TargetTalk

I don't know about you guys but I am not inclined to spend 50 cents a round for Zins ammo (or any ammo actually) when I can make ammo that will hold the ten ring at 50 yards for 17 cents a round. If I want a soft load that travels 700 FPS for the short line, I can do those for 11 cents a round.

[/quote]


Apparently MCP gives people the long and short line ammo all loaded into the same case without any markings to tell apart. In the instances refered to in the below link they were not informed that this was the way it was packaged nor given the option of choosing the load they wanted.

http://bullseyepistol.forumotion.com/t3 ... ry-45-ammo

losw wrote:

I don't know about you guys but I am not inclined to spend 50 cents a round for Zins ammo (or any ammo actually) when I can make ammo that will hold the ten ring at 50 yards for 17 cents a round. If I want a soft load that travels 700 FPS for the short line, I can do those for 11 cents a round.

Apparently MCP gives people the long and short line ammo all loaded into the same case without any markings to tell apart. In the instances refered to in the below link they were not informed that this was the way it was packaged nor given the option of choosing the load they wanted.

http://bullseyepistol.forumotion.com/t3 ... ry-45-ammo[/quote]

I wonder why it is packed 500 long and 500 short line when one shoots 2 short for every long?

I would call them up on the ammo thing folks.

Especially the packaging issue, and the manner the ammo is sold. I do agree that if there isn't an easy way to distinguish between the two load types, then the ammo isn't as useful as it could be.

In so far as the velocities...

I wonder if the folks having lower velocities have barrels that are reamed for hard ball, as opposed to specifically for wad cutters?

I tend to think its something like that.

Me, I'm a buddy with Dr. Nick, and I still make my own ammo 'cause its cheaper. However, the cost of Gunny Zins ammo IS very competitive, and Brian's quality control is very good. I would likely be using that ammo and an MCP 1911 if I were shooting competively. Time is the key reason to by Brian's ammo, and cost/quality is the reason to use it.

It shoots well in my 1911, but MCP did the barrel work... even if it is a Springfield.

You should see the machines. They've litterally rebuilt them and improved them.

If you even remotely suspect you have a quality control issue: CALL THEM.

Those two guys seem VERY serious about this.

I'm trying to think, technically, what might case a difference of a few hundred FPS betweem several 1911's, and the only thing I can come up with is the chamber or that you were using the rapid fire ammo pack.

I know the ammo was supposed to be made specifically for firearms reamed for wad cutters. (I gather nosler JHP is a good substitue for a wad cutter...)

Can anyone chime in here on what issues with a 1911 would effect velocity of the round? Are there any??

I'd guess the biggest difference in velocities is due to the chronos and the way they are used. Brands and models differ, distance from the muzzle varies for different people.
Also, I don't get the "reamed for wadcutter" thing. Barrel diameters will change as tooling wears, but what is a "reamed for wadcutters" vs a "reamed for jacked"? Old wives tales, I think.

No, there are actually specific reamers for standard .45 barrels and match barrels.

Additionally, you can order reamers from PTG, etc. specifically to your specifications. MCP does this with the headspacing being set for a 185gr nosler JHP.

I know in rifle shooting, such as with TRG-42, the head spacing makes a significant different in velocities compared to shooting out of my M70 Winchester with the same batch of ammo.

Chamber size should have an impact on things with handguns as well, but I would not assume its that pronounced.

GBMaryland wrote:No, there are actually specific reamers for standard .45 barrels and match barrels.

Additionally, you can order reamers from PTG, etc. specifically to your specifications. MCP does this with the headspacing being set for a 185gr nosler JHP.

I know in rifle shooting, such as with TRG-42, the head spacing makes a significant different in velocities compared to shooting out of my M70 Winchester with the same batch of ammo.

Chamber size should have an impact on things with handguns as well, but I would not assume its that pronounced.

You don't understand headspace GB. The .45ACP headspaces on the mouth of the case; most rifle rounds headspace on the shoulder. If a rifle barrel is set up for a specific bullet, the throat is what is different. Headspace is the same, but the amount of freebore changes.
Ben

davekp wrote:I'd guess the biggest difference in velocities is due to the chronos and the way they are used. Brands and models differ, distance from the muzzle varies for different people.
Also, I don't get the "reamed for wadcutter" thing. Barrel diameters will change as tooling wears, but what is a "reamed for wadcutters" vs a "reamed for jacked"? Old wives tales, I think.

I was thinking "reamed" referred to the bore of the barrel, not the chamber. Certainly the chamber reamer can have an effect.

Freepistol:

So that would mean that I have the overall idea correct, but the terminology wrong?

So MCP is setting the "freespace" after the headspace on the 45ACP barrels so that it is specific to 185gr wadcutter / Nosler 185gr JHP. [I've been told 185gr JHP from Nosler, but I've got to assume that a WC should pretty much always work.]

To me, this means that a hardball round (230 RN) should not chamber in the barrel... because the freespace doesn't exist in the same dimentions.

It was, and is, my assumption that the amount of freespace impacts the overall muzzle velocity.

I'm trying to think of what might make significant differences in 45ACP velocities:

- If the chamber were larger than specification... then the brass would expand in equal directions until the chamber wall stopped it?

- If the freespace were cut for 230RN, and you where firing 185Gr WC or JHP...?

- Recoil spring? Would keeping the chamber closed longer have an impact? Converserely, would having it open sooner have an impact?

Given that a typical load for a 45ACP is somewhere in the order 5gr of powder, even the smallest differences should have a larger effect... or at least that's what I'd suspect.

Thoughts?

MCP does cut the chambers differently. They are using reamers specifcally made for them, and this cuts the chamber and the freespace. I'd held one in my hand, and one meant for hard ball.

Nick won't make be hardball gun, but he's got a reamer for it. -grin-

GB, with Brian Zins shooting Cabot Guns, and the rest of the team having previously left, do you know if MCP is planning on putting a new team together? Did he say why the team left?

losw wrote:GB, with Brian Zins shooting Cabot Guns, and the rest of the team having previously left, do you know if MCP is planning on putting a new team together? Did he say why the team left?

Ouch!


.

GBMaryland wrote:Freepistol:

So that would mean that I have the overall idea correct, but the terminology wrong?

So MCP is setting the "freespace" after the headspace on the 45ACP barrels so that it is specific to 185gr wadcutter / Nosler 185gr JHP. [I've been told 185gr JHP from Nosler, but I've got to assume that a WC should pretty much always work.]. . . . . . . -grin-

NO GB,
You are not correct. We are not playing bingo. There is no "freespace" after the headspace. Headspace is the distance from the boltface to the head of the round. {The head is not the bullet}. That headspace is established when the round goes in the chamber and stops on something. The .45ACP uses the case mouth, the .22 uses the rim of the case.

If one sets the headspace too large, at best the round won't fire, but there is a real possiblility of case rupture and hot gases in the action and burning the shooter. Too small headspace and the round won't chamber.

I don't think anyone reading your ideas on here believes them, however, I hope your circle of friends does not act on them without consulting a gunsmith.
Ben

Here is a picture which shows head space for a 45 ACP.
Freepistol is on the money.
Free Bore and lead angle can be cut with the same reamer as the chamber but some times a gun smith will use a chamber reamer that just cuts the chamber and then do the lead and free bore with a seperate throating reamer. Most 45 chambers use about 2 1/2 degree for the lead angle. I am not a gunsmith but I do no how to chamber a barrel.
I stole this image from another shooter forum.
[/img]

I own an MCP model 92. It shoots very well.
I believe the gun is capable of winning any EIC match. But I am just getting started in this field of endevour so take my word as you would any other stranger.
As far as reliability I will recomend that people put several hundred rounds through an MCP 92 before going to a gun fight. My gun was so tight it needed about 200 to 250 ronds before it would run most ball ammo. It was very tight. So tight that I really had to put the move on it to get the slide back. DR Nick uses a fairly stiff main spring. After 550 rnds It still will not run Monarch 115 grain FMJ. The loads are just to light. But that isn't much of a loss because they aren't that accurate. I guess thats why they cost 9.95 a box.
The standard cheap stuff does OK with green box Remington 115 FMJ working as well as any other. With standard velocity rounds functionality is 99.8 percent. I won't rate any gun 100 percent.
This gun seems very sensitive to head space and powder selection.
I started off using BE and Hodgdon International but didn't get good results.
Three things that made this gun a shooter from the long line were. Sierra 115 gr FMJ bullets seated long, WSF or Power Pistol powder in the midrange and matched cases near the max length.
Using mixed brass and other powders make staying in the 8 ring at 50 yards a hit and miss proposition. And of course the heart of any good reload is a quaility bullet. If you have skunky bullets all of the best components and greatest equipment in the world are just a waste of money.
I am not related to Dr Nick and this is the only item I have purchased from him. I have never met him in person. I believe good gunsmithing is just attention to detail and quality components. In the Benchrest community I have dealt with several different gunsmiths and all of my friends have as well. So if a gunsmith says he will have a gun ready in 4 months and a year later I am calling him on the phone, I think that is normal.
I consider the MCP Model 92 to be GOOD KIT.
Also when I say lead angel I am really talking about the angel of transition between freebore if there is any into the throat.
Ted

losw wrote:GB, with Brian Zins shooting Cabot Guns, and the rest of the team having previously left, do you know if MCP is planning on putting a new team together? Did he say why the team left?

Unless something changed significantly... I don't think that's the case. Honestly, they are in business together, how much and to what extent, I really don't know.

...but they spent a lot of money on equipment.

I do remember something odd along the lines of one of the members claiming it was his team, and bunch of other, frankly bizzaro stuff. ...but I'll need to call to get the scoop.

Freepistol wrote: I don't think anyone reading your ideas on here believes them, however, I hope your circle of friends does not act on them without consulting a gunsmith.
Ben

Ok, so then the question comes down to: What did I misunderstand when Dr. Nick was explaining it to me?

Specifcally, I was told that they were having reamers made that were designed for specific use of wad cutters and 185gr Nosler JHP.

Period.

Based on the two posts (above), I'm going to assume it'd got something to do with the angle at the land and groves... something to do with bullet engagement.

You tell me, what would make the most sense if you were attempting to get better accuracy out of a specifically cut barrel when not shooting hardball?

If I were attempting to get the best accuracy, I would cut the lead angle so that the bullet was within a few thousands of an inch of engaging the lands when the round was chambered. I would also cut the chamber to minimum SAAMI standards.
SAAMI standards have a plus and minus to them. I would make my chamber to the minus side of that.
For in the field down and dirty combat conditions that wouldn't be the best route. But for match grade accuracy that is a normal path.
Ted

So,

Current news:

The MCP Pistol team had some sort of internal issue that lead to the team being disbanded. It appears that a specific member of the team was running around and presenting himself as speaking for the team, etc., and it caused serious issues.

Since MCP now it at a point where they can't keep their 1911 based pistols in stock, they've opted not to worry about fielding a team. Thought I got the impression that if the Gunny wanted to run that he'd be welcome to it. [He was not the source of the issues.]

It appears that if Brian has actually decided to shoot for Cabot Guns, the question would remain will he win using their equipment, or will he continue to use his MCP pistols. Who really knows? Personally, I'd pretty much demand that I got a cut of the action (% sales) if I were 10 time champ... but who knows what the arragement is, if there is one.

One of the earlier posted pointed out that it was not easy to distinguish between the 50 yard and 25 yard ammo packages for Gunny Zins ammo... and it apppears that MCP (et al) have heard you.... so they are now putting BIG stickers on the boxes to make sure the two types of ammo are not accidently distingushed wrongly; 50 yard ammo says "50 YARDS."

There is a very strong possibility this was what was causing the chrono issues, and it was meantioned that they had quickly distributed ammo during Camp Perry this year, leading to the wrong ammo types being distributed by accident.

It cost them $200,000+ to start the ammo business, and it appears they had some human issues along the way. (As opposed to making the ammo wrong, with did not happen.)

Next, it turns out that MCP has finally completed writing the program and creating the fixtures for making the 92SF in STEEL. So within a few weeks they will begin making Bulls Eye and IPSC 92SFs out of steel and using the same hardening / coating process as is on the 1911s. (Basically, making the pistols to a RC of 70 during heat treatment of the 38-40RC forged steel blanks they start with.)

Interestly, they have come up with a compensator system for IPSC on the 92SF the should completely emliniate recoil. Furthermore, they indicate that they've also come up with a simple procedure for switching the STEEL 92SF from bulls eye to IPSC configuration in minutes.

So for the gentileman that (I assume it was a man) that wanted the Brigader Slide, the above is the answer to that.

Unlike the 1911 frame / slide that is based off of a program purchased from Browning (that both MCP and STI use, as it turns out)... the 92SF in Steel is completely a proprietary MCP product and was programmed by them.

In so far as the chamber reaming: It is correct that they have two types of reaming going on, one for hard ball dementions and that other for 185gr Nosler JHP / Wad cutters.

There was I specific term given to me for this, but it was none of the terms previously mentioned here.

Lastly, Dr. Nick used to shoot a Walther GSP or SSP, I forget which, but he pointed out to me that there was an american company (started with an "M" I think), that is making a .22LR conversation kit for the 1911. He indicated that testing the two side by side the non-Walther conversion on his 1911 frame seemed to shoot at least as well (for less than 1/4 of the price). He was very impressed with the product.

To: GBMaryland

I am happy with my MCP Pistol and would get another. I am happy with Dr Nick’s business practices and the way I have been treated.
I appreciate your support of MCP ....HOWEVER.....you come off like the PROPAGANDA BRANCH for MCP.
The way that you report on MCP makes your reporting less than credible and not worthy of serious consideration.
I think that you are harming them as much as helping them.
Your general lack of knowledge of the firearms being discussed and the way that you report the information in a here say manner and your clumsy, heavy ahnded attempts at what you seem to take as "Damage Control" makes you less than credible.
Maybe you should stop while they are still in buisiness. Let MCP's scores at the range speak for them selves.

Any reader in the Austin area who wants to see and fire my MCP Berreta can ask for me at Red's in Oak Hill.
Ted

GBMaryland wrote:So,
Current news:

It appears that if Brian has actually decided to shoot for Cabot Guns, the question would remain will he win using their equipment

He could shoot High Master scores with a Colt Woodsman and an off the shelf 1911 with hardball.

it apppears that MCP (et al) have heard you.... so they are now putting BIG stickers on the boxes to make sure the two types of ammo are not accidently distingushed wrongly; 50 yard ammo says "50 YARDS."

What about the people that bought the ammo, thinking they were getting all 820 fps stuff. Are they S.O.L.

Next, it turns out that MCP has finally completed writing the program and creating the fixtures for making the 92SF in STEEL. So within a few weeks they will begin making Bulls Eye and IPSC 92SFs out of steel

Hopefully he has checked with the CMP on the legality of steel frames in the Service Pistol matches. The issue has come up before and the DCM's stand was that steel frames would not be allowed in EIC, Presidents Hundred, etc. So before he starts advertising the next great thing in bullseye it would be nice if that thing was allowed by the rules.

Brigader Slide, the above is the answer to that

. Nothing in your post answers the question about the Brigadier slide availability.

1) Yeah, I'd have to agree that the Gunny could probably shoot with almost anything and shoot without much in the way of issues. He's a machine. However, equipment does make a difference... Comparing a Cabot or MCP to a woodsman, well... that's a severe handicap. I doubt that in a ransom rest at 50 yards a woodsman will group in under 1.5 inches... and that makes a difference. Even if you are a human targeting computer of extraordinary ability like Brian Zins.

2) Gunny Zins ammo: As far as I'm told, nobody got hosed... what happened was that the clear label with writing on it that distinguished the 50 yard ammo was SMALL and easy to miss. So some folks grabbed a box and didn't see the label. If anyone finds that they didn't have 50 yard ammo with a sticker on it indicating as such, they should contact MCP.

I don't believe for a SECOND that Brian Zins would put out a product that was substandard in any way.

(I've suggested that they make two box colors and ensure they are color blindness compatible, and that short of that they fix the label size. It does appear that they've made LARGE 50 yard labels to reduce confusion.)

Let’s be clear, at the moment, it appears to be an end user issue.

So this pretty much answers two of your statements.

3) I was given the details on MCP taking the issue up with CMP, et al., and it's been indicated that many variations have been made in the 1911 arena. It's been indicated that due to precedence of modifications on the 1911s allows for use in competition, it will not be an issue to use a steel 92. If you want specifics, call MCP.

There may be specific events where you can't use the pistol, but that's no different than other events where you have to use a specific pistol.

It certainly won't be an issue in 3 pistol events...

Me, I own a number of pistols and I use different ones for different things.

4) No, I didn't explicitly address the Bridger slide. The reality is that a steel M9 made to the tolerances used in the MCP 1911 manufacturing process will have adjustable sights. I did not ask if they were 1mm wider, nor did I get the impression they going to sell them separately.

So, what people will end up with is purchasing an new 92 from MCP, that will include adjustable sites, have a rockwell hardness of 70 for all steel parts, be properly balanced using tungsten parts to replace various parts of the firearm (especially the plastic parts), have a match barrel (I guess a KKM), and basically be superior to any currently fielded Berretta 92 models in the wild.

As with the 1911 pistols, it's not cost effective to continue to accurize the 92 series when they can be made for a cost that is less that the 20-40 hours of work it takes to prepare a 92 sent to MCP.

The target price is to be less than the current price of the 1911s (which sell so fast currently that they are having trouble keeping them in stock). So that's a lot cheaper buying a 92, and sending it to MCP...