kernelofwisdom

I got one and have been feeding it Winchester. So far it's been perfect and has made the most tedious part of reloading a non issue. It's expensive but - granted mine is working - very worth it.

I would not draw the conclusion SV thinks highly of the RTS2 - not yet anyway!

Yes - Call of Duty is so popular because you never shoot at a humanoid target!* :-D To tap into those guys the targets would have to be shaped exactly like humans and blow up and bleed when you shoot them. No CoD guy (and their are MINORITIES on CoD) gives a rip about a cardboard box target whether it does or doesn't have a bump on it. *I realize you aren't saying that but actually I think CoD is a great example that young people etc. do not abhor graphic violence and so wouldn't give a crap about whatever target we shoot except the targets are boring.

If X games said here's a giant contract conditional on the target change that's a no brainer. But I don't think that's the carrot being dangled for the head chopping.

Nobody is saying it is unamerican to shoot at anything but metric targets. Your really stretching. The metric target was here first. It is the "politically correct" crowd that want to change everything we do. The sport of practical shooting originated from competitions in California in the 1950s with the goal of developing handgun skills for defensive use. USPSA wasn't defensive enough so you now have IDPA. IPSC evolved because the International crowd is more PC. I for one, do not want to see USPSA evolve into anything close to IPSC. If Phil Strader and Max think that is the way to go--great. Head to Europe and grow IPSC. Yes or they can start an organization/game not based on practical shooting but rather the vision of a general public, television friendly shooting sport and rake in the dollars as the crowds gather! Amazing bowling has survived with that head on the pin!

How can anyone think there is a significant television market awaiting USPSA if only the target shape were slightly different (and only 9mm and easier scoring)? People don't come in any sort of numbers to spectate any match at all ever and it's free to do it! Moreover, handgun/carbine action shooting is not a dollars bonanza even where the targets are shaped differently. So the evidence seems a target change wouldn't do anything to "grow" the sport. Change it if you want to change it but speculation about big sponsors and TV contracts is pure speculation flying against empirical evidence. If you want to change it under the proposition that it insulates against anti-gun legislation ok though it'd be nice to see some evidence that it would help. And if that analysis should be applied to targets shouldn't it be applied generally? Is there going to be a committee to assess whether any particular type of stage design or division is beneficial or harmful to the perception of shooting to the general public? It seems like USPSA is overflowing with ideas for change (which can be good) either supported or agitated against on pure speculation and evidence free theories more than stances built on any research or facts. The higher the certainty, it appears the less likely any research was done.

I think it scares minorities! Metric target is for old white people. If we are going to do this, the right way is to talk with young people of every stripe and ask them what target interests them the most to shoot at. Don't assume the turtle - it was invented, not kidding here unfortunately, by old white guys - is what will work.

Change the target or don't change it - it's hard to believe that is a big driver on whether the sport is "mainstream." Is it mainstream in countries that use the ipsc target? Popular on television, draw lots of spectators, outside sponsors, etc.?

I can only say I have a high opinion of both and I share concerns other people have about the rifles being in the match. I think those being aired early give the leadership the opportunity to hear all aspects of criticism before provisional rules are passed - the more and better considered the issue is before they launch the better. The provisional division gives it a shakedown cruise - can't see any harm in that. Don't do carry optics again - a division with an odd name with apparently haphazard restrictions.

I see the merit in what you're saying. It's a good point. I see the other side too. But, if the idea is to consider rules for a provisional division to see how it works, it seems that would shake it out for everybody - that process seems reasonable - if damage is being done to the handgun side of the matches it would come to the fore and if not then that's that. I've got at last count (and hopefully at some point fewer) 9 AR style carbines so I'm certainly not against the platform.

Ah the Area 51 Classic?

You worded it fine, my reading comprehension was lacking. PCC's capabilities are far closer to pistols than carbines. The same rules work for both except for the start position. The match I attend most frequently dropped USPSA affiliation a few years back. The first few years they held pistol matches and allowed carbines. It worked very smoothly together. I agree with some of the previous posters that said that some stages will be owned by PPC, some will be owned by open/limited. The winners are the best shooters. The biggest reason I can see is to attract shooter back. 3gun has pulled a lot of shooters from USPSA and I'll bet it has nothing to do with a want to load the shotgun. You're right there. I hate the shotgun reload. Anyway, if they put it through a provisional period I can't see how that's bad. I wouldn't have picked it as an issue for now, but I can see the reasons people want to do it and I think the leadership will do their best to integrate it smoothly with good communication. I got a 9mm Colt carbine a while back - should dust it off and go to one of the local carbine matches and see what the fuss is about!

If they were 9mm I would be ordering them right now. I am disappointed that as much as I am in NC, I didn't know that place existed. Thanks for the heads up I will definitely be stopping in there the next time through.Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Yeah they say they got a lot of calls for 9mm. They had one bushing barrel and I grabbed it when it got there. Fun shooting gun. I figured that 5.4 would be gone by now.

Well I said victory of using the infrastructure but talked about scoring them together so that was all poorly phrased. I meant them being in the same match is what seems an unnecessary blending to me - PCC shooters using the handgun match course for a short rifle course is what I intended to mean by "victory" for them. I thought perhaps the goal was to be able to use the existing handgun match course (it is currently a handgun match after all, currently), so PCC's could fire a match without all the issues of setting up a match course of fire (time, labor, etc.). But I'm gathering from these responses it's not that, it's that (some) PCC shooters see that PCC needs to be in the handgun match itself. I'm not sure why that is. One thought is that well why should any hand gunner care b/c divisions. On the other hand, why the resistance to having carbine matches? That's what I'm used to seeing around here - handgun matches and carbine matches. You shoot a handgun in one and a carbine in the other. I can't see why they couldn't be shot at the same time if the course makes sense and they each follow their rules, but I don't see why they have to be the same match. What makes the carbine shooters need to have their rifles in the current handgun match is something I don't understand.

But why does a rifle have to be scored with the handguns? Will rifle shooters say hey if I'm only scored against other rifles and not also handguns I just won't shoot? If rifle/carbine guys want the victory of using the handgun match infrastructure, do they also have to be scored in the same match to be satisfied? I wouldn't think so.

To flip it, why cannot, as someone on another forum pointed out, the PCC guys shoot a rifle match? It can be earlier, later or the same time as the handgun match. The rifles will have to have some different rules at least for certain starts, gun handling, and probably other things. Why the insistence on having a rifle scored in an otherwise handgun match? Or maybe there is no such insistence, the rifle guys maybe just want to shoot using the infrastructure of the handgun match. Would suit me fine. Shoot before, with or after, and score the rifles - which will operate on their rule set and used like rifles must be which is different than handguns - together. But if the idea is no: absolutely carbines MUST be scored in the handgun match, no matter that it is a different weapon system and will have at least some different rules, I don't understand that.

Even on a mount it was turning off? I have had mine for about two or three months now...Use it every monday night and so far no problems..oops should not have said that. Will probably puke now. So far...I like it The old one was on a CZ 9mm slide. It failed rapidly (couple hundred rounds or so is my recollection) and right away after coming back from the factory. However, whatever they did with it plus then I put some rubber under the spring made it work after that. I didn't run it much though, having moved on. Anyway, after talking with a local shooter who knows a lot about RTS2 good and bad I decided to give it a run again. I like the form factor a lot and the window is good. I'll see how the current gen runs since I'm drinking the kool aid again.

On the right is an older "auto off" model. On the left is a new one. A visible difference (in addition to screen tint) is the new upper battery contact has a bit of spring built in in addition to the one on the bottom that I suppose should help keep the battery in contact. I understand they made changes on the board too. So anyway I'm trying this one now. The older one was auto off while shooting, went back to the factory shortly after purchase, arrived and was doing the same thing. I put a bit of rubber washer under the bottom spring to tighten the battery contact and it worked after that.

I can compare it to Tanfoglios, STI DVC Open and Dawson (I kind of did in the DVC Open thread). Recoil is similar; tracking is great - each gun has a different personality there. Weight and its distribution and all that is different but down to personal preference. It's very loud (compared to about anything). The other guns have very sweet triggers, but the SVI are fantastic. Less than 2 pounds; glass breaking and all that. It's true! I like the metal grip (shape and weight) and the big magwell and the thumb guards. Accuracy is superb but then I've had great results with the other guns too. However, most of extra value is that it is a great fitted gun that runs very well. I feel it is the highest quality tool of its kind. There isn't much with the SVI that you can't get on another gun or have done to it, but it's more than the sum of its parts. I'd say find one and go over it and see if you feel it is worth it to you. How you place in a match, if you have a good decent gun that runs, will be up to you - I'm hoping if I shoot enough matches SVI will sponsor me to NOT shoot their guns! Latest: Both:

For anybody who can't wait (like me) there are still 3 on the shelf at PDHSC, including a 5.4.

Nice post. Here's the RTS2 next to a slide ride that should give some perspective. The smaller scopes are closer to the shooter's eye (depending on the mount of course) and certainly take up less real estate.

Just checked out pix of it after reading your post. Sounds like they fixed all the nits from v1. Very cool looking sight - looks very high quality.

For all around value, the Burris FastFire III seems hard to beat to me (if they had a bigger window version to me it'd be near perfect). The 8 MOA version is very visible in daylight and the sight is tough and you can replace the battery without losing zero. Adjustments are easy too. I have or had an RTS2, Docter and the first version Deltapoint. I'd pick the Docter second. The delta point had the tiny locking screws for adjustments, had to remove to change battery, and the light intensity adjustment blew. The RTS kept failing. When they fix it or if they come up with RTS3 and it works it could be a winner. Like to hear on some of the other newer offerings out there; good idea for a thread.

I was and hope to get back out next month. If you don't get on the list asap spots are all gone. Appreciate the guys who run it - nice to have an evening match option.

38SC - not helping my reloading budget!