matteekay
-
Posts
1,524 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Forums
Profiles
Events
Store
Posts posted by matteekay
-
-
1 minute ago, clee403 said:
So, I've scoured the 2017 and 2022 rulebook. The 2017 version had this specific line for ammunition carriers:
- 8.6.2 H Magazine carriers must be worn in a location on the belt so that the front edge of the carrier or magazine is behind the shooter’s hipbone.
In the 2022 rulebook this line is removed, and the only reference anywhere to the location of magazine carriers is the following:
- 8.6.2.3 Magazine carriers must be worn in a location on the belt so that the magazine is completely concealed.
So, while an OWB holster must still be behind the hip bone, there does not appear to be any limitations on magazine carriers as long as with your arms in scarecrow position your concealment garment covers all.
Consensus is that bullets-out, cant, and forward placement is now ok as long as concealed.
Jump in and let me know if I missed something!
Cheers.
I missed that; I think you're right, and the PCC rule wasn't revised to reflect the new master rulebook. Good catch!
-
6 hours ago, Scooter said:
There's not rule in placement of mag pouches, but then they throw this in for PCC.
"If they choose to use magazine pouches, them may not place more than 2 on their
belt which must be worn behind the hip bone as in pistol divisions."
Why did they put "as in pistol divisions"?
That's the rule for pistols: behind the hip bone for carriers (2 or 10 o'clock).
-
45 minutes ago, Racinready300ex said:
Probably not, 100%
At least I think we're in agreement with my original point the debate is just what is cover, and it'll be what ever the SO say it is.
So no better than the old rules then, lol.
-
9 hours ago, Racinready300ex said:
I still would say your club is kind of doing it wrong to place "cover" but no fault line and designate that it's a surprise target that is in the open.
Literally every wall on your stages has a fault line?
-
53 minutes ago, Racinready300ex said:
I'm not sure I follow your example, you have a box made of walls with a fault line. That's not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about surprise targets you engage in the open. If you're leaning around a wall that isn't cover you're making the shooting harder than it needs to be, which you're welcome to do.
I specifically asked this question on our first stage at the recent state match. The stage had you move down a hall way to a 2nd position of cover at the end of the wall. I asked if I could reload moving up, the answer was yes. Then I asked hypothetically if there wasn't a fault line at the end of the wall and that was a surprise in the open target could I reload and the answer was no. Which goes back to my point about this being IDPA and there is really no right answer so you need to ask the SO on the stage what they expect you to do.
That was my point, as well: if I'm separated from a surprise target by an impenetrable wall, even if there's not a designated PoC, I am logically not exposed to that target (if I can't shoot at it, how can it shoot at me?). Sounds like your SO disagrees, but that doesn't make them right.
I was only pointing out that we've separated the shooter from targets using walls that don't have PoC's for years, and none of that wording has changed in 2022. I read the new rule as specific to vision barriers.
-
2 hours ago, Racinready300ex said:
I'm imagining your comment to mean if you block a target with a wall and call it cover but don't have a fault line could you reload. I'd think that's not a legal stage, if there isn't a fault line it's not really cover it's a vision barrier.
That's not true. We absolutely use walls to separate targets from the shooter that aren't "positions of cover" or a vision barrier. Think of a box made from walls with a target in the middle and an opening on the uprange wall that's marked as a PoC. The side walls in that situation aren't cover, as there's no shooting position, but they sure as hell aren't a vision barrier, as then I could just lean around the side and shoot through them rather than going to the PoC.
To extrapolate that, move one of those walls so it's separating the shooter from a target that's in the open. There's no position of cover to shoot from, but the shooter also can throw rounds through the wall at the target. I'd assume the shooter is covered if they want to reload.
-
2 hours ago, Racinready300ex said:
Under the old rules you could leave the position of cover with a empty gun and preform a reload on the move. As long as the reload was done prior to the surprise target becoming visible you did not get a PE. This was pretty subjective, to decide when the cardboard target can see you and when your reload was complete.
Under the new rules on this stage if you leave cover with the empty gun you get a PE.
Isn't it only a PE if the only thing separating you from the surprise target is a vision barrier? What if it's hard cover, like a wall?
-
Thanks for the clarifications; that makes a lot of sense (even if the rule change doesn't). I run an indoor match so we don't use true vision barriers often (ie. penetrable).
36 minutes ago, Jim Watson said:If you run out in the Open, just keep going, reload ASAP. How are you going to run empty in
Concealment behind a Vision Barrier?
You're right, you can't. However, you could go dry behind cover and the next target is behind a vision barrier, so you'd have to reload before moving.
-
On 5/19/2022 at 5:57 AM, Mike62 said:
That said the new rules with vission barriers seems to be a bigger problem than the mag capacity changes.
Which vision barrier change is this? I'm running my first match under the new rules this weekend and want to make sure I'm tracking everything.
-
9 hours ago, Buzzdraw said:
Dropping too many loaded live rounds on the ground if you are running a revolver will potentially get you to the dreaded "I'm out of ammo!" phase in a CoF.
100% agree but it's weird that it's allowed. It would actually be the same thing if a semi-auto shooter racked a round out so they could drop an empty mag to reload. I don't think this is the intention of the rule but it's how it's currently written.
-
Another fun thing that a fellow revolver shooter pointed out: the new rule book dropped "or loose ammunition" from the section regarding reloading PE's, meaning now you're only penalized for leaving behind "loading devices" with ammo. So, if you're shooting a revolver with speed loaders, you can *technically* dump unfired rounds out of the cylinder at any time without a penalty. That seems... interesting.
-
Not sure if anyone else caught this, but loading past division capacity is now a flagrant penalty.
Brb, ordering 10-round G17 mags... Yikes.
-
On 5/11/2022 at 7:38 AM, Racinready300ex said:
The jist I'm getting is it needs to retain your mags and be concealed, that's it. It's pretty logical to do it that way since it doesn't really matter for match performance so why worry about it so much.
All of the local MD's here got together and went over the new rules. This was also our interpretation; needs to retain the mag and be concealed, but all other restrictions are pretty much gone. Same on the holster retention screws and how low the mouth of the holster can be.
-
4 hours ago, pskys2 said:
Just back from the 2022 Revolver Nationals a BIG CONGRATULATIONS to;
MWP Another National Championship under his belt, and convincingly so.
Fishbreath, Jay finished 9th Overall. Good to be on the squad with you, smooth and fast a bright future there.
Pat Jones finished 12th.
https://practiscore.com/results/new/bcc073fb-2dd3-455d-a249-1e374e0cd0ce?q_division=2
PAT JONES IS MY HERO. And I'm not ashamed to admit to it.
Congrats to everyone who shot and survived! I'm tentatively planning to do the IRC this year so hopefully I'll see some of you there. And/or, feel free to come to the ICORE Rocky Mountain Regional. I hear the match director is a total stud.
-
People far more well-versed than me have spoken, but I promised an update... so here we go.
I installed the RevUp kit in my hooptie/beater 627. This gun has never been set up by a gunsmith and has only been tuned by me. Despite my best efforts, it's been problematic, and has never run at less than a 8.5lb pull. I worked the strain screw up on the RevUp until I had 100% ignition. This wound up being pretty close to the same weight as my previous configuration but initially felt better because of the shorter nature of the pull. I then ran this gun in three USPSA matches: two locals and the Colorado state championship.
First local was a short indoor match. The gun ran without any problems.
The second local was one of the most horrendous outdoor matches I've every shot, with winds getting into the 40-50 mph range sustained and gusts even faster. All of our gear (and us) were getting sandblasted but the gun ran without issue. I noticed that my hits on paper seemed to be closer together than they were with a traditional ignition setup and I shot steel decently well.
Bighorn, the CO state championship, decided to take the crown as easily the most horrendous outdoor match I've ever shot. I did all eleven stages in one day and, during that day, we got to experience a 40-degree temperature drop, 65 mph winds (with dust), thunder, rain, sleet, and hail (and getting royally RO-****ed, but that's a different story). These were literally the most exacerbating circumstances I could have asked for and the gun ran without a hiccup despite not having a frame lock or a plug in its place. However, as the day wore on, I found that I was having a serious problem with poppers and even missed some paper than I shouldn't have. Bighorn pushed my shooting more than the locals insofar as I was shooting at tougher arrays, further targets, more movers, etc. (I did win, but there was only three of us so it doesn't count).
I did a lot of thinking and experimenting afterwards. My biggest issue is that I've always partially staged the trigger and then pulled through when shooting hard shots. I fully acknowledge this isn't the best way to shoot but it is what it is for me. That method is literally impossible with the RevUp; once you clear the initial wall, the trigger goes full-send to the break. This would be ideal if I could get this particular gun to run with a lighter trigger pull, but at 8.5 lbs, there's too much front sight wander when getting the hammer in motion. I think that's my final verdict on the system: it's better than a traditional ignition setup, but only if your gun will run at a low-ish pull weight. I'd rather have a "standard" trigger at 8+ lbs.
I returned the gun to its original configuration for now. I want to experiment with it more further down the line but I'm quitting USPSA Revo for a while and would rather have the 627's trigger pull feel closer to the Rhinos' I run in IDPA and ICORE.
I feel like I need to underscore that these kits do exactly what Protocall advertises and it's an issue with my gun that's preventing me from dropping the pull weight to where it needs to be. I'd recommend these to anyone with even a slight inclination toward tinkering (which is all revolver shooters as far as I can tell, lol).
-
3 hours ago, Carmoney said:
Weigand blades are OK, but they have three flaws: (1) hassle to install, (2) wiggle around...
Yes! They seem to go one way or the other - the one on my V-Comp has that up/down wiggle and the one on my hooptie is so tight it barely moves.
2 hours ago, pskys2 said:Agreed, the wiggle doesn't seem to cause any accuracy but frets my OCD! There is an Aluminum Black solution that works though.
Glad it's not just me, lol. I use Aluminum Black, too. It doesn't seem to take as well as cold blue does to steel but it works well enough.
-
Appreciate all the feedback! Definitely going to look into them.
On 5/21/2022 at 7:24 PM, Squirrel45 said:Would you guys think this is superior to the rough country sight?
Personally, I didn't like the adjustment method on the Rough Country. Mine also loosened under fairly mild recoil.
-
I've always ignored these because they don't look like they're meant for standard S&W revolvers, but I guess they just added a shroud to the standard mount. Anyone use one? Any advantage over a stock unit with a Weigand blade?
-
40 minutes ago, OptimiStick said:
As somoene extreeeeemely familiar with that particular problem - my best advice, and advice I wish I'd followed much earlier - pick one now and stick with it. I spent way too much time waffling between rigs and moving back and forth.
100%.
-
1 hour ago, OptimiStick said:
yeah, I don't know if that's it or not. But the G34 with more barrel , slide and the heavy guide rod and the Zev with it's steel frame - seem about the same to me. But that DR is def a little snappy in comparison. Like I said, not a huge deal and I'd get used to it just fine - but I do notice the difference. The wife is smaller statured and doesn't have the best grip, and its very noticeable to her.
Even an opinion is a data point! Thanks for sharing.
I'm waffling on continuing to shoot the Shadow Systems or switching over to the Gen 3 G19 longslide I built. Need to do some head-to-head testing.
-
On 5/13/2022 at 7:14 PM, Lingering said:
During the 150 round quoted break-in period I had approximately 15% FTFs. No stovepipes, just pure FTFs. The barrel also has the same amount of wear from the slide after 150 rounds, if not more, as does my Glock 19.4 with approximately 3K rounds through it. The frequency of FTFs was the same across 2 different types of ammo and did not improve as I went towards the tail-end of the break-in period. This is reasonably high-quality ammo too, a mix of Fiocchi and American Eagle. All using their preferred Magpul pmag that came with the gun. Although not an expert shooter by any means, I've shot a couple local matches for fun and dry-fire regularly. I'm not one to immediately blame my equipment and double-checked my grip to make sure I'm not limp-wristing it or otherwise inducing malfunctions. The gun was also cleaned and oiled before I took it out for the break-in process.
SS quotes on their break-in period video on their Youtube channel that really the gun should be broken in a couple of mags in, which is like 30-45 rounds, and should maybe have 1-2 malfunctions due to their "tight tolerances." After calling their customer service, they said up to a 5% malfunction rate during the break-in period is within spec. Even after being at triple that, 2 weeks after initiating contact with their CS, I still have yet to even receive a shipping label to get it sent back in for eval.
I went to my 2 largest local gun stores, and they said my experience although not common, is what they've experienced before. They have great designs and can make good guns. There are just a fair number of lemons. Both stores have had to send back multiple guns. And their CS is known for being slow and unresponsive. And the turn-around time for service is on the order of weeks. From this information, it seems like even if they get the shipping label to me Monday, is that I'll probably get the gun back maybe in a month. 6 weeks+ turnaround time to fix a gun that I currently can't trust to carry or use in competition is bad. The lack of follow-through per their CS in conjunction with that is in my mind unacceptable. If another issue arises, I just don't have the confidence they'll take care of me and live up to what they promise on their website and social media.
If you google "reddit malfunction shadow systems" or "failure to feed" you'll see quite a few posts and threads with people having the same issues whether it's with their DR920s, MR920s, or even their newly released CR920.
At this point, I'm just completely soured on the brand and the gun no longer brings me any joy. I just want to send it back for a refund and to wait for the Walther PDP SD Pro to come out.
Really appreciate all the details. My MR920L has been dead-nuts reliable but hearing about a gun company with QC issues and slow CS is FAR from crazy. Looking at you, S&W. Hopefully you get it sorted and/or find a platform you prefer!
22 hours ago, OptimiStick said:I've got a pair of Gen5 G34s the wife shoots when she started gaming with me. Typical mods over time - several different triggers to try and get the right one, silicone carbide grip job , tungsten guiderod / lighter recoil spring & striker spring, extractor. She shot those exclusively for a while - then she wanted to start transitioning over to CO so I picked up a DR920 and a Zev 0z9. Timney triggers in both, guiderod & spring changes again , and some grip work - but between the two I was really surprised at the felt recoil differences . The DR920 is a good bit snappier. The Zev feels much softer. I guess maybe a combination of the Zev frame system and the DR920 using the shorter g19 recoil system even in a full frame gun. She shoots the Glock platform more than me, but she much prefers the g34 and Zev over the DR. It really just collects dust at this point unless I shoot it. The SS seems to be a well made gun, and I've had no issues with it. I agree with her on the recoil, but I'm one of those that I just kind of get used to whatever it is I shoot enough of. But for her its a deal breaker.
It's interesting you say this. I'm new to Glocks but I noticed I preferred the recoil of my PSA Dagger over the MR920L but couldn't figure out why. I hadn't considered the recoil system vs. slide length configuration.
I just ran my SS at a match yesterday with zero issues (again). Probably the only thing I'm not a fan of is the sight configuration; we had some 4" steel at unreasonable distances and the front sight completely obscures it. I will probably change them for something else if I stick with this as my main gun.
-
2 hours ago, AHI said:
No taste issues. But now have a constant noise in my ears.
I mean... how good is your ear pro?
Kidding, and I hope it improves for you.
-
11 minutes ago, RePete said:
Only if you are a member.
I sent GigG the copies.
5 minutes ago, Thomas H said:The Down Zero Blog is accessible by anyone.
Right.
-
33 minutes ago, Lingering said:
My trigger broke in reasonably well after dry-firing a ton. There's still stacking before the break but it's much crispier and has cleaned up significantly.
My main issue is the grip size is too small--I've got large hands and there's not a lot of room for my support hand. I've also had a ton of reliability issues and the customer service has been not great.
What kind of reliability issues?
2022 ICORE Rocky Mountain Revolver Championship
in Revolver Match Announcements and Discussions
Posted
GET HYPED.
I've seen the stages and we're looking at a good match. Even better - minimal teardown on Saturday because we're shooting the same stages for USPSA on Sunday (and we can make those shooters do it
). Also, no one is signed up in Classic right now; I'll flip over to that division if someone wants to come play with me.
See you all soon!