Ammo Comparison Test
I ordered some WOLF "Military Classic" and "Silver Bear" ammo to compare with the S&B 95 gr. that I've been using.
At 15 yards off the bench I wasn't awfully impressed, although my 3 ft. focal length "computer glasses" helped to define the sights a little better.
All 3 of these brands of ammo seemed to pattern in about the same place, stringing more horizontally than vertically.
I would get about 3 holes in a fairly tight group, and the other 2 would fly off to the right for some reason.
.........
A couple of observations;
The WOLF produced a lot of smoke; it would be pouring out of the receiver and back of the slide after every shot. I initially suspected blown primers, but the ones i examined did not show any signs of rupture or excessive pressure.
The BEAR is a lot easier to load into the magazine than the other 2.
S&B is #2 and WOLF is the worst; the rims really want to hang up on the case mouth below, and the lacquered steel case seems to provide greater friction.
The plated BEAR cases are really slick and they popped right into the magazine. I noticed a big difference.
After shooting the target I set up some tin cans and a couple of steel discs at around 25 yds. - and was doing much better offhand on those than I was on the target - regularly nailing them.
I angled the steel off to one side to minimize bounceback - and more than once the little 9mm MAK succeeded in knocking the fairly heavy 9" dia. by about 1/2" thick steel discs right off of the tops of the steel barrels they were perched on.
I was impressed!
The CZ-82 seems to like the same offhand grip pattern as the 1911; light pressure on the pinkie, thumb lifted off entirely - trigger slightly south of the distal knuckle and squeeze straight back towards the shoulder joint.
With mine, I have to hold right up into the middle of what I'm shooting at.