TGO
-
Posts
363 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Forums
Profiles
Events
Store
Posts posted by TGO
-
-
I eagerly await Amidon's ruling. This is interesting, as I have always thought there was some rule that said barrel cannot be more than .10 longer than factory length. Maybe that's a production division rule?
-
I agree, although reluctantly as usual with Carmoney. How different is this years top 20 from last years? Without looking I'm gonna bet mostly same players in different positions?
-
There are a couple reasons more of us shot minor 8 than major 6. First , it was easier. Less thinking and figuring how to make it work and second, it was better. There are places where having an extra shot or two could save the day.
On another note , no one I talked to at the match shooting minor was lamenting the fact. They seem to want to shoot that gun. Many shooting major wished they had. Matt had troubles so the most viable major proponent wasn't able to really make a case for the platform.
-
I see my iPhone skills are not up to par and there was much more on this thread than I originally read.
If you wanna run a big multi day match, what rules are you gonna follow? It's not uspsa approved to recognize and award separate 6 and 8 shot. Why not instead set up the match so that neither had a clear advantage? If you run an outlaws rule event, you aren't likely to get the same participation nationally as a rules following, sanctioned event. I'd go to nc to shoot a revo only big shoot. But not if it wasn't a sanctioned event so I knew what I was getting into...
-
Another item I need to mention is that at the western states SS match, they have over the last two years run a revo only day and each year it has grown. The match director has gotten the revo bug from this and is going to make the revo part even bigger next year.
-
Well it's interesting to see the chatter at this point. The ones that hate the new rule before it was a rule still do. Ok no shocker but the fact that uspsa matches are setup to follow uspsa guidelines is the reason the 8 shot makes sense. If your not going to shoot anyway or use this rule as an excuse to support not going, it's not really a valid statement on the status quo.
Guys that aren't here at the nationals sitting in hotels reading this stuff will not have the same perspective I do.
You guys that wanna shoot 32 round stages but don't like 24 round stages make no sense to me? Who cares what the round count is? IDPA is killing uspsa in revo BECAUSE they are short stages that fit well with the low capacity of the revo.
Time will tell, but it was gonna die the way it was going....
Giving it a kick to see if it would help couldn't hurt.
Being disgusted with the change is just sour grapes. If you want to shoot, shoot.
Wanna see big numbers at the area or state level? Run low/cap only matches (revo/SS/prod) separate of the open/lim and see what happens! It works at the national level. I'd love to shoot an area match for revolvers only. Bet you'd see 100's of shooters....
-
Inches, sorry!
-
I may be crazy but isn't there a rule staring barrel length may not exceed 5.1 imches?
-
The match is mostly full, but I'm pretty sure they would accommodate a few more shooters.
Jerry is not attending. He's shooting a 3-gun event instead. Jerry always follows the cash.
Jerry M isn't coming??
-
So is that what you're blaming those slow-ass reloads on? Flat-point bullets?Currently shooting 158 grain RN Jacketed with 3.5ish grains of Tight Group in 9mm brass loaded to 1.200 OAL. Shoots very, very well out of .38 super 627. Like 3 inches at 50 good!! Might be a fluke.... This is what your gonna have to deal with in Barry, Carmoney!! No more flat points for me...
Nice to see a little smack talking before nationals. I wish i could be there to witness the fun.
Mike, I guess I'm not the fastest revo reloader, but I only do this a couple months a year....what's your excuse?? Its not how far I finish behind Jerry that matters, It's how far AHEAD of you!!! :-) Booyah!!!
-
Currently shooting 158 grain RN Jacketed with 3.5ish grains of Tight Group in 9mm brass loaded to 1.200 OAL. Shoots very, very well out of .38 super 627. Like 3 inches at 50 good!! Might be a fluke.... This is what your gonna have to deal with in Barry, Carmoney!! No more flat points for me...
-
It's not about USPSA's or any other groups rule book. It's about safety. If someone doesn't know or care or worse, can't follow SAFE RANGE PROCEDURE, they need to for the safety of all others at range be disqualified and not allowed to further compete in that event. It's the cool off period and punishment of not being able to continue that drives home the need to improve ones skills.
If a shooter, new or old isn't thick skinned enough to overcome the indignity and embarrassment of being dq'd and subsequently does not return, that's a good thing!! I speak from first hand experience, and at a very high level and recently. To this day the being DQ'd is not the worst part of my experience. It is the memory of the gun pointing at me and everyone else on the range as it cartwheeled to the ground. I think being DQ'd was getting off easy. It still gives me chills. And it should. I did come back and try it again.... but, "Hi I'm Rob, I'm a DQholic" Being unsafe oughta be a big deal.
-
I'm not an RO so my opinion basically means nothing but if we could teach a new shooter about the rules while still being safe isn't there some value in that? Shooter loads his pistol, cocks the hammer but does not engage the safety and then holsters the gun and releases his grip .... At this point the RO then informs him that he has just committed a DQ offense, explains everything to him, has him correct his error and then allows him to shoot the CoF and tell him this was his one and only free pass .... Safety was not compromised and the new shooter got to continue to shoot the match and go home happy, probably to come back .... Everyone wins ......???
Of course I guess you could argue that the moment he started to holster the gun with the safety not engaged he was in an unsafe condition, which if true would warrent a DQ ....
All of that goes exactly the same but he holsters the gun and it fires. Do you try to figure out if the gun malfunctioned or he hit the trigger with his finger? Neither. You help him unload and take him to the emergency room to get sewn up and hope he doesn't bleed to death on the way. These aren't toys folks and not everyone can do this without training and practice.
if the gun was unsafe when holstered it is a DQ, and the safety of everyone is more important than saving face for the shooter. If this type of mistake is being made, the shooter is not ready to be doing this kind of shooting if he endangers others on the range. Because the gun didn't fire doesn't mean safety wasn't compromised.
This is a constant problem with inexperienced shooters in the training I run. I do not kick them out the first time it happens, but i do if they do it repeatedly. I shouldn't let them ever do it, but I'm a softy. And, this is why they came to my class, to learn how to do things.
A match is a whole different world entirely and isn't a place to see if a potential shooter is safe. BTW, shooters who do this repeatedly are the same ones that break the 180 constantly, handle their guns in unsafe areas and keep their fingers in the trigger guards while moving and reloading. Guess what happens next???
-
I'm not an RO, but I would support what happened there. My guess would be that the majority of new shooters have not read the rule book before their first match and if they don't have an experienced shooter guiding them through their first few matches, they might break a lot of rules. Depending on who that new shooter was, had he been DQd at his very first match, he might not have ever shot another one. I do realize that safety is extremely important, but so is building the sport.
Now is where you blast me with "So where do you draw the line?"......
So which is more important, building the sport or safety?
I have never seen ignorance of the law stand up as reason not to follow it. I set up a new shooter safety certification course at our club and run a match specifically for new shooters. In the year we have been doing it I can tell you about 1 in 5 new shooters at the PSSC is ready to try this kind of match before the class. The other 80 percent need to be taught what is safe and what is not. About 1 out of 5 should not be allowed to participate without more, much, much more experience and training and testing. We routinely ignore the warning signs of shooter danger in order to get bodies onto the range. I see shooters who have been competing for years and decades who do not know the rules, are not safe and are not going to pick them up by osmosis.
Don't be in a hurry to get your buddy into a match. Take him out and teach him, see if he's capable and safe and if he's not, make him be or don't bring him out!!!
This sport is hard and very stressful. Don't throw new shooters into the water to see if they can swim.
-
The big problem I have with the the current scoring system is that my final match score is not based purely on my performance.
That seems like a reasonable point, but the fact that stage designs are all different means your score is never based purely on your performance, but also on the particulars of the stage design.
People keep records for bicycle races on tracks, and they know that someone won the 4k pursuit with a time of 4:15 or whatever. OTOH, when bicycles race on roads, noone keeps track of the total time, and it's just a matter of how far behind the winner they were. When compared to just about every other sport on earth, it makes some sense to me that we talk about steel challenge scores as raw times, and uspsa scores as being relative to the winner.
Honestly, I couldn't tell you how many points I scored in any match I've ever done. All I pay attention to is what my percentage is of the winner. Unless you run the exact same courses over and over, the points are only a tool used to figure out the relative differences.
This whole post misses the point. Whether you look at your total match points or your percentage (the same thing) it is not soley based on how you shot. Your match score is based on how you shot but also how someone else shot a stage since your HF is compared to theirs.
It has nothing to due with all stages being different, just like at a race it doesn't make a difference what the record pursuit, 200m, or 500m time is, what matters is how that person performed on that day against the other people competing that day.
Yes it is.
You are confusing me. You do not want your score to be representative of your performance compared to the winner, Like how you place in a race or do you? In a race, you are scored by where you place against other participants, regardless of whether you are a lap down or ten. Just your placing matters, not how well you performed. Comstock scoring and being given your percentage of the winners score takes into account not your placing, but how well you performed against the top score.
We used to add factors and it doesn't work at all. Any fast stage that has a high hit factor is way more important than a long and possibly difficult stage that will likely have a much lower hit factor. An El Presidente, only 12 rounds in 4 seconds or so would be worth more than 2 or even 3 long 32 round stages.
Percentage scoring awards points by the number of rounds fired and the balance of speed and accuracy. A miss on an el Pres would be worth 3-4 full factor points. A miss on a 32 round stage that took 25 seconds would be worth .6. So you better plan where you screw up! one stage won't mattter and the other would be a catastrophe you could never recover from.
It's like adding up stage placements. It doesn't take into account the severity of the differences in the shooters performance. I won SOF a couple of million years ago because I placed 1st on more stages than Brian did. It didn't take into count the fact that on the stages I was second on, Brian was first and on at least one of them by a huge margin. I still got a 2 and he a 1. I won one more stage than he did and won but he beat me on the stages he won by much, much more than those I beat him on.
If you just add stage factors, you could easily win a match while shooting poorly and inconsistently. This is the exact reason they use the current system. Plus time might be easier but it is essentially the same thing, but it also has problems.
-
So where do we get these guns? Are there some of you out there that actually have them in hand?? BTW, I shoot .356 diameter Nosler 135 grain jacketed in 9mm brass with tight Group in my .38 super. Assume it will work well in 9 chambers?
-
I'm too commited to .38 Short Colt / 627-5 to make a change now
Short colts in hearthcos is exactly what i have planned for the 929. I am betting that will be the ticket.. You heard it here first....
floppy 9mm's will be good..... I am still staking claim that the short colts will reign supreme in the 929
It pretty much ruined the brass in one shot when I tried .38 sc in my .38 super.. It is the weakest brass with the thinnest web of anything I have tried. Someone needs to try cutting onto a .38 special and .357 case and see if they are stronger/thicker. If so, cut them to whatever length you can and try those.....
-
Toothguy
Do you really believe that USPSa made the change just because they thought it was a swell idea?
There is a driving force behind every change. Who other than JM would support a following to cause a trial of revo minor in USPSA and the subsequent intro of a minor 8 shot revo by S&W?
Certainly not me nor, I suspect, you!
JM has a large following but he is in it for himself and what will keep him on top.
Time for me to bow out and reload before this turns ugly.
Sorry to bring back page 3 back but just saw this.
Toothguy, you are 1000% right.
TheBrick, you are so wrong on so many levels, you really oughta do a little research. You post this way as though you have a clue and others may read it thinking you do, when in fact you do not and it really pisses me off.
You really think Jerry did this, and got Smith to make a special run of guns just for him? Are you crazy? Smith did it so they can make money! USPSA Area directors passed the rule change because a number of them see it as a way to try to increase the involvement of revo in USPSA. Blame them if you don't like it. Blame me. Whatever, but watch the slander. I'll be the first to try to beat JM but I get really annoyed with people like you and your posts.
Rob
-
TGO,
Why bother with change if your current setup is yielding good results? Age of the platform? I am always curious what those so attentive to detail are thinking about with equipment changes.
I'd have to agree with the idea of less to fool around with in regards to 9mm vs. anything else cut or uncut for making minor. From my perspective, when it falls like pennies from heaven at local ranges from so many shooters that don't reload, this gun is a God send for folks looking for brass in quantity. Everytime I get once fired .38 Special for free I'm amazed if gifted to me and perplexed if I'm picking it up off the ground. All of these situations make me happy, but one of the three is more common by far. As an unsponsored Joe shooter, every penny counts.
Ammo availability is a problem for all these days ya'll.
I want a ti cylinder, plane and simple and I bet the 9 chamber, throat, forcing cone and bore are gonna work better with a wider variety of bullets. Who knows, maybe a couple S&W guys will be the only ones to get them in time for the nationals, but a couple big shots at smith were very keen to get them produced. And I felt they were talking sooner than later... and in greater quantity than ever was the super. I bet at the buy shows they've already sold more of the 929 in pre-order than were ever made of the 627 super. It's just more of a main market gun. Just so happens that is now the ultimate competition gun. All that is very good at many levels.
-
TGO, have you played with 38 special cut to .900?
No, am so happy with the 9 in the super that I quit when no consistently good results were showing up otherwise. I also use lots of 9 in those other guns, and load 9 and do not regularly any of the .38 SC,LC,SPCL family. Will be even happier with the 9 in the 9! :-)
-
Ok, I admit, my idea of accuracy may differ from most. The 9 mm load I'm now shooting in my .38 supers is based on the bullets I have at hand. They shoot better than anything I have seen or been able to put together in SC brass. Period. they are not the best I have ever used.
The best loads I had developed were those I shot in the 38 super at the IRC. I'm not about to get into internet group claiming, just understand that I in practice several times over shot all X's on the IRC standards with that gun and load. I can never get the SC with any load with any of the barrels in any of my guns, including my ppc revolvers with shortened cylinders to shoot anywhere near as good as that gun shoots with that load. And my friends, I've tried. Same loads in special brass shoot dramatically better. BTW, I frequently mount optics to do group testing. Several of those guns have aftermarket barrels.
So you can understand my skepticism. please don't now turn this into a thread on SC loads. BTW, I shoot large numbers of rounds to test for accuracy. That 170 sierra round nose in the 9 brass would routinely shoot 12 and 18 round groups within the ICORE x ring at 50. That's counting every shot fired. Never yet seen a SC not shoot flyers when tested equally. Never. Can't imagine how it couldn't as the bullet leaves the case in the chamber, enters a tube unsupported at any point on the bullet that is at least .020 too big, then is forced into a smaller bore that may or may not be the right size, then jumps from that bore into an off center cone, swaging whatever shape it has arrived in into a smaller diameter, engraves it and starts it spinning and then ejects it out the front after putting thousands of rpm's to it. It that mass is not concentric when it enters the barrel, the barrel ain't gonna fix it.
There's a reason the most accurate revolvers commonly used for competition us flat based and fronted bullets that are hollow and very soft at very low velocity and pressure to gain the best accuracy. They don't have to speed reload, make a power factor or knock down steel targets. Of course it doesn't have to shoot that well to be good enough to win in ICORE, USPSA or IDPA. but, the 9, I'm betting, with the right bullets is gonna shoot as well as my supers do.
9 will, sc won't. just saying. propellers will never replace sails either....
-
I bought a 4in Pro. I don't foresee the sight radius as being an issue.
I agree, oddly enough!!
There is lots of interesting discussion on this whole " will you want a 9" issue here. That's fine but the whole weight and barrel length discussion is excited speculation before we get them. I believe this. The 9 is going to be so much better than the .38 short colt/special that it wont be funny. It's going to shoot better, much better than sc. It's gonna eject better, much better. If it matters, the brass comes out a 9, not a short rimless .38 super. This opinion is based on both my experience of many years using nothing but 9 brass in my .38 super cylinders, holding the 929 at the SHOT Show, talking to Jerry about the whole thing, talking to the smith PC people there and shooting the 986 at the media day.
986 has exact same dimensions except 7 instead of 8 holes in cylinder and shorter barrel, ejects and fires factory 9 ammo, shoots about 1.5 inches standing in my hands with all things stock at 20ish yards, and was able to hit a 100 yard full silhouette at 100 yards. Wished the barrel was longer and it was heavier.
The 929 barrel is exactly the same profile as the 627 .38 super, just longer, cylinder is same length as 627 super, except Ti and fluted.
No one is gonna agree on what barrel length is best, but your not gonna care. The gun ain't too heavy. Sight radius is good.
9 brass will not over expand like short colt does in a .38/.357 chamber and stick. If you want shporter brass, cut special or .357. it is the right diameter, not weak as a baby in the web area.
Wish I new how to post the photo of me holding them at the shot show. I'm not quite the comp geek :-)
Everything is better about 9 compared to .38/.357 for USPSA/ICORE. Everything except accuracy of special or .357 length brass in the 627.
No factory .38 special ammo you are likely to find actually makes minor. Almost all 9 does.
9 is still the cheapest ammo.
New dimensions will shoot wider variety of bullets. You may just be able to shoot what you can get instead of what wished you could get.
I don't work for S&W, but this is the coolest revolver they have ever made. In like the whole of forever!!!
When we finally get them, it's gonna be like carbon fiber compared to aluminum. .38 super to the .45 in 1984. The scope to the iron sights.
Sure the old stuff is good, just not as good.
You're all gonna see.....
BTW, I hear Jerry has his........ :-(((
-
Laugh all you want, but the guys at S&W who make the decisions as to what and how many new things get made are actually shooters, and competition shooting enthusiasts. Hell, they hold one of the largest IDPA events in the country at the shop in Mass. The fact that USPSA legitimized the need for the gun that otherwise had no competitive home except for ICORE IS the stick that broke the camels back and allowed the 929 to be offered.
That it may not sell reminds me of the same things I heard when Springfield introduced the 5.25 XDm's. That has sold quite well and I hope and feel that the 9 revolver will find its home amongst the competition shooters. If it works. it will sell. My fear is it will be a limited production item that becomes hard to get as I bet it's gonna be over ordered for a while.
Now I am of course only speculating as I am just a lonely bottom feeder operator, but the sheer interest this has garnered from mere rumor and a quickly produced video from Smith's performance center has already sold more of these than they have/would ever sell in .38 super.
If the thing is all it's supposed to be, it will be the coolest revolver since the 5.25 inch 625's that Jerry designed all those years ago. That is still my favorite so far...
It isn't for everyone, but it may, with the new 8 shot minor rule give revolver a kick in the pants that it sorely and deservedly needs. Is it going to replace .38/.357, no. Do I wants one? Yes my precious....
-
Sounds like some folks won't be trying to get these, as they are unhappy with Smith quality or specs before we even know what they are!! That makes it easier for those of us that are dying for the 9, and it appears smith has covered all the issues, to get a couple sooner than later.
Thank your USPSA BOD for the introduction of this gun. The new rule allowing 8 minor, I imagine, is the final step that got this the green light. Thanks Chuck. Well, that and Brad.....
Now be good little consumers and go to your LGS and get these things ordered. I'd bet that Smith has no idea how many to schedule production for, so let's swamp them with orders so this gets a higher priority production time.
I will order at least a couple personally at the Shot Show in 10 days!!
5.4" 1911 in single stack
in USPSA/IPSC Rules
Posted
So does this mean we can have longer slides to go with those barrels or must the box length barrel extend forward of a 5" slide?? This brings up many other questions.....