NickBlasta

Just like practicing any skill, you make huge gains in the beginning and then it takes more and more repetition for incremental gains. The 85% to 95% gap represents that incremental gain delta for most people very well I think.

Very little handgun experience to start, classified into C, made master in 6 months and GM 17 months after that. Bit less than 2 years.

I cut a piece out of my holster body (bladetech) for mine with the old dremel.

It doesn't fit.

12 scoring hits are available. 12 penalties can be assessed.

Said rule only applies for the referenced reason, trying to give general procedural when specific ones should be used. In this case two specific penalties are being given. There is nothing in the rulebook that says two (or more) specific procedurals can't be given for one shot. The correct number of procedurals is 12.

You would need a plate that raised the optic up above the slide, because the optic is too big for the cut itself.

Have one in my hands and I can tell you it doesn't fit the cut.

Any replacement grip module is allowed if it meets the criteria in 21.4.

Can use the P10 plates. They're the same size?

Is there anywhere to buy the factory plates in the US?

The language you use is important. It helps to be up front that a service is being provided to the buyer rather than a product. A product can or can not be delivered, pretty black and white. A service you are arguably already providing (registering a person, squadding them, building the match on their behalf) it can help you win chargebacks more easily.

You're right, I personally wouldn't buy one without a lifetime warranty.

Only if it pokes out the sides.

To be fair there's an extra level of complexity where the merchant has an agreement with the credit card company, listing where chargebacks are and aren't acceptable. The person organizing the match is bound to this merchant agreement, even where contracts you make with the cardbearer might contradict it. For example if my merchant agreement with the CC company says "cardbearer may chargeback in instances where the product/service is not received or is significantly different from described", nothing I try and bind the cardholder to in terms of agreeing to no refunds will fly. I could say 'but you said you were fine with no refunds' and the CC company will say 'you agreed to give refunds under these conditions'. I speak as a merchant who sells nonrefundable deposits and wins chargebacks. So in winning the chargeback what he did may have been "legal", you can only argue about whether or not it was morally correct.

Anyone put a Romeo3 XL on one of these? Do you use the RTS2 plate?

Looks a lot like a sideways bullet having tumbled after hitting the steel. I would say the call is legit.

Technically 9.5.5 only counts if it exceeds your bullet diameter... How I've seen the RMs score it at majors is that if you have a hit that's partial on steel, and then anything at all that resembles a bullet, or a piece of a bullet (including any kind of semi-conical radius, or any piece of lead that leaves grease on the paper), in the NS, you get the NS. If it looks clearly like just a piece of jacket (a sliver, or a mere tear) you do not get the NS.

It's not well defined because the entirety of the fault line is the boundary and half of it is covered by dirt. It would be equally as arbitrary to say "it's okay because if you don't touch the fault line at all you won't get a procedural".

The justification I've seen used against assigning foot faults in these situations by RMs is that it no longer provides the physical reference indicated by the rule. The shooter can no longer physically feel where the shooting area ends. Though there is a rise to the inside of the fault line, the shooting area actually ends on the far side of the fault line ie, the buried part.

No because of the portion after "unless".

Sent in a cracked slide 8 months ago, still waiting.

I imagine they will eventually only do what they mostly do now, which is offer to replace your old model gun with something they currently produce. If they say they can't fix it because they don't make open guns anymore you may be able to convince them to do it, maybe not. The terms of their warranty allow them to decline a repair for whatever reason they want.

There was a point where STI began to notice that the prices being charged for custom 2011s were considerably higher than the prices it was charging. Reasonably, STI wants to bring its prices up somewhat from where they are, but not quite to custom prices. They know they are seen as the entry-level 2011, so they can't just raise prices. At least not easily. So, boom! The DVC is born. It's flashy, and the price is higher. Gradually, the old lines (Trubor, Edge, etc) are discontinued. People of course begin to notice that the guns are not really different from the old lines, and in fact may even be worse. Comps and slides are cracking. People still go to custom vendors. So the company thinks... another brand redesign. If competition shooters know the product isn't worth the new price, let's advertise to... tactical shooters! After all they're spending the prices we want on custom Glocks, we can get them to buy our guns! They're half plastic already! So they drop the Staccatos, marketed towards timmies. Enter the gradual phase-out of the DVC line.

Gear violation during the COF, the relevant rule covers both, which is that if you're not shooting open you go to open, and if you're shooting open you now shoot for no score.