sn0wflake

Also. Which of todays guns do YOU think is capable of accomplishing that?? Or is it an "indian, not the arrow" type of deal in your opinion?

I see some performance center smiths use a "briley bushing". Is this preferable compared to regular 1911s?? Or is only just as good as the regular stuff? http://www.brileypd.com/bushings.html

Thats awesome. I would gladly be satisfied with that

I have the opportunity to buy a smith 66, from the 80ies I guess. Low round count (about 200 or so). And I just wonder if these revolvers are good. And how good. Compared to the latest gen 686 and current Ruger gp100 models.

What about moly based lubes such as molykote? I use this on pretty much anything that needs lubing, bearings, wires, sliding things, bolts, nuts, you name it. It appears to stay put for a long long time too and prevent rust on bolts. Also what about slick 50 and all other teflon lubes. My father has good experience with this, he simply boils machine parts in slick 50 for several hours and all the sudden they last like 3x longer. (no joke) Is it overkill for guns??

So I wondering how accurate can a 1911 style gun possibly be? I'm thinking when the gun is placed in a vice or ransom rest or similar. At 50m/50 yards. And for fun lets just assume the gun is shooting the bullets it likes the best and powder it likes the best and everything else it likes the best! Also are some caliber more accurate than others or is it just BS? What is regarded as the most accurate guns? Which things determines the maximum attainable accuracy of a gun?

Thanks for your advice guys. So a few days ago I was at the range and I was shooting the 945 again, spreading lead all over the target like a shotgun. Almost ready to give up. Then a guy from my club shows up with a glock. One of the long slide models with a cutout in the slide. With an aftermarket trigger installed. We were discussing glocks and accuracy and so. Then I got to try it. I was told: if I could get 3 out 5 in the black maybe glock was something for me. To my surprise I shot like 10/10/9/9/7 with it And that was my best group by far that day. And i pretty much just banged them away. This gun had fiber sights though and that might have contributed. It wasn't that bad. A bit "blocky" in the grip but I did manage to shoot it. Oh yeah the trigger was of the long travel type compared to a 1911. I still want an all metal gun though. The glock felt like a toy. I was so surprised it was that light. No problems with recoil though, just different. Those are some seriously ugly guns though

I want a gun that I can win with in the following categories: bulls eye 25 m field competitions (these are fairly high demanding in accuracy) and at least one ipsc division (and be competitive, from a materials standpoint at least).

Thanks for responding! Well i have no worries about external extractors. Seems to me that they would be easier to mass produce and make them work well compared to internal ones. Since the spring and the extractor are 2 separate parts. On internals the extractor are both the spring and extractor. And i have feeling that springyness will go out of tune quite fast. And i don't want to work on my gun ever! lol (yeah right). All right. Reloading! My friends tell me: for reloading 9mm I need a dillon 1050, since it works much smoother than a 650 and wont throw the powder out of the cases while operating it. for 40 and 45 it doesn't matter they say. then the 650 is good enough. The 1050 also has 1 extra station that removes the staking of the primers commonly found on 9mm. A 1050 is like 1800€ set up for a caliber ready to produce. A 650 is about 8-900€ or so ready to go. but supposedly wont work well with 9mm, but will do 40 and 45. ***************************************************** Regarding the svi's. I would seriously expect such an expensive gun to run with all commonly found store bought ammo with 100% reliability. In all calibers too! If the cheap ass glocks made out of plastic can do it I would seriously expect and demand that a 4000€ hand made gun do it too. Even though I understand that precision comes at the cost of "reliability". But hey if you are charging 4000€ for a gun it better be fkin run store ammo all day long without problems imo. Am I wrong here??

Hi. brass seems to be available. I'm in one of the more liberal european countries. Basically I can get whatever I want around here regarding brass and bullets. However 40 and 45 seems to fairly similar priced regarding bullets and cases. 9mm is significantly cheaper. If I get a 9mm I would probably just buy off the shelf ammo, shoot that and when I have 10k or so cases I would reload them. I wasn't aware there was different 45 primer holes. I will have to talk to my buddies and see how common this is (2 different kinds that is). Preferably I would like to not have to reload 2 different types of 45 cases. 40 is popular here. But hey If I'm shooting major I might just as well get a 45. the 45 platform seems to be better ironed out by now. And I) pretty much want no trouble. I might be odd or something but i can shoot 45 as good as i can shoot 22lr at the bulls eye targets. At my club I usually borrow a smith 945 pc when shooting 45, and I can shoot one hole groups with that one. Not every group, but at least 2-3 of them out of 10 (5rd). I really like the 45. I can see how well I shoot from 25meter away with the 9 and 38 revo not so much. But I have also shot a lot of 38 wadcutters in a smith pistol (from the 60ies or so) and a really bad ass tuned model 10. And both of those also provide 1 hole groups. I wouold like a gun that has the capability of giving me 1 hole groups at 25m. But my buddies are starting to question my gun selection. I also want to compete in ipsc. And pretty much they say get a production gun, get a few thousand rounds and just shoot it. I know that they know better than me with anything regarding shooting. So now I'm starting to second guess my own choices too.. heheh Well but they have a point. 15 rounds are more fun than 8. so now i'm looking at production guns. and they both tell me just get a cz shadow. And I really hate it. Its ugly, And I have no idea what that particular gun does in production at all. Looks pretty "competition oriented" from the factory to me with the full length dustcover and all that. Also I just don't like shooting what everybody else is shooting. So now I'm looking at sig since they make high quality guns. And it seems I can get parts and stuff easily for those here. Going to try out my friends 40 standard edge first and a glock 19 just to see how those are. I like the looks of the all stainless 226 and 229 models but I don't know if I will be competitive with those. Or at a disadvantage. Or I could just get one of svi 1911 guns. I guess I have to roll a dice to decide Brain overload.

Also is it true that i HAVE TO reload if i go for a .40 1911?? (thinking svi)

this is gonna be a long ass post! All right. I'm in a shooting club and I have been a member for so long so I can now legally own several guns. But most likely only 1 large caliber auto, for now. So I've tried out many different platforms this last year and I've pretty much decieded on a 1911 (single stack) since they fit my hand the best. I intend to compete with the gun in field competitions and also ipsc classic. I have used 9mm smiths pros (really like those) And several different .45 smiths PC, really nice ones. Around here we can't get all the brands you have in the states since no one imports them. And private import wont work here. But we can get: ruger smith remington sti svi sig My friends are in the very top of practical shooting in europe (rifle and 2 gun mostly though) and they are not very helpful to me when selection my first gun and my first caliber. But I have understood that with an svi i don't have to think about jack sh1t, its the best there is already from the start. no need to mod it, no need to send it to a smith, its already done at the factory. And even though I'm a skilled machinist and highly knowledable hobby metallurgist I just want to buy a gun and shoot the sh1t out of it. and win. so basically I have narrowed it down to either smith or sig 9mm (for around 15-1800€) or maybe a sig (new style) 45 or a smith pro series 45 for the same money. And then there are the sti's: I really hate the look of all their guns and I feel this is like the last option for me, and on top of that they seem to be of questionable quality to begin with. So there are a few svi guns avaiable. And these look really nice. I can get these in 9/40/45 with different slide-styles to boot. Considerations: The sigs and smiths can be had all stainless (i like that) The svi's are 0% and 50% stainless only (might even be hard chromed), and they cost 100% more than the sigs and smiths. Another consideration: 9mm is cheap to buy (about 0.2€ a pop), .40 and .45 (0.4-5€/pop) I would have to reload pretty much no matter what. to save money. I intend to shoot this gun a lot, and I like pure quality. I don't mind paying to get quality. IF I actually see/notice the quality! My friends says the svi's will be the cheapest in the long run. Buy once cry once kinda. It also has high resale value should that day come. So this the background. And now to my questions. In your opinion shoud i get a nice gun or a sig/smith? Should I get it in 9/40/45 (and why)? Bear in mind I also shoot precision competitions in the woods (field comps), not only practical. But from what i have experienced I could have won those with the smith 9mm if i did my part (which i didn't )

Also crack propagation always have to start somewhere. It always starts at the weakest point. At an inclusion usually.

Also in certain constructions cast steel is actually preferable since the grain orientation and structure is "random" so it lowers noise and vibrations, at the cost of everything else pretty much

Basically cast parts are either 30% weaker or 30% heavier at best. According to current knowledge. You might not notice this ever though... depending on the specific part.

Actually this is not correct. But almost. cast parts are maybe 99-99.9% density. The problem is that they have voids in them. This degrades their performance compared to forged parts about 30% (strength). Some cast parts are better than others. But for best performance you dont want cast at all. Casting is cheap since you get an almost finished part right out of the casting. Metals are usually crystalline materials. You have a certain grain pattern. the finer the grainstructure the better the strength and the better the toughness, ALWAYS. Inbetween the crystal structure you have space to put non metallic inclusions (and alloying elements) such as gasses and sulphur and phosfor, these make the steel more machinable but also degrades performance. Minimizing these is very important. some really high quality steels don't have any sulphur or phosfor at all. and these grades cost a lot. Like 10-50€ a kg. You get what you pay for though. Basically you want forged stock and (almost all steel that you can buy in bars are already forged at the manufacturing plant), and no non metallic inclusions. (typically 0.025% is good, or even 0.0025% but don't quote me on that ) Silicon is a non metal that is added in certain amounts in certain grades that improve toughness (this is steel grade dependant). Nitrogen added can improve stain resistance. But thats pretty much it for non metals that are beneficial in steel imo. And to relate back to steel used in guns. I see "4140" being used quite a lot. However 4140 is quite a lax "standard" and you can probably make steel that is twice as tough and twice as durable (and like 5-10x as expensive) while still being stronger/harder (this is the same thing in steel, these type of steels at least, that is) if you really wanted to. And it would still be inside the 4140 standard (but obviously made to a higher quality). It all depends on who makes it and the finished price of course. But usually you get what you pay for with steel.