broadside72

Haven't used a Dillon but they look so tight and compact that my fat hands would get frustrated trying to setup or correct an issue around the shell plate. I enjoy my LnL with Hornady case feeder and MBF. Both need tweaks and have a learning curve. If you need more stations, then Dillon or mark 7 options offer than but for the progressive 5 station presses, I don't see much difference between the 750 and LnL. I am however, undecided if I want to go with a Dillon to have the option to fully automate later or get another LnL since it is the platform I know. I think the automation is the driving factor in a lot of the blue vs red debate

The BOSS hanger does not fit the Safariland ELS belt as it is 1.75" and the hanger is only 1.5". At least its not anywhere close to fitting mine.

It fits the ELS better. I actually replaced all mine with the TekLok style because the ELS/QLS pushed the gun out too far for USPSA rules. So i put in 1/4" spaces to make it legal but then the gap was too small for my thumb.

OP says after are you ready and we assume before standby

What already got shot down by an RMI earlier in the thread is "shoehorning" the rule to fit. But whatever, if it was not meant to be used, then that language would not be in the rule book.

I can understand that. I just can't justify the cost and setup time to me. I can't shoot enough ammo to break even for a decade

I have no real issues with my LnL AP but I use a Mr. BulletFeeder instead of the Hornady feeder. I do use the Hornady case feeder though. With dies, InlineFab upgrades, etc I am still less money into the equivalent Dillon setup. It took a few sessions to get all the components tuned to working together best, but now I can turn out ammo pretty fast, at least 9mm now that its setup for that. But that fine tuning applies to all presses, especially as you add more automation features. When I buy another press, I am torn between red and blue since I know red well and for the cost, but I do like the idea of more stations and full automation possibility of a 1050/1100 base system. Though I am not sure I really need that level of automation as I don't shoot that much to justify it.

That seems like a cool product, but my Hornady auto filler is easy and fast enough. I just wish I had more tubes for it.

Talk to your local USPSA club and see if they want to start offering it, perhaps volunteer to help run it.

I just setup the MFB on my LnL and hung the collator off the Hornady case feeder tub. The spring tube was a bit tight and would hold the feeder head up allowing multiple bullets to fall through. All I had to do was unscrew the spring tube half way out of both ends of the plastic ends to give it slack and the head falls normally. So far at least. If it gets gummy then I might add a spring to pull it down but so far so good.

I am trying this and it seems to be working for me, at least improving things. Thanks!

He is only getting away with no DQ because "are you ready?" happened and he was no longer under 8.3.1

You aren't reading the entire thread. I'm done.

Hence my "PCC are getting a free pass"

hence my "PCC are getting a free pass"

And if I flip the safety off on my holstered 1911 I go home. That is the comparison I am trying to make.

PCCs are getting a free pass here. Pistols have safety on or hammer down requirements when holstered/staged but a PCC held in the hand before a start signal don't have a DQ rule for no safety enabled. The fact that the shooter popped one off before the start signal and did not appear to be in the process of starting a COF (starting to move) seems like a unsafe gun handling to me, but hey apparently the rules are black and white and set in stone as written even though "but not limited to" is first line in bold print.

Fine it's an AD but there is no such thing as an accidental discharge in my opinion, especially the case described in the OP. But again first line of 10.5 is includes but not limited to

An ND is not unsafe handling? Got me there

I will say it again and no one has offered an exception to this 10.5 Match Disqualification – Unsafe Gun Handling Examples of unsafe gun handling include, but are not limited to: therefore a specific rule is not required for DQ under 10.5

And is this really any different than a "staged firearm"? There are specific DQ rules about NDs for holstered/staged firearms.

10.5 Match Disqualification – Unsafe Gun Handling Examples of unsafe gun handling include, but are not limited to: If the RO calls it, and the RM and MD support it, then it stands. If shooter wants to go to arbitration, it's their money and the staff stands by the committee decision.

This is semantics I think. I am calling the leg the entire piece that goes from the ground to the top of the wall structure since it is typically a single piece. But the leg in the rules is only the part below the physical portion of the wall that defines the edges of the invisible wall that goes to the ground per the rules.

If it is completely outside the shooting area then it can't be used for support. If there are forward fault lines that are not directly under the wall then it can't be used

Show me the rule that says that. The 2019 rules changed to no longer allow gain support from the "supporting items" of a wall. Any portion of the wall outside the shooting area in the 2019 rules was deemed unavailable for support. That last part is what changed in 2020. It is the feet and braces that can not be used for support. That means the devices that the walls fit into cannot be used and any brace or stabilizing part extending away from the wall structure itself cannot be used. This has not changed from 2019 But the edge of the wall (aka the leg) can now be used for support if it is outside the shooting area if a portion of the wall is used to define or is within the shooting area. Would you treat a solid piece of plywood that was sitting on the ground on its edge acting as a wall any different than a typical 2x2 framed snow fence wall that does not physically go to the ground other than the legs?