CHA-LEE

Yeah, that is why I am choosing to use a slightly higher than normal Minor PF in the 145 - 150 range with the 40 Minor ammo I have loaded. This slightly hotter Minor ammo makes the felt recoil more "sharp" and a little closer to what 9mm ammo feels like. I actually like it when the ammo has a "Sharper" felt recoil as that in of itself forces me to grip the gun hard all the time. All that being said, I am absolutely sure that once I switch to 9mm ammo the felt recoil impulse will feel a lot different than my current 40 Minor ammo. I have actually been testing the Super Vel Certified Select & Competition 9mm ammo in 115gr, 124gr and 147gr. So far I am liking the 124gr ammo the best from a felt recoil and accuracy perspective. There is always the Next "Project" in the works for me. If people knew how much gun & ammo testing & tuning I am regularly doing behind the scenes their heads would likely explode

My 2023 Major Match Season is now finished this past weekend. I shot the Colorado State Championships and the New Mexico Section Championships in Limited Optics Division using my 40 Cal Atlas Artemis. I was able to win both matches with this setup and didn't feel like I was at a significant disadvantage from a magazine capacity perspective. I have also been shooting LO exclusively in practice and local matches for a while now and its an interesting challenge. Coming from shooting Major Power Factor divisions (Limited & Open) pretty much exclusively since 2008 its been a little difficult for me to figure out the correct shooting aggression pace for Minor scoring. I have been experimenting with different levels of shooting aggression and aiming points on target to see what will work best for Minor scoring. So far I have been biasing my shooting aggression to a slightly too reserved pace which results in regularly capturing 93 - 97 percent of the available points. This is great points accumulation but doing so results in too slow of shooting on average. I need to figure out a slightly more aggressive shooting pace which is basically in between an effective Limited and Open Major PF pace. Its easy for me to shoot at a properly aggressive Open pace but then my available points capture drops to the 85% range. If I shoot at a properly aggressive Limited pace then my available points capture increases above 95%. The hardest part for me is getting used to the correct middle ground aggressive shooting pace between Limited and Open. I still have a lot of training and time behind the gun to get that middle ground aggressive shooting pace figured out. My 40 Caliber Limited Optics Adventure will continue through the Winter Months and into the spring of 2024. By then I will likely have burned through all of the 40 Caliber bullets and brass I have and will make the switch to a 9mm setup. Or maybe I will switch back to shooting Open Major? We will see how it goes when the snow starts to melt in 2024 and the trajectory of the Divisions will be next year.

Sounds like the Barrel was fit by a Monkey who over cut the depth of the lower lugs.....

Run it like a rental until something breaks then get it fixed. That is the normal life cycle of an Open gun. If the gun is functioning reliably and still accurate don't try to proactively fix something that may not even be an issue.

If the scope mount is solidly mounted but the vertical stringing continues you can try putting a much heavier recoil spring in the gun to see if that changes the stringing behavior. A heavier recoil spring will help reproduce a consistent lockup position of the barrel every time the slide cycles. If a heavier recoil spring eliminates or improves the vertical stringing issue then the root cause of the issue could be many different things such as poor barrel lock up fit, worn slide stop pin, and or slide to frame fit. Frame mounted red dots expose barrel/slide fit or lockup consistency issues. These issues get exposed easier the lighter the recoil spring is. For example, I am using a 7lb Recoil spring in my Open gun and EVERYTHING needs to be fitted properly and locking up consistently for that light of a recoil spring to maintain good accuracy.

So there is nobody who attends your local matches who can't do a trigger job on a 1911/2011? That is hard to believe.

The CZ P10 models are basically "Glock" actions which are obviously using different parts than Glock. But the action design is essentially the same. This action design basically cocks and releases the striker as the trigger is pulled back. Light strikes with this type of action are usually caused by using too light of a striker spring. Lighter striker springs make the trigger pull weight lighter because the force needed to cock the striker before it drops. On the P10's I fiddled with, when I went down to a 3lb striker spring I had to be pretty selective in which primers I used as hard primers would have random light strikes. A 4lb striker spring would set off all of the harder primers I had like CCI. All of this being said, if you just bought the gun and are having light strike issues with all of the stock springs, then I would suggest sending that thing back in to CZ for inspection and repair. The second thing is that you failure mode description doesn't clarify which ammo or primers you are using. When in doubt of gun functionality test it with known good functionality factory ammo like Winchester White box. Do you get light strikes with WWB ammo? If no, then what ammo or primers are you using? This is sounding more like an ammo/primer issue if a stock unmodified gun is having light strike issues.

Until you need to make a 20+ yard head shot then you will be missing over the top of the target all day long

Take it to a competent gunsmith to get it all sorted out. 1911/2011 triggers are not "Drop In" as there are too many variables to deal with from one gun/part manufacture to the next. People like screwing around with their home brew trigger jobs to save money until they end up with a bullet in the leg because they created an unsafe gun. What is more important to you? Safety or Saving Money?

Those are great observations and basically where I am at in my situation. I have about 20K of 40 cal reloading components to burn through and several Limited guns sitting around doing nothing. I think that by this time next year Limited Optics or whatever division variant it morphs into by then will become one of the primary Divisions participated in. I have always preferred competing in divisions where the most competition depth and heat exists. Today the hot division is Carry Optics. But I think that over time more CO shooters will move over to LO and LO will be as or if not more popular than CO. We will see. In the mean time I am going to burn up what I have in 40 Cal guns and ammo while honing what is needed to be competitive within this type of Red Dot / Minor Scoring division.

My whole intent of this thread isn't to poke the bear or turn it into a bickering session about other topics. There are plenty of other threads on the BE forum that have already beat these other topics to death. My intent in starting this thread is to give others information on competing effectively in the new Limited Optics division with a 40 cal setup. I know there are a boatload of competitors out there who have Iron Sight 40 cal Limited guns collecting dust in their safe or a bunch of 40 cal reloading components sitting unused. For these people, they can make use of these "Old" 40 cal guns and ammo in Limited Optics while still being competitive. Cutting a slide for a red dot and slapping a red dot on your Limited gun is a much cheaper way to dive into the LO division vs buying a whole new setup.

That specific stage scenario was already established as a far exception to what “Normal” field course stage design is. The vast majority of field course stages have 2 or more steps of non shooting movement where you can stick a reload. That is a fact which is proven every weekend during matches all across the nation. If you can’t separate these two facts within your logic assessment of needing more than 21 rounds in a mag to get the job done effectively in a division that limits mag length to 140mm, then it doesn’t matter what I or anyone else says. As I said before, excuses usually come with highly polished justifications.

I have probably trained thousands of practical shooting students at this point. All skill levels from U to GM. Able bodied adults fail at achieving their performance goals due to being lazy in some aspect of their training or preparation process. I have heard all of the excuses people have in not being able to achieve their goals. 99% of the time the root cause of their failure to improve comes back to giving up on something which is quickly justified by a perfectly crafted excuse with a bow on top. Its much easier for people to focus on the excuses as to why they can't succeed. That my friend is a clear definition of being "Lazy". I also get it that some people choose to not embrace the suck, which is required to improve their skills. To these people, it a Social Hobby activity to do on the weekends with their buddies. If someone falls into that group, then they don't get to bitch about sucking or how impossible it is to make certain classification level.

"Everybody"? No. There are some competitors with physical limitations or disabilities which will always restrict their maximum performance to a sub M/GM level. These are the far exceptions. But the vast majority of shooters absolutely could achieve an M or GM classification if they simply put in the work and effective training to get there. It just so happens that the vast majority of shooters simply CHOOSE to not put in the work to get there. Being lazy isn't a valid excuse to something being unachievable.

I understand the point you are trying to make. Everything is a give and take. I just think that the probability of someone screwing up a risky round count stage plan by trying not to do a reload for the only justification of "I don't want to reload" is much higher than simply doing the reload. The same people who don't reload aggressively are also not running aggressively between position. For the vast majority of those shooters, doing a reload or not while they are still NOT RUNNING will take the same time to get between positions. So yes, in that scenario doing a reload is still "Free" from a perspective of stage time. This assumes the person can do a 1.5 - 1.75 second reload which most C/B class skilled shooters can do. If someone has a reload north of 1.75 seconds then their overall skill level is going to be bad enough that doing a reload or not simply won't matter to their score. As far as the term "Free" goes, my interpretation of that is that doing a reload shouldn't add more time to the stage vs not doing a reload. Does performing a reload increase the complexity of the movement task? Yes. Does doing a reload while moving increase the risk of screwing it up? Yes. Multi-tasking is never "Free" from those two perspectives.

Maybe 10%........... If more could do it, there would be more M's & GM's.

Doing a reload while moving makes the movement slower..... No..... If the movement is 2 - 3 steps there shouldn't be a time impact by performing a reload during that movement. I made a video about this exact topic a few years back. If your gun handling is negatively impacting your ability to move aggressively then you need to fix that problem. Having more rounds in the mag will NOT fix that fundamental problem.

Back to the regularly schedule program My 40 Cal Limited Optics adventure is still going well. Even though I can cram 21 rounds in my 40 cal 140mm mags the vast majority of the time I am starting with 20+1 and reloading to a 20 round mag. I will start 21+1 or reload to a 21 round mag once in a while but its not very common. I am basically using the same mag capacity strategy as I did when shooting Limited division. So far I have only run into 1 stage where not having 23/24 rounds in the gun was a slight maximum performance disadvantage and that was the 8x3 Classifier I mentioned earlier in this thread. While observing other CO & LO shooters during matches, I have actually seen more people get screwed by NOT reloading (starting with 23+1 or 24+1) and unexpectedly running the gun dry forcing an unplanned reload on the clock. This "I don't have to reload, I got all the PEW's" mentality isn't something new to CO or LO. The same thing happens to most other High Cap division shooters when they first start shooting those divisions (Open, PCC, etc.). There is a definitive difference between not reloading to create a true competitive advantage vs not reloading because you refuse to practice reloads and suck at doing them. If your primary reason for not wanting to do a reload is due to sucking at reloading, then fix your reloading skills issue. Don't use mag capacity as a crutch to mask known poor reloading skills.

I hate to say it, but this happened at a Level 2 match with standing RO's on the stage. You would think that RO's working the same stage over several days would notice something like this and proactively fix it. That or even the Range Master who is driving by and "Observing" what is going on would notice it. But we all know how it goes. Nobody is perfect and every match has its challenges. This thread isn't started to throw any specific match, club or person under the bus. I have served as RO, CRO, RM, and MD for a boat load of matches from Level 1 - 3. I totally understand how and why the root cause of the leaning popper happened and how it could be prevented. That isn't what I am asking about here. I am trying to wrap my head around there not being an empirical quantification of what "Displaced" really means in the USPSA rule book. For the most part, everyone pitches in to do their best in making sure that stages are reset properly and provide a consistent shooting/movement challenge for all competitors. I also realize that having land survey level locates and or measurements of props for highly temporary things like USPSA stages is totally unrealistic in the reality of the game we play. But there has to be some level of clarification of what "Displaced" really means, right?

I don't have actual footage of the most recent example of this displaced popper situation, but I created an Example and attached it to this post. The "Before" example shows that both Poppers were setup where they are both pointing straight up. These poppers are also set within the bay in a manner where they are standing out on their own and either of them leaning would NOT change being able to see or engage them. The "After" example shows the Left popper leaning at about 20-30 Degrees to the left. This "Left Leaning" position of the popper existed for at least 4 - 5 squads at the tail end of the match. My squad was the last one to shoot this stage as we finished the match here and everyone on my squad shot it in this same condition. Amazingly, the Popper didn't fail to go down or fall down prior to getting shot leading to a range equipment failure or calibration call. At least not that I witnessed. Either way, there is no questioning that the "After" Popper presentation was different than the "Before". One could argue that the shooting challenge was more difficult on the leaning popper because there was less vertical popper to shoot at because it was leaning. This leaning popper was ABSOLUTELY a visual distraction for me because of its abnormal leaning state vs what it should have been (Straight Up/Down). I shot the stage well and this specific steel array one for one so the funky lean didn't negatively impact my stage performance. But it wasn't the same shooting challenge as what others had when it was standing straight up. After the match this scenario got me thinking about how someone could have Arbitrated this stage and likely gotten it thrown out simply because this popper was leaning at a significant angle for a portion of the match.

All of your feedback makes logical sense and I agree with it..... But.... It doesn't answer my question. I can't find anywhere in the USPSA Rule book that quantifies how much displacement = displaced. To me that is the primary issue. Even for replacement cardboard target scenarios where targets are layered on top of the original or removed and added back via target stick markings, the replacement target is almost always be slightly displaced vs the initial target when compared to its overall location in space. For example, a layered on top of replacement target is displaced the width of the target under it. The overall location in space position of that target is different than the original targets location. Layering replacement targets on top of the originals for major matches has been in practice forever so arguing the front to back displacement is moot as that has been "Accepted" broadly. But the leaning steel scenario does happen and I am yet to see it be Arbitrated personally, but I can see how a shooter could arbitrate it and it would likely get the stage thrown out if too many squads shot it with the steel leaning. I have been on a few Arbitration Committees for major match arbitration's and the committees task is to determine a decision based on what is listed in the USPSA Rule Book. If someone arbitrated a leaning steel scenario, the arbitration committee would be in a pickle because the current USPSA Rules don't have a clear definition of what "Displaced" really means via a measurement. If a displacement measurement is defined, let's say its "Moved more than 1 inch from its original position" even then, how is that movement supposed to be taken from given that very few non-classifier stages have a WSB Drawing that depicts the exact location of each prop then on top of that is actually setup to match those exact dimensions. Its really a Chicken or the Egg scenario.

I would like to know from the BE Brain Trust what their interpretation is for "How much of a Target Displacement = Range Equipment Failure"? USPSA Rule 4.6.1 states the below... Range equipment must present the challenge fairly and equitably to all competitors. Range equipment failure includes the displacement of cardboard targets, the premature activation of metal or moving targets, the failure to reset moving targets or steel targets, the malfunction of mechanically or electrically operated equipment, and the failure of props such as openings, ports, and barriers. Rule 4.6.1 doesn't clarify how much displacement = being displaced. For example, if an overlapped replacement cardboard target is displaced by 1mm is it considered displaced? What about 0.5mm, 2mm, or 10mm? This gets even more complex when we consider that most non-Classifier stages don't have measurements of "Where" the targets or props (Walls, Barrels, Fault Line, etc) should be located. A replacement cardboard target could be overlapped exactly on top of the original within the lath sticks, but the whole target stand could be moved a few inches in any direction and nobody could really contest it because there wasn't a defined precise "Location" of the target stand defined. A more realistic and common example of this would be a Steel Popper. Throughout a match the weight of the popper dropping repeatedly will likely cause the standing angle of the popper to vary. It could start the match in a straight Up/Down position, but by the end of the match it could be leaning in any direction more than 10 - 20 degrees due to the base of the popper settling into the dirt. Is this "Lean" considered displaced? If so, could a competitor use that to Arbitrate a stage and get it potentially thrown out if the original location can't be replicated?

Shoot it. The upper lugs will either start eating themselves or not if there are barrel link or hood length based timing issues. Is fashion really worth the risk of destroying the upper lugs in the slide or barrel lugs? Only you can answer that. It would probably be safer to simply send the original barrel off to get coated to whatever color you want to win the fashion show contest you are attending. The barrel hood length is one factor in determining the barrel unlocking timing. The distance between the breach face to the first lug within the slide is slightly different for every slide manufacture and runs of slides. This is why the barrel hood length needs to be cut to the slide its being installed in.

I prefer using what works best on the clock and hits on target after testing everything.....

As stated in my post, Adding a reload to that Classifier cost me about half a second vs not needing to do a reload. Did it cost me extra time? Absolutely. Did that extra time pull down my potential Hit Factor on that Classifier? Absolutely. Is that stage or others like it an anomaly vs what we are normally exposed to in 24 round stages? Absolutely.