regor

I'll have to pick up a spare sear and give it a try. Sounds like a worthwhile investment. Unfortunately I'll be stuck with stones/sandpaper.

Surprised no one has mentioned this yet but anyone's load is going to completely depend on what OP is shooting it out of. Quoting the above as an example compared to my load, which is 3.1 grains of Unique over a 147 MBC "SubSonic-Grooveless " loaded to 1.11" and makes 129 PF out of my SP-01 tactical suppressor ready (5.2" barrel). I didn't even test up to 3.9gr in my development, the first I tried was 3.5gr because that was the minimum load listed in the Lyman cast book and that was over 140PF. RePete's load would be complete overkill in my gun, mine might not even make PF in his. As others have already said, OP really just needs to (A) read a reloading manual and (B) run loads over a chronograph. And the reality is if they are only competing at the local level they are probably never going to get chrono'd anyway.

This thread will give you a good idea of the Urban Grey's finish durability from very heavy use. I've run five matches with mine and have about 2-2.5k rounds through mine and it is just starting to show a tiny bit of holster wear on the edges of the rail, and those parts have taken off a little bit of kydex from the inside of the holster as well. No signs on the trigger guard or the dust cover, but obviously only around 10% of the live fire use as the one above. FWIW I have a RHT holster with the retention adjustment knobs, so it's very easy for me to loosen the holster during dry fire or when I go to L&MR, which definitely helps to cut down on some wear. Not sure if the other guy is running a holster that is tighter/more prone to wear or if that's just what I should expect.

Looks like IPSC only limits the barrel length of the pistol (127mm = 5" max), not the overall dimensions like USPSA. The FNX45T's barrel is 5.3", so it's out for both (it won't fit in the USPSA box anyways, at least with the stock baseplates). The 509T is 4.5", so assuming they submit it for review it should be legal, same for the X-Carry.

FNS 9 is an example of one that can be purchased in both a manual safety and no manual safety version. It also has a particularly small safety (though it is ambi), so it would be easy for an RO to miss, especially if they haven't seen the MS version since it is less common.

I agree that #1 is the absolute most simple way to run it, but I think it would be challenged as unsafe since you would have folks running 1.5# trigger race guns holstering with no safety on. That can absolutely be done safely, but it's opening the door wide open for a ND when someone catches the trigger on something. I addressed #2 in my initial comment as "safest possible condition". It is simple from the shooter's side, but more complex from an enforcement/rules side. An SP-01, SP-01 converted to SAO, and an SP-01 Tactical all have different safest possible conditions even though they look very similar from the outside. Throw in the 75 Omega series for good measure since it has a convertible decocker/safety just to create additional confusion. The consequence of that change is every RO needs to be much more familiar with all possible configurations of any pistol in order to ensure that the rules are consistently applied.

Springer Precision makes 140mm basepads https://shop.springerprecision.com/Springer-Precision-CZ75-EZ-140mm-base-pads-Mecgar-17-round-mag-SP0318.htm, not sure if anyone makes 170mm. I haven't seen them. You'll be running a round count deficit either way though since the mags are skinnier. Something to think about: The suppressor ready SP01 is a decocker model which means you're going to have to run it decocked from the start. So the better option might be to get a regular safety SP01 and add a threaded barrel. CGW and CZ Custom both have them for $185 and the regular SP01 MSRP is around $40 lower (not sure how it actually works out at retail), so it's up to you whether you think it's worth a net cost of $150 to not have a heavy DA first shot Another thing I would look into is how well the SP01 will handle 9 Major loads. I've seen people talk about how CZ redesigned the barrel for the Czechmate because the "peanut" was breaking I would assume a SP01 would run into this same issue.

Yes, I agree with that interpretation of the current rules, which is why I said it would be simpler to just get rid of the language related to "selective action" and just lump DAO and DA/SA together. Ready condition for both = hammer down/decocked. That's how it currently is and the new rule doesn't change that. The proposed rule doesn't require striker fired guns to have an external safety or any internal safeties, only that it be engaged if it does have one. The P320 is available in versions without a manual safety and I see plenty of people running them. If a handgun currently passes 5.1.4, that the "trigger mechanism must, at all times, function safely", and 5.1.6 that all handguns must be "serviceable and safe", then it will still pass after these revisions. If it fails 5.1.4 with no manual safety then I don't see how it will pass by just adding one, since at some point the safety will be off and therefore it will not be safe "at all times". Why should a model with a safety by treated to a different set of rules than the same pistol with a manual safety added but otherwise identical internals? It just adds confusion. Changes need to be justified. You can't just say, "the rulebook is already complicated and messy so it's fine to make it even more complicated". What does this rule actually address?

The proposed rules for 2019 include a change (8.1.2.4) that defines the safe condition for striker fired pistols as, "chamber loaded, handgun cocked, external safety engaged if present". I saw a discussion about this pop up on reddit.com/r/competitionshooting and thought I'd bring it here since this is a much more active community. What are people's thoughts on this? My thoughts: The rule seems inconsistent in its current form but the proposed change just makes it even more inconsistent. At present it is inconsistent, especially in Production where you could have a striker fired pistol with an ultra light trigger that is legal yet the folks running running DA/SA have to start de-cocked and deal with a heavy first shot. Doesn't seem fair to the folks running DA/SA, but I suppose the perks of the DA/SA is access to more all-steel pistol, so at least you get something in return? The proposed change doesn't fix the above inconsistency since many striker fired pistols have no external safety and creates a further inconsistency within the set of striker fired pistols. This adds additional complexity for ROs to track and opens up a subset of striker fired pistol users to a DQ-able offense that the rest aren't subject to, which seems especially unfair since the new "unsafe" condition is the same as the "safe" condition for striker fired pistols with no safety. It's far from a perfect adjustment, and if it passes it brings up the question of why DA/SA pistols with a safety shouldn't be required to be de-cocked *and* have the safety on to bring all pistols to a consistent standard of "safest possible condition". IMO that's the most consistent ruling short of saying "all pistols must be DA or have a safety", but it suffers the same complexity issues as the above. The simplest thing to do is seems to be removing references to "selective action" firearms from the rule book since they are a subset of DA pistols and add in striker fired pistols, then keep the ready condition consistent for each category. Striker is carried as the current rules. Anything with the ability to function in double action has to start hammer down. It still leaves the inconsistency between DA/SA and striker fired pistols, but and it leaves only 3 different ready conditions to keep track of as opposed to the current 4 and the proposed 5. The pistols I can think of that would be harmed of that would be ones like the Shadow 2, which are designed with production in mind but could be run cocked with safety in Limited minor, but that's already a handicap, so even though some people would still probably complain, it seems like the least reasonable to complain about.

Mine felt really tight fit as well; I was used to being able to press the slide release in with just a my thumb. I'm not sure if the slide stop pins are a tighter fit or if it's just the lack of surface area to push on that makes it feel like a tighter fit. It taps in fine in any case.

I just had a match this past weekend with a shoot house. There was one hidden target that could only be seen from a very specific corner that you would otherwise stay out of to make the transition to the last two targets easier. I walked the stage probably 5 times, carefully counting for reloads (Production), and I don't think I noticed that target a single time. Had I been counting targets I would have noticed I was missing one. The toughest part is that I may well have walked away with a stage win on that stage had I shot that target. Lesson learned, count the targets for long stages or stages with hard cover.

I did the decocker sear cage for the SP-01 Tactical, so I'm not scared of the safety models . I don't see any major reason to disassemble it since purchasing it because I'm not planning on any major parts changes; with the SP-01 I was installing the CGW pro decocker kit so it all had to come apart. I guess the sear cage bit was totally unnecessary in the video then; it's not really a "tuning" item if it comes installed, so I figured it had to be an add-on since it was mentioned. Thanks for clarifying though!

I haven't taken the sear cage out of mine. The video gave me the impression that the springs do not ship with the pistol but they can be added as an improvement, I supposed I am mistaken? When I set mine I followed the instructions that came with my CGW reach reduction kit for my SP-01 Tactical, which includes backing them out a little once you find the edge, I agree the way he did it in the video was aggressive. When I adjusted both my TSO and SP-01 I found that point where it just barely breaks to be a very uncomfortable trigger since you feel the trigger feels like it has stopped but you still have a tiny amount of squeeze left before it actually breaks, which feels very unnatural. A quarter to half turn out fixes that.

So If I'm reading this correctly, that was not a legal target, but if there had been a fault line at the base of the wall it would have been since it would then be impossible to use this approach. What's supposed to happen at a match if there are illegal targets?

I came across this video about trigger tuning that can be done with the TS series pistols. I've done the set screw adjustments for over travel and reset for my TSO .40 (the previous owner never did this, which I was quite surprised by), but I was wondering if anyone has tried out the ejector springs [starts around 15:10] or the sear/trigger bar tuning [18:00] and can comment on what difference it has made. The ejector springs seem simple enough, but the sear/trigger tuning is confusing to me and seems like it would be easy to mess up and brick a part, so I'm not sure I'd risk trying it unless there is a noticeable positive difference

Funny, I just saw a different video day or two ago of a Production GM shooting the same COF without that trick. Thought it looked familiar. https://youtu.be/azWxYzxa8_E?t=33 In the "gaming" clip, is there a rule that required him to activate the pad, or was that just to be cheeky?

Input from a new guy: I have my fourth match upcoming this weekend. I find there is a pretty big difference between the skills needed to perform well on classifiers vs standard stages. Based on overall match finish I am averaging in the 50% range (2/3 matches had at least one Open GM), and in Production my very first match was a 50% finish (with a M class shooter on top), and my other two were both 80%+ (one with an M class shooter). My classifiers tell a totally different story. My three matches were 0%, 35%, and 10% Production. I've basically guaranteed my first classification will be a D unless my next two average over 57.5% Maybe I've just been unlucky with the classifiers I got, but they seem to test completely different aspects of shooting that I have never practiced before and never knew I was supposed to practice. Distance, strong/weak hand only, and engagement of head only targets with no-shoots at medium distance, all under time pressure. My classification is entirely a representation of my marksmanship fundamentals and corner-case shooting skills, whereas my match performance also reflects efficient stage planning, ability to execute said plan, ability to move well. You never shoot strong hand or weak hand only in a non-classifier. If there are distance targets it is rarely the entire course of fire. Same with head only targets, so even if you are not good with those skills, they will probably not tank your match and rarely will they even tank a single stage. You don't need rock-solid fundamentals to do decently in a match as long as you just run efficient stages and having no misses/no-shoots. You do need solid fundamentals plus skills that must be deliberately worked on (like strong hand/weak hand only) to do well in classifiers. It takes a lot of time and conscientious practice to improve those fundamentals, as well as confronting your weakness and working on them, which is not something many people are willing to commit to. It takes very little effort to just show up to your local club match once a month and have fun and it is very easy to brush off poor classifier results by saying "who cares how well I shoot weak hand only at 15 yards".

Ammoseek shows SGAmmo as the cheapest right now, but they charge shipping so it looks like Target Sport USA will be your cheapest bet at 24cpr for a case of 1k.

Thanks everyone! I'll pick up some .40 projectiles with my next batch of 9mm and get to load development.

Thanks. Sounds like it's just personal preference and not too common. I just carefully load all of mine to 10 then if the stage is a loaded start I add an extra to one mag and put it in my front pocket for load and make ready.

In reading through various threads here I've noticed a number of mentions of people talking about using 10 round magazines in Production, most recently in this Match Screw-ups thread, but I also recall one about someone at 2018 Nationals shooting Limited nationals with their Production gear. My question is, what incentive is there for using 10 round magazines? The only one I can think of is the issue mentioned in the Match Screw-up thread about getting bumped to Open for overloading. I can see why you would want to avoid that, but from a training perspective it seems far more convenient to use standard capacity for drills (e.g. I can shoot the Bill drill three times on a single magazine when fully loaded vs. having to use three separate ten rounders or constantly be topping off). You can't just stuff weight into the extra room because the weight is determined with an empty magazine loaded in the pistol, so no gain there either. Am I missing anything?

Hi all, Planning on eventually making the move over from Production to Limited Major with a CZ TSO .40 S&W. I currently have a whole heap of Unique that I am using in my 9mm minor loads and would ideally like to use that for both so I can work up a load and make the switch sooner rather than wait until I am close to through with that batch of powder (which will take quite a while with 9mm minor loads) before making the switch. I took a look at my Lyman cast bullet handbook and it seems like major is achievable with Unique and without going above max. Does anyone have any experience with it making major? I don't see unique mentioned often on the .40/10mm forum, is there a particular reason why?

@jripperobviously you were present so you know if this was a genuine safety issue or not, but in either case that says to me that this guy didn't read the USPSA rule book before showing up to compete. There are people who carry 1911s cocked and safety off; the rule book makes it quite clear what the "safe" conditions are for each type of handgun/division and when it has to be in that condition. I think it's unreasonable to expect every new competitor to memorize the rule book start to finish, but it's disappointing to see new shooters who have not read it at all, especially the basic safety requirements. It's understandable if you don't know how to score a shot that breaks a perforation, if your magazines are under 140mm, or whether standing on the fault line is in or out; that stuff is learned as you go. But every competitor should know the general safety rules as well as those specific for the division they are planning to shoot (for example, a competitor shooting a Shadow 2 in Production has a different "safe condition" than a competitor shooting the same in Limited). I'm fairly new to the sport but I have shot alongside at least one other new shooter in every match I have shot so far; it's very clear when they have read the rule book (slow draw, extra care in pointing down range when reloading, etc.) versus when they haven't (didn't know there were different divisions, one-handed/nearly blind shooting through a port at an angled target, transitioning between positions with the muzzle up like a TV detective [didn't break the 180 doing so, but came very close]). New shooters are required to do a safety check before their first match in my region, which mostly consists of a rule/safety overview and a verification that you can safely draw/holster, but I don't recall ever being asked if I had read the rule book, which IMO should be a do-not-pass go requirement. Reading the book is not going to completely eliminate mistakes, but it's hard to believe that anyone who has NOT read the book takes safety seriously.

Hi all, I'm hoping someone here can help me with a disassembly issue I am having. I recently picked up a Franchi Affinity with the intention of opening up the loading port a bit and adding an extended magazine tube to use it in 3gun, but I've run into an issue with getting the factory bolt release/carrier latch out of the frame. I've punched the roll pin out and removed the spring, but the bolt release is too large to fit through the hole in the receiver and it doesn't seem to be screwed in or want to be pulled out. It looks like the older versions of this shotgun did not have this enlarged bolt release and would just slide right out once the roll pin was removed. Does anyone know how to get it out with the newer version? Am I just going to need to do the dremel work with it still in? Thanks

I'm definitely not blaming it all on the ammo. I am by no means a great shot. If I had ammo that I knew the exact POI on I still would probably not have gotten all As. There are definitely other factors that I need to work on that would have made this mostly irrelevant, but the point is that I willingly introduced an unknown variable that is easily fixable (whereas consistent sight picture, better trigger pull, etc. all take a ton of additional training). The point of the match screw-ups forum is to share mistakes that others can learn from, right? The point here is make sure you know all the variables you can so you only have to focus on applying the fundamentals. Even with my 147s I'm not positive if they hit at the top of the post or behind the dot, and that alone could cause A hits to turn into C hits, and this was a stage that really required knowing where your rounds go. Just sharing my experience.