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


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About SweetToof

  • Rank
    Finally read the FAQs
  • Birthday 01/31/1990

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    Fleetwood PA
  • Interests
    USPSA, Steel Challenge, 3 Gun, Sporting Clays, Old VW/Audi
  • Real Name
    Anton Siekmann

Recent Profile Visitors

501 profile views
  1. I could see the BOD wanting to lump USPSA Rifle in with multigun, but I don't think it needs to be. Here's a suggestion that would require very little added in the way of management from the BOD. My thought is that we start a USPSA Carbine ruleset. Basically copy the current USPSA rulebook and keep the verbatim safety rules for PCC. The rules regarding stages stay the same, probably push the distance out for minimum range of steel targets. Keep 32 rounds as maximum Same paper targets, metric and classic. Major-only scoring with power factor established to keep standard 55gr .223 as a baseline. Same scoring zones as pistol. Stage designers get creative and basically adapt USPSA stages to rifles (easier said than done). I personally like the idea of adapting the IPSC Pistol rules regarding round count with the Small, Medium and Large field courses, but the current mix of stages at most Majors works out pretty well without those rules. Divisions are a bit of a debate, but I have some ideas. Open Carbine - Anything goes obviously. Current Open division rifles slide right in without modification. - Barrel length whatever you want, same rules regarding SBR's as current PCC rules. - Magazines only loaded to 30 rounds. (This might be up for debate, but I see it as the equivalent of Open Pistol division) Limited Carbine - 1 piece of glass, magnified or not. - Backup/offset irons allowed. - Any muzzle device that fits within an agreed-upon dimension. (current IPSC rifle rules have this specified already) Most traditional .223 muzzle breaks are allowed. - any barrel length. Again, see PCC sbr rules. - no Bipods - any magazine length, but may only be loaded to 20 rounds in mag. The point of this is to force some gun manipulation as a part this sport. The goal of this division is more along the lines of USPSA Pistol Production, rather than Limited. A place for "real" guns.
  2. https://www.ammoland.com/2019/12/2021-ipsc-pcc-world-shoot-is-coming-to-polk-county-florida/#axzz68UDNt2xw Recent news indicates that Universal Shooting Academy in Florida is hosting the 2021 PCC World shoot. The article quotes Frank Garcia mentioning that many Rifle shooters have came out to PCC matches rather than pistol guy switching over to PCC. To me this shows that there is a large group of people that want rifle competitions. PCC itself has become very popular very fast, and maybe USPSA-style Rifle Caliber Carbine matches would be popular as well.
  3. Space could be an issue at some clubs, but most clubs have at least 2 100+ yard ranges. The clubs I shoot USPSA matches at have at least 4 bays that are 50-75 yards, and with small steel or mini paper targets, you could create scenarios for precise shooting with a little creativity. But I agree, there are more ranges with space for pistol matches. My overall point is that I think that IPSC is dropping the ball when it comes to world class Semi Auto Rifle competition, and USPSA has an opportunity to change that. Part of this is that they have the semi auto divisions competing in the same matches as "Manual" and "Manual Action Lever Release" divisions, and I would guess that is what's slowing down the stages. They aren't using bolt guns either, they use these very odd pump-action AR's in "Manual", and the "Lever" isn't like a Marlin U.S shooters are used to, it's an odd bolt-release button. Basically a design work-around to create a gun that can be bought by civilians in certain European countries (from what I understand). But just imagine shooting a USPSA PCC Championship where the divisions are PCC Open, PCC Pump, and PCC Bolt-release. Sounds like a great way to get boring stages from a semi auto point of view.
  4. High cap divisions certainly are popular, but there are still reloads in USPSA Pistol matches. Mag length forces even open shooters to reload, where in IPSC Rifle there are 60 round mags allowed and effectively eliminate reloading. I also am a production shooter and like the division for many reasons, one of which is the locap part. For the sake of short courses, I would suggest maybe 15 rounds in the mag, there by most stages would have at least 1 reload, some would be 2. That is if you stick to the 32 round maximum round count. I also like the idea of keeping just 2 divisions. 2 Gun is interesting and I was not aware of those matches by me, so thanks for that, and I'll have to check them out. I'm throwing my idea out because IPSC Rifle (with hit factor scoring) is the closest thing to what I really want.
  5. As the US arm of IPSC, USPSA has made it's own modifications to the pistol part of USPSA, but how about a revamp of the IPSC Rifle rules? Over the last 2 decades there has been tons of progress made in the AR/M4 shooting world, but the current IPSC Rifle rules do not really reflect the current gear or uses of the AR15. Specifically, everyone that uses an AR in their profession uses a LPVO, red dot, or similar but the IPSC rifles divisions for semi auto guns are basically Open, and then Irons with no bipods. For all intents and purposes, Irons on rifles are dead, with their sole use being backups in case optics go down. And with modern tech improving optics constantly, that is becoming less and less likely when using high quality gear. As for the matches them selves, recent world shoot had very few close range targets, pretty much zero SOTM, and it looks like there was nothing in the way of decision making as far as attacking a stage. IE there was 1 way to do it, and every shooter did the same thing. The round count on each stage and current rule set make weapon manipulation pretty much not a thing. Honestly the match looked boring as hell, and those type of stage attributes are exactly what we hate to see at pistol matches, yet the damn WORLD CHAMPIONSHIPS look like level 1 club match stages to me. IMO it is not a truly thorough test of a shooter's abilities, and I would guess those on the world stage would agree. Better COF's, updated equipment rules, and maybe a magazine limit (to force some reloads) would provide something I think a lot of US shooters would be into. Recent numbers say there are 17 million AR15's in the US, making it the most common gun in the country.Right now the only competitive outlet for Carbines is 3 Gun, and it's loosing popularity. I think shotguns and time+ scoring are the reasons why. Applying the same concepts of testing one's skills that we do in Pistol matches, I would love to see a better way to test who the best AR shooters in the world are. Interested on your thoughts.
  6. They're just not the same. I have 2 guns with Johnny's competition trigger in them, and a nicely tuned 1911. The glock has more pre-travel and not as crisp of a wall/break, but it's about as good as it gets for glocks. The two gun designs are just inherently different.
  7. I made a template of the target shape with the A zones cut out to trace with a sharpie. Slice the outside and then mark your A zones with 1 template. Got some cardboard from the warehouse where I work. Cut probably 50 in an hour. I will say IMO if you are training for USPSA, you should be using actual or replica Metric/Classic targets with proper A zones, for visual repetition's sake.
  8. SweetToof


    I know this is getting more into a debate about classifiers rather than the OP's question, but... I may be the outlier here, but why care about classification? Especially someone else's classification, and in regards to taking classes. If you really want GM, cool. Practice classifiers. If you want to min matches, that practice is going to be different. Swinging for the fences on classifiers is not the best way to win matches, but if that's not your goal, then go for it. If you tell a top shooter who you are taking a class from the your goal is to reach GM, they're probably going to tell you the same thing. To use the term "paper gm" seriously is to truly miss the forest for the trees. Everyone is a paper (enter class). Classifier ability does not really reflect match performance ability. If you think someone else doesn't deserve their classification, beat them in a match. That's why we're all doing this, to place high as possible in matches, right? And just because a GM loses a match to an A class, don't think the Gm bought their classifiers or somehow gamed the system.
  9. I've heard of people sanding the tip of the decapper pin very slightly to give it more of a point rather than a dome, but have not tried myself. Had primer pull-back only a couple of times through 5k 9mm on my 1050. Pretty new to it though.
  10. Hoser match with a stage split between 3 bays. Started raining heavily and while the bays were gravel, there was grass that turned to mud in between them. Right handed shooter sprinting left to right, slipped, fell, and broke the 180 to a point that some spectators may have been swept. Not sure if maybe the stage should have been thrown out or what the right course of action would be, but it had several other people fall, at least one dropping a gun.
  11. As you can see from responses, you can buy almost anything and get a good one. Some are just more popular and have a reputation to go with the name. You will also potentially get a bad one, but it's less likely if you spend more, to an extent. I agree with Charlie. If you shoot even a moderate amount for a competitor, and especially for multiple seasons, you will very quickly out spend what you put into your gun, even at the high end level. Obviously everyone is on a budget, but get the best gun you can afford. I have a S&W 1911 E Series ant it rocks. Got it for about 1200, was sold when I shot a friend's, and loved the look and small features that set it apart.
  12. Thanks for this! Interested in stages myself since I'll have a private outdoor range soon and as a relatively new shooter, don't have the breadth of knowledge as to what stage elements to set up.
  13. Had a Bladetech, switched to a Red Hill and never looked back. The Bladetech is thin and flimsy in comparison. Get the Red Hill double-layer kydex. It is way more firm, and you notice that every time you draw. The holster stays completely still during the draw and doesn't want to come with the gun at all. Feels like its bolted to your belt, as a holster should.
  14. buy it The worst part will be realizing how much time you wasted over 8 years Considering the cost of your components, guns, and most importantly time, a 1-time 1100 purchase is small in comparison.
  15. I skipped from a Hornady LNL progressive to the Super 1050. While I do not have experience with any other Dillon, I can say the 1050 is a dream come true. The speed, and more importantly, quality, at which it loads made me re-think my loading schedule for the year. I shot about 12,000 9mm last year, and it was a chore I did not look forward to. I bought my 1050 this past fall and I casually loaded 15k rounds in about 2 months. Done loading 9mm until 2020 I also load .45 and .223 and while the change over is a good bit of work, if you are at all familiar with setting up presses, its really not that bad. I only have 1 toolhead for now, 200 bucks is a lot for convenience, and it does not even save you from changing powder bars, swage system, or primers. Just saves you the die setup, which is the easiest part of setting up a press if you have lock rings or just marks on your dies. I also load for a whole year of shooting, per caliber. Set up for .45 now, and once I load 10k of those, I'll set up for .223 which will take a bit of load development for my rifles, and keep it that way until I need more 9mm next year. The only reason I'd say not to go 1050, would be if you don't shoot much, and in just 1 caliber. Even if I only shot my 12k 9mm and nothing else, the money I spent on my guns is more than the 1050, the money I spent on my ammo components is more than the 1050, the match fees last year were about 1/3 the cost of a 1050, and add the time I slaved over the Hornady, and the top of the line press sounds like a no brainer at this point. That not even taking into consideration the fact that you're likely going to do this for a few years, and that's a lot of time loading at 600/hr compared to 1000+. buy a 1050
  • Create New...