Fireglock

Premature slide lock, don't you hate when that happens?

Your wish is my command. Maybe you want to put some GOLD inlays on the slide. Nah, I had it painted grey!

It's a Siedler, they offset the scope to the left side of the pistol.

I live at minor power factor and my Stock gun 17 with stock recoil spring runs either Xtreme 135gr RNFP or Zero 147 JHPs over 3.5 of Rex #2 all day long. All my ammo has been loaded at 1.150, it works fine. I still run the same load in my 17L w/12lbs spring and it flies along fine. If the trouble isn't spring bind then magic thumb or weak mag springs where the mag not keeping up with the pistol would be my next steps.

Bobby, Steve and myself are all using the Novak comp which seems to work well with the lighter loads. BUT these loads are still hotter than I shoot in my stock guns. Going with even hotter loads hasn't seemed to improve things in my testing. In USPSA you HAVE to make PF, so you tune the gun to meet that requirement.

Well I'm sure somebody will have a better explanation but, a compensator takes gases and ports them upward to reduce/eliminate muzzle rise/flip. You need a load that provides sufficient gas to do the job. With a gun making major you typically will need more gas and more ports to use the gas effectively to reduce the rise/flip. In GSSF with no power factor we're using enough powder to make the slide cycle as quickly as possible and keep the muzzle flip as low as possible without meeting an arbitrary PF. Quicker cycle time, less dot jitter and quicker second shot. If that's not clear enough I'm sure someone can clarify it for you.

I have a 17C that Novak fitted with a KKM barrel and one of his aluminum comps. Since I shoot GSSF with this gun it's loaded to make the comp work and not for a particular power factor. I would think comp size would be the biggest drawback to change over to major. Most minor PF comps don't have as many ports as those for major. I would think you need to pick which is important and size the comp to that. I can't think of anything else that would prevent you from going to major. If a G18 can take the beating they do and not have anything done to them I doubt you'll have a problem with a 17 and a comp. Slide tightening is done to reduce trigger creep, not so you can use a frame mounted optic mount like the Carver. I sometimes do tighten the slide when I do a trigger, the 17C slide needed it.

That is a bit forward, it might not be a good thing because im thinking of porting my barrel and at least one hole is going to be just under the blast shield. USPSA mount? Is it going to be a completely new design? That is the rear most position without reducing the number of mounting screws in the top plate. The mount will be similar but there will be differences, the scope will likely be flush with the end of the slide. Again we don't have a prototype yet, so don't hold your breathe waiting. Like I said, when we start on it, I'll post.

I have a prototype base that we tried but it still is a bit forward of the rear edge of the slide. Unfortunately the demand for a base you would like to see won't support the tooling and inventory needed. Bobby is still working on a USPSA version of the Competition mount but it has been moved back due to the demand for the regular mounts. When we get a prototype to try I'll post the info and some photos. Here's a photo of the prototype top plate. This may or may not be the one used with the USPSA mount. http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y138/fire...un/DSC01372.jpg And as always, things can change.

That's is the same design as the THE. It mounts on the rail with only one side rail and the trigger pin as the support. They're very "flexible" and the dot moves about when the gun fires. We used the THE in GSSF and even with the pussycat loads we were using the dot jitter was bad. This is the reason the Carver Mount came about.

That puts me back to recoil spring bind. +1 on the recoil spring bind, it happens with ISMI springs. If you cut the spring it may well go away, I just went back to Wolff springs.

Try here. http://bb-enterprise.biz/productCat44574.ctlg

According to the folks at Glock, when I questioned them about the 21 SF for an article, it stands for Short Frame. And that's what it stood for at the Shot Show.

Mags hold 13 just like the 21. The frame grip is actually shorter, not thinner.

I installed my Super Heavy magwell on my 17Cwith a US frame. It required me to modify the butt plug to get it to fit correctly. Once installed I have had no difficulties with the Taylor Freelance +5 base pads I use.

And it's available with a standard Glock rail.

Geez Kyle, that hurt....

It was painted by Tripp Research. It's been through the rounds first with TJC and then me in GSSF. The treatment holds up well. The Slide has been painted by R&J Performance Coatings, it actually made the slide "slipperier"! I was using a Novak slide racker and it had to be "encouraged" into the slot and the same to remove it. After R&J got through with the slide the racker slipped in and out by hand. They offer the blue as well as several other colors for frames and slides. R&J http://randjperformancecoatings.com/ Sometime later in the year I'll send the comp gun out to R&J for a little color.

The Carver Mount can be used with a stock gun and if the scope is in the full forward mounting position will usually work without cutting your slide. I tried my 17L this way before making the decision to go with a C-more and having the ejection port cut and the scope mounted in the full rear position. Unless you are using a Comp the full forward position should work fine, a Comp, 17 and C-more will require moving it rearward to avoid the muzzle blast, shield or not. The attachment is of Blue with the test mount in place, a standard Competition C-more mount. Here are a couple with a 17L, scope full rear position and a 17 Comp gun with the C-more in the full rearward position.The Comp gun has a prototype baseplate for the C-more, it's not scheduled for production at this time. Blue w/full rear C-more: The 17 Comp gun: http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y138/fire...un/DSC01372.jpg (pic edited to a link...'cause Jerry put too big a freakin' picture on here - KF)

The small frame trigger bars are interchangeable, the 17L and 24 are in that group. The "target" triggers on the 26, 27, 31, 19, 23, and 32 are for import points. A 17 smooth trigger will work in any of them, it's one of the first things I change on my compact and subcompact guns that get used a lot.

9mm3 followers can be used in 10 round magazines. We used them extensively in GSSF especially in the Unlimited guns where slide drag was a major problem. With the abundance of standard capacity magazines I've shipped all my 10 rounders to friends in New Jersey, minus the 9mm3 followers of course, they've found their way into my standard capacity magazines.

If I was shooting 9 Major I might feel better about a 3 pin. I only have one 3 pin frame (9MM) and that's on the comp gun.

Does the Jentra have a screw securing it to the trigger bar? Does the Jentra's aluminum block rub against plastic for the stop? I've been using a screw in the trigger housing for several years and it's never "loosened" so I'm happy with the metal on metal design overtravel stops. That would be the Lone Wolf in this discussion. And I don't work for anybody, unless I have to. My overtravel was made and installed by me.

My question has always been "who makes the GM spring"? I've never had any real problem with the Wolff spring but I did have a GM spring break. I wouldn't be surprised to hear that both are made by the same folks.

I was under the impression the G17L was discontinued well before the new frame changes. Though I could certainly stand to be corrected on that. The 17L hasn't been discontinued, they just don't import them as a general rule. Last year they imported 17Ls and 24s with the newer frames. If you pick up a Glock with the frame made in the US you'll find that the backstrap void is different than previous and imported models.