Zak Smith

In my first post to this thread, I suggested ditching the shotgun because I think it's an antiquated weapon for general purpose use (as in practical utility), not because I hate reloading or don't like shotgun stages. If we have shotgun, there should be at least one high round count shotgun-loading stage in a match, because if you choose to employ a shotgun, the crux is carrying shells and reloading it. Most people who do not shoot 3Gun but have a shotgun for self defense are not cognizant of the reloading issues.

I have heard that Form 1 transfers take longer than Form 4 transfers.

I have tried to get a lot of people to shoot 3Gun locally, and successfully cajoled a bunch. The #1 and #2 objections/excuses BY FAR are that they don't think they're good enough (intimidated) or don't have all the equipment. I don't hear anything about rules, reholstering, power factor, or scoring, etc. Is this in-line with others' experience? If so, then maybe "growing the sport" should concentrate on the actual perceived barriers to new shooters, and not relatively obscure rules?

Right. It's pretty common at "outlaw" matches for the MD to say something along the lines of-- "We're here to have fun. If you don't feel comfortable going { up the tower / in the boat / in the helicopter / in the HMMV / etc} then don't feel compelled to."

Form 1? 6 months? Oh yeah, this thread is useless without pics!

On a serious note, I was just thinking about this- USPSA rules and procedures, including what kind of stages, targets, etc, are allowed are VERY specific. This can be good from a "fairness" point of view, but it also narrows the scope of what the shooters gets to experience. When I compare USPSA pistol to 3Gun, just in general, I see USPSA pistol as very specialized, very focused, the shooter knows almost exactly what to expect. On the other hand, I see 3Gun as testing a much more broad set of skills. If you add in the "Outlaw" 3Gun and tac-rifle matches, you have to think more because you will have to process more different types of situations, targets, movement, planning, etc. In summary, they throw stuff at you you don't expect, and you have to deal with it. It tests me more broadly and keeps me on my toes (mindset). USPSA doesn't do that.

We could make it 100% safer by ditching holsters entirely. Shooters will bring their guns to the line bagged and unloaded, will LAMR and then place it horizontally in a small pistol-shaped box on a table, from which they will draw one-handed (so as to not sweep their weak hand, of course).

I just checked my 3 OWB and 3 IWB Milt holsters, Kydex for my 1911 (ComTac) and SV (BladeTech), and Safariland for the Glock. None of them cause the muzzle to "cover" any part of my body while static, drawing, reholstering, or "most" body positions. (Though I point out it's also possible to cover one's self while opening a door with one hand and holding the weapon in the other.) IF we accept your premises (though refuted above) and follow your logic, then virtually EVERY USPSA/IPSC match has got to drive you NUTS, because they start off with loaded pistols in holsters and sometimes even MOVE before drawing.

To back up Russell, the only instance of a gunshot wound at a match I know of was a dude walking/running during a stage with a loaded AR15 who shot himself in the foot. This was not a USPSA nor a 3Gun match.

I hate it when the most excellent US dealer for some premium foreign-made items stops carrying them because said foreign manufacturer's US importer is incompetent. That is all.

Along these same lines, what recoil/op spring is the "right" one, to replace the one that comes in the M1S90 "Tactical"?

IMO--- The"P" is about the types of skills exercised, not about the scenarios per se. (Scnearios can make it more FUN, though.) If we were limited to only practicing for likely self-defense situtations, we'd would be limited to 1-2 targets and about 5 rounds. regards

This thread is about the "State of 3Gun", not necessarily changing USPSA 3Gun. The assumption that the discussion ought to be USPSA-3Gun-centric is frustrating to me and others. regards

The same could be said for drawing from a holster or shooting on the move... under stress and time constraints. What's the "P" in USPSA & IPSC? Like Russell said, if this is "bullet golf", let's shoot at different size bullseyes, not humanoid silhouettes. And not shoot from vehicles or helicopters. Heck, why even use a holster? Doing something with both hands right after shooting your pistol, perhaps.

I think that's how RM3G has been scored since 2003?

fomeister, You're right about a physical/orienteering/cross-country component. It will rule out a lot of people who like to shoot, but have bed knees, etc. Then there's the whole logistical problem. I personally love matches like that, but I realize it's not really conventional 3Gun. I just keep looking at the Shotgun and wondering, "Why am I shooting this?" They have ranged from more or less similar, to "WTF?", to what we would consider gross safety violations. -z

1. Ditch the shotgun. This sport is about "practical" use. It's an antiquated weapon with very limited and focussed applications where it's the best solution to a practical problem. Door-breeching is one of those applications. CQB is better served by a carbine. Unless we're developing marksmanship and gunhandling in preparation for a vampire bat attack, it's useless. In its place, I would personally prefer a long range precision rifle, a subgun, or some type of physical challenge or orienteering component. 2. Allow the shooter to use whatever guns he wants and engage "most of" the targets with whatever weapons he wants, with a limitation on what kinds of rounds may impact which targets, just like CavArms did at Tiger Valley for Trooper. As a corrolary, the shooter should always be able to back-up to his pistol if his long gun goes down. 3. Rocky Mtn 3Gun has been the pioneer in "sane" hot-gun and gun-ditching protocol. A pistol should always be able to be holstered hot. I personally believe a rifle should be able to be put on "safe" and dropped on a sling as long as muzzle control is exercised. 4. Overall match total time scoring is sub-optimal in that short stages are meaningless (WACO match 2004-05). 5. Complex scoring sucks-- its difficulty is roughly proportionate to the amount of information the RO has to communicate to the person with the clipboard as they score the targets. Along with this point, power factors have a purpose, but I'm not sure if the administrative overhead is worth it. The alternative is telling people steel is variable and TFB if they can't knock it over with 1 shot. Taking this point too far are devices a reasonably competent shooter cannot knock over in a reasonable number of rounds (e.g. MGM's 360* swingers with 9mm - the MD tried to do it with a Glock 18 mag and didn't get it over). 6. Institutional bureaucracy resists progress, and often does "the wrong thing." 7. "Classes" for awards/prize table make NO SENSE without an ongoing national classificaition system (like USPSA has). MGM did this. It was lame. Even with a USPSA-like classification system, it seems wrong to award someone at the 50th percentile overall while not rewarding someone at the 71st percentile. 8. With regard to standardization, I REALLY DOUBT many (any?) "Outlaw" matches will "come into the tent" if it "cramps their style." They don't need the USPSA banner to draw shooters-- they already draw 250+ and have to turn people away. Safety and procedural rules are already pretty similar anyway since we are roughly in the same "community". (As an exercise, go to a "Sniper" match and notice how the safety protocol is different.) 9. Discussing standardization with USPSA being the "default answer" is terribly ironic. First of all, Front Sight has been historically LOATHE to acknowledge other (I mean, the established, high-draw) 3Gun matches and even their shooters! Second of all, it is the "odd man out" with respect to rules. (This post edited by Zak Smith )

I am glad to hear this, because I would like to shoot the 3GN in 2006, schedule of course permitting. -z

In summary, R.S. does not know the answer. It would be illuminating to hear from someone who does.

That is why I posted a question about clarifying the intent. Let's say the dates don't overlap and it is mechanically possible to shoot both. It is hard for people who work for a living to shoot two major matches in a single month, to say nothing of back to back matches 1400 miles apart. If the posted info is correct, the conclusion is inescapable. The fallout from such a decision is likewise inevitable (as already witnessed).

Let's just say mid to late August is a busy time for non USPSA matches.

So is the intent to compete against RM3G ?

I don't know, try the usual suspects: G&R, MSTN, LaRue, etc.

LaRue SPR mount. Returns to zero all the time.

Yep, I misremembered-- http://www.armalite.com/library/history/history.htm