sslav

I'd like to add a big plus to the custom molded plugs. I tried a do-it-yourself kit a few years back and did not get anything useful out of it. But I had a set made at the VA/MD in May and they are fantastic. They are quieter by themselves than foam plugs and muffs put together. When the weather gets cooler I still intend to wear muffs over them though.

Or we could just leave well enough alone and enjoy our great game. Not everything that is good is on TV and not everything that is on TV is good.

Ah, thank you! Yes with a mandatory reload it could be called a speed shoot.

Huh? Where is that? Did I miss a new rulebook revision?

Under what specific rules?

Previously answered ... Post #21 Seems like that is the only problematic and contradictory part of the rulebook. Stage (under 6.1.2) is defined as "A separately timed and scored component of a match". Chrono is neither timed nor scored (not by any scoring methods recognized in (9.2). Furthermore considering chrono a stage runs afoul of 9.2.5 "Stage results must rank competitors within the relevant Division in descending order of individual stage points achieved, calculated to 4 decimal places." But even if we consider classifier a stage it can not be considered a course of fire - for the reasons stated by me before. Any rules dealing with competitor equipment malfunctions apply specifically to the course of fire as initiated and terminated by the appropriate range commands.

Where in the rulebook does it say that chronograph is a course of fire? It certainly does not meed the requirements of any legal course of fire in the rulebook. It does not have a WSB. It contains none of the approved targets. It does not specify the scoring method. It does not follow the sequence of range commands for starting or completing the course of fire. Oh...and here is the minor issue of the competitor not operating the firearm. So chronograph is not a course of fire. Why would you want to apply the same rules to it as you would to a course of fire?

I have tried all of the above in various combinations. While the result is noticeably better than watching someone's back as they point the gun here and there and spray brass out to the side, it is still not all that interesting.

Why wouldn't you just record the velocities for rounds 1 and 2, clear the squib, and fire the next round? Most chrono shops have calculators laying around to deal with averaging the best three out of six or seven.... Because you don't get to stop in the middle of a stage, clear a squib and keep going. You're done. I see chrono the same way. It's a minimum three round course of fire. Take shot 1+2+3/3=PF. If you only have one or two that aren't zero's they better be really heavy bullets going darn fast. I am sorry that is a ridiculous interpretation of the rules. We are at the chrono to determine the power factor. So velocity of anything that leaves the barrel should be measured and included in the average. If the bullet never left the barrel for whatever reason (squib, light primer strike or whatever) it does not count as a shot. It did not have a velocity of 0 - it had no velocity. Clear the squib, and shoot the next round.

Any hit on a a plate that went through a no-shoot would require a re-shoot due to range equipment failure(Rule 9.1.5.2). Paper no-shoots around steel is not a good idea. The same goes for any shots that pass through the fence and hit a plate - re-shoot due to range equipment failure(Rule 9.1.6.2). With the mesh fencing it is hard to judge if any of the shots went through the cover. A solid wall in this particular case would make determination of any shots going through the wall a little easier (Though with the sheer number of the shots fired in the general area there will be enough holes in the cover to make adjudication of whether a given shot that hit a plate went through the cover difficult at best). All that aside the stage is not a legal USPSA stage based on rule 1.2.1.2 : “Medium Courses” must not require more than 16 rounds to complete and no more than 3 shooting locations. Course design and construction must not require more than 8 scoring hits from any single location or view, nor allow a competitor to shoot all targets in the course of fire from any single location or view. Rules 9.1.5.2, 9.5.6.2 & 1.2.1.2 are not subject to the level I exemption.

Is this a legal stage? Requires more than 8 shots from a single position.

My home club is a private club with the same guest restriction(no more than 3 times). However that does not apply to any of the sanctioned matches - USPSA or otherwise.

I am a Glock man myself. I think currently it still has an edge because of all the aftermarket support and reliability. I do believe that over the next few years M&P will gradually catch up to and overtake Glock.

I lost the .45 & 9mm/.38 stud inserts for the barrel platform of my C-R speed holster. Since replacements were not available for sale separately on the web site, I had e-mailed the company asking if I could purchase them. Instead they just asked me for my shipping address and just sent them to me. They did not even charge me for shipping. Kinda makes any future decisions about purchasing any of their products really easy ones.

I do not know him all that well, but from the few interactions I have had J.J. comes across as a great guy.

It did not stink as badly as reviews may lead you to believe. I think it started off a little weak and got better as it went along. My son is a fan of the cartoon and he liked it. The main thing that irked me was the unnecessary narration. Film is a visual medium. Too much voice-over narration usually means that the director either admits his failure to expose enough through the images and dialog or feels that his audience is too dumb to understand the subtleties. In at least a few memorable scenes, everything was apparent enough without narration.

Sorry... the POI was 2" lower with the monopod, relative to a forearm rest. I think I may have experienced something like this recently at the Topton's team 3-gun. Or it could have been me. I am planning to play around with it once the weather cools off a bit.

When you say "work right" do you mean "functions consistently" or "set up the way I like it"? If it is the first, then every gun I have bought so far - for 3-gun or otherwise has "worked right" out of the box.

Jim, I would like to reserve a seat. Make mine first class please.

Being originally from the former Soviet Union and fluent in Russian, I frequent the main Russian gun forum - talks.guns.ru . Perhaps Saigas exported to us here go through some sort of a selection process for quality, because the ones they discuss there are expected consistently not to work out of the box and need "tuning".

I did this modification to my glock. I used a bunch of thin metal shims and kept taking them out one at a time until I got the fit I wanted. Worked out for me.

I would put no-shoots on all edges that may take a hit.

Do barrels serve a useful purpose? I think that all you need to do is bring the first set of side fault lines in - a few feet short of the edges of the two walls and you can get rid of at least one and probably both sets of barrels. Also why do you break the FFZ into two? If you are worried about the 180 breaks you can fix that by moving the two side arrays a few feet downrange and keep the free fire zone contiguous. This will give shooters an option of shooting these arrays on the move.

I think that would not achieve what they are trying to achieve. This way, the more unbalanced the teams become the higher the number of better shooters sitting out becomes - giving the team that is outnumbered a chance to catch up.

I also felt that Jim was the weakest link on the blue team. But he did surprisingly well on the elimination challenge. Ironic that he got eliminated right before the challenge that was supposed to be his specialty. On the side note I initially thought that it was bogus that the opposing team chooses who sits out the challenge. But now I see the merit in the approach. It should theoretically keep the two teams fairly balanced numerically for as long as possible. But that assumes that the weaker shooters get eliminated. In case of the red team that has not been the case. Blue team was a lot more logical in their approach. On the other hand they have had more time to get a sense of the actual skill level of their members. They also seem to have avoided the various personality issues that have been plaguing the red team.