Chuck D

I've started loading and unloading them at various times during the day and leaving them loaded to capacity overnight and while I'm at work. They all now hold a full 10, I can load them w/o having to use a loading tool (some are still a bit sticky/tight) and I can hand cycle the full 10 rounds (using dummy ammo) through each magazine w/o a problem. Sunday will be the 1st match using the mags to their full capacity... I believe that in a couple on months they will all be good to go. Thanks everyone for the tips !

The G41 would make an excellent choice for an L10 division pistol for those like me who still shoot 45acp. I'm in the market for one should they make their way into NYS at some point this spring/summer.

I think I hit on a possible solution... I disassembled the magazines, cleaned (again) all the mag bodies and polished the interior of each mag. I checked the overall length of each spring to make sure I didn't have springs that were either too long or too short. All the springs, like the mags are like new and everything seemed to be within spec. I removed material from the rear "feet" of the follower and the rear most post where the spring attaches to the follower until the magazine would take the 10th round. Be careful not to remove too much material or the follower will "tip" inside the magazine. Unfortunately I destroyed one out of 6 followers but I had replacement parts thankfully. Now they all hold 10 and are reloadable with the slide in battery. Some are still a little bit too tight for my liking but I have them loaded to capacity and locked up in the safe until the springs take a set and loosen up a little. I hope this works....

...I've tried one. If I can manage to get in the 10th round it dents the case of the round below it and you can't insert it in the pistol with the slide in battery.

I live in a capacity restricted State...I'm stuck with 10 round only magazines or standard capacity magazines with magazine blocks permanently inserted in them. I can't get the 10th round in over half of my G21 magazines...even after leaving them loaded with 9 rounds in them for over 2 months...no such luck. Instead of cutting coils off of the magazine spring, would installing a + 2 magazine basepad like those offered from Lone Wolf give the magazine spring enough room to allow the 10th round in the magazine and render the magazine easier to speed reload ? They won't add to the magazines capacity according to the manufacturer but I'm hoping that a little breathing room for the spring might do the trick. Thank you for the input !

Thank you ! I plan on coming to WNYPPL quite a bit this year. Make sure you introduce yourself and at the very least allow me to buy you lunch and a cold one. Good luck in Montreal ! Chuck

I've looked into that option...it's tough to register for matches seeing that the registration process is password protected and access to it via non-members is difficult. If IPSC Ontario will allow me to join so I may obtain access to the match schedule and registration process then it will be my best opition. I've been to IPSC Ontario matches before and they were all memorable times indeed. I'll be at WNYPPL this coming Sunday, I have a 12:30 time slot. Hopefully we can meet ? Thanks !!! Chuck DiSalvo

Does anyone on the East Coast host matches under IPSC World Body rules other than the U.S. IPSC Nationals ? I'm looking to find a club that holds an IPSC rules match or two or utilizes the IPSC Classifier stages. Thanks...

The reason this is coming to the forefront is that there are liability issues here both for local clubs and USPSA. It's simple, if you live in a capacity restricted State as I do in New York, we have a HARD 10 round limit and no more grandfathering of pre-ban magazines. Open is now Open 10 and Limited moves to Limited 10. If you come here from outside the State and you bring magazines that can hold more then 10 rounds of ammunition, you are breaking NYS law and are subject to arrest if you get caught. If that happens, it's bad PR for USPSA and the club you traveled to to shoot. That's what the new rule is designed to address, your legal liability and the liability of the sanctioning body based on either a mistake, receipt of bad information/advice, or your stupidity. The pre vs. post ban argument is moot. If you live in a jurisdiction where you can't purchase a new handgun with a standard (greater than 10 round magazine) capacity magazine then the new shooter would almost never be able to acquire the equipment required to be competitive in Open or Limited. Never mind "parts kits" because once you assemble a magazine with all of the "new parts" that came in the "kit" (and please don't bother to tell me this isn't done) then you've broken the law and no one should have to break the law to shoot competitively. Lastly, we do not need an Open 10 Division. What I would suggest is an Open 10 category that would be instituted if participation numbers warrant it at a major match. The rest of the nation need not suffer like those of us caught behind enemy lines. We have Production, L10, and Single Stack Divisions already. Adding an Open 10 category at Nationals would give those who would like to participate a place to play.

Polished stock strikers with stock striker springs in my humble opinion will provide you with a decent trigger and reliability is as far as light strikes are concerned

...these mags were modified by the dealer, certainly not Glock and most likely done so because 10 round factory mags have become hard to find as of late. As far as Glocks shipping only G36's and G39's to NYS that's not correct. We can get the full Glock line sent here with 10 round magazines shipped with the pistol. The 7 round rule only applies to the number of rounds you can load into a magazine for CCW and home defense purposes. Range use allows for a 10 round capacity in the magazine. Magblocks makes a plastic limiter that allows only 10 rounds into a standard capacity magazine. You would insert the limiter and use the supplied epoxy to glue the base pad on the magazine to render the magazine legal and meet the requirements of the magazine "not being readily convertable back to its standard capacity." If the base pad pin is "melted" as a way to install the block and make the installation permanent....whoever provided you with these mags is a certified hack.

I've been an LE Firearms Instructor for over 10 years. No one in my neck of the woods has even suggested slide mounted optics (or any optics period) on a duty gun. In fact, they're dead set against anything other than standard night sights on a duty pistol because of a real or perceived chance of sight/component failure and the fact that they are more fragile than iron sights. The S&W Core pistol is a "gimmick" pistol in the eyes of my fellow instructors so please excuse me if I don't mark your words because I know better...from 1st hand experience. No disrespect intended. Just pistols? My agency (300 officers) is in the midst of mounting optics on rifles after extensive testing showed they were much faster and more accurate under stress. Pistols might be different, but that would be pretty counterintuitive. My experience with firearms instructors is that many of them are crotchety old guys that are VERY resistant to change. Rifles are a completely different story. They don't ride your hip and every optic I've ever seen mounted on a patrol rifle is a larger and stronger unit then those that would be utilized on a duty pistol. and we're not all "old and crotchety" either...lol. Nope, rifles get bounced around in the trunk or in locking racks with crap hitting them all day. The worst looking police guns I've seen are long guns. And I've seen plenty with micro red dots mounted. The exact same ones that would go on a pistol. I know one large holster manufacturer is working on duty holsters for red dot mounted pistols. Considering the rapid evolution in red dot sights over the last 10-15 years I'd be very surprised if there weren't electronic sights mounted on a decent number of duty guns by the time I retire. And certainly some CHL carry guns. Patrol rifles in my neck of the woods are mounted on a rack between the seats where they should be in my opinion. The only optics mounted on patrol rifles for the City PD, County Sheriffs Dept, or the 11 Town and Village Depts are EoTech's or Aimpoints. It's obvious we are at polar opposites of the LE spectrum. Regardless....we are WAY off from the day that microdots are seen in any significant number on duty pistols in my opinion. Using what MIGHT occur 10-15 years down the road if ever to justify the creation of a new division is a "reach." Production Optics Division is a dead issue. I certainly wouldn't object it being afforded "category" status if there was enough participation to warrant the change.

I've been an LE Firearms Instructor for over 10 years. No one in my neck of the woods has even suggested slide mounted optics (or any optics period) on a duty gun. In fact, they're dead set against anything other than standard night sights on a duty pistol because of a real or perceived chance of sight/component failure and the fact that they are more fragile than iron sights. The S&W Core pistol is a "gimmick" pistol in the eyes of my fellow instructors so please excuse me if I don't mark your words because I know better...from 1st hand experience. No disrespect intended. Just pistols? My agency (300 officers) is in the midst of mounting optics on rifles after extensive testing showed they were much faster and more accurate under stress. Pistols might be different, but that would be pretty counterintuitive. My experience with firearms instructors is that many of them are crotchety old guys that are VERY resistant to change. Rifles are a completely different story. They don't ride your hip and every optic I've ever seen mounted on a patrol rifle is a larger and stronger unit then those that would be utilized on a duty pistol. and we're not all "old and crotchety" either...lol.

I've been an LE Firearms Instructor for over 10 years. No one in my neck of the woods has even suggested slide mounted optics (or any optics period) on a duty gun. In fact, they're dead set against anything other than standard night sights on a duty pistol because of a real or perceived chance of sight/component failure and the fact that they are more fragile than iron sights. The S&W Core pistol is a "gimmick" pistol in the eyes of my fellow instructors so please excuse me if I don't mark your words because I know better...from 1st hand experience. No disrespect intended. Yeah, I wouldn't guarantee you speak for all Law Enforcement. We've kicked the idea around. Not for anything real soon but looking down the road. They get a bit more durable and with the capability of having backup iron sights I can see some value. Lights, lasers, red dots on rifles and shotguns. All stuff that 20-30 years ago (or this year for some agencies) laughed about with derision. I'm not saying I will be bolting one on to my Glock any time soon. But it's a possibility.That said I'm not in favor of splitting up the divisions any further. Yeah...I never said I did speak for all L.E just those in my "neck of the woods" of which I took great pains to clarify in my original post.

I've been an LE Firearms Instructor for over 10 years. No one in my neck of the woods has even suggested slide mounted optics (or any optics period) on a duty gun. In fact, they're dead set against anything other than standard night sights on a duty pistol because of a real or perceived chance of sight/component failure and the fact that they are more fragile than iron sights. The S&W Core pistol is a "gimmick" pistol in the eyes of my fellow instructors so please excuse me if I don't mark your words because I know better...from 1st hand experience. No disrespect intended.

... optics on handguns belong in Open Division. You can use your "CORE" carry model pistol there. ...have bad eyesight? Get a pair of glasses same as I did. ... Leave Limited 10 alone. I'm SO sick of hearing people dump on this division especially when they want to kill it off for their own personal gain.

...as if there are not clubs that run outlaw USPSA. That in and of itself is no consequence. The rules are what they are...an imperfect document designed by well intentioned human beings. No one will EVER get everything they want or think they need and the inability to look at the big picture and find more "good" than "bad" in any shooting organization is concerning. The top level shooters will continue to adapt and "game" wherever they can, the bulk of the membership will adapt and participate at the level they feel comfortable, and the whiners will continue to whine no matter what. The time for teeth grinding is over. Either shoot IDPA or don't. I hope everyone stays but I'm realistic enough to know better besides for every shooter that leaves another will join.

...this poll proves nothing more than a very small number of the people who frequent this tread, not the forums and certainly not the membership disagree with the new rulebook in some fashion. As someone with a Political Science degree and has studied polls, their format, creation, and dissemination I can surely attest that the results some of you so strongly cling to are flawed at best and outright unreliable. I understand the concerns about rulebook changes not being viewed as beneficial. What I so strongly object to is the use of such a small sample to CONSTANTLY be used to prove a point. The rulebook goes into effect in October. Hopefully the bitching and teeth grinding will end by then.

I was wondering if anyone would be willing to share any lnformation on loading 9mm 147g plated/jacketed bullets to minor pf using WST. I have LOTS of WST and would like to use it in 9mm if possible... Thanks !

Well put from another IDPA guy who actually DOES have access to the internet (lol).

I'm not in the habit of wishing big chunks of time to pass but I so look forward to returning to this issue 9-12 months down the road to see if the new rulebook adversely effects membership numbers. I'd bet the last 5 dollars in my wallet it doesn't. "Comfortable and committed" as I am...

Not sure which question I did not answer so I will try and expand a little. I rephrased the poll answer to cover the fact that not all 20k IDPA members voted. but 96% saying "not much better" or "not better at all" is a pretty big number even with only 195 votes. If you can't see that as an answer I can't do any better. I think there were 1128 comments the last time I looked before they pulled the comments down. I guess the fact that all 20k members did not put up a comment says the new rule book has a mandate? Over 1100 comments is a pretty big number any way you slice it. As to speed as a tactic. If you make me stand still while reloading when there is cover available to reload behind you have stopped me from using speed as a tactic in that situation. By the way, I don't think we should be running 30 yards between shooting positions either, but I am old and fat. Getting into odd places and in and out of odd positions is enough to make me want to get younger and less fat. .. the numbers you constantly quote as "pretty big numbers" are extremely small samples of the overall membership. Polling requires a much larger sample to poll from then less than 10% of the population. Nothing can or should be deemed valid from such examples on either side of the issue because the samples are not of significant size and scope to offer an accurate assessment. my problem is these small samples are what you use to state your claim. You have valid points, you just use skewed statistics to prove them. Larger samples would be beneficial to prove your point. Reloading behind cover before advancing is an IDPA principle as the belief is that you should't advance from position to position with an empty gun verses the run and gun format of USPSA. The principles of the sport of IDPA should never be up for negotiation.

Ok, so it is not a running contest... however, why is is a kneeling contest and a laying down contest, and a getting out of a car contest, and a getting up from a chair contest... You argument doesn't have any validity. There are plenty of physical activities besides running that make older, heavier, less mobile people un-competitive. Get into a car trunk and shoot out of it... really? FL state match had low cover in the middle of a stage, getting into and out of a low cover position can cost an otherwise competitive person a match... It absolutely has validity. I expect movement, I expect low cover, awkward shooting positions, kneeling, and prone. ...and it isn't about old, big, fat, in poor shape, or physically weak shooters. it IS about reasonable distances between shooting positions. Read the post where I state that movement is important.

How can a rule that stops me from advancing behind cover while reloading be a good idea? To me if I am not shooting, I should be moving, and sometimes I should be shooting and moving at the same time. Sorry about the wording, it should have been. The vast majority of people on this forum that participated in the poll think the update was a waist. If you look at the IDPA forum there are more posts about issues than posts saying it is wonderful. Well over 1100 suggestions for changes to the updated rule book also point to at least a few people that think it was not the update they expected. I think Bob hit the nail on the head with these comments: "I didn't expect there to be too many changes suggested by the Tigger Team process because of the individuals that were selected to provide input." "If you ask people who are comfortable and committed to the current rule set to suggest changes you aren't going to see much because they aren't going to see much that needs improvement." Chuck, it is obvious you are one of the people that are " comfortable and committed". That's OK, We just don't agree. They had a chance to make changes that brought the game up to date. They missed that opportunity It's still a good game and the rules are the rules. I am waiting to see if some of the 1100+ suggestions make it into the rule book when it comes back out. By the way, I don't think we need USPSA lite, USPSA does run and gun very well. I like that IDPA forces accuracy with it's point structure, I don't mind most of the cover rules. Its a fun game, it just could have been a lot better with some updates. I think it is good to have more than one game to play. It would have been nice to have had half the people on the Tiger teams that were not " comfortable and committed". I appreciate your response but you never answered the question. ...once again even if I accept your statement of "well over 1100 suggestions" that's approximately 10% or so of the total membership and not every change suggested regards the same subject thereby narrowing the arguments even further. ... the most vocal arguments i've encountered consist of moving with an empty pistol from position to position, eliminating 10 rounds only in a magazine, allowing 40/10mm in CDP and allowing the IPSC style speed reload. Obviously you can draw your own conclusions but I know what it sounds like to me.

.... yes, the rules are what they are. Most profound statement I've read here in a long time.