Chuck Anderson

Yeah, because there's no way that anyone can be competitive in Multi gun with anything other than a conventional AR platform.

My gun should be at Pinnacle High Performance this week to have the 9mm conversion done. As soon as I get it back I'll let you know how it went.

Not sure if they changed it from last the model shown at SHOT. The one that I handled was substantially heavier than the M-4 or even a HBAR Colt. Heavier than I wanted for a work rifle after adding optics and a light.

Okay, I've had a little bit of sleep in me after getting back to Oregon. This was, bar none, the best three gun match I've ever shot. The stage design was fun and challenging. With some actual running (and this is coming from a fat guy) that we hardly see any more. The long range shots were a perfect blend of distance, making them challenging but possible. The close range stage was fun also. The only problem I had as far as stage design comes from the method the sttages are scored. When all the stages are even in score they really need to close in time. For example, say I shot stage 1 in 100 seconds and another shooter shot it in 120 seconds, 20 seconds longer. Less points but not too bad. Now what about Stage 2. 20 seconds longer was an eternity. By throwing a few speed shoots into a match where all the stages are the same value, really overvalues those stages. As far as the scoring problem goes. There's nothing to say to improve it. The scoring crew worked their butts off. As far as the "select group" of shooters that helped with scoring. I was over there for a while. The only shooter that I saw was Kurt Miller. He was also match staff and I trust 100% that he did his absolute best. The AMU and stats did what they could. There is no good solution in that situation. If they had waited till the stats were reentered, which I'm sure took them all night, no one would have gotten to select their own prize. It would have basically results in an order of finish drawing for a prize and would have probably results in the AMU paying a couple thousand dollars for extra shippng to ship prizes (mostly for the guns) to the winners. And even then people would still complain that, " well I didn't want the 9mm M&P I wanted the .40" I don't know how they could have fixed it better than they did. I'm glad I went. I'll go again next year if I can get in. And I'm going to recommend the match to my friends (you know, after I get in). Hats off to everyone involved. You guys did a great job.

Don't worry about it at all. I know Linda and the whole stat's crew worked their butts off. Mistakes happen and I'm certainly not upset about it. I already got it squared away with BigHamp so no worries. Please let the new shooter keep the gun. I appreciate it but I know how it feels to win that first gun. I certainly won't take that away. This was a great match all around and I'll definitely be back again next year. Thanks, Chuck Anderson

Nice website. Looks like there's plenty of room in that Slimline column for some new models.

This is actually one of the multi-gun proposals. To use a fixed time course with no penalty for extra shots. Basically a way to manage a long range rifle stage with steel targets. Say, 10 targets in 60 seconds. Shoot as much as you want but your done at one minute. Definitely not the rule yet but it's on the table.

Okay, then it really doesn't make any sense for a heads up Division. How would you possibly enforce it with an STI/SV pattern gun which is made from the frame alone frequently. I've got a EGW lightened slide bushing .40. It's more than 2 oz lighter than a factory Edge. But that is the way it was made. What would the factory weight of a limited gun actually be?

Dude, that's not even close to accurate. Maybe most factory 147's make that but the majority of 124's and 115's are anywhere from 128 to 138. I tested around 20 loads out of 3 Glock 17's for that figure. Yeah the 147's were hot but nothing else. "6. Allow almost any mod as long as you don't add or subtract 2 oz. This was also proposed to the board in October. " Is this per modification or as a total to the gun? If it's per modification there's no way to enforce it because there could be multiple modifications that change the gun by a pound. If it's over all, cool, I'm gonna mill the slide on my Glock to produce a lighter recooiling mass and then hang a weight off my frame rail so that I have some recoil damping. Sorry, but this is the least "Production" idea that I've ever heard. As far as the trigger pull weight. I doub that it had much to do with what police agencies thought would be a good carry weight. I think it had more to do with picking a weight that they didn't think a factory gun ( not a race tuned one) would come in lower than. With all due respect to you and Ron (who I can't imagine would be your unnamed "friend") Not everyone wants to shoot your version of USPSA. While I personally like harder matches, (including the evil Texas Stars), there are times I just like putting my brain in park and shooting a hoser match. So here's the problem. For those guys that think there should be a 3 pound limit in Production because it is more carry related. Or think that we should use carry related gear. Or heck, if you want to shoot from a concealed carry position and use cover. Do it. There's nothing that says you can't. But this incessant need to enforce our will and personal ideas on others do more to damage the sport than allowing a 2 lb trigger.

.357 Mag model

I can't believe that folks are upset about adding a reload into an evolving discipline but cool with throwing away peoples investments in C-Mags. I would imagine that the open shooters could care less but as a Tactical shooter it would seriously piss me off. We're talking about changing Production rules in another forum and one of the main keys is enforcability. Good luck counting the number of shots fired on a LD stage with a lot of rounds fired. Or even a short assault course that's fast and furious.

Nope, I would not use them by themselves for shooting USPSA or indoors. But the great thing is their great to wear when your not on the line or ROing. Just wear them by themselves. When it's time to go to the line, throw a set of muffs over them. Nice and cool off the line and plenty of protection.

I can't believe that this is such a hot button topic. For crying out loud it's a reload, not the end of the world. I get the point Jim was making with making us crawl in the mud, etc. If you haven't yet, you either live in a very dry state, or you just don't shoot three gun much. I think most of this thread started with the question of C-Mags and their effect on the Limited/Tactical Division. Heavy Metal is now the only Division where a shooter would have to bring more than one Magazine to complete the average IPSC/USPSA match. I really don't want to shoot a sport that completely does away with reloading the rifle as a skill. Gordon, you say you're not against doing reloads (practice etc.) but not in a match. (you don't want a standards course, and you don't want them in field courses). I do. Shooters want different things out of matches. I personally would like a shooting challenge that includes a variety of skills challenges. These would include, short, medium and long distance courses, different shooting positions, shooting on the move, and oh yeah, reloading. I know everyone is saying that this mandatory reload is an IMGA thing but I honestly don't remember doing one at an IMGA rules match. Not to say I didn't, I just don't remember the requirement. And I've shot a couple of them. It may be different at a local level. I shoot a local 3-Gun match that has their own rules and they mandate reloads. I just look at it as a skills test.

Same problem we run into with changing rules in any other division. If we limit the capacity in Limited/Tactical, we make all the C-Mags that people bought to use in those divisions obsolete. I know Tactical shooters that have 3-4 of the dang things. Not sure where they ran across a 400 round course but maybe it took 4 to find one that worked. The mags are about $240.00. Lets not tell these shooters to that they just threw away that money. USPSA has enough trouble keeping three gun shooters without limiting legal equipment. As far as requiring reloads. There's no reason that we shouldn't be able to add it to the multi-gun rules. Not sure how to word it, that's Bruce's problem, but there are other things we do in Multigun that we don't in Pistol matches. There are compromises that need to be made.

Nope dates are funky probably so that they can hold the Gold Team Qualifier match afterwards. As far as the Multi gun, I really don't want to shoot three matches in a row, with three sets of equipment.

Ah yes, my Division dominating 51% Master score. Tremble before my awesomeness. As far as the 627 over the 625, I think I'll probably be spending more time shooting steel and ICORE matches with it so the extra two rounds are kind of handy. Besides I'm a great big wuss and the massive power of the .45 scares me.

Except for those one or two open shooters that have their guns chambered in a caliber other than .40 or larger. And how long would it be before STI/SV came out with the super high cap pistol with the 170 mm extended grip. Come on the mag doesn't extend below the grip.

Well, I'm having the gun shipped straight to Mark Hartshorne at Pinnacle High Performance. The seller is in PA so it seemed easy enough. Gonna have him at a minimum chamber it for 9x23 so that I can shoot .38 super, 9mm etc out of it. I'll probably stick with 9mm though. We'll see what else he can talk me into doing to it as well. Should be easy, I'm a push over. I'll order the Heartco Moon clips, but what is a Speed-E-Rack? I can't find any pictures on the net.

How many moon clip pouches should I get to shoot an ICORE match? Up to and including the IRC. The cost of the 147 is not an issue for me. We've got about 75,000 sitting around the office of the WWB, and we don't authorize the 9mm for duty carry anymore.

All right, Jerry V bugged me enough that I picked up a PC 627 to shoot. Now what do I need to do to it? I won't get it for a week or two but if I need to get some parts/equipment I might as well start now. Ideally I would like to shoot this as a 9mm because that's what I shoot in Production anyway. I just don't want to have to convert the press over to .38, or .38 Short Colt, or anything else that I don't have stuff for already. What's required for the new converson, new cylinder or just ream it. Any left coast recommendations for the work? I've heard of Randy Lee and Apex Tactical but can't find a web site for him. Are the moon clips interchangable between .38 and 9mm? I'm assuming no but figured I'd check. Where do I get 9mm moonclips for this thing from? Anything else? I'll probably be using Blade Tech holster etc but do I need anything else to get going? Thanks, Chuck

Mouse AD.

Uh no. We went through this years ago when the .40 limit was put into place excluding the .356TSW cartridge. Part of the reason for the cap was to slow the arms race in Limited. If it wasn't put there we'd probably all be shooting heavy bullet .30 carbine variants with 30 rounds in a 140mm mag. Changing it would require a whole new arms race costing competitors hundreds of thousands of dollars. There is no good reason to change it, other than they'd all be the same, and one really expensive reason not to change. Additionally, since the rest of world also uses those caliber dimensions, I think that might put us at an advantage when half the US shows up at the next World Shoot with .40 cal open guns, or have to rechamber all the .38 super Limited Guns.

We're still quite a ways off from IPSC in Production. And I really don't want to have IPSC Production rules. I don't think Amidon can handle the extra emails asking, "Can I do this?" IPSC doesn't even use a box in Production, just Standard. We've always had a list of approved guns. The only thing from your list is the minimum pull which IPSC specs at a DA biased 5lb. USPSA will now have a 3lb minimum which is much more reasonable.

International Handgun Leather. Dillon sells a couple of their holsters. Contact info should be in the back of the match booklet. I'll see if I can dig mine up if you still need it.

Keep in mind the majority of Front Sight articles are not written by Front Sight Staff. The majority are submitted by members. If the members write more articles about Multi-Gun and no one submits pistol articles, well there's gonna be more multi-gun. Are they passing up good pistol articles or have there just not been any submitted?