ken_mays

Positioning this kind of rifle for hunting is as good as saying "well, it just can't hang with other chassis-mounted precision rifles for accuracy" as far as I'm concerned. Who is going to want to lug this thing to the deer stand or through thick brush? Nobody, that's who. All those projections and cutouts are going to get hung on undergrowth or catch on your gear. I do think the folding stock is a move in the right direction, but not enough to recommend it for anything. I think I'll take a Remington 700CP with a brace in 6.5 Creedmoor long before I consider the SIG.

The factory optic models usually sell for more of a premium than the optic rail models, which go for around $2000-2200. It would take more than $2200 to get me to part with mine, personally.

The trigger is the wrong thing to buy for the M&P, IMO. The sear is the big problem, and you can either buy a replacement sear or you can stone the factory sear by following the Burwell Gunsmithing guide. http://www.burwellguns.com/M&Ptriggerjob1.htm If that doesn't do it, a $22 Apex spring kit will get you the rest of the way.

Interesting... do you have a handguard plan? I know the factory handguard is nothing I would be happy with. Glad to hear installing the trigger wasn't bad... the last time I did a trigger job on a Sub-2000 I swore it would be the last time. Nothing like springs and parts flying out when you separate the receiver halves, and trying to hold everything in while you put it together.

I had a CZ P10 right after they came out. Mine was unsatisfactory. The mag release and slide release were both very stiff, and even after several hundred rounds, they didn't look to be getting any better. The trigger safety was actually difficult to work with, like it would take more pressure to "pop" loose than I thought it should, and the pressure had to be straight back. Accuracy was not bad but due to the smallish grip and narrow trigger guard, I had to cramp up on the grip and it tended to push my shots to the left. The aluminum sights were just another slap in the face. I'd like to shoot a P10F, I think that would be a better model for me.

To me, something like the M&P 2.0 Core would be the ultimate... but I haven't seen any on the street yet, and they are guaranteed to be more than $400 when they show up. I'll have one someday, though.

I've got about 350 rounds downrange with the Masada as of today. Basics: 2 x 17 round magazines, with remarkably stiff springs. Comes with 2 backstraps (small and large), and optic mounting kit with 4 RDS-specific spacer plates and appropriate screws. The optic cut cover and all the mounting plates are plastic. The RDS plates included are for: Deltapoint, RMR, Venom, and Romeo 1. Trigger pull is 4 lbs, about 4.5mm worth of takeup and another 4mm of smooth, non-stacking creep. Ambi mag release and ambi slide release. Steel 3-dot sights. Handling and shooting impressions: Good hand feel for me, I left the large backstrap installed. Trigger has a great pull, but trigger slap does occur on mine. Out of the box, shooting a few mags of mildly hot 9mm earns you a stinging trigger finger. After mounting a RDS, the trigger slap was softened and all but unnoticeable. The Glock-type safety dingus isn't really a problem. I'd put about 100 rounds through it before I installed the Vortex Venom RDS, and the trigger slap was unpleasant enough that I was considering getting rid of the gun. After installing the RDS and putting 250 more rounds through it with considerably tamed trigger slap, I feel like it was built and intended for RDS use exclusively. Sights are very much a "combat hold" setup, where the POI is about where the white dot on the front sight is. I was using a 6'oclock hold at about 10 yards and my group was about 1.5"-2" below the 1" dot that I was resting atop my front sight. Accuracy was about average for your typical $400 polymer combat pistol, about on par with my S&W M&P 1.0s, at least while shooting irons. The rear sight notch is a bit too wide for me, so that likely contributed. With the RDS, accuracy seemed to tighten up to the point I had no complaints. Reloads were not as fast as I'd have liked. The front of the magazine extends up into a "tab" that is prone to catch on the frontstrap side of the mag opening. The mag opening has a pretty good bevel on the rear but not on the sides or front, which are thin; and the recessed area on both sides doesn't do you any favors, either. The mag release button is a bit small and requires me to twist the gun just a bit to hit it reliably, but since this is an ambi mag button, I may just work on hitting it with my trigger finger instead. At least the mags eject briskly. Slide release is large and easy to hit but not big enough to be in the way. The gun doesn't seem all that fat, but the only holster it would fit in is the one for my Steyr M9, which, along with the Beretta APX, has the fattest slide of any gun I own. Fortunately, the Steyr, APX, and Masada all fit very nicely into the same holster, so that what I'll use. Reliability was 100% with my ammo, which are 115 gr coated lead reloads running about 1200 FPS. Summary: An exceptional value at a little over $400. Trigger slap is something to watch out for, maybe it was just my gun, but installing a RDS made that a non-issue. Due to its magwell, mag changes are a little slow. Accuracy and reliability earn an "A" for me. Sights adequate but not optimal.

The Ruger PCC is a phenomenal effort by Ruger in my opinion. I absolutely love mine; they did a lot of good things with them. The trigger needs no improvement, for instance, and takes 10/22 parts if you feel like you need to swap out the trigger. I used to own the old PC9 and it was a very mediocre attempt in many ways, but this one is a whole new ballgame. Threaded barrel, takedown, interchangeable mag wells, reversible bolt handle, built-in top rail and bottom accessory rail. Mine, at least, runs with a wide variety of ammo. I was loading 2.4 grains of Titegroup behind a 115gr bullet for Steel Challenge and it was cycling them when no pistol I own would even attempt to run on that load. I've seen the complaint that they are heavy and people hate the stock. Magpul announced a stock for it and there are aftermarket foreends you can buy, as well. The blowback bolt is a big solid chunk of steel, so there's only so light it'll get. I've been thinking about picking up another one at some point. By contrast, I'm in no big hurry for an AR9. I've had an old Olympic 9mm that takes Sten mags for about 20 years now and it fulfills about all my 9mm AR needs. The Extar 9mm looks intriguing but I haven't had my hands on one yet.

As a lover of (almost) all things Steyr, I would love to have one, but haven't been quite able to talk myself into one. I think I'd have to go with 6.5 Creedmoor if I were going to pull the trigger on one. The whole scout rifle concept is intriguing and it's really the only reason to pay the premium for this one. Otherwise, something like a Bergara makes a lot of sense.

Just a word of caution on the PSA guns. The earlier ones had a run of short chambers. That could be fixed by reaming (I ended up reaming about 5 or 6 guns personally) and I think they have fixed that in current production, but just something you might keep an eye open for if you buy a used one. I also think the AR9 formula hasn't been universally figured out yet. A lot of the guys I shoot with were breaking triggers in competition and having to tweak things like buffer springs and weights to get them running reliably. Not saying everyone will have this problem with every gun, but it's probably good to recognize there's the possibility that you might be buying a minor project.

I loved my M&Ps; I love my M&P 2.0s, and now I'm waiting for something like the Compact to come out with an optic mount, though I would be happy enough with the service model like the one shown above.

When is Ruger going to standardize on a thumb safety design? Seems like every pistol with a safety has a different design and manual of arms. This one looks a lot more usable than past designs, though that slim extended lever looks prone to snap off.

I also have a Venom on my Canik like the one above. As far as zero, it's been good. I did go through a couple batteries in about a month at first. Not sure if it was turning off like it was supposed to, but I'm on the 3rd battery and it's been OK so far. As a pistol optic I'm not a huge fan of it. The window is rather squashed down and I like to have a little more field of view than it offers. Now that they have things like the shake-awake solar Holosun, I wouldn't buy another Venom unless it was dirt cheap, and then use it only on a competition pistol, or a rifle. If you intend to use it for self-defense on a pistol, you definitely want something always-on like the RMR or at least shake-awake like other models offer.

This was just one of those guns I used to see from time to time in shops and was never really all that interested in... until I realized I hadn't seen any in years and I was getting more curious about them. It's also a difficult gun to find on Gunbroker because nobody really knows what to call it :)

I ran across one of these on Gunbroker recently and got it today. Quick blurb from Wikipedia: I'd never seen the BDAO model in person. Browning gave them a confusing name, BDA, which was already applied to the Beretta-made .380s. The included "manual", about 4 stapled and Xeroxed pages, calls it BDA9. If I'm reading the date code correctly, this one was built in 1996. I gave $550 for it, which is more than I would have paid in the past, but seeing as these things are only getting more scarce, I felt comfortable with the price. I'm keeping my eyes open for a DA/SA one as well. The case contains 1x10rd magazine, 2x14 rd magazines, a cleaning kit, nondescript gun lock, "manual", and a lanyard ring. In BDAO config, the safety lever is completely omitted. The trigger is about 10-12 pounds and after about 1/2" of takeup, the real pull travels about .650" until it breaks. Reset is a bit longer, maybe .700". The trigger pull is the same at all stages of operation. It'll never be my favorite trigger, but due to the bobbed hammer and lack of a safety lever, I find it notably more ergonomic and usable than the standard BHP. Sights are the standard Browning white blocks. The frontstrap features serrations and the grip is a one-piece affair very similar to the one used on the BDM, secured with one screw on the backstrap. Being Browning/FN, of course standard BHP mags don't work, nor does any other mag they ever made. It looks like BDM mags will insert but not lock, despite having a similar semicircular cutout as the BDM mags. The underside of the "beavertail" has an import mark from Ohio Ordnance Works. Not sure when these were imported, but judging by the holster wear, this one may have been issued to someone at some point. How does it shoot? Quite accurately if the user does his part. This is the first mag of 10 rounds at 10 yards, 115gr reloads. I put another 14 rounds right on top of that group with the second mag but neglected to get a photo.

I’ve never been tempted to pay a premium for one, especially since the prices have climbed so high. I don’t own guns I won’t shoot, for collection reasons or whatever, so I never saw much point in getting one to just sit in a box. I’ll be following the new Python with interest and will probably pick one up. I also hope the design changes don’t change matters for the worse. I’ve recently picked up a couple of Trooper MkIIIs, so my Colt wheelgun needs are pretty much filled for the moment.

They don’t have to be. I think alloy framed 5” models are the best possible setup for a carry 1911. The full length slide is generally more reliable than 4” guns, which are more sensitive to spring wear and it actually carries better for me. Then the STI Staccato C is lighter yet, but expensive. Speaking of expensive, 2011s make a lot of sense too but they are rather chunky. In 9mm, a 4” 2011 is a great setup because the 9 avoids the disadvantages of the short slide in .45. Of course, one might have a problem with the thought of a $2500 gun sitting in an evidence room for years, possibly bloody and rusting. I’ve decided that the advantages of the platform outweigh the monetary risk, especially when you factor in the difficult shot the gentleman in Texas had to make a few days ago.

I have a 41 and a MKII. The trigger on the Mk4 isn’t nearly as good as the MKII. The Ruger will need a trigger upgrade. Also, the reliability may not be as good as the 41. I know a lot of guys who shoot Steel Challenge with their Rutgers and they’re always tweaking or replacing something to get them more reliable. Not to say the Smith is perfect but at the end of the day, you’ll have pride of ownership and higher resale value.

My thought on the return to battery issue is that the magazine spring is worn enough that the cartridge is getting out early and not slipping under the extractor; and the recoil spring may be worn enough that it may be contributing. I'd get a set of replacement mag and recoil springs and start from there; also make sure your mags are clean and dry at the same time you replace the mag springs.

My last three were a full-sized Beretta 92, a Browning High Power Competition, and a CZ-75 Phantom SP-01. I rarely buy compacts because all they're good for is carrying and I already have plenty for that role.

As a "not a Glock fan" who has owned a lot of them over the years, I'll say the G45 is the first 9mm Glock I feel like I can live with. The full, flat frontstrap is something that I have wanted over the years. They have either put an uncomfortable, sharp scallop on the bottom, or finger grooves that don't fit.

I have owned a couple other Vertecs in the past and actually prefer them over the standard arched frame. I thought the beavertail here might be more of an issue than it turned out to be; if you have large, beefy hands and like to ride the safety, you may have a problem with it. I think the trigger is ideal the way it's currently set up. I'm not very finicky about pre- and post-travel so I don't foresee ever twiddling those screws. I haven't used the Langdon trigger bar; I imagine they changed the contact point against the hammer so as to provide more leverage, or something. Generally I add "D" springs to my Berettas and that gets them into the acceptable range for me.

I picked up a 9CT not long ago. I'm not really fond of the PTR hand guard and will probably replace it with something like the classic MP5 wide foreend, though I'd like some sort of handstop. Nothing wrong with the PTR handguard, other than it's ugly. I don't plan on tacking on a lot of accessories since it's only ever going to be a range gun for me, but I will probably put a RDS on it, most likely a Holosun.

I visited the range and put about 250 rounds through the 92X Performance. The trigger measures about 6.5# in DA and 3.3 # in SA. Weight of the gun without a magazine is 2 lbs, 13 oz. The reliability was perfect with both included magazines. I was shooting reloads, 115gr Brazos coated LRN atop 4.6gr Titegroup. Accuracy of this load in this gun was mediocre, about 2" at 15 yards. I didn't have any other ammo with me to test with. I don't know if they had any special accuracy requirements for this gun; I did detect slight movement of the muzzle when the barrel is in battery, so that's not great. Shooting impressions: Sights provided a good picture. I'm going to nitpick the front fiber sight a bit and say that the fiber was placed higher than I like. I'm used to Dawsons, which are easier to align vertically. I found myself looking for the top of the black front sight to get alignment for precise shots, only to find glowing dot there. So I'll probably replace that. The rear sight was easy to adjust, I had to dial it a few clicks up and over to get my hits where I wanted. I disliked the "gas pedal" style takedown lever. It's only large enough to get maybe half the tip of my thumb onto it, and the edges and corner are far too sharp for comfort. I'm going to look into swapping it out for a standard 92 part. I shot most of the time with my thumb underneath it. I also wasn't fond of the slide stop's angled tab. Its proximity to the safety lever and its downward rake of the tab meant it was more difficult to find and hit than it should have been. I'm not really sure why they didn't use a standard 92 part; maybe they were worried that people who ride the safety would accidentally hold it down with the tip of their thumb. The thumb safety was OK: it had a good tension on and off, and the extended "shelf" was easily reached by the thumb, although I would have preferred it to extend further back. Beretta says they will offer 3 different sizes of safety lever, but I haven't been able to find out what they look like yet. The safety did make slide manipulation a bit more of a challenge than I'm used to on 92s. Between the location of the serrations (low on the slide) and the prominent safety levers, it makes grabbing the "sweet spot" more of a challenge -- if you grab too low, your fingers will be blocked by the safety. I'm glad they included forward serrations, they're probably going to see a lot of use on this gun. The frame serrations were a bit of a help, but not what I'd call sharp enough to be really useful, and the slick nickel/tin finish wasn't helpful here. I would skateboard tape over the frontstrap if I were going to do much competing with it... not that such a heavy gun is all that hard to hang onto in 9mm, but I like my grip to be locked in. The built-in mag funnel was well done. No lanyard loop, and it looks like you can get to the mainspring housing pin without taking the grips off. I thought the beavertail might prove to be a problem due to its sharp corners, but that was pretty much a non-issue.

This is an example of the issue that the dimpled magazine follower was created to fix. Mec Gar makes a good magazine in general, but they aren't what I'd pick for 1911s. The Wilson mags have that plastic follower with no dimple, and the mag comes out of the box with the springs a bit on the soft side. A moderate amount of use will weaken the springs to the point that odd things may start happening if a 1911 isn't set up quite right. I also suspect that your recoil spring might be a little on the light side for the loads you're using, which can cause inertia feeds with the right (wrong) magazine design. In your earlier posts, you said it happened with the Gold Dots; did it happen with the 400 rounds of ball ammo?