Chuck Anderson

My CCR is very tight with Gen 2 Pmags. They won't drop free. EMags and Gen 3s come out just fine though. JP was a bit tight. Maybe 50/50 drop free with Gen 2's.

So we lost 84 shooters by moving from Vegas to Utah. But gained 102 by moving Revo to Barry.We also gained 62 SS shooters without moving. It'll be interesting to see how big the Production match is. yeah I would like to see how big production isthey sent a fb message out that there was still room for the production match so it is not sold out Last I heard there were about 300 registered for the Production match.

Actually Brandon, go back a page and re read what I wrote. I said Doodie. No mention of a forum. That's an example of someone's bias interfering with their perception. The reason I mentioned it is because this seems like a thread designed primarily to troll for a response. Filled with people who often troll for responses. In fact Andy even talked about trolling in this thread.

On my phone which doesn't like copying links. But it's the one from less than a week ago about Some AR lowers. Facebook, not the forum.

Based on the hypothetical situation you put forth. No. But I also don't think "implied" is in the rule book either. I'm also not an RM, or at this point even certified as an RO anymore (expired). What I do know is that I can ask a question lots of different ways and get a response that may not necessarily reflect reality. If I ask someone about something that occurred I get their perception filtered by my own perception. If I ask the question from a perspective that I believe something was done wrong. I'll probably get a response that supports my previous belief.

The assumption is that the reshoot was implied. That's a sticking point and is the reason I'm not getting worked up till someone there says what was actually said. I've heard RMs ask questions before with no intention of granting reshoots. Looking at the question, with the hindsight of having the reshoots granted after, makes it easy to say that's the implication. In reality I don't know what the actual intent was. I don't even know which RM did it.

There's a difference between your original post and what Andy posted. And no offense but you talking to one shooter and then relaying what was implied by that statement is not a first hand account. I'm not saying it was right or wrong. I don't know. I'm not there. But I'm willing to wait a couple days until the folks who were there say what happened.

Depends on what question was asked. If it's asked the way you say sure. If I ask "Who had an issue?" Then tally the results and decode that reshoots need to be completed by the people who had issues that's different. Kind of the point I was making that getting info passed along by someone who wasn't there may not be the most reliable way of finding out what happened. And that totally leaves out that at least a couple folks participating in this thread also seem to be participating in the " Call to Troll" thread on Doodie. But I'm sure that's completely unrelated.

This information is different than what was originally posted about it. It makes a significant difference to me. If the shooters who said they were affected were made to have reshoots it's not an optional reshoot. The method of determining who had REF's may be questionable but the reshoot sounds warranted. To Moto's point. I did not take away that he was saying if you weren't there your opinion doesn't matter. What I got was getting upset about a violation of rules posted second hand or more by someone who was not at the match and has already been contradicted by another second hand report might not be the most productive use of time. I don't know what happened because I wasn't there and haven't talked to anyone directly involved. Therefore I'm not going to get my undies in a wad. I don't think that calling someone, or their idea stupid is productive.

Well yes. I was hired by various parties to investigate why these accidents/injuries occurred. If you want to stop by the office some day, I'd be more than happy to let you look at some photos..45 ACP has maybe 1/4 of the powder of a shotshell and one heavy slug. It has little to no "propulsion". You likely had a slightly bulged case and not much else. Are you familiar with Hatchers Notebook? Commanding general the ordnance training center and a whole bunch of other positions. Please refer to chapter XXI," explosions and powder fires". He did extensive testing on cartridges fired without being chambered. He used an electric welding torch to set off the primer. He tested 45acp, 30-06 and 12 ga SHOTGUN trap loads. He took a bar of laundry soap to simulate flesh and covered it with a thin layer of white sheeting to show any scorching. He then laid a bath towel over the shell to simulate a coat. He used a 1 1/8 0z 3 dram equiv. trap load. He then placed a ordinary corrugated cardboard box over the arrangement to catch any fragments and to indicate what force they might have. I quote" On closing the switch, the pop of the exploding primer was heard, followed by the rattle of shot inside the cardboard box. On lifting the box, I found that the end crimp of the shell had opened up, and the shot was scattered all around, together with the wads and some unburned powder. THERE WERE NO MARKS ON THE INSIDE OF THE BOX, AND NO SCORCH OR BURN ON THE CLOTH, AND THE SOAP WAS NOT DENTED OR BRUISED. The sound of the explosion was so mild it did not sound like an explosion at all, but more like a marble dropping into a dishpan". So the incidents you cited did not happen with an unchambered round. And yes, the bar legend of firing a shotshell with the barrel off does work, but not with a model 12. A browning A5 extractor holds it firmly enough against the breech face to make it happen. Cost me a few bucks to see it happen. So, I think I'm going to side with Mark here on this one. Despite the incredibly scientific experiment described above (and since I'm typing, that's sarcasm). A single experiment does not cover all possible outcomes. There are literally dozens of variables that were not accounted for in that test, Dram eq., crimp design, powder speed, shell orientation, shot charge weight. I'm sure I can keep going. To say that something can't happen because it didn't happen one other time is short sighted. Considering the little bit I know about Mark's work, if he says it happened I believe him. BTW, we also had an officer shot in the leg a couple years back. Had a pocket full of ammo in his BDU pocket. Dropped another round in and it hit just right. Round fired and penetrated his leg, although not deep. That also shouldn't have happened, but did. Weird stuff happens.

Sure. And the shirt design was done before Sig was finalized as the match sponsor. I don't think USPSA has ever used the match sponsor gun in the match logo. At least not intentionally. That said yeah, I thought a 1911 was a lousy idea as for the design.

I noticed it too and brought it up to USPSA. They replied back to me and said they would try to make it look less like a 1911 but that was about it. With Sig being the match sponsor it would feel like a smack in the face if they didn't have a Sig as the gun silhouette if I were Sig. Kevin Sig makes lots of 1911's. None Production legal though.

I totally get the three day match. Trying to cram it all in over two days is great. Until something goes wrong. Like a couple more of the thunder showers we had on the first day. Add in a couple more hours of guys to wuss to run around holding long metal rods in lightning and Sunday is not a luxury, it's a necessity. If the plan was everybody is gone or done Saturday it makes for some expensive scrambling to change flights.

Uh, no. That's a Para LDA. Really. It is.

Alan Zitta used to make his own by welding them up. If memory serves. Not sure if he's still in business. Or if he ever did it for anyone else.

I've got GA Precision building me one with a Bartlein and a 4 month wait. But that's because they felt bad because I got ripped off on the purchase of the rifle and they're trying to help me out to fix it. (Note, not by GAP, they've been awesome to deal with on this.)

Lowers and uppers are relatively easy to make and scaling up production is not terribly difficult. Small parts are a bit harder. But barrels require unique equipment that isn't easy to just go out and buy. It's also not a good idea to do so for a temporary upswing in the market.

Gary. I've seen you shoot. Delta/Mike sounds about right.

I carry way more mags than I need to. I've got the following. 20 round 20/30 round coupled 2x 30 round coupled sets 3- 30 round 1x 40 round coupled set 1- 40 round 1- 48 round 1- 60 round coupled pmag. All Magpul. Most Gen 3's. I use different ammo for hosed stages than long range so it's easier having a set loaded with each. Do I need to carry 15 mags (holy crap I carry 15 mags?). Probably not bug it's easier to have them and not need them and they don't take up that much space.

Sight it in POA/POI at 50 yards. Shoot a group on 4x, then do the same at 100 and 200. Don't mess with adjustments between. Just shoot center of reticle, center of target and post the pics. It's hard to tell what's going on. But it doesn't look normal. And indicate where you aimed on the target.

I use a light mod most if the time. Enough spread to still be a shotgun, but enough reach for most steel. Works fine with slugs and buck.

The muzzle break will ease some of the wear in the can. It's easier to replace a comp every few thousand rounds than to have a can rebuilt. It'll feel the same when its on either way though.

You might verify but it looks like your scope may be canted in the mount as well. Assuming everything is right you should be dealing with drop at 300 not left to right shift unless you're shooting on a windy day.

I can't imagine the scope mount that would do that. He looks zeroed at 50. Mine will run an inch and a half high at 100 and 10.5 low at 300. I can probably do the math to figure out how high the scope would have to be, but if its the scope mount he needs a new one.

Did you re zero to put it on at 300? Normally on at 50 is pretty close to on at 200. Then hold overs at three and four. If you're getting on at 50, on at 300 and 5" high at 100 something weird is going on.