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


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited


About StealthyBlagga

  • Rank
    Special Little Snowflake

Contact Methods

  • Website URL

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    The Uzi Triangle (Gilbert, AZ)
  • Real Name
    Richard Bhella

Recent Profile Visitors

3,959 profile views
  1. I don't disagree entirely, and would not want stages to be overly regimented either, but IMHO the way USPSA implements freestyle creates a significant disincentive for new MDs to come onboard. I understand why someone coming from a USPSA handgun background might feel more at home on the stage with the added walls, but the walls really do add absolutely nothing but extra work for the poor MD. If the USPSA shooting community is asking MDs to build them more match capacity, they owe it to us to consider meeting us half-way.
  2. The "first, then" WSB is common in multigun because there are, well, MULTIPLE guns, and one gun may have to be used before the other for safety reasons (not always, but most of the time). The same would likely apply to the proposed 2-gun sport. The above examples are just some very basic stages to illustrate how much extra work USPSA "freestyle, as seen" creates for the multigun MD with ZERO impact on the shooting challenge or enjoyability. There is nothing wrong with the above stages, just as there is nothing wrong with totally freestyle stages, memory stages etc., so long as they are part of a well balanced match. Even the first stage would be quite at home in a USPSA match, except that the MD would have to put down about twice as much fault line, 2-3x vision barriers and an extra array of rifle steel. In practice, everyone would still shoot it the same: My point is that, if we want to encourage MDs to run 2-Gun matches under some variation of USPSA rules (as Max is proposing), a few rules changes that make their lives much easier is not too much to ask - as an MD, I'd rather we debate this aspect than burn energy getting down in the weeds on whether a CO handgun should or should not be allowed in TO. It's not like throttling back on "freestyle, as seen" is completely alien to USPSA mutigun rules - under the current rules, the WSB can stipulate shooting defined targets from defined locations, but only for rifle and only beyond 100 yards. Simply allowing the same for all guns at all distances would resolve the issue. Unfortunately, USPSA leadership sees everything it does through the lens of handgun competition, which I guess is why they have so far failed to gain traction in multigun.
  3. Yes and no. The problem with USPSA Multigun rules as written is that they are overly dogmatic about what freestyle means. Here are couple of stages I designed for outlaw multigun: Stage 1 - Engage rT1-6 with rifle from Area A, then re-engage rT1-6 with rifle from Area B, then engage rT7-10 with rifle from Area C, then dump rifle in barrel. Next, engage pT1-8 with pistol from Area C. This stage would be illegal under USPSA frestyle rules. Here's another example: Stage 2 - Engage rT1-6 with rifle through Port A and/or Port C, and engage pT1-6 with pistol through Port B. Building the stage as shown above would be illegal under USPSA rules. Instead, the poor MD would have to build the monstrosity shown below - exact same shooting challenge, but a lot more work and expense. Why? Because "freestyle, as and when visible". Stupid, and one of the main reasons multigun matches run under USPSA rules are as rare as hens teeth.
  4. Max: You will probably get more useful feedback HERE
  5. Without reading your document (which is hard going on a phone), here are my initial thoughts as an experienced action long gun rules writer and MD: 1) Do not incorporate the Major vs Minor scoring disparity. The concept is outdated, and it greatly complicates the use of hit factor scoring in Multigun. Someone should be able to shoot a stock 9mm Glock 17 and 16” 5.56 AR15 and not be at an automatic disadvantage vs. some crazy competition-specific calibers. 2) Stick to Comstock only scoring like IPSC does. Virginia Count is stupid in handgun - do not contaminate your concept with it. 3) Definitely get away from the USPSA “shoot as seen” dogma. For something you want to be viable at the club level, the current rules as written are too restrictive on the stage designer, requiring too many expensive props and too much setup work. 4) Do not attempt to align with existing USPSA handgun or Multigun equipment rules. They are a complete basket case, the product of decades of compromise and “must not obsolete a gun” thinking, and are thus irreparably broken. Start with a clean sheet of paper based on the most common kinds of guns out there. Definitely do not create an Open Division that requires huge $$$ to buy a competitive rig. I’d actually make the case for only ONE equipment division, with stage design rules that negate the benefit of magnified optics, bipods etc. (e.g. minimum available target size vs distance for both handgun and rifle). Make the shooter run their gear unchanged throughout the match and they will figure out what works. The outlaw Multigun world is already well versed in running 2-Gun matches. Look at what is most successful there and use that as a basis for your new sport.
  6. Less Virginia Count anything. By "less" I mean "zero". Stupid idea that needs to die. ETA: 50 yard weak hand and other ridiculous nonsense is why I shoot less and less USPSA these days, and when I do I bring a PCC. If USPSA stage designers present us with rifle problems, don't be surprised when more and more folks bring a rifle.
  7. Get the Apex barrel - the semi-fit is easy to install and works great. If you add an Apex FSS trigger kit too, your M&P trigger will be better than any Glock is capable of being.
  8. I have an M&P CORE that comes from the factory with cowitnessed irons. I don't need them to find the dot (as mentioned above, you don't want to get used to that crutch), but neither do I find them in any way distracting. I guess they would be handy if my dot did fail, but I mostly leave them there because I see no reason to remove them. Equally, I'd not make any effort to install irons if they were not already there.
  9. IMHO, the greatest virtue of PractiScore is that it gives each shooter the ability to self-squad. If there is someone you can't abide, be sure to pick a different squad next time - problem solved. As mentioned above, if you can't find a squad you like, the problem is probably you
  10. I've had several Quarter Circle 10 9mm PCCs and they all worked great. Not necessarily optimized for competition out of the box like the JP, but robust and reliable to be sure... those guys have figured out how to make a blowback PCC run and run and run. If I had to bet my life on a PCC functioning (heaven forbid ), it would be a QC10.
  11. You could apply a mixture of lead shot and epoxy anywhere inside the pistol that is not visible - notably under the grip module and inside the dust cover. Cheap and easy, but permanent. I may try it for grins.
  12. In a major match last year, I saw a competitor experience an out-of-battery discharge with his skeletonized blowback PCC. The generous lightening slots cut in his upper allowed flying fragments of brass to exit the left side of the receiver and cut up his forearm so badly he had to go to hospital to have the wounds patched up. While not life-threatening, it looked painful and impacted his match performance (he finished the match on a hurry-up schedule with a heavily bandaged arm). In general, a plain vanilla forged receiver is lighter and stronger than a billet receiver. Although lightening cuts in the upper might look sexy, I don't see the weight saving being significant, especially so close to the center of gravity. Given the safety concerns above, lightening slots in the upper seem like a waste of time and money to me. For a lightweight build, I'd just use a standard forged flattop stripped .223/5.56 upper (long ejection port, no ejection port cover, no forward assist) and spend the money saved on practice ammo (or, if you must, a bitchin' Cerakote job).
  13. Thanks for the reminder, but that's not my issue. I am a long-time Limited 3-Gunner and know myself to be capable of shooting MOA groups at distance with a red dot. The trick is to size the target so that the dot nests and centers very naturally with a halo of black evenly around it - this way, alignment issues are immediate apparent and easily correctable. In my case I am shooting 3" black rounds at 50 yards with a 2MOA dot turned down to the lowest visible brightness. I shoot for groups with my weak-eye closed. The PCC is supported front and rear with sandbags, which makes for a rock-solid hold. Lastly, I am centering the dot in the tube for every shot to minimize parallax error.
  14. After some testing and load development, this is what I have come up with: 147gr Blue Bullet Round Nose 2.8gr WSF CCI SPP Mixed brass This load is VERY soft shooting, makes a 133 power factor, uses powder I have a lot of, and is relatively inexpensive. The 10-shot group below was shot today at 50 yards with a Trijicon MRO red-dot optic. The cluster is 8 hits in one ragged hole - the one high hit out on its own is a mystery, and this is what I have come to expect from both my Guard PCCs... a reasonably tight group and then one or two wild flyers.
  • Create New...