[1x optics for FB3G]

I agree that a 1X optic doesn't offer that much of an advantage over irons in a typical 3-gun match. I shoot my Eotechs better than irons, because I've put a boatload more rounds downrange with them than I have with irons. I would expect that folks that have more time in with irons would shoot them better than a dot. I believe that the standings in tac-irons and HM won't change much, except maybe the results lists will be longer, and I get to get beat by more people!

DanO

[Ft Benning 3-Gun Challenge 2010]

I would prefer paper slug targets at 10 yards... with the bridge used a backstop!

DanO

[Looney idea of the week]

So semi shotguns are only allowed in modified, but allowed in heavy metal?

In my theoretical system, Heavy Metal isn't a separate division (there's only 3 divisions), but more of an option you can choose no matter what division you want to shoot. If you choose to shoot a "heavy metal" pistol, rifle, or both, you can shoot a pump shotgun and shoot Limited, or an autoloader and shoot Modified, or even a saiga or speedloader gun and shoot open. (personally I'd love to see an open rifle in .308, or an open singlestack .45 with a dot and comp... old school IPSC FTW!) In exchange for moving up in power and down in capacity, you are allowed the one-shot option on paper targets. Bottom line is, the HM shooters get to compete in larger divisions, with greater latitude in equipment selection.

DanO

[Looney idea of the week]

Okay, times they are a-changin'. The discussion about 1X optics in tac irons has got me thinking, and I've come up with a division concept I want to run by the 3-gun world here and see what sort of discussion it creates. Here goes:

Open: Let the arms race begin. Open means open. Saiga drums, Xrails, lasers, monster muzzle brakes, whatever. If someone wants to build a 1919A6 in 20 gauge, go for it. This division should be the lab where gear is grown. As long as it’s safe, legal, and meets minimum caliber/gauge requirements, bring it, run it, and make us all want one.

Modified: Tactical Optics under a different name. The same equipment rules would apply. This division makes up the bulk of the game, leave it alone.

Limited: Here’s where things start to get different. Pistol rules same as Modified. 1X optic or irons on the rifle. 30rd mags only. Same comp/brake limitations as Tac Optics. PUMP shotguns that otherwise conform to Modified rules. This is the “stuff I have in the safe anyway” or “stuff that’s cheap to get and I should have in the safe anyway” class. You could buy all the gear you need to win this class for under $2K, probably well under.

Heavy Metal: Now things are starting to get complicated. Heavy Metal isn’t a stand-alone division. If a shooter chooses to compete in any of the 3 divisions with a rifle of .308 caliber or above (20rd mag limit), a pistol of .45ACP or above (8 rd mag limit), or a revolver of .38Spl or above, the shooter can neutralize paper targets with the “heavy metal option” (1 shot only on target with an A or B zone hit). The “heavy metal” gun must otherwise conform to the requirements of the chosen division.

The number of targets neutralized using the heavy metal option can be totaled for the whole match and used to recognize/reward the top HM shooters. (such as highest number of “HMO” targets in each division, total match time divided by HMO targets, etc.)

Here’s the advantages I think this system would bring to our game:

Makes fewer, but larger divisions: As much as I would love to see it, I don’t think Tac Irons (without 1X optics anyway) or HM is going to get any bigger than it is now. Shooting against 6 or 7 folks is still fun, but shooting against 60 or 70 is way more fun. I think I’ve come up with a way to fold iron sights and HM into larger pools of competition while still allowing them to remain competitive.

Gets pump-guns out of Heavy Metal: It seems in my talking to HM shooters, and shooting a few matches in HM myself, that the pump shotgun is the least favorite part of HM. It also encourages the use of the lightest 12ga loads one can find, which IMHO kinda defeats the whole purpose.

Gives pump-guns a bigger place to play: The pump shotgun needs a place in 3-gun, because it’s cheap, and everybody already has one. I would venture that in looking at “defensive” type shotguns alone, pumps outnumber autoloaders by at least 20 to 1 in the US.

Limited is a great entry-level division: Most “gun people” these days seem have an AR with a dot on it, a pump shotgun that either already holds or can easily be made to hold 9 rounds, and a good defensive pistol. A zillion new combat vets are coming back from durkadurkistan with time behind a 1X optic, and a ton of them come home and immediately buy one for themselves. Dot-sighted patrol rifles are becoming more and more prevalent in law enforcement. I personally carry all the gear I would need to shoot in this division in my car everywhere I go.

What say you, 3-gun? (flame suit on) Like I usually say when I'm throwing out my addled musings; I'm not trying to change the world, I just try to think about ways to improve and grow the game, and encourage everyone to do the same.

DanO

[1x optics for FB3G]

Looks like 1x sights are a go for HM too. I just bolted on an offset Burris Fastfire for the close stuff, and if I like it I might go to a thinner front sight post for long-range. Or I could just put an Eotech on it and use it for everything. Or I could finally bring my 5.56mm 10.5" Eotech-equipped "working gun" out to play in TI... damn, too many hard decisions!

DanO

[Saiga discussion]

The Saiga shotguns are becoming more and more prevalent in open class, and now that the aftermarket for them is spooling up, more and more popular as defensive guns. I don't think you could let them into "tactical/limited" class with 10, 12, and even higher capacity mags. But how about with a 5-round magazine limit? The poll question is: Does a 5-round detachable-mag gun have "equipment parity" with a traditional 9-round tube-fed gun? Reloading is faster, but would have to be done more often. What say you? Disclaimer: I'm not trying to make waves, get any rules changed, or God forbid "level any sort of playing field" ... just wanting to start some discussion.

DanO

[Does USPSA need a classification system for multi-gun?]

If you want to do a Multi-gun classification system (I'm not sure it needs one, but I've given it some thought nonetheless)... here's my humble suggestion.

Select 10 (or more?) "Major Matches" i.e. RM3G, FB3G, SSM3G, etc. Criteria for selection should be 100+ shooters, 200+ total rounds, 8+ stages, however it would need to be tweaked. The only rules requirements should be that it is a true multi-gun match (all three guns are used with at least 3 multi-gun stages), that a standardized set of divisions be recognized (equipment rules for each division to still be determined by individual matches, keeping the outlaw flavor), and that while whatever scoring system is used, scores be calculated as a percentage of the top shooter in each division (pretty sure everybody does this anyway).

Now, each shooter of a "major" will have a percentage score at the end of a match. When the shooter accumulates 4 scores (or 5 or 7, we can work out the details later), the shooter's scores are averaged and a classification can be assigned.

100% - 90% = M

90% - 80% = A

80% - 70% = B

and so forth. Of course, as the shooter gets more "major" scores the average (thus classification) will go up (hopefully). It's kind of like the USPSA classifier system, except using only "real-world" match results. Think of each of the major matches as a "one-time" classifier.

Now, Individual matches can choose to recognize classes if they see fit, I don't think it's really necessary, and I certainly don't think prize table distributions should be class-based. It would be bragging rights, trying to get the "M" status (or "B" status for chumps like myself), and even buddies competing among themselves for the highest average they can get. Actually, as I think about this while typing, this system would offer a few advantages:

I see it as a way to very, very loosely "confederate" the sport, while not imposing on individual MDs that don't need to be imposed on, since they're already running damn successful matches. The success of these incredible matches lies in great part to each match's individual identity. That being said, there is very much a "3-gun community", and I think an all-inclusive classification/ranking system might foster that sense of community even more.

It encourages the new and/or casual multigunner to go out and shoot the "majors". You want to get classified? You don't have to join any organization, just go out and shoot X number of big matches. You can only travel to 1 or 2 a year? No sweat, you can still get your "score" and get classified, it's just going to take longer.

It can encourage smaller matches to grow, creating more opportunities for the "big match" experience. Make the requirements for being a "classifier match" big, but attainable. If an MD is running a 75-shooter, 6-stage match, and he finds out that by adding a few more stages and letting in a few more shooters he can become a "Classifier", I would think he would take advantage of this. It should make the match more marketable to both shooters and sponsors.

DanO

[2010 Mississippi 3-gun challenge]

Got my verification email yesterday (thanks Linda), picked up the spaghetti-pump this morning, it should be fully Nordicized by new week... the pieces are in place. My end of operation MS Heavy Metal Domination is a go! I move to re-name the match the Marty Robbin's "Big Iron" Challenge!

DanO

[Rifle/Pistol Matches]

Man, that's a tough one. The shotgun is the probably the biggest hurdle for a budding 3-gunner. I have a couple of opinions as to why that is (and they are just opinions):

The typical "3-gun shotgun" is more specialized, more unlike the "mainstream" shotgun than is the typical 3-gun pistol or rifle. Most pistols used are pretty close to stock, even the rifles used aren't too far from "real-world" configurations, or at least you could say that a "plain-jane" AR type rifle with decent optics wouldn't be at too terrible a disadvantage. This really can't be said for the shotgun. High capacity semiauto rifles are becoming pretty prevalent here in the US, but the same can't really be said for high-cap semiauto shotguns.

The same argument can be applied to the skill-set needed to run the shotgun as well. The shotgun is (again, my opinion) the toughest weapon system by far to learn how to use well. On top of that, the learning curve is steep. An experienced but casual shooter will be beaten by the seasoned 3-gunner with the pistol and rifle, but will be thoroughly (and somewhat embarrassingly) trounced by the the seasoned 3-gunner with the shotgun. (Ask me how I know this )

Now, on the other hand, adding shotguns to a match is much easier for the people running the match than adding the rifle. Some steel and clays can turn practically any good pistol match venue into a good shotgun match venue. A rifle match needs at least a little distance to be worthwhile, and scoring becomes either very slow (walking out to score paper), or expensive (flash targets, etc.). So shotgun matches are easier to put on than rifle matches, but harder to gt people to come shoot. Ironic.... don't you think?

The OP seems to want to grow multigun at the local club level, which I think is a great idea. I like the "outlaw match" concept that defines multi-gun, and I don't think the major matches should make any major rule changes. However, the "loose set of guidelines" that makes MG so great doesn't really lend itself to attracting local new shooters to small club matches. I think a club that wanted to start down the multi-gun path should probably gear its rules toward the entry-level shooters, not the guys that already shoot multigun (we'll come shoot the matches anyway, right?). Production or Single-Stack legal pistols, no magnified optics and 30rd mags for rifles. Stretch out to the ends of pistol bays and use small targets, you can still make things challenging.

DanO

[Does USPSA need a classification system for multi-gun?]

I don't see the need for a multi-gun classification system, and really don't think a workable system could be devised. I do like the idea of "Lewis" cuts... where the top shooters in the 2nd and 3rd 33% of all the results get a early trip to the table. It gives a most any shooter at a major match a shot at a sweet prize, and doesn't effect the overall standings much.

DanO

[Remington 1100 select slug load]

I did some experimenting back in my LEO days (we had a few 1100's), and came up with a "cop proof" slug select sequence, that's done the same way whether or not the mag tube is full or not (KISS).

Cycle Action

Insert slug into magazine tube

Cycle action

Sight picture

It's not the fastest drill in the world, but it works every time. If the mag tube wasn't full, you could skip the first cycling of the action and quicken it up. Lt. Murphy hates it when you try to remember how many shells are in your gun, especially in a stressed situation, so I decided sure and simple was better, just do it the same way every time. The Remmy doesn't really lend itself to "select slug", so stage planning and shot count is even more important.

DanO

[2010 Mississippi 3-gun challenge]

Sam, you talked me into it. I'll get the entry in the mail Monday. AND I'm even gonna shoot Heavy Metal... so 19 to go!

DanO

[308 mag pouches?]

I recently.... uh... acquired about 3k of 308 ball, so I decided to shoot Heavy Metal again. I've put together a DPMS 308 gun that I'm pretty happy with, and I've got everything I need except mag pouches. I did a search and didn't find anything recent. I'm using 308 Pmags, what's everyone using for pouches? Thanks.

DanO

[Feeler: WWII USGI 3-gun]

Thanks for all the replies, I really appreciate the opportunity to "brainstorm" this. Upon reading all of the comments, some additional thoughts / responses to some concerns:

Definitely think a "bolt action" military rifle class (sub-class of Issue class) would be in order. Mausers, Springfields, Nagants, Carcanos, SMLEs (limited to 5 rounds in the gun and loaded from clips only), etc. I think most of the rifle shots would be longer ranges, with most of the "CQB hoser" type targets to be engaged with the carbine.

Shotguns: This was one of the first things I thought about when fleshing out the WWII 3-gun concept. I realize that shotguns such as the model 12 and 1897 were used throughout the war, but there just aren't too many of them around nowadays compared to the proliferation of Garands and carbines. The Modern division allows updated versions of the 1911 pistol, but to allow "updated versions" of WWII shotguns would basically allow any modern pump gun in. There just hasn't been much progress made (or needed) in the pump shotgun in the last 50-60 years. A period-correct shotgun might make an excellent "stage gun" however.

Pistols: I would tweak the Issue class rules, 8 round magazines are allowed, but can only be loaded with 7 rounds and can be no longer than the USGI 7 round magazine (no basepads). I never intended to allow only 7 round mags, I just didn't write the rule well enough. I've also considered allowing foreign WWII-issue pistols in, possibly in the "Issue/Bolt rifle" class provided they match the country or origin of the rifle. Again the Anglophiles would get hosed, as their Hi-powers would have to be capacity-limited.

Carbines: Thinking about allowing semi-auto versions (or legal full-auto fired semi only) of period submachineguns such as Thompsons, Stens, etc.

Issue class , and the resulting equipment parity, would allow a shooter that doesn't own or want to use his/her own guns to be just as competitive with a "loaner set" of weapons and ammo. Competitive advantage gained through equipment should be practically nil, so a competitor, for a fee, could be "issued" one or more of the weapons/ammo needed for the match. The CMP could be instrumental in this, I would love to see them bring up a few dozen guns, "rent" them to shooters for the match, and give the shooter the option to buy them from CMP at the end. I think it would be great for the CMP as well.

Any other thoughts/comments/suggestions? If we (the 3-gun community) can put together a workable concept, my next step is to reach out the the CMP community in a major way. I think both groups could benefit greatly from a match like this.

DanO

[Feeler: WWII USGI 3-gun]

While dodging rogue golf carts at the PanAm this weekend, I did some thinking about a 3-gun match using USGI period weapons from the WWII era, namely the M1 Garand, M1 Carbine (instead of a shotgun), and 1911 pistol. Most of us have at least one of each of these, and if you don't you should. I think it would be a really fun match for the 3-gun crowd, and might be a great way to "reach out" to the CMP community and other "square range" disciplines such as High Power. I propose IMGA scoring (8-round en-bloc clips would really "encourage" A-zone hits), and I've thrown together equipment rules. I'm thinking two divisions, Issue, which is intended to use equipment very close to WWII-era USGI, and Modified, to include synthetic stocks, .308-converted Garands, fiberoptic sights, 30-round Carbine mags, "modernized" 1911s, etc. Here's what I came up with, the measurement numbers will need to be tweaked, as I was just going off the top of me head:

Equipment, ISSUE class:

Rifle: Must be an M1 Garand pattern rifle chambered in .30-06 Springfield. Ammunition must be loaded using 8-round en-bloc clips. The stock of the rifle must be made of wood, and be of USGI configuration. Rifle slings, if used, must be of the 2-point USGI web type and may only be attached to the rifle using the original attachment hardware. Sights must be of USGI pattern, these sights may be painted/blackened, but may not be modified in any other way. Internal modifications such as barrel bedding or trigger work are allowed. External modifications that alter the gun from USGI configuration is not allowed.

Carbine: Must be an M1 Carbine pattern gun chambered in .30 Carbine. Magazines may hold no more than 15 rounds. The stock of the rifle must be made of wood, and be of USGI configuration. Rifle slings, if used, must be of the 2-point USGI web type and may only be attached to the rifle using the original attachment hardware. Sights must be of USGI pattern, these sights may be painted/blackened, but may not be modified in any other way. Internal modifications such as barrel bedding or trigger work are allowed. External modifications that alter the gun from USGI configuration is not allowed.

Pistol: Must be a 1911-pattern pistol chambered in .45ACP. Magazines may hold no more than 7 rounds. External modifications will be limited to the following:

Grips: May be changed, provided the grips are of the same shape as USGI grips and do not add more than 1 ounce to the weight of the pistol.

Mainspring Housing: May be changed provided that the mainspring housing is of either “flat” or “arched” configuration. Mainspring housings that incorporate USGI-type lanyard loops or allowed.

Sights: Sights must be of the “notch and post” variety. Both front and rear sight must be of fixed, monolithic construction, and may protrude no higher than ¼ inch from the top of the slide. Sights may be painted or blackened.

Other: Ejection ports may be lowered and flared. Undercut trigger guards are allowed. Magazine openings may be beveled, but the magazine opening cannot be made wider.

Equipment, MODIFIED class:

Rifle: Must be an M1 Garand pattern gun chambered in a.30 caliber cartridge. Ammunition must be loaded using en-bloc clips holding no more than 8 rounds. Optical or electronic sights are not allowed. Modifications are allowed provided that safety devices are not disabled, overall length of the gun does not exceed 47 inches, and the empty weight of the gun does not exceed 13 pounds.

Carbine: Must be an M1 Carbine pattern rifle chambered in .30 Carbine. Magazines may hold no more than 30 rounds. Optical or electronic sights are not allowed. Modifications are allowed provided that safety devices are not disabled, overall length of the gun does not exceed 39 inches, and the empty weight of the gun does not exceed 8 pounds.

Pistol: Must be a 1911 pattern pistol chambered in .45 ACP. Magazines may hold no more than 8 rounds. Optical or electronic sights are not allowed. Porting, compensators, or muzzle brakes are not allowed. Modifications are allowed provided that safety devices are not disabled, overall length of the gun does not exceed 9 inches, the height of the gun does not exceed 7 inches, and the empty weight of the gun does not exceed 3 pounds.

So what do you think? Sound like fun? Perhaps more importantly, does it sound like something we could get 100 shooters to come to? Any input would be appreciated.

DanO

[Divisionless concept]

Well, my late-night musings have certainly stirred up some conversation anyway. Actually I didn't see any of that stuff at David's match... pretty much everybody in my squad (myself included), had a McRifle (patent pending)... 18-20" 5.56mm AR with a low-powered variable. I should have just looked around more.

DanO

[Divisionless concept]

I think the biggest "upside" would be the inclusion of gear that would normally bump a shooter into open. Wanna run your Saiga with a red dot? Go ahead, but leave the comp off of your rifle and shoot a .45ACP handgun. Think a "two-optic" rifle is the cat's ass? Run a pump shotgun and we'll call it even. The point about the evolution of the 3-gun rifle is a good one. The crucible of competition has refined the rifle to near perfection. The problem is, any sort of "better mousetrap" with the pistol or shotgun bumps you into open. A match like this one might encourage more experimentation with equipment, especially the shotgun.

DanO

[Divisionless concept]

Okay, so I'm thinking way outside the box here, probably been out in the sun too long today. It seems like a huge percentage of 3-gun shooters shoot "tac optics", and this is starting to result, IMHO, in the "McRifle" for 3-gun. When I went to the first Benning shoot, I saw all sorts of guns, optics, mounts, etc... now not so much, it's getting pretty homogeneous. How about a big match run like this:

Heads-up competition, one big division (or maybe 2, more on that later), everyone shoots and is scored together, regardless of equipment. However, various firearm features are worth one or more "points". All of a competitor's 3 guns have to conform to a total point maximum, or perhaps you could have a "5 point division" and a "10 point division", or whatever. For example (meaningless numbers, naturally the actual values can be tweaked):

non-magnified optic: 1 point

magnified optic : 2 points

bipod : 1 point

detachable magzine : 1 point

comp/brake: : 1 point

.45 (pistol)/.308 : -1 point

and so forth... I think it would be fun to see different equipment setups again. Any comments?

DanO

[2010 Steel City Carbine Championship]

I just printed out the entry form, looks like I'm finally gonna make this match. Amazing how gettin gout of the gun business freed up so much more time for shooting...

DanO

[Knob Creek matches...]

If anyone wants to run an open-bolt iron sight gun, you're welcome to bring some 9mm for my Beretta, I don't mind letting it make multiple runs... maybe at least my gun could win...

DanO

[10mm in Heavy Metal]

I say let 10mm in, but with the same 8+1 mag limit as .45... I think that would eliminate the advantage of the 10 (you can load a powder-puff .45 just as easy as a powder puff 10mm). Even if it would just bring a couple more folks in to play, if it doesn't hurt anything, why not? I also like the USPA singlestack holster rules. I wouldn't mind opening it up to .357mag, I think it would be cool to play the game with an 8-shot revolver. Just my random thoughts...

DanO

[Knob Creek matches...]

I'm registered for 0900 Saturday, gonna run my Beretta 12S, looks like I need to find a few more mags...

DanO

[Knob Creek matches...]

Anybody going? I'm signed up for the subgun match, never gone before. ANybody have any advice?

DanO

[Spike's Titanium?]

Wow, almost 100 views and no response... I guess there aren't too many of these out there. Anyway, I got it, it seems pretty cool, very light, very good machining. I'll put a few rounds through it and see how it does.

DanO

[Spike's Titanium?]

Anyone have any experience with the Spike's Tactical titanium muzzle brake? I've got one coming to me on an upper I traded for, and I'd never even heard of it. Apparently it's no longer available from Spike's, and they don't have anything about it on their site. Anyone ever shoot one? Is it a decent brake? Thanks.

DanO