Racinready300ex

Production is already CO without the O. If you can pull you optic off you can put your stock base pad back on. Really most people would have two guns anyway. Certainly someone who's going to nationals.

I think this part might be a mistake. Just because a division exists doesn't mean it should get a nationals. We know every nationals looses money. We also know the org is running a deficit and is considering raising dues even though we have record numbers of members paying dues. I don't think we should have a nationals for two divisions that make up 5% of the sport. You should just stick those divisions with something popular. Like CO nationals is it's own thing, why not let 10 revolver shooters in so it can be their nationals too?

I'm pretty sure that number is % of activity. It's vary likely that it's a even lower % of the membership. And L10 is really inflated because in banned states people shoot L10, when the could just shoot limited loaded to 10 just like every other division does. It's not crazy for a area match to have 0-3 shooters in L10 out of 450. That's like .5% of the turnout.

I don't know but, people talk about saving them all the time. To me, we shouldn't save divisions and we should have the means to eliminate divisions that aren't shot. But, there are probably 2-300 revolver shooters who would disagree.

Blue Bullets is doing 10% off Friday to Monday.

I wonder with CO so far ahead is it a success or a failure? Meaning, half the divisions are dying. Pcc is struggling too really. We're constantly reading threads about "saving" divisions. Lets say we add SAO to CO and it's a huge success. Then we see limited and open drop down below 10% and CO ends up at 50%. We then have 7 out of 8 divisions on life support. Are be improving things? Now every division needs to be "saved". Should we save divisions at all? Or we add a new LO division. I think you end up in the same place just take a few years. Is this the right direction? Most of the sport will still be on life support. What should the division numbers up look like? What's the goal of them? To me having everyone in just a couple divisions would be okay, but then why have several divisions that no one shoots? What happens if the Supreme Court rules against capacity restrictions? I be low caps already dismal numbers take a serious hit minus revolver because those guys are crazy. I don't know the answer, I'm looking forward to SAO-CO and it'll be interesting to see what uspsa looks like in 5 years. Edit, what I'm getting at here is to save divisions we need to pull people from CO not add them. So CO's massive success in a way is hurting everything else making uspsa a failure. At least assuming your goal is have all the divisions be popular. If your goal is deep competition, CO is the only thing in uspsa that's working.

I've put up some of my best times on drills running my SS gun. It's also the only gun I've clocked myself doing sub second reloads with. But, I have a lot of time on 1911's. But clearly that has nothing to do with it, because it can't be the shooter or else we couldn't point to shooters match results to prove gear questions. I also found major to be a advantage for me. I don't actually think major and minor are the same. I just found the statement funny because it's the exact justification used for SAO.

You're probably right, and that gun would make the prodigy look expensive. Everyone would have one lol.

It'd be interesting to see this done with a current CO gun vs a Atlas Nyx for example. I don't think anyones done this yet we just point to Nils and say "see" It's just amusing how it only works for what you want it to work for.

Interesting that a striker fired gun winning limited proves SAO isn't a advantage but even with the same striker fired gun shooting minor, major would still definitely be a competitive advantage. Really Nils has proven that SAO=Striker and major=minor. So we should be able to mix major and minor in out new limited optic division fairly. Minor guns will have a 2 round capacity advantage and less recoil to offset the scoring. roflmao

Says unavailable

I wonder though, does it really matter if the dot leaves the window? You can't really shoot again until the gun comes back down and and that should only take what? .06 seconds for the gun to cycle. I know it's a thing everyone seems to be concerned with I just wonder if it really matters. I also wonder how many people think their dot doesn't leave the window when really it does. Like will your average C class guy really notice the dot left the window for .01 seconds mid recoil?

I think most PCC shooters don't want difficult PCC shots. Really they should know going in you're getting pistol shots. The challenge in PCC is the movement really. One target that can challenge PCC shooters is the 3 yard upper A only with a NS under it. Make sure they got that height over bore dialed.

It'd tell us way more than 5 guys debating again on Enos. Though I'm fine with starting a new thread about this every few months.

I just got one of the RFX25's for $150. I ended up putting it on a 22. I was thinking about running it on a CO gun to see what happened, but it doesn't seem like it'll be bright enough to me. Haven't tried it on a bright sunny day yet.

Keep it alive... it's currently number 2. One could probably make the case we should fix numbers 6,7 and 8 before we fix 1, 2 and 3. It's a thought.

Here me out....what if we allowed minor in limited they get 140's but they can't turn the dot on they have to use their back up irons. It's a win win really.

And clubs need to be careful once they build that volunteer base. A new MD can quickly destroy what took years to build. I've seen it at my local club, I stopped building stages a few years ago. I'm not going to put a bunch of thought into a stage, then show up early and build it by myself for it to be torn apart because someone doesn't like it. I've talked to others that had the same thing happen at that club. Now that club struggles to get help, the stages the build are super vanilla and in many cases I'll drive a extra hour to shoot another club if I can. 3 or 4 years ago I'd of told you it was the best club in the region.

I'd rather we nuke major all together then pussify it. Nuke major and bump minor to 135. Lets shoot real ammo for a change and not powder puff competition only loads. At this rate 10-15 years from now 9mm minor will be scored major and 30 super carry will be the new minor.

You're not wrong, it's fizzling. I like limited but I don't want to shoot major anymore. But at the same time lots of guys still do so why destroy their division? What are we trying to fix? Really that is the question we need to answer first isn't it? Should all the divisions be equally popular? Based on activity Limited is still the number 2 division in the sport and we're talking about fixing it by taking out major. So if limited at number 2 is fizzling why are we talking about changing CO in a way that might pull more limited shooters? Adding SAO to CO will likely also hurt Open the number 3 division. How will we fix open? Make it minor only too maybe? We need to come up with some direction here.

So minor 126's with a dot added into limited as is. Irons keep major and 140's. Capacity will be almost equal, giving major 1 or two rounds extra.

Is that really helping the division? That to me would be a fundamental change to the core or what limited is. You're not helping limited you're creating a new division at that point. It's just a new division that looks similar on the outside to the old division. I do think a iron sight, hi-cap minor division would be massively popular. Probably wouldn't matter if it was limited based or production based really. I think that's more of the reason for CO to be popular than the optic is. It's cheap guns, cheap ammo, low recoil and high capacity. What if we did 126mm mags for Major and 140's for minor. I might like that. 140's and 170's might be simpler, since we don't need a new gauge. But it just doesn't sit as well. Or what if everyone had 140's but minor gets a dot and major is stuck with irons. Limited and CO have really close HHF's depending on the stages and the shooters. This could be a interesting concept IMO. And this way were not messing with the most popular division, instead were messing with one that is loosing competitors quickly, and we don't have to create another division.

I have read that also but like you no actual evidence to back it up. It must of cover the ejection port, probably interesting thing. That's probably the OG-CO gun.

That's true, I saw open shooters with slide mounted optics a long time ago. But that's not the direction we want to go lol Something I've never seen is a c-more slide ride mounted on a slide. But it must of been a thing right? Off topic I know.

For me, I've pretty well moved into your camp of lets just do it. I do think the gear race has some merit. More so for the new guy coming into the sport. We have a ton of turn over, we need a constant flow of new shooters because in 2-3 years they'll be gone. I worry we'll loose some of those shooters because our gear scares them away. We already have this reputation to some degree. I've yet to see data that proves it would be a level playing field. Everything is anecdotal at best. Data to me would be put two guns in peoples hands running repeatable classifiers. Use people of all different skill levels, if the guns are equal the results should be easily repeatable. We should see vary similar and consistent HF's from each shooter. I do think the results would be close, but I've not actually seen anything like this. All I've seen is people point to a couple pro shooters results as proof that the gun the same and the shooter isn't better. If we were talking about changing L10 that's 1% of the sport the conversation might be different. But at 40% this is a massive change that if we're wrong might be a big deal.