Carmoney

I've participated in a lot of different types of handgun competition over the past 20 years--just about everything you can name from bowling pins to bullseye--and I have reached the conclusion that USPSA/IPSC revolver is the single most difficult shooting challenge available. When you shoot a USPSA match with a revolver, you are attacking courses of fire that clearly were not designed to be attacked with a gun that (1) has a double-action trigger pull for every shot, (2) must be reloaded every six rounds, (3) requires mastery of a complex reloading procedure, and (4) has no reciprocating action to absorb recoil and assist in returning the muzzle to zero. Those of us who choose to shoot USPSA revolver on a serious basis are not doing it because it's easy. We're pushing ourselves, challenging ourselves--if you're the kind of shooter who looks at a big tough field stage and says "man, I sure wish they would have made this course 6-round neutral" or "man, I sure wish I had two more bullets in my gun for this one," you don't understand.

From my very casual observations, it appears that the ICORE shooters who don't shoot USPSA are somewhat uncomfortable with (1) iron sights, and (2) major loads. I guess in my mind there is no reason to try to make USPSA Revo more like ICORE. If you want to shoot your ICORE gear, go find an ICORE match! That's what I do every now and then.

I think there was only one time where the 10-round capacity saved me a reload at the SSC. Plus I guess it gave me a bit more comfort to go faster on the obligatory all-steel stage. But you gotta realize, the SSC is always geared to be 8-round friendly, always has and always will, and I knew that going in. Take a random sampling of other major matches and there would be more opportunities for the 10+1 to save some reloads and close the gap a little. Most (but not necessarily all) the time the advantage will go to major-8.

There, I went back and added a bunch of smileys in order to bring my post into compliance with the BE forum nicey-nice rule.

Although if you really stop and think about it, when USPSA/IPSC decided to have more than one handgun division, the initial dividing line should have been between the two types of operating systems--autos and revolvers. Only after this division was implemented should they have divided it further into Open Auto, Limited Auto, Open Revolver, and Limited Revolver. This would have made so much more sense than what we have today. More beer talk that will never matter now.....

I would respectfully disagree with any plan that would propose to split our small division out any further. I'm also quite certain such a plan would never be favored by the BOD.

Who uses that Lee junk anyway? Seriously!

I also might point out that this conversation was going on when I first tuned in to the BE forum back in 2004. This is not a new concept.

I have always been curious about the idea of allowing the 8-shot revolvers for USPSA, but limiting them to minor power factor. Each platform (6-shot major and 8-shot minor) would have both advantages and disadvantages, and in the end I think it would be very close to a wash. At matches where the stage designers tend to think in terms of 8-shot arrays (and yes, you do see this quite a lot) the advantage might accrue to the 8-shooters. Still, a 625 with RN ammo will always reload faster (on average) than any 8-shot revolver, and the difference between major and minor scoring is pretty big. We have seen in Single Stack division that the top shooters almost all shoot major .40/45, rather than minor .38Super/9mm, and will happily give up the two extra rounds in order to have major scoring. There would be more of an advantage with an 8-shot revolver, though--it's a 33% increase in ammo capacity over a 6-shot gun, and like I mentioned above, you see an awful lot of targets set up in 8-shot arrays.... Would it bring in lots of additional revolver shooters? I doubt it. I like the concept better than adding an Open Revo division (sorry Rogan!) which would only split our small numbers down even further. I'm also not at all sold on the idea of including 8-shoot revolvers in with Single-Stack (sorry Tom E), yeah sure, you might win local matches here and there against a bunch of scrubs, but any decent 1911 shooter will handily prevail on reload speed alone. I'm pretty steady with an 8-shot revolver, but in a USPSA match with anything meaningful on the line I'd grab one of my 1911s every time if that were the game. Now--this is all fun beer talk, but let's not forget that one of the real attractions of shooting in USPSA Revolver Division is that we have largely factored out the "equipment race" (leaving Revo as the purest available test of shooting talent, perhaps?) and are all shooting essentially the same gun. Hell, on Squad 1 at Nationals I think we were all shooting 5" 625s--we could have darn near put our guns in a big bag and everybody close their eyes and pick one out randomly and it wouldn't have changed the results much.

Depends on how much you shoot, I guess. I don't have time to practice so virtually all my shooting is at matches. 5K primers will last me quite a good while, so the extra $32 isn't worth worrying about. I'm fairly frugal when it comes to this stuff, but I have shot enough Wolf to know it does not dent quite as easily as Federal. And my unwillingness to tolerate misfires is well known on this forum.

John, keep in mind that the USPSA revolver rules were significantly liberalized with this latest rulebook, due in large part to the efforts of our community here on the BE Revolver forum. We drafted the language for the new rule, took a poll, spread the word, lobbied the board, and got 'er done. There was a strong consensus to keep USPSA revolvers 6-shot only, with no optics and no ports/comps. Otherwise, though, you can pretty much do what you want. For example, people can now experiment with different custom barrels, weight distribution, etc.

Good call. Using your numbers, a Federal primer only costs $0.0064 more than a Wolf primer, anyway.

The only division (other than Production, obviously!) where minor is worth considering is Single Stack. And even then shooting major is usually going to be to your advantage. Occasionally there will be a match where several reloads can be saved by shooting a 9mm or .38 Super 1911 with 10+1 capacity, then it's worth thinking about. As an experiment, I shot minor (10+1) at the Single Stack Classic this year. I did this knowing full well that this match is always designed with 8-rounders in mind, and that I would be at a disadvantage on probably every stage except the all-steel stage. I finished 40th place overall, and was reasonably pleased considering the serious level of high-level competition at that match. Re-calculating the numbers, if I had gotten the same hits shooting major, I would finished 9 or 10 places higher.

That may be absolutely true for you, but cylinder latches are a lot like grips--people have different preferences. I strongly preferred the Ed Brown latch for years, then earlier this year switched to the Hogue release. In my hands, the extended thumb latch offers a significant advantage. On the other hand, my son prefers the old-style stock S&W release, and doesn't like the feel of any of the extended aftermarket releases. There is no reason for any of the extended thumb latches to be illegal. They are practical, concealable, and readily available at a fairly modest price. Am I wrong about that?

I wonder why IDPA has that rule? Most of the oversize cylinder latches would conceal perfectly well--maybe all of them, for that matter. Hmmm......

All good advice.

No. It's not right. All the cylinder release spring does is hold the bolt in a forward position when the cylinder is swung out. It would make absolutely no difference in whether the cylinder can fall out on its own when the latch is pushed. I often cut the cylinder release spring (or even remove it and its plunger completely), but that is to prevent the bolt from pushing against the center-pin when the cylinder is closed. None of my guns will allow the cylinder to fall open when the release is pushed. Apparently my revolvers aren't "real race ready"!

Dang, I thought for sure this thread would be about Dremel tools....

I saw a faint glow in the sky this evening, coming from the east. Now I know it was all those candles on Bill's birthday cake I was seeing! Happy birthday, Bill!

One misfire can potentially make the difference between winning the match and being first loser. Many folks feel that 99.9% ignition reliability is plenty good. I think it's awful. I remember having a misfire at the Illinois Sectional in Havana in 2005. Pissed me off. Got home, tried shooting the round through several 1911s, and never could get it to fire. Must have been a bad primer.

Lefty or righty: (1) have plenty of chamfer, (2) use true round-nose bullets and a good crimp so there's no edges to catch, (3) let gravity work for you, and (4) watch with your eyes as you index the moonclip into the cylinder.

Exactly right. I will not tolerate misfires. Plus I don't shoot that many rounds per year anymore. I don't have time to practice, and frankly I don't enjoy practicing. Virtually all my shooting is at matches. So it's not too big a deal for me to hand-prime my ammo. Some day when my ship comes in maybe I'll get a 1050, which primes on the downstroke and allows you to set the seating depth wherever you want it.

I've always thought Mark has a great face for radio.

Dave, many of us here on this forum are seeking to compete at the highest levels of revolver shooting at the national (and even international) level. For us, locating and properly seating Federal primers is not any huge inconvenience. It's well worth the effort, particularly given the higher technical level of the shooting tasks we have been seeing at the bigger matches recently. Or so it seems to me.

I've never fired one, but it is said to do both. It's a multitasker. Not so sure it really does a whole lot of either! One of my most favorite guns of all time, my treasured Nowlin custom 25-2, has a shortened cylinder. It has a nice action and shoots very well, but my 625 with regular cylinder compares quite favorably on both counts.