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

Magazine Measuring Procedure


nwb01

Recommended Posts

I don't think he means force enough to compress anything but the slop in the base pad. In Single Stack,do they allow you to compress the spring on the back sight in order to fit the box?

If that was directed at my post, you are exactly correct. Making the basepad pull up against the magazine is my goal. As Brazos Custom already noted there is usually a bit of slop on the fit on these things and I would like to remove the slop from the measurement.

Gary

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 217
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I would tell you that is not a magazine. It is at best a magazine tube, and a basepad. :rolleyes:

When I measure a mag I compress the basepad as much as I reasonably can then measure. The gauge is already oversized, sometimes cutting it too close is cutting it too close, so to speak.

Gary

Gary,

Sounds as if you are giving the competitor every opportunity to conform to the gauge. I am very confident that adding external pressure to the magazine/basepad would/could have a dramatic effect on the outcome of a measurement.

Is this standard practice or just your technique ??

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Obviously, it does.

If you take the slack out (which is how it would run during the match...under spring pressure) it will be longer.

What would be next if you didn't measure with the spring? Accordion-like base pads?

As I recall, the current IPSC rules now explicitly bans telescoping magazines/basepads because somebody had constructed a set for a major match a few years ago. USPSA doesn't have the explicit ban (yet).

Edit: Adding link to the telescoping mag discussion: http://www.brianenos.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=103708&view=findpost&p=1185518

Edited by Skydiver
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would tell you that is not a magazine. It is at best a magazine tube, and a basepad. :rolleyes:

When I measure a mag I compress the basepad as much as I reasonably can then measure. The gauge is already oversized, sometimes cutting it too close is cutting it too close, so to speak.

Gary

Gary,

Sounds as if you are giving the competitor every opportunity to conform to the gauge. I am very confident that adding external pressure to the magazine/basepad would/could have a dramatic effect on the outcome of a measurement.

Is this standard practice or just your technique ??

Well it may be hard to separate standard practice from technique B)

When I first started playing around with the gauge I noticed that some really close magazines might not fit without compressing the basepad a bit. The spring was pushing it down slightly depending on the "slop" in how it was attached. I just try to take the "slop" out of it by applying a bit of vertical pressure to the basepad. I am trying to give the competitor every possible chance to fit in the gauge. I had to make a decision at the Pan Am match one year about putting a Modified gun in the box. The gun had Bo-Mar sights and would not go in with the sights in its normal positing. I told the shooter I didn't care if the sights were up or down I just wanted it to fit in the box. He turned the sights down, it fit. That was the end of my involvement. I guess some will disagree with that decision, but what else is new :devil:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think he means force enough to compress anything but the slop in the base pad. In Single Stack,do they allow you to compress the spring on the back sight in order to fit the box?

If that was directed at my post, you are exactly correct. Making the basepad pull up against the magazine is my goal. As Brazos Custom already noted there is usually a bit of slop on the fit on these things and I would like to remove the slop from the measurement.

Gary

I would add that, if the follower somehow sticks up above the feed lips and is an issue, it should be compressed to fit inside the lips. The diagram clearly shows the measurement from the bottom of the basepad to the top back edge of the feed lips ... It does not include the follower (or any ammo, for that matter!)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nick,

I, too, am having a WTF moment. :huh: It sounds like the way the gauge was used was not very consistent if ALL of your mags didn't pass. I think that a mag or two could out of whack, but not all of them.

Edited by sirveyr
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think he means force enough to compress anything but the slop in the base pad. In Single Stack,do they allow you to compress the spring on the back sight in order to fit the box?

If that was directed at my post, you are exactly correct. Making the basepad pull up against the magazine is my goal. As Brazos Custom already noted there is usually a bit of slop on the fit on these things and I would like to remove the slop from the measurement.

Gary

How much slop are you going to allow to be compressed for measurement? It would be simple enough to machine (or allow it to wear over time...LOL) the slot in the base pad that the tube flange engages large enough to add capacity yet compress and still fit the gauge. If you were to measure without compressing the base pad you would actually be measuring the lenght in which it will be used.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nick,

I, too, am having a WTF moment. :huh: It sounds like the way the gauge was used was not very consistent if ALL of your mags didn't pass. I think that a mag or two could out of whack, but not all of them.

I don't know about that. There appears to a slight difference in tube length, between the latest, tapered Glock mag tubes, and the previous generation that had the shoulder. The newest tubes don't seem to fit my unofficial gauge as cleanly as the old ones did....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think he means force enough to compress anything but the slop in the base pad. In Single Stack,do they allow you to compress the spring on the back sight in order to fit the box?

If that was directed at my post, you are exactly correct. Making the basepad pull up against the magazine is my goal. As Brazos Custom already noted there is usually a bit of slop on the fit on these things and I would like to remove the slop from the measurement.

Gary

How much slop are you going to allow to be compressed for measurement? It would be simple enough to machine (or allow it to wear over time...LOL) the slot in the base pad that the tube flange engages large enough to add capacity yet compress and still fit the gauge. If you were to measure without compressing the base pad you would actually be measuring the lenght in which it will be used.

I'll cross that bridge when I get to it. Remember Range Masters get paid a lot of money to make these tough decisions....hey wait a minute.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nick,

Just to let you know you are not alone in your frustration, I to was at that match and got bumped to open with the same mag setup Bud was not picking on you. I couldnt agree more in that if their is no clarification on the proper way to measure a mag then how can you even check your own gear if the RO at the match will do it difefrently. If a mag will fit if you cock it or apply a lil bit of pressure than shouldnt the shooter get the benefit of the doubt? I don't see how being a thousandth over is going to give you an advantage over the other shooters in your class that may still be able to have more rounds than you anyway. I can understand if your production gun weighs to much you get bumped because those should be "out of the box" even though a G34 will weigh more than a G17. I can't wait to hear what John Amidon will have to say about this. I do know however that when Jessie Abbate was still a member of team Glock she used them in her limited set up, I wonder if she ever had this problem.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nick,

Just to let you know you are not alone in your frustration, I to was at that match and got bumped to open with the same mag setup Bud was not picking on you. I couldnt agree more in that if their is no clarification on the proper way to measure a mag then how can you even check your own gear if the RO at the match will do it difefrently. If a mag will fit if you cock it or apply a lil bit of pressure than shouldnt the shooter get the benefit of the doubt? I don't see how being a thousandth over is going to give you an advantage over the other shooters in your class that may still be able to have more rounds than you anyway. I can understand if your production gun weighs to much you get bumped because those should be "out of the box" even though a G34 will weigh more than a G17. I can't wait to hear what John Amidon will have to say about this. I do know however that when Jessie Abbate was still a member of team Glock she used them in her limited set up, I wonder if she ever had this problem.

Well, at least it was being done consistantly !

Yes, I agree and I am sure many others do as well, the shooter should be given all opportunities to comply. If it takes a hammer to get in, so be it !

I hope to hear from Mr. Amidon but I am sure he is busy with the Multigun Nats. Rather than wait, my mags will be adjusted accordingly so I don't go thru this in Vegas in a few weeks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't see how being a thousandth over is going to give you an advantage over the other shooters in your class that may still be able to have more rounds than you anyway.

That is one of those...you have to draw the line somewhere...things.

We don't have a capacity limit, so we have to go with a length limit.

And, we actually get a bit of a break. The limit was 140mm. With the gauge, some tolerance was built in and it allowed 141.25mm (IIRC)...then the rule was tweaked to allow the extra 1.25mm. (and then mag pad makers designed to the edge of that standard)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wouldn't compressing the spring/follower and basepad be similar to compressing the rear sight to make it fit the box for Single Stack?

No, it wouldn't. You are measuring the magazine to find it capacity limit. Therefore, the magazine should be measured at its full extension. If I could compress the magazine basepad during the measuring, what would stop some accessory maker from producing a basepad that would slide up 1" (or more) when compressed. :devil:

Bud

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess I am wondering about all the debate on this issue.

The gauge used does not fairly represent the measurement procedure as specified in appendix E-1 of the rule book.

According to the pictures provided, it would appear that the upper front end of the feed lips of the magazine seems to be preventing the back of the magazine from touching the pad.

The angle and height of the upper front end feed lips does not encounter any portion of the measurement specified in the appendix. The measurement is simply from the bottom of the base pad to the lowest, rearmost, portion of the feed lips of the magazine.

If the upper angle of the feed lips is inclusive of the measurement portion of the magazine, it is not demonstrated in the measurement procedure specified in the current rule book.

The gauge, in my opinion, needs to have the angle removed as it entends from the measuring corner of the magazines top rear lip. That would provide a fair measurement of the magazine length according to current rules.

Peter

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess I am wondering about all the debate on this issue.

The gauge used does not fairly represent the measurement procedure as specified in appendix E-1 of the rule book.

According to the pictures provided, it would appear that the upper front end of the feed lips of the magazine seems to be preventing the back of the magazine from touching the pad.

The angle and height of the upper front end feed lips does not encounter any portion of the measurement specified in the appendix. The measurement is simply from the bottom of the base pad to the lowest, rearmost, portion of the feed lips of the magazine.

If the upper angle of the feed lips is inclusive of the measurement portion of the magazine, it is not demonstrated in the measurement procedure specified in the current rule book.

The gauge, in my opinion, needs to have the angle removed as it entends from the measuring corner of the magazines top rear lip. That would provide a fair measurement of the magazine length according to current rules.

Peter

I tried to put this into words a few times and scrapped the post. This is exactly my concern with E1, the NROI ruling and the EGW gauge. I see what the OP is questioning with the angle of the feedlips. No question if the BACK portion of the lips hit the gauge and keep it from sitting flush, there's an issue, but if the FRONT portion of the feedlips hit the gauge and there is a space where the back portion of the lips could go into the gauge and still pass, there should be a way that a caliper measurement of the magazine could be used to determine the length. Just an observation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm thinking that the EGW gauge costs less than a magazine and it might be a good idea to have one. I'm sure it sucks to go from Limited to Open, but it wouldn't be any more fun to go from Open to no score if your 170mm mags were too long. Same should be said if you shoot production and have added parts to your gun. You should own a scale. I understand this thread is about the procedure, but if more shooters took an interest in following the rules and being responsible for their own gear this might have already been figured out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm thinking that the EGW gauge costs less than a magazine and it might be a good idea to have one. I'm sure it sucks to go from Limited to Open, but it wouldn't be any more fun to go from Open to no score if your 170mm mags were too long. Same should be said if you shoot production and have added parts to your gun. You should own a scale. I understand this thread is about the procedure, but if more shooters took an interest in following the rules and being responsible for their own gear this might have already been figured out.

+1

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I bought the EGW gauge once I decided to go to Limited. If you have one, and work with it a little, it's actually very well designed IMO to measure mag length...the angle mentioned, in particular, allows accurately measuring the length to the back of the feed lips, no what what the angle of the feedlips. The two small ledges where the back of the magazine touches accounts for magazine tubes that may not be completely flat. A deeper cut out allows for basepad overhang. If you gently press down on the mag in the gauge, the spring will compress a little and then it's easy to hold it up to the light to make sure it is touching at all the appropriate points, and hence legal. Ingenious, actually.

A buddy and I went in together on one after I saw how futile it would be to try to get accurate measurements with a caliper.

Curtis

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I bought the EGW gauge once I decided to go to Limited. If you have one, and work with it a little, it's actually very well designed IMO to measure mag length...the angle mentioned, in particular, allows accurately measuring the length to the back of the feed lips, no what what the angle of the feedlips. The two small ledges where the back of the magazine touches accounts for magazine tubes that may not be completely flat. A deeper cut out allows for basepad overhang. If you gently press down on the mag in the gauge, the spring will compress a little and then it's easy to hold it up to the light to make sure it is touching at all the appropriate points, and hence legal. Ingenious, actually.

A buddy and I went in together on one after I saw how futile it would be to try to get accurate measurements with a caliper.

Curtis

Are you allowed to apply "gentle" pressure ??? Is your "gentle" pressure the same as the RO running the chrono stage at the next major match ??

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let's try having this written into the procedure:

In addition to using the gauge, a trigger pull scale shall be used to pull/settle the magazine into the gauge. If the force needed exceeds 1.5 lbs to pull the magazine into position, the magazine shall be deemed oversized. This procedure will be done with the magazine and gauge in a horizontal position with the back of the magazine facing towards the ground to give the shooter the benefit of using the magazine's own body weight supply additional force for settling into the gauge.

Of course, that procedure above still doesn't account for the rule book saying measure on thing, but the gauge not only measures that thing, but also measures the feedlip angle.

Curtis, will with the gauge handle a magazine whose angle from feed lips to magazine back measures more than 165 degrees? (Not that there's a magazine that is designed like that, yet.) Based on the pictures, I don't think it can.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let's try having this written into the procedure:

In addition to using the gauge, a trigger pull scale shall be used to pull/settle the magazine into the gauge. If the force needed exceeds 1.5 lbs to pull the magazine into position, the magazine shall be deemed oversized. This procedure will be done with the magazine and gauge in a horizontal position with the back of the magazine facing towards the ground to give the shooter the benefit of using the magazine's own body weight supply additional force for settling into the gauge.

Of course, that procedure above still doesn't account for the rule book saying measure on thing, but the gauge not only measures that thing, but also measures the feedlip angle.

Curtis, will with the gauge handle a magazine whose angle from feed lips to magazine back measures more than 165 degrees? (Not that there's a magazine that is designed like that, yet.) Based on the pictures, I don't think it can.

Yep, then we'll need a spec trigger pull gauge, that will have to be certified annually, and the one used at major matches will be a different color than those available to us. Analog or digital? And the exact spot the gauge will be placed on the magazine will not be defined anywhere in the rule book.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I bought the EGW gauge once I decided to go to Limited. If you have one, and work with it a little, it's actually very well designed IMO to measure mag length...the angle mentioned, in particular, allows accurately measuring the length to the back of the feed lips, no what what the angle of the feedlips. The two small ledges where the back of the magazine touches accounts for magazine tubes that may not be completely flat. A deeper cut out allows for basepad overhang. If you gently press down on the mag in the gauge, the spring will compress a little and then it's easy to hold it up to the light to make sure it is touching at all the appropriate points, and hence legal. Ingenious, actually.

A buddy and I went in together on one after I saw how futile it would be to try to get accurate measurements with a caliper.

Curtis

Are you allowed to apply "gentle" pressure ??? Is your "gentle" pressure the same as the RO running the chrono stage at the next major match ??

When I say gentle pressure I mean "gentle"...one finger's worth of pressure just to make sure it's in place and all obvious play is taken up...if it's at all marginal or iffy to even a small extent, then I change basepads or break out the file. I don't believe in tempting fate and plan for the worst case scenario. For example, when weighing my production gun at home I don't want it to make weight on my scale...I want it .1 oz. below weight just in case the match scale doesn't agree.

Curtis

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...