regor

I've heard mixed commentary around the newer Czechmates coming with two barrels; seems like some do and some don't, so the regular Czechmate may or may not be a better deal in terms of the value of the box contents. In either case, I agree with everyone else that if you are serious about shooting then you will switch basically every anodized part on the Parrot. The grips offer almost no traction, the factory slide racker is horrible compared to aftermarket options, and most folks will switch out the CMore Slideride for a modern MRDS, which means no shiny blue mount. If you want a safe queen/conversation starter for shooting static targets at a typical stalled range, then go with the Parrot, otherwise go with whichever is cheaper.

The issue you reference with the Shadows not being drop safe is only really an issue because the USPSA rules require that Double Action guns without a decocker have the hammer manually lowered all the way in certain divisions (Production/Carry Optics), which rests the hammer on the firing pin. Someone carrying a similar gun in the real world would either have the hammer at half cock or fully cocked with the safety on, both of which are drop safe. The DWX is a single action only pistol, so the rules for DA/SA don't apply. CZ definitely intends for it to be carried loaded with the hammer cocked and safety on, just like all other SAO pistols in the market. Yes, you could manually lower the hammer all the way down on a loaded round and not apply the safety, but there's no practical reason to do that with a SAO pistol, it's the worst of both worlds; if you don't want to carry cocked and locked then carry it with an empty chamber. Your concern about muscle memory with the safety is going to fall on deaf ears with the BEnos audience since this is a competition oriented forum and holstering with the safety on is a requirement for loaded SAO guns and everyone shooting SAOs is used to flipping the safety off after the draw.

DLC applied to a high polished slide/frame can look quite striking. If you want it fancy you could also see if the builder has relationship with any laser engraving shops that would do something custom pre-DLC so you'd have something unique.

The Sebo Ti comp's main benefit is that it makes the gun much less front heavy. The compensation improvement over the factory compensator is minor. Both of my Ti comps required removing some material from the front of the slide to get the timing right.

In my experience (my video was posted by Ludde in a comment higher up) adding the brass grips and magwell to increase the weight help to smooth out some of the twitchy movements of the dot, but they don't have a major impact on magnitude. Popple holes had an impact on magnitude in my subjective view, but grip is still the most important factor by a massive margin. I settled on running the Sebo Titanium comp + two 3/16"popples + brass grips and magwell. That configuration is, in my opinion, the best you can get from the Czechmate with current aftermarket options -- after that you have to do the hard part and actually work on your grip. I also switched to the IPSC Alex double sided optic mounts on both of my guns because I'd heard that can reduce some vibration, but I didn't do any side by testing between that and the CZC mount so I'm not sure if it made a substantial difference.

Found the photo.

I assume that's what OP is referring to. CZ made the design change to the barrel lug sometime during the B-series from my research, so all As and some Bs have the old thinner lugs (same as other CZ barrels), and some Bs and all Cs have the thicker lugs. I'm not sure when the D series started, but I have seen photos somewhere where a D series gun had an interesting barrel that had a round insert in the lug; I'm not sure if that is a change across all the D series guns or if it's just CZ playing parts mix-n-match I haven't really heard about lug breakage being an issue with the newer barrels with thicker lugs, certainly not in the <10k rounds timeframe the original ones were known to fail at.

My experience is the brass grips are less aggressive than a fresh set of bogies, but the G10 grips start to round off fairly quickly and end up around the same aggressiveness as the brass grips. It's a different feel though because the brass grips have a much finer checker/point pattern.

CZ is a business, they are only going to make major changes if they can justify it with increased sales amongst the general population or if their market share/reputation is obviously dropping from their offerings being out of date. Their design changes will be tailored to make manufacture easier, even if it's sub-optimal from the competition shooter's perspective. The last count for USPSA members was just short of 35k vs ~80M gun owners in the US, even though the former group collectively will probably put more rounds through TSOs and Czechmates than anyone else. The Czechmate in particular is a low-volume gun for them so they aren't going to move mountains to get the new shiny model released just to sell a few hundred or low thousands a year vs tens of thousands of shiny SP-01 Competitions. When they do release the 2.0 it's almost certainly still going to need some attention because CZ will cut corners to make manufacturing cheaper/simpler. Up until the TSO2 announcement my expectation was that it'd be a pretty meaningless update like the TS2, but TSO2 makes me slightly more optimistic that a CM2 could have some meaningful design changes.

I am most excited that the TS2O with the bull barrel allows you to disassemble by taking the barrel out the front of the slide - not super important for an irons setup, but hopefully a sign that the Czechmate 2 won't require removing the compensator to disassemble.

A buddy tagged me in an MBX post on Instagram and I think it's awesome that MBX is entering this market. https://mbxextreme.com/index.php?page=Magazines_CZ I'm not sure I see much benefit of the 140mm mags since they are generally reliable in the small frame guns and the .40 large frame guns and going with Mecgar tubes + extensions is quite a bit cheaper than what MBX is selling them for, but the 170mm 9mm mags for the large frame 9mm mags will be a welcome addition to anyone who has dealt with the Czechmate's nose dives and issues with JHPs. I suspect the 170s will also come in cheaper than the $130 OEM 26rd mag + $40 CZC follower that is the standard now. Time will tell if they are reliably out of the box!

I'm not aware of anywhere selling the sight tracker for the Czechmate separately. If you reach out to CZ directly (or CZC) they might be able to help you, but you'll probably have to purchase one from a Czechmate owner who doesn't want theirs (I sold one of mine to someone build a project gun).

Ohhhhh, okay I know what you are talking about. Next time I am at the bench I will check which set of holes I am using and try swapping.

I'm not sure this will really solve the issue considering it happens even when the feeding tube is removed and it's just the base die. If there are more than 3 bullets in the die body it starts to happen. But it's worth trying so I'll see if I can hack together something that does the same thing as the DAA before buying the nice version. I can't find any documentation on that being the case and DAA only sells one style of replacement bearings for 9mm. https://www.doublealpha.biz/us/mr-bulletfeeder-dropper-ball-bearing. Mine came with two sets but as far as I am aware they were just spares because they are so easy to drop and lose if you take the die apart. Maybe one size of bearings up would work with what is essentially a very short bullet behavior issue.

Example of the nesting I am talking about. Funny the first couple times, frustrating the 200th.

I bought a Mr. Bullet feeder earlier this year and loaded several thousands of rounds of 9 Major with 115gr Montana Gold FMJs and it worked beautifully once I followed the setup guide. I recently switched my toolhead over to load stock up some 9 minor ammo with some 115gr concave base projectiles I got in bulk a while back and even after re-doing the MBF setup process I've had double bullet drops about 50% of the time that I can't seem to make go away. I think the issue is that the concave base bullets allow the next bullet to nest low enough that it can pass the ball bearings before there is enough pressure to hold it in the up position. I've tried tuning the die adjustment but if I back the die out any more it will stop dropping the bullets entirely. I am aware the MBF can have issues with double drops if the spring tube is pulling on the plexiglass tube that extends above the die and preventing the die from reliably dropping all the way each cycle; I have moved the main unit so that the die is not under any tension and can cycle up and all the way back down smoothly, but the issue still happens. Weight does seem to be a factor in the issue; when there are only 2-3 bullets left in the die the issue doesn't happen at all. When there are 4-5 it happens, but probably <25%. It was enough of a nuisance that removed the plexiglass extension and have been starting the die with two bullets and dropping a new one in with every press cycle, but that's much less efficient than the MBF is under normal conditions (still better than manually placing though). Has anybody encountered similar issues with concave base bullets and managed to fix it?

I think any Iron Sighted single stack gun fits better in Single Stack division than anywhere else, but the division name and the equipment rules just don't align. It's actually Old School 1911 division. Let my Hi-Point play!

I run a full DAA setup. The N-Frame insert for the Alpha-X is the best fit I've encountered of the 4-5 inserts I've tried. I run the muzzle support on my Open setup but with the 929 there is no wobble and the release is still very smooth so the muzzle support is unnecessary. The combo of TK stainless moons + DAA posts holds very firm but releases nicely. Blued moons + DAA posts are VERY stiff. Setting up the DAA posts the first time is a pain in the ass but it is nice to be able to fine-tune spacing.

D8.6 is not clear about whether a brace is a stock under the rules and is just a prohibited stock (see 10.5.18 for precedent, bump fire stocks explicitly prohibited), or if it's excluded because it's not a stock. There isn't any official ruling on this subject from NROI (https://uspsa.org/nroi/rulings), so per 11.8.2 you are "required to submit [your] questions in writing, either by fax, letter or email to NROI headquarters". I'm not convinced such a setup would actually be faster though.

There is a certain amount of hearsay, but at the member meeting at CO Nats one of the BOD members said the org was in discussion with manufacturers to have divisions where their guns could compete. Hard to imagine that alludes to anything other than 2011s in CO or a new division for them. Infinity was going to host a Major with a side match the day before for 2011-inclusive CO setups. Being up to date on orders is not relevant. If a builder can shift their books from making Open guns that require comp fitting, warrantying crack slides, tuning for ejection, extra milling for slide lightening, etc. to slide mounted, non-comped guns then their build times will be shorter and their profit margin will probably increase. Your average person shooting CO is not going to suddenly decide to order an $8k open gun, but the person who was going to buy an $8k open gun might buy a $7k CO gun and switch divisions. Getting USPSA to add 2011s to CO would let these builders re-balance their books in a way that benefits them without actually stepping on the toes of competitors like STI did when they bailed from the competition market. Atlas has already shifted from a to-order model to an as-available with minimal modifications model and has made design choices (like switching from a titanium to steel comp on the Chaos 2.0) that make the gun cheaper to manufacture and decreases warranty work (loose comps). Idk how many guns per year they were making before vs after, but it seems pretty clear that there's a desire to reduce costs from the Open business.

Last year my club ran a classifier match at the beginning of the year and then didn't run classifiers in our monthly match for several months. We started sending out post-match surveys at some point and one of the questions we asked was whether or not folks (a) preferred a classifier at every match, (b) preferred no classifier, or (c) were indifferent. The break down was about 25-25-50, respectively, but the distribution of the responders' classifications were insightful. The folks who wanted a classifier every match were heavily skewed to lower classifications (plus the upper level A folks who were chasing an M card) and the folks who didn't want one were skewed towards the upper classifications. The current classification system gives the vast majority of the member body an obtainable goal to chase. Most members don't go to area matches or nationals, and if they do they aren't competitive, so the classification system is their North Star. If you made it harder you would lose engagement, which would cost the org a lot of revenue. I personally wouldn't mind a system where you could get to M via a classification system but GM had to be earned by major match performance, but at this point the cat is out of the bag and switching to that without resetting every GM down to M would create resentment from members who thought they had a shot under the old system but think the new way is unobtainable but, "X got grandfathered in and I beat them every match". The best USPSA could realistically do is copy chess and have an informal or formal "Super GM" title for folks that have made the super squad or won an area match, but do the folks who would get that title even care?

I think the main problem with the 2011s in CO topic is that the primary pressure is coming from industry participants who are pushing it not out of any love for the sport or competitors but because they want to sell $$$ guns that are less likely to need warranty work because they don't have to deal with major PF ammo beating. None of these custom/semi-custom shops seem to have any issues keeping their books full, so this change won't increase their business, it will just increase their profits by shifting orders from more time consuming and demanding builds to ones they can crank out faster and with fewer warranty issues. I highly doubt that letting 2011s into CO will attract new folks to the sport in a meaningful way, it will just pull Limited and Open shooters into CO. How many folks have optics ready 2011s and are choosing not to shoot USPSA because there isn't a natural home for that setup? It doesn't seem like a good value-add to USPSA unless the org is getting some meaningful, long-term sponsorship agreements from the manufacturers. I'm not sure if the addition of lights actually brought in more participants but it seems like a more reasonable proposition that it would attract more first timers and anecdotally I have seen many more first-time shooters running MRDS + light combos this year than in years past. Even if the actual retention rate of those new shooters isn't any higher it would still result in more total participants.

Mec-Gar is the OEM for the CZ75 mags and the Mec-Gar branded ones are cheaper than the CZ branded ones, which is probably the main reason why everyone standardized around them.

Did it still require taking the comp off to take the barrel out of the slide or did they modify it so it can come out the front? Any idea if the comp is steel or titanium? The weight balance of the Czechmate from the factory is its largest issue, IMO. Fixing the safety ergos would definitely make them more popular for a lot of people, though I don't personally have an issue with it.

You can't tease us like that! Is it basically just what Eric G has been shooting (slightly shorter comp, V2 popples in the compensator, double sided optic mount)?