gnappi

Well, my mag spacers came in today, all six that I ordered Funny, the back of the spacer is cut away as if they were made to fit a frame with a lanyard. I feels a bit odd, but not as bad as a full size mag in the compact frame does. So kudos again to EAA, I ordered 9mm mags from them last year and that order came in without a hitch. Maybe they are turning a corner?

It is for the IPSC shooters in Italy on the design committee. Its biggest faults are when the hammer is down, the hammer is BURIED in the rear sight. The more I decocked it practicing the draw, the more annoying it became. The trigger is serrated (I haven't seen one in 30+ years) and the slide and frame serrations are cut REALLY sharp. If you drop the slide with your right thumb, it's not gonna happen, you pretty much have to re-learn to drop the slide with the left thumb. Tanfo and CZ owners likely already do this so it's no biggie for them. Lastly, mine went back to Beretta last month because the slide initially was a bear to get off, after a couple of boxes of ammo I couldn't put it back on. I had to use a soft rubber mallet to get it on. That was the final straw. I await its return. There's LOTS of positive things to say about it, but then again even a broken clock is right two times a day but it doesn't do it for me overall. Any of my Tanfos or CZ are IMO just better thought out.

Me too... I had the buckazoids stashed for one and a local dealer who I had asked to let me know if a Beretta 92 X performance came in did just that.. Being a long time Beretta aficionado I jumped on the Beretta. I have been underwhelmed with it... And I feel I should have waited for the DWX.

Well said.

I looked at a .38 super "Match" yesterday which was a large frame, as is the Gold team. I do not think you'll have an issue there unless you stumble on an older small frame upper.

+1. Unfortunately as of now they only have the Defiant / Limited pro models, but theose are available in models with small frames which fit some hands better than the large frame models AND some WITHOUT a rail.

I currently have three Tanfos, all large frame, and two spare complete uppers. I may be incorrect, but I'm thinking that beside the LARGE/SMALL frame compatibility issue the upper fitment to frame depends on the frame (DA/SA or SAO) the original upper came from. I have a "Stock" .40 upper fits my DA/SA compact 10mm frame but not my "Match" SAO frames, not even close. EAA has a serial number check that you can use when ordering a slide conversion. PS, welcome back to the Tanfo fold, their rep in the U.S is less than wonderful but in my hands I much prefer my Witness pistols to my CZ SP-01

I have seen bits and pieces on how to identify Witness small / large frames and I genned up this to have it all in one place. There are may be other subtle differences but these positively will identify them. Note, measurements have some bit of wiggle based on my vernier and Tanfo tolerances but not so wide as to have one measurement get even close to the other.

I collect load data and have for dozens of years. Considering that the powder makers are VERY diligent about maintaining consistent burn rates over lot numbers, I can only assume that attorneys have influenced the publication of many of the more anemic loads published nowadays. IMO, collecting hard copy load data is a GREAT way of finding safe workable loads in your gun for your location.

I've been following a few items on the EAA site, in particular the full size mag spacers and they have been "Out Of Stock" since well, forever. Having some free forced COVID downtime I called and they have a few dozen in stock... their part guys don't have the time to update the site. REALLY? No wonder CZ is and has been kicking their arses, in my experience CZ has no such troubles. So, if you have been checking their site for parts it pays to call, and while you're at it maybe crab about their crappy site

Do tell PM me if you're interested in selling

I just stumbled on this thread, GR8 info, thanks! I have two Tanfos, an early compact 10 and an SAO Match and plan on a stock very soon.

I'm not a big guy, and what was said by Nujudge... "How hard it is to conceal depends largely on your body type, where you carry and what clothes you wear" is spot on. I have full size and compact Beretta and carry my single stack S&W. I gladly give up a few rounds for more comfort and ability to conceal it easier with street clothes. .

I didn't think so, I took it as a statement to rebuild a stock gun as opposed to building a full out racer.

Maybe a Vertec "G" would sell, maybe. Considering from the USPSA site... "Our over 31,000 active members and over 440 affiliated clubs makes USPSA the largest practical shooting organization in the United States" I think they may have missed some customers here?

As was said in other threads in the U.S there are few enough IPSC matches to be of concern. I could give a crap less whether peeps buy them, as a matter of fact, if they're discontinued as most "float a balloon" designs Beretta comes out with have been, I have (when I get it back) mine

I quoted: "92XPerf is now USPSA Production legal. Have to take off one or reduce the safeties to fit the box. " And USPSA DOES, unless my 2020 rule book is incorrect and I said "competitors" nothing about IPSC

I was surprised to hear that Beretta didn't submit or ask for inclusion to the production list, good to hear they solved that one... but the safety having to be removed is just stupid... since they supposedly had them evaluated by competitors they never put it in the size restriction box? I wonder who's steering the boat in Italy Mine is still at BUSA, with the slide on/off problem I don't expect it back for another couple of months.

I'm a natural lefty, right eyed dominant, and not a large fellow. When I was around 10 (~1961) my dad (a serious country boy and outdoors man) once said: "Son C'mon we need to talk about your handicap" Well, I was in absolutely top physical condition and this word "handicap" stunned me. We sat and my dad went on to say: "Look, you're not a big guy (ultimately up to 5'4") and you're left handed and in a man's world of sports (very little LH gear was made back then) your're screwed. What I want to impress on you is these are two handicaps in sports. So, as far as that goes, you can either learn to use the tools of a larger right handed man or... stay at home with your mother and sister while I go hunting, to target practice, golf, etc." So, I learned to golf, play guitar (I STILL call it lefty thought right handed players call it right handed) and shoot right handed. In the 80's in came some severe tennis elbow on my right arm, and I had to buy left handed holsters to practice and shoot matches. Since my left arm and hand were always "stronger" I had little issues shooting with my "weak" hand... the left. Initially my one minor obstacle was my right eye dominance which turned out to solve itself with practice drawing at home. I fitted my 1911's with ambidextrous safeties and wound up doing fairly well till my right arm healed. Then in the 90's tennis elbow struck again and once more I was forced to shoot (and carry) with my weak hand / arm. Luckily most other moderately serious injuries were to my left hand which is always used for intricate work like car repairs so my right hand has had a skate on injuries. Bad for guitar playing but good for shooting Overall the tennis elbow episodes forced me to train and become nearly as proficient with my left arm as my right, and even though it was literally a pain in some ways it was a blessing. Has anyone else an injury to their dominant arm / hand which compelled them to re-train using their weaker arm / hand?

I read them both and USPSA and IPSC are similarly ambiguous Neither make note of caliber / ammo differences or barrel length changes... only that OFM supplied parts are allowed. Though in the IPSC clause "specific model" comment I read to "Witness" not compact or stock sub models. I take the vague description of authorized modifications as a green light in my particular case. I guess whether it was IPSC or USPSA having a screen shot of both lines in the current rules would possibly identify the authorizing rules clause to settle a dispute? Whether it's favorably or not ultimately the Range Master would have to make the call.

Thx for the reply, both / either but I referenced the IPSC rulebook if that helps.

Production division states: "Original parts and components offered by the OFM as standard equipment, or as an option, for a specific model handgun on the IPSC approved handgun list are permitted, subject to the following" But does not specify sub model or changes on firearm size / geometry. For example my large frame DA/SA Witness "compact" (10mm, 3.5" bbl) also has a 4.5" .40 (Conversion kit available on the EAA website as an option) Witness "stock" slide AND an OEM ambi safety with 15 round EAA supplied mags as opposed to the short 10 round compact frame mags. Is this combination legal in production division?

This morning I received a complete Witness "Stock" 4 1/2" slide for my early 2000 Witness 10mm compact and the slide fit perfectly. Rather than starting another thread, one question I have... Are the Witness 9mm mags usable (reliably) with .40 ammo? I have a pot load of EAA 9mm mags and I'd rather not dump wads of cash into .40 mags unless there were reliability issues using 9mm mags for .40. At some point soon I'll settle this at the range but experiences from others who may have a much larger round count than I'd be able to do in a day will be useful.

Seems to be an emerging issue with the XP, several on a Beretta site are reporting similar problems. Since my X'perf only has ~500 rounds through it I haven't had it happen, OTOH, not one of my other 92/96's have ever had fte problems.

I'm looking for a .40 top end that fits my full size 9mm Witness "Match" and I located a complete Witness .40 slide that just indicates it's from a PF Witness. I take it as Polymer Full size? Does anyone know if the slide on the PF is compatible with a Full size steel frame?