Greg Jones

He was not talking SIGHT distance-he specifically asked about overall length. But more importantly, let's talk about the term aggie. Care to explain that comment, as I have only heard it used to describe students at certain universities or homosexual sailors?

Well, according to the S&W Web site, the difference in length is that the 5" 625 is 1 5/8" longer. The 5" 625 is listed at 10 3/8" while the 5" 1911 is listed at 8 3/4". Any more questions?

That not an apples to apples comparison. The barrel of a 5" semi-auto includes the chamber while the barrel of a 5" revolver does not.

The M&P would be good to go for either division. It would be ESP only for the XD9.

I would agree that you should find an IDPA legal gun that you like best and shoot whatever division it is legal in. I personally like the M&P and the XD, but I don't own either one. If I had to pick between the two, I personally would select the M&P because Springfield, to my knowledge, will still not sell XD parts. If the XD breaks and it is not a simple fix, you have to ship it back for repairs.

From what I have been told, it is impossible to get liability insurance for the gun shows unless they are posted no loaded firearms permitted.

Nice old school trap gun you have there. I started out with a 3200 O/U for ATA doubles back in 1980. I knew several shooters at the time that had single barrels made for the 3200. I believe Simmons Guns made most of them and I'm pretty sure that is a Simmons rib on your gun. As to the "Why" of the high rib, it is true that a higher rib reduces the amount of heat waves off the barrel. However, the most important reason for the unsingle barrel is because the trigger group is non-selectable, meaning it will only fire the bottom barrel first, then reset for the top barrel. In 1981 I had a Perazzi made up similar to your combo, with a MX-8 O/U barrel and frame and a Grand American Unsingle barrel fitted to it. I shot the O/U for ATA Singles and Doubles, and the Unsingle for Handicap. I scored my first 200 straight in singles and made the 27 yard line in handicap with that gun. I don't shoot much trap any more, but it's still fun to talk about it and your gun brings back a lot of memories!

I would fall into neither of the above myself, although I have carried with my competition set-up and I have competed with my carry set-up. I do compete and carry similar guns, a 5" 1911 and a bobtail Commander. The Commander is not small enough to fit in the BUG category. Holsters are a different story as I use an OWB kydex for competition and an IWB leather for carry.

I'm speculating that he did not get the Blade-Tech DOH, but the injected molded holster that sells for $15.00. My Dan Wesson Razorback with top rib fits fine in the Blade-Tech DOH.

Actually any IDPA-legal holster will be legal in USPSA Single Stack or L10. Even with the tightening of the USPSA SS holster rules for 2007, they are still a bit more relaxed than what you will find in IDPA. I don't see how USPSA could be more accommodating that that. With respect to the IDPA rules, modifying a holster was illegal when there was an approved holster list. Beginning with the 2005 rules, the approved list went away and holster modifications are now legal as long as the holster still meets the criteria set in the rules. You will find mention of this on the bottom of page 33 in the latest rule book. There is no shortage of holsters that are legal in IDPA as well as in USPSA SS division. It sounds like your choices may be more limited by the configuration of your specific 1911 than anything in the rules.

Unbelievable! I have a buddy that works for Verizon-can't wait for him to see this.

There is the utility Taboo that is supposed to patch Safari to do what you want. I have not tried it myself as I prefer to use OmniWeb, which does warn the user before closing a window with multiple tabs open.

If we are talking about a two-hand hold with a handgun, there will be a negligible, if any, difference in the amount of the shooter's body that is exposed from cover when switching from strong hand to weak hand. If the shooter switches eye dominance, which should be easier for most people than shooting with the weak hand, there would be less of the shooter's body exposed. Put another way, assume I am a right-handed shooter that is right-eye dominant, shooting with a two-hand hold from the left side of cover. I will expose more of my body shooting weak hand/dominant eye than I will if I shoot strong hand/weak eye. The amount of the shooter's body that is exposed with a two-hand grip does not change by switching the gun from strong side to weak side. The shooter will expose more of his/her head when leaning out to force the use of the strong-side eye from behind weak-side cover. The above only applies to a handgun as the dynamics change with a long gun, especially when you consider that switching eye dominance with a rifle or a shotgun is a "hit or miss" proposition (pardon the pun).

I normally reload lead bullets myself, but occasionally I need jacketed bullets and I've found the Blazer Brass 230 grain ball to be a good substitute. I've never shot it over the chronograph, but I'd guess it clocks around 775-800 fps. A local dealer routinely puts them on sale for $9.00 for a box of 50.

I'm guessing that in the proposed 2008 rule book there are no IPSC divisions, so D1-D6 would be Open, Limited, Limited 10, Production, Revolver, and PSSD.

I installed the security update and had no problems myself. I did hear of someone else that experienced the same issue that you are having and solved it by connecting the Mac directly to the modem's Ethernet cable, then switching it back to the AirPort.

I have a 13-year old daughter also and she has been shooting small bore rifle matches the past two years. She started out shooting a handgun by begging me to let her shoot my .45 1911. She shot it a 2-3 times, no more than 10-12 rounds at a time and did well with it and she said she loved it. She decided that she wanted to shoot Flex's steel match with it and the results were disastrous. It was clearly too much gun too soon for her and she has much to "unlearn" as we move forward. I have a Ruger Mk II .22 and that is what she is going to work with in 2007. Luckily she has a great attitude and desire to shoot, so I think we can get her back on track.

I would say that the "why" for weak hand only stages is to simulate what would happen if our strong hand was somehow incapacitated. Beyond that, there would be few practical reasons to shoot weak hand, two-handed, but it could be interesting to try.

I ordered a Blade Tech DOH in September of 2005 and it shipped early November 2005 and it is the convertible design with 2 different back plates. I would expect that just about everyone that bought a new DOH for PSSD has all they need to stay legal in the division.

Info on the one/two piston SX2s is in this thread.

It does look like it was designed for the trials, unfortunately the Combat Pistol program was canceled in September. More info here.

Sorry to drift from the original topic, but unlike the other guns you mention, the HK45 is not a single stack and with its 10-round mags it would play nicely in L10.

Thanks Gary, that is helpful. One final question on this for clarity. If I understand correctly, the approved Production list is about gun criteria and production numbers while the approved Limited/L10 list only addresses production numbers? As example, the H&K USP Expert is not approved for USPSA production due (I presume) to gun criteria but would be legal for Limited/L10 because production has exceeded the required number?

Gary, what about Shred's question on: "How does this work with guns that are either so old the manufacturer isn't around, or doesn't feel like providing a signed letter to NROI? "So sorry, you have to shoot Open with that Nambu"??? Can third-parties submit documentation for evaluation." It does appear that the potential exists for many guns to not be on the approved list just because the original manufacturer can not/will not submit the appropriate documentation to have it approved. This could have a big impact on many shooters, particularly 1911 shooters that choose to shoot Limited/L10 instead of PSSD. Or would a gun that already meets all the requirements for PSSD be automatically be approved for Limited/L10? Related to this question, why no approved gun list for single stack? If there is an approved list for Production/Limited/L10, will we see an approved list for single stack once (if) it moves beyond provisional status?

I've loaded several thousand of these bullets myself and it is pretty much all I use in my primary competition gun. I've had similar experiences to yours and here is what I have discovered. The Precision 230 has a round nose and a flat point that makes it approximately .030 shorter than most full round nose bullets. I found that by loading to 1.220 OAL the base of the bullet was seated to the same depth as a Zero or Montana Gold 230 RN loaded to 1.250. This has worked well for me in my primary gun, however a round loaded to this length can still cause problems in some guns. The profile of the Precision bullet is more fat at the nose than other full round nose bullets. I've tried the Precision loaded to 1.220 in 6 different .45s and in 3 of them, the fatter nose will contact the lands of the barrel slightly before the case mouth seats, causing the round to occasionally just fall short of going into battery as you describe. I contacted Precision about this and it was recommended that I try loading a little shorter yet or get a gunsmith to ream the lands slightly deeper. Instead I decided to just load a different bullet for the 3 affected guns as I don't shoot them that much anyway. If I did want to use the Precision load in these guns, I'd try loading shorter and look for sighs of pressure rather than spend the money to have the barrels altered. Hope this helps.