New Pardini SP w/ integrated picatinny on barrel shroud.

I've been considering the purchase of a SP .22/.32 Bullseye combo. One of the main issues as you guys know is mounting rings for a red dot especially on the .32acp since the rings are known to slip. I was checking on options today, I spoke with both Larry's and BME, both said they no longer make scope mounts for the Pardini. Larry suggested I call PardiniUSA as they might offer rails. 

So I spoke with Vladimir at PardiniUSA. He said they were about to release an updated SP for Bullseye use with an integrated picatinny rail in the barrel shroud. It wasn't clear how far back the rail would extend however he did mention possibly having to use 2 scope rings on the front half of the red dot so sounds like it wouldn't extend as far as the old Larry's rail. He mentioned this would get the dot lower than if using a rail adapter. My only concern without seeing more info is possible balance issues if it requires the dot to be mounted too far forward, some of this could be offset by removing some of the 6 counterweights. On the plus side this will allow using a dot for each caliber so you won't have to juggle adjustments as much, just your standard 25 to 50 yard adjustments. Plus you won't have to buy an additional $200 worth of rails and possibly have to have a brand new gun drilled & tapped.

Vladimir did seem a bit defensive though. When I mentioned scope rings slipping he blamed it on people using the wrong scope rings (not Pardini rings) however I swear I've heard of issues using their rings as well. I also asked him if there had been any adjustment in the slightly oversized bore on their .32acp for the new model, he stated it was a propitiatory tapered bore however it seems if it were tapered when people slugged their bore it would measure the smallest diameter but I hear most barrels measure out close to .314". 

Anyway, its good to see Pardini is improving their product for the US bullseye market. I'll be eagerly awaiting pictures and reviews from early adopters.

I'm surprised there is no interest in this news. It seems the scope mounting issues were one of the top complaints I read about the SP lineup.

Kodiak mount is the fix KC posted some photos of it, personally I like the way Keefer did his.

If you are doing 2 calibers having a scope mounted to each barrel is a good thing. There are zeroing issues when swapping calibers.
Jon

You beat me to it Jon. The new KC Kodiak mount would be great with a dedicated pistol but with 2 calibers it will sure be nice to have separate dots mounted on the shroud.

Jon,
I have tremendous respect for your knowledge and I'm a fairly new shooter.  Could you please articulate the issues?  If the issues you cite are the fact that significant sight changes are required, I agree. With my current mount, .32ACP zero at 50yds is 17 clicks up from .22LR 50yd zero and .32ACP at 25yds is down 8 clicks from there.  If your issue is having to remember to make the sight change, I also agree so I've made sight change part of my protocol for changing caliber.  Is there something further that I need to know?

I've been shooting both .22LR and .32ACP with a single Aimpoint.  I have four marks for elevation (.22LR 50yd & 25yd; .32 50yd & 25yd) and two marks for windage (.22LR, .32ACP).  

Prior to upgrading to Aimpoint, I also used a single Ultradot for two calibers on the same frame.  The ultradot did not require windage adjustment but I attribute that to the fact that the Ultradot was properly centered and level on the frame.  When I get my new Kodiak Machine Aimpoint mount, I hope the Aimpoint will also end up centered and level.
Glen

Glen, it's just a lot to keep up with. Its obviously not impossibly since you've proved to do it. You have 8 different combinations of knob adjustments with your markings. Worst case scenario is you're mid match and realize you didn't make an adjustment properly then you're stuck playing catch up with the scope instead of focusing on shooting. I could see it not being a big issue if you're really disciplined with your process.

If the new rail integrated shroud ends up putting too much weight out front the best bet may still be going with KC's new mount.

Zane,
Yes, I see that it could seem complicated.  What works for me...
.22LR marks are in black.  25yd settings are DOWN from 50yd settings.  
.32ACP marks are in red.  25yd settings are DOWN from 50yd settings.

Since I'm accustomed to having two marks (50yd & 25yd) for every bullseye gun, I just need to be on the right color marks for the caliber.  The two red (.32) elevation marks are both UP from the black .22 marks since the .22LR velocities are a good bit higher.

If I forget to make sight changes between .22 and .32, it's obvious on the first slow fire Center Fire shot.  A shot called "X" will be 9-ring at 7 o'clock.  If that's the only point I lose at the 50yd line, I'm having a very good day.

Glen, aren't the knob caps pretty tiny on the Aimpoint, I know the Matchdot knob cap is pretty small. Do you try to engrave it an bit then paint it? I guess I could see having the exact number of clicks written down on your box then just using the colored marks to make sure you're in the correct general area.

Well they've posted pictures of the new model with the picatinny shroud.





With the rail being so far forward and as short as it is it kind of seems like a reflex sight might be the way to go since they're only about an ounce. Even an aimpoint micro will add almost 4oz to the front of the gun. You can remove the counter weights in the front I suppose to offset the weight but I don't know how much they weigh.

For balance and aesthetics, that looks god awful. I can't think of a worse way to do that, unless they're also including a cantilevered scope mount that extends rearward. I'd think the ideal solution would've been to just machine a weaver rail into the frame, but perhaps there wasn't enough meat in frame, or they were concerned it would make it too bullseye-centric and would ruin things for folks shooting iron sights in ISSF and CMP EIC events.

It's also showing that these new picatinny bullseye pistols are 6" not 5". I've been communicating with Alex at Pardini and he claims they reballanced it to make the 6" perform like the 5". 

He said the steel counter weights are 17 grams each times 6 weights. So you could remove them all and gain 3.6 ounces up front, almost exactly what the standard 30mm ultradot weighs. The only weird thing is that due to the short picatinny rail you'll have to put both mounts on the front of the dot.

I'll definitely be waiting for feedback from early adopters before dropping the change on a 22/32 combo.

I've been thinking about getting back into Bullseye and purchasing a couple of the new Pardini SP Bullseye 6" in 22lr and 32S&W but the Picatinny on the front doesn't make sense to me.  Why wasn't it incorporated into the frame?  Is there any advantage to the 6" over the 5"?  And is the gas compensator worth the extra $100?

Beeser,
Everyone has their own preferences so there is no "wrong" choice.  However, as someone who has been shooting Pardini SPBE for three years, I'll offer these suggestions...

The front Picatinny doesn't make sense to me either. You can get Warne rings (for Ultradot et al) or Kodiak Machine mount (for Aimpoint) to mount the optics on the dovetail where your eyes and weight balance work best.

I'm not sure why you would choose 32S&W over .32ACP.  Ask Alex, Vladimir or Emil what they would recommend.

The SP/HP already has a spring/weight recoil mitigation system.  The .22LR recoil is already more of a wiggle than a recoil.  In that configuration, it is a legal gun for CMP .22 EIC matches (iron sights).  With the gas compensator, it is NOT legal for EIC.

Regarding getting two guns (.22lr & .32) there are a few things to consider:
Two guns means you have backup for any "frame" issues which tend to be related to trigger adjustment and sear engagement.  You don't have backup for extractor, firing pin or recoil spring issues.
Unless your grip is "perfect" as delivered, it takes a lot of time to tweak it.  Two guns means having two grips to tweak.  It is theoretically possible, to move one grip from frame to frame.  It's a single screw but it's not quite as easy as swapping caliber.
Two guns probably means you'll have a 2lb trigger on the .22 and a 2.5lb trigger on the .32.

So, I actually have two guns: SPBE and HP (in .32ACP). For them, I have three grips (Rink, Rink Steep, Dick Horton with Pardini GT45 grip angle).  With all of that, I actually shoot one of them.  I have the Rink "Steep" grip on my SPBE.  The trigger has been adjusted to 2.5lbs.  I have an Aimpoint H1 micro mounted on a Kodiak Machine base as far back as the dovetail will allow.  I have red marks on the sights for .32ACP zeros and black marks for .22LR zeros.  I can convert between .22LR and .32ACP in under a minute.  I have made changing sight settings part of my conversion process.  I get dual use for a single expensive Aimpoint.  Best of all, I shoot .22 and CF with EXACTLY the same grip and trigger. My second frame is currently iron sights only which means for an EIC match, I just add the .22 conversion.  I've spent too much time trying to get the triggers on both guns to feel exactly the same.  The are very close but I can't get them to feel identical.
I hope this helps.  If anything above is contradicted by a High Master, please ignore my input for that topic.  I promise, the HM is right.

Forgot to mention...
Pardini actually makes a rail that extends the full length of the frame for the SP.  They call it the "SP Scope Mount Sledge" with part number "ATSP".  You can find a picture on the Pardini (Italy) website.  http://www.pardini.it/weapon/accessori_target_pistols.php#

That makes mounting any Picatinny style scope easy.  The rail goes with the barrel so you have to have one for each caliber and hence a sight for each too.

carykiteboarder - Thanks for the comments.  I purchased a Pardini SP .22LR and .32ACP conversion a few years ago but sold it after dropping out of Bullseye.  Switching barrels always felt cumbersome and thought that if I ever got back into the sport and purchase another Pardini I would get two pistols.  Our local Bullseye group does not shoot beyond 25 yds so the benefits going with .32ACP, as I understand them, would be lost.  Besides, I'm curious about loading/shooting .32 S&W.  I could always buy a .32ACP conversion if the need arises.  As for the grips, I used Rinks and they always felt fine without modification.  Good point about adjusting to two different triggers but I'm afraid my skills are and probably will never be honed enough to matter much.

Apparently it doesn't make much sense to consider the compensator but what about the 6" versus 5" models?

6" will be extremely nose heavy. I think its a huge mistake. Loading for .32 S&W is a learned skill! Almost like making HM. Be prepared to spend lots of time and money getting it right.
Jon

I was interested in the new Pardini as well, but after a bit looking online, my takeaway on the new guns was that Pardini added features that no one wanted or needed.  If I recall correctly, in a youtube video promoting the new gun, even one of Pardini’s sponsored shooters said he would not be shooting it. Ouch.

 The general excitement level about the “improved” pistol has been something between a yawn and an eyebrow raise.

I even felt that way about their new air pistol, which seems to be the old pistol with a new piece of anodized aluminum shroud over the barrel and a higher price.

Not denying the pistols are nice and shoot well. I would love to have one some day, but I am holding out for the one with a cup holder attachment coming out in 2018.  

Jon Eulette wrote:6" will be extremely nose heavy. I think its a huge mistake. Loading for .32 S&W is a learned skill! Almost like making HM. Be prepared to spend lots of time and money getting it right.
Jon

Thanks Jon!  I recall loading for .32ACP wasn't exactly trouble-free either unless using the Hornady projectiles and thought the bugs would've been worked out by now for .32 S&W since it's been around for so long.  Where do the problems lie loading .32 S&W - casing?  crimp? setting OAL?  load?  projectile?  I recall the first problem I had with .32ACP was the ID of the casing.  When Starline eventually started making a casing I think that problem was solved.  And lastly, am I correct to assume that shooting .32 S&W will not be an issue at the shorter distance of 25 yds?

willnewton wrote:I was interested in the new Pardini as well, but after a bit looking online, my takeaway on the new guns was that Pardini added features that no one wanted or needed.  If I recall correctly, in a youtube video promoting the new gun, even one of Pardini’s sponsored shooters said he would not be shooting it. Ouch.

 The general excitement level about the “improved” pistol has been something between a yawn and an eyebrow raise.

I even felt that way about their new air pistol, which seems to be the old pistol with a new piece of anodized aluminum shroud over the barrel and a higher price.

Not denying the pistols are nice and shoot well. I would love to have one some day, but I am holding out for the one with a cup holder attachment coming out in 2018.  

Ouch indeed!  I saw the Pardini video but don't recall seeing the sponsored shooter's comments, that is if we've seen the same video.  But now I'm a little confused, is it just the 6" that is new and the 5" is the old style or are both lengths the new style that have the convenience of interchangeability?

These bullets are what the pardini 32 acp people are using for lead. https://tbbullets.com/bullets/handgun-bullets/32-2/

solid performance i hear.