regor

The black portion of the target is NOT a target as defined by the rule book, it is hard cover. Hard cover does not have a non-scoring border (even though there happens to be one present when you paint over a standard cardboard target). The confusion of this situation is exactly why 4.1.4.1 says "When possible, hard cover should not be simulated but constructed using impenetrable materials". All hard cover should be treated equally when scoring, so if you replaced the black portion of the peekers in your situation with a sheet of plywood, how would you score it? If you and I were both ROing the same match, and we scored that array our respective ways, would that be a fair match? No. This is a corner case that exists because of the wording of the rules and should be fixed. Partial targets should not be used to simulate hard cover on another target (again, I have never seen them used this way, although it sounds like you have). Better solution for your array: Use three open targets and put two no-shoots at the desired angles to create the same effect of the peekers but with higher risk.

Hence why I started my comment with "Production (and low capacity divisions in general)". I went on to address production specifically because the comment I replied to asked, "Why shoot production?" I am not saying that accuracy is not important in Limited/CO/Open/PCC, nor that speed is not important in Production, I was merely pointing out that the weights for each are different and that difference in weight is what appeals to many Production shooters. Open and PCC do not weight reloads as heavily as Production because they are less frequent. In a long course an open shooter will reload once and it will not be a standing reload. A production shooter on the same course might reload 4-5 times depending on the layout, but they are not 4-5 times slower than Open shooters, so the time spent reloading counts for a higher percentage of their total time than it does for an Open shooter. The appeal for Production over the other low cap divisions likely is due to the cost of guns and ammo.

To clarify your question, you are asking about the situation where someone sets up two targets such that a partial target is stapled on top of another target? For example if the left side of the Zebra/Tuxedo below was on top of the open target with the C/D zones overlapping the right side of the open target? I have never seen a target set up in such a way, but by my reading of 4.2.4 and 4.1.4 I think that is a legal target set up because that array would be hard cover as defined by 4.2.4.1, and 4.1.4.1 says "Whole cardboard targets must not be used solely as hard cover". Clearly the Zebra target is not being used solely as hard cover. In that case, the black portion of the zebra is not target, it is simulated hard cover, and hard cover doesn't have a non-scoring border, so you would use the edge of the black portion, not the perf within the black area. That being said, I think that is an exploitation of the wording and I don't know why you would make the target that way when you could just overlap the zebra with a Half-Zebra (Right) to the same effect. I would change the end of 4.1.4.1 to say "Whole cardboard targets must not be used solely as hard cover and partial targets may not be used to simulate hard cover on another target".

I recently joined the club in my section that is closest to me and helped set up for the last match. I think we had 8-10 people help setting up 6 stages including the MD. We had a good system, one guy from the start was in charge of making the targets for each stage and then grouping them together with a copy of the stage diagram. 3-4 people hauled the materials to the bays, 3-4 more followed and roughed out the stage, then once everything was roughed out in a bay the MD came through and tweaked things with 1-2 helpers to move props while everyone else continued roughing. We did a final pass looking for potential traps/shoot throughs/other issues, then went through and put in stakes and paint marks. That made things very efficient because there was very little standing around; the closer to an assembly line the process can be the better. If there are more than 4 people working in a given bay at any time then you are probably not being as efficient as possible., likewise if you have people doing redundant tasks (like two people covering up unwanted wall ports rather than one). In addition to comping the match fee for people who set up, I think bringing in coffee/doughnuts/pizza for the setup crew could also go a long way to getting people to help out. Could you also green light giving people discounts on their annual dues for club membership (or if your club has a work hours requirement letting match setup hours count for that)?

Production (and low capacity divisions in general) will always attract the people who want to be rewarded for creativity and efficiency as much as possible. It rewards good stage planning, quick reloads, and boldness in shots more than other divisions. CO/Limited/Open are about going fast, Production is about finding ways to save time. Taking on two papers and a plate rack in CO is not a big deal because missing two shots on the plate rack only costs you the splits and you can reload while exiting the position if needed, whereas in Production that costs you a standing reload. The 10 round limit isn't super practical now that most full sized pistols come standard with 15+ round mags, but it makes stage planning higher risk/higher reward and I think that is the appeal. If USPSA moved to the 15 round capacity like IPSC I don't think it would be as fun because it would get rid of a lot of those high risk/high reward positions. At that point I'd rather go up to 20 rounds and shoot Limited.

1.12" should be no issue unless they have some bizarre bullet profile. My handloads are out to 1.165" with RNFP 180s

If you are going to track a moving average of each member's classifiers, you might as well lump them into classes. It may not add anything profound to the sport, it does make it simpler to understand your progress and compare yourself to your fellow competitors. It also makes it a more rewarding experience to hit an officially marked threshold in the sport like making B class vs deciding for yourself that 60% is a big milestone for you, and that is very beneficial to keeping people engaged. These might be meaningless to some people who are able to entirely self motivate, but even if they are meaningless to you it's damn near impossible to make a case that it has a negative impact on the sport. I definitely think it is funny when someone brags about being the top of their class because what they are really saying is that they are either (a) sandbagging or (b) aren't good enough to make the next class. That being said I do think the practice is no different than giving trophies/prizes in any other tiered sport. The team that wins the G League still gets a trophy even though it's not the NBA championship; we just happen to be in a sport where all of the leagues are competing in the same event. It helps keep things competitive up and down the ranks. If you got rid of the classes but kept percentages, would you count every single classifier or throw out low scores like the current system?

Sub 1.0s reloads are very doable with a couple weeks of practice as long as you pay attention to excessive tension and body movement as well as the speed with which you are doing the independent parts of the reload (dropping the mag and positioning the pistol with strong hand, and grabbing/indexing the new mag with the weak hand). When ever I am working on my draw or reloads I do a couple very slow iterations just to focus on the movement. For reloads I also do a couple iterations where I just drop the mag on the buzzer and then just grab the new mag. It helps to break everything apart so you can focus on just one movement at a time. If you are stuck at 1.4s reloads I can almost guarantee you that you are not moving your weak hand to the mag pouch with any urgency. Make sure you are always pushing yourself. Get solid reps in at a repeatable par time, but then do a couple reps where your focus is just going fast, then when you back off a little it should feel much more manageable (think about how fast it feels to drive 45mph when you have been driving in a 25mph neighborhood versus how slow it feels to go 45 when you have been driving on a 70mph highway). For you that may mean setting the timer to 1.1 for a few reps and then throttling back to 1.3. Once 1.3 feels comfortable, try 1.0 and then throttle back to 1.2, etc.

Since the rulebook's guidelines for calibration lay out that the popper needs to fall when hit with 115-125PF ammo when hit in the calibration zone from the furthest place in the COF it can be shot from, but doesn't specify that it should not fall when hit below the calibration zone, is it best to just always setup poppers so that they are just on the edge of being able to stand on their own?

I do think the bump to 140mm mags is what really makes the deal. With optics ready pistols like the Canik TP9SFX available with an optic for <$600 fairly regularly (it comes with a holster too) it's probably the cheapest division to get into now with a competitive set up. You just need an extra mag and 2-3 mag pouches and you're ready to go. A lot of people love their dots but don't want to/can't afford to spend the money for an open gun; even more people hate having to plan stages around reloads, CO with 140mm mags fills both of those plus everyone is scored minor and 9mm is cheap, which makes it very accessible to newcomers.

The parrot is just a special edition of the Czechmate. No mechanical difference, just more colorful and more expensive.

I had issues with that combo with Tula 9mm; maybe 1-2% would light strike. Tula is known to use harder primers, so this is not too surprising, and CGW specifically recommends Win/Fed for maximum reliability. S&B was fine for me with the 11.5# as well.

As mentioned, the blue 13# spring that comes with the kit will run anything (provided you also have the extended firing pin and reduced power FP spring, both of which come with the kit). With the 11.5# hammer spring it should still run perfectly with Winchester and Federal primers. The difference is DA pull weight is fairly substantial so if you are reloading and have the option to only use Winchester primers (which tend to always be the cheapest for me anyways) then it is well worth it IMO.

Yes OP, this is a very good point, especially on the stage below, which from the looks of it is forcing hard leans (especially if you are a lefty). You do NOT need to stay in the shooting area when moving, only to shoot. To avoid all the weaving around the walls and risking potential 180 breaks I would be moving on the right side of all the walls, and engaging the "tuxedo" targets as I stepped back into the shooting area before. I suspect this would be a good bit faster as well (though your focus should just be on safety for this match). To illustrate, this path avoids the potential for breaking the 180 when transitioning from the right side to the left side of the walls:

Can't speak to the promag but I assume the number for welded is just taking into account the DIY cost of two mag bodies + spring & follower kit. With MecGar mags that'd be around $45 for the mags and ~$60 all in each. The $80 estimate is probably low, but I think your $100 is high. SP is the only one I am aware of at the moment who does 170mm extensions for stock Tactical Sport/Czechmate mags and they run $52.50 each, so assuming that ~$50 would be the market rate for a 170mm extension you'd be looking at around $90 per mag with MecGar tubes. That's much cheaper than the Czechmate options of $110/mag for 170mm extensions + guts or $185 for the CZC big stick + guts + base pad (why they didn't just make the big stick 170mm to begin with is beyond me). Edit: Just realized that the 170mm Promag option is probably in reference to cutting down their 26 round mag and adding new guts. $45 still the DIY cost.

The biggest difference between those pistols is that the TSO is single action only, the SP-01 Shadow Orange and Shadow 2 are both DA/SA. The TSO in .40S&W is geared towards USPSA Limited division where you can start with hammer cocked and safety on. The 9x19 version is geared towards other shooting sports like 3Gun or Steel Challenge where there isn't Major/Minor scoring so there is no reason to handicap yourself with lower round count. The SP-01 Shadow Orange or the Shadow 2 are both geared towards USPSA Production division where you have to run a striker fired or DA/SA pistol. The TSO and Shadow Orange may look similar but if you picked them up I am sure you noticed that the TSO has a much larger grip and has a <2lb trigger pull. The SP-01 Shadow Orange is just a heavily spiffed up SP-01 from CZ's custom shop geared for competition. If you look at pictures of the SP-01 Shadow Orange [https://czcustom.com/new-firearms/cz-pistols-custom/cz-sp01-shadow-orange.html] vs pictures of the Shadow 2 [https://cz-usa.com/product/cz-shadow-2-black-blue/] you'll notice the Shadow 2 has an undercut trigger guard, adjustable rear sight, a paddle style safety, a slightly longer barrel, and some other minor differences. Basically the original SP-01 Shadow was a really popular competition gun but they decided to make some tweaks to make it even better; that's the Shadow 2. The Shadow 2 is a great gun but people still generally do some tuning to it (swapping out some springs, polishing internals, etc.)

Awesome, hopefully it works out.

Any movement on this or was interest too low?

There are a handful of commercial offerings but you'll be paying 2-3x typical 9x19 prices.

You will probably come across this situation much less shooting Limited, but in Production it is not uncommon to have stages where it is advantageous to do a reload after firing only 2-4 rounds. A simple example for Production would be a stage where you start facing a single target but then will have to move to a position from which you can see 5 targets. If you don't drop that nearly full mag when moving between those positions, you 'll have to choose between doing a standing reload to finish that array of 5 (since you'll only have 9 rounds left), or engage it from a less desirable position later in the COF (maybe it requires a angled shot or a hard lean).

I'm assuming you're referring to a DA/SA since for anything else the striker/hammer will be down when "Make Ready" is called and pulling the trigger will do nothing. May I ask what your reasoning for this is? Are you're concerned that you somehow ended up with a live round in the chamber since you visited the safety table/your last unload and show clear and you'll fire a shot when you dry fire at the first target? Racking the slide first and then taking a sight picture may prevents a spook from an unanticipated discharge, but you're getting DQ'd either way (10.5.13 for having a loaded firearm at any time when not specifically allowed by the RO or 10.4.3 for ND during Make Ready), so why not use the start sequence to accurately mimic what you will do what the buzzer goes off for real?

Saw this clip from World Shoot VII over in the "Open Pistols" forum in the thread "How Long have Open GunsExisted?" Time stamp is 23:05 if it doesn't autoplay from that point.

My TSO has the trigger guard shape that goes with the "TSO" insert and it is a great fit. There is no side to side play. The Alpha-X locks very firm so I don't feel the need to get the barrel rest or thigh pad for it.

Rear notch width: .123" was the max measurement I got Front sight height: .155" at the highest point from flush Front sight width: .120" Investing in a pair of calipers is a good idea if you like tinkering (and a must if you are reloading)

Would that hold true for any combo of 140mm extensions + grams/CZC guts, or do CZCs offer the most room?