motosapiens

i would say that is not only legal, but I would encourage it... especially for my competitors.

I've been getting most all my bullets from Blue for the last couple years. I'm on their subscription plan so I get a case every month. Those have been running about 2 months behind since summer. I ordered some extra 9mm bullets in january and they said expect 14-16 weeks. They've always answered my emails within a day or so, and I'm inclined to just stick with them for the future. I don't really get why bullet mfrs are so busy tho, but maybe they sell to hoarders too, and not just to competition shooters. I know I'm shooting about half what I normally do because of lack of primers, so I'm not sure what people are doing with all these bullets.

Y'all must have sharper slides than my trojan. I wore the bluing off from my thumb dragging the slide, but never got scraped by it. OTOH, my new ruger koenig has razor-sharp serrations (and a fairly narrow safety) and I drew blood in the first 50 or so shots. so I did 2 things: 1) I got a little piece of sand paper and dulled the edges of the serrations. 2) I spent a few minutes each dryfire session paying attention to my grip and my thumb to keep it off the slide. Mostly by just thinking about pointing it more forward. presto. problem solved.

I beat open guys with a single-stack gun all the time. You won't come in dead last unless all the open competitors at your club are as good or better shooters than you.

i'm just not going to shoot any low-light stages where I really feel like I need a flashlight. And I'm not expecting to see any at normal uspsa matches.

I had a pm9 for a few years. nice tight accurate gun. slide is a bit heavy for a 9mm imho. I just got a ruger koenig 45 a couple months ago (prize table), and it is a little nicer in every respect. the trigger is awesome right out of the box, but I'm also a flat trigger fan. the slide looks traditional but is about an oz lighter than my sti trojan slide. Feels to me like the sights settle a little quicker. The trigger guard is more undercut than any other 1911 I've handled, but that's not saying that much. if they were the same price, I'd buy the ruger, especially if you like flat triggers. If the pm9 is $200-300 cheaper, I'd probably go that direction.

cuz stoeger joked about trying to do so. Now that stoeger has gone into hibernation, and CO has 140mm magazines, I don't think it's a serious worry anymore.

as i mentioned earlier, the darkest dark house stage I have seen was at 2015 SS nats at pasa. IIRC they did have a handheld flashlight available for use. I could see well enough to shoot at full speed without it, and I don't think a WML would have been the slightest advantage. Now you could intentionally construct a dark house stage where it might be an advantage, but in 9 years of shooting this sport, it seems like such stages have been exceedingly rare, so I'm not sure using that point really makes for a valid objection to the rules. However, if we suddenly start seeing lots of MDs constructing dark houses that are big enough to put targets far away, and dark enough that they can't realistically be shot without lights, I'd be willing to change my opinion. I suspect it will just be way too much infrastructure for anyone to invest in. One thing you *might* see is the occasional uspsa sanctioned night match (as opposed to the current occasional outlaw night match). I doubt I would shoot either one.

fwiw, here at our local matches, I heard zero griping about the rules change, and many positive comments. CO is probably the most popular division here right now, for whatever that is worth. It does appear that every person in uspsa who doesn't like the rule changes is posting in this thread.

It appears that I disagree with you on just about everything, but at least we can have a respectful conversation about it. I think retreat stages are an important part of the sport and a shooter's skillset, but I also think they require extra care from the stage designer and RO to be safe and non-dickish. I understand the concept of weight limits as applied to the original idea of production (and ss), but once you started seeing custom shop race-only guns made in quantities of 2000 (we promise!), that kinda made the weight limits stupid and counterproductive. I wonder how many serious competitors even still shoot old-school sub 30 oz duty/carry guns in production anymore. I imagine everyone is different based on strength, skill, and so forth, but for me, once I get up to around 40 oz with minor loads, extra weight has zero benefit overall, but I do definitely notice a speed/accuracy difference between 30 and 40 oz. I'll never put a flashlight on any of the guns I currently own, but if I was still rocking the xdm in CO, I might very well try a flashlight instead of spending $1500 on a custom shop race-only cz. I'd be very interested to see how big the difference was. anyway, this has been a very interesting thread. Some whining and dumb points, but also lots of good points brought up that I think will eventually have to be addressed.

I see what you mean. Haven't really seen that with pcc lasers, but a pistol would be significantly easier to do reach-arounds with. I'd kind of like to see some real-life examples, but I suspect there will be a few make people's heads explode

i am no longer making fun of thumbrests. we put one on tresa's volquartsen 22 pistol and *immediately* started shooting better and more consistently. I think she even held a world record on one of the stages for a day or so. I haven't found a need for them on any other gun however.

you think sharks with frickin' lasers will be useful in open? a competitive advantage in some situation?

I think my wsb for next weekend is going to require the shooter's eyes be closed for the entire stage......

not even what I'm talking about. I'm talking about people finding a new way to interpret a rule to punish people that no one else thought of before. Or designing an even more annoying stage than previously. Or coming up with some bizarre new interpretation of what things are 'in the shooting area'. so we end up with rules prohibiting those stages, or specifically allowing the behavior that a few people thought was not allowed in a particular interpretation of the rule, or even MORE carefully defining what is and what isn't part of the shooting area.

I would say the rules are deliberately designed to stop people from figuring out ways to be dicks and interpret things in a way to punish people. That's why our rulebook keeps growing. People keep finding new ways to be dicks.

are sights the same as weapons mounted lights? If you could do that, and you did, do you think people would come to your matches? I expect that issue will be specifically addressed in the rules clarifications in order to prevent such behavior.

fixed. lolz.

I'm sure he's telling the truth, but as I recall he went into the last nats with a potential disadvantage (no frame weight on his limited gun, shooting against significantly heavier guns). I don't remember him complaining about it then. Or is the extra weight only an advantage when shooting minor? this whole thing is very confusing..... Note, I am not 100% certain that mason didn't use a frame weight, but I don't remember one when I watched him shoot, and I heard zero talk about it, so I'm pretty sure.

according to Troy, yes.

perhaps you have shot more low light stages than I have. I have only shot a few, 2015 SS nats, which was VERY dark, and the shoothouse at frostproof, which was not very dark at all. In neither case do I think a flashlight would have been any help whatsoever, and in fact, would probably have been a distraction that slowed me down. Our typical low-light quals at my agency are somewhat between those two examples, and a flashlight isn't a help there either. In my experience, If you are close enough to the target to really illuminate it, you're close enough that you don't really need a very good view of your sights. Now that won't stop some jackwagon md at some match somewhere from doing low-light stages, but if it's light enough to not be dangerous without a light, I believe it's light enough that a light will not offer an advantage.

see above. I don't think it will be an advantage, and I think the wsb will prohibit the use of lights anyway.

a) I don't think a light would be an advantage in that stage. b) i strongly suspect (based on troy's clarifications) that the wsb will be written to specifically prohibit the use of lights on that stage.

I pretty much agree with you..... Of course if it won't change the results, and it will give some people a little more flexibility to make their gun/gear work for them, it sounds like a good change, right? I can't think of any reason to be against it unless it turns out that it will be impossible to win or place without a flashlight on your gun.... and I'm pretty certain that won't happen. As we saw in Limited nats a few months ago, a guy with a crappy plastic gun and no frame-weight and no flashlight was able to beat all the gm's and m's running 50+ oz custom wonder guns. Maybe the infinity and atlas shooters would have beat him if they only had a light......

the weight, the sights, and the marketing are all directed exactly at competition shooters. Literally no one is saying "hey, i'd like to concealed carry a gun that is 50oz empty and has big sharp sights.