Jump to content
Brian Enos's Forums... Maku mozo!

Need a quick advice regarding full vs. cut dust covers.


BenAlpha
 Share

Recommended Posts

I'm about to order a new BUL SAS UR open gun (israeli made) and there's an option for a full or cut dust cover.

I'm a small guy with small hands and the gun smith said heavier is better.
Why is it that I rarely see full dust cover ones? which one should i choose?

 

I shot both, without sights and they felt different, not by much.  (10 rounds each)

It was my first time shooting open so my mind was overwhelmed, can't decide.

Also, should i opt for the TiN barrel?

Help!

1111111111111111.jpg

222222222222222222222222222.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 53
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

All personal preference. Lots of top guys seem to be going back to full dust covers.

 

I run cut back full dust covers (Roughly 4/5 of a full one very similar to a traditional butler cut).

 

20663960_10159046284030459_5859604012242875086_n.thumb.jpg.6f108c36fbda492d84cd3f87d553ad1e.jpg

Edited by Maximis228
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, cecil said:

I prefer "cut back" dust covers.. much easier to remove the guide rod..

 

Dust cover doesn't effect removal..... at least never has for me. Get a Dawson tooless if you want even easier removal. 

Edited by tcazes
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The cut frame looks more finished and the light weight at the end of the gun will help with transitions. But. Get the one you like the best.  

The biggest problem with shooting open is pulling the trigger when you are not on the target not the pistol frame. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd go for short.  The slide has more weight reduction in non-critical areas, so reciprocating mass is reduced.  That's a good thing.  Plus it will cycle and transition faster.  If they use a cone comp, that's even better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, zzt said:

I'd go for short.  The slide has more weight reduction in non-critical areas, so reciprocating mass is reduced.  That's a good thing.  Plus it will cycle and transition faster.  If they use a cone comp, that's even better.

+1

yes, they use cone comp.

and with short dust cover for 9mm minor  it doesn't  jump at all.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The FDC should rise slightly less than the short, because there is more weight out front.  I have two 2011 Open guns.  One is full dust cover with a bull barrel.  The other one is short with a coned barrel.  The short moves faster, cycles faster and is softer to shoot.  The only difference between the two guns you are comparing is the length of the DC and the weight of the slide.  If I really liked the look of the long, I'd go that way.  There isn't going to be a big difference either way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

They are made in Israel, where I live.
Quality seems to be on par with STI, they do Tin coating, DLC if you want to pay for it.
The only thing cheap on it is the Nikko Sterling optic which is an RTS2 knockoff.

But that's the only option I have down here, and it'll do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


×
×
  • Create New...