Stock Car Extreme

[Allen Yerke]

Anerror by broker or exchange. Exchange clearing out part of their books incorrectly is an example. Most exchanges make firms reopen their positions for after market hours. There may have been an issue doing so or exchange could incorrectly cancel positions. I was in the direct feed industry for years and this was a big issue. At the same time the broker can issue a no limit buy on accident (or has software that is prospecting and said software has a bug or written poorly).

unscrupulous parties looking to feign an upswing or downswing in market. Let's say you hold 500k shares in a stock that sells for $11. You could possibly buy 100 shares for $13. Trust me you will find a seller. Then you are hoping that people see that trade as a "norm" and trade from there, allowing you to rake in $1M for spending an extra $200 - NOTE this is not normal and an extreme example. This was so common in the early days of NASDAQ after hours that they discontinued using the after hours trades as part of historical information that they keep like daily/yearly high or closing price. The liquidity allows for manipulation. It isn't seen as much now since this has been done a million times but it does still happen.

Many of the above comments are correct about illiquidity. If someone needs to trade at a time of low liquidity, for instance when the markets are closed, the bid/ask spread can often be large to induce someone to trade at odd times. Especially as the broker/bank on the other side of the trade can't immediately go to the market to close out the risk as they often prefer to do.

Stock II and III should have the same grip feel and same trigger feel and parts. The Xtreme guns do have the Xtreme trigger group parts which will improve the DA and AS trigger pull. You can also get a standard gun and replace the parts yourself, along with polishing. That is the route I went with my Stock II, and it was a LOT cheaper than a Stock II Xtreme.

The Stock III is about .25 inches longer on the slide, barrel and dust cover, so it will have more weight forward. I had a stock III for a few months and found it too muzzle heavy for a minor PF 9mm gun. I feel like the Stock II is slightly more balanced and quicker in the transitions. Also the Stock III has a longer slide and straight barrel, meaning the slide is heavier than the slide on the stock II because of it's shorter slide and bull (cone) barrel. The heavier barrel may make the gun feel like it shoots with more of a push than a snap of recoil, but I like the faster cycling of the lighter slide. It helps me get my sights back on target faster, and reduces muzzle dip.

Granted... much of this is personal opinion, so in the end of the day, you can be very competitive with either of your options. Weather you buy the pre done Xtreme model or do the work yourself will depend on your budget, timing and technical abilities.

The only difference between the extreme and the factory models is basically you're getting your Tanfo tuned by the smiths at the factory. Yea the extremes come with some EG parts already but you can install every one of those yourself. And the Extremes have fancy colors. I've owned every competition Tanfo I think as far as the steel framed guns go and they are all good guns. My Stock 2 is my favorite but my Limited Pro is freaking growing on me. I think it's underrated. I wish I would have gotten one a long time ago, lol

A lot of us USPSA shooters glance over the fact that you are an IPSC shooter... (I did, sorry) Make sure you take whatever we say and double check it against your rule book so you don't run into any surprises.

Shadow 2 hands down . It is not even close to me. It is more reliable, has better trigger, better customer support. I have shot over 60k rd through my practice shadow 1 gun, 15k through my accushadow match gun. I have two shadow 2s now. 15k through my practice gun as of this moment. Not a single issue. I have shot 3 different stock 2s. I am yet to find one with a trigger as good as my czs. Stock2 can be run well obviously but it is actually more difficult to get them running. .. And you just need a lighter main spring and an extended FP with shadow 2.

Both guns are similar size depending on the choice of grips you run. I can tell you that if you struggle reaching for the double action trigger, the factory curved tanfo trigger that comes on the regular stock 2/3 is way easier to reach then compared to the cz trigger or the xtreme tanfo triggers.

S2X for me, the trigger improved also alot with minimal use. Ive left it as is, Xtreme medium springs 10lbs recoil spring (AU barrel/long slide). It lights off anything and is very smooth and nice, absolutely no problems putting the DA shot where it needs to be.

cheby, I respect your opinion, but obviously you've not shot any stock 2's that were correctly tuned. The aftermarket parts and a competent 'smith will have a s2 with a better trigger, and running better than a shadow two.

Perhaps... But the two I shot had all the parts from Patriot Defense. The third one was built by Bodkin... Do not get me wrong - they are nice guns with very nice triggers. They are just different. Considering that nothing actually needs to be done for Shadow 2 except replacing the main spring, I just do not see any need for Stock2/3 at all

Perhaps... But the two I shot had all the parts from Patriot Defense. The third one was build by Bodkin... Do not get me wrong - they are nice guns with very nice triggers. They are just different. Considering that nothing actually needs to be done for Shadow 2 except replacing the main spring, I just do not see any need for Stock2/3 at all

Honestly, the discussion about which trigger is better between a Shadow 2 and a Tanfoglio is kind of dumb. Both guns can produce a great trigger. No one can argue that. I mean, let's just say that neither is a Glock. How much it costs to produce the trigger is all relative to the investment the individual wants to put into it. The Stock 2 that I used to shoot had a fantastic trigger, if not a slightly better one, considering my personal preferences. The reason why I switched to a Shadow 2 is because of all the other reliability issues I had with the Stock 2. I just couldn't get that platform to run reliably enough for me to feel confident about it. On the other hand, I do have the utmost confidence with my CZ. Also, it was the newest thing, so I just wanted to try it. So far, so good.

In this Economic Letter, based on research by Kruttli, Roth Tran, and Watugala (2023), we use firm-level exposures to hurricanes from 1996 to 2019 to understand how extreme weather events affect firm performance in financial markets as measured by option and stock prices. We show that asset prices in financial markets adjust to account for significant uncertainty for companies that have been hit by hurricanes. We then show that investors historically underreacted to the volatility arising from the uncertain impacts of a hurricane and did not efficiently update their volatility expectations based on the information available in real time. We find that investor underreaction to hurricanes diminished after Hurricane Sandy, suggesting that the informational efficiency of markets improved after this particularly salient extreme weather event that many investors experienced personally.

Extreme weather events can affect businesses in a variety of ways. In addition to damaging physical assets, such events can disrupt normal business activities, imposing costs like lost sales, evacuations, or shutting down and restarting of plant operations. Extreme weather events can also upset supply chains or slow demand for products. However, for some companies, such events can present opportunities, such as higher demand for products like power generators or construction supplies. Also, some firms may be able to mitigate the negative impacts of extreme weather events through insurance or adaptation. For example, companies could relocate to less vulnerable areas. However, because adaptation and insurance are costly and not always available, incomplete insurance or adaptation can leave some firms facing significant losses after extreme weather events. This can lead to investor uncertainty about how firms will fare after being hit by such events, which can be reflected in market valuations.

The thick blue line in Figure 1 shows our estimated average impact of hurricane exposure on uncertainty for a business over the months following landfall. The figure shows that market uncertainty is higher for affected firms once landfall occurs. It also shows that uncertainty increases over the next few weeks and remains elevated for an extended period before dropping substantially in the third month and beyond to a level that is not statistically distinguishable from the pre-hurricane level.

These findings suggest that firms are not fully insured or have not adapted to hurricane risk because, if they were, hurricanes would not create uncertainty for firms that are in landfall regions. This limited protection against hurricane risk could reflect the high cost or lack of availability of insurance and adaptation. For example, relocating the firm to low-risk areas could be unworkable if demand, labor supply, or natural resources that are essential to its operations are located in high-risk areas. For instance, a mining company has to operate where the oil, gas, or coal it is extracting is located. As in the examples of wildfire risk in California and hurricane risk in Florida and Louisiana, obtaining insurance against certain risks is becoming increasingly difficult. Furthermore, some impacts like declines in demand may be difficult to measure and attribute and thus may be difficult to insure against.

3a8082e126