Mr Glack

The other posts are correct. 625 is the way to go to be competitive. As to your question. My game is USPSA. I shoot a Model 25-2 and enjoy it. I usually do a match each year with my GP100 too. These are not competitive revolvers (and I am not a competitive shooter for that matter), but I enjoy them and like to work on skills for their use as well. For me, "practical," and shooting the wheels are not about being the fastest at the match.

I took a look at this and there is a proposed rule posted at OSHA.gov http://www.osha.gov/pls/oshaweb/owadisp.sh...&p_id=19509 There may be some SAAMI members out there that know more about this. First of all this is an OSHA regulation and does not apply outside the jurisdiction of OSHA. It does not apply to sport shooting outside of the employer-employee relationship. See the summary section and purpose of the regulations: "SUMMARY: OSHA proposes to revise the explosives and blasting agents standard in subpart H of part 1910. This revision of Sec. 1910.109 is intended to enhance the protections provided to employees engaged in the manufacture, storage, sale, transportation, handling, and use of explosives. The proposal updates and clarifies the regulatory language, addresses regulatory inconsistencies between OSHA and other Federal agencies, incorporates updated consensus standards, and provides the regulated community with greater compliance flexibility." These are not new regulations either but modification of existing regulations. It appears to be an update based on changes to NFPA standards: "This proposed rule contains a complete revision and re-organization of existing Sec. 1910.109. In addition to requesting comments on any of the requirements in the proposed standard, OSHA has identified issues throughout the preamble and has requested comments on these issues. OSHA's development of the proposed rule was based in part on the 2001 edition of NFPA 495--Explosive Materials Code. NFPA has recently issued a 2006 edition of this code. OSHA has compared the differences between the 2001 and 2006 editions. Any significant changes relevant to the proposed rule in the 2006 edition compared to the 2001 edition are discussed at the appropriate location in the preamble. OSHA is interested in comments on whether there are any requirements in the 2006 edition of NFPA 495 that should be in the proposed rule but have not been included." The changes to the rules seems to be in response to a petition by IME and SAAMI. This is not surprising since these organizations were probably involved in developing changes to the NFPA standards and now wants antiquated OSHA regulations to be updated to reflect their work with NFPA. "On July 29, 2002, OSHA received a petition (the Petition) from the Institute of Makers of Explosives (IME) and the Sporting Arms and Ammunition Manufacturers' Institute (SAAMI) to revise the standard. A copy of the Petition can be found at Docket No. OSHA-S031-2006-0665 (Ex. 2-1). IME is an association of manufacturers of high explosives and other companies that distribute explosives or provide other related services and the SAAMI is an association of manufacturers of sporting firearms, ammunition, and related components. The Petition claimed that Sec. 1910.109 does not reflect significant technological and safety advances made by the explosives industry since the standard was promulgated. It further contended that the standard contains outdated references, classifications, and jurisdiction-related provisions that do not accurately represent the current regulatory environment." There are also definition changes which make sense since years ago U.S. DOT started adopting international dangerous goods code definitions for explosives which are a lot different from the old U.S. definitions and needed changing by OSHA (who apparently adopted a lot of the old DOT definitions).

Great stuff. THANKS ! You got it.

Did someone call for a smartass? Sorry I'm late. There was a line at the door.

I watched one competitor go left first... then take a knee for the right hand shots (i.e., half way heading to prone) ... then go to his right shoulder for the center low port. Thought that was a pretty clever way to economize the body travel to prone position.

This is what we do as well; stake down a pulley or simply run the cable through a "U" stake. You stake it down a few yards against the activator's direction of travel then finish running the cable back to where you need it (e.g., your swinger). You can modify the direction of the activator cable up to 180 reversal.

Sorry to hear this. You were not alone of course. Class act to help the squad and stay with it. The best thing about the nationals was all the great people there. There were a lot of people just enjoying the company and the spectacle. Hope you find some satisfaction in your experience.

Jim +1 ... Leroy +1

Sounds like a good stage design if it's got you thinking about different approaches. I think the rule is that you practice based on weaknesses, but you compete with your strengths. What are your strengths? Good at shooting on the move? Good on long range shots? How fast can you cover ground? Is there a no-shoot in the array that adds a bonus to accuracy (or penalty for lack of it)? How hungry are you for a match win? It takes a lot of points to make up for lost time.

+1 +1 !!

Old eyes so I purchase the ones with the bifocal lens built in.

Lab Safety Supply is a large supplier on line with a good variety of hearing protection. http://www.labsafety.com/store/Safety_Supp...ing_Protection/ Here is the page for the style you are looking for. http://www.labsafety.com/store/Safety_Supp.../Hearing_Bands/ Personally when I wear these around the back of my neck the band rubs on shirt collar or neck and generates an irritating noise from a stethescope effect. They are typically used under the chin which might bother you in other ways. I use push ins or custom molded for hot weather. Need the string to take them out regularly and still keep track of them.

Partial hits that strike other score/penalty targets count for score or penalty. Rules 9.1.5.3 & 4 for hits on targets ... and 9.1.6.3 & 4 for hard cover. 9.1.5.3 Bullet strikes partially within the scoring area of a paper or metal target, and continues on to strike the scoring area of another paper target, the hit on the subsequent paper target will also count for score or penalty, as the case may be. 9.1.5.4 Bullet strikes partially within the scoring area of a paper or metal target, and continues on to strike down (or hit the scoring area of) another metal target, the fallen (or hit on the) subsequent metal target will also count for score or penalty, as the case may be. 9.1.6.3 Bullet strikes partially within hard cover, and continues on to strike the scoring area of a paper target, the hit on that paper target will count for score or penalty, as the case may be. 9.1.6.4 Bullet strikes partially within hard cover, and continues on to strike down or hit the scoring area of a metal target, the fallen metal target or hit thereon will count for score or penalty, as the case may be.

I had 6 years of active reserve and 11 years regular. Great experience. It was a while ago though. All of it was in the marine safety missions. Mission balance has changed of course in recent years. Mobile had a great reputation and a lot of people in marine safety wanted to work there. It should be a big plus to have a good sized port station like this near to your home. You may have to travel though. Could you deal with activation for the war effort? I'm not sure how much of that is going on for the CG reserves. I'm sure you are checking it out though.

Have a similar thread going on chrono variability for revolvers shooting .45. The chrono pros will hopefully chime in. They commonly use two chronos (in line) to account for the equipment part of variability (chrono equipment that is). I understand there's not much difference there actually. The table data is for a certain type of gun and/or barrel. Often it is a bench test standard barrel that allows them to test CUP pressure as well. Even if it's the same gun model it won't necessarily match the tables exactly. On the other thread we have the extreme example of 1911 .45 ACP ammo being used in a revolver. Can't expect the same results. Predicting the difference is also hairy. You must test. You also want to get in the habit of testing something like 10 rounds for a load to get an average and I also evaluate the standard deviation to get an idea of the variability of performance. Even if your powder is very accurately measured there will be differences. In particular the arrangement of the powder in the case cavity (remaining space when bullet is seated). A .45 or .38 load for example will have a lot of empty space for the powder to rattle around in while a 9mm often is just the opposite. In my experience my 9mm loads typically are below 1% standard deviation (reflected as a percentage of the average velocity) while .45 or .38 loads are going to be well above. In the other revolver thread for example. This results in a 95% confidence limit for one load example ranging from 713 to 763 fps. So it's not necessarily the chrono's variability. The only real test is what the chrono pros do with two chronos measuring the same shot. I'm anxious to hear their thoughts.

You are welcome. And, forgot to mention as well ... Welcome to the Wheel World!

I agree with those above who call for chrono with revolver. I have found 1911 v revo .45 to be too unpredictable. I load 9mm and .45 among others but 9mm is a high load density (little empty space) while .45 is low density (lots of empty space) and find my data similar to yours. .45 has a high standard deviation while 9mm has a low std dev (typically less than 1%). For your data above you have a standard deviation of 12.3 fps or 1.7% which is about normal in my experience (1911 or revolver either way the variability seems to be associated with the load rather than the gun). The 95% confidence limits for your load is +/- two standard deviations or +/- 25 fps. So when you go to the chrono you are going to be 95% confident of the range 738-25 and 738+25 or 713 to 763. Supposedly some powders are less sensitive than others to this low load density effect, which might help tighten things up. Haven't seen it make enough difference to bet on it. Same thing with talking to the chrono team. When I chrono I pretty much keep the gun in a level configuration except for the kick factor! And I still get the same variability with .45. If you are inclined you might look for a powder that takes up more space (fluffier and more of it). Don't think it's worth it myself to select powder based on this.

I read so many different ideas on this question. In considering this I personally think different people must have different answers. Before making a choice you need to ask yourself how it will be used (e.g., ankle v waist carry? ... also a home defense gun? ... holster type desired and so on). What is your personal strategy for use (considering your own strengths and weaknesses as well ... what is your personal stressed accuracy ability that you are willing to bet your life on? ... how good is your eyesight? ... etc.). Are you going to count on accuracy for example which might favor a larger caliber and fewer rounds between reloading. Are you going to carry/how many, and where reloads? If you are going to be wearing more and heavier work clothing vs lighter business clothing you have different concealment options and can carry reloads easier. If you are limited on carrying reloads you might think more toward a weapon with higher capacity... or seek greater accuracy. Be prepared to give a regular workout to your strategy at the range/matches. If you read the threads here you will find that one person might have issues with a certain weapon where others have nothing but praise. If your ccw and you have irreconcilable differences a change will be necessary. Especially reliability and/or confidence you have in it. I love shooting a revolver and used to consider it THE reliable self defense weapon. But my real experience at matches and the range tells me that my most reliable weapon is a Glock. Others will rail at this notion because they have the opposite experience. This has an impact on confidence which has to be taken into consideration. Bottom line is your strategy is your strategy and you need to be comfortable with it BEFORE you ask what weapon will best support that strategy.

It's the real deal. The suit helps route the charge running around them (which they do feel). Actually pretty common. On the other hand, it's far more dangerous to do it while in contact with the ground. The safest thing would be to shut the whole thing down. Ain't happening.

The safety comes off when you are ready to engage the target. As stated above this is somewhere between the chest and pulling the trigger. You should be aiming at the target at that time. Rule 8.5.1: "Except when the competitor is actually aiming or shooting at targets, all movement must be accomplished with the fingers visibly outside the trigger guard and the safety should be engaged. ..." Of course there's that 'should' word. But then again that's the word you used too!

You have a valid complaint. You are not alone. I'm not a joiner by nature (see other threads on this point) probably has a lot to do with 'group dynamics' such as you call attention to. In my experience any group of people has some members that put more into it than they take out. There are also those take more than they give; and even some that are just there. Sad to say USPSA did not break this model. But ... I really enjoy this sport because of some great people I have met in it. Each one that I admire puts more into it than they take out. It's people like these that have made this a uniquely fantastic experience. Experiences like yours test your spirit. Be mad for a while and vent. Don't expect things to be much different though, do what you can to change a piece of it, and then get over it. Keep on being the contributor you started out to be. Volunteers are needed to keep this thing we love healthy.

I hope you are misunderstanding the motivations. RO's don't get paid for their time and enjoy this aspect of the sport for its own merit (in my experience anyway). Everyone at a match should be having a good time. Why the rush then? For large matches in particular, if a squad starts getting behind and backing up the other squads it can create a lot of down time for everyone else. In my experience "programming" has little to do with this problem [unless you are taking 15 minutes in the box! ], but others may think differently and simply want to keep things moving for everyone's benefit.

+1 There's also a lot of course design that takes place during set up as the reality of the stage is revealed.

Missed the "by it" on the first read, and had this instant vision of someone out for an evening stroll--geared up and practicing draws on whatever they see with the Airsoft gun. Probably a good way to meet some of those nice people with the lights on top of their cars. But it has a red muzzle !

Do a search on 'airsoft' here and you will get more information. Including some folks who shoot the BBs as well. I have one and like to spend a few minutes every time I walk by it practicing drawing into a grip and taking the first sight picture. Or transitioning between sight picture and pulling the trigger. Your situation may 'force' you to spend more time on practicing fundamentals in this manner. Good Luck.