George

The following formulas shoot well for me. --------------------------------------- Powder = AA7 (5.4gr) Primer = WWSP OAL = 1.115" on up to whatever fits mags Bullet Wt.: 147 gr. (Hard Cast LSWC .356") Muz. Vel.: 875 fps Power Factor = 128.625 Powder = AA7 (7.3gr) Primer = WWSP OAL = 1.095" Bullet Wt.: 124 gr. (Remington "Golden Sabre" JHP .355") Muz. Vel.: 1017 fps Power Factor = 126.108 Firearm: Glock 19 Caliber: 9x19 --------------------------------------- I have used almost the same data for 9x21 in a Glock 17L (6.5" bbl) and get the following: Powder = AA7 (5.4gr) Primer = WWSP OAL = 1.140" on up to whatever fits mags Bullet Wt.: 147 gr. (Hard Cast LSWC .356") Muz. Vel.: 915 fps Power Factor = 134.505 Powder = AA7 (7.5gr) Primer = WWSP OAL = 1.170" (no shijt) Bullet Wt.: 124 gr. (Remington "Golden Sabre" JHP .355") Muz. Vel.: 1090 fps Power Factor = 135.160 --------------------------------------- The 147 load shoots softer, but doesn't always lock'er back when empty. The 124 loads are a bit snappier, and do lock the slide back. Regards,

Whoo Hoo, I feel way better about continuing my usage of this supposedly noxious concoction. Just found this thread. I have been using AA7 since 1989 in 9mm in various PF's, exclusively in Sooper, and occasionally in .44 Mag. This is the first good press I have seen for good ole 7 since about 1990. I heard that same bbl wear BS from the smith who built my sooper in 90, but I ignored it because I liked it, and had just bought 32Lbs of #7. Thank you all, I have stood by #7 all along, and have taken un-ending scolding for it. Suffer no longer. I will forevermore proudly say that I Use AA7 ;~) Regards,

I have a workable 9x21 load going with AA7 using a .356" 147gr hard cast LSWC (they actually weigh in at around 149-150gr, but I calculate @ 147 anyway). OAL is 1.145", and the primers show no signs of flow whatsoever until the PF gets towards 175. I use WW Magnum SP primers because they ignite well with lightened striker springs needed for good Glock triggers, but are strong enough for the pressures of major (These loads may be different in your gun. This is a 17L, with a 6.5" Bar-Sto 9x21 bbl. G34's will not respond the same due to the 1.2" shorter barrel). These tests mostly used some vintage 1x CP +p brass I had from way back. I also tried a few of the 168PF loads in recent (not +p) 1x Starline brass, and found no differences in velocity, or any over-pressure indications. 7.1 - 7.2 grains AA7 gets 1140fps (167.5 PF) 7.5 gets 1200ish (176.4 PF) I worked up the 7.5 grain loading back in 1990, when I used the same 17L, and 9x21 bbl (without porting) to shoot major in Limited when that class first reared it's head. I lasted a month or two of practice, and 1.5 club matches due to not sorting all of the functioning problems out (spring stuff as it turned out). Now waiting for a new 550 toolhead (ordered at a really great price from our host, thanks Brian!) to dedicate for lighter bullets before I get back to the 124gr testing. I couldn't stand to re-adjust the dies again on the tool head set up for the LSWC, and I've decided that I'm gonna keep that load going for 130PF Glock match fodder. I will let ya all know how things progress here, and thanks for all of the input. Regards, Regards,

Just a thought here. I am not sure that this would be the problem, but seeing as you just got the Pact, and haven't had it working before, I thought this might be worth checking. Do the stop/start jacks have the correct cables/sensors plugged into them. The closest sensor to you goes into the start jack on the timer. I have never had any problems getting mine to read in sunlight before, as long as I use the shades provided. Distance from the muzzle has not been an issue either (except for the destructive muzzle blast effects from high powered rifle calibers). My MkIV has been a gem, so I thought I might mention what came to my mind in hopes that it would help. Regards,

I totally agree with Nolan about Sony being "It" when it comes to motion video. My company rents the bigger broadcast brothers of the Sony "weenie-cams" (sorry, buts thats just what we call the pro-sumer camcorders in my industry), and the Sony cameras give the best picture for the "buck" Period Canon's cam-corders are OK, but the best picture quality award (video pictures, that is) pretty much always goes to Sony in the pro-sumer arena. The feature sets vs. price are the best in Sony gear too. They pretty much own the broadcast/industrial video production market (yeah there are a few other broadcast camera options, but your gonna look at em on a Sony monitor and/or record them on a Sony deck, anyway! Oh yeah, they also own all of the tape, and encoding methods that we use too. Sounds a little like a software company we all know, and love, doesn't it?). So Sony is definitely the word here, and the TR-30 is a good choice. It will give you the ability to do things on your computer that were flat out unimaginable just a few years ago in the professional arena. If you are running on a Mac, and have FireWire I/O, you are "In Like Flint" for video editing with the iMovie application Apple provides (it's about the best software available to edit video for under $500 bucks, it's free). In Windows, ACD's Video Magik, and Windows Movie Maker 2.0 are starters, and here's a link to the rest of em' http://desktopvideo.about.com/cs/toppick1/...opvideditsw.htm If you want to do "desktop video", make sure the camera supports FireWire, and that your computer does also (Sony calls it "iLink" cause they think they own that too!). Get ahold of one of the aforementioned applications, and your pretty much "in business" here. But, one thing that the TR's are a "still" a little light on is the still resolution (Sorry Nolan, but I do disagree here, but very politely). 1360 x 1020 isn't enough to do much more than fill a 17" monitor, or print 4.53" x 3.4" @ 300ppi (300 Pixels Per Inch is pretty much rock bottom pixel pitch for "photo quality" print work on modern inkjets with photo paper. Yeah, I know it looks "OK", but have ya seen the real thing here? Inkjet Photo Printing is really impressive when done up right). 1360x1020 is only 1.2 MegaPixel, and ya really do want 3MP, or more when you do anything other than e-mail the images to your buddies, and relatives. In fact 2550x1700 is only 4.3MegaPixel, and 8.5" x 5.6" print size @ 300PPI. I am not saying that ya need 4.5MP, but if you are planning on replacing a 35mm film camera with a digital for your family photo album, you will need it (or more!). It still truly comes down to one for each type of shooting if you want each @ optimum. Multi-function devices always blow at one, or all of the intended uses. Regards,

Area 1 3Gun MGM 3Gun (If I can wiggle out of a work clash) 3Gun Nationals Lookin forward to lots of great opportunities for squandering some match points. (I must be used to going to Las Vegas, or sumthin') Hope to see some of you out there. Regards,

Hi All, I had a Kodak DC-265 for about 3 years, then the warranty ran out, and I got into a Nikon CoolPix 990 for under $600 ($549 plus tax at my local CompUSA). Now that Nikon has some even newer models out, the 990 is going real cheap. The Nikon 990 is a real good choice for a full featured, high resolution camera. For a real budget camera, any of the little Canons get the best marks in most reviews. My hands on experience is with the high end of the consumer digital cameras, and IMHO the Nikon 900 series rules the roost there. The Kodak was OK, but I had to send it back for repar/replacement twice (they always sent me a totally re-built camera with a different S/N). The picture quality was Great, but the user interface was klunky compared to the Nikon. I have a friend who got the Kodak DC-265 also, and he is on his second one right now (the Kodak warranty is as good as the Dillon warranty until it runs out). My wife who is a professional shutterbug (she does large format work), hated the Kodak, but thinks the Nikon is "normal" enough to actually use. Tip: No matter which camera you settle on, get two 128, or 256 MB storage cards right upfront. I don't bother with the smaller cards because I always shoot at the max resolution, and re-sample as needed later. You should also get a PCMCIA card adapter that allows you to read the card right into a laptop after doing a card-swap type reload at the camera. You can get a USB card reader if you don't have a laptop, and it will still work lot's better than the camera cable method. It basically mounts like an external disk, and ya drag', drop. You clear the card out after verifying images on the computer, and you are ready to swap again. It beats the heck out of the "incredibly slow" USB download apps that come bundled with camera's. I usually disregard most of the image handling software that comes with cameras. Once the JPEG's are pulled off the "Flash" card into a folder on my hard drive, I use PhotoShop, (or similar) for manipulation, and various shareware/freeware sorter/viewer software to browse, and catalog. Video cameras do a poor job of getting good stills (the resolution of the ccd sensor is too low for good photo printing quality), and still cameras don't do good motion video in return (the sensor of the still camera blurs motion, and suffers from slow frame rates). This is truly a one, or the other thing. A good digital video camera will cost over a $Grand. Unless my priority was making movies, I would get a still camera for everyday usage/utility. Hope this helps, Regards,

Skateboard tape, or grip tape, whatever ya wanna call it. I love it. Got a big chunk of it for $5.00 @ my local surf shop (I live near Mavericks, a big surfin' spot). I use a little wherever I think it helps, and it does help. All of the thicker options made the Glock feel wrong. Grip tape doesn't change your grip. Regards,

Hey casp, It's been a little over a year since I have shot my "souper". It's an early comp gun (built in 1990) with an "archaic" two port comp, but it does have a C-more on it. It doesn't shoot as flat as a more modern comp design, but it did shoot well enough with a 168pf, 124gr load. The dot bounced around in a figure 8, but was always sharp. The 17L with the J-point seems to bobble the dot a bit less (with the 150pf, 124gr load), but the dot does seem to blur a little during recoil. Maybe I am actually not seeing the dot during part of it's movement and calling that a blur, I don't know. I think I will need to do a lot more shooting with some higher pressure loadings to see anything concrete here. I was still using the 18lb Wolff spring. It is probable that a heavier spring will be needed by the time all is said, and done here. Will let you know what happens as I progress with this project. Regards,

I see no real problems getting 165-170 pf with my 17L using a 150gr LSWC that I already have 5-6k of. I have already shot this gun major (175pf) back in 89-90 with no porting. I used 8.3 AA#7 @ 1.150" OAL under the same 150gr LSWC and got 1190-1200 easily (it was a real handfull though, and I didn't shoot it major for very long). Yeah, caspian28r, headspace is indeed fine in my Bar-Sto. But you are right, I will have to check land contact vs OAL with the 124 gr JHP's before I start pushing them to the limit here. I am certain that that is not an issue with the 150gr LSWC'rs as they load with their shoulder flush with the case mouth @ 1.145" OAL. This makes sure that they jump quite a bit, but they are still very accurate in this barrel. With the ported barrel, I have decided to be cautious, and am going to work my way up very carefully here. I will probably stick with AA#7 for my 150gr load because I have a poop load of it. For the 124 gr load I want to work up, I think I will follow the P9 data, and go with the WW540 I can get from my buddy (8lbs), and switch to HS6 when I run out of it. OAL is going to be as long as it can be and still feed from the mags reliably. At the moment 1.140-1.145 still has good clearance in the mags. I figure I can load a tad longer and still get good functioning. Once again, another thing to test. Right now I am shooting 135pf loads with the 150gr LSWC, and 150+pf loads with the 124gr JHP. All of my 9x21 brass is loaded up with these recipes at the moment, so I am burning it off to function the gun, and recover the brass. 300+ rounds today, and functioning was flawless with the mags loaded to capacity (27). Pointability, and dot acquisition were outstanding. I have decided that the old iron front sight is definitely going to stay on because it really aids quick line-up on long shots. In fact, 50 yard US poppers are almost a hose fest with this gun. The 150pf loads actually started to get some gas action at the barrel ports, and dot rise was noticeably less than with the lower pf loads (I am going to have to get used to way the dot is visible during recoil because of the sight moving with the slide). Now to sort out a load at 167-168pf that gets me some gas action at the ports, and I think I've got myself a great platform for my pistol shooting style. All in all, I am very pleased with the gun. John Paul @ JP Enterprises has once again delivered me another very nice competition firearm. BTW. I just got my full house open class 11-87 back from him, and it rocks big time. Regards,

Hi Vince, My world also hinges on my cellular, and my porta-puter ;~) My big need (want) in a cellular would be IR, and an internal modem so I can connect without a dad-burned cable. George is my shooting "Nome De Guerre". I got it bestowed on me at match many moons ago. They couldn't believe that any name could start with "Geo", and not end with "rge". That's what the nametag said, and "by George" that's what I was gonna be :~) Regards,

I wanna Nokia 6000 series too!. But I just replaced my phone with a lower end Nokia without realizing what I could have gotten if I had only paid attention to the features while I was at the store. But now I have to wait a while on general principle. Maybe if I drop this one a few times, sorta by accident, I can create a need for a 6610i ;-) Now I gotta bad case of "Cellular envy" too! Great.

I have the Taylor Freelance +10 base pads on 5 Glock NFML 17 round 9mm mags and they are flawless. Great product, they worked perfect right out-a-da-box. No problems seating, or loading them. The only problems show up while trying to do speed reloads. These suckers weigh a heck-of-a-lot when they're full ;~) Regards,

Just realized that I have come down with a serious case of the "Gotta Have It's" for this device. With many thousands of MP3's on my computer, I can't afford not to have one ;~) MacWorld SliMP3 player review. SliMP3 Player Website Regards,

Thanks casp, I was thinking 540 was gonna be a contender. I had looked up Maas 9x21 loads, and assumed that the P9 data would suffice. I think I will take my friend up on his offer of trading the N350 I have for his big can of WW540. I will report back once I settle on a spring/load combo, and get some rounds through this baby. The jury is still out on keeping the iron front sight. So far, it seems to only be a plus, and doesn't get in the way when I don't want to pay attention to it. Regards,

Howdy All, Just got around to getting an image posted of the on-rifle ammo holder I worked up. It is an Uncle Mikes hunting ammo belt pouch that I turned inside out, and removed the belt loops from. It just wraps around the rifle in fromt of the receiver, and holds 5 on either side of rifle. I also use another one wrapped around my weak forearm/wrist to make an additional 10 rounds available in quick reach. I still believe that all ammo loaded after the initial 5 rounds that you start with, ought to have to be loaded into the rifle, or loading device by hand. This alone would completely level the equipment field in Open & Standard. JMHO. Regards,

My open 17L in it's new trim. I had been shooting it iron-sight/minor/open/un-comped many, many moons ago. Decided to turn it into a more modern plastic, fantastic blaster recently, and just got it back the other day. J-Point melted in, and left old front sight on (it actually seems to aid in indexing, and is an in-place backup if dot dies, just center it up). JP trigger (3.5lb). JP magwell. 4 ports in a Bar-Sto 6" 9x21 bbl. Wolff 18-20-22 lb springs (best combo still TBD). Taylor Freelance +10 base pads on original Glock NFML 17 rnd mags (they actually fit 28, and run 100%). Working with 124gr JHP's (Remington Golden Saber), & Starline 9x21 brass. Tried AA#7 @ up to 8.0gr and I am getting 1250-1270ish (1 very short range session so far). Shoots easy, dot stays centered. I need to shoot it a lot more now. Looking for some load data before I just start stuffing in a bunch more #7. I have a couple lbs of N350 powder (not sure if it is really suitable), and lots, and lots of AA#7 (yeah, I know it eats barrels), but I am open to any, and all suggestions. Regards,

No question in my mind. Get the Pact chrono/timer system, and make sure you get it from our host, Brian. Regards,

I get my new brass from various online sources. I get 100% processed, ready to load 1x brass from Scharch Mfg. The new stuff is carefully processed, and re-used for the life of the brass. The 1x is loaded as is, and discarded at matches, or after a couple of practice firings. Regards.

Ah, Java. Kinda like coffee, "one cup is good, two cups is great, three cups is even better" JavaScript really is kinda like an open class blaster in many ways.

I was listening to George W. ask for the supplemental the other morning on my car radio when I started getting a feeling that the delivery, pacing, and content of the speech had a real familiar ring to it. Then it hit me: Chauncey Gardiner, Being There! (some older comparisons) "As long as the roots are not severed, all is well, and all will be well in the Garden". "You know, where I'm from, when winter comes, we quit mowing the grass". "That is correct. There will be growth in the spring." "I know the human being and fish can coexist peacefully". Make of it what you will. Regards,

I actually like working with HTML as text. I think hand coding in a text editor is a real gas, heck it might even be fun to put a site together in "edlin" someday ;~) Yeah Right! I create all of my forum posts, and tweak scripts, and such in Apples "TextEdit" app (same as "NotePad", and "SimpleText"), but when it comes to grinding out a site, site layout apps win hands down, especially if you have prepared templates to start from. I think todays 4th, & 5th generation site layout/management apps do an incredible job of handling big HTML tables with hundreds of image slices, and dozens of rollovers per page, on a multitude of pages. I know the code output from site layout apps isn't as tidy, and proper as you might want, but that's where hand tweaking can be used if you really feel the need to hammer your code into any specific shape. I mostly sign off when sites look, and run clean on the latest versions of the big 3 browsers, in the big 3 OS's. CSS is your best friend here. Modern browsers (4th gen, or later) are damned forgiving nowadays, and it makes little difference anymore if every single one of the tiny code niceties are exactly perfect. I may sound cavalier, but I do not care about all 9 of the folks still using Netscape 2, or the one soul still cruising "text only" in Mosaic 0.1, nor am I at all worried about both iCab Beta users. Assemble it in your layout app, (clean & strip it first in BBedit, or such if you feel you absolutely must tidy up the code), upload it, and manage it from the layout app, and you have a pretty easy way of keeping a grip on bulky sites that need regular updating. The graphical interface option in modern layout apps is way faster when assembling pages where look, and feel is almost entirely determined by external input (read client whims, and moods here). In fact, graphical layout modes are the best way to deal with "over the shoulder input" situations. I do not always get to settle for how the code wants to be. The client may want a layout/look that needs a non code-centered approach. That's where today's website layout software really shines. These apps (and their interlocking graphics handling counterparts) may cost hundreds of dolllars (at the minimum each), but they are worth every cent times 10 if you sling a lot of web pages on a regular basis. In the client driven world, it typically doesn't have to be perfect, it just has to look real, real good (on the big Kahuna's favorite browser) by a very specific date. Regards,

Hi Eric, If you have any old PageMill site folders, GoLive will import, and update them. I hand-coded the first site I did for my company back in 95, found PageMill in 98, bought into the Adobe Holy Trinity of PhotoShop/ImageReady/GoLive in 2001, and have never looked back. I manage 5 sites right now, three I built via the Holy Trinity, and two I sucked into GoLive after being handed the management task by clients of mine. GoLive makes my life easier than any other option I have found. Heck, I use it as my main FTP client too. GoLive V6.0 is the most stable version since 4.0. Move through 5 ASAP, if that's where you are. Any site that is up, and running on the web, or on any server, at any URL, can be sucked into GoLive via an HTML, or FTP import. Works great if you need to rescue a site from another programs clutches. Regards,

IMHO, if you are gonna use a layout/site management app, then GoLive is the best, with Dreamweaver right behind. Netobjects Fusion is also OK if you are running Windows (98-2000). I would rather use PageMill (old adobe app) than FrontPage. Heck, Word outputs more consistent HTML than FrontPage!. Of course, we all know that hand-coding, and stripping the text clean in BBedit (or other text manipulation app) is the mondo bad-ass way to do it ;~) Eric, If you have a full version of PhotoShop 5.5, or later, then try building the main image/page layout in PS, slicing, tabling, and creating the rollovers in ImageReady (comes with PS 5.5, and later), then dropping the resultant folder of code, and images on GoLive. Voila, you have a site ready to add the HTML text, and upload. Adobe has done some wonderful things with interlocking apps. It isn't 1997 anymore, and automatic web design really works when you add the name Adobe. Regards,

INTJ 11 44 33 33 Sheesh, we are the major minority.