PatJones Posted March 21, 2016 Share Posted March 21, 2016 Meh...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jmob50 Posted March 24, 2016 Share Posted March 24, 2016 Why not make it a side match for cash payout and gauge interest? Would be perfect for the half day major format. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaskapopo Posted March 24, 2016 Share Posted March 24, 2016 Why not make it a side match for cash payout and gauge interest? Would be perfect for the half day major format. No thanks I want to shoot it in the normal club matches for fun. Might as well say lets make revolver a side match or single stack. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CplHOG Posted March 28, 2016 Share Posted March 28, 2016 USPSA does one thing well. Handgun matches .The ball was dropped long ago with Multi-Gun. Lets face the facts, 3-gun has taken off as opposed to USPSA's Multi-Gun. If PCC is added to the USPSA Multi-Gun matches, that is well and fine. Adding the division to handgun matches is just plain and simply problematic. Adding PCC to a handgun match hniders course designers in their design of a COF. Try fitting a PCC in a briefcase or drawer for a gun ready condition, I understand that USPA is about shooting skills as opposed to any one start position or gun ready condition. Saying that, hands at sides, loaded and holstered for every start takes a lot out of the sport. So, it all becomes freestyle for every stage? Are we going to require a PCC competitor to operate their carbine strong or weak hand only? Is strong hand then the same as freestyle?I have heard the concept of strong shoulder/weak shoulder, it is just not the equivalent to freestyle,strong hand, weak hand. Lets stay with what we do well,HANDGUN matches. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaskapopo Posted March 28, 2016 Share Posted March 28, 2016 USPSA does one thing well. Handgun matches .The ball was dropped long ago with Multi-Gun. Lets face the facts, 3-gun has taken off as opposed to USPSA's Multi-Gun. If PCC is added to the USPSA Multi-Gun matches, that is well and fine. Adding the division to handgun matches is just plain and simply problematic. Adding PCC to a handgun match hniders course designers in their design of a COF. Try fitting a PCC in a briefcase or drawer for a gun ready condition, I understand that USPA is about shooting skills as opposed to any one start position or gun ready condition. Saying that, hands at sides, loaded and holstered for every start takes a lot out of the sport. So, it all becomes freestyle for every stage? Are we going to require a PCC competitor to operate their carbine strong or weak hand only? Is strong hand then the same as freestyle?I have heard the concept of strong shoulder/weak shoulder, it is just not the equivalent to freestyle,strong hand, weak hand. Lets stay with what we do well,HANDGUN matches. Why does adding any division hinder any stage designer. The stages are being designed by people running pistols unless some how PCC shooters take over the sport which I doubt will happen. This will have no impact on those shooting their current divisions. It will add more shooters is all. Pat Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StealthyBlagga Posted March 29, 2016 Share Posted March 29, 2016 ... Adding PCC to a handgun match hniders course designers in their design of a COF. Try fitting a PCC in a briefcase or drawer for a gun ready condition,... PCC is sufficiently different that the rules really need to affirmatively allow the stage to stipulate DIFFERENT start positions for PCC vs. handguns. This will allow stage designers to continue to use novel and interesting handgun start conditions... PCC just starts somewhere else. In your briefcase example, handguns might start inside the case, PCC on top of the case. As PCC will be scored as a separate division, I don't see a problem beyond the extra work for the author of the WSB and maybe the stage construction crew to provide such an accommodation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SW4me Posted March 29, 2016 Share Posted March 29, 2016 Sheriff who owns our local range says "No Rifles" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beastly Posted March 29, 2016 Share Posted March 29, 2016 Sheriff who owns our local range says "No Rifles" Do you know why? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SW4me Posted March 29, 2016 Share Posted March 29, 2016 Sheriff who owns our local range says "No Rifles" Do you know why? I do not Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N920A using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thermobollocks Posted March 29, 2016 Share Posted March 29, 2016 Does he mean no rifles or no rifle calibers? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jmob50 Posted March 31, 2016 Share Posted March 31, 2016 (edited) Most likely due to people running around with the rifles are more likely to send a rifle round over a berm(edit: into an adjacent property whereas a pistol round may not travel as far). Several ranges have this same rule due to their proximity to neighboring homes. PCC is no different than pistols in that regard so maybe if that's explained we can play. As for start positions having to be altered, PCC will be it's own division so that's not a big deal either. The stage designs won't have to change at all, the WSB will need to include a start position for the PCC and that should cover it. Jon Edited March 31, 2016 by Jmob50 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beastly Posted March 31, 2016 Share Posted March 31, 2016 Most likely due to people running around with the rifles are more likely to send a rifle round over a berm. Are you thinking that said range owner honestly thinks that a person 'running around with rifle' is more likely to send a round over a berm than an equivalent person 'running around with a handgun'? Not following here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jmob50 Posted March 31, 2016 Share Posted March 31, 2016 Most likely due to people running around with the rifles are more likely to send a rifle round over a berm. Are you thinking that said range owner honestly thinks that a person 'running around with rifle' is more likely to send a round over a berm than an equivalent person 'running around with a handgun'? Not following here. The thought process that I've encountered was that a pistol round goes yada yada feet that is within their property/control area and a rifle round travels yada yada feet that is well outside of their property/control area and can enter a neighboring home etc and their insurance simply doesn't cover such and such weapons used in a specific way. Jon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jmob50 Posted March 31, 2016 Share Posted March 31, 2016 Reading over my post I should've clarified that but the intent was that their range may allow rifles to be shot but not as we shoot them in our matches. Rifles at ranges like these are intended to be shot from a bench or a stationary position Jon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
b1gcountry Posted April 1, 2016 Share Posted April 1, 2016 Some berms don't stand up to rifle as well as pistol. In my experience, ranges word their rules to make them easiest to enforce, and easiest to explain to the range officers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
photoracer Posted April 4, 2016 Share Posted April 4, 2016 PCCs shoot at basically the velocity as Open Major so saying PCCs are more dangerous at the range is basically BS. A 16" barreled PCCs adds about 200 FPS to the muzzle velocity of your average 9mm round so in fact most of the PCC bullets will be slower than Major caliber pistol rounds. You might get equal velocity if you shoot NATO 9mm out of the PCC. I was in my first match with PCCs this weekend, the monthly USPSA all steel match put on by Gravitas Tactical at North Mountain in VA. 2 were in my squad and both were operators (LEO). The matches are 2 day events and they allow PCCs and Shotguns in the Sunday PM squads. Did not effect shooting in anyway with steel only. Heck I out shot them in one stage with my Open Minor G34. One thing I noted was they can lean out farther out of an opening than any of the pistol shooters could do to shoot around some double stacked barrels. And while the stages had 20-22 targets at least once one had to put in a 3rd 25 rd mag (they pretty much always shot part of the 2nd mag). Only thing I really learned was that I have to build another firearm. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IronArcher Posted April 8, 2016 Share Posted April 8, 2016 Video from Foley on PCC https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=byubawDsnFo I hope he is spending as much time trying to address all the issues with USPSA that he campaigned on fixing as he is on making PCC videos ... I hope he is spending more than 5 minutes on that other stuff too.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
polymerfeelsweirdman Posted April 9, 2016 Share Posted April 9, 2016 (edited) I think this would be a lot of fun and don't see a lot of downsides Another point is that shooting a long gun is way easier for a beginner and would probably be more accessible/more fun to people that don't get to go to the range that often and get to keep up on pistol skills or for the people that are just new to shooting Also, 9x25 Dillon is allowed so velocity shouldn't be an issue. I think it would be comparable to .30 carbine which if also allowed, would make the division more accessible to people in ban states via M1 carbines Edited April 9, 2016 by polymerfeelsweirdman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beastly Posted April 10, 2016 Share Posted April 10, 2016 9, 40, 45 only in latest proposed rules I saw, goal to keep velocty < 1600 fps or so; comparable with Open guns. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
polymerfeelsweirdman Posted April 10, 2016 Share Posted April 10, 2016 9, 40, 45 only in latest proposed rules I saw, goal to keep velocty < 1600 fps or so; comparable with Open guns. That's a shame I doubt that .30 carbine would cause issues and it could open this up more to the less gun friendly states Even in non-ban states it would be a fun option to run Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aandabooks Posted April 10, 2016 Share Posted April 10, 2016 Most likely due to people running around with the rifles are more likely to send a rifle round over a berm. Are you thinking that said range owner honestly thinks that a person 'running around with rifle' is more likely to send a round over a berm than an equivalent person 'running around with a handgun'? Not following here. The thought process that I've encountered was that a pistol round goes yada yada feet that is within their property/control area and a rifle round travels yada yada feet that is well outside of their property/control area and can enter a neighboring home etc and their insurance simply doesn't cover such and such weapons used in a specific way. Jon It could have more to do with how a person naturally runs with a rifle between shooting positions. Normally you run with the muzzle of the rifle up at about 45 degrees. Touch one off that leaves a close neighbored range and you're much more likely to hit something off the property. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beastly Posted April 10, 2016 Share Posted April 10, 2016 9, 40, 45 only in latest proposed rules I saw, goal to keep velocty < 1600 fps or so; comparable with Open guns.That's a shameI doubt that .30 carbine would cause issues and it could open this up more to the less gun friendly states Even in non-ban states it would be a fun option to run 30 carbine commercial ammo runs an easy 2000 fps. Loading lighter is possible but getting good function < 1600 fps is a bit of a trick. How would you separate the two in practice? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
polymerfeelsweirdman Posted April 10, 2016 Share Posted April 10, 2016 9, 40, 45 only in latest proposed rules I saw, goal to keep velocty < 1600 fps or so; comparable with Open guns.That's a shameI doubt that .30 carbine would cause issues and it could open this up more to the less gun friendly states Even in non-ban states it would be a fun option to run 30 carbine commercial ammo runs an easy 2000 fps. Loading lighter is possible but getting good function < 1600 fps is a bit of a trick. How would you separate the two in practice? The velocity can be had in 9x25 Dillon loads with similar bullet weight Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StealthyBlagga Posted April 10, 2016 Share Posted April 10, 2016 ... Also, 9x25 Dillon is allowed so velocity shouldn't be an issue. I think it would be comparable to .30 carbine which if also allowed, would make the division more accessible to people in ban states via M1 carbines I don't think 9x25 is allowed... just 9x19 Parabellum. In any case, I haven't seen a 9x25 handgun in the wild in more than a decade, and that would be a pretty unusual round in a carbine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
b1gcountry Posted April 11, 2016 Share Posted April 11, 2016 I think the point was that he can get hotter velocities with a handgun Sent from my SPH-L720 using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now