CodeSlinger

I'm happy with the Mobius. Attached to the UNDERSIDE of my hat brim with adhesive-backed Velcro tabs. Pros: Cheap Weighs nothing Great frame rate & resolution I can see the blinking red light when it's recording so I KNOW it's on (If this is distracting, the light can be disabled in the settings) Mounted directly over my dominant eye, when everything goes right I can just about see my actual sight picture. Cons: Alignment - With a Go Pro, you can use your phone to see what the camera sees, so it's much easier to get it aimed correctly, where you just have to guess at the alignment of the Mobius. I have video of several matches where all the action is in the top left corner of the frame... Battery life - Less than an hour on a full charge. There are set-ups for external batteries to extend this, but I haven't bothered. I just turn it on before every LAMR, and off after scoring and there's plenty of life for that. Indoor color. For indoor/poorly lit matches, the auto white balance can be a liiittle hit or miss compared to my Go Pro, but this can mostly be corrected with the right post-processing software

Not as much as I expected. Krytos specs 6.4oz for the 19 slide, 6.7oz for the 17. I could lose .3oz from my slide just by cleaning it...

Started on a Pro 1000, tried a friend's 650, ended up with four Pro 1000s. I love em. 9mms load just fine for me in one pass, not sure what you mean there? THIS. Case feeder is $240 motor driven for the Dillon, with multiple $40 caliber conversions... or a $12 plastic tray with no moving parts from Lee, and it works just as well for me. People pay hundreds of dollars extra to get reliable vibrating primer tube fillers (PAL) just to avoid paying $350 for the Dillon one... and I stick a flip tray in my press and get back to loading. Call me tight, but the cost of the Dillons just offends me, especially if you're loading multiple calibers. For less than the cost of a 650 caliber conversion (Dies + Conversion kit + Quick Change), I can have another entire dedicated Pro 1000 shipped to my door. I'm certainly not a fan boy, the Dillons are fine machines and I'm glad the people that like them are happy. But the only reason I've found so far that would cause me to move on from a Pro 1000 is if I decide I need a bullet feeder.

Remember, shooting four guns is a requirement. Owning four guns is not. Go to a shoot, talk to people. You'll find many Cowboy shooters have backup guns they'd be tickled to let you borrow for a few shoots if you can't afford 4 guns at once. Or start shooting with a buddy. You buy two pistols and he buys two long guns and you share. There's always a way.

The theory is that with a L-M-R order, your gun/hands are covering the Middle target. You have to shoot the left target, move your gun/hands out of the way, then acquire the middle target with your eyes, then put the sights on the target. With M-L-R (or M-R-L, same-same) you can always see the remaining targets in your peripheral vision. The tradeoff is between a longer L-R transition and a slower L-M visual acquisition. Which works best for you depends entirely on which of these is slower for you. Which brings us back to the OP, who had the answer all along:

I don't think this explanation is quite correct. Your finger letting the trigger come forward does NOT reset the sear. It resets the disconnector. If the sear/hammer is disengaged when the slide goes forward, your hammer will follow (ok, ok, granted, that won't beat up your sear nose at all! ). The sear gets reset as soon as the slide moving back pushes the disconnector down. Regardless of whether you're holding the trigger back or not, and regardless of whether you're chambering another round, the hammer will always engage the sear when the slide closes...if it doesn't, the hammer follows. Now here's the interesting part: The whole time the slide is farther out of battery than the length of your disconnector groove, the trigger *can't* affect the sear (because the slide is holding the disconnector down). The slide has to close, and the disconnector has to raise back up into the groove, before the trigger can affect the sear. In order for your "trigger bounce" theory to be correct, the disconnector would have to pop back up into its groove, reconnecting the trigger to the sear, before the slide slams back into battery. [CONJECTURE] Given the very fast speed of a closing slide, the very short length of the disconnector groove, and the relatively weak disconnector spring, I'd be shocked if that were possible. Let me restate that if it wasn't clear: I'm not saying that parts don't bounce, they do. I'm saying I seriously doubt that it's possible for the disconnector to pop up and get between the trigger and sear in the short amount of time between when the diconnector groove reappears over the disconnector and when the slide slams home. [/CONJECTURE] That's a short distance for a fast-moving slide to move, at an already high speed. The disconnector, remember, has to accelerate from a standstill after the groove reappears above it. If that's true, if the disconnector can't pop up there fast enough, then you have to agree that there's no difference between shooting a slide-stop-disabled gun empty and dropping a slide from slidelock on an empty chamber. In both cases, the position of the disconnector makes the position (or movement) of the trigger irrelevant. Thoughts? (other than the fact that I need to practice being less verbose... )

I definitely have grip issues...I keep spilling my water low and to the left. Heading off now to do some dry-filling practice... you know, with an empty bottle...

LOL is that a Happy Birthday Hickey???

Howdy! New to the site, pretty new to competitive shooting, trying to learn as much as possible...(always). So far one of the biggest things I've learned is Efficiency...trying to get the most results out of any effort expended. In that vein, I'll use my first post as a stab at winning a bookful of wisdom! First instinct: It is Zen! At that moment, the pupil was enlightened. Heh...Worth a shot. Sticking with the Zen theme, we have been asked to describe the Truth of the image. Remember the water vase. Isan recognized that the Truth of a water jug is dependant on it's position... i.e., it can't be defined as a "container of water" if it's on its side. He demonstrated that by tipping over the vase. He then realized that an object is only "defined" within the frame of reference of its observer, and demonstrated this by removing the observer...leaving the room. So I applied that lesson to this month's challenge. I realized that the image is only a temporary configuration of electrons located in a volatile RAM chip, displayed by the video card and interpreted by my eyes. So I turned off the computer and took a walk. Of course, at that point, I couldn't post about it here. Rats. Too Zen for my own good. That line of logic was still useful though. It reminds me to question all assumptions, and concentrate only on Knowledge. What do I Know about this image? Minimalist/Literalist answer: It is a .jpg! True, but lame. What else do I Know? I Know it has been Photoshop-enhanced, so some non-zero percentage of the image is "false", or not representative of the image's "Truth". But what percentage of the image is false? I am a software engineer, so I immediately test the logical extremes, the "special cases." All I know is that the lower limit is > 0, so there is no hard lower limit to test. The upper limit, however, is a hard 100%. Could it be that 100% of the mystery image is Photoshop fabricated? Sure, why not? Logical Boundary Test response: It could be a purely abstract digital creation! Certainly possible, but what would be the point? Just for the entertainment value of reading people's interpretations? A modern Rorschach test? Unlikely. Besides, Mr Enos' followup on 4/25 specifically states "the pic was taken". Ahh well, logical shortcuts being exhausted, I suppose I have to take a real shot at identifying the image. One of Mr Enos' comments caught my attention: Out of the darkness? Hmm, is there some useful information inside the black spots? So I tweaked the levels in Photoshop, and no such luck. Granted, it isn't all pure black, but the color variation that remains is easily attributable to artifacts of the jpeg compression. It appears now that the black spots were placed there, to cover up more specific details. So what's the deal with the bright blue edges on the spots? Close examination shows that the blue edges are consistent, very very consistent. I also know that this type of halo effect is an easy effect in Photoshop, so I write them off as mere distraction. What does the shape of the black spots tell me? I can see several of the previous guesses... I see the circus bear balancing on a ball (it's even compressed under his weight). I will admit to searching the internet for images of Scooby Doo to make sure the spots on his back don't look like these. They don't. I don't get anywhere useful. So let's see if we can get more from the other visual element: the background. First, I'll look at the blue version. Playing with the levels, I see a distinct border, 3 pixels wide, around the edge of the pic. Is this border "True", or Photoshopped? Looking closely, I see that the borders are perfect. Straight up and down, straight across, perfect to the pixel. Too perfect to have been part of the picture, it has to have been Photoshopped. I discard this along with the blue glowing edges. The blue background is rich with texture and color variation. I don't think I can trust the colors, but where have I seen that much visual texture before? My best couple guesses here were mentioned by other posters as well. First was that it looks like carpeting. The color levels in the blue image start to resemble a soft light source, somewhere out of frame to the upper right. Moonlight through a window on the carpet? That could easily make the black spots shadows, either of something in the window, on the window, or outside the window. In an abstract way, I almost see a bansai tree in the negative space left between the spots. Seems kind of appropriate, but too abstract to be the Truth. My second guess is that I've seen similar depth of visual texture in deep polished granite countertops. Is this a shot of a shadow on a countertop? Or something spilled on a countertop? Meh. Just doesn't feel right. So then we get a new image: "Mystery in Browns". It has been posted as a hint, since the month is drawing to a close. From this, I think it's safe to say that the differences between this image and "Mystery in Blues" must have been performed with the intent of returning the image closer to its Truth. This validates some of my earlier conclusions. The glowing bright blue edges on the spots are gone, as is the perfect image border. The color scheme is the most dramatic difference. It is now clear that some of the biggest color differences in the Blue background, the greens and purples, are just an exaggeration of the more subtle coloring differences in the browns. There is still texture, but not at all as dramatic. Woodgrain perhaps? Or is it...Skin?? Looks like it to me. Is there hair here? Possibly, but it's short. Maybe recently shaved, with a few day's growth? Like at the nape of a neck shortly after a haircut? Or maybe a thigh if you aren't quite the hairy bastard that I am? If the background is an area of skin, then what would be under the black spots? What interesting details would you find on skin? The first two that come to mind are a tattoo, or an injury. The tattoo idea isn't bad, and since we know from Mr Enos's comment that this pic was taken on his birthday, it could be a new birthday present tattoo. Unfortunately, Bigbadaboom already guessed at a tattoo, twice, and Mr Enos later said that nobody was even close. Ooooh, wait. We also know that, on his birthday, there was Tequila. Now I even have motive! Could it be that this is a picture of a Tequila-induced Mystery Injury? You know, the kind you wake up with, and wonder how the hell that happened? And Mr Enos can't identify it, so he's asking here to see if anyone else can identify it for him?? I like it. That's my final answer. Ok, that was long winded, but if nothing else, was worth it just for the mental exercise. This sport is about solving problems, is it not?