>>14697 They're just unremarkable and typically have bad triggers. 13 rounds capacity in a full size is also pathetic and no the 15 round mecgars don't address that because they increase capacity across the board. Get one if you like it, it's not like it's going to Sig on you.

>>14716 Yeah, maybe eventually I will. I just like the feel of it, my tastes are weird because I'm normally a wheelgunfag and don't like the feel of most semis in my hand at all, especially double stacks. Do even the modern clones like Springfield have the bad triggers?

>>14401 >to me it balances put the aesthetic. Agreed. Sometimes they just need something to fill out the blank space. I compare it to shoes--I've got size 13 feet and if a shoe doesn't have something to break up the area between the end of the laces and tip they tend to look like clown shoes.

>>14727 SAs don't have the worst triggers but they're not very good either. Its inherent to the mechanism. Try one in a store, of all the HPs you're most likely to find a SA locally.

>>14753 >clown shoes >tfw size 15 I know the pain. I work in finance, so slacks and tie every day. For shoes, if there’s not something interesting going on with the toe, I just skip it, because otherwise they really do seem like clown shoes. I’m 6’4”, but I’m thin and lanky, so the feet still look big.

>>14850 >size 15 I can't relate 1 to 1 but working in corrections cos and offenders constantly rag on my 11.5s. And it's always the blacks. God I hate the blacks.

>>14855 >working in corrections Too stupid to get a real job.

>>14777 I saw a Turkish clone too, I forget the model. Are those any good?

>>14860 >.t felon No it's because my eyesight is to dog shit to be in federal field work

>>14855 >I can't relate 1 to 1 but working in corrections cos and offenders constantly rag on my 11.5s. Beat them until they knock that shit off.

>>14928 >yOu HaVe To ObEy ThE lAw Faggot. You probably pay taxes too. Boot licking cunt. I hope you get shanked by a nigger. That probably won't happen, but we both know you've had shit thrown on you and (((liberals))) make laws saying you can't beat them senseless. You're a cuck to the system. Kill yourself.

On 4chan's /hg/ someone recommended that I get my W. German P220 slide Chromed instead of TiN or gray PVD coated. A local place does metal plating, and after finding a nickel plated frame, I dropped off my slide earlier. It's a few weeks wait time, but I was quoted $30 so it's worth the wait.

>>14949 You should give it another go. You didn't try hard enough.

>>13924 burt pls for the love of god get a trip here so i can feel like everything is normal my safe space has been destroyed and i dont deal well with change REEEE

>>15038 That controller is fire.

>>15038 Check the old /hg/ :)

Just got my Tisas service special! Im quite happy with it Gun seems well made, even the grips are solid. Ot does have a bit of side to side play and a bit of a click in the trigger...is that normal? This is my first 1911

>>15209 Congrats. Yes to the trigger, not so much on the slide. All guns will have have some play there, but a nice 1911 will have the least.

>>13374 There are a few different things going on with that. They' have always been, historically speaking, pure dead soft lead bullets. Push them too hard and you get leading. Additionally a lot of the popular commercially available wadcutter bullets that were sold as reloading components, particularly in the 20th Century, were hollowbase designs. They were long for caliber with a big hollow skirt in the rear, almost like a lead badminton birdie. Excessive pressure or velocity could, and often did, tear portions of the lead skirt loose and leave a it in the bore. On the next shot this could result in a physics lesson pertaining to what happens when two objects try to occupy the same space simultaneously. And it was normal to seat wadcutters flush or nearly flush with the case mouth. They were loaded, typically, with tiny, tiny charges of extremely fast-burning powder. 2.7-2.8 grains of Bullseye is a very old recipe, 2.5gr of Red Dot shotgun powder is another. Reducing the amount of empty space between the base of the bullet and the powder charge made them less position-sensitive. It made ignition and combustion more consistent and gave more consistent velocities compared to having the bullet seated way out, with a pinch of powder rattling around inside the case underneath it to redistribute itself randomly with each shot. And reducing the available space inside the cartridge case makes pressures go way, way, way up, very very fast. If you want to push wadcutter bullets really fast, I strongly recommend that you use double ended wadcutters rather than hollow base ones, and I strongly recommend seating them as far as you can while still having a place to crimp them and still having them fit in the cylinder. Wadcutter ammo has almost always been reduced-power ammo for shooting at paper targets. There are memes about the bullet shape having terminal effectiveness that is extra more better, but it's just another meme, right up there with all the other retarded gun store fudd memes. "Ya just have ta rack a shotgun an' dey run away, you betcha!' "Ya carry wadcutters in yer revolver 'cause they tear more tissue!" "With da scattergun ya don't have ta aim! It'll cut 'em in two!" "Muh two world wars!" There is now commercially available ammunition in revolver calibers with hard cast wadcutter bullets loaded hot. It might even have made sense in 1925. In 2025 it's pants on head retarded. Use hollowpoints. >but muh .38 snubby won't push hollowpoints fast enough to expand reliably! Noticed that, did you? Yeah, it's a shame there is nothing better available, that's thinner, flatter, and more powerful, with better sights, better trigger, and faster reloads, for about the same weight, and usually a lot less perceived recoil too. Yes, it sure is a shame that there haven't been any improvements in implements of personal defense since 1890. >but muh wheelgunz is reliability! I don't trust them there new-fangled otter-matick pistols, or that there new-fangled smokeless powder neither! Well, okay, you do you. >>13375 Pretty much. Any other application the bullet design may have is coincidental and has nothing to do with the properties it was designed to have. And sure, it is a bullet. It's not a ping pong ball. It's better than relying on harsh language. But you can do much better.

Hi. I want to ask some questions about electronic sights on handguns. I have a specific application in mind for a dot sight and I'm wondering if anyone has any advice. I've made an impulse purchase, which I hope I won't regret, of a Keltec P17. While I was reading up on them I found a guy who makes CNC milled aluminum optic plates for them. There are two great big screws on top of the slide in front of the rear sight. Apparently they hold a conventional-slide-shaped plastic shroud over the actual steel bolt. You take those screws out, you put on the optic plate, you put threadlocker on the screws, you screw the plate down on the slide. Then you can put your optic on it. The guy makes them in a bunch of patterns and styles. I went with RMSc because everyone agrees that optics made to fit other mounting patterns tend to be much heavier. Additionally, given the difference in footprint size and what I am assuming about the thickness of the metal based on what he told me about the RMSc plate, the C-More mount plate he sells probably doesn't weigh much less than 14g all by itself. I base this on looking up the standard optic footprint size and pretending his adapters are flat rectangular prisms of aluminum 3mm thick, and rounding down to the nearest half gram. That sounds dumb but it got me a guess of 9g for the RMSc plate while I was waiting to hear back from him. Anyway, In my research I saw some threads on Le Plebbit where guys were talking about 3D printed optic plates for the P17, some weighing about three grams. A guy had tried a few different patterns of them with different optics on his P17. With one combination--I don't recall the particulars but I looked up the specs and I did the math--with that plate and an optic whose manufacturer said it weighed 30g, the gun ran fine, at least with the ammo he was using that day. He tried a different pattern plate and put a Holosun on it that was a big fat chonky boi of an optic, weighing 42.5g by itself. 45.5 grams of mass total added to the slide, and no, I don't know if he counted the mass of the screws and battery, resulted, he said, in somewhat less reliable functioning and some apparent ammo sensitivity. Maybe. "Or maybe I should have cleaned it and oiled it before that test. It was really dirty that day. I dno, lol." Another guy said that on his own P17, an optic-and-mount combination weighing 37g seemed to cause some functioning problems, maybe, or maybe the gun was dirty, or maybe it was low quality ammo, or maybe there's some burr on the internals making something important inside that one drag, and so on. It isn't much to work with but this is where I am. And yes, I know, Kel-Tec sells a version of the P17 that has an optic already installed, either a Viridian RFX11 or a Crimson Trace CTS1550. They come with an RMSc pattern mount already attached and the front portion of the slide skellingtonized (spoopy!) to reduce weight, compensating for the added mass of the sight. But I'm compelled to tinker with stuff. Where's the fun in that? Where's the fun in this if I don't get to dremel some lightening grooves inside the top of the slide to make it run? Also it doesn't have a rear sight, probably to save weight, and I might in the future want to remove the dot and take it to the range without it. I promise, I'm getting to a point. I emailed the guy who makes the CNC machined plates and he was kind enough to weigh one for me. He said the RMSc one weighs 8.7 grams. 34 minus 8.7 equals 24.3 grams, which I am taking as the probable upper bound on mass where I have a reasonable expectation of proper function. I know there are a lot more choices in RMR pattern optics, and there will be a lot more features, but RMR optics tend to be pretty heavy, and for this I need something light. There was a guy on Reddit who had a spreadsheet of RMSc optics you could download from his Google Drive account and I started from there, but, you know, a lot of manufacturers don't have very complete lists of specs on their web pages. Some of them have no specs at all beyond what mount footprint it fits and the rest of the product page is a pep talk about how amazing it is. For that matter, I found more than one dot sight available to buy on Amazon whose manufacturer doesn't list it on their web page at all. All that is preface. I have a list of boxes I have been checking for the optic for this project. It needs to be sooper dooper lightweight, even by RMSc optic standards. That's the absolute requirement. It absolutely has to be 24.3g or less in weight, preferably as little weight as possible. In the nice-to-haves, I want it to be green rather than red, because I've got a touch of the 'tism. That's astigmatism, if you were wondering, and I am generally able to see a green dot more sharply than a red one. And I want a circle dot reticle rather than just a plain dot, because it's clearly visible to my eyes at lower brightness. If the dot is too bright my astigmatism causes me to perceive it as blurry and distorted. And I want top or side battery compartment access rather than the battery being in the bottom. This was difficult, because a lot of manufacturers, as I said, put up product pages for the sights they sell that don't actually have much information at all. I've spent a bit of my spare time looking up product pages, looking up Amazon and eBay listings, and trying to gather enough information about enough different optics to make a list. Starting with that spreadsheet, I added an additional column to it for weight. There are an awful lot of very different looking sights on Amazon where under "product information" it says "weight: 1oz," and I see that repeated so often that I think some sellers are just guessing and putting in a figure with which they assume their prospective customers will be comfortable rather than weighing them. If it's one ounce, 28.3g, then it's over the weight limit I've set by 4g. If it isn't, then I don't know what it weighs and have no information. So I'm discarding all of those. Some of these products look like they might be suitable, but if I don't know what they weigh, I have to cut them from the list. Special mention has to go to Vector Optics, which not only puts almost no information about their products on their web page, but also has their own made-up names for optics footprints that nobody else in the business uses. It took me a while to figure out that when they say "MGT Footprint" they're talking about what everyone else on the planet calls RMSc. Their web page seems to be getting served up from a Commodore 64 connected to a dialup modem on a noisy analog phone line in Guangdong Province. I think their "Frenzy-S" line optics are RMSc compatible--I think, anyway--but their web page doesn't show me much other than "Loading" animations that never stop, thumbnail images that don't connect to anything, and links that don't do anything when clicked, so I dno, lol. They could have some products meeting my criteria, or not. I can't even see anything usable in the Wayback Machine, going back as far as 2020. I think they need to have a talk with their ISP. People are selling their products on eBay and Amazon, but there's not a whole lot of information beyond the sales-pitch stuff, and some of them have RMR optics listed as RMSc and vice versa. Anyway, I ended up with a list of over eighty different RMSc sights, which is a lot more than I thought existed in Current Year, and I'm sure it's not an exhaustive list. It's possible that many are identical sights from the same Chinese factory, just with a different logo painted on the side, being put in boxes with different names printed on them. Nonetheless I have at least something to work with. The Ruger Readydot, at under 9g, is appealingly lightweight, but the dot is 15 MOA, it's red, it's fixed, and it's illuminated by fiberoptics with ambient light only. It's really clever but that's gonna be a no from me, dawg. A number of others had really bad battery life, and so on. And, though it may offend some, I'm not going to consider a $400 Holosun, a $550 Aimpoint, or a $700 Meprolight for a <$200 .22 plinker. The vast majority of RMSc sights have bottom battery compartments, which I dislike very much. The vast majority are available in red only. Very few circle dot reticles are available at all in RMSc, most in red only. Others, like the ADE Nuwa, were removed from the list for things like really bad battery life, or the CVlife Wolf Covert, for weighing almost 40g, unless that's a typo on their web page. but I have a list now. At the top I have placed the ADE Nuwa Pro. It's 15.5g and has a top battery compartment, and it's available with a green circle dot reticle. It's about a hundo on Amazon. The only optic with a red circle dot reticle that made the weight cut and didn't have a bottom battery compartment was the C+H Precision Weapons EDC. It is priced far above what I'm willing to spend on an optic for a .22 plinker. The Cyelee CAT0-G is a green dot with a side battery compartment that makes weight at 22.8g, though not by much. Optics with a green dot that are 20g or less are the ADE Spike, Gorilla Optics Samaritan, Nightstar PR17G, Ohhunt RD U1, Primary Arms 21mm Micro, Swampfox Sentinel, Viridian RFX-11, Viridian RFX-15, and Zerotech Thrive HD, but all of these have bottom battery compartments. Of these the lightest seem to be the RFX-11 and the 21mm Micro. So, does anyone have any experience with any of these optics? My tiers are: ADE Nuwa Pro Cyelee CAT0-G Viridian RFX-11 Primary Arms 21mm Micro ADE Spike, Gorilla Optics Samaritan, Nightstar PR17G, Ohhunt RD U1, Swampfox Sentinel, Viridian RFX-15, Zerotech Thrive HD Or maybe someone knows of more choices in green circle dot optics that fit RMSc, weigh 24.3g or less, don't have bottom battery compartments, and won't cost more than the gun they're mounted on. Or maybe someone has weight figures for the Crimson Trace RAD Micro, Foxarmy FXV22, Foxarmy FXV22 Pro, or Victor Optics Frenzy-S.

[Expand Post]

Thanks. >in b4 "just use the iron sights, faggot"

>>15209 My tisas slide is tight. Not much play if any. Also not sure what you mean on clicking in the trigger.. so I'm going to assume mine doesn't have it either. I have the basic A1 model looks about the same as yours

>>15224 For what it's worth, all the ADE optics get absolutely roasted in Amazon reviews. They're merciless. Though when I read them I get the impression that a lot of the people complaining don't read instructions, didn't install the screws properly, ordered an RMR optic and are butthurt it doesn't fit a Holosun base, and so on. At Optics Planet and Optics Factory the reviews are overwhelmingly positive, and they are all vague shit like "wow! so amazing!" and "good value 4 moneys!" Most of the bad reviews seem to be from morons. Most of the good reviews seem to be from bots. If you believe Reddit, ADE optics are mostly considered to be low tier, better than the Pinty brand airsoft trash, but below Swamp Fox, let alone Holosun. There are serious quality control problems. Make sure you're dealing with a reputable seller. If you get one and it's DOA, if the adjustments don't work, if it stops working on the third shot, you might not have much recourse if you got it from some shady Internet store that's drop-shipping from China.

What is considered the best handgun that holds at least 11 rounds of 9mm for concealed carry? Small, but reliable, and shoots like a bigger gun?

>>15247 Glock 43X 10+1, there are other mags that are double stack and hold 15 but glonk reliability thoughbeit

>>15220 You wrote so much and then ruined it all right at the end. I get why people like the new tiny 9mms, but I have yet to see one that excels as a pocket pistol like a small revolver does. But thanks for the info about wadcutters. >>15247 I consider the answer to that question to be the P2000sk. It's not a single stack, but the grip gives more to hold if you have larger hands, it's not too heavy, it's reliable, and it's the softest shooting subcompact I've ever fired.

>>15247 Any variant of the p365/any of the guns made to compete with the p365, and any standard double stack compact like a Glock 19.

>>15270 Okay, I'll bite. In Current Year, what does something like a 2" S&W Model 60, which weighs unloaded almost exactly the same as a G43X with a full mag and one in the chamber, while also being almost a quarter inch thicker and having about half the sight radius, bring to the table? Or if you don't like Glocks, substitute another brand or design in the same class, like a Hellcat, or a P365.

>>15270 > It's not a single stack, but the grip gives more to hold if you have larger hands, it's not too heavy, it's reliable, and it's the softest shooting subcompact I've ever fired. Thanks. I'll look into it. I hope I can find one with them being discontinued.

>>15314 I don't know about a steel Model 60, but revolvers with a polymer, aluminum, or alloy frame have always been and will always be the best pocket carry guns. The first wave of polymer micro compact 9mms were barely usable as pocket pistols, and the double stack ones definitely are not.

>>15331 When you say "pocket carry," what do you mean, exactly? You're talking about a concealable firearm you carry in an IWB holster, rather than dropping the gun into a pocket full of chewing gum wrappers to go about your daily business, right? Boomers do things like that, or put guns in their purses full of random junk, or in the center console full of fast food wrappers, with the expectation that in the event of danger they'll just be able to find the handle part eventually and fish it out eventually, and it won't be so clogged up with pocket lint and cigarette butts that the cylinder won't rotate. It's the sort of thing people who don't carry spare ammo do, or drop loose rounds into the center console with the gun, or put them in another pocket Barney Fife style.

>>15333 By "pocket carry" I mean the gun is in a holster (to break of the gun shape) in my pocket with nothing else in the pocket. The pocket becomes a dedicated holster and the gun has to be small and light enough to work well for that.

>>15314 >what does something like a 2" S&W Model 60 bring to the table? More reliable in close ranges. >can't go out-of-battery >easier to retain/harder to be disarmed >harder for someone to prevent you from firing by grabbing the gun

>>15394 LOL, he said. LMAO >More reliable [ citation needed ] >can't go out of battery And a Glock 43 can't snap its MIM hammer axis pin in half like a piece of hard candy while you're shooting. >easier to retain/harder to be disarmed [citation needed] >harder for someone to prevent you from firing by grabbing the gun

>>13320 >>13341 I’m trying to decide if my next fun will be a .357 mag 4” double action, half lug Smith or colt. Or should to get an Uberti with wheels for .357 and 9mm. .357 because I already have a good stockpile for my snub nose. Its primary purpose would be for inawoods. No grizzlies here so .357 is fine. >inb4 why not both In time, but I’m broke and have mouths to feed.

>>15397 Just get a good 357 wheelgat, anon. Don't overcompensate it.

>/hg/ missing Burt and others Sad.