JGus

Definitely some super squad shooters in the group. But I'd call it more of a commercial team squad. Glock/TTI, Springfield, S&W. Need Sevigny for FNH and Max for Sig to fill it out. Don't think we will see any EAA/Tanfo sponsored shooters because of weight issues?

Thanks for the clarification. I definitely must have gotten the stages confused with PRD NATS.

My memory could be wrong. I thought we had a 30 or 32 stage round last year? I also shot Production Nats at PASA last year so maybe I'm getting the stages between the two confused.

PASA is a great range and I love shooting SS Nats. The range and the volunteers always put on one of the top run matches of the year. But does it seem that the stages this year don't appear to be as challenging as past SS NATS? I realize stages on the ground can be much different than stages on paper, but the highest round count stage is 24 rounds, and only four total stages of 20 or more rounds. Just thought that was interesting compared to past SS Nats with stages of 30 or more and with what appeared to be a lot of movement. I guess we will see next month. It's going to be a great match and a great time! http://1911ssc.com/2016-stages/

I don't need someone to tell me what is and isn't collectible. It's all in the eye of the beholder. I've been collecting various firearms for years and i can say with certainty there are very few guns that are considered "investment" value, where capital appreciation will occur over time. Now many people like to collect various types of firearms, but that doesn't mean they are investment value. Some people just like to collect certain types. Anyone that thinks they will generate a worthwhile return on their "collection" will be sadly disappointed. But, most people that collect aren't doing it for investment value, but for personal satisfaction.

I would gladly trade my 5 P226 X5s for the new style X-Line. The reason for the redesign was to strengthen the slide to prevent slide cracking yet still remain light weight. But that doesn't mean they aren't collectible. Prices for the first generation X5's have increased significantly on Gunbroker. I've got two X5 Allrounds, one X5 Competition and one X5 L1 four years or so ago (i think?). And the price i got mine for when they first came out is significantly lower than current prices.

I would gladly trade my 5 P226 X5s for the new style X-Line. The reason for the redesign was to strengthen the slide to prevent slide cracking yet still remain light weight.

Might be some collectibility to the original P226 X-Five models. They no longer make these. The second generation X-Five version models dropped the P226 relationship to strictly the X-Five line.

I'm signed up for PRD NATS and CO NATS. Benefits of living an hour from PASA Park. I see Team Glock is signed up. Team Springfield is signed up. Team S&W is signed up. If Team Sig got their team members to shoot CO NATS that would be another 25 slots filled.

Seems a double standard that the Wilson Combat Beretta model qualified for Production under an already USPSA approved Beretta 92 model long before there were 2000, but that the Legion P226 doesn't qualify under an already approved P226 model.

I think what you're experiencing is normal. When i moved to a CZ Accu Shadow i took a step back initially as i just wasn't accustomed to it. But in a short time i then took a big step forward with it. I'd say give it some time and expect a small step back until you get the feel.

Not sure about the FastFire 2, but the FastFire 3 has been great. Has never lost zero and works as great now as when it was brand new. But Burris has a lifetime no questions asked full warranty so I'm not too concerned.

Pretty big investment to bail after 120 rds. But if it doesn't feel right stick with the Glock. Are you looking for reasons to keep working with the CZ? Or just making a statement?

I've got a Springer Precision optic mount for a Burris FF2/FF3 on my CZ SP01 Shadow. But this was a dovetail fixed rear sight I replaced, obviously. Works great. I'd highly recommend it.

I just replaced the rear sight on my xdm 5.25. I left the front sight on as you can see in pic above. I didn't install sights to co-witness.

For the XDm 5.25 with rear adjustable sight, it's so easy your kids could do it. All you do is unscrew the rear sight set screws. Lift off rear adjustable sight. Place Springer Precision mount on rear sight space. Screw set screws through mount and into slide. And your done. It's that easy. Since it's not a dovetail sight for 5.25 model all it takes is unscrewing and screwing back in. No need to hammer out sight.

The FF3 has held up great. Zeroed it when i installed it and its held zero ever since.

I've got an XDM 5.25 set up with a Springer mount and a Burris FastFire 3. I also have a Sig P320 with a FastFire 2 set up. The XDM has a Canyon Creek trigger job so the trigger is superior to the P320. However, when the Bruce Gray / GGI drop in trigger kit gets released for the P320 I will have to re-evaluate. With the Springer mount it's incredibly easy to install on the XDM 5.25. It's a high quality mount that does exactly as advertised.

I have all three pistols you mentioned; X5 Allround, CZ Accu Shadow, and full size P320 (all in 9mm). My primary Production gun is the CZ Accu Shadow. You obviously have experience with DA/SA with the X5 Allround, as well as striker fired with P320. You also have experience with different weight; X5 vs P320. It's up to you which feels most comfortable, DA/SA vs striker, heavy vs light. If you like the heavier weight and DA/SA of the X5, I think you will really like the CZ Shadow. With the Shadow you are able to grip higher up on the bore axis than the X5, and the DA can be brought down to a very nice and smooth 5lb - 6lb. I really like the X5 but the trigger (which had a trigger job by Sig Custom Shop) just doesn't compare to the trigger on the Accu Shadow. So if you want an all metal DA/SA gun, you can't go wrong with the CZ.

Agreed. It assumes someone would want one or the other. Polls always need a "none," "neither," or "other" category. Or the poll is purely for those that would be interested in one division or the other. If you're not interested in either, then don't vote. I read in another thread that people that don't support new provisional divisions are "old guard that need to go away." Thanks for the education, but that's how polling works to increase the sample size participation rate and expand the data collection.It was just a suggestion from this "old guard" that is already shooting Carry Optics in matches. Don't you think it's hypocritical to want CO but not embrace another pistol division that a lot of other people want? What are you smoking? I never said I was against any new division. It doesn't matter to me. I was simply making a suggestion to the OP on a way to improve the polling participation, not making a statement on what to, or not to, offer.

Agreed. It assumes someone would want one or the other. Polls always need a "none," "neither," or "other" category. Or the poll is purely for those that would be interested in one division or the other. If you're not interested in either, then don't vote. I read in another thread that people that don't support new provisional divisions are "old guard that need to go away." Thanks for the education, but that's how polling works to increase the sample size participation rate and expand the data collection. It was just a suggestion from this "old guard" that is already shooting Carry Optics in matches.

Agreed. It assumes someone would want one or the other. Polls always need a "none," "neither," or "other" category. Or the poll is purely for those that would be interested in one division or the other. If you're not interested in either, then don't vote. I read in another thread that people that don't support new provisional divisions are "old guard that need to go away."

Agreed. It assumes someone would want one or the other. Polls always need a "none," "neither," or "other" category.

To me it seems with the changes it's now closer to, but not entirely, a Production Optics division. Which in my opinion (which no one asked for and holds no weight or significance) is how it should have been. Just make it Production Optics. This is a game. It's not real life tactical practice for CCW. And if someone wants to shoot it with just iron sights.....who gives a damn. People can shoot Open without an optic, but no one at a high level does because they know it's a disadvantage. For the elite level GM's that are used to shooting with a red dot, I'd be surprised if someone could beat them with iron sights over a 14-20 stage match. But if someone wants to try so be it. But rules are rules. Bottom line is that you can't please everyone. In it's current form it seems it's generating a lot of interest. While there may not yet be a lot of CO competitors at local matches, there are a lot of people gearing up for it. It's just in its infancy. I think it will grow to be a popular division.

Lot's of people with anger issues over a new division.