Carry Optics p320 questions

[Sterrance]

So I recently bought s 320RX and ordered the advanced apex trigger. I plsn on using near floor loads. (floor being 125pf) does anyone have any suggestions on spring weight to use with 115 125pf loads? Also does anyone have any experience with say a tungsten guide rod for a p330, is it worth it? Any suggestions welcome!

[GeneBray]

So I recently bought s 320RX and ordered the advanced apex trigger. I plsn on using near floor loads. (floor being 125pf) does anyone have any suggestions on spring weight to use with 115 125pf loads? Also does anyone have any experience with say a tungsten guide rod for a p330, is it worth it? Any suggestions welcome!

Is the P320RX on the production list?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Sterrance]

The 320 is, same with the 320x5 which is cut for an optic.....the RX is just a 320 with an optic

[GeneBray]

Saw the P320 and P320 X-on the list. Looks like the P320 RX is a new model. Regarding legal in CO/Prod is that pistol being on the list. There are certain steps the Sig has to take step to get it on the list. You can ask NROI and get a ruling as well. NROI could consider the RX a variant of the X-5 and no issue. Or, they may consider it a new model. And that requires Sig certify sales of 2,000 or more and general availability to the public.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[sfinney]

Already threads discussing this. 

An RX is just a regular P320 cut for an optic. It does not say "RX" anywhere on it.  Its not a variant per se, it IS a P320. No need for NROI to rule. It would be no different than milling a P320 to accept a Romeo1. X-Five, being slide marked "X-Five" and having features  regular P320 did not possess had to be added to the list for legality.  The RX is not a variant of the X-Five. An X0Five is a variant of a P-320. 

[Tonka]

has anyone had some experience with a really adjustable small dot red dot that fits on the X5 and holds up, its for Carry optics..thanks

[carlspeed]

Any new information on production status for the RX if the optic is removed? I bought one thinking I could pull it and shoot it in production, or leave it on and shoot it as a CO with the larger mags. I guess I was too excited when I got it. I didn't even think about the RX not being production legal. 

[terrydoc]

IPSC yes you can

[JAFO]

On ‎8‎/‎11‎/‎2018 at 10:11 AM, carlspeed said:

Any new information on production status for the RX if the optic is removed? I bought one thinking I could pull it and shoot it in production, or leave it on and shoot it as a CO with the larger mags. I guess I was too excited when I got it. I didn't even think about the RX not being production legal. 

 

I'd be surprised if the RX ever gets added specifically to the list, since it comes from the factory with a red dot.  I'd email DNROI to verify, because after you pull the Romeo off the slide, your slide is modified from a stock 320.  Granted it's milled for a sight, which would seem to be allowed per D4, 21.2b.  But some have contended that the rule cited is for milling as it pertains to irons, not optics.  Personally, I think it would be legal per the rules.

[GeneBray]

I asked DRNROI about the P320 RX last year, and never received a response.  Some say it is a P320, not a distinct model, so it is okay for Production.  Since it is listed on Sig's website as a separate model in the P320 series, I have my doubts.  It is not on the Production list, rightfully so since it does not meet Production division requirements with the red dot installed.  D4, 21.1b does not limit slide milling for side installation to notch and post sights.  I think that condition is implied, but making that assumption is perilous.  D4, 21:  Please note that, during a match, a competitor may be required to demonstrate that their gun complies with Division rules by identifying a specific rules clause or published interpretation authorizing any disputed modification.  If the competitor cannot identify an authorizing rules clause or published interpretation, the RM shall rule that the modification is PROHIBITED for Production division use and shall move the competitor to Open Division.

 

All that said, if you remove the red dot and don't change anything else, I think the pistol qualifies for Production except that it is not on the Production list.  Since the production list lists specific variants of the the P320 as legal for Production and the RX is not on the list, that speaks volumes.  

 

Seems to me that with all the questions pertaining to the P320 RX a ruling would be appropriate, or DRNROI believes it is answered because the pistol is not on the list. 

 

A significant issue may be that Sig Sauer has never submitted the required paper work to place the gun on the Production list.  The five steps required are clearly listed at the start of the production list on USPSA.org.  An addition to the list is reliant on the manufacturer attesting  to the 2,000 production requirement (doubt there is any issue here), and submission of paperwork to DRNROI.  Maybe USPSA shooters should be contacting Sig and asking why the gun has not been added to the production list.  

[jcc7x7]

Answering op ?

I use a 13 lbs Wolff spring on a Gray Guns guide rod

12 work also but don't like it on an unloaded start

[JAFO]

1 hour ago, GeneBray said:

I asked DRNROI about the P320 RX last year, and never received a response.  Some say it is a P320, not a distinct model, so it is okay for Production.  Since it is listed on Sig's website as a separate model in the P320 series, I have my doubts.  It is not on the Production list, rightfully so since it does not meet Production division requirements with the red dot installed.  D4, 21.1b does not limit slide milling for side installation to notch and post sights.  I think that condition is implied, but making that assumption is perilous.  D4, 21:  Please note that, during a match, a competitor may be required to demonstrate that their gun complies with Division rules by identifying a specific rules clause or published interpretation authorizing any disputed modification.  If the competitor cannot identify an authorizing rules clause or published interpretation, the RM shall rule that the modification is PROHIBITED for Production division use and shall move the competitor to Open Division.

 

All that said, if you remove the red dot and don't change anything else, I think the pistol qualifies for Production except that it is not on the Production list.  Since the production list lists specific variants of the the P320 as legal for Production and the RX is not on the list, that speaks volumes.  

 

Seems to me that with all the questions pertaining to the P320 RX a ruling would be appropriate, or DRNROI believes it is answered because the pistol is not on the list. 

 

A significant issue may be that Sig Sauer has never submitted the required paper work to place the gun on the Production list.  The five steps required are clearly listed at the start of the production list on USPSA.org.  An addition to the list is reliant on the manufacturer attesting  to the 2,000 production requirement (doubt there is any issue here), and submission of paperwork to DRNROI.  Maybe USPSA shooters should be contacting Sig and asking why the gun has not been added to the production list.  

 

I can muddy it up some more for you, Gene.  The "gun" part of a 320 is the FCU, which is the same across all 320's with the possible exception of the X-series.  With the February update to App D4, aftermarket slides are now allowed.  Aftermarket grips have always been allowed, but the RX grip is the same as the stock 320, anyway.  So the shooter has a P320 "frame" and grip with a 320 RX slide (minus the dot).

[GeneBray]

Just wish USPSA would make some definitive statement.  They have on other P320 variants.  

 

[GeneBray]

I believe SKU#s are used to differentiate different models.  If a P320 RX model has the same SKU as another P320 (i.e., P320 X Five) on the production list, they are considered the same model and the RX would be considered on the production list.   If the SKU#s are different, then the pistols are considered different models and each would be have to listed on the production list.  This maybe in error but it is close.

On 8/6/2017 at 8:15 AM, Sterrance said:

The 320 is, same with the 320x5 which is cut for an optic.....the RX is just a 320 with an optic

 

[sfinney]

I don't see any SKUs on the production list.  

There are no markings on the P320 RX identifying it as anything other than a P320.... it is in essence a regular P320 with factory custom milling for a Red Dot. The RX indicates the Red Dot is installed... separate model? Maybe. But its otherwise a factory P320.

I have shot an RX in CO several times - no one even blinked. With everyone shooting 44.9 ounce X-Fives in CO now, why would anyone even care or point out if someone shoots an RX.....   its not like its a competitive advantage. 

 

I'd go further to say that I have seen discussion saying a CO pistol that has a custom plate reinstalled on it to cover the milling work (like the Glock MOS cover plate), would be legal for Production as well, if the original base gun is Production legal. In this case a P320.

[JAFO]

17 hours ago, GeneBray said:

I believe SKU#s are used to differentiate different models.  If a P320 RX model has the same SKU as another P320 (i.e., P320 X Five) on the production list, they are considered the same model and the RX would be considered on the production list.   If the SKU#s are different, then the pistols are considered different models and each would be have to listed on the production list.  This maybe in error but it is close.

 

 

I can guarantee you the 320 and 320 RX have different SKU's, because one is sold with a dot on it and one isn't.  But the 320 RX has been in use for CO since it's introduction.  I don't think it was necessary for them to add it to the list, as the only difference is that the RX is a standard 320 that has been milled for the included dot.

 

17 hours ago, sfinney said:

I'd go further to say that I have seen discussion saying a CO pistol that has a custom plate reinstalled on it to cover the milling work (like the Glock MOS cover plate), would be legal for Production as well, if the original base gun is Production legal. In this case a P320.

 

I think this should be allowed as well, but no ruling has been made on it that I'm aware of.  The only possible catch I can think of would be, What is that custom plate made from, and could it offer an advantage if it's lighter/heavier than the steel that was milled out?

[sfinney]

Note that many Production division guns can be easily modified to compete in Carry Optics as well as Production, but be cautious with the modifications you make, as many will render your Production gun illegal for that division. You can mill the slide of a production legal gun to install an optic, and replace the optic with a filler plate for competition in Production without risk. If you are unsure, check the appendices for both divisions, or email dnroi@uspsa.org before you proceed. Troy McManus Director, NROI

http://multibriefs.com/briefs/uspsa/USPSA020416.php

 

Doesn't mention what the plate needs to be made from. Most I see from aftermarket are aluminum, carbon fiber or polymer.

Edited September 14, 2018 by sfinney

[JAFO]

I don't remember where it's stated what information sources are considered official.  I know the Rulings website and articles in Front Sight are, but are the DownRange emails included in that?  For that matter, is there a way to access past DownRange articles through the new website?  I have bookmarked the archive, but I can't find a link in Member Resources.

[GeneBray]

Made several posts on the topic.

 

There are specific rules regarding CO and Production firearms.

 

For production, if the manufacturer does not submit the paperwork to get a firearm on the list, and USPSA accept the application which also requires a physical exam of the firearm then it won't be on the production list. Not on the list then, it is not legal in production.  Since the RX's  SKU# is not the same as other P320s on the Production list, it is a fair assumption the P320 RX is not the same model as those Sigs that are on the list.  It really doesn't matter if the RX is the same as except.....  It is not on the list.  Nor does is matter, if staff at any level allows the firearm to be used in a match in Production Division.  Unless it is on the list or DNROI has made a published ruling saying it is legal for Production in a specified (i.e., the P320 X Five) configuration, it is not legal in production.  My feeling is the P320 RX may qualify as a Production Division gun with the optic removed.  Just like the  P320 X Five (or P320 X5 whichever is the right name) is legal in production with the mag well removed.  Don't now if the slide cut for the optic would require a filler or not.  Time will tell.  Until the RX is on the production list or there is a published DNROI declaration on the gun being legal for production, it isn't.  Since it is not currently on the list there is a potential issue with the gun in CO.  

 

The CO rules say: "A handgun may be approved specifically for Carry Optics division provided that the model of the pistol used is an approved Production Division model AND meets Carry Optics criteria.  Any pistol that is not on the approved Production list, but meets Carry Optics criteria must submit a Manufacturers Declaration Form to DNROI stating that a minimum of 500 complete handguns have been manufactured and are available to the general public {sic}"  The first sentence may mean the RX is not legal for CO since the RX is not listed on the Production list.  The next sentence would allow the RX IF Sig has submitted a Manufacturers Declaration Form, and USPSA approved the RX for CO.  I would be shocked if Sig has not.  I know of no list like the Production list for CO.  A quick google search did not turn up any reference to a USPSA declaration on the gun which doesn't really mean anything unless it is that I don't do a good job of wording searches.  And, USPSA may well have announced the RX is legal in CO and I failed to see it, missed it, or don't remember seeing it.  

[GeneBray]

I don't remember where it's stated what information sources are considered official.  I know the Rulings website and articles in Front Sight are, but are the DownRange emails included in that?  For that matter, is there a way to access past DownRange articles through the new website?  I have bookmarked the archive, but I can't find a link in Member Resources.

Front Sight and Down Range articles official. They may provide info but if it is a rule/ruling it should hit the website at the same time or very quickly thereafter. Recall how the CO and Production rule changes were published/publicized?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk