Nice write up. :thumb: I hope it works better than my SIG P226 Classic 22 which was unreliable from the get go. Only lapping of the slide/frame fit eased up function. I'd imagine a mil rounds would have realized similar results, but I'm just not patient enough.
The scuttlebutt I've heard is it's just one more wannabe lookalike but not really 1911 in .22lr manufactured by an outside contractor who pays Browning to use their name.
Haven't fired with it yet but it makes a lot more sense than the Fastfire. It is an iron sight with laser so it's instant into action which is good for me because I might have to draw and fire quickly in the business I'm in. The Fastfire has no iron sight capability and is useless in a fast draw or dead battery situation. The Fastfire sounded like a good idea at first but like a lot of do dads the reality just didn't pan out once I had a while to use and think about it. The Laserlyte appears very robustly built, came with 2 sets of batteries and a brass installation punch.
I took this Burris Fastfire II sight off my SA XDm9: and replaced it with this new Laserlyte rear sight: I then took this Bushnell Holosight off my S&W 41: and installed the Burris Fasrfire II from my SA XDm on it: I like the swaps.
We've had a bunch of these through and there ain't no way on God's green earth they are worth $129. They're just taking advantage of the P22 enthusiast's desire to accessorize with a fitted laser.
I couldn't agree more. My first handgun was a Ruger .22 auto and I've owned at least a half dozen since. I own one now, a 50th anniversary Standard model.
It's been my experience with film cameras that the expensive f1.0 normal lens' only significant advantage over the f1.8 normal was speed. Photo quality was virtually the same otherwise. The expensive high speed lenses are just more versatile and for that reason, in my experience, worth the extra cash. I spent most of my photo equipment money on lenses. Never stopped seeking out better ones. The bodies were secondary, especially since I shot only in full manual mode with a hand held meter. Virtually any decent body would do. In film photography the 3 factors that effect photo quality the most are the film, the lens and the photographer.