graycrait

All the good 9mm "plastic" guns are about the same in terms of functionality and reliability, yet each has some unique points that make them desireable for that or those points: Ruger SR9C, Glock, S&W M&P, Springfield XD , then I would look at the Rock Island 9mm for a truly fun gun and then go take a look at the higher end Sigs and maybe a Beretta 92 in some form. There are some others that sell in lower numbers which are worthwhile also, but you should be able to find those on the used market at pretty good prices from time to time like CZ, Baby Eagle, EAA/Tanfoglio, other Beretta's, Taurus and Bersa. If I didn't already have nine 9mm pistols I would think seriously abut the Ruger SR9C.

On plastic or any guns, check trigger reset distance. Some folks don't mind long reset distance while others do.

Trigger Job by Jerry Miculek - GunVideo.com Trigger Job by Jerry Miculek Trigger jobs are fairly easy to do yourself on S&W DA revolvers. If you need a barrel setback, or forcing cone recut then you need a gunsmith. Even if you don't want to do your own trigger job you would be doing yourself a favor just to watch the DVD and at least take apart your S&W DA revolver with Jerry Miculek as your guide. I took a look at the trigger job on a 442 a smith did up on the Chicago area for an FBI friend of mine. He was charged 180.00 and all the "smith" did was put in some Power Custom shims. I took the gun apart and showed the agent. I wonder if that smith can spell "audit?" At least if you watch the Miculek DVD you will then know what the smith is going to do for you and you will be able to look the work over yourself when you take the sideplate off. Can a smith do more than the Miculek DVD as far as a trigger job? Of course but you would have to get the smith to give you a list of each step he is going to take and I am not sure they do that. For instance you can polish the pins and even the holes that in the trigger that fit over the pin. You can polish every friction point, etc. etc. Ruger SP101s aren't that hard to spruce up either. I've done a couple of friends and myself.

I second Johnnychimpo. Put the smaller upper pin in first, then slide the slide stop lever in, ensuring that the spring rests underneath the pin. Then put the bigger pin in. Why would I know that:) The first time I reassembled my Glock and took it to the range. A friend looked at my Glock and pointed that out right away. I sure wish you were here in Clarksville, I would love to take a look at that issue if it isn't the slide lock spring "over" the pin. There are so few parts in the Glock that isolation and troubleshooting shouldn't be a problem if done methodically.

I also endorse the .22 idea. Go get a Ruger .22 pistol and once you shoot 10,000 rounds (it doesn't take that long if you get several additional magazines). Shooting is like any other skill sport, get a little guidance from someone who knows what they are doing then repitition, repitition. Why Ruger? Plenty of aftermarket, great value, lasts a lifetime. Get one with a 4" barrel and probably a 22/45, which will come close to replicating the dimension and weight of the top tier self-defense pistols. At this time I only shoot 9mm for self-defense and options might be different for me in different calibers. Why I like Glock 19 over XD and M&P: XD has a bore axis I don't particularly like in comparision to Glock or M&P. XD(M) has a great trigger and grip ergonomics, but the bore axis gets into my head. I have never heard an owner of a XD in .45 complain about them. The M&P is just a tad more "fiddley" in the action than the Glock and the backstrap hits the bone in the base of my stronghand thumb wrong. M&P has a relatviely low bore axis. Stock Glock has a blockier grip that is not near as pleasing as M&P or XD to many people. The Glock points a little differently than a 1911. Glocks are just a tad more simple than the other two in my opinion. The ergonomics of the Glock can be overcome with a dremel and wood burning pen. I really like the SR9C for a number of reasons and think everyone should try one, but I already have a couple of Glock 26s and in that size G26 is good enough, plus the 26 can use any of my Glock 9mm mags, of which I have quite a few. You should try a Sig, I have several friends who swear by them, but I find them too fiddley, higher bore axis than M&P or Glock, and they don't have plastic frames/receivers except for the 250, a model I am not real high on. The pecking order in degree of machoness seems to flow like this: 1)1911/Sig/H&K, 2) Glock/M&P, 3) XD, 4) Ruger, Then you get in low density numbered pistols like FN, CZ, Bersa, EAA which in most cases are fine pistols. For private citizen SYA pistols all these work pretty well. Simplicity for me goes to Glock and 1911. Ease of carry and care for me goes to Glock. Revolvers are great, especially S&W or Ruger, but I like a Glocks higher capacity. I used to think Ruger or S&W revolvers were the most reliable handguns, but now give my nod to Glock 9mm 3rd Gen.

I do know of a case where some bunched up material in a soft IWB holster helped cause a Glock to fire a round through 22" of a fella's leg - lesson learned for him and me - use a "hard" holster with a Glock. That was a catalyst for me to try out the safety seeing as I could find no other sensible first hand comments on the use of those safeties.

Now that I have installed Cominolli Thumb safeties on 2 of my 6 Glocks I won't put another on one of mine. It works, has positive engagement either way - so far, but the additional pieces inside my Glocks don't instill me with the same feeling as with the standard small number and make up of stock Glock innards. The parts are a little "fiddley", sort of like the sear/disconnector/hammer & pins lashup or the link/pin and slide stop in a 1911 - just a little "fiddley." Probably last my lifetime, but stock Glock gives me reliability confidence by experience. I don't mind the device on my red range Glock, as I intend to take the trigger as low as practical. On one of my 2 G26's it is OK, as I carry a BUG and if someone snatches it in public the safety may bamboozle them for a second or two. I have a number of other "cocked" and locked pistols that I carry at times and don't find the addition of a thumb safety in the "right" place moving in the "right" direction disconcerting. My verdict - save your money. Just another aftermarket gizmo that I have tried on any number of hand or long guns that works - but not so much for me. What I really want is a big TFO front sight in red.

Would I take my early 50's Bear Grizzly static recurve bow hunting? Probably not, but I sure do like launching arrows off that thing every once in a while. I sort of look at my range guns the same way. I appreciate the fact that I can keep them running at killing speed, but never intend to use them that way - but they are ready regardless of color, age, etc. I like jerking folks around who look at life through a toilet paper tube.

The naysayer or doomsayer comments are pretty interesting. It ain't like I don't have other Glocks, 1911 or other JMB designs. Just checking out aftermarket parts. No one got excited when I took out the GI grip safety on my Norinco 1911 and replaced it with a beavertail. I'll give range reports on how these things hold up over time. If they fail or don't work I'll simply take them out and live with a small slot in the frame - it ain't like I haven't already compromised the "genius" frames of more than several dozen Glocks doing grip reductions.

1911s, Chuck Taylors by Converse and Model Ts' - those were the days.

I always wanted to try a Paclite but haven't gotten around to it. I have 4 aluminum framed S&W 422s and they are about as light as you can get in a fairly accurate plinker without having a Paclite on a 22/45. I have 3 MKIIIs now, all in different barrel lengths. I have the "I wants" pretty bad for the new Nighthawk .22 1911 conversion designed by Bob Marvel (not to be confused with Marvel Precision's Units 1 or 2). 22 Conversion Units Nighthawk Tactical I've had several Glock Advantage Arms conversions, but could not really warm up to that conversion. I think the Nighthawk conversion is similar or based off the AA 1911 conversion as Marvel was working with AA a couple of years ago.

I have not ran them hard yet. I personally don't plan on installing any of the safeties on my other Glocks. I figured one on my range gun and one on one of two my shorties. From what I gathered online is that they work that is why I tried them out. Kind of a steeply priced experiment, but seeing as I have done just about every other mod, both externally and internally, that you can do to a Glock I figured I should see what the deal is on these. Now I have to handfit a Ghost Rocket connector on my 17L - that will be about the last of the gadgets I haven't tried that have been on the market for some time which gets pretty good reviews.

The reason I like fooling with these Rugers is that I think they are right at the crossroads where more money in a .22 pistol gun gets you diminishing returns. That is unless you make that quantum leap into bullesye pistol land, where my lack of training and discipline would leave me paper punching little better than with my revved up Rugers. In both the Ruger MKIIIs pictured: 1. Removed the mag disconnect apparatus and installed MKII bushings. 2. Installed after market trigger bar plunger springs. 3. Installed VQ pre and over travel triggers. 4. Installed VQ sears. In the black one I also installed a MKII Volqaurtsen hammer. And yes, MKIIIs have the button style of bolt catch/release rather than the lever. I like the button style better than the MKIIs lever from my own aesthetic point of view. I also like the 1911-like mag release on MKIIIs rather the "euro-style" grip heel release found on earlier models. On the other hand I'm not a fan of the "flat" plastic design of the MKIII 22/45 or the internal mag disconnect - but I generally like plastic framed guns due to weight and balance issues that personally appeal to me. Once again a gun manufacturer failed to consult me on pistol design in relation to the MKIII 22/45 frame. Like all mass production you give a little to get quite a bit. When you stumble on good deal for a MKIII 22/45 getting some aftermarket stuff to jazz it up is personally cost effective. I do get a very big kick out of handing over a pedestrian looking gun at the range, then hearing the shooter exclaim, "Wow!"

Just for fun. I put a 1.74lb trigger in the Ruger on the right and a 2.75lb trigger on the Ruger on the left. I used Volquartsen innards and components from Rimifire Sports online.

I showed a couple of fellas today how to install these. Why? Why not?

I get the the gun is sort of ugly in a not your typical Glock way. What is going to be fun is to shoot alongside fellas who are more concerned about how they look or what their tools look like than how they can use them. When things have gone way wrong in geography selection, attitude or situational awareness how the gun looks will matter little when it comes to actually having to launch a bullet.

Seeing as this was my first and so far only Cominolli Thumb Safety installation on a Glock I think it took most of 15-20 minutes. I think this is probably a <5 minute job and another 5 minute dis, re assembly and function test. I ordered another safety but am going to radius the edges on its lever somewhat because as it is the edges are too sharply angled for long term comfort.

My buddy picked this one up for 200.00. He loves the thing. The sight jumped out of the slot once and he super glued it in. Well, the second time it jumped it went into the high grass never to be seen again. the slot is much thicker than a dime.

Numrich doesn't have them and I don't see them at any if the usual suspects - so does any one have a clue where I might find a front sight for a Colt Cobra Lightweight? Craig

Having had a couple of dozen revolvers and having worked on many myself I second the notion that you find a 4" S&W Mdl 19 of the stainless version the 66, both K-framed sized S&Ws. The K-frame S&W has a great balance and can be made to run like a sewing machine if it doesn't already. If you have really big hands look around for a N-Frame S&W Mdl 28 Highway Patrolman. Sometimes gunshops will get in some used .38 S&W or Rugers as turn-ins from security companies and these are generally in good condition. Rugers are great revolvers and very robust (and somewhat heavy) but you probably won't wear one out. Although I have owned several reliable Taurus revolvers I won't own one any longer. Shooting .357 magnums routinely in a K-frame S&W can actually wear that revolver out, but I was never able to afford to shoot that much .357. You may want to look at getting a L-frame S&W, the 686 or its predecessor the blued 586. I have a friend who has killed quite a few deer with his 6" barrelled 686.

It would be nice if you could get any of your preferred choices used, because when you mention resale value it appears that you plan on letting it go before you buy it. Resale to private individuals will always be your best bet and there is a steady market for the Kimbers and I think the Champion would sell too but maybe just a bit slower than the Kimber. The recoil impulse in these 4" guns is quite manageable or at least it was in my 4" Champion I had for a few weeks or the two I have tinkered with that belonged to a friend. I suppose Crimson Trace is a good idea and has some applications but I never have liked it on a pistol. At distance it jumps around a lot with your wobble and is a distraction to me not a help. The best handgun optic I have found is a Millet Red Dot that I use on a Ruger MKII, but has no application in a self defense pistol. Crimson Trace or any pistol laser may have a good application in practical gunfight distances. When you say "... only use for shooting..." it makes me think this will primarily be a range pistol. The conventional wisdom (which I rarely follow) is that anything shorter than Commander size (4.5") may have some issues. My Champion ran fine, but two of my friend's 3.5" 1911s were never reliable. Recoil rate, angle of feed, mag springs, recoil springs, barrel unlock/lock speed, ammo choice, etc, all conspire to complicate the rate of movement over shorter distances. For range fun and emphasizing good fundamentals the standard 5" 1911 is hard to beat in .38 Super, .45 or 9mm. You have to love a 1911 trigger and this coming from a guy who only carries Glocks. I have to believe night sights must be a good thing because I have tried so many and spent huge dinero on them over the years. Then I think about that with my lifestyle if I have to shoot at someone at night outside of my home, where I have a weapon light on one of my Glock's rail for night shooting, I likely won't have time for aimed fire and everything will be instinctive point shooting at relatively close distances. So although I have night sights on some of my guns from purchases in times past, I'm thinking they aren't really necessary for my personal uses other than finding them amusing in a darkened room where I can't accurately ID the target. I too have found Hornady Critical Defense a good choice in both 9mm and .45 if you just want some SD ammo that has reliably fed in all the guns I personally have tried it in. As I grow older I find that owning a gun that I can't shoot decent "cheap" range ammo reliably is not something I have time for any longer.

Everyone needs at least one red gun, it goes so well with 501 tactical pants, safari shirts, and little serrated edged knives with the clips showing from the front pockets. Toss in a Surefire baseball cap, a pencil thin mustache, 8" speed lace boots, a 40lb digital watch - the picture is complete.

Juust get one of the reliable but comparatively inexpensive Philippino made 1911s for around 500.00. Shoot the crap out of it and maybe start tinkering with aftermarket parts. Once you find out how the thing works all the mystery will have been resolved and you will be able to figure out where the hype and quality separate. However, initially those guys who sit around talking about their 1911s while wearing 501 clothes, sporting little mustaches and fancy tactical boots, while showing their cute little pocket knives clipped into their front pocket will try their hardest to disparage your cheap gun while creating significant steaming piles about how their Kimber or Nighthawk will make them invincible against a lowly Armscor. Bottom line is get a functional and inexpensive 1911 and shoot thousands of rounds. Shoot that gun apart if you can. Learn barrel to bushing fit, lug lock-up, how the link works and work on your own trigger. Buying a thousand dollar 1911 doesn't get you ahead in the 1911 shooting game. Your miles ahead if you buy a 500.00 1911 and shoot 500.00 more of ammo than otherwise would have been shot.

that is what I hope the bad guy does, he looks at my gun and hesitates, saying to himself, "WTF?" as he dies. I need an edge!! I ain't getting any younger.

I don't really know, but if I shoot at 25 yards I can generally hit inside of the bull. I have a couple of older friends who used to 50m bullseye shoot competitively and I don't believe I have what it takes to learn how. I just like fiddling with guns and won't afford a Sig P210. I did have a 17L with a CCF stainless frame several years ago. Lock up was pretty tight, weight was nearer 50oz and the trigger was close to 2lbs, that gun may have been a barn burner but I traded it off. When I had the oppourtunity to trade for another 17L I jumped at the chance. I plan on using this gun to work on my longer range shooting and to bug my tactical clothes wearing expensive 1911 toting friends.