Chuck Anderson

There really is no gray to that rule. The way you want it listed would not allow for unloaded gun starts or an 11 round mag to load from. Read it again and tell me how it is legal to have 11 rounds or more in a mag at any point after the start signal. Or how you would justify shooting the gun with more than 10 rounds in the mag. It's really a very clear rule.

I don't think this was the case before the 2008 Rule book. I seem to remember there was a ruling or something that allowed you to have 11 in the mag to load with. I know that I've been shooting Production since 2005 and have always done it this way, including at several Nationals. I've also seen every guy I shoot Production with do it at those matches. I'm pretty sure it was legal before 2008. That said, good explanation of the rule. I really didn't think it was that hard to comprehend.

If there is 10 in the magazine at the start signal and it's a loaded gun start it would be 10+1. If it's an unloaded gun start it would just be the 10 in the mag.

It also would surprise me if SJC had considered the erosion problem and firgured a way to refit the comp with Steel baffles later in it's live. Jimmy, I'd give some thought to the load. While the 180 slow load will extend the live of the comp it won't do much to work it either. There just isn't a lot of gas pressure with that combo. A light bullet going faster will give better comp performance in the .40, you would just have to live with shorter comp life. Your choice.

I think that was probably John's stock answer without having to research the gun. Duane, you're a little off on the G34/35. They were designed for IDPA and IPSC Standard. They were never legal for IPSC Production because of the 5.32" bbl. IPSC has a Production requirement of no bbl longer than 5".

I'm in the same boat, right handed and left eye dominant. Just about all my guns shoot point of aim with the rear sight centered. I've shot a bunch of student guns as well and had the same results. I've got a couple guns that have the sight somewhere other than in the middle but they are the exception, not the rule. When you find that all your guns do the same thing, the only other variable is the guy shooting. 3in off at 40 yds is not bad at all with an XD. 6 inches at 25 yds with the sight all the way over is another matter. Does this do this with all guns that you shoot or only some? If it's all guns, sorry, the problem is the shooter, regardless of who else you've had shoot them. Statistically, one guy just isn't going to get all the bad guns. If you've got some guns that do it and others that don't I'd look at the grip and trigger design next.

I don't think the point of testing would be to determine which is better for each person, and at what range. There are some folks that are very proficient with iron sights. And others, not so much. I don't think match directors should be basing decisions about what divisions to allow based on what gun is easier to shoot. If that was the case the only division allowed for pistol would be open. I think everyone will agree that Open shooters, have lower overall times and better hits, than the average Limited, L-10 and Production shooters. (And note I left it limited to pistol matches, I don't need anyone to tell me that Taran won Ft. Benning with Tactical gear.) I don't mind if they want to have Limited, Tactical, Open, Heavy Metal or whatever at any three gun match, if there is interest to support it.

Jeesh, it's about time you figured this out. I didn't think you'd ever come around and wise up to the fact that optics shooters are just plain superior in every way to you iron guys. We're even better looking and we don't have that funny looking gold stuff all over our carry guns. On a serious note, has anyone thought about setting up the tests mentioned in the first post and doing it for themselves? I know the results are going to vary person to person and that's the important thing. I would probably be faster with irons than with an optic to certain distance. Kurt will be faster with irons than optic to a certain distance. But I'm willing to be Kurt is going to be faster with the irons further out than I will because he practices with them more than I do. I think it would be interesting for the folks posting on this thread to take some time and actually go set it up. I was going to do it today and tomorrow and Friday but I have to testify against some fine upstanding gentleman who beat his 10 year old kid black and blue for making mistakes on his homework. What would be a good test of this Time alone or HF scoring. What distances should the targets be set. All off hand or prone when we get to X distance?

The rule says that at LAMR you can only put your finger on the trigger on a gun without a decocker. If you've disabled the decocker I don't think that is going to change. The gun cannot be used for Production as it can't be legally placed in the required starting position.

New ruling that should be on the NROI Interpreatations page soon. Manufacturers have installed decockers to take the hammer safely to a position that is deemed safe, therefore; the term fully decocked is the position that the hammer rest at once the decocker has been used. Altering a factory installed decocker to bring the hammer to rest at less than a half cocked position is not allowed. John Amidon VP USPSA Director NROI

Yeah, that's not what I said. I don't think the premise will work. I don't agree with the golf analogy. I shoot against the pros now. Like everyone else. Out of curiousity, are you an attorney, because you send just like the last defense attorney that questioned me. Ignore everything that doesn't fit the answer you want.

For me what it comes down to is whether this is optional for mandatory for the pros. If it's mandatory, I would just quit shooting major matches. I'm a tweener, not good enough to win the big money, and apparently too good (by your definition of Pro) to be an amatuer. There would be no reason to go. If it's not mandatory, I don't think the pool of pros would be as big as you think. And if it's not funded by them, it's funded by no one. Are you still going to retain a prize table for amatuers? If not what about the millions of dollars in product that sponsors are willing to contribute to the sport. And yes it is Millions that our sponsors donate each year. Are the sponsors going to be as likely, more likely or less likely to donate product if it won't go to top shooters. I can speak from a bit of experience that there are a lot of sponsors that want their product to go to the best shooter, or at a minimum in order of finish. Some other sponsors would prefer random order, but from experience, they are the minority.

I can't see how it's not an issue, Bill. You would probably be talking about 10-12 matches a year for it to mean anything (Level III sized matches), right? That is five grand...more. I am sure that Springfield, Glock and Para could pay it for Dave, Robbie, and Todd. S&W...? Maybe...or maybe they'd lose a few shooters. AMU...? Max, TT, KC and Lee on the pistol side...their budget would take a $20k hit. Does CZ take a $5k per shooter hit? SV? Could anybody else? I know I'm not funding another $5k a year in match fees. Plus, how much more in practice and travel $$ to make a run at it? And, then...the pay off probably still couldn't be worth the expenses. I like the idea of some $$$ flowing, but I can't see it working as self-funded. I think the pool of pro shooters gets smaller, not larger. I could be wrong, somebody show Flex the money. You telling us you never spent 5k or more a yr on shooting? I have, lots of times and that was back in the Olden Days...you would not wager 5k against 500k? I think I might if I was 30 again. Not talking about an every week thing like the PGA..maybe 12- 15 events...in the mean time you teach, paint houses, do whatever you need to do to make $$....try it a couple of years and if you can't break out ahead, just shoot for fun and take a real job again. The main thread I see in these responses is that you guys need guaranteed money in your pocket to try this...do you play poker? Same thing there...wager some to get lots...depends on your skill.... Yes, I've certainly spent more than $5000.00 in a year shooting matches. What I don't want to have to do is spend another $5000.00 on top of what I already spent. I find it really interesting that all the people (except Jake) that are arguing for this, wouldn't be entering as pro anyway. There are only a few people that are going to win a match. Maybe three or four guys can win Production, Open, Limited, or L10. That number shrinks dramatically in Revolver. Second through maybe fourth will get enough, but I doubt match fee will be covered below that, unless you make it mandatory. In that case I'm done. I'm apparently good enough to be considered a pro by you, but I'm not anywhere near good enough to beat Dave.

I'm sure this isn't what you were looking for when you posted this, and it seems like your views may have changed a bit. But...LE Firearms instructors are professionals, Blade Tech gave a holster to our Junior team to use and Techwear gave them shirts with Blade Tech and Techwear logo's on them, they're all pro's, a shooter wins a raffle or heck even does well enough on a prize table to win a Glock certificate, pro. I think your definition of what makes a pro is a bit light. The number 30-40 that was used earlier is way high. The number of truly professional shooters, as in that is their job, is wayyyyyyy low. My guess is closer to 5-10. The folks who are instructors don't make money off of teaching IPSC shooters, the pool is too small. Most make their money with Gov't and LE contracts, with the rest by civilian type folks that may or may not be IPSC shooters. Even some of the folks that we consider pros actually have other jobs. The AMU doesn't spend all their time on shooting. The majority is spent providing training to troops. Same thing with guys like Dave Sevigny. His job isn't professional shooter, it's marketing. As far as some of the folks that have been listed as pros in the other threads. I'd be surprised if most of them get $5000.00 a year from their sponsors. With few exceptions, Robbie, Todd, Dave and some others, the big money days are gone. If the folks that aren't at the very top aren't even making $5000.00 a year from it, why call them pros? I'm a professional police officer. That is what I do for a living. That is my profession. I don't shoot for a living.

I must be missing something. With my 8 round tube (9 in the gun to start Tactical and Limited Legal), my mag tube is the same length as the bbl. Why would a 24" be the same length, unless you're putting a higher cap tube on.

50% of the matches seems about right for me when I was using the Remmy. Not horrible malfunctions but bad enough to cost time. The Browning still occasionally give me fits but it's been a pretty good gun for the most part. That said, Merlin is right. How long would I hold onto a pistol that malfunctioned every other match, or a rifle. I'm annoyed if I have one malfunction per year with both of those guns combined.

I don't have first hand experience but I'm sure you can just slap on some parts and you would get a decent performing Benelli. When I priced it a couple of months ago a complete worked up Tactical/Lim Benelli M2 was in the $1900-$2000 range. Now with the weak dollar it's a couple of $'s more. From what I have researched stuff that most of us can't do is lightening the bolt and welding up the shell lifter (?) so you don't mess up your thumb. In addition smoothing out and polishing the the feed area can be done by the home gunsmith... but I would rather leave that to experienced hands. I plan to add an American made stock and along with the American made follower and an American made extended shell tube and the gun will be good to go. That's what I'd like to know, is the Benelli good to go out of the box or do you having to spend $$$ to get it where it needs to be. I've seen some people that have Benelli's that run right out of the box. I've seen other folks that never get one to run. I "think" a lot of it has to do with shooting style and body size. Since the gun is recoil operated, it seems to be sensitive to this. I can't seem to get a Benelli to run with anything other than 3 3/4 dram or higher ammo, which is why it is on the list to send to Benny to get it fixed.

I hate to say it, but it almost sounds like some of us support gun control. I had a really wise ass response to this but it bordered on a political commentary. Fact is there is not really much of a difference between a gun which was declared as a destructive device that is a semi-auto 12 ga with a pistol grip, and 10 round box mags and a 20 round drum, and a Saiga with a pistol grip stock, a 10 round box mag and a 20 round drum. If you can't figure that out and seem to think that makes me in support of gun control, I'm sorry.

I would put money on the Saiga being ruled a DD soon. Especially since there are now 20 round drums available. Essentially it is the same as the USAS 12

I'm pretty sure that Kurt wasn't anywhere around us at that match.

Was it three years ago then that you had the major problem with your Benelli? I seem to remember at Superstition the whole trigger group or something falling out. I was just getting ready to buy a Benelli at the time to replace my Remington because of the "superior reliability" when I saw that and changed my mind. Of course, that was three years ago. BTW I have a Benelli I need to send to you to get worked on. As far as parts, I haven't broken anything on my Browning, once I figured out to put the stock mag spring back in. On the Remington though, I can email you the list, it takes up too much space on the forum. Actually, I've broken most of the gas system parts, piston rings, gas seals, action bar, interceptor latch, EZ Loader. I know I'm forgetting a few as well.

Semi-Autos, have this big mass of metal that moves front to back to chamber and eject rounds. Sometimes it comes in handy to be able to grab that mass of metal (bottom feeders call it a slide) and pull it back, normally when the gun jams. You know it happens all the time.

Humorous will be more like it. I shoot steel once a year or every other year. I'm always good for a laugh when I do show up. I'm hoping to get in a steel match or two before this. And I'm borrowing Everett's SJC Open gun, so it should be even more of a hoot watching me try to find that weird red glowy thing.

It was a pure concept. They had a planning meeting and said, come up with something cool. That was what one of the guys came up with. I doubt they have any plans to produce the unit. I'd be willing to pick one up for my 18 though.

Wuss