matteekay

I clarified this with our AC. His rulings are: - Compensators of any configuration are legal in ESP/CO/CCP/BUG-S provided they're a factory offered option with a corresponding SKU. Yes, we're bringing SKU's into ESP. - Porting is the same; it's allowed, provided it was a factory offering for that gun. I sent a mess of photos and examples to get as much clarity as I could. Based on this judgement, a Sig P320 Spectre Comp is legal, while a P320 configured the exact same way with a Parker Mountain Machine comp is NOT legal. I don't know how a shooter who reads the rulebook would EVER understand that "firearms with an incorporated compensator are legal" is supposed to mean "firearms that came from the factory with a compensator and/or porting are legal provided they're of a factory configuration with a corresponding SKU that can be referenced by a SO". God bless the poor SO's working at Worlds this year...

Maybe it'd be easier for you in zero gravity...?

You also don't have to drive through Glenwood Canyon and risk it being closed due to an accident/fire/mudslide/act of God.

I think the closest club is still the Galeton crew that's holding the Rocky Mountain Regional in June. Maybe there's an ICORE club out on the western slope that I don't know about, though. Any chance of you hosting a class?

Here's what these guns look like with the grip/magwell module removed (answer: "goofy."): There's a hollow section that runs the full length of the grip. As a simple first step, I'm going to see how much tungsten putty fits in there. It's not the ideal place to add weight, but I bet I can add 2-3 ounces without permanently modifying the gun in any way.

It's not a bad idea. No worse than the rest of this whole endeavor, lol. Out of curiosity, I removed the grip/magwell module to see if what might be utilized underneath. The metal magwell from my DLM actually slides on about 80% of the way, but you'd have to mill the inside at the rear to get it fully seated (since the metal frame guns are recessed at the heel). The bigger problem is grips from the metal guns can't be retrofit to the plastic frame (easily) as the rear of the plastic is flat rather than relieved like it is on the metal frame. There's a hollow behind the mag opening that could potentially be filled with something like tungsten putty. I'm thinking of doing that and running brass basepads and a heavy guide rod to give the gun just a hair more weight.

Yeah, it's the non-railed one (unfortunately in this case, but fortunately because the DA/SA trigger isn't great). A light would have been ideal.

(Disclaimer: Is this a dumb idea? Probably. But those are sorta my raison d'être) I have a SAO, triangular dust-cover P-Match in .40. Shockingly, I really like shooting it; I just wish the frame weighed more than a handful of biscotti. I've already added a heavy guide rod; other than that, has anyone figured out a creative solution for adding weight to the frame?

While we're discussing polymer Tanfo's - does anyone know if these use the same-sized thumb safety as the metal guns?

I have the other P Match Pro (the SAO, before/after? EAA swapped names) that has the huge, Stock 2ish dust cover. I've found that Stock 1/3 holsters work if you loosen the retention screws. Both my Ghost Thunder and RHT hold the gun well and I can draw without issue. I would probably replace the knobs/screws with longer ones and add a longer rubber spacer if this was my primary gun. Since it's my backup, I leave the holsters sized to my DLM with the knowledge that I can loosen the retention enough to work if I need to go to my P-Match.

Your cheapest option will be the Hogue HoldAlls. Personally, I'd spend a little bit more and get some from Revolver Supply Co. They'll have some specific to the 625 and you can stack two moons per post.

This is what I've seen: Magazine base pads can weigh up to 1.5oz for SSP, ESP, and CDP. Standards can be more prescriptive than they were previously (including specifying order of engagement and requiring re-engagement of targets). Clarifying language around the "suitable for everyday use" requirements from the prior rulebook. I think they're basically trying to say "nothing that would only work in competition" (though I never realized this was an issue). A new rule that specifically allows the Enigma holster and circumvents the belt loop requirement. The changes to Standards stages are actually a pretty big deal in terms of design. This should allow for more USPSA classifier-style stages.

So you're saying that you have Nill grips for sale...? I like mine - I bet they're the same style as yours, but in black - but I'm only shooting .38's with them. I could see how heavier loads could be punishing.

Thinking of going back to the Moon Clip Server to match my newfound love of strong-hand reloads. It'll primarily be used with .38 Short Colt and occasionally .40. Should I be getting the 9mm version? What's the difference?

True story. I'm gonna look it over but it looks pretty minor. Interesting that they basically wrote a rule to specifically allow the Enigma holster.

I get that you don't like the IDPA rulebook, but let's not confuse shooters looking for legitimate answers. Yes, CO uses ESP rules. There is nothing in the ESP rules or global rules that disallows slide rackers of any type for ESP. Provided that the gun fits in the box with the racker installed, I don't see a rule that can be quoted that would make it illegal. (Side note: Yes, I know it's possible to read the ESP appendix and argue that "Well, it ONLY says these three or four items are legal" using a ridiculously strict interpretation of what's there. We all know that's not what the division is about so presenting that as fact is misleading.)

Had a set, returned them. Compared to Hogues they're skinnier and have a more rounded back - both of which made them feel worse and less controllable than anything I've run from Hogue, Nill, or Altamont. Of course, your mileage may vary. I spent years hating finger grooves and then spent close to $300 fairly recently on a set of Nills that have them. Even more recently I picked up a new gun with factory rubber grips and went "Y'know... these aren't that bad." Who knows?

How long did they take to ship your order?

Skullhead Arms has you covered: https://skullheadarms.com/product/dagger-owb-multi-mount-holster/ Or have We Plead the 2nd custom-make you one: https://pro2customs.com/owb-kydex-holster-open-carry/

Yeah, exactly that. They're disallowed in IDPA anyway (hence the modification) but I've also stopped using them on my N-Frames. I like the added length, but I want as much contact between my support hand and my shooting hand as possible. The butt leaves a slight gap unless turned down like you describe.

Awesome. Always happy to help if you have more questions about the platform. I'll be honest - it's a little nerve-wracking to take a $130+ grip and stick it under a miter saw. Definitely give the Charging Rhino grips a whirl first and see if you like them.

I ran those for a long time (until Hogue put theirs out). They're really nice.

In terms of cant, I'd say it's about the same as the factory grip. The nice things about it is that it doesn't taper toward the bottom (front to back or side to side) so you have more purchase all the way down. I wind up cutting the butt section off on all of mine but that's just because I don't like Big Butts. It's hard to do a vertical grip on the Rhino because the frame itself is angled. I think the only vertical-ish ones I've seen are the finger groove models from Form but I've never held one.

Revolver division beckons.

Bumping my own thread now that I've had more experience with these guns. The issue seems to be that the rails of the Dagger frame sit somewhat proud compared to a factory Glock frame. PSA overcomes this by milling a more narrow channel in the slide than what you find on factory Glock units, effective holding the slide "down" against the frame (and sear, etc). Replacing a Dagger slide with a different manufacturer's introduces additional vertical play in the rear due to the taller slide channels, the outcome of which is inconsistent engagement between the striker and the trigger's cruciform. I strongly, strongly suspect that the root cause is PSA building their front frame rails into the locking block rather than the frame itself, allowing the slide to pivot. All of this explains why I can get the striker to release when applying upward pressure on the rear of the slide while allowing the trigger to reset. This is true of every slide I try on a Dagger frame (P80, AIM, Brownells, factory) regardless of the trigger setup (stock or Timney). However, swap on a Dagger slide, and the issue completely goes away.