kneelingatlas

I think it would be a helpful to pin a thread regarding official rulings in X Division, what do you think? That way we could all share the info we gather in one place and avoid hammering Amidon with "can I do X to my Production gun?" emails all day every day.

OK, thank you for adding that. I think it's important that we identify the difference between official rulings from USPSA and speculation by X, Y, or Z expert.

Here's a cool video on direct metal laser sintering: I think the coolest thing about 3D Printing is how it's inspiring people to think outside the box. We live in exciting times Here's a video on 3D printed houses:

Do the Canadian Edition mags have long tubes with a dimple or short tubes with a big plastic base like the US ten rounders?

Told by whom?

Yeah large frame. i may be missing parts. You don't happen to have a pic do you? I have them setup for small frame mags at the moment.

I've shot with the dot off before, but I wouldn't call the point shooting; if the pistol is in my field of vision I'm definetly aiming it, either consciously or subconsciously.

Large frame? What's the problem? I use three: thin plastic, thin rubber and one of the think ones.

Even if you don't conscientiously notice you sights doesn't mean you didn't use them.

I took it to mean what BE describes in his book as a type I focus, which (IIRC) is basically no visual input...you rely on nothing but your muscle memory and familiarity with your hardware. I like sights.

PS: please don't use big words like "statistical inference", they intimidate me

My mind is completely blown by this. Could you give an example of different processes which could be used to determine the HHF and how it would be determined which to use? Statistical inference can be pretty mind-blowing, but it is a powerful science. Here are a few ways: 1. Take the HHF from a national match, or take the average HHF from a few different levelII+ matches. 2. Take the mean of the 99th percentile of all recorded HF's for that classifier. (or any other statistical method to try to reduce the influence of outliers) 3. Graph all the HF's and see where they show up. Consider ignoring outliers (the 'hero' part of hero or zero) I suspect it doesn't really matter that much which you choose, unless you find that one of them doesn't appear to match up with competitor classifications. For most classifiers, the three methods are probably going to be within a percentage or two. If the goal is that people generally shoot approximately their classification unless they make a big mistake, then all that really matters is that the HHF is set accordingly. How you get to that point is interesting, but imho not very important. It's always going to be approximate, no matter what method you use. People have different strengths and weaknesses, so some people will do better and some worse on particular classifiers, plus people just get lucky sometimes. You give three (actually five) possible methodologies a few of which I could agree with, but how could you justify using one on some classifiers and another on others? Above you said there is no reason that it has to be the same process for every classifier, but how could that be?

So are you defining point shooting as shooting without the pistol in your field of view?

That's exactly what I want to know. My mind is completely blown by this. Could you give an example of different processes which could be used to determine the HHF and how it would be determined which to use?

Far too rational Zack!

Did any other shooters complain about the match ammo? It seems to me like the problem is the new crown on your barrel, but obviously more testing is needed.

It seems like it would be easy to establish an objective protocol: new classifiers are released each year at nationals and the HHF is in each division is determined by the winner of the stage. If that's the case, I'd love to hear someone confirm it; if not, how is it determined? If the stage design is altered after Nationals, obviously that HHF is no longer valid.

I've always filed the safety instead of the sear, is there any advantage to doing it the other way?

Either way you fit it (file the frame or the release) I don't think you gain a compeditive advantage over the Shadow. I would say this language permits it: "A magazine release which provides larger surface area (paddles, buttons) may only be used if it is an OEM part available on an approved model of gun." The rule says nothing about it being a "drop in" part.

That's well put I see the dot on the target.

HMMMM that's a good question.

I like it You've inspired me to set some goals for myself this winter.

Here's the advice I give to new shooters wanting to get into reloading: make friends. If you go to a USPSA match, chances are good at least half the people there are reloaders; talk them, make friends, and maybe offer to trade them components for a reloading lesson. I'll bet there would be at least one shooter willing to let you reload with them on a regular basis; they provide the machine and you bring lunch, or components, or something like that.