M1911

Also, for the "you can already shoot that in USPSA" crowd, not really. A Glock 19 with an RMR on it will not be competitive in USPSA Open class. An open gun will cost around $5k. A Glock 19 with an RMR is more like $1500. You can carry a Glock 19 with an RMR concealed on a regular basis. An Open gun? Not so much.

Glock slides milled for RMR optic, available at Brownells: http://www.brownells.com/handgun-parts/slide-parts/slides/tactical-19-rmr-slide-for-glock--sku100008783-45253-101546.aspx Glock slides milled for RMR optic, available from One Source Tactical: http://www.onesourcetactical.com/tsdpistolslides.aspx Glock slides milled for optics available from Lone Wolf: http://www.lonewolfdist.com/Detail.aspx?PROD=156471 From Rogers Shooting School: http://www.rogersshootingschool.com/products/gunslide.php From GlockWorx: http://www.glockworx.com/products.aspx?CAT=3720 There wouldn't be that many different places providing this service if only 10-15 people nationwide were carrying Glocks with slide-mounted optics.

I get the impression that moonclips don't work as well in 38 Spcl as they do in 45 ACP. 45 ACP is a short, fat rimless cartridge. The long, skinny .38 Spcl rounds flop around more in moon clips, making it harder to get the rounds into the holes. The guys who shoot .38/.357 moonclip guns in ICORE typically use .38 Short Colt brass, which is shorter than .38 Spcl.

I agree that red lasers are useless on outdoor ranges. I wonder if green lasers are more usable.

I think the difference in reloads between speedloaders and moon clips is more than 0.25 to 0.50. More like 0.75 to 1.0. And speedloader reloads are more error prone as well -- they sometimes go really wrong. If the 625 just dominates revolver, then the most common revolver (4" .357 with speedloaders) would have no place to play.

It's a typo. You should have received a followup e-mail that fixed that.

I'm not sure that merging the two divisions is a good idea. Reloads with moon clips are so much faster than reloads with speedloaders that moon clip guns will be required to be competitive. I don't think that the difference in power floors is a big enough penalty to even out the times.

Well hallefrickinlulah! I'm surprised that they walked back from that edge as they had defended it so vociferously.

Time will tell. I don't think GADPA made this decision quickly or lightly. From their statement, it sounds as though the issues at the GA State Match were the straw that broke camel's back, but that their problems with HQ started long before this match.

What spare parts situation is that?

This is the sort of arrogance that is so typical of IDPA HQ. They behave so badly and it hurts the sport.

Do you have any insight into why GADPA left?

Threatened by new shooters? Good Lord. I've seen strawman arguments before, but that right there is a peach. The only time I feel threatened by new shooters is when I'm the SO and they have poor muzzle control (like last Saturday's club match...). I've worked cooperatively for improvement. I'm an SO. I help teach new shooters. I help out at sanctioned matches. I've submitted rules comments to HQ. How is any of that not "working cooperatively for improvement?" What more do you want me to do? You keep ducking that question. When I made my comments to HQ about the new rules, the response I got from HQ was "if you don't like it, leave." So, who is being cooperative? Or is your definition of being cooperative "whatever Joyce says the rules are (today) is perfect"? PS, if you don't know who Joyce is, are you really an IDPA member? Have you not read her column in the Tactical Journal? Do you not realize she is the Executive Director (aka, the boss) of IDPA?

Joyce, is that you? Here it is again, her response to all complaints: "if you don't like it, leave." As for your implication that I haven't tried to help improve the sport, I submitted comments on the rule changes last year and this year. I exchanged messages with Joyce. I've helped teach an Introduction to IDPA class for the last three years. I'm an SO. I SO at monthly matches. I've been an SO at a sanctioned regional match for the past couple years (including taking multiple vacation days to help setup the match). I don't understand what more you want me to do to try to improve the sport. As for the Marksmen SO's from HQ, no, they aren't very good SOs either. They made bad calls. They designed illegal stages. They ignored a blatantly unsafe shooter (pointed gun up range) to continue because she was a guest of a big name sponsored shooter. All that was at a national match.

Doesn't surprise me, unfortunately. Some rather "interesting" rulings have been made at the Winter Nationals. I've seen better officiating at State and Regional matches. Frankly, I think HQ being involved at national matches makes things worse. The worst Marksman SOs I've seen were all affiliated with HQ.

Just remember, if you do 9+1 for one mag on one stage you have to do it all mags on all stages. This. Otherwise you are risking an FTDR.

I didn't have any problem with the online recert process. Given the lack of uniformity of officiating at IDPA matches, I think regular recertification is a good idea. That said, I'm so pissed off by IDPA HQ that I haven't been competing in as many matches this year.

Double-tap

Amen! Just like the way S&W 1911s with slide lightening cuts were approved just before a certain major match. I do remember that quite well. Joyce gave me the same line directly, in response to my opposition to the flat-footed reload rule. It is rather amusing some months later to see how the member proposed changes are dominated by hundreds of suggestions to drop flat-footed reloads. Nice going, Joyce. I guess you miscalculated. Now what are you gonna do? It should be interesting to watch her rationalizations and double-speak if she is forced to backtrack on flat-footed reloads.

In a random sample, yes, you could easily extrapoloate from 3% or far less. However this is a non-random sample, so you are only getting the most tech-savvy and motivated respondents. Probably not picking up any of the folks who simply moved on to other shooting sports last year. Yup, this is a serious issue with this type of poll/survey. Since the respondents are self-selecting, they aren't random. As a result, they may not be representative of the population as a whole.

Interesting...and you can actually extrapolate the wishes of the majority from such a small sampling? I guess I learned something today. That is exactly what statistics and polling is all about -- making inferences about a large population based upon a small sampling.

1) Lots of dry firing. 2) I found that I needed a new set of contact lenses. My eyes had gotten to the point where due to presbyopia I could not longer focus on the front sight. 3) What are you using for a front sight? I found that a green fiber optic front sight was too bright for me -- the green "bloomed" so that I couldn't see the front sight itself. All I could see was a green blob, not the actual top of the metal. So my elevation accuracy went all to heck. I replaced it with a red fiber optic rod and that helped me greatly.

At our club we've got some EE/MechE types who have rigged up electronic activators. They have an arm that is pulled by a spring or bungee, and an electromechanical device that releases the arm. The arm motion is big enough and strong enough to activate drop-turners, etc. We've got several ways of activating the device including pressure pads that the shooter steps on, a button that the shooter must push, and a light beam that they cross. You do need some wizards to rig these things, spares in case they go down, and spare batteries.

A worn gun is a loved gun. I don't worry about holsters wear.