Jump to content
Brian Enos's Forums... Maku mozo!


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About ATLDave

  • Rank
    Calls Shots

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I'm not sure. It's true that they all take work to be good/be competitive/win. However, dots are a lot lower-stress for shooters who struggle with calling shots with iron sights. With iron sights, some shots are stress-inducing in terms of whether the competitor will be able to make the shot at any kind of match pace. Dots remove that stress. I really have not seen very many people come back from the land of dots, and I think this is why. They're not any more competitive in their division with a dot than they were with irons, but they're not generally racking up mikes and no-shoots or going to war with mini-poppers. They can make all the shots pretty much all the time. For people with a relatively casual level of participation, this is a far more enjoyable way to shoot, as opposed to stressing about whether the equal-light-bars really were equal enough on that 20 yard partial. I do not think the iron-sight divisions are going to recover shooters lost to dots any time soon.
  2. Of course. I just think it's funny as hell.
  3. Imma just leave this here:
  4. What about the holster? If my holster gets bumped to a different adjustment/position, that can cause the kind of issue you're describing.
  5. All dot-equipped divisions are up in my area, and all the iron-sighted divisions are down. PCC and CO are both big and growing where I am, cannibalizing LTD and PROD.
  6. There's also the approach of putting some scotch tape or a smidge of grease over the left lens of the shooting glasses where the sights appear in a normal shooting position. You can force a temporary dominance switch that way. Everyone is right eye dominant if something is occluding the view of the left eye (and vice versa).
  7. Uprange movement is part of the game. Learning to move uprange safely and efficiently is a skill. Best way to learn and maintain that skill is to have regular practice at it. A local club that never has uprange movement is doing its shooters no favors (they will probably DQ or have some train wreck if their first exposure to it is at a bigger match), nor is it helping the sport overall (again, the shooters will be less safe at other matches that throw novel-to-them uprange movement at them in a less comfortable environment).
  8. I'm OK with the existence of Virginia count, but I have always been a bit puzzled by its predominance in classifiers, when that very poorly represents even the stand-and-shoot skills of the broader sport. As for its practicality, I think there is an argument to be made that, in a self-defense situation, having a miss (which means a stray bullet somewhere) heavily penalized may be quite practical.
  9. It's best if the next round of "likely suspects" can get pulled up into running the club/MD'ing gradually. If you've got a group of people running the club, rather than having them all leave at once and trying to find replacements across the board (or a new guy who's going to take sole primary responsibility), it's better to stagger the departures. When the existing club leadership is in good shape, that's the time to start incorporating other folks. Ask shooters who are local and have high overall enthusiasm levels for the sport to come up with a stage design for a match. Help them troubleshoot it. Then do it again next match or the one after that. After they've learned some of the stage design lessons, ask them to guest MD a match. Part of running a club isn't just putting on the next match... it's succession planning. You have to help create the next generation of MD's while you're in charge. If you wait until you're burned out, then asking people to go from 0-60 is a big ask. And will generally require the "club's gonna end unless one of you f***ers steps up" threat. Sometimes that's inevitable, but if it really comes to that, it's usually a sign people in charge haven't been thinking long term.
  10. Most of the people here are primarily into full-sized guns.
  11. If all the stages are really simple go-here-shoot-array-X-on-berm, go-here-shoot-array-Y-on-berm, yes, it is super easy to not have to worry about wall shots. If the match is trying to present more interesting stages that more closely approximate the feel of "real" outdoor stages, then geometry gets really complicated in a hurry. If you've got bullet traps to work with, then that also makes it easy. But getting complicated geometry completely right, with no oblique visibility anywhere of any wall-shot target is not easy to do in 45 minutes of setup time. And it's even harder to be certain that you've done it. So, as a safety measure and to make sure the club doesn't get kicked out of the range (thus ending the match forever), sometimes the MD/RM reminds people not to do anything that creates a wall shot. Here's the thing: I have never, ever seen anyone actually DQ'ed for this. Because, in real life, people aren't generally jerks. They understand the concept "hey, don't get us kicked out of this range forever or kill someone in the next bay just because we missed a gap in a wall that makes it possible to shoot a target at a 175° angle." Nobody is building stages that force people to consciously monitor that stuff... they're just telling people not to "game" some obscure defect in the stage design/setup and create a match-ending situation. In the context of matches with an hour to set up, everyone understands the reasonableness of this direction.
  12. That is, indeed, the primary solution. However, many indoor matches have very limited windows for set-up time, and sometimes there are positions where some sliver or highly-acute angle shot is technically available yet unsafe, and fixing that would add 30 more minutes to setup time (and knock at least one stage out of the match due to time constraints). So the club (that wants to be allowed to continue using the range) announces that shots that go into side walls are unsafe. It's not a thing that people actually object to in person.
  13. Your repeated contention is that the slide weight of the G40, as compared to a Tanfo', makes it suited to 10mm. This obviously raises the question as to whether the G20 and G29 - both of which have shorter, lighter slides than a G40 - are unsuited to 10mm. My feelings are unhurt. I am also un-bothered by anyone's brand preferences. I do wonder what malady you contend my 10mm Tanfoglios are due to suffer from... what, exactly, is it that you contend the too-light slide of my Match or Limited is going to inflict?
  14. Yondering, Including other 10mm non-long-slide Glocks. Even the little Glock 29 works very reliably. Are you contending that G 20's and G 29's are not well suited to handling 10mm safely or reliably? I do not believe you are thinking about this correctly. I think you're attaching WAY too much importance to slide mass in terms of how/when the action unlocks. I also think you are mistaken about the effect of slide mass on recoil/battering. Momentum is mass times velocity. If a slide is lightened, it will move faster... but it will have less mass. The momentum will be the same when it hits home at the end of the slide's rearward traverse.
  15. I have shot a number of other 10mm launchers. Including a few generations of Glocks (20's, 29's, and one 40). And several 1911 platforms. I'm pretty familiar with the cartridge. It is not some nuclear device. In terms of recoil force, it does not generate a great deal more than stout 45ACP +P. You seem to attach a great deal of weight (ha!) to the mass of the slide. We're talking about Browning-type locked-breech tilting barrel actions. The slide's mass is not the primary control on the timing of unlocking; nor, for that matter, is the recoil spring. These are not Hi-Point guns where the mass of the slide is the thing keeping the chamber from opening early and allow the case to blow out.
  • Create New...