Jump to content
Brian Enos's Forums... Maku mozo!

atbarr

Classifieds
  • Posts

    2,008
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by atbarr

  1. I look at CO as a jumping off point for someone to test drive open class without taking the jump into the open gun equipment. The other way to look at it we have limited and limited 10 so why not open and carry optics.

    Sent from my SM-G900P using Tapatalk

    I've tried open, shooting Major PF. Too much for my arthritic hands and wrist to handle. I'm shooting a G19 with a RMR, and I love it. 130 PF is a long way from >170 PF.

  2. I've posted this elsewhere......or similar......

    CO actually started life as Production Optics........many threads and back and forth on this in different forums. Do a search.

    A simple division using Production rules, but also a slide mounted optic.

    I have been a proponent of "Production Optics/Carry Optics" from the beginning. Full disclosure....I am almost exclusively an Open shooter, Production is the furthest thing away that I'd even consider shooting.

    I supported it because I could see that the concealed carry crowd was leaning towards optics. It was starting to be fairly common amongst them and the "new" set up.

    I WANT USPSA TO BE ON THE CUTTING EDGE OF PISTOLCRAFT AND AT THE FOREFRONT OF DEVELOPMENT OF NEW TECHNIQUE AND GEAR. WE GET THIS AND HAVE ALWAYS DONE THIS BY PUSHING THE ENVELOPE

    SO,.... What was discovered was........the very words PRODUCTION OPTICS rendered the "HATE THE IDEA CROWD" complete drooling troglodytes.. Those words were so powerful you could see the IQ ticker plummeting as they furiously typed and complained. While never once offering one idea why the division would hurt USPSA.

    Anyway,...once this phenomenon was identified the name was changed to Carry Optics and more than half the naysayers disappeared..

    I DONT KNOW IF IT WILL EVER TAKE OFF,... BUT I BACK THE DIVISION. I HOPE IT WORKS.

    Upon reflection I now think naysayers can not stand the idea of getting beat by a minor gun with an optic. Admit it, most of us look at "overall" even though we know better. This new division shakes the status quo.

    I have carried a gun concealed since 1987, I know a lot of people that carry a gun.

    I don't know of anyone that carries one with an optic.

    I have never heard anyone I know say they would even consider an optic.

    See post #125

  3. Does anyone know anybody that carries a concealed pistol with an optic on it. "Wait wait hold on a minute let me get the cover off this thing"

    You betcha! My EDC is my G19 with a RMR, in a Blade-Tech IWB Razor. Very comfortable. This is also my Steel pistol. I have a G21 with a RMR also, I shoot it in Carry Optics.

    post-14692-0-97501400-1453516354_thumb.j

  4. What year was that. Why did they feel the need for a single stack division? Again just asking!

    I'm going to say somewhere between 2005-8. You'd need to look through BOD meeting minutes....

    Actually narrowed it down a little by way of rulebooks: The division exists in the 2008 rulebook. I'm thinking '06 or possibly '07 was the provisional year. Probably '07 -- I'm thinking the push to make it official was due to the new rulebook coming out. So I'd start by looking at the Fall Board meeting for 2006 to look for the vote to establish the provisional division/approve its equipment rules, and then to look at fall 07 for the final approval.

    It's possible that I'm off by a year -- but starting in 2006 should allow you to bracket....

    Here are the original memo and the rules update.

    This, would help Carry Optics, I sure haven't seen much of this.

    "Marketing: Marketing of the provisional 1911 Single Stack Division will open possible

    revenue streams to the Front Sight magazine and our tournament prize tables."

  5. People seem to be throwing around the statements "it will attract new shooters" and "it will not atract new shooters" like they are scientifically proven facts ..... It's all conjecture and anecdotal evidence at best at this point ... No one really knows what will happen until it happens. Who wants to argue that SS, L10 & Revo have high enough participation levels to warrent keeping them as divisions yet they've been around for years .... Once the division is made real and is around for a couple of years, only then will you know if it's worth keeping ..

    Too much common sense.

  6. DQ for not making power? First thing out of my mouth would be "show me in the rule book" I've never heard of anything like that. Care to elaborate about the incident?

    IDPA:

    8.3.2.1.6 A competitor whose ammunition fails to make power factor will be allowed to shoot the match, but their total score will be a Disqualification

    So I was allowed to keep shooting for no score if I wanted. So there was no incident, 3 rounds failed to make 165 and then another 3 failed to make it in my gun. That was that. Maybe I should have been more specific in that the ammo was DQ'd, not me. But since we already shot a couple of stages I was not allowed to change from CDP to ESP.

    Oh, IDPA. :^)

×
×
  • Create New...