wild cat mccane
New member
Hey TFL friends,
In the last little bit I’ve picked up my first metal frames; Walther Q5, Sig P226 Elite, Shadow 2, Shadow 2 SAO, and now a Tanfoglio Stock Master.
So…
When I picked up the Stock Master, the FFL store let slip that they all were playing with it. Guy said, “yeah we had a hard time opening the IFG box (it’s push in two tabs while moving up) but when we did, we all loved the feel and look….not that we played with it!”
That wasn’t mentioned for any gun I’ve picked up. It just looks good. The hard chrome is perfect. The wood grips look good with wood grain. The sights look smart. Skeletonized slide looks good. The barrel looks like a tank.
“If it doesn’t move, chrome it!” I’ve heard before. Here the slide moves exceptionally well. Good or not, the slide floats in feel vs the hard pull back with the CZ that just moves to the end because of the first hard pull. Very different feeling. No comment on performance, but the Tanfo slide moves smoother than my two Shadow 2.
Tanfoglio comes with a bull cone barrel with bushing. So positive Tanfo. CZ comes with anti glare channels on the slide—that seems to be done with by Walther with the PDP, but I really like those. So negative for Tanfo for not having those.
The only other negative against it is the slide release is too forward compared to the Shadow.
Where the Tanfo is much better than the CZ is the grip. I wrote in my original review of the Shadow 2 and P226 Elite which I picked up at the same time, that thought the E2 grip and Shadow 2 are exactly the same shape, the Shadow 2 is too narrow at the knuckle of the hand. It leaves you feeling liking you can’t torque down at the center of your grip. Others agreed. The Tanfo grip does not slim here. With my small hands it perfectly filled my grip but was just as slim as the CZ. Major difference here in grip, while both being the same.
Firing pin block in the Tanfo but not in the CZ. The Tanfo does stack in the DA at the end. Otherwise, the reset and pulls feel the same. If someone measured them differently, that’s fine. But the hand isn’t feeling it. Both are crisp with a not quite Sig SRT lightening reset, but “really good.” Again, the reset on the Shadow 2 isn't amazing either--Sig SRT is a LOT shorter.
Didn't take it directly to the range. I know. The most important part.
I would say that the hard chrome is a benefit. I think the Shadow 2 is an exceptional price point right now ($922). I think they are too similar for one just to be the obvious winner. The hard chrome looks great and will wear better than the poly. Does that matter, probably not. But it does make the gun just look better.
It's a really nice-looking gun that I’m not seeing or feeling negatives that the Shadow 2 clearly wins out. That’s great for both guns.
Take care
Zero time spend on pics;
In the last little bit I’ve picked up my first metal frames; Walther Q5, Sig P226 Elite, Shadow 2, Shadow 2 SAO, and now a Tanfoglio Stock Master.
So…
When I picked up the Stock Master, the FFL store let slip that they all were playing with it. Guy said, “yeah we had a hard time opening the IFG box (it’s push in two tabs while moving up) but when we did, we all loved the feel and look….not that we played with it!”
That wasn’t mentioned for any gun I’ve picked up. It just looks good. The hard chrome is perfect. The wood grips look good with wood grain. The sights look smart. Skeletonized slide looks good. The barrel looks like a tank.
“If it doesn’t move, chrome it!” I’ve heard before. Here the slide moves exceptionally well. Good or not, the slide floats in feel vs the hard pull back with the CZ that just moves to the end because of the first hard pull. Very different feeling. No comment on performance, but the Tanfo slide moves smoother than my two Shadow 2.
Tanfoglio comes with a bull cone barrel with bushing. So positive Tanfo. CZ comes with anti glare channels on the slide—that seems to be done with by Walther with the PDP, but I really like those. So negative for Tanfo for not having those.
The only other negative against it is the slide release is too forward compared to the Shadow.
Where the Tanfo is much better than the CZ is the grip. I wrote in my original review of the Shadow 2 and P226 Elite which I picked up at the same time, that thought the E2 grip and Shadow 2 are exactly the same shape, the Shadow 2 is too narrow at the knuckle of the hand. It leaves you feeling liking you can’t torque down at the center of your grip. Others agreed. The Tanfo grip does not slim here. With my small hands it perfectly filled my grip but was just as slim as the CZ. Major difference here in grip, while both being the same.
Firing pin block in the Tanfo but not in the CZ. The Tanfo does stack in the DA at the end. Otherwise, the reset and pulls feel the same. If someone measured them differently, that’s fine. But the hand isn’t feeling it. Both are crisp with a not quite Sig SRT lightening reset, but “really good.” Again, the reset on the Shadow 2 isn't amazing either--Sig SRT is a LOT shorter.
Didn't take it directly to the range. I know. The most important part.
I would say that the hard chrome is a benefit. I think the Shadow 2 is an exceptional price point right now ($922). I think they are too similar for one just to be the obvious winner. The hard chrome looks great and will wear better than the poly. Does that matter, probably not. But it does make the gun just look better.
It's a really nice-looking gun that I’m not seeing or feeling negatives that the Shadow 2 clearly wins out. That’s great for both guns.
Take care
Zero time spend on pics;
