box rule for Limited

[benos]

The thread on "IPSC or USPSA" and the recent blasting I have been doing (with Rob's 6" 45) has got me thinkin' (and Hatin')- I'd really hate the fact that the Limited Class (in the US) is going to develop into a 6" gun thing. It stinks. That's today's Hate, but I thought I'd post it here since it somehow seems to fit. Furthermore, I would not be opposed to some sort of holster rule for Limited that would prevent absurdities like a Sarariland 012 being worn in the appendix postion. (Which is what I wear, almost.) OK, as much as I hate to say it (because I don't like rules in general), I wouldn't mind seeing a box rule, a holster (and position) rule, and even a gun weight limit rule (you could just have the box setting on a scale) and a 10 rd limit rule for LIMITED CLASS.

what do you guys think?

Actually, since I'm in the mood, I'm gonna send this to the pres. right now.

be

[38supPat]

I hate rules as much or more that you BE, thats why I shoot open

I'm not sure more rules will solve the problem...we have the box rule here and it does keep the guns a bit more tame...but neccessity is the mother of invention. I look at it real simple...Its open or its not...Mods should be kept to a minimum, production class is the right step as far as I am concerned. Have two classes Open and production..thats it...if your 1911 needs extensive work to be competitive, and looking at limited class guns it apparantly does, you go to open, if you want to shoot stock, the gun must be STOCK.

If the weight limit came into effect I can see heavy frames with ultra light components eg. titanium slides (already being made) etc to balance off the weight rule. And how do you say a para must weigh 40 oz 'cuz they come from the factory that way but SVI's come out at 46 oz. Its tough to draw lines like that, they get fuzzy after awhile...I miss the days when there were no divisions, you came to shoot not whine...put a limit on optics, fine but how 'bout we just shoot and forget about the separation of the shooters.

Pat

[Bill H]

Maybe we could get some Democrats congressmen to make the rules. They did pretty good on the assualt weapons.OUCH  

[Ron Ankeny]

OK guys, how do you figure that Limited is going to turn into a 6 inch gun thing? When I asked about a 6 inch gun on the old board, everyone told me I was nucking futs for buying one and that they are sluggish, etc., with no real advantage. If a five inch short dust cover S_I is the superior pistol, why would anyone care if I handicap myself with a six inch gun?

Seriously though, I do understand what you are saying about the arms race. I started USPSA a little over a year ago shooting Limited 10 with a pretty much stock 1911 style pistol. The next thing I know, the cone tubed Limited guns show up with half full magazines so I figured whizz on this and I got a wide body in 6 inch configuration.

I gotta tell you guys that my Limited pistol really put a hell of a ding in my personal finances. I can't afford to throw a two thousand dollar pistol on the scrap heap and go buy a five inch limited pistol just because folks are bitching about an extra inch.

In my view, (as a new shooter) it would make sense to have just three divisions. Production for the Glocksters, etc. Open for the racers, and something like the single stack classic for guys like me.

[Flexmoney]

Ya' know, Brian...its all Robbie's fault.  G&A (Handguns) put that six inch SA on the cover, then Robbie shoots it in a match or two.  Of course he wins.  He could win with a sling-shot.  Now everybody says...hmmm maybe the six inch is the way to go.  Then they figure out why so they can justify buying one.  

It's not the gun...it is Rob L. (and maybe the "new trick of the day").

It bothers me to see people try to buy their way to better performance when all they need to do is work on the source.   (hey, that was one of my "hates")

Then again, with everybody switching to six inch guns, I might be able to get a deal on some old five inch shootin' irons.

[Singlestack]

I wish that they had made LIM-10 a single stack division...... I could not give a hoot less how long someones barrel is but it bugs me when the wide bodies download and jump the fence. I do feel a wide body has a advantage over a single stack in reloads. However, it is pretty funny to see a guy walk up to the line for a 40 rd stage with 6 double stack mags.

[Flexmoney]

I wonder where we would be if the politicians hadn't slapped the 10 round limit on new mags.  

[benos]

Thanks for all the feedback, that's what I was looking for.

Pat,

I miss those days as well. Really noticed it when I posted those ol pictures.

Ron,

Your gripe is a good one, and one that's tough to deal with. As I said on some other posts, when I actually shot the gun on standard tests that I absolutely know what my LOHF is - the gun showed promise. Actually, it was pretty cool. Definitely worth more testing. And it's not just that it's the trick of the week. I wouldn't say that I thought it was pretty cool if I didn't think it were for real. So, I don't know what the answer is, I just wanted some feedback on what direction everyone felt USPSA  should go. It's really already too late - too many 6" guns are out there. What about in another year? It will be total loser then. Is that what we want? A 6" Limited gun? I don't know, I just have a problem with it.

This is just a gut feeling but I wonder if the reason USPSA (board) didn't adopt the box for Limited (and some good holster rules) was due to pressure from manufacturers/sponsors? You know, the first guys on the block with the new loopholes are the winners.

And thinking of it, I'm certain the newest mag guage (for Stock) is longer than it should be is due to pressure form manufactuers/sponsors. "Their" current base pads weren't making the 140 mm rule, so now we have a "tolerance" guage that allows an extra round in SV's and Para's. 21 and 22 rds, respectively. Like 20 wasn't enough.

At first, I hated the idea of going to a 10 rd limit (in Stock class) just because that's what the law was/is. Now, for Limited, for no other reason than simplicity (OK, and a little nostalgia) I'd love to see the Limited go to 10 rd. (Forgive me), but in the ol days it was so nice - you didn't have 4 different capacity mags to pick from that you might use on any given stage. It would be so nice to standardize on the mags. An another thing - with many of the major matches having more than 50% of the entry's in Stock class, the course designers would have to seriously consider designing the courses to be at least 10 rd nuetral. The super-retarded 40 rd stages would eventually fizzle out.

OK, I'm done for now, but I might be back....

be

[Flexmoney]

I am all for less rules and more freedom.  Competition fosters innovation.  That is the way our country works...the old standard is constantly tested by the new innovation.  Let the cream rise to the top.

[spook]

I think IPSC should have a category with those rules Brian. I shoot in Europe and we have no Mag restrictions and the only consequence of that is that everybody shoots the same (expensive) gun, or a glock. Other options will put you down on the scoring list.

I agree with the ten round rule you suggest. It would have the advantage that people can enter stock class with other guns in major calibers than 1911's and glocks. Now people can compete in a serious class, without having to: either spend $2000 on a S_I, or having to shoot with a glock as the only alternative.

Production class in IPSC (not USPSA) allows no mods at all. That sucks too. I mean, the rules in IPSC production are so inconsistent and yet so tight.

I furthermore dislike the fact that USPSA has no influence whatsoever on European IPSC. Some of the rules you wish for are found only in IPSC and not in USPSA (yet), but limited 10 would no doubt be my class if it was an IPSC class in Europe. But...no magazine restrictions, no limited 10.

It basically comes down to this: I would like to be able to compete in a class where gear is not the main thing and you can choose what you WANT to shoot to win and not what you HAVE to shoot to win. Somewhere inbetween production (IPSC) and limited (IPSC) with a 10 round restriction (to stop hicap-big$$$-gun-mania)?

[Ron Ankeny]

Brian:

I hear you on stuff like the tolerance gauge. I'll go you one better on the base pads. I am sure you are right about the "tolerance" or "slop" being allowed so as not to rule out many of the exisiting base pads. However, I know of at least one maker of base pads who had pads that made the 140 mm rule. Now he is coming out with a base pad that violates the 140 mm rule, but it fits into the gauge. I guess some guys just push it to the limit and then beyond.

[benos]

Kyle and spook

I'm with you. I all for inovation myself, but for me, after awhile, i get sick of it when it comes to testing skill. I don't see any fault to have 2 classes. Let the Open class go where it will, and have a class for the purists. Like with shooting a bow. I think the new bows are awesome, but I also like to shoot an 'old' bow, without sights of any kind. Be the arrow...da da da da da da.....

be

[IPSC Supercop]

Brian,

Do you really think shooting the 6" gun was that impressive and gave that much of an advantage? What was so special about it if you don't mind me asking? This is a difficult subject because I see everyone's point. Like buying another gun just cause it doesn't fit the box anymore, but also, how much is enough, where do we stop it 7", 8"? Also, I think they should have called the new Division "Single Stack" and not Limited 10. Limited 10 sometimes kind of confuses people, where Single Stack would give them their own little niche instead of kind of riding on Limited Divisions back.

Kevin/IPSC Supercop

[Patrick Sweeney]

The problem with the equipment race isn't that the gear costs so much (blow the engine on a dirt bike and then complain to me how much a new Limited gun costs) but the "churning."

When a competitor feels he has to go out and buy new equipment to be competitive because someone came up with something new, and not because his equipment is worn out or he can shoot past its limits, then a bunch of shooters opt out.

Use the IPSC box, and make the gun fit.  Come up with an accurate measurement determination of how long a magazine can be, and stick with it.  When we can measure magazine length with a Starrett or Mitutoyo digital caliper, we can enforce length restrictions.  With some sort of funky "gauge" that has to be handed around from match to match, who knows if their magazine makes it?

As for "Single Stack," to describe Limited 10, explain the new name to a guy using a compact hi-cap frame in Lim10 (actual gun, he carries it in Detroit).  I think "Limited 10" is one of the things USPSA got right, even though they were late to it.

[Scooter]

Even if there is a box rule, manufactures will figure out a way to make the largest gun they can get into the box.  Just take a look at SVI's Infinity Modified gun.

[IPSC Supercop]

Yeah Scooter,

That SVI Modified gun is something else. Pure genius if you ask me, but then again, everyone says I don't get out enough and the only getting out I do is at an IPSC match.

I see what Patrick is saying, but this is one of the reasons I wouldn't mind them just making Limited Divison a 10 round limit anyway.

Kevin/IPSC Supercop

[benos]

I think the modified class is a stupid class. Basically, it's really an open class that has to fit into a box. It's not different than a desktop computer  and a laptop - the laptop costs more because you've got the same stuff jammed into a smaller space. Eventually, if modified class ever caught on, meaning some heavy hitters shooting it (like Robbie), it would turn into the same thing.

Kevin,

It's hard to say why it seems like the 6" has potential, I need more time with it. But I'm not sure I want to go there because I just don't care about that stuff anymore. The little I shoot, I'd just as soon train with what I have, equipment-wise.

be

[BigDave]

First off, let me say I have a very, very small amount of experience with USPSA or IPSC, but I will sound an opinion as someone who is new to this sport (and it is a game, folks)

I think, as far was USPSA is concerned, OPEN and LIMITED should be left alone, with the exception of magazine length and loads (so that 40 s&w and 38 super et al are even, say 18 rds ea.)  I think that those two classes are somewhat of a development platform for FACTORY guns.  However, I don't think there should be a magazine restriction (I think both should be 140mm) between OPEN and LIMITED.  If you do that, the basic difference should be sights and comps only.

I think LIMITED 10 should be replaced with STOCK.  the new STOCK class should have a box rule and a weight limit. The allowed mods should be limited to internal functioning only. It should not have a holster position requirement.

I think PRODUCTION should be renamed STOCK DA.  It should follow the same rules as the above STOCK class except first shot must be DA.  Here too, I don't see the point of a specific holster or position.  What is USPSA trying to do, bow down to IDPA?  If I want to shoot a concealed rig, I will go shoot IDPA.

Someone else decide where 6" slides fit here.  Maybe find an even point in STOCK where the length of the slide is made even in weight by another gun (i.e. long dustcover guns)

just my $.02