler (not mine) rented at indoor range at 70-degrees.

Good deal -- thx, Chuck! Steve

Has anyone stayed at the La Quinta motel in Conyers? Wondering what that's like....

DonT -- I was cannibalizing the trigger job from one gun to put into another, so I took the liberty of snapping a photo. I wasn't really sure how it all worked either, prior to seeing it. I just know, I likes it! Here you go:

Well, no, not consciously. Just trying to replace my G17 and G35. Most expensive thing I ever did was shoot a Glock. <grin> Now I think I'm set for the next few years, as long as my eyes hold out. A set of special shooting glasses has the front sight nice and sharp now. Have the SV for Limited, and this STI Eagle for practice, Limited minor, steel and IDPAish things. Same grips, and controls, and almost the same sights. I don't want to shoot lead or exposed base bullets, and JHP is getting crazy expensive in .40.... This is starting to make a little more sense to me. The mag that came with the gun had an insert and a follower trimmed front-and-back. But not properly trimmed -- Beven was right. It's sticky, and either pops up too far (very bad), or doesn't pop up and engage the slide-stop when empty. The other two mags, which are marked .38 super on the package, don't have any spacers, and there wouldn't be room for the followers unless I trimmed them. OTOH, in a short test (Tues. night match), they seemed to run just fine....Maybe they'll work fine as is? I still am going to get a couple of the Grams kits and some more tubes, regardless.

Thx, Eric and Howard. I haven't even shot this gun yet, so yeah -- first test will be trying without the spacer. I only have 1 spacer for 3 mags, regardless...From searching the forum, sounds like the other options are adding metal spacers, sending mags off to be tuned, or buying SV mags which are $100 each, on the website. While I'm on the subject, some additional questions -- perhaps not all answerable. 1) Why doesn't STI make 9mm specific tubes and magazines? 2) Why do I want the .38 super follower? If they work that much better, why doesn't STI use this follower? 3) A full 126mm mag doesn't seem to have much spring tension. I have some left-over STI springs from .40S&W mags. Would these work, or should I use them? 4) I have some Dawson internation (wedge) pads. I've discovered filing the tabs on the mags so they just *barely* go on, leads to Extreme Frustation, when the don't come off. OTOH, there doesn't seem to be anything to retain the pad, unlike the +1 pads, besides slip-fit. Do y'all file until the pads slip off and on easily, and take a chance that they won't come loose?

Picked up an Eagle 5.0 9mm and three new 126mm 9mm STI magazines. One, that came with gun, had a spacer - it fell out loose on the floor when I was adding a basepad. For the life of me, I can't get it back in the magazine and have it work. It just fits inside the back of the magazine, right? What happens is, if the magazine is unloaded, the follower gets jammed by the spacer slightly above the lips of mag, and can't move. How is there room at the top of the mag for both the spacer and the follower? Also, should this plastic spacer be glued or somehow secured to the inside of the mag? Thx