TRG65

I have two guns with cajun trigger jobs (SP-01 and P01). both are very good. I sent the one to cajun after having purchased it as a custom from czcustom (P01). my wife has a cz custom trigger (shadow 1 target). it is a huge improvement over factory and shoots very well. it still runs the czcustom springs because my wife doesn't want me to tinker. the best cz trigger I have was done by Matt Mink when he ran automatic accuracy (shadow 1). the mink gun with an 8# cajun spring gets run with federal primers either SP or SPM whichever I can get. I've also tested it with a newer batch of cci and it worked with those as well. The DA is 4.25-4.5# and the single is under 2#. Since automatic accuracy changed a few years ago, I've sent my cz work to cajun.

One of the first things I do with any gun is install a buffer. I have run them in CZ, Glock, Beretta, and various 1911. On the 1911's, I have two types. I have a thick and a normal. Every gun I've tried will run on the "normal" but like others have mentioned, the thick (or a double stack) can cause issues with slide lock. For the guns that have the issue, I just run a normal. I have tended to run lighter springs, so I just use this as insurance. I can't remember ever having one tear up to the point it caused a malfunction. However, I only run 9's for matches (SS, production, CO) so mine don't take the abuse of major loads.

The comment about heavy being the trend is spot on and they are easier to shoot for some. My CO G17 (Gen 3) with magpul 21 rd mag is 35.6oz. That is with a flashlight with the W74 batteries, tungsten guide rod, and tungsten added to the grip cavity. The CZ CO set-up my son shoots is just under the 59oz limit.

I have accushadow and non. I got one converted after the rules loosened up on production and carry optics. At USPSA speeds, I don't feel like I'm at a disadvantage because I'm shooting a SP-01 instead of the accushadow that I let my son use. When I shoot groups to check zero or do some test, the accushadow groups do tend to be smaller.

I got a red hill for my Dan Wesson specialist also. I have been much happier with the RHT holsters I have than other brands I've bought.

I run tungsten guide rods in my SP-01 and one of my Shadow 1s. I prefer a muzzle heavy gun. From a reliability standpoint, I have no issues with the plastic, I just wanted more weight out front. I got some brass grips to try, but for the gun to feel right for me, I need to also run a light as a weight then to get back to the right balance.

It has been a great choice for years. I shot a very similar package from Matt Mink, until it got redone as a carry optics rig for my son to shoot. My wife has the "target" model of linked gun. It is very consistent and very ready to run package. On the CZs that I have, the cajun triggers are a bit better than the CZ custom. Also, the cz custom front site is a bit wide for my preference.

For my RPR, I run a similar height mount to what I would on an AR. I use a Burris PEPR for the Vortex I have mounted on mine. I've also used a similar JP mount when I ran a 34mm scope on it.

I did the putty and pinewood derby weight add to my Glock frame (gen 3) as well and I did use a plastic plug to hold it in. I ended up about the same point. I already had a tungsten guide rod. Those two made some difference in feel, but weren't really noticeable shooting. What made the biggest difference was putting a flashlight with w74 tungsten batteries on the front. That was noticeable when shooting.

I shot a gen 3 Glock either a 34 or 17 from the time I started competitive shooting in 99 until 2012. Then I switched to a CZ, shot that for a few years, moved to rifles and then picked it back up when I started shooting USPSA with my son in 2019. His gun needed some work this past fall, so he used my CZ and I went back to a Glock. After a one match adjustment, I was shooting higher classifiers and overall placements with the Glock than I had with my CZ. So I would say it is more competitive for me.

I shot a Glock in IDPA and then USPSA from 1998 or 1999 until 2012. Then I went to a cz shadow from 2012 to 2014. When I came back to USPSA shooting in 2019, I went back with the cz (CO this time) with my son shooting too so we both shot cz to make mags and spare parts easier. We sent the one cz off for some work about 2 months ago, so I went back to the Glock. I've shot my first ever M classifiers in the last two months since going back to the Glock. The Glocks aren't as nice/comfortable to shoot, but they work.

Or a rim x with a good barrel.

I'll differ with the above comment that bolt throw is no big deal. For me it is a primary consideration, and for a few years I've only looked at <90 deg actions. I have several with 90 deg, both Rem and custom, mostly those are for other family members. They are a bit easier to unlock, however, I consistently mash my thumb on my switch view and more than once have ended up with a skinned knuckle on a 90 deg action. Either can be run very fast and the 90s tend to have a bit easier/smoother bolt lift, but the difference isn't enough to overcome the efficiency gained and, for me, the safety factor with the 60 deg actions. I have been looking at getting a new action and I've decided on the terminus. I like the Curtis too, and have seriously thought about buying an mpa production rifle that comes with the Curtis action.

I use the vortex razor 85mm with the mrad reticle eye piece. I have RO'ed a fair number of PRS match over the last few years and it only once let me down on a very humid rainy warm day in NC. I was getting a lot of fogging, but so were most other scopes. I would like to have a Swaro but would have paid double and I'm not sure about the gain. In addition to the PRS and LR field matches where I've used it, I've used it for field hunting. I was able to count points in the last 10 minutes of shooting light to pick a buck for my son in a point restricted area. Could a better scope have done, better probably, but for what I need, it has done the job. At one match I RO'ed I used Swaro and vortex side by side, and several other version. Hands down the best glass was in the Hendersoldt. Under the light conditions that day, I could tell very little difference between the swaro and the vortex and I had a slight preference for the color hue of the vortex. I've looked through the Zeiss, Leica, Swaro, and vortex ranging binos, and there I could tell enough difference that I will wait and get the Zeiss or the Leica when the rangefinder I'm currently using gives up. My match and hunting rifle both wear Schmidt and Bender glass. I suppose you could see the mirage in some of the high power binos, but I prefer the spotting scope. Enough power for good mirage, but still wide enough field of view to spot shots. I also prefer the straight tube to the angled, the aiming just makes more sense to me.

I agree that SH is ok and I check-out the new threads often just generally only read a few. Some of the best information is from local shooting FB groups. Here in VA there are 2, Mason Dixon and VPRC. When questions are posted there, the responses are usually informative and knowledgable, plus if you shoot with the groups, the quality of the shooter is known. I like the PRN YouTube videos. But at the end of the day it is best to have a few local good shooters to be able kick around the ideas, or who will let you shoot their equipment. Like Hoser/Tom Freeman letting me shoot his fancy AI 300WM at a Raton match.

I rarely shoot paper for practice, almost all steel. But this weekend I had to rezero the venoms on my Cz accushadow 1 and my SP01 w/ cajun bushing with my new 147 load. I called it good when standing offhand both put 5/5 in the head A/C from 25 yds. The accushadow went 4As 1C and the SP01 went 3As 2Cs. Years ago I had a Les Baer 45 w/ the 1 1/2 at 50 guarantee, that gun was magic, it was just plain hard to miss. My CZs are good and a much better fit for the shooting I do, but they aren't magic like that gun was. At one time I also had a David Sams Elite II Beretta, that was a good gun, but I'll take the CZs as they feel better to me. The Elite II never impressed me as magic like the Les Baer did.

I've had two slides milled for optics. Neither is perfect. One uses a plate and wasn't milled quite right so I had to shim the plate to get the optic to zero. The other was milled too low and the venom light sensor is buried in the slide, so I have to use manual adjust. Both were done by reputable CZ smiths, the one that is too low was a retrofit on a slide that had a target adjustable sight. I would 100% say buy the OR version, also if it is a standard plate, then you can shift plates if you decide to go from a vortex to a trijicon or whatever, instead of having the slide re-milled.

I’ve used the udder and the gamechanger. I did a shoot off between the two and for me the udder shot better. Lots of folks love the Gc and the pint sized Gc, too

Are you after the smallest group or the most consistent? If you look at Smithck’s chart the 2.330-2.350 aren’t the smallest but the groups look reasonable and more importantly the groups are impacting the same point. I’d call 2.330 my starting depth and then I probably wouldn’t have to change for the life of the barrel. Then I’d play with the charge a bit to see if things would tighten up a bit. when you resize could you try a small base die? That should put you back to factory dimensions. a screwed up chamber can definitely ruin a rifle, but if it shot 1/4 on one day you should be able to get a hand load to a consistent 1/2 to 3/4. I would look at some of the recent stuff on the precision rifle blog about seating depth for consistency, and look at stuff for ocw. I’m going to use ontargettds (to overlay shots and groups) for my next load development in conjunction with the satterlee velocity method to look for consistency. I hate redoing a load for a barrel, because usually it means I’ve lost confidence in it for some reason.

I've had and have GAP, Crescent Custom, APA, and PVA rigs. I also have an RPR (up for sale currently). However, the RPR shoots as well as I can shoot. I have turned in great groups with it, just as I have my PVA Sako TRG, or my GAP full custom 7WSM. I got good groups from the factory 308 barrel, but the Hawk Hill/PVA barrels prefits shoot outstanding. You don't need a high dollar gun. My TRG and McM A5 stocked guns are more comfortable to shoot than the RPR. When I shoot the RPR, I have to think about it, when I shoot the Sako (but its not a full custom, but it is considerably more costly), I just lay down and shoot.

I use my 650 for precision loading (hunting and PRS/NRL), and my 1050 for 9mm and 223. Based on your criteria, I'd probably say go with the 1100.

My most recent 308 has liked H4895 better than Varget for accuracy.

I have had a different experience than some of the others. I have two sets of Whidden dies, one was custom for 6.5 Addiction and the other is for 6.5 Creedmoor, both are outstanding. My experience with Forster has been just the opposite. I had a set of 6x223 dies that kept cracking seating stems, Forester's answer was to say don't use compressed loads. Using Whidden or Redding, I haven't had a problem, and have found that slightly compressed loads have usually been the best shooting loads. I will happy buy another Whidden or Redding set (in that order), but I won't buy another Forster.

I use a Dillon 650 with whidden or Redding bushing dies in whidden floating case heads. I don’t use the Dillon powder dropper. My ES is usually around 20 and the SD 6-8. 3 shot group set usually average in the upper .3 or low .4 and 5 shot groups a tenth bigger. This is on multiple rifles and loads, and when the rifle still has a new barrel or at least hasn’t started deteriorating noticeably. I do get variation in my bump and seating depth. If I’d use a single stage, it would probably be less, but I did try on the RCBS JR that I was given for free, it gives bump and seating variations too. I’ll admit it isn’t the most solid single stage. I also use the expander in the seating die and don’t expand as a separate step. But my ammo isn’t holding me back from doing better at PRS matches, it is the fact that I don’t shoot live rounds for practice at distance. I do a little dry fire and shoot local matches, but I’ve can’t look around and “feel” what the right wind call is going to be that comes from lots of rounds being shot in practice at distances where the wind is a factor.

This thread really got me thinking about building a 6mm or 6.5mm Grendel off of one of my AR platforms, but yesterday I managed to trade my one AR on an older GAP-10 6.5 Creedmoor. I didn't realize how much more there was to an AR10 than an AR15, and the GAP-10 is built focusing on precision so everything is extra heavy and stout. It weighs in at 11.5#, so with scope and bipod I'm guessing more like 15# give or take a 1/2 pound. I bet your Grendels are significantly more portable. I can't wait for some goodies to arrive and some work free time so I can get to the range.