Storm

OK, I found it. It's in the September/October 2001 issue of Front Sight, pages 70-72.

Greg, I'm not sure what issue it was in. Check the following link for a description of it. http://www.brianenos.com/cgi-bin/ikonboard...m=5&topic=9

I've encountered both types of Masters. Luckily, I've had the extreme fortune of meeting more masters that are like you. They're the first to offer advice if you want it. And they're also some of the best at helping out new shooters. I've also had the misfortune of dealing with the egotistical types too. They're so wrapped up in themselves that they rarely have time to bother with the little people. Luckily, they are in the minority. I have found that the true masters are far more helpful than so-called paper masters. Maybe that's because grandbagging is somewhat of an egotistical thing. Maybe it's because they don't really know "how" they shot those scores. They just re-shot classifiers until they got lucky. At the local match level, I think the "personality" of the club has a lot to do with it. Some are just more friendly than others. Bret - So far your posts have been very informative. Thanks for posting.

I'll echo a lot of what everybody else said. I'd prefer a magazine about competive shooting with the emphasis on "competition" & "shooting". There are too many "gun" magazines. Shooting is not about the gun. Have articles that cover: 1. The techniques of shooting. These can be physical techniques, mental aspects of competition, training routines, whatever. Concentrate on intermediate to advanced shooters with an occasional beginner article. 2. Cover multiple shooting sports with no bias. I'm tired of the "IDPA is more practical than IPSC" type of stuff. Although I currently only shoot IPSC and IDPA, I'd be interested in other sports like bullseye, hi-power, sporting clays & etc. A lot of the competitive aspects carry over from one sport to another. 3. Interviews with experts. These could be interviews with shooters like Rob, Jerry, BE, Langdon, etc. They could be interviews with competition gunsmiths. Cover both biographical info and technical topics. 4. When you cover products (guns, grips, holsters, etc.), concentrate on the competitive and technical aspects of the product. How does it work & why is it different from other products? What we don't need: 1. My caliber is better than yours. 2. My shooting sport is better than yours. 3. My gun is better than yours. 4. This new gun will solve all your shooting problems.

Looking over last year's stats: Limited - 42.8% Limited 10 - 27.9% Open - 29.3% I didn't keep track of Production & Revolver shooters. Except for a special classification match (which isn't in these stats), I think we only had 1 or 2 production shooters and no revolver shooters. This year, we're starting up a 2nd monthly match strictly for Limited 10, Production & Revolvers. I expect we'll have a number of production & revolvers at those matches.

Kelly-I was kidding about only having an open division. But, you illustrated my point perfectly. Flex has complained numerous times that limited division rules stifle competition. Well, there's a reason it's called limited division. It has limitations. If someone wants fewer limitations, they should come over to the dark side where there are fewer rules. I also agree that limited class should not equal no innovation. As long as the innovation is within the rules, great. Sometimes the rules create the innovation. Look at many of the major racing organizations. Every time they implement rules to slow things down, folks find creative ways to increase speed. The rules keep things interesting. Long wide dustcovers, tungsten guide rods & etc. are all creative ways to get an advantage while remaining within the rules. Finally, I'm not necessarily against detachable magazines in Limited. But, I would consider them to be a speedloader. The question is, what will NROI consider them? If they say they're legal, fantastic. It just means somebody found a way to be innovative.

That's why they have open class. Except for 170mm magazine length limitations for handguns and 11 round limitations for shotguns, pretty much anything goes. Maybe we should get rid of everything except open. How's that for stirring the pot?

I would think a detachable magazine would be equivalent to a speedloader. Speedloaders are specifically disallowed in Limited shotgun.

Whoops! I forgot the newer Benellis don't allow you to put a round on the follower. I've got one of the older ones.

9supercomp - The limit for open shotguns is 11 loaded rounds. With the Benelli, you have 2 choices. You can go with the 10 round tube and load 10 in the tube & 1 in the chamber. But, with a Benelli M1, you can put a round on the follower. So, you could go with a 9 round tube, 1 on the follower & 1 in the chamber.

Bob - Try http://www.speedshooter.com/ for the Benelli mag tube. They have 8, 9 & 10 round extension tubes. You'd want the 8 round tube (+5 extension).

They did something similar at an IDPA match I was at a couple months ago. You were only allowed 2 magazines for this stage. You started with a fully loaded mag in the gun and a downloaded magazine (3 rounds) on the belt. You opened a door, engaged targets, did a mandatory tactical reload then proceeded to another door. You then opened the door and engaged targets. Since you only had 4 rounds, you went to slide-lock and had to do a reload using the previously stashed magazine.

Shooter Grrl - Interesting article. Thanks!

Personally, I wouldn't do it. I've recently been trying to unlearn the habit of placing the weak thumb on the frame. You have too much tendency to "steer" the frame with the left thumb and pull shots. If you touch the frame at all, you want to touch very lightly. As far as legality, you should be able to accomplish it legally by cutting some sort of "cosmetic" serration into the frame on both sides. I've seen vertical stripes, horizontal stripes, etc. They've all been legal.

Yeah, I've experienced target colored dirt at 40-50 yards on a couple occasions. Stop bringing back bad memories... (Edited by Storm at 5:19 pm on Jan. 24, 2002)

Bill-Yeah, I agree. I already planned on going with polycarbonate. Does the gray tint help improve contrast at all? Everything I've been reading is telling me to go with amber, orange, brown or even dark rose to help with the contrast. I'd like to better distinguish between the targets, ground & etc. But, I still need to be able to see the dot or front sight. Kyle-Thanks. I've seen Jerry's tape & was already planning on moving the optical center up a little. Come to think of it, he also made some tint suggestions. Hmmh, maybe I better watch that part again.

It's time for new prescription shooting glasses. I need some opinions. I'd like to know what kinds of frames folks like and what all around lens tint works best. Here are the conditions I need to work around. 1. Surgery is not an option I want to consider right now. 2. Contacts don't appear to be a good solution for me either. 3. I can't go with prescription sports glasses like Oakley frogskins & etc. My prescription is too strong, too high of a cylinder value. 4. I'm probably going with a special prescription optimized for distance in the weak eye, up close in the strong eye. (Right handed, Right eye dominant.) For frames, I only see 2 options, unless somebody knows of other options. 1. Regular frames. These are OK, but I'll be limited to one tint color. I only want to buy 1 pair of frames right now. I might buy a second later if the weird prescription work out. 2. Sports frames with the Rx insert. (Bolle Vigilante, Wiley-X 2002, etc.) The nice thing about these is I can swap lens colors. But, I used to run a pair of Oakleys with a Bolle insert several years ago when I used to cycle (bicycle) a lot. Never really liked them. Having the lens that close to my eye was a little annoying and they just "felt" funny. But, I might go an insert system if there's a good one out there. I also need to know what lens tints people have tried and liked. I want something that will be a good all-around tint that increases the contrast between the ground & the targets in most lighting conditions. What tints and/or frames have you tried? What did you like or dislike about them? Would you go with a regular tint with UV protection or a specific sunglass lens?

First, I apologize for the continuation of thread drift. Sorry folks. Nik- Good rant, even if it was aimed squarely at me. I think everybody has a right to an opinion, including me. Although Bill doesn't have absolute control over the IDPA board, he does have a large degree of influence. You are right, there is an equipment race in IDPA. It's just different. You can easily sink $2000+ into an IDPA legal 1911. Does the extra money buy you something? Yes, it often buys accuracy. IDPA is an accuracy oriented game. Although you can play the game with a $600 dollar gun, there can be an advantage to the $2000 gun. As usual, it all depends on the shooter. I think your comment "If you don't like the rules, and I think that some of them are downright dopey, then play another game." is interesting. It bothers me that you think it's OK for you to question the rules, but if I do, I should stop playing the game. First, I have played both games. Although I prefer IPSC, I will continue to shoot IDPA. It allows me to learn a few things I may not otherwise learn in IPSC. But, that doesn't mean I can't or shouldn't question the motives, rules and etc. of IDPA. Heck, I even question IPSC rules. If people didn't question the rules, it would be difficult to make positive change. I will continue to play both games & question the rules. Peace and happy shooting!

Yeah, I've heard of the blue plastic practice mags. I've got a couple. I'm not sure if mine are CTRC's or not. I don't like them. They don't duplicate the length and feel of my 140mm and 170mm mags. They wear real bad around the mag catch too.

Wilson Combat doesn't offer any long dustcover 1911's, do they? Maybe that's the real reason they aren't allowed in IDPA.

Yes, if practicing with dummy rounds makes you nervous, by all means put 2-3 snapcaps or plastic dummies on top. The main reason for the powderless and primerless handmade dummies is the weight. Snap caps & plastic dummies won't duplicate the weight.

I've found practicing with dummy rounds (reloads w/o primer or powder) to be better than empty mags. If I practice with empty mags, I have a tendency to not seat the mags hard enough the next time I live fire. Plus, it better replicates the feel you get with a loaded gun. I usually use a mag loaded with dummy rounds when I practice draws & transitions too.

Joe, Rather than a round "button" try an oblong "paddle". There are a number of manufacturers that make them. Or, you can have a gunsmith custom make one to fit you perfectly. I have very small hands yet am able to hit the release on my STI's w/o shifting the hands. I used to use the left-hand technique, but it costs you time too. With the paddle there is no time lost re-shifting. Nor is there time lost getting the weak hand from the grip to the new magazine. Another option you could try is an ambi mag release. I always thought about trying one, but never got around to it. You can use your trigger finger to activate just like most lefties do.

Yeah Shooter Grrl that new "disappearing, yet appears more than once" target rule isn't very friendly to lower class shooters. Just doesn't seem right to penalize someone because they couldn't get hits on a disappearing target. 5 points down should be enough. I still cannot understand why they added miss penalties for those situations. Luckily most disappearing targets only appear once.

BE, Wow! It's good to hear I'm not the only one who can't "see" visualizations. If it works for TGO, then I should be able to make it work for me. No, I haven't worked with the exercises in books on visualization. Can you recommend any good books on the topic? (Besides yours. I'm already in the process of re-reading it again.)