[custom open 9mm gun for Bianchi]

If you have access, just case pro your brass,

...I have to see a guy about my town being flooded right now.....Argh.....

What is case pro? I'll do a search, just haven't heard of that, yet.

I hope you don't float away!

Tracy

[custom open 9mm gun for Bianchi]

Thanks, guys!

I'm currently using CCI small pistol primers. Will a primer make that much difference? I also use mixed range brass for practice, since it's essentially free, but I separate it by headstamp for matches. I guess it's time to pony up the cash for some new Starline brass. What I was loading those two loads in was Winchester brass. I'm not sure how many times it had been loaded, since it was range brass. I have a bunch of Starline range brass, though. Would it be worth it to try that, before buying new Starline brass?

Warren got a group inside the 10 ring at 50 yards with my Para 18-9 and the Universal Clays load. He was shooting it off a rest at 50 (bigger hands, plus he's very accurate). The VV load opened up beyond that. I'm anxious to try the VV load and the Universal Clays load with JHP bullets to see what they do in the Para.

I was told that different guns like different things, so assuming my loads tighten up on the Para with a JHP bullet, will they be tight on a custom gun, too? What I'm getting at, here, is whether or not I can determine how accurate my custom gun is, when I get it, with the load get to work with the Para.

Please excuse any lack of clarity of thought. I've had WAY too much caffeine, tonight...

Grant, see you at the Cameron Cup. Doug, see you at Big Dawgs.

Tracy

[custom open 9mm gun for Bianchi]

Hi, guys,

What size of a group do you expect to see from a custom open 9mm 1911 at 50 yards, prone or off a rest? What kind of a load would you use? I'm currently using 4.8 gr of Universal Clays, with a 115 gr Zero FMJ. I tried 4.6 gr of Vihta Vuori N330 with the same bullet, and it didn't work out so well, but I didn't have any 115 gr JHP to try.

Thanks,

Tracy

[Competitor's Input for potential BC Change]

Around 1979 or so Chapman and Bianchi with I think some input from Mickey Fowler, Mike Dalton and others came up with the COF for Bianchi.

It is thought that the Barricade & Practical were greatly influenced by NRA's PPC, and possibly the Practical requiring the 50 yd shots likely had Bullseye flavor. The plates were likely a bit of PPC and BE with a hint of steel! The MOVER was a "one of" as was the Tombstone no bullseye target. The target and the mover are what made the Bianchi Cup unique. Bianchi Cup without the mover is less than the Bianchi Cup. Drop it if you must, but if you do it is no longer the Bianchi Cup, but still a good match.

In all recent years the 4 events had to be shot clean to win. Most years for most of the top contender shooters the three "other" matches are preliminaries to the finals. The finals being the Mover. In other words if a shooter was clean after an event, they were still a contender. Next event clean still a contender and so on. In all recent years (except 1996) the winner came from the Super squad, so the Mover was last, thus the finals. In my opinion the Cup is WON at the Mover, lost on one of the other three events. My opinion is that if the order is rearranged, then the last event will become just as significant as the mover, since it will be the final, with the 3 preceeding events the "preliminaries".

Since the Mover is NRA Action Pistol Specific, how about the NRA partner with one of the Mover manufactures or a new one to develope a quality, easy to set up mover that can be purchased through the NRA and drop shipped to the Club purchasing it? If the NRA could and would commit to say 10 or 20 of these units then the price could and should come down, they would be obtainable by many Clubs and would be endorsed by NRA. In fact, it would such a win-win-win, because the Club would then pay less, and NRA would likely require some small license fee (as they usaully do) thus make a buck or two, and the shooters would have more access to a Mover. Additionally, if there were multiples of these at ranges, then the likelihood is greater than a visitor could also operate it, or troubleshoot, if the need arose. And yet another win, I believe, the Bianchi Cup would again prosper. All of this for a $10,000 - 20,000 investment by the NRA.

I would think that an investment of this sort by the NRA would be money better spent than some other very costly things they do. Perhaps the Movers could be leased, loaned, "grant" or financed by NRA to make them more affordable to smaller Clubs. The NRA already does GRANTS which are there for the asking. The problem is OK, we have this money, now where do we get the stuff. Perhaps the GRANT should be the equipment, not cash, condintional on either holding a match or clinic for a match.

In my opinion, the best events at Bianchi are the Mover and the Plates. Perhaps, the NRA support as mentioned in the previous paragraph should be a GRANT of a MOVER and a PLATE RACK. Most guns that anyone would use in these types of competition will hold a 3-4" group at 25 yds. Therefore the plates and the mover at no greater than 25 yds with an 8" ten hit zone are doable by just about any gun, quite frankly by most shooters. It is just the "moment of competition that creates the havoc on us. In my experience, few new shooters are excited about the Barricade, and the Practical. But they all want another crack at the Mover and the Plates, and I think the reason is that they are doable with fairly normal equipment, and within many of our skill levels, it is just a matter of doing it when it counts and at someone else's command!

Martin

P.s. Whatever is best for the Clubs, is likely best for the sports future.

I've only shot at the Cup twice (think long braid with .22 :-), and 2008 is the first year I'll have a "Real Gun ," but I agree with Martin. If somehow the small clubs could get a Mover and a plate rack, that would help. I'm not fond of the idea of changing the main match events, but then, I'm still trying to get my skill level up. I wouldn't be opposed to changing the side events, but I think taking the mover out is a bad idea. The mover is one of my favorite challenges. I also think, after reading some of the responses here, that announcing the events for the next year at the current-year Cup would be a better idea than waiting until the week of the championship to announce them.

Tracy