SteelCityShooter

Not quite. Vista Outdoors does own Remington, CCI/Speer and Federal. They don't own Winchester and, of course, none of the foreign brands.

Yeah, I know that. But, the surrounding frame on the 512 is much thicker and can't be removed so it it makes the apparent size of the window smaller. Not a big deal to some shooters but it is to me.

I've got a Holosun 510 on my JP GMR15 and, by removing the shroud, you save a lot of weight. The huge window is a big plus and the circle/dot reticle is very fast to find. I did buy an HS512 just for the reason given but it's smaller window and more intrusive frame makes it a bit less fast than the 510.

I have a 9mm Ruger PCC that's been lightly modified (Taccom Carbon handguard and comp, barrel mount red dot base, left hand safety, VQ hammer, etc.). I have several Ruger 17-round SR9 magazines and have been using them for Steel Challenge and they have been 100% reliable. However, I also have a couple of big-stick Glock 32 round mags, one with a TT +10-round extension, that I would like to use in it. What has been the experience with the Glock mag insert in the Ruger PCC? I could find out myself by shooting it a lot but, with the current cost of ammo, I'd like to get some guidance before wasting a lot of money if other's experience hasn't been good. Thanks.

Yes, the 2.0 CORE and OR guns come with a set of mounting plates for a wide variety of red dots and matching screws. The OEM mounting plates are plastic but perfectly serviceable since they are only spacers and under very low load. If you insist on a metal spacer plate CH Precision will be happy to sell you one. Note the older DeltaPoint (DP) and newer DeltaPoint Pro (DPP) use different plates as the DPP is slightly longer. I'll assume you have the DPP. For the M&P9 2.0 CORE and OR guns, the DPP mounting plate is the Type 6 with Screws Type E. For the 40S&W guns, the mounting plate is the type 6A and the slide cutout cover screws are used. The screws that come with the S&W mounting plates are #6-32 so they aren't super strong but modest torque (~12 to 15 inch -pounds) and a bit of blue Locktite is all you need. Gorilla torque is not needed and a torque wrench is your friend.

I'd measure to the center of the glass lens.

+1 Faster powders will use lower charges for the same bullet velocity and have lower recoil.

Yes, a revolver that hang-fires can be more dangerous than a semi as you can pull the trigger again immediately and have it fire "out of battery". Solution: DON'T pull the trigger again if you get a click-no-bang. Wait to be sure it's really not going to fire.

For mounting a scope or tube-type red dot the Weigant Picatinny mount referenced above is very solid and easy to install. I had one on a 6" GP-100 with a 2X Leupold pistol scope and it was excellent. I agree on a 2X scope. Higher magnification ones have a very limited field of view and are maddeningly difficult to hold steady enough for a comfortable sight picture unless on a solid rest.

That certainly isn't satisfactory. If it were me, I'd return it and find another make that does it correctly.

Here is another option for mounting a red dot on your Ruger revolver. EGW makes excellent products but these mounts are limited to specific red dot models so be sure you get the correct one. https://www.egwguns.com/pistol-and-red-dot-mounts/mounts-by-firearm-brand-sight-cut/?brand=761&model=710

Not much use if you are left-handed.

The mag wells are pretty much identical. You have to get the "Competitor" model to get an significantly larger mag well.

I have a GP-100 that, I believe, has an action design and geometry very similar to the Super Redhawk. I also bought the Wolff spring kit with the same weight hammer springs. The 12 pound spring was reliable and the 10-pound also works very reliably in mine and it made a noticeable improvement in the trigger pull. I never tried the 9 pound as it seemed to be tempting fate.

If you are loading to different cartridge lengths for the two guns then the shorter LOA cartridges will develop more pressure for the same powder charge due to the smaller net case capacity. That could account for the velocity difference. That said, as mentioned above, every barrel is a world unto itself and some are faster than others. I've noticed that my two M&P2.0s (a 5" Pro and a 4.25" Metal Frame) both have short chambers and require an LOA of 1.105 with a 125 gr Blue RN to "plunk" properly.

I don't see how much further forward it could go while leaving enough room for your trigger finger in the trigger guard. There isn't a whole lot of space even with the OEM trigger.

Last time I looked at the S&W web site there were plenty of wheel guns in a wide variety of sizes and chamberings. They are certainly in whatever revolver market still exists. BTW, if you personally had a choice to make modest money or a chance to make big money, both legally, which would you do? Why should companies not do the same?

125 gr Blue Bullet coated RN with 4.0 Sport Pistol gives me 1066fps (PF 132) out of a 5" M&P9 2.0

Yep, this is how to install any coarse threaded cap.

+1 I've used 10's of thousands in 9mm and .38Sp and never had one fail to ignite.

Metal Frame action update. I obtained a sear spring plunger and installed it along with an Apex sear spring and sear and the Apex striker block in my Metal Frame. So far it appears to work just fine. It improved the trigger pull noticeably and reduced it from 6+ pounds to about 4 pounds. So, the Apex parts work in these guns.

No reason it should. It weighs exactly the same as as my 5" M&P9 2.0 CORE so it should weigh slightly more than the standard 4.25" guns but not a lot. Also, metal frame guns generally have a bit more noticable recoil than polymer guns since the polymer frames flex under recoil and reduce the jolt a bit. Noticeably better than the polymer guns? No, not really, just different and an interesting variation for S&W. That said I like mine and am looking forward to shooting it with the Apex changes.

For anyone considering installing any aftermarket sear, etc. on a new Metal Frame M&P be aware S&W changed the older sear spring and plunger arrangement for a revised spring and deleted the plunger. Check with your supplier to be sure they know about this and that their parts work properly with the new seat spring. I know Apex is saying they haven't certified the MF pistols yet but check with Timney and Overwatch.

A follow up on the "missing" sear spring plunger. I called S&W's customer service again and this time got a most helpful agent. She actually went back and talked to the gunsmiths and then sent me an explanatory e-mail. Apparently S&W has indeed made a change to their sear spring set up for the Metal Frame. The spring is longer and the plunger dispensed with so the sear now sits directly on the end of the spring. This redesign also applies to the Shield + 30 Super Carry. So, this is a feature, not a bug. I don't know if this new type of sear spring is going to be introduced across the board or limited to these two model guns but if anyone here runs into it, that's the explanation. BTW, she also told me that the old style spring and plunger arrangement can still be installed in the sear block and I'm going to do that for my Apex sear installation.

Maybe. I wonder if they even disassembled it to see. Yes, it certainly functioned as my range trip confirmed but the change in the sear block was puzzling.