Chuck Anderson

Additional thoughts on trigger pull. A couple of folks have mentioned a reduction in the pull weight across the board. The downside I see with this is you still end up with a striker fired division. If you have a choice between first shot 6 pounds and each one after 2 or 2.5 or a gun where every shot is 2 or 2.5 you still end up biased towards the gun with all light pulls.

As an example of what I was thinking: Original Rule: g) Trigger weight may not be less than 3.5 lbs. in any mode. Potential Rule: g) Trigger weight may not be less than 2 lbs in any mode. For guns with only one firing mode (i.e. Striker fired or DAO) the trigger pull may not be less than 3.5 lbs. Here's my reasoning. There are three potential types of guns I see competing in Production Division: DA/SA guns, DAO/Striker Fired guns and Revolvers. The division requires the first shot to be fired DA so for the DA/SA guns and Revolvers they still have to deal with the first shot of each string being heavier. I'm not aware of any gunsmith that can make a revo with a 3.5 lb DA pull and a 2 lb SA. I actually think it's impossible for a DA/SA semi to do so and work. So the DA/SA will have a first shot of at least 4+ lbs. Every factory gun on the market should be able to meet both standards without internal monkeying. The weights are easily discerned and measurable. This change would allow more guns to compete on an equal footing.

I personally find this funny! I do not recall you or anyone else suggesting that we start a Production Division, it's real easy to sit in the Monday Morning Quarter Back spot! I wish I could do that, but I (TOM) am not that kind of guy! The bottom line is, if it's broke...fix it! NRA AP needed to be fixed, we are working on it, we need people to support it, and run matches in OH and anywhere else there is a want and or need to run them. Nothing good happens over night, is NRA AP perfect? NO! Will it ever be perfect? NO! We are in the business of running matches, we all have (2) two choices: Be a part of it...or not. Bottom line: Be a part of making it better, or leave it to those who care to make it better! In the last few years, anyone on here could contact anyone at the NRA, and suggest changes to NRA AP, there are many people on here that have done that. We are where we are because of opinions and suggestions from Competitors, Sponsors & the Founders of all Pistol Championships. Merry Christmas! TOM... I would really hope this post, funny and all, wasn't a slam on Kyle (Flex). I know for a fact they run AP matches at his club in OH. Because he showed me the setup and helped me towards gettting our club off the ground in Oregon. He's also the one who set up the Bianchi Cup forum here so that we can trade ideas. He is trying to help. If you can't see that maybe take a moment and read what he said. I haven't seen anyone get on this forum and disparage anyone who shoots AP or runs matches or runs the discipline for the NRA. The fact that we didn't suggest Production for AP doesn't mean we don't want it to thrive and flourish now. It's more likely we didn't care about AP until there was somewhere for us to shoot. Now that NRA has Production there is a spot to run wtihout specialized equipment and that attracts me to it. Will I be happy shooting just Production 5 years down the road? Nope, I'll probably have a dedicated Open gun, but to start there is no way I'm spending that kind of money without getting my feet wet. Kyle and I, as well as several others have been working wtih USPSA and IPSC Production rules for years. They've been through many iterations and a lot of the same mistakes (and yes they are mistakes) in the NRA rules have been sorted out in various other shooting disciplines throughout the years. Take what you need, throw out the rest. You don't need to be exactly the same as anyone else's sport but there are certain things that we've dealt with for years (it seems like decades) and can help with. NRA has always taken a Not Invented Here stance, both in it's LE training, and competiton program. There is a very simple way to get the Production rules sorted out quickly. Ask someone who knows and has shot Production.

Then say that. By saying no Bo-Mar sights, with not wording about ribs, or three position, how can you read it any other way. Now, take away your extensive AP knowledge, and look at the rule as a new shooter. Would you think a regular Bo-Mar is legal? Why? It clearly says they are not. I honestly can't figure out how you can think otherwise.

If you've got ideas for something that needs to be changed in NRA AP Production lets here it. Present your case, what are the benefits, what are the potential pitfalls etc. Let's try to get this all in one thread so it will be easier to find this summer when we need to get it to Tom to put before the BOD. Let's try to do more than just complaining about certain rules, lets hear ways to fix them. If you've got wording you want changed, lets see the potential wording and see if we can bulletproof it before it gets changed next year. It would be nice to have a nice stable, and consistent set of rules for 2011.

Okay, so let's start getting that input now. There are several active and potential shooters on here talking about rule changes. Let's use the forum to aid in that process. What are the upsides and downsides to a change in the trigger pull rule, what about the holster rule. Let's come up with some decent changes and get them to the NRA. I know nothing will change for 2010, I'm okay with that. But lets not wait until August and then find out it's too late then too.

I know what a rib sight is. I've got an Aristocrat sight on my PPC revolver. But this is the rule d) Peep, ghost, optical, electronic, Bo-Mar and Aristocrat type sights. It doesn't say Bo-Mar and Aristocrat Rib type sights. Is a standard Bo-Mar adjustable that comes on dozens of 1911's a Bo-Mar type sight? Well of course it is. It says so right on the side of the sight. If a preclusion of rib type sights is the intent, then say that. Right now, how can you say that rule doesn't exclude standard Bo-Mar adjustables? As far as barrels I'm totally on board with that rule and understand it. As far as revo's doing better last year, I'm guessing all must have been modified internally with the SA notch removed (not a modification likely to generate interest from new shooters), and most were likely dual entries. A competitor in Metallic or Open who also entered Production wtih a gun they already had. How many were unique or new entries? If you're goal is attracting new shooters, then why not make the majority of guns competitive on equal footing rather than a specific class that is much easier to run with. That is how to generate interest and get new people involved.

It has been discussed many times that the CZ will likely not meet the trigger pull restriction after much use. There is one shooter that mentioned his out of the box SA pull was 3 lb 11oz. Thats only 3 oz from the limit. I know for a fact that with use (and not much use) the CZ pull weight will drop. Some a 1/2 pound some a full pound. This is one of the reasons they're so popular for IPSC. You can get a great light trigger without a trigger job. There is a really simple way to word the rule to include not just striker fired guns as competetive but DA/SA as well. And it would elimiate everyone doing the SA modifications. Use a two step trigger pull process. If the gun has more than one function, i.e. DA/SA it must have a 2lb trigger pull in SA. If it's striker fired or only has one mode 3.5 lbs. Nothing changes for those people who have already purchased Production guns but it will open up a lot more possibilities in the spirit of the Division. I'm not surprised only 30 people competed in 2009. If the only competetive guns were striker fired. It severly limits the shooter pool. Also as far as the restriction on aftermarket sigths that really needs to be cleaned up. Does the restriction against Bo-Mar sights exclude guns like the Para LDA which come with a Bo-Mar clone? Or is it meant to prohibit rib type sights. If it's the latter (which I suspect), the rule is written way too broad. If it's the former, why? You can have Dawson adjustable sights on Glock, but not a nearly identical functioning sight on a Para? What am I missing?

I'm already signed up and looking forward to it.

The notch in the front has nothing to do with the Gen 4 design. The notches for the Gen 4 are on the sides of the magazines, just like now, but there are two instead of one. One on each side. The front notch was for the Ambi mag release like the G21 had. Didn't seem to be that big of a success so I think they went with the reversible design. I'm not sure but I think the old mags might work with the new gun as long as you keep the release on the left side like the original. There also might be a way to fix older mags to work with the new design. One of the questions I'm sure will be answered in the next couple weeks.

Almost forgot, the older magazines are not compatible with the new gun. Even the ambi cut mags. And for anyone that hasn't bought a Glock recently, the sights across the board have been upgraded. The new standard front sight is actually mounted the same way after market sights are with a little metal hex head bolt. The front sight is still plastic but at least it's a bit more durable.

Our Rangemaster got to fire one on the range a couple months ago (didn't call me the SOB). The changes he told me about were the dual captive recoil spring similar to the subcompact models. This required a larger opening on the slide for the end of the recoil spring assembly, as well as a wider slot in the locking block for the same reason. The frame is too short front to rear to use the standard trigger housing assembly so they are using the one from the Glock 37 as well as the 37 trigger bar. He mentioned the backstrap inserts and said there were only two inserts (clearly different than the picture). But, you could shoot the gun without a backstrap in place for the smallest setting, or add one of the two inserts. He didn't mention anything about stacking of inserts. Not sure if the rep didn't know, or if they've changed backstrap systems once or twice. As far as shooting it's very subjective, but he shot the Gen 4 side by side with a G22 RTF. He said there was no comparison. The Gen 4 was hands down softer to shoot and overall a better gun. Of course I didn't get a chance to shoot it (the SOB) so I'm relying on his words.

I was just going to point out that the 5906 in the picture was Single Action only. You can tell by the slide mounted safety. I just saw one of those listed on Gun Broker. I was thrilled till I saw the dang SA only function.

If it's a new gun that pull will drop 1/2 to a full pound as you dry and live fire. It doesn't take long either.

So what is the Pro-Am?

Modified or not the SA is too light making it illegal. Unfortunately NRA turned Production into a Striker fired gun Division. Not sure if it was intentional or not. But that is the result of trigger pull limits that only have one weight. They either penalize Striker or DA/SA depending on how their worded (IPSC for example requires 5lbs first shot which means DA/SA guns rock).

Since I apparently need to be classified before shooting the Bianchi Cup for the Production money. Is there a listing somewhere of local matches I can get my classification? I'm looking for matches in the Northwest. I tried searching the NRA site but quit after my head started to hurt too bad. I was going to host my own matches under AP rules but the way I read the rules is that if I run them I can't compete.

Might check the trigger pull on it. All of my SP-01 and CZ-75's have been worked on by Angus and the SA trigger is substantially below 3.5 pounds. Most of the factory Shadows will fall under 3.5 as well after a bit of shooting.

What is the definition of Sponsored/Professional competitor? If you've ever received something? Is there a threshhold? I've got a couple sponsors, but nothing that amounts to even the 3rd place Production Prize.

Phil Strader would be perfect. The Rodney Dangerfield of USPSA.

NOOOOOOOO. It's the same weekend I scheduled my Section's Championship. Guess it's time to do some scrambling. I need to make it back next year to come back from my lousy finish this year.

I run a SureFire M951 now. But I'm not doing much outdoor work. 65 Lumen is plenty for inside of a house. If I need to reach out further I have a 9P on my raid vest. When I was on general patrol I ran the M952. I've had them for a couple years now and they're old tech. Doing it again I'd look at the current gen Scout which is running 200 lumen and based on the new Defender line. I've never been impressed with the original scout light. It's almost the lowest powered light in the SureFire line. It's only rated for 60 lumen. I could never figure out why anyone would buy it. Really expensive light for what was essentially an E2E with a mount.

Primarily pistols. I'm not a fan of trying to go cheap by using a pistol light on a rifle. Most of them are only capable of throwing useable light 25 or so yards. Especially the LED lights. Way too limiting on a rifle IMO.

We run a couple hundred guys through low light quals every year. Every year Streamlight and Insight lights fail while shooting. Every year SureFire doesn't. I run SureFire on everything. I guess if it was a play gun I might try another light. But if I have to put my life on the line SureFire gets the nod.

It's not the only way. You have Section Coordinators, Area Directors, the President. All of whom have emails or other ways of contacting them. I've always been able to get through to Dave Thomas whenever I called HQ. There is also a USPSA forum that can be used to give feedback. There are lots of ways to give feedback. Just because the organization doesn't do what YOU want doesn't mean they're not responsive.