Canik TP9 Series Modifications and Upgrades

Modifications, Tutorials, Gunsmithing, Instructional and "How To" articles, write ups and videos.
User avatar
Weapon
Global Moderator
Posts: 130
Joined: Wed Apr 25, 2018 2:08 pm
Founding Member #: 005
x 44
x 77

Cheating or Almost Cheating? Heavy Junk in the Trunk

Post by Weapon » Mon Jun 18, 2018 3:49 pm

The mod that is almost cheating...

Image

Those weights are tungsten.

And the Heavier Version 2.0:
Image

Of the two mods, unfortunately, neither is exactly inexpensive. Tungsten weights are a bit of cash and to do either of the mods above, you have to have a few sizes handy as the backstrap gets very thin at the top and there just isn’t much room.

The weights...
You can buy tungsten rod, cut it yourself, smooth out the edges, get them the exact same size and blah blah blah but that is a royal pain in the arse. However, you can buy tungsten weights off of Amazon in a number of different sizes and shapes and maybe even find some locally if you have a Hobby Lobby nearby (pinewood derby car tungsten weights...those pinewood derby car guys are damn serious about downhill speed it seems) or maybe at a local golf pro shop (tungsten swing weights and tungsten powder - usually not in the ideal form or purity).

For the 2.0 version, you have to basically gut the backstrap cover. Initial gutting for the first mod with less weight looked about like this:
Image
As you can see, I cut out all the cross supports and shaved the center posts. That’s the small backstrap. If the larger one happens to make the pistol point naturally for you, that is a stroke of luck for this mod as it also allows you more room and an easier mod.

The smaller diameter weights at the top are .25” diameter and right at 0.57” long according to my trusty dial calipers. They are the only size that is a convenient, semi-near fit for the top section that would not have required a lot of grinding (note: grinding tungsten is another PITA process).

The lower weights are obviously substantially larger diameter - they are 3/8” diameter and 7/16” long. My scale determined they are slightly heavier than advertised at 0.52oz - no complaints on the extra weight this time.

If you want to try the mod in the first picture, the shorter weights in the middle are also 3/8” diameter but they are only 7/32” tall (weight: ~0.26oz).

Here is a pic of the weights I used...I didn't need nearly all of them but they had prime shipping and I have gotten sick of waiting for that slow boat from China (because it is slooooooooooow). Besides, I invent reasons to use tungsten in something just about daily:
Image

The backstrap mod:
I just used a Dremel with a cutting wheel and then a small diameter sanding drum to remove all of the cross supports down to level with the surrounding material in the backstrap. For the lighter of the two mods (the one where the center studs in the backstrap are partially retained), I used the cutoff wheel to remove the portion of those studs. If you look at that pic, you can see the bottom of the studs are basically level with the support that runs horizontally across the inside of the backstrap. If you want to be gung-ho from the start and go for the heavier mod, just cut out all of those supports and the center studs in the upper part of the backstrap.

Note on sanding/cutting speed: do not let the polymer get too hot. It can warp and deform. A Dremel with a cutoff wheel or a sanding wheel can generate a lot of heat very quickly. I kept an index finger on the back side of the backstrap and when it started feeling warm to the touch, I would take a short break and let it cool off before going at it again.

Fitting the weights
The fitting process was basically the same for both but the bottom ones took more effort. For the top ones, I just wrapped them in 220grit and slid them up and down the upper third of the slot in the back of the frame until they would sink roughly 1/2 of their diameter into the slot. I left about an extra one millimeter of clearance at the top of the slot just to make sure the weights wouldn’t prevent the backstrap from closing.

You can test fit this part by sitting one weight in place, inserting the top tab of the backstrap into the grip and lowering it while eyeballing the fit under good lighting. It is fairly simple - just take your time and do not try to sink them so deeply that they will protrude into the mag opening area of the frame...because a mag has to go in there.

For the top weights, you will have a lot of material left between the weights and the back wall even when they are deep enough to allow the backstrap to completely close over them. However, you should plan on the top of the weight being about 1mm down from the top of the slot because the top of the backstrap needs a bit of room to slip in there and then rotate down to close. As for the depth of the sanding and how deep the weights are sitting, you can check this several times while sanding the slots just by lifting the weight and looking at the thickness of the material as well as by holding a weight in place and then shining a small light up the magwell to gauge the depth and thickness of the material remaining. The top ones are pretty much easy-peasy.

On to the ones that are a pain...but first...a coffee refill and a minute to figure out where I saved the pics...
...I got distracted by an interesting conversation but now I am back on track and coffee'd up yet again (i would insert a pic to explain that distracting conversation but someone would likely try to claim photoshop and then I would have to call the Fanatik in to back my story as he was a remote witness :lol:).

Moving right along.

The 3/8" diameter weights. Fitting them takes more work but it isn't a nightmare. I wrapped them in 220 grit sandpaper and made some good progress before other things came up and then I got pinched for time and had to get it done. I would have preferred the sandpaper wrapped weight method just because it would have allowed for a lot more control despite the inevitable sore fingers from doing it that way but sometimes clients have problems and you have to deal with them. So, the quicker method was called into play...

The ideal solution would obviously be to own or know someone who owns a milling machine - a mill with a 3/8" ball cutter would make this about a 1 minute job. Unfortunately, I was stuck in the no-mill-for-you-so-suck-it-boat and, as such, I resorted to a Dremel with a 3/8" cylindrical grinding bit and slowly increased the depth of each slot at the bottom of the groove where the thicker weights needed to sit. Since the weights are 3/8" diameter and the grinding stone was 3/8" diameter, I could roughly judge how deeply the weight would sit based on how deeply the end of the stone was in the slot. I moved fairly slowly and kept both sides as even as possible in terms of depth while pausing fairly frequently to check how close the backstrap was to fully closing. I would also check the amount of material left under the weights (or how deep the cuts were getting) by looking up the magwell with a pen light. Luckily, there is plenty of room and even when the backstrap was just a hair from completely lining up, there was still a lot of polymer separating the weights from an inserted mag. Once I had the backstrap about 1/4-1/2 of a millimeter from closing, I switched back to the weight wrapped in 320 grit for a few passes until I could fully close it. Then I made a few more passed with the weight wrapped in 400 grit to get just a little extra clearance and smooth out the area under the weights.

and I now have to break it into two posts to keep all the pics...this will resume about four posts down.
1 x

User avatar
LT USN (Ret.)
Global Moderator
Posts: 477
Joined: Tue Jun 05, 2018 11:17 am
Founding Member #: 7599
CF Member: 7599
Location: Louisiana
x 231
x 264

Re: Canik TP9 Series Modifications and Upgrades

Post by LT USN (Ret.) » Mon Jun 18, 2018 5:49 pm

Weapon wrote:
Mon Jun 18, 2018 3:49 pm
The mod that is almost cheating...
It's only cheating if you get caught.
0 x
LT

Go Navy! Beat Army!

ImageImage

jonholl
Member
Posts: 71
Joined: Thu Jun 14, 2018 8:43 am
x 20

Re: Canik TP9 Series Modifications and Upgrades

Post by jonholl » Mon Jun 18, 2018 7:33 pm

Thanks Weapon, that pulls it together for a new sfx owner, will upgrade after break in. Hopefully that will get me down to a smoother ~ 3.5 lb. trigger pull.
** Just verifying before I buy - that's 16 lb. recoil spring. Just verifying because I run 10-12 lb. springs on my 1911 9mm's - different pistol I know.
Weapon wrote:
Mon Jun 18, 2018 3:47 pm
1. Ghost 6.5lb Glock striker spring and Ghost reduced power firing pin block plunger for a Glock. The reduced power block plunger spring is a must after the severe duty upgrade
2. Any one of the lighter recoil spring setups. A Sig p226 stainless guide rod off of eBay for $9 and a Wolff Sig P226 16lb recoil spring from Wolff Gunsprings works and costs next to nothing. You can run 130 power factor ammo with that easily.
0 x

User avatar
Weapon
Global Moderator
Posts: 130
Joined: Wed Apr 25, 2018 2:08 pm
Founding Member #: 005
x 44
x 77

Re: Canik TP9 Series Modifications and Upgrades

Post by Weapon » Mon Jun 18, 2018 11:07 pm

jonholl wrote:
Mon Jun 18, 2018 7:33 pm
Thanks Weapon, that pulls it together for a new sfx owner, will upgrade after break in. Hopefully that will get me down to a smoother ~ 3.5 lb. trigger pull.
** Just verifying before I buy - that's 16 lb. recoil spring. Just verifying because I run 10-12 lb. springs on my 1911 9mm's - different pistol I know.
Weapon wrote:
Mon Jun 18, 2018 3:47 pm
1. Ghost 6.5lb Glock striker spring and Ghost reduced power firing pin block plunger for a Glock. The reduced power block plunger spring is a must after the severe duty upgrade
2. Any one of the lighter recoil spring setups. A Sig p226 stainless guide rod off of eBay for $9 and a Wolff Sig P226 16lb recoil spring from Wolff Gunsprings works and costs next to nothing. You can run 130 power factor ammo with that easily.
You can run into a problem with striker fired pistol that you will not see on a hammer fired 1911. Namely, striker fired pistols are cock on close (about the last 1/8” of slide travel). If you go too light on the recoil spring, you will get a failure to go into battery. You can run a 28Newton spring or nip a coil off the 6.5lb spring and get it about the same as the 28N and then drop down to a 15lb 226 spring but you will be risking two things then: greater likelihood of light strikes and a greater likelihood of battery issues.
I tried it in mine and it ran great - right until the second stage buzzer went off and I had a bit of dust in the mag that added just a bit of extra friction. That stage pretty much sucked. Granted, it depends on the type of range you are shooting on — my local Range is a bit of a dust pit. If you shoot at indoor matches or turf matches, you might be able to run the 28N with the lighter RSA fine but just know you are a little closer to the line when it comes to reliability.
0 x

User avatar
Weapon
Global Moderator
Posts: 130
Joined: Wed Apr 25, 2018 2:08 pm
Founding Member #: 005
x 44
x 77

Tungsten Mod Part II...

Post by Weapon » Tue Jun 19, 2018 3:32 am

LT USN (Ret.) wrote:
Mon Jun 18, 2018 5:49 pm
Weapon wrote:
Mon Jun 18, 2018 3:49 pm
The mod that is almost cheating...
It's only cheating if you get caught.
I think I can get caught with that one and it still isn’t cheating...even if it looks like it. :)

TUNGSTEN MOD PART II:

Here is a really nasty pic of the slots after a few very rough initial passes with the 3/8" course cut grinding bit. I would have preferred a slightly finer grit but I didn't have one on hand and I knew I would be doing the last bit with sandpaper to smooth and even it up some anyway. In any event, do not be shocked if you encounter a really nasty sight like this on your journey to hidden weight goodness. The good news is it only looks this nasty for a very short time:

Image

If you compare that pic to that back of your SFX, you will likely notice that the slots are longer at the bottom that the ones on your pistol. I added about two millimeters to the slot length on each side with a small hand file and later discovered I likely didn't need quite that much extra length (if any) due to how the bottom of the backstrap lines up right below that point. You can add just a slight bit of length but the bottom ledge of the backstrap will keep you from placing the weights any lower than that. Before you lengthen the slots (if needed) put the backstrap on and rock it down to where you can see how it lines up against the back of the grip. Look closely at where the bottom of the 3/8" weights are in this pic - it will give you a good idea as to how low they can go before they interfere with the fit of the lower lip on the backstrap:

Image

How can you tell if you have just a little extra clearance between the weights and the backstrap when the backstrap is completely on? Put the weights in place, put the backstrap in place, tap in the backstrap pin (or just hold the backstrap tightly in place) and then reach in through the magwell and lightly push on the underside of the weights. The top and bottom weights will likely have much more wiggle room than the ones in the middle but all of the weights should have a slight bit of give and movement when you push on them.

Keeping the Weights in Place -- there are several options here but I will narrow it down to two...and then add two additional ones that are really cheap and easy.

The Easy Method
Supplies required: Tungsten putty

This one adds extra weight while also keeping the weights from bouncing around. Tungsten putty has a number of uses but is typically used by pinewood derby car builders and golf club techs (getting those two groups together would certainly be a wild night on the town...until at least eight-thirty or maybe even nine p.m.) Anyway, the tungsten putty is not permanent and it can be easily pressed in and around the weights or in the backstrap itself. Then you just have to try squeezing the backstrap on a few times until you get just enough putty in the backstrap to lock the weights in place so they will not move or rattle. Do not squeeze insanely hard when fitting the putty - it is not an IronMan competition and if you squeeze incredibly hard you could pop one of the smaller weights through the slot in the frame.

NOTE: DO NOT JUST USE TUNGSTEN PUTTY WITHOUT THE WEIGHTS. If you just try to use just the putty, it will eventually ooze through the slots and get in the magwell area which could cause all sorts of bad things to happen. Tungsten putty is tungsten powder mixed into a polymer base which does not harden. Once it gets warmed up, it will sag and gradually follow the path laid out for it by gravity.

The Mostly Permanent PITA Method
Supplies required:
MarineTex Gray Epoxy
99.99% pure Tungsten Powder (optional)
Release Agent (Kiwi Neutral Shoe Polish (no, I am not joking)
Q-tips (roughly a million or so)
A bottle of 91% or better rubbing alcohol
A roll of heavy duty paper towels
Piece of scrap cardboard (preferably glossy)
small measuring spoon
mixing stick

There is a really strong marine grade epoxy that often shows up in the world of firearms called MarineTex Gray. The reason it shows up around guns so often is it has about seven billion uses related to firearms....It can be used for various forms of bedding, to increase grip diameters, to add contours and even for layered epoxy stippling (yes, that is a thing). When mixed, MarineTex behaves more like a putty than the usual runny liquid bedding epoxy and it is more apt to stay where you put it than the gel epoxies when you apply some pressure to it or contour it. It has relatively high bonding strength, great compression strength and really good temp and chemical resistance. Good stuff to have around....especially if you need to bed some weights into a polymer grip but still make them removable.

All you need to make all of these magical sounding things happen is a small piece of cardboard for mixing, a mixing stick. a small measuring spoon and a release agent. You can buy commercial release agents like Brownells release agent (used in rifle stock bedding) or you can be a cheap skate and use something from the local Walmart that works incredibly well while costing next to nothing...Kiwi Neutral Color Shoe Polish. Any area you do not want the epoxy to stick to gets one coat of neutral shoe polish which is allowed to dry and then another thin coat of neutral shoe polish rubbed over it just to make sure you didn't miss any spots. This works really well because it is an incredibly thin release agent layer and MarineTex just will not stick to it well. Now, before you turn on me over this whole shoe polish thing, I have used this method repeatedly when bedding rifles that cost more than the most loving and forgiving wife/gf would ever forgive you for even thinking about buying and I haven't had a single problem...at least not with the rifles, shoe polish or epoxy....

As such, coat the weights on all sides with two thin coats of Kiwi Natural Shoe polish. Then coat the outer edges of the frame around the weights with two coats of shoe polish. Lastly, coat the outer edges of the backstrap with two coats of shoe polish. While that is drying, mix the MarineTex according to the instructions on the box (follow them to the letter for mixing). Bonus weight: add no more than 1:2 tungsten powder to the epoxy while mixing it (that's one part tungsten powder to two parts epoxy at most). I would mix about 2.0ml (or 2.0cc) of epoxy then put it in the backstrap and slowly squeeze it into place over the weights. If you see any trying to seep out, stop and remove a small amount with a Q-tip dipped in alcohol just to avoid the extra clean up. However, if you use only 2cc of epoxy, you will likely end up having a nice but shallow base layer of epoxy once it cures. This is the safe way to do it. It is much easier to add a little more than to clean up a cured epoxy mess so go light and just add epoxy two or three times until you are satisfied with how well it fits around the weights and holds them in place.

Please note: I did include an early warning that this method is the PITA method.

The Two Cheap and Easy Options
For the low-risk crowd who would rather resolve the weight fixing issue via a trip to Home Depot or Hobby Lobby...

Third option: cram any form of dark colored modeling clay in the backstrap and slam that sucker shut. It will work.

Forth option: put any form of silicone caulk (so long as it is polymer friendly) in the backstrap and slam that sucker shut and let the caulk cure. This will also work. If you want to make an easily removable caulk egg of sorts, coat the inside of the backstrap, the weights and any potential contact points on the frame with...Kiwi Neutral shoe polish.
EDIT to add an additional thought on this - you could probably load silicone caulk with a decent amount of tungsten powder to add some extra weight to it without causing any problems other than it would be a bit of a mess to mix and you would have to make sure you had enough time to mix it up and get it in the backstrap before it cured. Some caulks have long cure times so it should be fairly easy to find one that would work well for this.

The initial weight of the backstrap was 0.235oz. With the Tungsten epoxy and weight method, it gained over 3 oz...that's quite a bit when you are shooting 9mm minor.

Despite the scary looking finish on this initially, it is now down to some very light sanding to clean up the rough edges of the bedding epoxy and then a light brush down with some alcohol to get rid of all of the release agent residue.
Image

After some cleanup, it looks relatively plain Jane other than a little release agent sitting against the edge of the grip:
Image

While doing some additional research on various tungsten powders, I came across this interesting bit of info:
"High density tungsten powder makes the ideal additive to various polymers for use in both weighting and radiation shielding applications." Bonus: my pistol now has some radiation shielding. :lol:

Note for the Canik R&D team....you could make a tungsten weighted polymer frame for production division and carry optics. Max weight for CO is 45 oz. including optic and empty magazine so if you subtract out the weight of the empty mag (allowing the weight of a Taylor Freelance mag extension) and then figure in for a couple of additional ounces for the optic, a tungsten+polymer frame could add an extra 9-10 ounces to the overall weight of the pistol. That would be right under the limit and would handle much like a a CZ with a slide milled for CO and carbon fiber grip (which can be used with some other minor mods to come in just under the max limit of 45oz...)

Tungsten weighted polymers...that sounds like way too much fun.
1 x

User avatar
Weapon
Global Moderator
Posts: 130
Joined: Wed Apr 25, 2018 2:08 pm
Founding Member #: 005
x 44
x 77

Re: Canik TP9 Series Modifications and Upgrades

Post by Weapon » Tue Jun 19, 2018 5:53 am

I added some page corrections and updates to the first post just to keep it up to date and corrected a few glitches from moving this thread from the old forum. Still working on it as I noticed there is some content and pics that didn’t make it here yet.

Update on the Tungsten Junk in the Trunk Mod. I reassembled the SFX and the balance has definitely changed. When unloaded, the balance point is almost directly under the Freedomsmith trigger...it’s almost like I planned that out or something. :)
1 x

User avatar
LT USN (Ret.)
Global Moderator
Posts: 477
Joined: Tue Jun 05, 2018 11:17 am
Founding Member #: 7599
CF Member: 7599
Location: Louisiana
x 231
x 264

Re: Canik TP9 Series Modifications and Upgrades

Post by LT USN (Ret.) » Wed Jun 20, 2018 8:00 pm

Weapon wrote:
Tue Jun 19, 2018 5:53 am
it’s almost like I planned that out or something.
Com'on, you plan everything out.

Really interesting mod. How does it help when launching rounds down range?
0 x
LT

Go Navy! Beat Army!

ImageImage

ncjw
Member
Posts: 248
Joined: Tue Jun 05, 2018 9:16 am
x 110

Re: Canik TP9 Series Modifications and Upgrades

Post by ncjw » Wed Jun 20, 2018 9:31 pm

Why not jam in a bunch of cheap lead fishing weights (or lead shot) that fit and lock them in with the tungsten putty? Wouldn't that be reversible and nearly as much mass as all of the gaps would be filled and no milling would be required?
0 x

User avatar
Weapon
Global Moderator
Posts: 130
Joined: Wed Apr 25, 2018 2:08 pm
Founding Member #: 005
x 44
x 77

Re: Canik TP9 Series Modifications and Upgrades

Post by Weapon » Wed Jun 20, 2018 10:47 pm

LT USN (Ret.) wrote:
Wed Jun 20, 2018 8:00 pm
Weapon wrote:
Tue Jun 19, 2018 5:53 am
it’s almost like I planned that out or something.
Com'on, you plan everything out.

Really interesting mod. How does it help when launching rounds down range?
I only plan out the scent for my DIY CLP. All of my other discoveries are purely accidental.

Playing around with weight on a pistol is always fun but balance is really subjective. To me, the pistol has better balance with a bit more weight in the back and balance helps with target acquisition. As it is below bore axis and non-reciprocating weight, it definitely reduces the recoil of the SFX when using loads near minimum power factor. As a bonus, the weight gives the slide something to push against so if you are shooting weak hand and get a bad grip on the pistol, it doesn't have nearly as much of a tendency to wrench your gears.

I am cranking out several different loads tonight from low to relatively high PF. If the storms will blow out by tomorrow afternoon, I am going to do some side by side testing with an unweighted SFX tomorrow.

Edit: old forum count plus new forum count: 22,465...I apparently need to come up with something more interesting to say. dammit.
1 x

User avatar
Weapon
Global Moderator
Posts: 130
Joined: Wed Apr 25, 2018 2:08 pm
Founding Member #: 005
x 44
x 77

Lead vs. Tungsten

Post by Weapon » Thu Jun 21, 2018 3:30 am

ncjw wrote:
Wed Jun 20, 2018 9:31 pm
Why not jam in a bunch of cheap lead fishing weights (or lead shot) that fit and lock them in with the tungsten putty? Wouldn't that be reversible and nearly as much mass as all of the gaps would be filled and no milling would be required?
Tungsten is about 1.75 times more dense than lead and you do not have that much space behind the backstrap. If you mill out the small backstrap as shown above and use high purity tungsten weights that are the largest size you can fit after some modifications to the backstrap and the slots in the frame, you can add around 3.25-3.5oz. If you did all of the same and crammed it full of the most dense lead you could get your hands on (which would also be fairly soft and toxic). it would be about 2oz at most. With tungsten putty + lead weights, it would be somewhat less than 2oz because tungsten putty isn't very dense unless you are considering its density relative to some other type of weighted putty. Even somewhat compressed pure tungsten powder is considerably lighter than a solid 99.9% tungsten weight. Compressed pure tungsten powder has a specific gravity of around 12 where the tungsten weight has a specific gravity of around 19.3 or so. 1.75 to 1.95oz vs. 3.25-3.5oz may not sound like much, but it is a considerable difference when you are trying to shift the balance of the pistol and also add enough weight to effect recoil.

If you just wanted two ounces, you could very likely do that with the smaller Tungsten weights, some Tungsten putty and no or very minimal frame or backstrap modifications. However, I would still want the structure of the tungsten weights and epoxy putty over the slots in the frame. The problem with tungsten putty, lead putty and just about any other weighted putty that is non-hardening is it will move. If you roll tungsten putty around in your hands for a few seconds, it becomes somewhat saggy. In the backstrap of an SFX, in the middle of summer, you would find it oozing into your mags pretty quickly unless you find a foolproof and shockproof method to completely seal up the slots between the backstrap and the mag. The worst case scenario for cheap lead weights and tungsten putty without sealing the slots would be: the lead weights shift, the tungsten putty starts oozing into the magwell area, you slap in a new mag and chamber a round that has a wad of tungsten putty stuck to it. It might go downrange or just be a squib or it might be a boom.

Epoxy plus lead is also a problem. Epoxy never sticks to lead very well. If you have lead suspended in epoxy and add quite a bit of ongoing vibration and shock to it, the lead will start working free of the epoxy. Not sure how long that would last as I have never tried it in a 9mm but I would expect some rattle after a few matches.

The minor frame mod and backstrap mod may look a bit spooky with tungsten and epoxy but it is incredibly strong after the epoxy cures (24hrs at 72 degrees F). Where the backstrap had a bit of polymer supporting it, it is now filled with tungsten and an epoxy that has compressive strength of 13,000 PSI (lead would be about 1740 PSI), adhesion sheer strength of 1,800 PSI and tensile strength of 4,000 PSI -- it isn't going anywhere unless I really, really want it gone and I have a power tool on hand that can manage high rpms.

Since I mentioned pure tungsten powder...
I actually thought that would work. I had some left over from building a custom-weight, silent AR buffer (now there's a fun DIY project I need to add to the 'other guns' area of the forum) so I gave it a shot. After the silent buffer project, I was fairly sure I could cram enough of it into an unmodded backstrap and get some significant weight. I tried it and realized it was epic fail even if I compressed it with a huge amount of force and then managed to seal it up well enough to make it stay in there - there just wasn't enough space around all the polymer cross supports and studs to get enough of it into the backstrap.
0 x

ncjw
Member
Posts: 248
Joined: Tue Jun 05, 2018 9:16 am
x 110

Re: Canik TP9 Series Modifications and Upgrades

Post by ncjw » Thu Jun 21, 2018 7:36 am

That certainly answered the question "why not?" - it was already considered an rejected for reasonable reasons.

I agree that adding a couple of ounces will change the balance and reduce recoil somewhat, but on an already 30 oz gun with say an additional 2 oz added, the extra ounce or two isn't going to make that much of a difference (2 oz is about five 9mm rounds, so going from full to empty is an 8 oz difference).

In any case, I'm just jealous that you have extra SFX's around to experiment with...
0 x

User avatar
Weapon
Global Moderator
Posts: 130
Joined: Wed Apr 25, 2018 2:08 pm
Founding Member #: 005
x 44
x 77

Re: Canik TP9 Series Modifications and Upgrades

Post by Weapon » Thu Jun 21, 2018 9:07 am

ncjw wrote:
Thu Jun 21, 2018 7:36 am
That certainly answered the question "why not?" - it was already considered an rejected for reasonable reasons.

I agree that adding a couple of ounces will change the balance and reduce recoil somewhat, but on an already 30 oz gun with say an additional 2 oz added, the extra ounce or two isn't going to make that much of a difference (2 oz is about five 9mm rounds, so going from full to empty is an 8 oz difference).

In any case, I'm just jealous that you have extra SFX's around to experiment with...
At 130ish power factor in Carry Optics or Production, 3.5oz or so will make more of a difference than you would expect but only so long as it is in the right place on the pistol. The top 10 to 15 in a decent sized field of shooters is often separated by microseconds...3.0-3.5oz can make up some of those microseconds.

It will actually be more of a help in CO than in Production. To put it mildly, current production gun weight rules really handicap almost all polymer framed pistols because the maximum weight limit is: "4 ounces over OFM listed weight with empty magazine inserted."
As such, in production division
If you are shooting a 9mm Canik TP9SFX, you top out ~34oz
If you are shooting a 9mm CZ Shadow 2, you top out ~51oz.
If you are shooting a 9mm Tanfoglio Stock III,........ ~53.4oz (a mere 20oz more than the SFX).

Carry Optics is a slightly different story because the weight rules are different.
CO Maximum Weight: "45 oz. including optic and empty magazine."
The optic is above-bore, reciprocating weight so you still want to stay as light as possible on the optic but the remainder of the rule currently seems to translate to "so long as we can't see it, it's legal" (give or take a couple odd rules quirks) and that makes all kinds of sneaky weight adding extremism very tempting...thus far I have resisted that temptation...some. :) Coming soon to a forum near you...a 44.8ish ounce TP9sfx :lol: Nah....I will not get that carried away with it.
0 x

ncjw
Member
Posts: 248
Joined: Tue Jun 05, 2018 9:16 am
x 110

Re: Canik TP9 Series Modifications and Upgrades

Post by ncjw » Thu Jun 21, 2018 9:26 am

...CNC machines are pretty amazing nowadays, you could probably order up a steel SFX.
0 x

User avatar
Weapon
Global Moderator
Posts: 130
Joined: Wed Apr 25, 2018 2:08 pm
Founding Member #: 005
x 44
x 77

Re: Canik TP9 Series Modifications and Upgrades

Post by Weapon » Thu Jun 21, 2018 9:49 am

ncjw wrote:
Thu Jun 21, 2018 9:26 am
...CNC machines are pretty amazing nowadays, you could probably order up a steel SFX.
External mod. Not allowed. They are forcing us to be sneaky.

Speaking of sneaky, version 3.0 of the Sneaky Tungsten Weighted Backstrap (STWB) is in the works. It won't be quite as heavy but it also will not require frame modifications.
0 x

User avatar
Ghostwolf308
Staff Member
Posts: 223
Joined: Tue Apr 24, 2018 7:26 pm
Founding Member #: 009
x 26
x 29

Re: Canik TP9 Series Modifications and Upgrades

Post by Ghostwolf308 » Thu Jun 21, 2018 11:07 am

Just add the ar buffer to your ar tuning thread i brought over :)
1 x

User avatar
Weapon
Global Moderator
Posts: 130
Joined: Wed Apr 25, 2018 2:08 pm
Founding Member #: 005
x 44
x 77

Re: Canik TP9 Series Modifications and Upgrades

Post by Weapon » Thu Jun 21, 2018 12:42 pm

Ghostwolf308 wrote:
Thu Jun 21, 2018 11:07 am
Just add the ar buffer to your ar tuning thread i brought over :)
I had almost forgotten about that thread...that was during one of my AR building rants when the AR zzzzzzzrrrrrrp! noise had really started to annoy me. After I de-zzzzzzzzzrrrrrrrp'ed my ARs, the buffer tick-tick started annoying me and the silent buffer upgrade was the solution to it. ARs are much better when de-zzzrped and de-tick-ticked.
1 x

User avatar
LT USN (Ret.)
Global Moderator
Posts: 477
Joined: Tue Jun 05, 2018 11:17 am
Founding Member #: 7599
CF Member: 7599
Location: Louisiana
x 231
x 264

Re: Canik TP9 Series Modifications and Upgrades

Post by LT USN (Ret.) » Fri Jun 22, 2018 6:36 am

Weapon wrote:
Thu Jun 21, 2018 12:42 pm
ARs are much better when de-zzzrped and de-tick-ticked.
Yeah, what he said. I think...
0 x
LT

Go Navy! Beat Army!

ImageImage

User avatar
Weapon
Global Moderator
Posts: 130
Joined: Wed Apr 25, 2018 2:08 pm
Founding Member #: 005
x 44
x 77

Re: Canik TP9 Series Modifications and Upgrades

Post by Weapon » Fri Jun 22, 2018 8:45 am

LT USN (Ret.) wrote:
Fri Jun 22, 2018 6:36 am
Weapon wrote:
Thu Jun 21, 2018 12:42 pm
ARs are much better when de-zzzrped and de-tick-ticked.
Yeah, what he said. I think...
SEALs and Delta refuse to carry any AR-based weapon system that doesn’t have both mods...

The weight of the guns at the top of production division is still somewhat amazing to me. Minor power factor 9mm “production” (cough-cough-BS) pistols that weigh almost 50oz. To put that into perspective, my old school, steel-framed Para Ordnance P16 in .40S&W with ambi extended thumb safety, aluminum magwell and tungsten full-length guide rod weighs several ounces less than the most popular CZ or the Tanfoglio pistols for production division and the Para is sending ammo downrange that is +40PF over the typical 9mm minor load. They almost need to break that into two subdivisions: production polymer and production heavy metal or possibly require a higher PF for pistols over 35oz just to level it out some. I doubt that will happen because gaming out everything to the extreme is just part of USPSA. “You can compete in production division with whatever ya got...but if you wanna win at level 2 or above matches, please consider purchasing this $1000 50oz pistol”
1 x

User avatar
Weapon
Global Moderator
Posts: 130
Joined: Wed Apr 25, 2018 2:08 pm
Founding Member #: 005
x 44
x 77

Re: Canik TP9 Series Modifications and Upgrades

Post by Weapon » Sat Jun 23, 2018 1:30 pm

I just found a deal for anyone who wants to play around with adding tungsten weights to their Canik...

This is an incremental set of 3/8" diameter tungsten weights so there are a few different lengths included. It normally runs $20 and that is about average for this type of tungsten weight set. They are currently on sale for $1.99 +$3 shipping. I just ordered two sets and the total with shipping was $7.18 - the first two sets of similar tungsten weights I bought before cost me $38...so that is one helluva deal,

grrrrr...the link will not work - get on amazon and search for "Horizon Hobby Pinecar Tungsten Incremental Cylinder Weights 3 oz." -- they sold by Phil's Hobby Shop.

edit: even if you are not considering the sfx weight mod, you should consider grabbing a set of these. They are great for tweaking the balance on rifles and shotguns.
0 x

mikeAZ
Member
Posts: 10
Joined: Sun Jun 10, 2018 12:23 am
x 5

Re: Canik TP9 Series Modifications and Upgrades

Post by mikeAZ » Sat Jun 23, 2018 3:25 pm

No findum???.... I tried all different doors/ways??? Prime only deal????...
0 x

Post Reply