solow/grip interference on a 22/45

The place to discuss the inner workings of firearms.

Moderators: Bullseye, Moderators

Post Reply
User avatar
GooseYArd
New member
New member
Posts: 44
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2007 9:56 am
Location: Fairfax, VA
Contact:

solow/grip interference on a 22/45

Post by GooseYArd » Tue Sep 18, 2007 9:43 am

after reading for several days about the solow mounts, I made one critical mistake when I finally installed them. I heard several people mention needing to file them to fit, but I didn't understand where the not-fitting part came in until I went to tap the receiver into the grip this morning. This was, of course, after the epoxy was nice and dry.

I'm trying to figure out if theres any way to fix this mess without busting the epoxy. anybody ever tried it? I have a feeling that filing down the top of the grip is probably not a smart idea, but that would be the easiest thing to do.

User avatar
Bullseye
Site Admin/Host
Site Admin/Host
Posts: 6382
Joined: Sun Aug 14, 2005 12:23 pm
Location: USA

Post by Bullseye » Tue Sep 18, 2007 5:46 pm

:welcome

I haven't experienced this type of problem but I have heard from folks who have and most just have to file of a couple of thousandths off the rings to make everything fit. How bad is the overlap? Altering the fame is not a good idea for the scope rings to fit. Do you have a picture of the mismatch you can post?

R,
Bullseye
Image

User avatar
GooseYArd
New member
New member
Posts: 44
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2007 9:56 am
Location: Fairfax, VA
Contact:

Post by GooseYArd » Tue Sep 18, 2007 9:29 pm

Hiya Bullseye,

What a great forum you have here! It was kind of a shock to find a site on the internet where people know what they're talking about AND they're polite about it. You guys are a good bunch.

I got a chance to look at the pistol again tonight. The overlap was hard to measure since I had never bothered to check the clearance when I didn't have the rings on. I spent a few minutes masking and filing, but it was awkward and I gave up and decided that it couldn't be easier than redoing the epoxy.

I mistakenly thought the epoxy would be hard to break, turned out to be no problem at all. My mistake was clearly putting the rings on without the grip installed. I was afraid I might ooze epoxy out the bottom of the rings and glue the grip to the receiver. Now I see that having the grip on is what ensures that you have the rings aligned correctly. duh. I think I had the rings rotated very slightly.

This time I put them on with the grip installed, and everything fits. It still looks pretty snug, I guess I'll find out whether the bottom edge of the rings are hitting the frame next time I knock it off.

thank for the advice, and I'll keep you posted!

User avatar
Bullseye
Site Admin/Host
Site Admin/Host
Posts: 6382
Joined: Sun Aug 14, 2005 12:23 pm
Location: USA

Post by Bullseye » Wed Sep 19, 2007 6:45 am

I have heard others mention that they didn't apply the epoxy to their So-Low rings because the fit was tight enough to keep the rings in place on the receiver. You also have that locking tab in the sight dovetail holding the rear ring fast and the front ring will use the scope tube in conjunction with the rear to stay firmly fastened in place. Another thought, if you haven't already epoxied the newly modified rings, is to apply some masking tape to the grip where the rings sit so any sealant run over will be kept free from direct contact with the frame.

Welcome again. You've hit it right on the head - We're one of the best kept secrets on the web and our members are some of the friendliest and most helpful anywhere. I'm looking forward to exchanging ideas and hearing your observations about your firearms in the future.

Thanks!

Bullseye
Image

User avatar
GooseYArd
New member
New member
Posts: 44
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2007 9:56 am
Location: Fairfax, VA
Contact:

Post by GooseYArd » Wed Sep 19, 2007 7:58 am

I agree- I don't think the epoxy is really necessary. If anything, it acts more like a glass bed than an adhesive. The fit is so snug that the dried film is very thin, maybe 1mil or so. Not hard to get off at all, nor was it difficult to break the bond when I needed to adjust the rings.

You can tell that the Ultradot expects to be sitting much higher above the bore than these Solows place it! I was afraid I might run out of elevation clicks!

I just shot my qualifying match for our bullseye league on a borrowed Marvel and I can't wait to get this thing snazzed up for my first match. If I can just get the grip a little thicker I think I'll be all set. Thinking about going to low-tech route, with a couple of pieces of griptape :)

Thanks Bullseye!

User avatar
Bullseye
Site Admin/Host
Site Admin/Host
Posts: 6382
Joined: Sun Aug 14, 2005 12:23 pm
Location: USA

Post by Bullseye » Wed Sep 19, 2007 5:33 pm

You could get one of those Hogue slip-on grips to add a little girth for your 22/45's grip. The Handall model will fit your 22/45.

Image

I have a Marvel Conversion Unit 1 with both of the top ends (iron sights and scope rail) and I like it a lot.

R,
Bullseye
Image

User avatar
GooseYArd
New member
New member
Posts: 44
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2007 9:56 am
Location: Fairfax, VA
Contact:

Post by GooseYArd » Wed Sep 19, 2007 8:03 pm

thanks bullseye. I have one of those handalls on a little keltec and I like the feel of it. how much of a pain is it to get the bolt release out of a 22/45 with that handall on it?

I liked the Marvel but since I haven't got any 1911's I'm not sure what I would do about a frame. still a possibility though. the best shooting I've done so far with my teammates' guns has been a S&W 41. I think maybe I'll keep borrowing stuff through the season and see if anything jumps out at me.

just back from a practice and the 22/45 ran without a hiccup with the VQ stuff in it. the trigger feels really nice. got the ultradot sighted in and ready to rumble!

User avatar
Bullseye
Site Admin/Host
Site Admin/Host
Posts: 6382
Joined: Sun Aug 14, 2005 12:23 pm
Location: USA

Post by Bullseye » Wed Sep 19, 2007 9:49 pm

I've got several M-41s. I've shot them in competition for many, many years. My only complaint is they are very ammo sensitive. I still have difficulty keeping something working through them. They work fine for a while and then they decide to get particular and stop feeding the ammo I'm using and then I have start all over again trying out brands to get another one to work.

Since I shoot three gun NRA, shooting the same platform is beneficial. Using the 1911 frame as a base is one way to keep consistency. I haven't been competing with the Marvel but I'm going to start. Its surely accurate enough and doesn't seem to be picky with ammo.

The handall grips can be a pain to remove for unlatching the mainspring housing. But the alternative is no increased girth on your polymer grip - unless you're willing to go the grinding and installing 1911 style grip panels route.

I'm happy to hear that your range session went well. Get out and practice as much as you can and your skills will vastly improve.

R,
Bullseye
Image

User avatar
GooseYArd
New member
New member
Posts: 44
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2007 9:56 am
Location: Fairfax, VA
Contact:

Post by GooseYArd » Wed Sep 19, 2007 10:06 pm

you think it'd be possible to put the handall on with some kind of adhesive and then cut out a slot in the back for the mainspring once it was dry? I was thinking of something like RTV or hot glue.

User avatar
Bullseye
Site Admin/Host
Site Admin/Host
Posts: 6382
Joined: Sun Aug 14, 2005 12:23 pm
Location: USA

Post by Bullseye » Wed Sep 19, 2007 10:18 pm

I don't know if that would work with a Handall grip but I have seen a fellow use RTV sealant to adhere a set of rubberized 1911 grips onto his 22/45. The result was a semi-permanent grip attachment that could be removed if necessary. The best part was the grip panels do not interfere with removing the mainspring. However, if you want to remove the hammer pivot pin or the sear pivot pin without removing the grips, then the grips will need to be pre-drilled with holes in them for access to the pins.

R,
Bullseye
Image

Post Reply