Jump to content
Brian Enos's Forums... Maku mozo!

CO slide lightening clarification


display

Recommended Posts

Hello, I was wanting a clarification on the rule 21.2b for Carry Optics. Does it consider all of the milled out spaces (besides the hole by the barrel) on this one legal? Its the TTI combat master if the picture doesn't show up below. I saw a photo earlier of the high lady in CO at the nats using this piece with the only difference being the hole was not milled all the way through and it didn't have the magwell. It seems to me that all of the extra milling, specifically the front lower part being removed and the middle part where it says combat master at minimum, would fall under "Cuts that are designed to specifically or significantly lighten the slide, such as holes, are ruled as competitive advantage and prohibited." I just would like to have this clarified before I buy/build my new gun! Thanks!

 

12752146_10209145171777179_618814947_o__

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If thats approved for carry optics and your allowed 140mm mags loaded up what is separating CO from open other than 170 mm mags, the dot being slide mounted and no magwell.  They really are ruining that division in my opinion.  They should just make it limited optics.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, APPENDIX D7, CARRY OPTICS, PROVISIONAL, 21.2b Milling of slide — only as required to insert optical sights A slide may be modified specifically for the purpose of installing optical sights, and for no other purpose. It's still Production rules with an optic, and a 140mm extension, now.

Edited by 9x45
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The rules have been changed, a lot. This is the current rule set for slide alterations

 

A slide may be modified specifically for the purpose of installing optical sights or cocking serrations. Textured finishes, grip tape, milling or stippling on the slide to provide texture is also allowed. Cuts that are designed to specifically or significantly lighten the slide, such as holes, are ruled as competitive advantage and prohibited. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

So it appears someone could run this gun in production then too... that is very odd. Does USPSA have a list of approved vendors of modified guns that are not legal per the words but legal to shoot?

Edited by display
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Production rules are different:

 

Quote

Per existing NROI ruling, cosmetically enhancing the finish of a slide is already ALLOWED in Production Division, provided that the finish provides no com- petitive advantage.

This clause is NOW interpreted to specifically ALLOW refinishing the frame, as well as the slide, subject to the existing constraints on refinishing (cos- metic only, no competitive advantage).
Special Notes/Clarifications:

Any finish which provides a non-cosmetic function will be deemed PROHIBITED. For example, a gun finish which provides a roughened texture in an area where grip tape is not allowed (Appendix E4) is a PROHIBITED modification. 

 

Additionally

 

Quote
 

Milling of slide — only as required to insert sights

Remains in effect – a slide may be modified specifically for the purpose of installing sights, and for no other purpose.

     
     

 

Edited by BritinUSA
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This borders on something I have been wondering about. I am assuming that the Glock MOS models with the optical sights removed and the milled area covered with the supplied cover are eligible for Production. If that's wrong quit reading here.

 

If that's true can (for example) a CZ 75 with a milled optical sight position be covered with a custom cover (and fitted with iron sights) also be used in Production?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Brooke said:

This borders on something I have been wondering about. I am assuming that the Glock MOS models with the optical sights removed and the milled area covered with the supplied cover are eligible for Production. If that's wrong quit reading here.

 

If that's true can (for example) a CZ 75 with a milled optical sight position be covered with a custom cover (and fitted with iron sights) also be used in Production?

 

Mount the sight to the cover then all the slide machining is for mounting the sight 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow ... these COptic rules are a moving target ...

 

Soooooo I wonder if I can send my 5 inch M&P Core slide to Primary Machine and get the "V1" cut (no holes ... just enhancing my grip!!) ...

 

http://primarymachine.com/m-p-ucc-v1-cut/

 

Of course ... even I got away with the cut ... I seriously doub't I could take my JPoint off and shoot the gun in Production ... but ... If I could ... then all the Production shooters could send their slides out for depression (grip enhancing) cuts ... just get a "covered" optic cut so you can say it is a CO gun too ... geeese ... :wacko: 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, waktasz said:

only if it comes from the factory that way, IMO

 

Thanks for your answer. However based on certain discussions I have had with insiders (after posting my question), you can put a custom cover over a milled slide and use the gun in production (with iron sights of course). The caveat was that you must use a cover material similar to the material and shape that was removed. In other words you can't mill the slide on a steel gun and put on a plastic cover that would lighten the gun or a tungsten cover to increase weight. 

 

I know of no official ruling in existence at this point, but I bet one is overdue. In my opinion it has to be similar to the above. USPSA has generally taken a path that allows manufactures maximum equal access and competitors as much flexibility as reasonable while preserving the basis of rules.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Gooldylocks said:


I know for a fact Zev has done it before. An RO/RM might make a stink about it, but I'm guessing the arb committee would side with you.

 

I think you need to review 6.2.5.2 ... If the RM determines your equipment does not fit the Divisional requirements you declare, his decision is final.  Per the rule, an AC does not get a vote in this matter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Brooke said:

 

Thanks for your answer. However based on certain discussions I have had with insiders (after posting my question), you can put a custom cover over a milled slide and use the gun in production (with iron sights of course). The caveat was that you must use a cover material similar to the material and shape that was removed. In other words you can't mill the slide on a steel gun and put on a plastic cover that would lighten the gun or a tungsten cover to increase weight. 

 

I know of no official ruling in existence at this point, but I bet one is overdue. In my opinion it has to be similar to the above. USPSA has generally taken a path that allows manufactures maximum equal access and competitors as much flexibility as reasonable while preserving the basis of rules.

 

What does "certain discussions with insiders" mean?

 

In the absence of a ruling or rule that covers it, you're still going to be out of compliance. The officials at that match have only the rulebook and official rulings to go by.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree with you. But as far as I know there is no ruling in place that requires the milling and cover to be from the manufacturer. Equally there is no ruling that says "homemade is ok". 

 

There simply is no current rule of any kind. I guess my comment about "insider" was a little vague. Sorry about that. I am like a member of the House Intelligence Committee. Not about to reveal my source. 

 

It it would be interesting to find out before I have a cover made. Guess I'll have to break down and ask for an official answer. 

Edited by Brooke
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, display said:

My buddy sent an email today, got this in return... " as long as the cuts don't perforate the slide". So I guess we can mill away just make sure to leave a few thou at the bottom of that hole!

 

In light of this position, I am struggling to understand the continued prohibition on perforations. :huh:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is no mention of cover plates being allowed or not being allowed. That doesn't mean it's unclear that means it's not a legal modification.

 

appendix d4 22

 

     
   

Please note that the absence of an item in the list of

prohibited modifications MAY NOT be construed to mean a modification is allowed. A modification is only allowed in Production Division if there is a rules clause or interpretation which specifically declares that it is allowed in the Division.

   

 

And in special conditions

 

UNLESS a modification is SPECIFICALLY authorized in the rules or SPECIFICALLY authorized in an official, published NROI interpretation, it is considered a PROHIBITED MODIFICATION. 

 

 

Edited by Garmil
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is no mention of cover plates being allowed or not being allowed. That doesn't mean it's unclear that means it's not a legal modification.
 
appendix d4 22
 
     
    Please note that the absence of an item in the list of
prohibited modifications MAY NOT be construed to mean a modification is allowed. A modification is only allowed in Production Division if there is a rules clause or interpretation which specifically declares that it is allowed in the Division.
     
And in special conditions
 
UNLESS a modification is SPECIFICALLY authorized in the rules or SPECIFICALLY authorized in an official, published NROI interpretation, it is considered a PROHIBITED MODIFICATION. 
 
 

I absolutely agree. But if the sight was mounted TO the plate, then the argument could be made the milling was for the sole purpose of mounting the rear sight.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Gooldylocks said:
UNLESS a modification is SPECIFICALLY authorized in the rules or SPECIFICALLY authorized in an official, published NROI interpretation, it is considered a PROHIBITED MODIFICATION. 

 

 

I think you are 100% correct. I'm betting that changes because only the MOS Glock and similar M&P will be eligible for dual use if the slide is milled (rear dovetail installations would be dual eligible). I can't see that position being defended for long. Doesn't involve me too much because I have four of the same guns, two with iron sights and two milled for optical sights. I'm guessing popular demand will result in a change.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They should issue a ruling to clarify it, since the slide has been milled for sight installation, just not a sight that's legal for Production.  You know someone would argue that on a technicality, since the Appendix doesn't say "milled for iron sights" or "milled for Division-legal sights".

 

I'd be in favor of making a cover plate acceptable.  The MOS, CORE, Q5, and 320 X5 (once added to the list) all have a removable plate for optics installation.  The MOS and CORE are just plates, while the Q5 and 320 X5 have the rear iron sight mounted to the plate.  I see no competitive advantage as long as the plate is of the same material as the slide, and it allows competitors more flexibility in what Divisions to shoot in without having to buy multiple guns or slides.

 

Of course, once you go milling your CO slide for grip surface you're out of Production and the plate becomes a non-issue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For example, if you took a Sig P320 RX and put a custom cover over the milled spot for the Romeo.. could it be Production legal? Seems silly that it wouldn't be... heaven forbid people have flexibility to shoot multiple divisions with the same gun. (I know, I know.... rules).

 

Sig should have offered a cover plate from the factory, like the new X series guns.

Edited by sfinney
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The p320 rx isn't on the production list.  It fits the criteria of a production so is allowed in.

 

is there a list of non production approved guns that have been approved for carry optics after getting doing manufacturers decleration form?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...