Jump to content
Brian Enos's Forums... Maku mozo!

boo radley

Classifieds
  • Posts

    1,170
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by boo radley

  1. But still - here's the thing. Two things. I understand IDPA not wanting folks to mix magazine capacities - it would be like downloading selectively. But why not simply say, IF you have magazine of differing capacities, you must ALWAYS start with the highest capacity magazine(s)? It's just a weird way to approach the issue, IMO. If I'm going out into the wild, and worried about bears or goblins or whatever, and I have a 7-round Wilson mag and an 8-round Wilson mag, you can bet I'll keep the pistol at 8+1 and not 'download' the 8-rounder. Thing 2: Now, that said, in my experience only, starting with an even number of rounds is a minor edge in MANY IDPA stages. Not in every match, and there's always the piece of steel, or necessary make-up you can't execute, but a slight advantage nonetheless, day in, day out. What would your ruling be if I disassembled one Glock 17 magazine, and inserted a small block of wood so the magazine only held 9 rounds when reassembled? At the match all my mags will hold 9 rounds. Grounds for an FTDR? I'm thinking thin-ice, despite the apparent legality. Thx
  2. Hi folks -- I'd like to be 100% clear on a couple issues with IDPA and magazine capacity, and have a couple specific questions. In this example, let's take CDP. A shooter arrives with n number of 1911 magazines; the shooter declares some are 7-round magazines, and some are 8-round magazines. My understanding is, in this case, the shooter will be shooting 7+1; at least this is always how I've seen this treated. Question 1: does the value of 'n' make a material difference? If a shooter arrives with ten Wilson Combat 8-round magazines, and a single Metalform 7-round magazine, is he or she still limited to 7+1? What if the shooter only has 2 8-round magazine and 1 7-round mag? What about one 8-round magazine, and two 7-round magazines? What is the rationale, if one (or more) magazines DO make division capacity, for not using the higher capacity magazine? (Hmmm... more than 1 question -- sorry). Question 2: What constitutes 'mechanical capacity?' Clearly a magazine labled '7.' But suppose the shooter says, "This magazine doesn't function in my pistol reliably when loaded to 8 rounds?" Or says, "I can't jam 8 in here, even though it says '8'"? Question 3: If the shooter has a mixed bag of 7 and 8-round mags, as per the example, and is limited to 7+1....Can he or she start with an 8-round magazine, to avoid the hassle of a barney mag, or topping off? If not, why? Many thanks in advance; I'm confused in this area, with the Rule Book.
  3. IMO, I think it's a mistake to monkey with the slide-stop so that the slide drops when inserting a magazine. In IDPA you're going to slide-lock on almost every stage, and it's hard enough getting the 9mm Eagle and magazine combination working properly in this regard w/out adding another variable. Believe this or don't believe this, but you will save yourself much pain with this gun by buying SV magazines or tubes and the *purple* follower. This combination has worked for me 100% of the time in my Eagle.
  4. Hmmm. Broke down my 9mm STI Eagle for a complete cleaning, and stippled the grip while I was at it. Put it together, seemed to work fine, then the first target I shoot it doubles. Bottom line, with the slide on or off, I can squeeze the trigger, and, holding it in, the hammer won't ever cock. What have I done wrong, or what part is bad? Old sear spring? (Control parts have about 5k on them). Thx!
  5. Got an email tonight with last minute instructions, and a link to the online .pdf of the range booklet, with instructions to print it off, if I want a hard-copy. That makes a TON of sense. I've got to say -- from the match descriptions and diagrams to communication, y'all are setting a standard, IMO.
  6. Mine arrived Thursday, from SC. I have a 6" SV, and was worried about extra length on the draw, but shouldn't have been. DOH Bladtech feels great, and I know I'm going to be a lot happier and more relaxed on starts, period. CR-Speed will be retired or FS.
  7. If the gun with magazine snapped into place would still fit in the box, sure. A lot of people who own, for instance, Glocks, don't own 10-round magazines. Some of those who do - like me - have never been impressed with their reliability and simply choose to shoot the match with something we know works. For me that would be a downloaded 17-rounder. That's different. In your example, all magazines either meet or exceed division capacity. You don't need to go past the first sentence in Rule 3. E. What I'm talking about is deciding to plug a single Glock mag with a wooden block to a mechanical capacity of 9 rounds, because 9+1 is a competitive advantage for a specific match. Now, per every explanation I've heard for this rule it would be perfectly legal to start with this mag, then load all the rest of your 10 or 17-round 9mm Glock mags to 9. Wooden block might be extreme, but a 7-round Tripp kit in a single 8-round Wilson mag isn't. Show up to the match, notice tons of paper and stages with even number of shots (12/14/etc)? Start with that mag.
  8. This rule has always bothered me, because it's a rule that seems very clear in meaning and requires no interpretation of intent, yet it IS interpreted all the time to allow downloading of perfectly good magazines that do meet the division requirement. If you ordered 8-round capacity magazines from MidwayUSA, and received 10-round capacity CMC PowerMags, would you buy the explanation that "it's the same capacity magazine -- just only put 8 rounds in it?" Competitors must use the same capacity magazine throughout the match. Where does it ever say anything about downloading and mixing and matching?? How could anything be more unambiguous?? There's even an example: Example: if you start with a 7-round magazine you must use that capacity magazine throughout the match. Again, nothing about: "if you start with a 7-round magazine, you must download all your other magazines to 7-rounds."
  9. Why did that rule change? According to Linda, that's the way things *were*. I'd really like this -- sort of like an airport TSA approach, and randomly selected for screening, but better, 'cause not everyone has to take off his or her shoes. Those few that DO get selected - chrono and maybe an equipment check; mag gauge or whatever. I'm not saying The Rules aren't sufficient reason enough, to do the right thing, but hell - with all the money, work, time and thought going into tweaking mags, equipment position, etc, etc,....it would be nice if the occasional check validated the effort. :/
  10. Wait. What's wrong with that approach? Instead of everyone having to mess with the chrono, why not randomly select a percentage of names -- say 20%. So with 200 registered shooters, over a 2-day match, you have 20 names a day to worry about. Over the course of the day, the chrono-man, and/or assistant pick a name on the list, find the shooter, ask for ammo from the belt, or -- if the shooter's just finished -- a mag on the deck. If the shooter's is on deck, they'd go to another name on the list. Sometime between the ammo collection and the end of the match, the shooter has a responsibility to visit the chrono station. Relieves the burden on everyone. I think someone cheating on the PF (and honestly -- is this even an issue?) isn't going to gamble on the 1/5 chance, especially given a true random collection. And, since the chrono station is only burdened with 20 shooters, that's plenty of time to pull a bore-snake through the barrel prior to shooting, and/or check the gun for box-fit if single-stack, etc.
  11. The stop plate approach isn't using sound at all. It's going to be an electronic impulse when the plate registers a hit. Yes, they would have to be a known distance apart, but you could build a rig that held the plates pretty easily. The problem would be that you're introducing bullet splatter right where your rig is at and that would necessitate it being built up pretty good, and therefore not very light and easy to transport. I don't understand -- don't you record the 'start' time using a timer? I haven't done the math, but you'd need the shot timer to be incredibly precise, along with whatever sensor you're planning on recording this 'electronic impulse' with. Not to mention the distance between 2 plates.
  12. Hmm...OK, so basically once the score card is signed, it's entirely up to the shooter (and his/her conscience) whether to accept a correction, and the penalty target?
  13. I sometimes see (surprisingly frequently) a no-shoot target that's been hit, but not noticed by the RO/Scorekeeper and (possibly) the shooter. Here's my question: Shooter finishes the COF. The RO/Scorekeeper score the targets and the shooter & scorekeeper total the scores, record the time and sign the sheet. A few minutes later another competitor on the squad says, "Hey! The guy hit this no shoot", and points to a hole in a no-shoot. Per the rule 9.7.4 does the shooter have a right to protest changing the score-sheet? Thx
  14. It should probably *should* have been an FTDR, but I can easily understand how and why a local match might not assess one, especially since it probably hurt the shooter who's thinking 'WTF??" as he's shooting. I'm no IDPA evangelist, but I agree 100% with Steve J -- I've seen plenty of rules broken/ignored/not been aware of in 'other' practical shooting competitions to think any organization is superior at enforcement.
  15. Because here's what happens if you don't: (from 2006 FLOpen thread) "Last stage to be shot by my squad on Saturday. Guy before me starts and drops gun, DQ. I ask him if he had holster locked, he says no. Other guys say it has already happened to 6-8 people from other squads. My turn......I LAMR, gun in holster, and LOCK IT. Turn to RO and show him that it is locked and yank up on it a couple of times to test. We even have a good laugh about me being nervous even though holster is now locked. BEEP, take 3 steps forward, lose control of handles, so I stop and reach back for them. Gun comes out of locked holster and I go to Dairy Queen! " 12 DQ's total, and I think 8 or 9 for the same reason on 1 stage? In any event, it seems like very, very few stages ever have start positions or actions that challenge holster retention, and I guess this has been a natural evolution and for good reason. But if that's the case (and I'm not against race holsters -- I voted 'no change'), I would hate to see that mentality extend to other areas of stage design so that no targets ever presented themselves close to the 180, for example, or no steel was ever closer than 15y, or less and less movement will be required or.... My long-winded point being, there is some indignation that race-holsters aren't safe or secure, and hostility towards any new rule that would change the status quo -- fair enough. But the issue has been rendered moot by never having stages that require a practical holster.
  16. Hmm...voted "let it go," but after this next match, I'm going to buy a Bladetech DOH for my 6" SVI limited gun. I don't like the grip of the Bladetechs's, and I regret what Kydex does to a blued finish, but I'm sick of worrying about the CR Speed. Even from a locked position, this Limited gun is heavy and long enough to pop out with a sharp tug; especially at certain angles. The bottom line is, if stages actively tested holster retention, (thinking of that parachute stage from the Florida Open a few years back), you'd see a disproportionate number of DQ's from race holsters and a lot of worried and unhappy shooters. Fortunately(?) most stages do not have lots of gyrations and movements prior to the draw that would cause an issue.
  17. <grumble> All this talk of guns falling out, or being knocked out of holsters, is bad Ju Ju.
  18. I liked the match, and great job from the staff. It's been many years since I shot Ant Hill, and the range was as beautiful as I remembered it. Some *golf courses* aren't as immaculate or groomed. I liked Tombstone, Holding the Stick and ended up liking the Octagon, though at first I thought it was silly. It was a blast to shoot. The other stages...neither here nor there. I did actively dislike Flipper, probably because it crushed me, but I agree about a swinging no-shoot being tough to score, and it blatantly rewarded taller shooters. I also agree with you, Seth, about the 180 -- there were many stages with the targets right at the 180, for sure. It wasn't dangerous, but you had to put the throttles on mid-stage to avoid overrunning an array. Will the match be there for 2009? Or back at SWRGC?
  19. I'd like to blame some recent performance on too narrow a front sight and aging eyes. <grin> Is the factory SVI front sight cut equivalent to the factory STI cut? IOW, can I order a Dawson STI/SV front sight and expect to be able to drift it in with some minor fitting? Thx!
  20. If you're using the stock sights and trigger, I'm not surprised you're having problems getting good groups. Both are notoriously awful. I'm not sure what a "$300 Fulcrum Trigger" is, but there are a number of inexpensive options. I have had/have a number of Glocks, and found the .40's a bit more accurate -- the G24 (very) and G35 (some) than the 9's; a G17 and two G34's. The 9mm pistols were also very ammo sensitive vis-a-vis accuracy, and liked 115gr Blazer the best outside of certain reloads. In fact, when I first got a G34, I ended up sending to Smyrna, complaining that it wasn't accurate. 5 weeks later (!) I got it back with a new locking block and a test target @15y that was 'ok,' but not exactly inspiring. Even with a better trigger and sights, the system is still somewhat funky and it takes a lot of rounds downrange before your freestyle groups start shrinking. On the bench, I couldn't come close, from a rest, at 25yards with a Glock to what I can get with my 19/2011's, period.
  21. A couple random thoughts: 1) The more you believe switching to a new Limited gun and platform will help your shooting...the happier you will be. 2) I approached the change with a lot of skepticism, and as a consequence, was pretty unhappy during the inevitable learning curve with a new gun's feel and timing. I was cynical, and wanted objective proof that a 2011 would improve my game - of course it didn't and doesn't exist, and it's no fun doubting a major purchase decision. 3) 2011-style pistols are wicked cool and that's reason enough to own one. Glocks are not wicked cool, but you can buy a sack of 'em -- for cheap -- and it won't be devastating if one is stolen or lost. 4) 99% of the question has to do with personal disposable income and choices thereof - very little is about shooting. 5) Given the cost of ammo, with either platform, you'll quickly outspend the cost of the gun, so might as well get what you want. 6) There are some folks who derive satisfaction by making it a point to succeed with the minimum equipment necessary -- the guy who shoots par golf with an ancient set of hand-me-down sticks; the bowler who rolls a house ball; the shooter who makes GM with basically a stock G35, so weigh opinions accordingly.
  22. Hmm...I load .45, 9mm and .40. I've experimented with a couple set-ups. for .40, I run the straight Lee 4-die set. The sizing die works great on 'glocked' brass, and the dies are cheap. The negative, is I really, really hate the deprimer on Lee dies. They're not easy to clean, either. for .45acp I like Dillon with a Lee FCD die in the last position. You can easily clean the lube out of the seating die w/out removing the die, and the new Dillon dies have replaceable tips for their depriming punch. for 9mm I run straight Dillon. I've toyed with the idea of a fancy seating die, like the Redding competition, but haven't had a problem turning out ammunition that's more accurate than I'm capable of shooting, in general, so I've not seen the point. They look cool, however.
  23. I have heard a great many oral stage instructions get lost in translation -- even simple things like the start position -- and I do agree that exploiting the stage weakness, without checking with the MD first, is poor sportsmanship. Who's to say who heard what? If it's an obvious weakness, why not at least get the MD to carefully repeat the instructions, before telling him, "Hey -- I don't want to bust your chops, but I'm going to do X, Y, Z ?" If there IS a WSB, that's been designed at leisure, I'd feel differently -- the instructions are explicit, and not based on what a shooter in one squad *thinks* he remembered hearing a couple hours earlier during the stage brief, but doesn't want to double-check.
  24. Those are some awesome stage diagrams!!! I wish all matches would use a format like that. Very nice. Now, about the weather....There is hot and there is HOT. Last year had me writing checks to Al Gore.
×
×
  • Create New...