Vlad

Part of it is that gas engines have gotten FAR more efficient as well. You mention your F-150 with 13mpg. Lets assume that's the v8 of the era at 220hp Current F150 with with a entry V6 puts about 300hp with 17/23mpg. That means about 100% "better" when you look at mpg/hp ratio. The bigger issue has been the type of diesel available. US diesel has a crappier ignition performance, does a bit worse in MPG and a lot worse in cold weather, when compared with Euro diesel.

The AD video makes me think the guy behind him had a slam fire. Look at their charging stance, no hands near the trigger. Idiotic formation. They must wear special pants though, with extra room in the back for dippers and extra room in the front for the testicles the size of beach balls.

Don't bother. This is politics and clownshoes, nothing more.

Besides the safety issue there is one of work. Know your shooters, if you build a match the way we do, were we spend 2 hours building stages before the main crowd shows up, you kinda want to know if you are going to have anyone besides your build crew be there for you being wet, cold, muddy, and miserable. If you know your shooters are unlikely to show up in that weather, whats the point? Although I'm considering taking the "we only cancel if we think you will die" approach and just build simple dumb stages during the bad weather, its just that we plan stages days in advance and like to put decent and complex stages in out matches.

That sounds even dumber. As he was not conducting his walkthrough how does that even count. Meh. Combine that with them not reading his name during the awards, and it sounds almost like they don't like americans or something.

That would be a ISPC rules, they have this silly little rule saying you can't use "sighting aids" during a walk through. This apparently includes water bottles, towels, and maybe cigars in your hands when you point at a target. The match in question was an European match under IPSC rules.

Get some really good drill bits and carefully drill out the offending screw down to the barrel.

Kneeling and going prone are athletic now? I know some people argue that stages should be only a shooting challenge, but that's a silly argument for wanting "easy" hoser stages and arguing against "track and field" stages. To my mind running hard for a good stretch and then getting hits on target or having to shoot from awkward/hard/unusual positions AND then getting back up and doing it some more is a shooting challenge and appropriate for the "P" in the name of the game, Yes, I know its harder on older or heavier folks. I'm in the heavy camp, with a bad back. I'd like to grow the sport as much as the next guy, but at some point if your body is failing you maybe it is time to not worry about winning and just have fun and take it slower. Or ask the match director about applying rule 10.2.10, thats why it is there. Or maybe shoot Steel matches where those bad knees are not such a draw back. I'm sorry. I know it sucks, but as we age there are lots of things we can't do. We don't ask the ski resort guys to make slopes easier, the volleyball courts to lower the net, or NASCAR to make everyone drive 37mph with the right blinker on for 500 laps of turning left. Of course, modern medicine did solve ONE problem, but this is a family forum, no?

I'm no lady, as you well know, but next time you I would inform the 'gentleman' to occasionally leave his cave and learn that the rest of the world would probably define his behavior as 'being an ass'. On, the other hand, us men can be awkward creatures around the fair half of the species, so keep in mind it might have been a poor attempt at being funny or clever, instead of misogynistic.

Thank you Gary, and thank you for your years on the board, even if along the way I've argued with you about the rules you guys made

So I understand, I'm just curious if USPSA ever published anything actually saying so?

So the Multi gun rules now allow an non-magnified optic in Limited. The thread we had hear a while ago about this contained area directors stating that this applied to all Limited in rifle only stuff as well. However the USPSA website shows the Multi gun rule book updated but the Rifle rule book is still the 2009 one with the "no optics" rule for Limited. Do we have official word somewhere on this?

Running a midlength 1/7 chromed BCM 16" barrel, with a rifle length recoil system in a ARFX stock, YHM light weight freefloat, non adjustable gas block, nordic tactical comp and now with a tiny red dot instead of scope. Loving it, handles fast, its light as anything and shoots softer then it has any right to, the silly thing is a MOA gun friking wolf ammo. Wouldn't think of trading to a 20".

You are assuming I ALREADY own the gear. Semi-auto .308s are not anywhere near as common as AR-15's in people's closets. You can build a competitive AR for $1000 or less before the optics (lets assume irons for the sake number crunching) with a bare bones factory 308 AR starting at the price, before we talk about the costs of M1As. And then I have a unitasker gun because I don't really want a semi-auto .308 for anything else. And sure ammo is not THAT expensive (well it is twice the price of .223, but whatever) if you only count matches, but if I'm going to lay down 1000-1500 on a gun I should probably practice with it too, no? Practice ammo far outnumbers match ammo and well, it is expensive. So sure, let me run right our and spend $1500 on a rifle and $1000 on ammo so I can get ready for the next match where there are going to be 4 competitors in that division: me, 1 new guy who thought it would be cool, 1 guy who thinks this is going to be militia training for his 600 yard dream scenario come the revolution, and one HM specialist who will then complain that the the field is not wide enough and the prize table is too small. I'll get right on that.

Ammo is expensive, rules keep changing, no one else is shooting it, guns are heavier, etc, etc. It is a retro division, like single stack, like cowboy action shooting, etc, and retro divisions do not appeal to me. We could shoot 3gun with hand crossbow, blunderbuss, and Kentucky rifles too. I know lots of people like that sort of thing, and thats ok by me, it just isn't my cup of tea. When we get a lasers and masers and phasers division I'll probably shoot that. I know it odd to say from someone who only shoots production and disdains open, but I'm more interesting in what is practical rather then experimental so if I have to be honest about it I'll wait until the third version of the Marvin's the Martian laser pistol before I switch over.

Visible, and I've come around to Trapr's way of thinking that 4moa is not just a good idea, it should be the law.

Reading the rule book I found: but then I also found: Anyone know where forward grips, AFG's, hand stops, etc fall into these rules?

Some of it is a matter of preference. I'm quite happy with 16" and I prefer the shorter guns but I don't shoot any matches where targets are at 400+ yards so I don't care about the extra velocity. Longer is softer but then a midlegth gas system, with a rifle recoil system is pretty soft anyway and adjustable gas blocks can make that more so. Your best bet is to see if you can shoot a few different configurations and decide what you like best.

Mine seems to be fine with a single dimple.

I'm quite happy with the low profile YHM one I installed on my midlength barrel. It is a set screw type, but the BCM barrel I got is dimpled for set screws, and the screw and dimple lined up very nicely. I have used a shaved down standard sight base for years and worked fine, but it was cross pinned so I had to replace it with the new barrel.

I like the SPR-E with my Millet. The only thing is that it is still not far out enough for me but I'm kinda ok with that. Basically at 4x nose to charging handle is perfect, at 1x I need to have my head a bit further back. As far as compromises go thats not to bad because it the odds are if I need 4x I also need to be a lot more careful about head placement so I have my nose anchor point, and for closer stuff it matters a bit less. Of course your height, stock length, neck lengths, etc can all change the math, I'm using a A2 length stock and I'm 6'1.

Ok you are right. There is no way that a baked on poly/moly/other coat is in any way different then some moly powder thrown over some FMJ bullets in a tumbler. I stand corrected.

Woot, I finally changed a class after like 5 years.

I think as posted in the original thread, molly coated rifle bullets from the 90's (which is the topic of the article) and molly coated pistol bullets we use today are very different beasts.

I can tell you my production CZ developed the same issue. I noticed it somewhere around 4-5000 rounds and it got worse after that. I replaced the barrel around 10000 for a different reason and by that time it seemed to have stopped advancing. It didn't seem to hurt anything else. Of course, in a open gun I would assume the whole process would be faster and I'm not sure if it would become a problem in the long run.