sjz

Here is the wording in permitted modifications: 8.2.1.3.4. Recoil spring guide rods and dual spring recoil systems made of material that is no heavier than stainless steel. 1) Above is for modifications and applies to ssp, esp, cdp, so an oem single, double or triple or more spring would appear to be ok regardless of material weight. 2) If it is a modification, a literal interpretation (is there any other type) applies only to dual spring assemblies. So a single, triple or more are not covered here and would likewise be ok. Guide rods are a little different. Tungsten guide rods are not allowed as a modification, period. But if you have an oem gun with a tungsten guide rod or other material heavier than SS it would appear to be OK Someone else will add to this if I am missing something.

I can't find a specific place on the website to submit recommendations? Do we just send IDPA an email ?

Safety rules are pretty much black and white, in other words there are no degrees of being unsafe. If an RO knows that the shooter is unsafe, there is no question in my mind that the RO must not allow the shooter to proceed. He should "immeditaely" bring it to the shooters attention and correct it, just like any other safety violation. Knowingly letting a shooter proceed in an unsafe condition without correcting it, is an absurd argument.

This should be fine for IDPA. SS is OK for SSP and it has a captured guide rod with no separate bushing. The 13lb spring is pretty light for a gun set up for SSP. Let me know your ammo specs and how it runs. I run atlanta arms match grade 147gr low PF ammo with a stock recoil spring assembly and have no problems in my g17 gen4.. A 13lb spring might be needed if you had a compensator.

No such rule exists in IDPA. Where are you getting this mis-information that guide rods have to be captured?

Above is incorrect. You no longer need to have polymer guide rod in Glocks to stay in SSP 1) The new IDPA rule book specifically allows recoil rods of any material not heavier than stainless steel in SSP. Under permitted modifications for SSP 8.2.1.3.4. Recoil spring guide rods and dual spring recoil systems made of material that is no heavier than stainless steel 2) What would bump you to ESP (in a Glock for example) is a sleeve or bushing in the slide to accept a different type of recoil spring assembly or rod. This violates 2 rules for SSP. Under SSP excluded modifications 8.2.1.4.1. Externally visible modifications other than those listed in the Permitted Modifications section. ... 8.2.1.4.5. Slide inserts to accommodate a different recoil assembly design.

Which part# did you order? I am confused by Glockmeisters website. The G17 gen 4 and the G34 gen 4 take the exact same oem recoil spring assembly. But when I looked at the SS guide rod on Glockmeister, there are a couple that say: "This recoil rod works for the following GLOCK models: 17 (including RTF2 but not 4th Gen), 22 (including RTF2 but not 4th Gen), 31, 34, and 35." Why would it work in a G34 gen 4 and not a G17 gen 4? Also, for IDPA- the tungsten would not be allowed. SS is the heaviest weight material that a guide rod can be made out of.

My concern would be that the shooter was given the opportunity to correct his error before the penalty was given ? Did the "SK" verbally call "Cover !" ? Or did you find out about it only after your run ? A fault line would for ever eliminate this on going cover call. It has always been a major problem in IDPA. How many times have we all seen a big time shooter go fast enough that a SO does not know if they used cover or not. Go slow Joe blow does the same as big time but gets the procedural for cover. Leaving cover calls up to SO's will always be up to their personal interpretation. Enough!! Problem with a fault line would be cover is different for each person. i am 6'6" and can lean WAAAAAAAYYYYYY around a corner compared to my competitor who is say 5'3". Im in favor of a fault line because it would give me an advantage when shooting around corners for that last target. The cover line ( fault line ) is the same for everyone. It is a straight line from the center of the target in question to edge of cover and extending indefinatley. 100% of your lower body must be inside this line. That doesn't mean that certain body builds could make this harder or easier. The problem is that from a cover position there are usually multiple targets, so each target would need a separate line.

You can not do this and I am surprised this was taught at an SO course. When you run dry behind cover, in this case the left side of the wall, you can not move from this position of cover with a gun that is empty. So on the left side you can essentiually take 1 step while reloading with one of your feet not moving (the pivot foot.) Only when the reload is complete can you move the pivot foot. ******************** 3.9. Under no circumstances may a shooter leave a “position of cover” with an empty weapon. A “position of cover” is defined as any fixed location in a stage from which the shooter is required to engage targets from cover. The boundary marking the “position of cover” is the line of cover defined by the last target to be engaged from that position. 3.9.1. If the shooter runs the firearm empty behind cover, the shooter may not advance in the stage, (move toward the next shooting position) until the weapon is deemed loaded.

If you look a little further down in the rules under prohibited modifications for SSP, there are 2 listings that I would think make the bushing a no go for SSP and bump you to ESP where they are specifically allowed. 8.2.1.4.1. Externally visible modifications other than those listed in the Permitted Modifications section. ... 8.2.1.4.5. Slide inserts to accommodate a different recoil assembly design. Personally I think that the bushing could be viewed as a part of the recoil spring assembly and not a modification of the slide. On the other hand it does fit into the slide so that a different recoil spring assembly can be used.

This DPM triple spring system looks like it has a bushing to fit the Gen 4. Needs to be researched further. Also big $$ http://www.theshootersbox.com/DPM-Recoil-Reducer-Mechanical-System_p_600.html

With the new rulebook in IDPA you can now use a SS guiderod in a Glock and stay inn SSP. The problem is that I don't know if one is made for the Gen 4 that doesn't require a bushing for it to fit. The gen 4 opening for the front of the guide rod is bigger than the gen 3. I had tried an uncaptured ss guide rod in my Gen 4 with a bushing that allows this to fit. This bushing becomes a visible external modification which would bump you out of SSP. From the prohibited list for SSP ( but permitted for ESP) 8.2.1.4.5. Slide inserts to accommodate a different recoil assembly design. You will have to do some searching.

I would experiment with 2 other striker springs. Wolf sells them in 1/2 increments and they are only a few dollars each. You could get a 4.5 lb and a 5.0 lb ( the stock glock spring is 5.5 lb)

The text book answer is that the rules say that a safety violation is a DQ. Shooting at steel is unsafe per the safety section 2. The rule book, in the unsafe gun handling section should be amended to specifically indicate shootong at steel <10 yds is a DQ. USPSA has it worded this way, ironically the USPSA distance is approx 7 yds..

The IDPA ruling that came out was a real gem. Hopefully the next actual rules revision will reword this section.