Chuck Anderson

Sure, RO's need to make sure the range is safe. Other than it being not what we expected, what is really usafe about firing a shot into a target, from the start position, after the RO gave the LAMR command, but 5 seconds before the RO was going to give you the signal to shoot. Admittedly at first blush it seems like it must be a shooter not in control. But is it really, or is it probably just brain fade the in actuallity, really isn't as unsafe as everyone wants to make it seem. As far as when loading stops, I was always told it was when you are done loading, mag in gun and hand away from magazine. You can't really say, under the current rules, that loading ends when the gun is back in the holster because there isn't a different definition of loading under LAMR. And I don't know about you but I don't holster everytime I hit a reload. You also can't say it ends when the second hand reaquires a firing grip because that doesn't address SHO/WHO only stages, or the fact that IPSC is freesytle and if I want to shoot the whole thing one handed I can. As far as the definition of the load ends when the shooter is back engaging targets, that would be any AD that they made. "What?? There's no target within 10 feet of where my, deliberate, gun on it's side and pointed at berm, shot went. Jeez, I must have really jerked the trigger, but I was engaging a target." How about a closer situation where there is a target nearby but it's obviously an AD (you know shooter has the dumb slack expression on their face and the rapidly growing wet spot in the crotch). He hits the target with his hand on the magazine as he seats it. Sure an AD, but once that hand comes away? I think he's good, just in need of a new pair of underwear.

Nope, I'm not involved in this one at all. We put in a bid for the match but got shot down.

There have also been times where I've seen an RO DQ someone (stop them during the course of fire and tell them they're out) only to check the rule book or talk with the RM and realize that it's not really a DQ. Most recently at the Multi Gun Nats. A shooter basically finished and AD while moving the gun out of the port. Safe direction, no other issues, wasn't during unloading yet. RO initially DQ'd. RM brought up that it really wasn't an unsafe AD (and yes as a firearms instructor I realize the contradiction). The shooter was willing to take whatever he got and assumed he was DQ'd. There are lots of times when shots are fired unintentionally but are not unsafe. Tripping that third round on a target because the trigger is bouncing is one. While I agree that it is unintentional or accidental, a shot into the target, during the course of fire (which begins with LAMR)?? I'd have a hard time accepting a DQ for this. I also hate the attitude of, DQ them and let'em arbitrate it. If you think they've got an out with an Arb committee, why are we doing the DQ. I'm not talking about the craps game that Arb Committee's are, but a legit reason they shouldn't be DQ'd? What about the shooters that didn't bring $100.00 cash to the match with them. I know I normally don't, regardless of the match size. Or if I do it's gone after the first trip to the vendor's tent. As far as allowing loaded sight pictures. We have a couple shooters who do it. Almost exclusively they are primarily steel shooters who shoot some IPSC. They do it to get the weight of the loaded gun before the draw. I normally only do it while shooting MG. I've had twice where I started the stage with my shotgun only to find the rear sight missing. We had a couple shooters who forgot to remove scope covers at the MG as well. Probably a good idea to take one in this case. Although I did get yelled at for it on my first stage of the 2005 MG Nats.

Sweet, my side of the world. Hopefully I can make that one.

Give it a couple squeezes every 20-30 rounds. Makes sure the rounds have some lubrication as well. At least that's what I was told and, knock on wood, no issues yet.

Any word on when and where for next years match?

The aftermarket sight will be fine (IPSC) as long as it is conventional style notch and post and does not have a fiber optic. You also cannot mill the slide to fit the sight, if you were thinking Bo-Mar. Under the US rules though, you can pretty much change it to whatever you want.

Sounds like you might be reading the IPSC rules on Production. There are two entries in the Appendix, one for USPSA and one for IPSC. The IPSC rules are a lot more restrictive in most areas.

I know that some, maybe even most people have difficulty getting time off. However, if they want to go bad enough, most people will find a way. There are only so many people that can be accomadated in a 2 1/2 day match. Regardless of the squad model and number of stages. Well scratch that, we can probably get a ton of people through a two stage match but I don't think anyone wants to see that. I would be my spot in this match that if they opened up a wed/thurs set of days, they would still fill it.

There is another solution other than moving and that is to add days. I know that A2 hasn't wanted to do that because of the expense and difficulty in getting RO's to stay the whole time. A6 has managed to use different RO's on different days without the earth opening up and sucking them in. Wanna open it up, start the match on Monday. Have Monday/Tue squads, Wed-Thurs Squads and the rest finish up on the normal days. You can open the match up, alot. The people that are desperate to get in, and I'm sure there are alot will fill in the weekday slots. I actually wouldn't mind shooting earlier in the week and spending a few days relaxing (actual vacation?) before the awards and prize day. The increased number of entries should cover the additional costs of the match. Of course this is also said knowing that me and my crew got in.

And Shawn Carlock (I think), lost all of his guns out of his vehicle driving to the Area 1 3-Gun a couple years ago. It can happen flying or driving.

For anyone considering going to a USPSA Multi Gun match, please don't use the 2004 match as a yardstick. That thing was a disaster with the new rules that no one quite knew how to put into effect. 2005 was much better and I think most of the kinks were out by this year. There were a few odd ball things that came up, i.e. one very good shooter got DQ'd because when he put his pistol in the box the safety got knocked off. I think we're still working on it but I think the rules are getting ironed out. To the shooters that have given up on USPSA, come back. We've got a President willing to change. The last couple MG matches I've been to, Mike always has a little sitdown at the end of the match and asks what needs changed. Some things just won't be changed, like doing away with HF scoring, but a ton of stuff has been changed in the last few years.

Yeah, I definitely didn't impress anyone in MOR. Probably not a good sign when I place the same in MOR as in the main match. Oh well maybe next year.

Millenium Custom has also done some good work on them

Don't agree with me 100%. I'm not picking a side in this battle. I don't really care whether it's DA Limited or Entry level. It's just not practical to call it both. What happens to the new shooter who comes to a match with his Production Glock 19 that his buddy told him would be fine to shoot and just as competetive as any other gun. First thing he sees is the local B class shooter walking around with a $1500.00 Springfield Limited gun, with downloaded .40 ammo, also shooting production. Kind of sends a mixed message. I really don't think that stuff gives that much of an advantage. Looking at the top 4 from last year Production Nats. Two were using Glocks, a 34 and a 17. Both with a total of about $90.00 worth of work, combined. The other two were using a CZ's also with very little work done, little springs, a little polishing, and of course new sights. That's it. As far as the Bo-Mars. There is a specific ruling, based on a specific rule in the Production Equipment rules. That I really don't have a problem with. It's the arbitrariness of the other decision that bugs me. And I guarantee that few if any other manufacturers submit their products to NROI for approval. For example, ISMI didn't either. I asked John about the Vanek months before he ruled and never got an answer. No email response, nothing till he posted the ruling. Sometimes you just can't win.

OK, Yamil, you're a little lost. I don't shoot a 34 and I don't use a tungsten or other non stock guide rod. I shoot a G17 with Warren sight, Tru-Grip and a 3.5 lb connector. The only other mod is a reduced power striker spring giving it about a 4.5 pound trigger pull. If anyone wants to inspect my gun feel free. As far as the rules not being open ended, I believe Bruce Gary used pretty much those specific words in the Vanek thread that just because it's not specifically listed doesn't make it legal. My understanding from conversations with him and several others was that the intent was to permit limited modifications including certain limited mods. SRT and Yamil: As far as the rules and the intent of the division. To some degree they are mutually exclusive. If you want it to be a division where the manufacturers make guns designed around the division you get the H&K Combat Competition (With Jet Funnel), the Tanfoglio Custom Stock (with add on magwell) and the S&W PC5906. All are purpose built competition guns that the board and several members on this forum have complained about. They are also over $1000.00 ea. At the same time you have some people spending over $1000.00 on Glocks with mods, Sigs and Springfields. Not exactly what you would call an entry level division. SRT: You have an opinion as to what Production should be. Cool. I do as well. And pretty much everyone else does to. However, the board, which makes the rules can't decide what they want. How can you make a set of rules for a division if you can't decide if it should be box stock, not even changing sights (The opinion of at least one board member) or a DA Limited gun in Minor which I've heard several people espouse.

Just in case anyone was still wondering Squad 2 did shoot Stage 12 in the late afternoon on Saturday as scheduled. There was only one squad member who wanted to try and get around the schedule and everyone else shot him down pretty quickly.

That's not true and many board members and John Amidon have said so. The problem with Production and the rules is that the Board won't make up their minds what they want the division to be. Is it an entry division or a place for manufacturers to build better DA guns. Is it designed to bring in new sponsors or new shooters. I really don't care either way, but someone needs to make a dang decision before making arbitrary rules decisions that conflict each other. I spent the weekend shooting with an Area Director from a different area and it's interesting to hear how different his opinion of what Production should be from my own and from my Area Directors. As far as the guide rod issue goes, like I said, I don't care about the specific decision. My concern is the process that went into it. It is a externally visible change. The Vanek ruling was based solely on the visible change. If John said that it was banned because it changes the mechanical advantage, fine, I have no problem with it. But based solely on the fact that he based it solely on the external change I don't understand what the difference is. That said I also spent 10 minutes arguing in person with John on Saturday about his vertical foregrip interpretation. Which since it's not posted or listed anywhere is that Vertical foregrips are illegal in Limited and Tactical Divisions and if they're on at the beginning of the match in Open must stay on. Removing is subject to a DQ. This has no precedent and I know several shooters were using vert foregrips in these divisions having no idea of this new, "Rule".

Yep, there's a new Vanek without the trigger pin moved. The difference with the 34 and the 17 is that the guide rod doesn't protrude, it's not external. Before you disagree that the Vanek ruling is different than this, read the Vanek ruling and see the pictures. An informed argument might change my mind. Bottom line. The Vanek ruling said if it's externally visible, it's illegal. The guide rod is just as visible as the Vanek, if not more so. The trigger has most of it's mass inside and concealed, just like the guide rod. As far as putting a stock Glock end on, yes that would make it no longer different externally. Like I said, I don't care one way or the other about the guide rods. I just find it interested the rules decisions that seem to contradict each other. Unless someone can explain how they don't.

It's cooled off a lot today. It's 83 in Hillsboro now. Not quite Albany but it's a lot cooler than the 97 it was this time yesterday.

My guess is the difference comes because the G34 slide is longer than the G17 and the guide rod is the same length. That means that no part of the guide rod is external on a G34. As far as the Vanek ruling. There is a huge thread on the forum regarding this. It was probably the fastest growing thread that I've seen and caused a lot of hard feelings. John's ruling on this was that a small hole on the trigger pivot was ruled therefore making it an external modification. I'm not kidding, I had to compare guns side to side to even see this modification. And I've worked on several hundred Glocks. The guide rod is as much an external modification as the Speed Bump and the Vanek. The reason for the consternation is that these two rulings directly contradict each other. One moved a pivot hole, the other added a screw head out the end of the gun. I don't have a problem with the guide rods, and I'd like to see them available to be used, in fact I'll probably have one in before Nationals. But, I really don't know why they should be legal.

There will be food on the range and there are a couple restaraunts within about 10 min from the range.

Except for the vendors that were counting on a half day schedule to be able to work. Nice to change it without notice a week before the match.

I railed my loose stainless SV open gun. Started with the gun new and tight. After about 5000 rounds it was the loosest gun I owned. I sent it to Doug Jones and it's great. Runs great and just tight enough. I also had him send a spare set of rails. Haven't seen anyone have a problem with them.

If you want to practice for cheap, just join the army.