apoc4lypse

The one gripe I have about the classification system is that it tops out at 100%. I would really like to easily see the actual % of the top 20 shooters without having to dig up their USPSA# from Practiscore.

On the classification page, click the button that says learn more about our classification system.

In the last four matches, on 4 out of 7 guns I was able to shoot to my classification. But since these were club level matches I approach them mainly as opportunities to improve a bad stage and bring up my classification, as opposed to playing conservatively to try for lowest overall. So if I already have a decently high score in a stage, I'll push as fast as I can to beat it - that more often results in horribad dumpster-fire performances that bring down my overall score for that match. For example, on my last match (all 8 stages) overall I shot RFPO at 88.3% and RFPI at 79.9%; I am M in both, but I was able to boost my classification to GM in RFPI (Pendulum was the only stage I improved, which of course had to be the last stage of the day, and moved me from 80% to 90% for that stage) and got my RFPO classification to 93.6% from 89.7% (bumped four stages which I shot at 94.7% average). Generally come match day I lose about 10% in classification compared to the times I post during practices.

I did see that this morning and Zack said the bug was fixed so I'm good to go. Now to work on the other six gold badges I want to get...

Has anyone else here earned a badge and not have had it updated on your classifications or profile page on the SCSA website? I have three GMs and have yet to get any of my gold badges. I just got my fourth today in a brand new division (PCCI, got it in a four stage match too) so crossing my fingers that it will update properly.

Has anyone used both the Brekke Custom CompXtension setup and the Wiland LLW PCC barrel? Those are my two contenders for my next PCC build and if anyone has any first hand experience using both, I'd value your input.

Yup. To keep it reliable I'd snake the bore and take a toothbrush to the bolt face to keep it clean after every 50 rounds or so.

If you take two guns that are on the production list and combine the slide/barrel from one with the grip frame from the other, is the result production legal? I'm thinking it would be allowed under 21.3 - replacing the slide or barrel with an OFM or aftermarket one. It might also be covered by 21.6 - exchange of OFM minor external parts between different models of approved Production guns is allowed. However slides/barrels aren't specifically listed as minor external parts. Asking because I may want to use my Q5 Match Poly upper on my PDP full size frame.

Yeah! It was like 3 people out of the squad of 8 or so. What gets me is the guy who did it is on several of the GM top 20 lists. You'd think he would know better.

The OEM bolt is fine but I wanted to try the VQ bolt to see if it would increase reliability especially around the 250rd mark.

No, a tier 1 match. Not a major match. Unfortunately they weren't summarily beaten as it's a bad idea to hit people who have guns In the SCSA rule book, 6.5.1 is the definition of the Rimfire Pistol Open division. Are we looking at the same thing?

So I shot a match today, and between stages 2 and 6, the weather started to get really bad - alternating between drizzles and bursts of steady rain. I figured what the heck, everyone else is dealing with it it's the luck of the draw whether your turn has a weather hazard. Only afterward did I notice that a sub-squad of competitors, who shall go unnamed, decided to wait out the rain and shoot their stages near the end of the event after the sun had come out and most other squads had finished shooting. Is this against the rules? One would think that if you are not with your squad and ready to shoot at the appointed time, you would forfeit that stage. No making it up later when conditions are ideal.

I went 4.5" for Steel Challenge and don't regret it. If it's good enough for Chris Barrett it's good enough for me

It's optics ready and offers a full size frame option (18rds flush) without finger ridges. The PPQ is 15rds flush.

Haven't seen anything on the internet on this yet but Walther has a new pistol out - the Walther PDP FS 9mm. Seems like a polymer version of the Q4 steel frame and a boxier, optics ready slide. Available with a 4" or 4.5" barrel. Rear sight houses an adjustable notch kind of like Taurus G2C sights. Trigger pull is similar to the PPQ and the internals looks very similar except the ejector is beefier. Capacity is 18rds so standard PPQ mags won't work, but Canik 18rders might work. Might need to buy one, $599.99 at my LGS. http://imgur.com/a/3QqTVfD

I ended up going with the Lead Star Arms Helium. I probably could have built something similar for cheaper but I wasn't confident enough in choosing the right bits. But I'm very happy with this gun as is; shot it today for the first time and ended up at 100% GM across four stages. It handles about as well as my RFRO gun although it's about 50% heavier. Hoping to earn GM in my first official match with this gun next weekend. Here's some video of my first stage after sighting it in - Roundabout, finished at 109% GM.

Update: After using both the Ruger trigger group and the T/CR trigger group with the ejector removed, I can confirm that it was the ejector causing hang-ups with the VQ bolt. There is apparently just enough clearance to allow the bolt to cycle smoothly on a clean gun, but after the receiver starts to get dirty, it gums up. I've since ground down the T/CR ejector so it's similar to the standard Ruger one and my gun has been working fine. So you would need to either delete or modify the stock ejector to use it with a VQ or any aftermarket bolt.

I'm inclined to agree with Thomas H; while you are free to sink as much money into a gun as you like, it's not necessary to be competitive in Steel Challenge. My criteria for a gun are for it to be as light as possible, be deadnuts reliable for at least 250rds with good ammo, have a decent trigger, and have a cheek weld/optic relationship that allows for the fastest possible first shot. If that can be done using a 10/22 with minimal upgrades, then so be it. My RFRO gun is a T/CR22 with a Wiland barrel, a VQ bolt, and a C-More Railway. The trigger group is the factory one although I upgraded the springs with an M*CARBO spring kit to reduce the weight, and had to modify the ejector to work with the VQ bolt. On the stock, I trimmed the end by about 1/2" to improve the length of pull and removed the barrel channel liner to save on weight, but that was about it. T/CRs have an anodized receiver and a better machined bolt than you'll see in basic 10/22s, so in my opinion they are worth the extra money while not being so hard on the wallet as a Tac Sol or VQ setup.

In one of the matches I shoot, the stages are set up in a single large bay. So painting between shooters would mean waiting for each squad to finish one shooter then calling a ceasefire. The other match isn't so formal so I suppose it's just to save on paint costs. Or to keep the match moving quickly.

Painting between shooters is a luxury we don't usually have in our local L1 matches. When I shoot two I don't do it back to back but get one shooter in between. I mostly do it that way so I can RO for the rest of the shooters in my squad.

Huh, that's odd to me. In all the events I've attended, shooters using a holster always carried their gun in the holster throughout the match. Only rimfire pistol folks used cases.

If that were the case, then a specific rule about it wouldn't exist in USPSA, no? The general rule of unsafe gun handling would have covered it under its umbrella. Apparently it was common enough that a rule was added to address it speficially as a DQ-able offense. Which begs the question, why was it left out of the SCSA rules?

Is removing a holstered gun or belt rig considered unsafe gun handling? This is the USPSA rule I'm referencing: 5.2.1.2 A competitor who, while not at a safety area or under RO supervision, removes their holster or their equipment belt with their handgun still in the holster, shall be considered to be in violation of Rule 5.2.1 and subject to disqualification from the match.

There is a specific rule in USPSA that says it's not allowed. There is no such rule in SCSA.

I ordered a VQ Competition Bolt for my T/CR-22 thinking it would be a drop in performance upgrade. I actually experienced deteriorating performance compared to the standard bolt - mostly FTEs/stovepipes and failures to return to battery, which got progressively worse with the more rounds I shot. This was using decent ammo (CCI AR Tactical and Mini Mags). Initially I was discouraged and swapped back in my original bolt with an intent to sell the VQ bolt, but after revisiting this I discovered where the problem was occurring - namely, the cuts on the underside of the T/CR bolt are different from the Ruger and VQ bolt with respect to the ejector. There is a deeper cut along the bottom of the T/CR bolt where the ejector rides (see pic). The distance between the top plane of the bolt and the bottom of this cut is right at 8.7mm, whereas on a Ruger or the VQ bolt, it's at 9.7mm. So when I swapped my VQ bolt into my T/CR while using the standard T/CR trigger group, the ejector was pushing upward on the bolt by an additional 1mm. When the gun was perfectly clean it was hardly noticeable but as the receiver got progressively dirtier, the bolt would start to lag and result in the failures I was experiencing. I was able to confirm this when I tried installing my T/CR trigger group (with the LRBHO removed) into my Ruger receiver with the standard Ruger bolt - the front pin would not align because the ejector was too tall and was smooshing the bolt up against the ceiling of the receiver. I swapped out the T/CR trigger group with a BX trigger group and will report back when I get some range time in to see if that's cured the problem. Alternatively, the trigger group ejector could either be removed from the trigger group, or modified by grinding it down by 1mm in height, to achieve the proper sitting height to work with the VQ bolt. I may just opt to remove it entirely as the magazine is the primary ejector on a 10/22 and without the secondary ejector, the rounds fall straight down through the magwell, which is actually more convenient (albeit less showy) than ejecting it up and catching it in the air I checked the interface of the magazine with the trigger group and it looks like the reason why T/C designed it this way is that in the T/CR, unlike in the 10/22, the trigger group ejector is the primary ejector. The ejector extends in front of where the actual magazine lip shoulder would eject the cartridge. The reason why the bolt is cut is to get that bit of extra height over the magazine lips and I suppose to reinforce the slim ejector with metal bounds on either side to decrease the likelihood of it getting bent out of shape.