|Raised Hands Surround Us|
Three Nails To Protect Us
Well it is off to gunsprings.com for me
I think that when those dark voices start calling our name in the back of our head we need to remind those voices who we belong to!
Andrew Schwab - Project 86
Me too. But I should wait till I shoot it with the fresh stock spring. It's possible I'll need to go to a lighter spring to compensate for the lighter slide mass.
If anything, you need a heavier spring to slow the slide velocity. It's not the closing of the slide during the firing cycle which is the problem; it's the slide/barrel impacting the locking block/frame during extraction. My impression is that because of the reduced slide mass, your pistol is getting the crap beat out of it.
Well, in that case I may be ok with the new stock spring, which will be stiffer. But ever more important to replace on schedule.
EDIT: I just tried dry-cycling with the new spring, and it is much stiffer than how the old one had been lately. Maybe this will solve the problem.This message has been edited. Last edited by: kkina,
Just shot with the new recoil spring. Gun ran perfectly. At 25 yards had to do a slight adjustment to the new Heinie sights. Grouping was a bit to the right initially, but one good tap to the rear sight brought me back to center.
Then moved on to the 50 yard line, and finally 100 yards. Again, gun performed fine, and with the right sight picture, shots were on the paper.
I'm thinking I should just stick with an OEM spring, but remember to replace at the Sig-recommended interval.
25-Yard Target - 1 by kpkina, on Flickr
Well, I usually use it more for zesting.
I love posts like this. Gee whiz, Wally. My gun broke even though it only had aftermarket porting and an aftermarket guide rod. I mean, what possibly could the problem be????
Normal wear and tear, as the spring was past the stated replacement interval.
Welcome to the forum, 19ontheslide. I'll think you'll find this place an engaging forum where people can post dissenting opinions without resorting to ad hominem comments.
I don't think you understand what ad hominem means. I made no statement about your personal character, simply commented on the idea that aftermarket modifications to a firearm that lead to eventual failure of the system, followed by confusion about why the system failed, are humorous. And by the way, I have been a member here for over a decade. No need for the "warm" welcome, but thank you all the same.
I understand perfectly. Your comment was personal and mocking, in an indirect way yes, but personal nontheless. Others have expressed the same differing opinion, but in a polite and objective way. As for the welcome and being a member for 10 years, your registration date is 2020, and less than 5 posts?
I understand your confusion about the second part. My original username and password went unused for so long that I forgot them and had to reregister recently.
Did I read this correctly? 25 yards? 50 yards? Then 100 yards with a P229?
Really? Please do tell us about that. Yards or feet?
Those who forget history are destined to repeat it.
There's quite a few members here who shoot longer ranges with handguns. I developed my own system of holdovers using modified sight pictures to compensate for ballistic drop. At the rifle ranges (50 & 100 yards) I generally shoot off a bag rest and take my time for each shot. I wouldn't say I get groups at those distances, and am happy if I can keep the shots on the backer.
P229R Sighting by kpkina, on Flickr
POA/POI at 50 yards isn’t a big deal.
At 100 yards the front sight completely covers a piece of steel that is about the size of an upper torso. 150 yards gets tougher. You have to hold a bit over the target to account for the drop. It’s been a while, but about 16 inches high for 9mm if I remember correctly.
That is precisely why I dislike so-called "combat-sighting" at any range, and replaced the sights with simple traditional irons (mine are Heinies).
With my gun and set-up, there is significant drop at 50, and even 25 yards as you can see in the chart above. Instead of just aiming higher (i.e. holdover), I prefer to use a slightly modified sight pic. Without this adjustment, I would definitely be off the paper at 50, and would get quickly scolded by an RSO for hitting the bottom of the frame.
So I just received my replacement recoil springs. They are no longer braided (or whatever the correct term is). Solid, single strand. Did Sig decide braided is no good after all?
229 Recoil Springs - 1 by kpkina, on FlickrThis message has been edited. Last edited by: kkina,
OK, I found this. Looks like single-strand for 9mm, while 40/357 still gets the
EDIT: Further digging suggests that a couple years back Sig started transitioning away from the twisted spring due to major problems sourcing quality units. Multi-strand springs have the advantage that it's unlikely to have all the strands break at one time (guess I'm just unlucky). However, that advantage is eliminated in that a higher quality single-strand spring will outlast a poorer quality multi-strand.
Wonder if eventually all their models will go back to single-strand. Could they be just running out their existing stock?
I always assumed they changed due to cost.
My 229 doesn’t run any differently with one vs. the other.
Yes, I get the impression that cost was also a factor. Maybe the high quality multi-strand springs were deemed too expensive.
I doubt if there's an functional difference when shooting the gun. More of a service life benefit.
|Powered by Social Strata||Page 1 2|