Racinready300ex
-
Posts
4,102 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Forums
Profiles
Events
Store
Posts posted by Racinready300ex
-
-
30 minutes ago, yigal said:
TGO ???
if u mean TSO their trigger system different from 1911 .
Power transfer ratio for the trigger pull in TSO around 1 to 4 and in 1911 1 to 1
TGO = The Great One = Rob Leatham.
-
56 minutes ago, Nile said:
Tactical Reload: The purpose is to prevent shooting dry. Let's say youre in a shoot house and you encounter three targets and put three rounds in each one. If you have a 12+1 round mag that would leave you with 4 rounds. You would grab a fresh mag off the belt, and with the same hand, eject the current mag and replace with a fresh mag - seat the new mag and stow the old, then continue through the house.
There is almost zero need for a tac load in todays IDPA. I can't remember the last time I did one.
-
13 minutes ago, shred said:
Brian's talked about getting a full season or more out of one of his 16-oz trigger job on his 2011s in the way back (which is probably more than 50K rounds), but I agree about somewhat heavier being better for me anyway.
I remember seeing mention somewhere of a infinity open shooter running around a 1 lbs or under and replacing the trigger parts after some number of rounds that seemed like to much trouble to me. 50k doesn't seem to bad, that's a few years for me.
I spoke to a guy recently at a club match that was running a 10 oz trigger. I handled it at the safe table, pretty sick for sure. Impressive he could do that. I didn't even think to ask him how long it would stay in spec like that. If I see him again I'll ask just because I'm curious.
-
51 minutes ago, yigal said:
When a leaf spring is calibrated to a small force, there will be less pressure on the sear and it will not be able to respond as quickly as a spring, which operates at full force. Therefore, it is expected that the gun will fire bursts or hammer falls.
These springs have almost no wear . Just fatigue of the material over time. Just fold it back a little and everything returns as it was.
It sub 2 lbs triggers are lasting 80k rounds without adjusting the spring, I'm not to worried about it either way. Generally I don't go under 2 anyway.
I've handled sub 1 lbs triggers, but I really don't see the point in that.
-
8 hours ago, yigal said:
I tried to shoot in 2011 with a trigger pull of a little more than 1 pound and it didn't suit me because I didn't feel the trigger. That's why I found that for me the best trigger for 2011 is between 1.5 and 1.25. On the other hand, in CZ I work with the trigger of 480 grams and it is comfortable for me.
That didn't really answer his question though. Why would a spring under less tension not last as long as one with more?
I find it hard to imagine the sear spring really wearing out when it's barely doing anything on a light trigger.
-
4 minutes ago, Fishbreath said:
At the Handgun Nationals dinner, Dave said that he shoots L10 because he can do it with a single-stack Ruger with a 10-round magazine, and that he doesn't want to shoot Limited if his only option is a custom gun with 'Ruger' stenciled on the side.
He could still shoot SS, but like I said I get him and James not going head to head in the same division.
I still think they should make a 2011. And not a fake Ruger 2011, like Ruger should just make one. I asked Dave if they were going to recently but his non-answer was hard to read. It was either a "They are but I can't say they are" or "I told them that but they wont". He didn't really use any words, it was more of grunts, noises and hand gestures. Hard to explain, but did not give me a answer.
I'd consider a Ruger 2011. Pretty much zero interest in anything else they make.
-
33 minutes ago, LHshooter said:
At our local NC Tier 3 match last year we had a stage set up with a surprise target behind a barrel as you left cover. A bunch of people did just what you said, they stepped out of cover, dumped rounds, reloaded and then blasted the surprise target when they got on top of it. Others didn't understand the rule, got a PE and bi*&%ed and moaned about the rule.
It's really confusing, and if you don't know what you're looking for I can see someone watching it done correctly and then not doing it correctly themselves and not even realizing it. Sometimes it's as little as pick one foot up step over fault line and fire one more shot. Vary subtle difference to catch in a split second.
See if I can explain this right. I shot a stage that at at a level 2 last year. From p1 there were 3 targets two close 1 far. Depending where you stand you might not be able to see one of the close targets due to a vision barrier. But, since vision barriers aren't cover you should be required to shoot both close then the far target. But you we're allowed to shoot close, far close because the target that you couldn't see you weren't exposed too. You could see this target at P2 also. So it was asked can I just not engage it and wait until I get to p2? No because it's behind a vision barrier and you're exposed to it so it must be engaged before leaving P1.
Gets worse, at position 2 there was three targets you had to shoot in order. The second target was behind a vision barrier and needed to be activated to see it. You couldn't shoot the 1st and third then activate. You had to shoot the activated target second because it's behind a vision barrier.
I'm probably screwing this up to some extent, it was super confusing but to sum it up they were handling vision barriers differently from position to position within a single stage. The SO didn't seem super sharp, I blame it on that. I just shot it the way he told me too.
-
On 1/27/2024 at 6:17 PM, NMBOpen said:
Wow. +0.8g. That's +25% at minimum to +21% maximum published for N320 in latest VV app for 9x19mm.
You also dropped the bullet weight by 21%, And you increased the case volume considerably too.
-
3 minutes ago, shred said:
I can assure you the big manufacturers do not care what USPSA does or doesn't do enough to try and influence things.
Especially the 5's of people shooting revolver division.
-
32 minutes ago, Diver123 said:
Is the wall solid and not see through? Or even if you cant see through it shoot it a few times and people stop playing games fast. Walls shouldn't be used as vision barriers. Vision barriers can get shot. Barrels are a better option.
6.5.27.1 Vision barriers are soft cover objects such as barrels, tents, fake trees, sheer curtains, etc., that are used to block or occlude the view of a target or group of targets. 6.5.27.2 Vision barriers are soft cover and may not be impenetrable or designated as hard cover.
4.7.1 Stage props are commonly used to represent hard cover or impenetrable objects such as walls, cars, barricades, and furniture such as desks and file cabinets. Truly impenetrable objects may also be used as hard cover in a stage
I see walls and barrels used as VB. Most walls you can see through for safety reasons. If you ask about shooting through a VB you'll be told no and possible DQ'd for intentionally shooting their walls. It's easier to just round dump in the open and move on.
I've seen this from the club level to level 3 matches. Not anything higher then 3 in this area.
-
33 minutes ago, testosterone said:
Right, they are in those divisions because there are enough reg's to be recognized. One of them would show up with a revolver if enough other people did, guaranteed...
Maybe, L10 is rarely recognized though. I get not wanting to shoot against each other in SS I guess.
Ruger needs to just get on the band wagon and build a 2011 already. Then see if they'll jump into some real divisions.
-
22 minutes ago, testosterone said:
Its not impossible. Smith did not have this gun at SHOT last week though...
In the meeting a8 russ said he had been talking to revolver shooters in his area and they were in favor. The last rev shooters i am aware of in a8 are dave and james and i have my doubts that they are in favor of this. I haven't talked to dave in a minute and owe him a call anyways...
Ruger didnt have any of the 8 shots either unless i missed them on the row, it is on good authority production is being setup to produce them again though.
I rarely see Dave or James shooting revolver. Mostly you'll see Dave in L10 and James in SS. When shooting IDPA they're in CDP and ESP.
There are other revolver shooters I stumble across, probably 3-5 of them ranging from A class to C class. I shot revolver like 7-8 years ago now.
-
14 minutes ago, Jim Watson said:
With consideration for cover and concealment - MD here likes to play "vision barrier" games - you may reload any way that does not leave ammo behind. They would rather you went to slide lock but a Tac load or a loaded chamber/empty magazine reload is acceptable. The type of reload is no longer specified in the CoF.
Locally they play vision barrier games too.
You can reload in the open, but if there is a target around the corner behind a wall but the wall doesn't have a fault line you can't leave cover with a empty gun or do anything but a slide lock reload in the open. So you just step out of cover round dump to empty as you advance in the open and reload from slide lock.
Personally I hate round dumping, and it really annoys me when stages are built so you have no choice but to dump lots of rounds. This is where uspsa is so much better, they give you all the ammo in the world but every extra shot you take punishes you. Meanwhile IDPA we make it rain with extra shots everywhere.
-
20 minutes ago, testosterone said:
Board is changing already. 2 years ago this proposition simply would have passed on suggestion.
Distinguished GM would also have passed already.
Ben Berry causing discussion to pump breaks and stop changing things without member discussion is good(even tho he is the prod 15 proponent which is dumb).
Not to derail this thread...
100%
-
15 hours ago, Joe4d said:
I understand scoring .. but I stand corrected , the 10th second per point works out for major,, which is what I shot when I shot USPSA.. AC only nets 80% not 90.. in minor
nah you still don't fully get it, even with major a Charlie is only a a 10th of a second on a 10 hit factor stage. On a 5 hit factor stage it's two tenths. It's not as simple as just saying x=y. Revolvers don't typically put up 10 HF's on stages major or minor.
15 hours ago, Joe4d said:far as recruiting ? I suspect the ICORE shooters that want to shoot USPSA probably already do. I bet most of those are probably dot shooters in ICore..
I think this is pretty likely the case, which means this change probably wont help revolver but could still potentially hurt it.
Our Area match currently has 5 shooters, so it's not even a recognized division anyway. So maybe it's worth it. I guess it depends what those 5 dudes want.
Side note, it's crazy the Area match currently only has 265 registered shooters when for the last several years it filled to capacity as soon as registration opened. That is more concerning then what happens to 5 revolver shooters.
-
7 minutes ago, RJH said:
Bolt on frame weights were only allowed a few years ago. Lights on limited guns are actually very recent.
In fact, there was a big to do when Bob Vogel showed up with a light filled with lead on his limited gun. This was a few years back, but frame weights were legal but lights were not. The question became is it a light since it's filled with lead. The ruling was it was a frame weight, and not a light even though it was originally a light
I would also say by those rules and if they were interpreted anything like production rules used to be, brass grips and magwells would be illegal. But I seem to remember brass magwell's way back before frame weights were legal
When I started the standard limited gun was an STI edge with a plastic grip and a Dawson ice aluminum mag well. And yeah I think those weighed somewhere in the neighborhood of 43 to 45 Oz. Most custom guns at that time were just fancier versions of the same thing
I can remember the vogel frame weight thing. I even did that a couple times after that, only once did a RO check to see if the light worked. Pretty funny how things change.
Considering how far we've come and how much things have changed it's funny to be arguing over change.
-
It's pretty interesting that limited back then was really more restrictive the current production rules. Note it says no add on weights to reduce recoil.
Back then would a lok brass light of been legal? Or Brass grips, brass magwells, tungsten batteries?
Guns were probably loaded to 180 FP and weighted under 43 oz. Look how far we've come.
-
30 minutes ago, Joe4d said:
If it was my call, Id allow them..
1. I agree , its a small division, and dont agree with splitting it.
2. I dont think its a big advantage,, so meh.. why not.
3. Of the non USPSA shooters, the most likely place to draw revolver shooters will be from ICORE open rules shooters... Of the people shooting ICORE most likely to come to USPSA, its probably the Open guys.. Or guys that move to open then decide to try USPSA...
Those of us shooting classic,, probably arnt interested,, or are less likely to be interested.
4. I would bet if you polled only the existing USPSA revolver shooters, allow optics would be the largest choice.
5. Putting an Optic on vast majority of competing revolvers out there is even easier than on most auto loaders, Almost everyone is using an adjustable sight Smith and wesson.. Screw on mounts been around for years.. Sooo no shipping, milling, or special new Optic ready guns required.Do icore shooters want to shoot uspsa in general? Or are we chasing unicorns? There appear to be a couple icore clubs 2-4 hours north of me nothing south for many, many miles. So the clubs I shoot at would likely pull zero shooters from icore. Any change in revolver will likely have no effect here. Even those clubs only have 4 open shooters, some of which already shoot uspsa up there.
Have you shot any uspsa matches? Looks like you're a icore Open shooter, will you shoot uspsa if optic are allowed? Is that the thing keeping you away?
I get you don't think it's a advantage, but your earlier posts make it seem like you don't understand the scoring system. A Charlie never being tenth of a second in revolver. So getting you to change your mind is understandably impossible.
-
Personally I kind of like the way the scoring works with minor vs major. I think the higher accuracy requirement is a good thing, especially these days with shooters getting to be so fast and accurate at the same time.
-
5 minutes ago, IVC said:
We don't shoot SAA revolvers, we don't reload one at a time, we don't reload loose rounds, we have extended releases, chamfered charge holes, actions tuned for very deeply seated softest primers out there, guns that won't fire factory ammo at all. We have race holsters and specialized moonclip holders. These all go against the "essence of traditional revolver."
You've gotta draw a line somewhere. Otherwise someone might make the case why does revolver even exist? It's a line drawn somewhere to allow obsolete equipment because people want to shoot them.
5 minutes ago, IVC said:Reading this thread only made me question my position about whether the current Revo should change to R/O, or there should be an extra R/O division. Some very good points in this thread are about the competitive advantage of the optics and how having only R/O would make basic Revo obsolete. I'm on the fence now, because killing irons in favor of the dot is not a good idea, but it's also not a good idea to kill the dot in favor of the irons based on "tradition" argument.
I'm not sure it's a great idea to split the smallest division into two smaller divisions.
Not a easy call to make. Two way to look at it, leave it alone to not risk killing something already struggling. Or go for it in hopes it'll some how breath life into the division. I don't think optics make revolver suddenly popular so I'd lean toward leave it alone instead of risking making it worse.
-
Just now, RJH said:
Chances are solid I agree with you almost 100%.
Well, other than the major minor stuff. I think you set a minor limit and call it good. Pscl I believe got the divisions right: open, limited optics, and limited. That may not be there exact names, but that's what they are in USPSA speak LOL. They're all scored minor though. I do believe they got not having a base for minor wrong though. You can be sub 125 and be fine in that organization
I think they're on the right track too, but agree that they should set a floor of 125 or so for PF. A local club did similar and I know guys are shooting 2011's at the lowest PF they can get them to run on a 7-8 lbs spring.
Personally I think dropping below factory ammo specs is lame. I get needing to be a little under as not all factory ammo is created equal. But no bottom is weak.
-
28 minutes ago, ltdmstr said:
Just seems there are plenty of divisions to shoot minor pf already,
So like Limited, L10 and Open are major
CO, LO and Pro are minor
SS both are a viable options
I'd say there are plenty of divisions for both.
-
1 hour ago, konkapot said:
LO should provide an option for shooting major. Choices. Action:reaction. Pro/con.
If minor in LO is "the way" then surely the match results will support that.
Similar to the debate in the other thread about optics in revolver. To allow the "choice" of major in LO isn't really a choice. If you want to be competitive you will shoot major. No one really shoots minor in Limited or Open even though the choice exists.
The question is do we want another small niche division, or should we follow the market and build a division for the guns people are currently buying. IMO, building a new division based on 40 cal Limited guns with optics would be a terrible move. Has zero to do with my ability to shoot 40, or my feeling on how major scoring effect the game. I base my stance solely on if we're creating a new division we should want it to be successful or not do it at all.
-
7 minutes ago, Schutzenmeister said:
Might even work ... Oh wait. When the membership does have the chance to vote, THEY DON'T! Democracy at its finest ...
A bigger problem is when you do and the BOD just ignores you. Sort of like how the SC's in Area 3 got together and found someone to recommend to replace the A3D that was removed. The BOD said no, we'll do our own thing. That's lame.
But, yeah if people don't care enough to keep up with what's going on and talk to their AD's they shouldn't be surprised when things don't go the way they like.
Thoughts after first matches with Prod 15?
in USPSA/IPSC Shooting
Posted
Did anyone expect day one for Production to explode? That seems silly. If production participation just manages to hold over the next couple years, that's probably a win. If numbers drop then it either did nothing or made it worse. Most people that left spent a bunch of money on new gear, they're not likely to just drop that stuff and go back.
There are no uspsa matches near me until March and that depends on the weather. First match of the year I'd expect 80% of the shooters wont even know Production is a 15 round division.
I've was thinking about it, but I leaning towards just selling my two production guns to buy another 2011.