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

Production division aftermarket hammer


waktasz

Recommended Posts

33 minutes ago, motosapiens said:

 

 

At any rate, if current trends continue, production will probably wither and die and get overtaken by singlestack. pretty big ss fields at A2 and A1

 

 

Wouldn't that be simply so they could practice major matches before SS Nats?  (Doesn't participation in SS drop after that normally?)

Production wither and die?  Given current trends in number of shooter division choices, that seems.....unlikely.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 63
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

The issue I see is that guns are varying so much. Some people are getting Shadow 2s that shoot like a CGWd gun whereas mine has a ton of creep and a loose bushing. It's not like you HAVE to get these upgrades to be competitive, and it allows the playing field to be evened up if everyone has access to the same spec parts.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In completely unrelated news:

 

It was announced today that Cajun Gunworks and CZ Custom have signed on as sponsors of USPSA Production Nationals.

 

(note: This is a joke, to the best of my knowledge. At least so far.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Then "production" is meaningless.  It's limited ten minor without 1911s.   
 
It's a bullshit ruling either way.  

Ten minor with no 1911s would be easier to manage. How many "Can I do this to my production gun?" questions do you suppose Troy gets​ each day?

If there was a production list, a box, no mawells, a weight limit, 10 round mags and minor scoring, production division wouldn't be substantially different than it is today.

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sure, but is "easier to manage" really the goal here?

To what extent are we willing to lower our standards for the lowest common denominator?

Is not that difficult to read and comply with the production rules.

Either it's a factory division for factory guns or it's just limited 10 minor.

But by all means, let's fix what ain't broken.

Sent from my MotoG3 using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, ktm300 said:

That is correct, the issue is how difficult the rules are to enforce.

 

I don't accept the premise that the rules ARE difficult to enforce.  

 

The rules are as simple to enforce as they are to comply with.  

 

This isn't the US tax code, it's a rulebook.  In the 3+ years I've been involved in the sport, I can't remember anyone bemoaning the complexity and unenforceabilty of production ruleset until now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, wtturn said:

 

I don't accept the premise that the rules ARE difficult to enforce.  

 

The rules are as simple to enforce as they are to comply with.  

 

This isn't the US tax code, it's a rulebook.  In the 3+ years I've been involved in the sport, I can't remember anyone bemoaning the complexity and unenforceabilty of production ruleset until now.

Do you work matches at the chrono table?  

Do you have any idea how hard it is to know what hammer is legal in every variation of production gun out there is?  

Do you want to keep up the reference material so the person running chrono will know what every possible legal hammer looks like?

Do you know how often there are running changes made on guns?

Do you know how many different hammers are available from the CZ Custom shop that are legal on various SP-01's because they come on one version of the gun or another.  

Do you know how little difference it makes if someone has a non OEM hammer that doesn't change the function of the gun?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, wtturn said:

I can't remember anyone bemoaning the complexity and unenforceabilty of production ruleset until now.

Probably because hardly anyone tries.  If the gun makes weight and doesn't have a mag well or any other obvious updates they are good to go.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, ktm300 said:

Do you work matches at the chrono table?  The chrono guys I know have a working knowledge of the most common production guns (and let's be honest, if it's a hammer gun, we're really only talking about two makes- either CZ or Tanfo).  But chrono is not the only guy qualified to observe equipment issues.  The CRO guys I know have an eagle eye for stuff like that; I observed a CRO at my state match last year bump a guy to open for the CGW hammer, so it would appear to be working under a overlapping oversight model.

 

Do you have any idea how hard it is to know what hammer is legal in every variation of production gun out there is?  The burden is on the shooter to demonstrate compliance.  Most people have google on their phones if there is a serious question that they don't know off the top of their heads.

  

Do you want to keep up the reference material so the person running chrono will know what every possible legal hammer looks like?  If I were asked, I'm sure I could make a handy binder with pictures.  NBD

 

Do you know how often there are running changes made on guns?    The typical "gun guy" USPSA shooter is usually in the loop, but again, ultimately the shooter is responsible to demonstrate compliance.     

 

Do you know how many different hammers are available from the CZ Custom shop that are legal on various SP-01's because they come on one version of the gun or another.  Can I give you a number?  No, but I know there are several.  I don't shoot CZ.  

 

Do you know how little difference it makes if someone has a non OEM hammer that doesn't change the function of the gun?  That's not the point.  Besides, if it didn't "change the function of the gun", then why are they using it?  That's traditionally the whole reason to upgrade parts, to upgrade the function of the gun.  The consensus of everything I've ever read about the CGW hammer is that it is a superior part to either the stock CZ hammer or the CZC hammer.  It's the very reason I put a CGW hammer on my dad's CZ.  

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, ktm300 said:

Probably because hardly anyone tries.  If the gun makes weight and doesn't have a mag well or any other obvious updates they are good to go.  

 

Then your RO corps are derelict in their duty.  Period.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, wtturn said:

 

Then your RO corps are derelict in their duty.  Period.

If the RO corps are being derelict because they don't know what every hammer on every production gun needs to look like I guess you are correct.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Worrying about aftermarket hammers sounds like a great way to suck the fun out of shooting production. If you *really* think the cgw hammer is an improvement in function and will make you shoot better, and is required to be competitive, I don't know what to say except that shooters are sheep.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, ktm300 said:

If the RO corps are being derelict because they don't know what every hammer on every production gun needs to look like I guess you are correct.

 

Ignorance is no crime.

 

Willful ignorance is a different story.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, motosapiens said:

Worrying about aftermarket hammers sounds like a great way to suck the fun out of shooting production. If you *really* think the cgw hammer is an improvement in function and will make you shoot better, and is required to be competitive, I don't know what to say except that shooters are sheep.

This!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, motosapiens said:

Worrying about aftermarket hammers sounds like a great way to suck the fun out of shooting production. If you *really* think the cgw hammer is an improvement in function and will make you shoot better, and is required to be competitive, I don't know what to say except that shooters are sheep.

 

If you're ascribing this thinking to me, you're incorrect.  

 

I shoot a Glock for what it's worth.

 

I'll still beat the CZ shooters I beat now whether they have a CGW hammer or not.

 

I'll still be beat by the CZ shooters who beat me now whether they have the CGW hammer or not.

 

My argument has never been on the basis of performance or competitive equity.  

 

But knock that straw man down all you want.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, wtturn said:

 

My argument has never been on the basis of performance or competitive equity.  

 

 

So you also are just trolling? That's cool.

 

I'm glad to see rules go when they are impossible to enforce and have no effect on competitive equity or cost of competition. This is one of them. There are more. I personally would let folks with crappy plastic guns stipple the grips too.

 

Until then, SS FTW.

 

Edited by motosapiens
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, motosapiens said:

 

So you also are just trolling? That's cool.

 

I'm glad to see rules go when they are impossible to enforce and have no effect on competitive equity or cost of competition. This is one of them. There are more. Until then, SS FTW.

 

 

Don't be facile.  

 

It's a cheap tactic.

 

You know perfectly well what my argument is, I've only posted it a half dozen times in this thread.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, wtturn said:

 

Don't be facile.  

 

It's a cheap tactic.

 

You know perfectly well what my argument is, I've only posted it a half dozen times in this thread.

I'm not being facile, I'm just mocking you gently for appearing to be hung-up on what *you* perceive to be the semantics of the word 'production', but I appreciate your thoughts.

 

I get that you don't like this rule change. Bummer. I think it's a good idea and I see zero drawbacks, but regardless of what either of us thinks, it's the rule now. Now let's get a beer and talk about something interesting, like Singlestack.

Edited by motosapiens
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, motosapiens said:

I'm not being facile, I'm just mocking you for appearing to be hung-up on what *you* perceive to be the semantics of the word 'production'.

 

 

 

Accusing me of trolling to dismiss my argument is facile and cheap.

 

And perhaps ironic, considering you admit to mocking me instead of responding to an argument with an argument.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Still not entirely sure what your argument is other than to complain about the rule change. Assuming that your argument is that the term 'production' should mean something specific, my argument is it makes no difference.

 

IMHO the point of production is not being 'stock' just like stock cars are not stock, they are merely shaped like stock cars. The point of production imho is providing a level competitive playing field for duty/carry type pistols. People modify hammers and stipple grips and do cosmetic stuff and trigger jobs on their duty/carry guns, so I can't think of any good reason they shouldn't be allowed to do that in this division. I don't see how it would affect competitive equity. Sure, people have particular preferences, but data doesn't appear to show those preferences make a significant competitive difference.

 

More freedom is good.

 


 

Edited by motosapiens
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, motosapiens said:

Still not entirely sure what your argument is other than to complain about the rule change. Assuming that your argument is that the term 'production' should mean something specific, my argument is it makes no difference.

 

IMHO the point of production is not being 'stock' just like stock cars are not stock, they are merely shaped like stock cars. The point of production imho is providing a level competitive playing field for duty/carry type pistols. People modify hammers and stipple grips and do cosmetic stuff and trigger jobs on their duty/carry guns, so I can't think of any good reason they shouldn't be allowed to do that in this division. I don't see how it would affect competitive equity. Sure, people have particular preferences, but data doesn't appear to show those preferences make a significant competitive difference.

 


 

Winner winner chicken dinner.

 

I think this is kind of the whole point here... There is already a huge equipment race in production division that theoretically shouldn't exist if it was truly "production" as the guns come out of the box. A NASCAR may look like your grocery getter sedan on the outside, but we all know that isn't what it actually is. Making a stupid unenforceable rule go bye bye? That is a step in the right direction.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

8 minutes ago, motosapiens said:

Still not entirely sure what your argument is other than to complain about the rule change. Assuming that your argument is that the term 'production' should mean something specific, my argument is it makes no difference.

 

IMHO the point of production is not being 'stock' just like stock cars are not stock, they are merely shaped like stock cars. The point of production imho is providing a level competitive playing field for duty/carry type pistols. People modify hammers and stipple grips and do cosmetic stuff and trigger jobs on their duty/carry guns, so I can't think of any good reason they shouldn't be allowed to do that in this division. I don't see how it would affect competitive equity. Sure, people have particular preferences, but data doesn't appear to show those preferences make a significant competitive difference.

 

More freedom is good.

 


 

 

That's certainly a fair position to hold, and proof that you can disagree without ad-hominems and straw men.

 

I don't live under a rock in the age of Stock II and Shadow 2.  Production is as much a race-gun division as the rest of them.  However, it is still a contradiction in terms to allow aftermarket externally visible parts in the factory division.    

 

Final thoughts, then I'm out.  If USPSA decides that the value of the change (easier enforcement, more options to the shooter, financial incentives from aftermarket businesses) exceeds the cost of another small step away from the intent/spirit/purity of production division, then I will understand.  I don't like it, but I understand the motivations.  My objection is more a matter of direction than change in itself.  If enforcement became so onerous that it was impractical to enforce, then let's make a change in the opposite, more restrictive direction, in keeping with the whole idea of "production".

 

See you on the range.  

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When you speak of the 'intent/spirit/purity' of the production division, do you have some official reference in mind? Such as a mission statement from USPSA? Or is it just your own personal preference?

 

Because my personal preference is different. I just want the intent/spirit/purity of the division to be such that the guns look like duty carry guns, and I can buy most any common duty/carry gun (75b or crappy plastic gun) and with minimal mods not be at a significant disadvantage. IMHO, allowing aftermarket hammers has no effect whatsoever on that, and neither would grip stippling, or milling the slide for different sights. People who like to tinker may buy them (and for sure the cgw race hammer, or cz comp hammer make manual decocking a little easier than the round stock 75b hammer), but not having one puts me at no disadvantage.

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...