cpty1

There was a fairly lengthy post on here somewhere, but I have been unable to find it. The rule for US production division says the holster must be worn behind the center of the hip bone. To me, this means I can place the holster some little bit forward of the body centerline. I arrived at my first stage of the limited nats last year with my holster for the most part strong side aligned; meaning the muzzle was probably within a half inch or so forward of the centerline of my pants (with the clarification that the centerline of my pants was consistent with the centerline of my body). I was lucky enough to be the first shooter in my squad. When I went to the line, the RO promptly told me my holster was in the wrong position. Due to belt loop placement, I had to bag my loaded mags and make my way to a safe area to move my holster probably an inch to the rear, holding up the whole squad for a short period of time. Something to be said for velcro belts, right? The RO specifically said my "muzzle needed to be behind the centerline of my body". I thought I'd took a wrong turn and ended up at an IDPA match. Obviously, there was and will be some variety in interpretation by each RO. Don't get me wrong, moving the holster wasn't a big deal...then or now. I just think the rule verbage and application are not in alignment. I'll keep searching for the previous post as I'm sure it is stated much better as the issue was fresh on my mind at the time it was written. I now wear my holster in the behind centerline position as that is where I have to place it for IDPA matches, as I shoot both. That way I have consistency and there is actually no difference in my first shot times either a bit forward or a bit aft of centerline. When you start reaching for the fourth or fifth mag you start to look like a pretzel anyway if you start mag placement anywhere near the centerline of the body. BTW, I hoping since this nationals is a Lim-10/Production/Revolver match the round count will be high but there won't be many 48 round field courses. Those are tough on prod and Lim-10 shooters and even tougher on the wheelers. (Edited by cpty1 at 11:25 am on April 8, 2002)

After last year's production division experience at the limited nationals, I'm curious to see how they interpret and enforce that rule this year.

Also, at last years limited nats, I didn't like the order of finish approach to when shooters visited the prize tables. While this does eliminate the sandbagger factor, it didn't do much for the popularity of Lim-10 and production when those shooters realized they got to visit the prize table 30 or 40 shooters later just because they chose to shoot production or Lim-10. Excepting of course, the three dedicated prizes Glock donated to the first three production finishers. Obviously, this year will be different, but it will be interesting to see if they use the same order of finish approach, lumping production class in with Lim-10 as it relates to prizes.

I'll be there shooting Lim-10.

I'll be there shooting on Friday so as to catch the IDPA match on Saturday. Forget which squad number. I'll be there Sunday to observe.

Way to go John! The journey begins.......

USPSA HQ told me no last year...said it was an external modification.

This wheel rolls both ways. There are definitely shooters (regardless of class) who will not help another shooter; there are those who "help" whether asked to or not; as well as several variations in between. I'm no GM, but like everyone else regardless of class, I have had plenty of opportunities to provide help and assistance. But I will confess that I never offer help without being asked to do so by the shooter. This may be by standing agreement with people I regularly shoot with, or after the fact on a per stage or per match basis. Regardless of good intentions and a polite approach, there are some people who view advice that's not asked for as someone just "stroking their ego". I ain't gonna take that chance. If asked, I will provide as much help as possible, and will enjoy doing so. I enjoy being able, when possible, to provide assistance that will shorten a shooters learning curve; because I'm convinced at a certain point, beyond proper technique, everyone's on their own anyway. With the exception of those who are naturally gifted, there is no silver bullet or quick fix. It is only through dedication and hard work that a shooter advances to the upper echelons.

Was hoping to erase this one from memory, but my good friend Singlestack has announced my participation, so I guess I have to respond. Shot production, Glock 34 - Time: 13.84 Points: 69 plus -10 HF: 4.2630 Shot left side first near to far, moved to right side right to left, then went prone completely outside the box, shooting through the barrel. I felt the extra split second to get back behind and go prone outside the box would be justified by the more stable shooting position, not having to worry about crawling up into the barrel, or having the lumber from the shooting box under my arms or midsection. All went well except for one shot on the left side that I pulled over into the hard cover which I didn't call nor make up. Yet another trashed classifier. Oh well.....such is life.

Shot this one Thursday night indoors and is probably the first classifier I've shot in a while where I haven't dropped a shoot, missed a reload or done something stupid. Shot 99-29 with a Glock 34, production division. Time: 6.39 Points: 48 HF: 7.5117 Because I had been trashing classifiers lately, I just tried to back off and get my hits. No Ds, but would have liked to have seen a couple of Cs that missed the A zone by a half inch been As. Can't be shooting many Cs with a minor gun. Draw times were between 1.04 and 1.1. Shot right to left on first two positions, and left to right on the last one. I enjoyed shooting this classifier. First one in forever where I didn't have to reload on the clock.

Was curious who was going to the factory nationals? Shooting what division? Would be a great opportunity for BE forum members to get together for a face-to-face. I will be there shooting production. (Edited by cpty1 at 1:16 pm on Mar. 12, 2002) (Edited by cpty1 at 4:23 pm on Mar. 21, 2002)

Thanks for correcting me. I didn't know he sold direct. What's Brook's price? I think about $19.95 is the best price I've seen from distributors. I would much rather go straight to the source when possible, especially if the price is better.

Congrats on the 125 run. You're getting there. Was just curious what your times were at the different shooting distances? My experience with the IDPA classifier is somewhat limited, but from what I've seen, most everyone can shoot master pace scores everywhere except maybe the el prez position and most certainly the last position around the barricade, reload, movement to, and shooting around the barrel. That's where I see a big difference in time among shooters.

Mark, I don't think Brooks sells direct, so you'll have to go through a distributor. The best price I've found is at bestdefense.com. TDean, the slide release is still accessible as the A-Grip goes under it. I usually trim the A-Grip out from around the slide release lever area anyway.

It is legal for production. At least USPSA production.

A-Grip gets my vote as "the" best grip enhancement available. I have it on both my production division Glock 34 and my Lim-10 35. On a carry gun, it's almost nirvana. At the limited nationals last year, as some of you know, it rained cats and dogs. This was my first experience with A-grip in the rain and I was surprised at the purchase it provided even when soaking wet. The downside....in a high use environment, dry firing, etc., there definitely is a life span. Even with the recommended brushing, I go through one every four or five months. After a period of time, in certain areas, the A-Grip surface will get as slick as the glock finish itself. I just look at it like a recoil spring or anything else that has to be periodically replaced. If installed correctly, it always stays in place, yet peels off easily months (and probably years) later. I cover the mag release button, but do cut away the A-Grip from the mag release push through area on the back side so as not to hinder depression or travel of the release. I've tried skateboard tape, decal grip, hogue grips, no grips, and even bicycle tubes (you might be surprised how well some of those work). A-Grip is the best. And no, this is not a "sponsored" endorsement. I pay retail for my A-Grip just like everybody else. I just call'em like I see'em.

I've actually given this "Man of Knowledge" label some thought. Whatever number of posts are necessary to acquire the man of knowledge "title" potentially could all be questions, which would somewhat contradict the man of knowledge title. But from another perspective, even if all the posts were questions, if the poster had any retention capability at all, said poster could hopefully still retain and pass on enough of that acquired information to others to actually be a man of knowledge. I guess it's a wash. ;-}

The Front Sight magazine a couple of issues ago addressed the tungsten rod and stated they were legal to use in production. Might want to check back through your back issues. Wasn't too long ago. Within the last couple of copies or so.

The 17 and/or 34 is a great gun for either SSP or ESP IDPA divisions. DB is dead on IMO with renting both guns if possible as some people do much prefer one over the other. The 17 and 34 are basically the same gun with the exception that the 34 comes with a 3.5# connector, extended mag and slide release, and obviously has a longer barrel and sight radius. I personally like the 34 best for those very reasons. However, there are some who prefer the 17 because they feel that since target range at most matches is short the 17 is quicker target to target and they don't need the extra sight radius which makes longer shots a bit easier for some. There are also those in IDPA who prefer to shoot what they carry, so obviously the 17 conceals and carries more easily than the 34 for a smaller framed individual. Depends on your purpose and motive for shooting IDPA as well as personal preference.

I want to thank everyone for the kind words. This forum (which ultimately translates to the people contributing) is an awesome knowledge pool and sounding board. And yes, I like to throw in a few equipment handicaps to go with my varying physical and mental ones. A guy's got to have some balance you know. Who knows, I might even break down and buy a real holster now. Maybe I could find a good used Ghost cheap.....Singlestack?

Well....I made master Lim-10. Had a 86.595% for classifier 99-46 that did it.

I was passed this recently, enjoyed it and wanted to pass it along: If Golf Were Like Shooting By Charlie McMillion I am a competitive shooter. My friend Bill is an accomplished golfer. We have had numerous discussions about the similarities of our respective sports. Recently, the subject turned to the hassles involved in participating in our pastimes. Bill's major complaint was the hassle involved in flying with golf clubs and the risk of them being stolen. After I finished telling him about the incredible "hassle-factor" in the shooting sports he promised to never complain again. That discussion prompted me to ponder how the golfers of America would feel if golf were like shooting. I think they would be outraged, to the point of storming the Capitol, because: Golfers would constantly be attacked and vilified by the politically active, anti-golf crowd. These groups would stop at nothing, including radically distorting facts, to meet their ultimate goal: the prohibition of ownership of golf equipment by civilians in the U.S. In some states, golfers would be limited to the purchase of one golf club a month. Who needs more than one club, anyway? Anyone possessing more than one club would be labeled a "golf-nut" who owned an "arsenal" of clubs. The anti-golf crowd would scream for a ban on Big Bertha drivers, because they can hit a ball too far. At the same time, they would scream for a ban on lob wedges, because they are short and easily concealable. New clubs would only be legally available through licensed dealers, with strict, federal oversight provided by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Golf Clubs. Airlines would allow golfers to travel with their clubs, provided they were declared upon arrival and checked. Attempting to carry clubs on board an aircraft would be a federal crime. Golf balls would have to be secured in a separate, locked container, and no more than five pounds of golf balls could be checked. Golf club manufacturers that wanted to sell their clubs in Maryland would have to hit three balls with each club, said balls to be provided to the Maryland State Police for high-tech "fingerprinting" and cataloging. Manufacturers that wanted to sell in California would have to "drop test" their clubs. This would involve dropping every type of club to be sold, in every possible configuration of grip, shaft and head, onto concrete and ruining it. Cutting the shaft of any golf club to a length of less than 18" would be a federal crime, as would the possession of such a "sawed-off club". All clubs would have to be engraved by the manufacturer with a unique serial number. Driving ranges would be subject to closure whenever homes are built within a mile. Whenever there was a terrorist attack on the U.S., Kmart would halt sales of clubs and balls in an attempt to "insure the safety of the public". Golfers could then begin a boycott of Kmart, contributing to its demise and forcing it to file for bankruptcy protection. In Massachusetts, golfers would have to have a license to buy balls. In all states except Vermont, a citizen would have to have a permit to carry any golf club that was hidden from view but readily accessible. Some states would allow golfers to carry clubs in the open, but they would be subject to arrest for disturbing the peace. All non-permit holders would have to be very careful when transporting clubs and balls. They would have to be in separate, locked containers and positioned in the vehicle so as to not be readily accessible. Anti-golf politicians, unable to realize their agenda through legislation, would resort to suing golf club manufacturers for creating a public nuisance. Hitting balls on your own property could be a crime. In New York, allowing a caddy that is under the age of 18 to carry your clubs would be a crime, as would teaching anyone under 18 to handle a club. A convicted felon, or anyone convicted of a violent misdemeanor, would be prohibited from possessing golf clubs for life. A golfer would have to be 18 to buy a long club, but 21 to buy a short one. Likewise, a golfer could buy balls when they were 18, but would have to wait until they were 21 if they intended to hit them with a short club. It would be illegal to buy a club for someone who could not legally purchase one. If a golfer were forced to live in public housing, they might have to agree not to own clubs or balls. They could also be subject to club searches. If a golfer that wanted to own a machineclub (a club capable of hitting more than one ball with a single swing) would have to go through an enormous amount of paperwork, be fingerprinted, have a background check by the FBI, and pay a $200 federal transfer tax. A golfer could ship a club to a clubsmith for repair, but short clubs would have to be sent by air. The anti-golf groups would be calling for the development of "smart clubs". These futuristic, high-tech clubs would allow themselves to be swung only by their owners, as long as the batteries weren't dead. Hypocritical, liberal talk show hostesses would call for a ban on civilian possession of golf clubs, while employing bodyguards who regularly engage in the game. There would be a waiting period of up to 15 days in some states to take possession of legally-purchased clubs. Children would be dragged from school in handcuffs for possessing tiny facsimiles of clubs and would be subject to suspension for drawing pictures of clubs or swinging objects as one would swing a club. Ownership or possession of clubs would be prohibited in Washington, DC. There would be no legally-owned clubs in Japan, but all adult males in Switzerland would be required to keep machineclubs. Anti-club groups would focus attention on the criminal misuse of clubs, but would totally ignore the millions of times each year clubs are used legitimately. Journalist Carl Rowan would decry the private ownership of clubs. Then he would use his own privately-owned club to hit balls at teenagers on his property. Churches and civic groups would sponsor club buy-back and amnesty turn-ins. Clubs collected through these efforts would be melted down. There would be bans on production and ownership of "assault clubs". These clubs would be functionally no different than other clubs, they would just look like they could hit more balls. The first act of fascist dictators would be to take the clubs away from the populace. The anti-club crowd would try the backdoor strategy of having the EPA close down driving ranges because the core of a golf ball is toxic when consumed. Hollywood liberals would condemn the private ownership of clubs, all the while making fortunes producing movies that glorify wanton golf club violence. These movies would contain egregious technical errors concerning clubs, such as showing a ball in flight while still in its box. A British-owned club manufacturer would sign onto a traitorous deal with the US government in exchange for special consideration in federal club purchase contracts. Pickup trucks would have golf club racks in the rear windows. Anti-club groups would cook data and declare that home-owners are 43 times more likely to hit a friend or a family member with their club than to use it properly. People would be relatively free to own and use clubs, and could even send them through the US mail, until the government passed the massive Golf Club Control Act. Some employers would prohibit clubs in vehicles on their property. If golfers worked for such a company and wanted to go to the local range to hit balls during lunch, they would have to drive home, get their clubs, go to the range, and drive back home to drop the clubs off again before returning to work. The United Nations would sponsor massive club collections and would run the clubs over with tanks. They would condemn the US for not participating in global small-clubs control. Nitwitted anti-club politicians would carelessly swing clubs over the heads of reporters during press conferences while espousing the dangers of club ownership. When questioned about their handling of the clubs, they would respond "I knew the club was empty. The State Police would never hand me a loaded club". Senator McCain would introduce legislation to close a non-existent club show loophole. School golf teams and tournaments would be a thing of the past. Old-timers would fondly remember the days when students would actually take their clubs to school for practice, but the thought of using them to hurt someone was the farthest things from their minds. Yet, golfers would be told they should feel lucky, because in many countries there is a complete ban on golf club ownership.

Why does it matter? Probably doesn't to some, but have you ever tried explaining the B vs. C zone scoring logic, or lack thereof, to a new shooter? This being usually the same new shooter who is already confused as can be by the complexity of calculating a hit factor, and then converting the hit factor into stage points. Sorry to thread drift, but the question was asked. I'm done.

Tighten them up so there's no doubt they'll stay in place. You'll never notice the tension in a match. Don't learn this lesson the hard way as I have. When you make a 90 degree right turn at full speed, and your mags continue to go straight, you'll definitely know you didn't have enough tension on them.

I agree Erik. I've never understood why the B and C zone scored the same from a point perspective.