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


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by beltjones

  1. Powerfactor is a bad approximation of kinetic energy. A 200gr bullet traveling at 850 fps makes 170 PF at 435 Joules. A 180gr bullet traveling at 944.44fps also makes 170PF, but at 483 Joules. To equalize the kinetic energy, the 180gr bullet would have to travel at 896 fps, making only 161 PF.
  2. On threads like these it's very difficult to get a good idea of quality because a lot of people will post in support just to justify their purchase decision in their own minds, and others will post their bad experiences as a form of catharsis. The best way is to look at who's using what to win championships, who is taking what to nationals, and how well things sell here on the classifieds. If no one has won nationals with a certain builder, the builder also doesn't show well in the nationals equipment survey, and guns sit for a while before selling on the classifieds, that's all you need to know.
  3. Before CZ they were owned by the guy who now does Fusion Firearms. I would stay way, way away from that guy.
  4. Bare lead bullets or coated? I use E3 a lot and have never had an issue like you're describing. I'm guessing it's fouling from the lead bullets that you're seeing.
  5. How it "sounds to you" is irrelevant. The rest of your post is a conclusion based on your own confusion.
  6. That was pretty good, except that nils guy is somewhat competitive in SS too. And Ben isn't too shabby in production Man, you guys really know how to step on a joke. Obviously I left out a bunch of awesome shooters, but that's because it was meant to be humorous. In other news, a chicken didn't actually cross the road.
  7. Open: People who like getting beaten by Max. Production: People who like getting beaten by Eric. SS: People who like getting beaten by Robbie. Revolver: People who like getting beaten by Jerry. Limited 10: People who like to win meaningless trophies. Limited: People who like getting beaten by Nils, Blake, Manny, Bob, or Travis. It's the most democratic division.
  8. Who are the nine people who think it's acceptable? That's what I want to know...
  9. Are you guys just going to ignore that Troy, uh, I mean Mara already weighed in on this one with the correct answer?
  10. The Uplula can certainly dent the casings, but those dents come from really smashing rounds (usually w/ an uplula) into an STI mag tube. The "ridges" inside the tube cause the dents.
  11. You make some good point, but I don't think i'm missing the point at all. I don't need to wait until demand is overwhelming. I'm ready to accomodate even a minimal demand *right now* at my local events. So far I have seen no evidence that it's worth the trouble for folks who aren't actually interested in shooting this division to get behind it. However, if someone started recognizing this division locally and got some participation, or got folks to show up for a PO-only match, I could change my mind. Certainly there are a handful of optics shooters at the glocks-only matches, but I'm not yet convinced that handgun optics are nearing a tipping point. As MD of a weekly steel match I brief and orient alot of new shooters and answer alot of questions about what guns are appropriate vs what people have. I just haven't seen PO-style guns as even being a blip on the radar. I admit that my limited experience with AR optics (one tactical shoot with some LE guys I was training for something else) opened my eyes to that aspect of shooting, but I think that the percentage of AR's with optics totally dwarfs the percentage of handguns with optics. I also work for an agency with 300 sworn officers, and while AR optics are standard now, we haven't even started discussing handgun optics, or really had a significant number of requests. fwiw, I totally agree that revolver is a silly division to recognize outside of specialty/novelty/classic matches. I would also combine singlestack and L10. Ok, I take back that you're missing the point. You're not. It's just that we're having a "chicken or the egg" discussion now. I think if USPSA envisions that it will one day have some kind of duty / carry optics division, then it would be wise to start shaping it now. It sounds like you would prefer to wait until there is some kind of "tipping point" where the prevalence of such guns is sufficient to support the division. I totally get the logic, and I don't disagree with it. Maybe fielding a production optics division at Nationals is way too premature, but I would still like to see USPSA start reaching out to potential sponsors with the message, "Your company is a leader in this technology, we are interested in promoting it through our national shooting sport, how can we work together? What would you like to see if we created a division? What other companies should we partner with?" So it's not that the conclusion is that PO is needed, it's that we have a hypothesis that a PO division will one day be popular, and that sponsors will want to support it. If we get some data that the hypothesis is incorrect we either course-correct or scrap the idea entirely. Either way it's a way to grow visibility of the sport among new potential sponsors and create goodwill in doing so.
  12. it hasn't happened yet, but it will be interesting to see if all 15 of you start shooting IDPA regularly and all show up to the same match. We've been discussing this for months, and so far I've seen 1 (one) gun that might qualify for prod optics show up to our weekly steel match. I need to see more interest than that before I can support watering down the existing divisions any further. I don't think I would shoot Production Optics, but I think you're missing the point. The point isn't to wait until the demand is sufficiently large that we are practically forced to create the division, the point is to lead the way if that's where the industry is going. If carry / duty guns with optics are really going to become a major trend of the future (and I think they are if the AR-15 market is any indication), then maybe it makes sense to create the division, connect with potential sponsors, market the sport to new shooters who are interested in these types of pistols, and grow the sport. The potential sponsors of USPSA seem like they are getting smaller and smaller, with even the sponsor-friendly Production division catering mostly to "boutique," custom pistols. This would be a way to "double down" with old sponsors (Glock, S&W, etc) and new (Trijicon, Aimpoint, etc). Or not. Let's worry about "watering down divisions" while we continue to recognize Revolver even though less than 10 people show up with one at even big area matches.
  13. No more mag pouches for me if thats the case Let me know how that works out for you.
  14. It says rear pocket, which are known as "hip pockets" in many places. I take "rear" to mean behind the hip bone line.
  15. As i see it in the video he made it in the front and let us say he has 10 rear pockets in his shorts he can get a mag in any of those and thats ok. All of my shorts including my buddies have 2 rear pockets. I dont know about nils and yoursSent from my Xiaomi Mi3 I don't think you are seeing what you think you saw in the video. It's pretty clear he loaded from a pocket on the side of his shorts.
  16. I have read them. It just says "rear pockets." There can be multiple rear pockets. If Nils drew the magazine from one of the rear pockets he's good to go, wouldn't you agree? Or are you thinking there is a definition of "rear pocket" that isn't in the rule book?
  17. There is no doubt Nils reloaded from a pocket, the doubt is whether it was rear of his hip. It's difficult to tell, but I think it was. It was definitely not one of the front pockets. All front pockets have openings exactly at the hip bone line so he can always make that excuse and if i remember it right, the rules state that it must be done in the REAR pocket not side not front but REAR!Sent from my iPad Air using Tapatalk HD Rear of the hip or rear of the pants? Rear pockets of shorts or trousers Sent from my iPad Air using Tapatalk HD How many rear pockets can a pair of trousers have? If there are multiple, how do you know which are the correct ones?
  18. There is no doubt Nils reloaded from a pocket, the doubt is whether it was rear of his hip. It's difficult to tell, but I think it was. It was definitely not one of the front pockets. All front pockets have openings exactly at the hip bone line so he can always make that excuse and if i remember it right, the rules state that it must be done in the REAR pocket not side not front but REAR!Sent from my iPad Air using Tapatalk HD Rear of the hip or rear of the pants?
  19. Not really. Have you compared one of the "outcast" Sig / Beretta / S&W / etc DA triggers to a CZ or Tanfo? The DA triggers in the CZ / Tanfo are much better, and frankly aren't that much harder to shoot than a tuned Production-legal striker trigger. I would rather shoot my CZ DA trigger for every shot than a stock Glock trigger. Then when you compare the CZ / Tanfo SA triggers to the SA triggers in the Sig / Beretta / S&W it gets even more "unfair." In other words, the DA/SA guns used today are much, much better than those that were shunned.
  20. There is no doubt Nils reloaded from a pocket, the doubt is whether it was rear of his hip. It's difficult to tell, but I think it was. It was definitely not one of the front pockets.
  21. It's all detailed quite thoroughly in old Front Sight editions, IPSC meeting minutes, and USPSA BOD meeting minutes.
  22. So why allow Brooke to receive a medal even though she was removed from the match? How can you be on a Ladies' Standard team if you have been DQed? If anything Kale was still a part of the Production team after he was bumped to Open in terms of stage planning, strategy, etc. Unlike Brooke, who would not have been walking the stages with the team after getting DQed. Note: I'm not saying I disagree with giving Brooke a medal, but I think it's messed up to not give Kale a medal under the circumstances.
  23. I have a question about how they administer the team medals. It looks like you can have four people to a team, and the three best scores count. However, the fourth place person on the team still gets a medal, right? So Brooke Sevigny got a medal even though she DQed, presumably because her score of 0 wasn't counted, and the other three on the team scored enough points to get the Gold. But why did Kale Garretson not get recognized as part of the Production Gold-medal winning team? He was bumped to Open, so obviously his scores wouldn't count for Production, but he was still on the men's Production team, which won Gold.
  24. Thanks for pulling that together. That shows some interesting data points. Most of the guys that shot the Nationals portion did better on their second go around. I wonder how much of this performance improvement is attributed to simply getting a second chance to shoot the stages again and deploying different tactics or just being more comfortable with what to expect for the stages, or if the pressure of performing was a lesser magnitude so they performed better in a more relaxed mental or physical state? I don't think its a realistic comparison to validate imaginary "Wins" for shooters performances on their second go around. I am sure that many other shooters would be able to perform better if they got a chance to reshoot the match under conditions that were a lot less pressure. I agree. It's certainly not valid to give much credence to a "win" on a second go-around, such as KC beating Max on his second go-around or Dave beating Nils. However, I remain impressed that Eric beat Max by such a wide margin. Sure, it was his second attempt at the stages, but he did it with an Open gun which is a different beast than a Production gun, with a different sighting system, different stage plans, etc. There is little doubt in my mind that Eric could have, and would have beaten Max in Open if he shot the WS with an Open gun, not that it takes away from Max's accomplishment in any way.
  • Create New...