kbear38S

What he said.

That thing looks like something that should be sold on TV, not available in stores, and wait... there's more! We'll throw in this free bathrobe to the first 10 zillion buyer so hurry, call now.

I'm not a machinist but I think front cocking serrations are more than 20 minutes worth of work. But yes, some of the top 'smiths do have that much work booked.

I just added 2 hybrid ports to my gun this year. I was on and off about adding them for at least two years before that. I definitely didn't want the extra noise but after shooting a gun that was virtually identical to mine but with the hybrid ports, I decided to have them put in the gun. I have a 5 port EGW comp and the gun does not hit back any harder when I added the ports but it definitely shoots flatter so all things being equal, I dissagree that they make the gun come back harder. Generally smaller comps and different loads account for that more than adding ports I think. My wife's gun is identical to mine and while she's generally oblivious to changes in loads and gun setup, she noticed the hybrid ports right away and appreciated the result. Because she's small, light, and not particularly athletic, the difference in muzzle flip for her is significant and obvious. I have been playing with powder and bullet weights and found that I can go to slightly faster powders and heavier bullets and the gun still shoots flat. VV 3n37 or N350 with 115s was positively obnoxious because of the noise. N350 with 125s is still bad but more BOOM and less CRACK. I'm now using 4756 and 125s and the gun is still very flat and the noise is substancially less that with 115s or VV powders. Keep in mind that the noise level is a relative thing. Any major load I've shot with the hybrid holes is WAY louder than any powder/bullet combo before I had the ports. After shooting a season with them, I don't think I'd build another open gun without them unless the PF went back to 175. At 182+ PF, the gun was plenty flat without them and probably just as loud which brings up the ultimate irony. I was opposed to reducing the PF to 165 and had some conversations with my AD about it. He told me one of the biggest reasons for reducing PF was because the noise and blast from open guns was beating up the ROs so much. First thing that happened after the PF reduction was a big increase in shooters using 115s which made the blast and noise much worse and then everybody started drilling holes in their barrels. I think overall, open guns are louder now than before - well at least since the 9x25 fad peetered out.

10,000 is just broke in.

Sure, lets change L10 to prohibit race holsters and enforce an behind the hip position. New shooters will be flocking to the matches. ...no wait.... Newbies will be intimidated by the huge advantage those gamers have with double stacks - so much faster to reload and those trick STIs and SVs must be worth many match points in performance over those single stacks, so lets make it a single stack only division. ...no wait... Newbies will have to lay out huge amounts of money buying those expensive 10 round Wilson and CMC mags. How can they be competitive with just 8 round mags, so how about an 8 round division. ...no wait... Any good tactical shooter will tell you 8 round 1911 mags are unreliable and the Wilsons and CMCs still cost much more than those $7 surplus 1911 mags you see in Shotgun News so since we're gutting L10, let's just make it a 7 round division right away, besides - it really puts the pressure on the course designers to keep them revolver neutral you know! ...no wait... There's already a sport just like that. SO LEAVE L10 ALONE! Single Action Production? Maybe but I really think we have too many divisions know unless we're striving for that twist on the new Army slogan... A Division of One!

Eric, Maybe you want to have your chrono calibrated or review your chrono procedures. You shouldn't have to be loading to 175-180 PF to ensure 165 PF. My chrono is very consistant and tracks well with those at major matches if done under shade or a cloudy day but varies quite a bit if done in bright sun. Of course, chronoman and others recommend an artificial light source. I remember reading in GunGames that Leatham chronos 10 rounds and if any one doesn't make major, he bumps the load up a bit. Your problem also might be due to altitude, temp, or humidity sensitive powder too. I chrono for +6 PF.

Ditto on the EGW trigger. And if you use an EGW sear and Koenig hammer, they last forever, too.

I simply could not get my Super mags to work reliably until I started using ISMI mag springs - and I've been using the same ones for about 4 years now. Wolff springs simply would not feed reliably. I had two Wolff firing pin springs break - no problems with the ISMI springs.

I've had 2 guns and several other items chromed by Checkmate Custom and I'm very satisfied with their work. http://www.checkmatecustom.com

Flex, it's a persistant problem. The Nats are always the last match scheduled and it screws up everybody else. Supposedly the USPSA waits until the last minute to book a range to get a better price but it would make life a lot easier for the clubs that host smaller matches if they'd book two years so everybody else knows when to schedule theirs. It sucks that a club can put a big effort into contributing to the sport then be faced with rescheduling or losing all the top shooters, ROs, and generally face reduced participation because the Nats is scheduled at the same time.

I think the USPSA should wait until all the area matches are scheduled and all the smaller clubs hosting section matches, state championships and such are booked to see how many they can force to reschedule like they do every year. No... wait... that's a Bad Thing.

But what are you going to use for a time? If the timer wasn't started, zero isn't even valid.(not that EZWinScore will accept a time value of zero anyway)

I had my Para mags nickel plated. It made a huge difference in performance and reliability. On the other hand, I had some STI mags Cobra Coated and it made little difference, probably I suppose, because the STI mags had a much better finish inside.

No, by threatening to click the timer, he threatened to cheat. The only applicable penalty was to assess the proper number of procedurals and let the shooter arbitrate it if he wanted. It is not a DQ able offence and it certainly does not justify altering the shooters time.

Topton's website: http://www.usshooters.com

That's out and out cheating. That guy should be thrown out of the NROI and the USPSA. We have no room for that kind of crap. Are we really that short of range staff that we have to put up with people like that?

OBVIOUS intent is an IDPA thing? There's no such thing in IPSC. It's either in the rule book or the written procedure. You see my point??

No apology necessary ther GvU since you're the one who's wrong: 10.3.4 If at any time during the course of fire, a competitor allows the muzzle to point rearwards, that is further than 90 degrees from the median intercept of the backstop, or in the case of no backstop, allows the muzzle to point up range, whether the firearm is loaded or not. No dispute that it's accepable to give a warning to a shooter who's approaching the 180, but once they're over, so is their match.

It's not still acceptable. It's a match DQ and there is no warning.

Neither is best. They are different and the differences affect how you'll shoot a stage. I like shooting Limted as much as Open but I shoot Open more because of the dot. If you take notice to the ages of the competitors in the various divisions, you'll notice that Open is the preferred division with the bifocal crowd. Limited guns are less expensive because they don't require a comp and a dot scope. I think they're generally less fussy mechanically and .40 brass is close to free these days. Reloading for Open requires more R&D to get the right load for a specific open gun. Different comps, slide weights, shooting styles are more profoundly affected by the different powders and bullet weights than Limited guns. If you like to tinker with loads, Open is for you.

No, the competitor should be smacked around for signing an incomplete score sheet.

JFD, You should report that to the USPSA. They can't get the problems fixed unless they are aware of them.

Except that the rules specify that if a shooter does not have at least 4 valid classifiers on file with the USPSA for a given division, then the shooter is unclassified in that division. Unclassified is not necessarily a lower classification than any other. You can just as easily consider U as something higher than GM. As far as it affects a match, the only thing a U shooter can win is High Overall. There's no such thing as High Unclassified. When it comes right down to it, if a shooter is unclassified, either you win High Overall or you're shooting for fun. If the shooter was indeed classified according to the rules and entered as U, then he's a cheater and deserves shame and derision. For the most part, I agree with that. I think it simplifies things. Write your Area Director.

You mistake is the assumption that U means newbie. It means exactly what it says - unclassified, the shooter doesn't not have a sufficient number of classifiers on file to be classified in that division. Don't read more than that into it.