jrdoran

My 100gr Atlanta Steel challenge loads were clearly a Berry's plated bullet 100gr. and had no exposed lead.

I'll pull one of mine tonight and see what is there.

I know your question was about compensator, but you also hinted at it being correlated to ammo choice. For steel challenge: I have used Atlanta Arms extensively in my STI DVC Steel ( stock ) and STI DVC Open with 7lb spring. It is the closest to a custom load that is commercially available. Runs about 109pf in the above guns. I suggest buy a couple of boxes and compare against whatever production ammo you might purchase. I think you will find a huge difference. https://atlantaarms.com/products/elite-9mm-100gr-fmj-steel-challenge.html As an FYI, the Atlanta 9mm 100gr load formula is Berry's 100gr bullet. 4.0 of N310 Powder loaded to 1.08OAL.

Will be interested to hear how the two shock buffers compare. That you for measuring and it will add to the discussion and data we have. Post back and let us know how your experiment goes.

https://scsa.org/classification Click Learn more about classification system; scroll down;

I have removed the classification from my match registration form. Also the Category. They provide no useful function for a L1 match. I'm a minimalist so less stuff to click and scroll is better. Division / USPSA #. That is all that is on my club form. example: https://practiscore.com/efgc-scsa-8-stage-sat-july-8-2023/register To your question for a L2/L3 it would be classification record. I believe L3 actually does a validation of sorts prior to match.

Steve, I've often had the same hypothesis about PCC with very lightweight setups and the adverse effect on absorbing recoil. What type of buffer / spring setup are you running and have you played around in that space ?

This is interesting, because with the exception of outer limits, I never considered or observed anyone actually standing on the box "fault lines", but this is certainly possible, thereby making the outside dimension the meaningful one. Frequently the box perimeter is raised enough that it would throw off balance to stand on top of, but certainly possible.

Rule 2.2 specifies shooting box size, but specifically indicates is for outside dimension. To me, this makes no sense. Based on material ( pvc, angle iron, 2x2, 2x4, whatever ) why would the rules specify outside which leaves variability to the actual inside dimension which is where we shoot ? https://uspsa.org/viewer/SCSA-Rulebook.pdf 2.2 Layout of stages All course designs and measurements are approximate with slight (+/-2”) variationspossible. All shooting boxes will be 3’ x 3’ except for Outer Limits, which are 4’ x 4’. NOTE: This is an outside dimension for the shooting box for all stages.

Completely agree with you @Hoops The current lifetime personal best for each stage approach isn't realistic. Like taking individual laps from a mile distance runner and then re-assembling the (4) laps into a 3 minute mile classification. Having some form of expiring classification based on 6+ stage MATCH performance is a much better measurement of a consistent good shooter. I also agree they should show the actual top 20 GM percentage . It is relatively easy to compute them on our own by using their USPSA number, but capping for display purposes only at 100% defies any logic. Honestly, Steel challenge within USPSA doesn't appear to be actively managed, curated, and cultivated. It is just sort of there. I enjoy it, but feel like it is frozen in time. Carry Optics example for those who aren't familiar.

I use https://www.personalabs.com and get mine checked every 6 months. You don't need to make a Dr. appointment. You make the order online and then you goto normal local lab like quest or otherwise. Has worked great for 3 years. You get the report via email and it is the same report your doctor would normally get. Be intentional and take control yourself;

Here is an example of the report I generated after this w/e match. The CO / OPN guys loved it because it put them on equal footing .

Very interesting, I was checking out your linked file. Perhaps the peak times are outdated, but I was curious was RFPO was scaled as the 100% ? You had RFPO as the lowest peak time and scale. This didn't quite make sense to me, but perhaps it had to do with the divisions that were shot in your match ( no rfro / pico ) ; Also nice how you split out centerfire;

Billy Stripling is first class; He will make you happy I am certain; https://striplincustom.com

Our thinking if very much aligned. Good ideas on the teams. Check out the app match tracker ( if you haven't already ) ( android / iPhone ) ; It does 75% of the stage by stage and total classification measurement you desire. It does not have a historical view, but you can capture after each match and go from there. https://teammatchtracker.com Tracking the achievement of MATCH classification seems like an easy addition to PS. Here is what I am doing now. I also wrote some python code to pull the data from the results screen and then product my own .txt files, but the cut / paste was also easy.

I've had good success with a simple cut / paste from the combined results. I delete some header info that comes across. I compute the MATCH classification for everyone for our 8 stage match and then email out. Shifts the focus from the one time personal best stage to a more consistent measurement that is normalized across divisions. We've been bantering in our club the idea of forming teams and aggregating scores and then comparing how teams did. Sort of like a bowling league. We have many GMs and lately it is a hero or zero type of match for everyone as they try and push past 100% classification. Sort of takes the fun out so we're searching for ideas. @Hoops What are some of the ideas you have around excel for the data ?

Super nice video you made.

Thanks for the confirmation and confirmation that I shouldn’t suffer alone. picked up 550 today. Youtube has been great. Seller was awesome !

OK, change in plans. a Dillon 550 fell into my lap for basically nothing, so I am going with my keep it simple approach and will start with non-auto index and full manual loading for a bit. I'm confident I will escalate my loading to a xl750 with auto case and auto bullet at a minimum , but for now I am going old school. I will now stand back and let the commentary commence…

I don't use any o-rings on my aluminum weights for 84pf loads. It works just fine.

Thanks for all the informed feedback. 3d Printing in on my hobby checklist, but I'm not there yet. Based on all the feedback, I'll definitely purchase the case feeder and likely the bullet feeder as well. Normally I just jump into the deep end of the pool with equipment and this time I was trying to inch my way in, but your experience and advice has convinced me of the value of these two. thanks;

I will reload about 15k rounds / year.

https://www.doublealpha.biz/us/mini-mr-bulletfeeder https://www.doublealpha.biz/us/mini-xl650-case-feeder Anyone have a point of view or experience with the lower cost option ? I'm just starting out and will purchase an XL750, but I don't load high volume and thought the mini bullet feeder and the mini case feeder might be a good way to simplify getting started. I'm not looking to go the absolute lowest cost, but simplicity I do value. Loading 9mm minor power loads for PCC.

Back to some comments on the proposed changes that Zach posted ( thank you ); I found it interesting in some of the anomalies between roundabout and smoke & hope ( 108 / 103 ) where in some divisions roundabout has a lower new PST and in others smoke & hope has a new lower time. Tried to find a pattern of rifle vs pistol or low ready vs draw, but couldn't. Things are definitely more precise in the new times; Interested in any insight in how the new PST were derived. Take RFRI vs RFRO for example. I guess the optic helps on the smaller plates of roundabout. While a few are equal, none have a lower PST than Smoke & Hope in current PST. 2022/current -->. https://scsa.org/classification# Easy Click proposed 2023 PST -->. 2023 Proposed PST