Jump to content
Brian Enos's Forums... Maku mozo!

mrd

Classifieds
  • Content Count

    239
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by mrd

  1. I'm in EU and have looked at the holosun.eu page, but I've been unable to find it.
  2. Sorry, but I'm unable to find the spacer you mean, do you have a link?
  3. Well, I'm in Sweden, so I don't think the answer would help you much. Sorry.
  4. If ignition is borderline and you don't have the Titan hammer or Bolo interrupter already (nor the xtreme one piece sear), then you might want to take the extra hassle with fitting the bolo for a Unica hammer instead of the Titan. I have fitted one Bolo for the Titan and I recently fitted a Bolo for the Unica in my Stock 2. The Unica setup hits the primers harder. The inside arc of the Bolo needed more work with the Unica hammer (I have the v2 trigger bar), otherwise it was the same procedure for me. I took a smidge off the tip of the leg for stronger DA ignition on both, never tou
  5. The Criterion Core barrels have the most interesting profile to me right now. They taper down to pencil profile slowly, so the mass is where it's needed for best distribution of weight and heat. Should be affected less by heat and still very light. Unfortunately the 16" version is not rifle length gas. If money is a big concern, cut down what you have or a Faxxon gunner 18".
  6. I did some experimenting, but I have moved on to other projects for now. I have the rifle set up the way I want now and the next thing to test is to make a powder ladder and see what load shoots the flattest. A comp makes a difference, with a 16" barrel the difference is small but noticable. I have had my barrel cut down to 10" now and the rifle shoots softer and the comp works better.
  7. https://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/308-muzzle-brake-test/ Precision Armaments Hypertap and/or APA The Answer might be even better choices, and tuneable.
  8. Nice writeup. Just asking for curiosity - isn't it better to fit the sear leg instead of the bumb on the safety? The end result is the same, but the sear is the cheaper part and the modification of the safety might make it incompatible with future hammer changes. I know this after trying to install an Eimantech SA hammer on a gun with modified safety "bump", the safety would never engage with this hammer.
  9. The target don't lie, I pretty much disregard the SD and just judge by the target. I only use SD to choose between two otherwise identically performing loads.
  10. Just wanted to follow up that I finally got time to test an initial crude charge weight ladder (0.4 gr powder steps) with these bullets and they worked just fine. Judging from this promising first test they provide more than acceptable accuracy for practice within 100 yards, and excellent price/performance ratio. Best 5-shot group was ~1.4 MOA. If I can improve this with fine tuning the powder and perhaps seating depth I'll be real happy, but just repeatable ~1.5 MOA would be great considering these are really cheap bullets.
  11. I see. The S-one has a rather unique attachment method for the handguard to the barrel nut, it does need loctite but once loctited I've not had any problems.
  12. Me neither. One other reason I don't see any cons of making the nut aluminum.
  13. I might be wrong about this, but I think there is a point to not having a too strong barrel nut - as long as it does the job. The barrel nut connects to the upper receiver. The aluminum upper receiver. If stressed one of them will break before the other and I'd prefer the barrel nut to break before the upper. I also prefer a lighter rifle to a heavier rifle, all else being equal. I get the point of going for the lowest hanging fruit, but I was at the point in the process where the barrel nut was next in line. I was improving on a rifle I already had, with a medium profile 16.5" bar
  14. I do have an aluminium nut for it that, but I've only been using it for about half a year. From what I can tell it works as well as the steel one, just 2.5 oz lighter. I have a 16.5" barrel, also medium profile. My rifle is still a bit front heavy, balance point just front of magwell. I'm running rifle length gas with the 15" S-one. If you're running intermediate gas you should probably consider getting the 12" S-one. it's actually more like 12.65" if memory serves. The S-one has sort of a space for the gas block in the front and the 15" seems to match the position of the gas block
  15. If trying to shave weight from a rifle, 4 oz in weight savings from one single part is quite significant in my book. Especially from the front end, where the weight feels the most. However, most of the weight in the Aero S-one is from the steel barrel nut. If you really like the profile you can have a machinist make an aluminum barrel nut for it. I really like my S-one, but there are some quirks with it. You need a REALLY slim gas block for it. And loctite the clap screw. The balance and weight of the rifle will be mostly determined by what barrel profile you choose.
  16. mrd

    CZ TS 2

    You're right, I do consider the muzzle dip as part of the recoil impulse. I think of recoil more in the terms of how much the sight picture is disturbed than how much force is transfered into the shooter. Sorry if this was cause for confusement, english is not my native language. No, I mostly just wanted to account for the stationary mass working to stabilize the gun and counter-acting on the moving mass of the slide. If you think I'm nitpicking, well sure, but was I really first to do so? I said coming into the discussion that the practical differences were small, I'm w
  17. mrd

    CZ TS 2

    F=M*A is less than half the truth. First, muzzle flip is a factor of the ratio between the moving force of the slide AND the stationary mass of the barrel and frame. Second, the mass of the slide has to be balanced with matching springs for optimal recoil reduction, you seem to have assumed the spring is constant. Just look at all limited guns. Do you see any that are made with heavier slides? No, the race guns have slide cuts and even slides that are shortened, to make the moving mass less.
  18. mrd

    CZ TS 2

    Exactly, this is also a valid point - to the advantage of the bull barrel. You want the weight to be stationary like in the barrel, the moving weight in the slide actually adds to recoil. So less weight in the slide and more weight in the front of the barrel means win-win for softer recoil and less muzzle flip. Less slide mass IS better for recoil. A heavy slide feeds better though and is less sensitive for dirt etc.
  19. kurtm, have you tried the Precision Armament AFAB and/or EFAB? If so, what are your impressions, and how do they compare to the MZLMAX? Sorry for the necropost!
  20. What makes you say this? His rounds passes his plunk test and he's using 145 grain bullets that are generally quite long, so plenty of bullet in the case.
  21. mrd

    CZ TS 2

    The advantage of the bull barrel is mostly to build more static weight out front, helps with recoil. Also, the cone lockup makes for a tight fit and helps accuracy, but a well fitted straight barrel locks up just as tightly and will be just as accurate. Key words are "well fitted", not every barrel is. The weight out front also makes for a more nose-heavy gun, which is not for everyone, even though it does tame recoil and muzzle flip. In practice, the differences are small. But given a choice, I'll go with the bull barrel. Every bit helps.
  22. mrd

    CZ TS 2

    I'm sorry to rain on CZ's parade, but I kinda feel that CZ dropped the ball on this one. Very slight improvements over the original TS. What would really have taken the TS to the next level is a bull barrel and a lightened slide, but I guess CZ saves this for TS 3 and TS 4. Until then the TS will stand in the shadow of 2011 and Tanfoglio Limited Custom, IMHO.
  23. I had feeding problems with the original Tanfoglio mags, made by ACT-mag, with hollow points. I swapped to Mec-gar and have had no problems since. I regard Mec-gar as very high quality mags. They have not had the same wear as the ACT-mags at the hole for the mag release either.
  24. I did some testing today after taking the last weight out of my carbine buffer. Was not able to turn the gas down, but that was quite expected, still recoil seemed a tad softer. Then did some testing between the Strike Industries flat wire spring and the clipped carbine spring I was using. The flat wire spring seemed smoother and slightly less recoil, though it was close so I can't be sure. Left the flat wire spring in there. I could clip a coil or two from the flat wire spring and have a two-piece delrin buffer made, like Taccoms ultra light weight (which can't be bought over here
  25. I got a reply from LOS: "our FMJ bullets 223 caliber are softer and due to this they could be a bit larger diameter without causing any problems. Bullets are used in major ammunition companies all over the globe." All good then, I guess.
×
×
  • Create New...