ken_mays

Yes, I have several, a couple M9s and a couple L9s. They are interesting for sure. What I like is that they use the same Glock grip angle but they also angled the trigger guard to be perpendicular to the grip angle. This means your trigger finger can ride more naturally. I always hated the Glocks because my trigger finger would always drag the frame and the bottom of the trigger guard due to my grip. The Steyr design completely fixes that. Shot-to-shot recovery time equals that of the Glock, in my experience. I'm not really fond of the pyramid-style sights but it's something you get used to, if you shoot it exclusively for about a month. The triggers tend to be pretty good, but the reset is difficult to feel, if that's something you care about (personally it doesn't make a lot of difference to me). Accuracy is good, better than most comparable similar service pistols that I own. Reliability is 100% with hot ammo; with lighter loads (example: minor power factor 9mm), I get the occasional stovepipe. I think it would break in and become a little more forgiving once the springs take more of a set. What I don't like: the slide is awfully wide, makes IWB carry a challenge. I also don't like the magwell, which is not beveled or funneled in any way, making reloads more cumbersome than necessary. They have the M9A2 out now, but I've held off buying one because they are so ugly

It sounds to me that the barrel has a very short throat and the projectile of choice is wedging into the rifling, keeping the slide out of battery just enough that the disconnector is keeping the sear disengaged (to prevent out of battery firing). If it were mine, I would run in a chamber reamer to make sure there was adequate freebore in the throat.

I have a full-sized PX4 9mm which is decent enough. I converted the safety lever to a decocker-only setup. The rotating barrel does mitigate recoil noticeably, and you can install a lighter hammer spring to make the DA pull easier. I'm with some of you guys, though, I always thought the subcompact version was way too bulky for what it was. A Beretta compact I do like very much (for some inexplicable reason) is the 96 Compact. I bought a 92 Compact later to keep it company but somehow still prefer the .40. I guess it's because it's scaled down just enough from the full-sized model to make it very handy, yet controllable.

Brownell's is the only place I know still offering a C&R discount... but discounted Brownell's prices = regular retail prices everywhere else. I have a C&R still but I probably wouldn't miss it if I let it lapse. I don't have much interest in C&Rs anymore and (aside from mail order), I've only ever had one regular FFL know what a C&R FFL was and sell to me.

No, I haven't handled the M or MRD, just the original 509. Encouraging to see that they are addressing even minor complaints about the frames, although there really isn't much to complain about, it's one of the more ergonomic ones out there. I still think the sear is flimsy compared to other designs and I think the Apex one would be a worthwhile upgrade (again, haven't seen the M or MRD). I am actually a fan of the factory trigger design though I know many people seem to prefer the straight Apex unit. However, even after shooting several thousand rounds though mine and doing some polishing, it still registers 6 pounds on the trigger scale. It's not as squeaky and gritty on take up as a couple of the FNSs I've owned, but I wouldn't call it smooth as an M&P or Glock either. I tend to reload every caliber I shoot, except for shotguns and .22. When I could load 9mm lead for $.06 a round it made more sense than it does now, but I still do so because I like a consistent load that I know makes minor power factor for competition. I also like to load fairly long (though nothing approaching SAAMI OAL limits) because long rounds run better in 1911s and I prefer to have one load that runs reliably in anything. Only Glocks and the 509 ever had a throat short enough to be a problem, but since there seem to be some subtle differences with the later 509 variants, maybe that was addressed as well.

The only thing I'll send out for is plating or PVD / IonBond. Usually I don't even bother, I'll do Cerakote or hot blue.

I've handled one and got a chance to look at it with the slide off. The internals didn't inspire a lot of confidence. The rails were relatively flimsy sheet metal that were floating and not firmly molded into the frame, and some of the fire control assembly parts appeared fragile and not up to much use and abuse. There was nothing off-putting about handling and dry-firing. It is pretty acceptable all the way around. Trigger was around 5 pounds. About the only exceptional feature here is the optic mounting system, at this price point. I'm not saying I won't buy one, but I want to wait until some longer-term reviews start to trickle in, and I will wait until I can pick one up more cheaply than I've seen it so far ($470).

As an owner of the 509 (non electronic sight model) and quite a few FNSs, what really chaps my hide is the trigger on these. They all tend to have a squeaky, gritty, jerky pull with plenty of hitches in the creep. Much of this is due to rough machining in the striker channel. I had the opportunity to shoot one of Dave Sevigny's competition FNSs and that trigger was slicked and lightened far beyond anything I've dared to do on mine. He said that polishing and striker spring trimming was how he managed it. Reliability wise, I think the fire control components are the weak spot here, especially the thin, narrow sheet metal sear which is more susceptible to deformation than it should be. I discovered this when I had a FNS that developed a dead trigger after a few hundred rounds. The sear was not always catching the striker, due to slop in the frame/slide fit. It was easy to bend the sear up at more of an angle to catch the striker every time. It is also immensely irritating that the FNS and 509 magazines are different, at least the floorplate. The tubes are the same but any advantage in interchangeability is lost once you have to fiddle-fart around with the floorplates. Another thing I don't care for on the 509 is the contouring of the frame around the mag release button. In their quest to shield it from accidental activation, they made it more difficult to find the darn thing with your finger or thumb. If I carried mine, I would have to grind down the plastic bumps surrounding it. They also have a really short barrel throat as well. I was shooting some reloads that had no trouble chambering in a lot of other pistols I happened to have that day, but the 509 wouldn't even go into battery on them. I believe the barrel is nitrided, which rules out reaming with a standard HSS finish reamer. Other than these gripes, I like the 509 and find it reliable and accurate. I especially like the sights. It's an easy gun to shoot accurately and would be even more so if the trigger had a cleaner break.

I use Titegroup for 9mm, 40 and 45, among others. It's fairly fast-burning and well-behaved. In my experience, almost anything will work well in .45. When I use medium-rate powder such as AA#5, the cases, especially in 9mm, are filled up more and tend to slop powder out as the shellplate rotates.

I always liked the LA Police Gear operator pants. I think every pair I bought has been sub-$30.

I suspect your powder has deteriorated. I would buy a pound of something new and try again.

In my experience, adjustable sights are more necessary on 9mm 1911s than .45s. Regulating point of impact for a 9mm is often not ideal out of the box on fixed sight 1911s and you will more often than not have it shooting low or high.

That's the old Range 8 facility on Lamar. I haven't been in there in 20 years. I figured it was no longer a public range, and I think they close up around dark (not a bad idea, in that part of town).

Oh, I absolutely agree. But on the 442s, they are such a dull matte blue that they might as well be painted. I did recently come into an older S&W Airweight that I think would be a sin to paint, though.

The PCC is far more reliable out of the box than most 9mm ARs, especially the parts / budget versions. I remember reaming about 7 or 8 short-chambered barrels for owners of PSA AR-9s after the owners saw crumpled loaded cartridges coming out of the chamber. Then there's the issue of finding a buffer system that you can live with that won't beat your trigger to death. One fellow I shoot with has been through about 3 broken Hiperfire triggers with his AR-9. The PCC can also handle very light 9mm loads, which is useful if you're doing steel matches with it. I got down to about 2.4 grains of Titegroup behind a 115 gr bullet before it wouldn't cycle reliably. It isn't often I get really enthused about a new rifle but Ruger did so many things right with this gun that I am a huge fan of them. Now the Mini-14 is still an expensive, inaccurate turd when you put it against a $400 AR.