BritinUSA

I sent my XL-650 in to Dillon a few years back for an overhaul. When I got it back it looked brand-new, they sent a list of parts that had been replaced, it was several pages. I think the overhaul was about $75 or so.

Most likely a 1911

P9 would perhaps be the Springfield Armory P9 (LS may stand for LongSlide, ie a gun with a compensator) I think the 6R was a six inch gun, I think the R indicated the angle of the holster.

Click the screen shot and zoom in.

Stage design is critical for both Revolver and Single-Stack divisions thanks to the huge difference in capacity (33% and 25%) between major and minor. I think any truly serious contender would want to have both options in the gun-case and make the final decision once the stages are open for review. This further drives up the cost of competing, especially for revolver shooters and this will always be a detriment to new recruits into this division.

I wonder if IPSC has any plans to change revolver division rules.. In 2011 IPSC deleted Modified Division due to falling participation. I have to wonder what the participation numbers are worldwide for revolver and whether there is anything planned for the next General Assembly in South Africa in 2025. I’m not saying they would delete it, but if numbers are down then they may consider some changes first to see if that brings numbers up. Perhaps it might be beneficial for USPSA to wait until after that GA, so if changes are made then they could align with the worldwide body.

I don’t shoot revolver; I wish you the best of luck with this, I remember the discussions with Major-6/Minor-8. Some people saw the potential problems immediately, though in hindsight it was obvious. A 33% increase in capacity along with 8-shot arrays gave the Minor shooter an overwhelming advantage compared to a 6-shot revolver that would be left either with a convoluted stage plan, or standing reloads. Your point (3) is one shared with other divisions, noticeably Production and especially CarryOptics which is as far removed from its IPSC equivalent as a duck is to a banana.

This is part of the problem, they are working on division changes, rule changes etc.. Meanwhile the org is sailing full-speed toward a significant financial iceberg. The structure of the organization is little changed from its inception in 1984 and therein lies the root cause of many of its issues. Numerous committees have been formed, but progress seems to be painstakingly slow. Some new proposals on the IPSC committee look very promising, and these need to be examined by the members - and voted on by the board - before any changes should be made to the IPSC RD position. The proposals from the last meeting were a clear case of putting the cart before the horse which would have likely led to more issues down the road. Making changes without considering their implications generally leads to more problems. The longer the problems with the org continue, the more fragmented practical shooting will become, PCSL, Hit-Factor, and other outlaw matches are growing. Getting everyone back under the same umbrella might be impossible. The org is likely doomed, and that’s why I would have preferred IPSC to transfer the directorate to a new organization. If that does not happen then the least USPSA can do is ensure that the members have a voice in nominating and electing an RD, and ensuring that they are held to the highest standards.

The org does need to be restructured, it’s still operating in 1980’s mode; The question is, can they complete that restructuring before the almost inevitable financial crash that it is heading towards ? They are seeing huge turnovers in membership, declining revenue streams and out-of-control spending. Many members are refusing to take part in USPSA matches which is hitting activity fees, others have suggested lawsuits against the organization. They are taking these actions because there are no other means of holding the BOD accountable. Members are afraid to criticize the board out of fear of suspension/banning, so dissent is no longer tolerated in USPSA. Once an AD is elected they have the job regardless of their performance, lacking any option to recall a malfunctioning AD leads to boycotts, and the threat of lawsuits. Per Delaware precedents, the members of a non-profit are the shareholders of that organization. The members own the organization, while the BOD are the custodians of it. The members must have absolute power to recall individual members of the board, and even the whole board if necessary.

There was talk of an IPSC Committee but I don't recall an agenda item to actually address the RD roles and responsibility if it was transferred from the President. The Managing Director is now in charge of Nationals, prior to being hired he had no knowledge of USPSA so I'm not sure how that's going to work out.

The bid to make A2D interim RD for IPSC failed to get the necessary vote, in fact quite a few of the BOD voted against the measure.

Correct.

It bothers me that they change the bylaws so frequently, again without any input/approval from the members.

The lack of details concerning the transfer of IPSC RD to A2D is troubling. Will the BOD/Members have any day on the decisions he will make? How long will he retain the RD position ? Will there be an election for this position, and if so when, and who is eligible to run ? All of the above should be detailed in the agenda, but all members get are vague bullet points. Also, who nominated A2D to hold this position and why ?

It’s a shame that Walther does not make more competition parts for their guns. The standard captured recoil spring is set for +P ammo (about 150+ PF). The only thing I can suggest is sending emails to Walther and asking them if they plan to produce factory parts that can be used for competition.