bobmysterious Posted March 16, 2011 Share Posted March 16, 2011 Just wanted to ask y'all if it's legal to paint the inside of the magwell if you shoot production. I've got a Glock 34 that I was thinking about hitting on the lip of the magwell with a little orange paint. Thanks in advance---- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Team Amish 1 Posted March 16, 2011 Share Posted March 16, 2011 To the best of my knowledge - yes. I've seen several people put color or a mark or X into their Glock magwells in Production. I used to have an orange dot in mine to give some inbound guidance (it's like the painted on fly in the urinal...). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobmysterious Posted March 16, 2011 Author Share Posted March 16, 2011 I was just a little confused because I had seen some internal magwells that are apparently legal, but would be visible from outside of the gun. So it would seem that if that worked then some paint would fly as well. Thanks for the input. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alpha-charlie Posted March 16, 2011 Share Posted March 16, 2011 perfectly legal. I've got the orange paint inside mine too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wide45 Posted March 16, 2011 Share Posted March 16, 2011 You can paint the outside, why would you not be able to paint the inside? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobmysterious Posted March 16, 2011 Author Share Posted March 16, 2011 I wasn't sure if it would be classified as a "competitive advantage" like certain slide finishes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Santiago Posted March 16, 2011 Share Posted March 16, 2011 No. Appendix D4-21 lists allowed modifications. If it's not listed, it can't be done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skydiver Posted March 16, 2011 Share Posted March 16, 2011 (edited) So those guys who put those white dots on the inside of the mouth of their (Glock) magwells could be (or should be) shooting open? Personally, I think that painting the inside is allowed based on my reading of 21.2a with the added clarification: Per existing NROI ruling, cosmetically enhancing the finish of a slide is already ALLOWED in Production Division, provided that the finish provides no competitive advantage. This clause is NOW interpreted to specifically ALLOW refinishing the frame, as well as the slide, subject to the existing constraints on refinishing (cosmetic only, no competitive advantage). Special Notes/Clarifications: • Any finish which provides a noncosmetic function will be deemed PROHIBITED. For example, a gun finish which provides a roughened texture in an area where grip tape is not allowed (Appendix E4) is a PROHIBITED modification. Since the inside of the magwell is part of the frame, I'd suppose that refinishing by painting should be allowed. Edited March 16, 2011 by Skydiver Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Santiago Posted March 16, 2011 Share Posted March 16, 2011 So those guys who put those white dots on the inside of the mouth of their (Glock) magwells could be (or should be) shooting open? Personally, I think that painting the inside is allowed based on my reading of 21.2a with the added clarification: Per existing NROI ruling, cosmetically enhancing the finish of a slide is already ALLOWED in Production Division, provided that the finish provides no competitive advantage. This clause is NOW interpreted to specifically ALLOW refinishing the frame, as well as the slide, subject to the existing constraints on refinishing (cosmetic only, no competitive advantage). Special Notes/Clarifications: • Any finish which provides a noncosmetic function will be deemed PROHIBITED. For example, a gun finish which provides a roughened texture in an area where grip tape is not allowed (Appendix E4) is a PROHIBITED modification. Since the inside of the magwell is part of the frame, I'd suppose that refinishing by painting should be allowed. I would say the Special Note at the end covers the painting of 3 dots. Noncosmetic function. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SDM Posted March 16, 2011 Share Posted March 16, 2011 I would say the Special Note at the end covers the painting of 3 dots. Noncosmetic function. Maybe they like that look? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vluc Posted March 16, 2011 Share Posted March 16, 2011 Thread link sent to John Amidon for a definitive answer. I've been running the barberpole since forever (at least 2003) and have shot areas and sectionals on a yearly basis and have never had it called. My former area director was the chrono guy at one match 2 years ago and it passed muster. Not to say that the interpretation could not have changed! What was once legal may now be illegal. What was once illegal is now legal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobmysterious Posted March 16, 2011 Author Share Posted March 16, 2011 Thanks! Glad I asked a pertinent question, I was worried this one might have been asked and answered on a regular basis. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vluc Posted March 16, 2011 Share Posted March 16, 2011 Thanks! Glad I asked a pertinent question, I was worried this one might have been asked and answered on a regular basis. Rules and their interpretation can change, always good to ask. Best to ask John Amidon as his ruling is usually the final one here. Lot's of times it doesn't matter what we think, it's how the rules are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LPatterson Posted March 16, 2011 Share Posted March 16, 2011 No. Appendix D4-21 lists allowed modifications. If it's not listed, it can't be done. Using an absolutely literal interpretation of what is written in the Appendix then you are probably correct. However the rule change was an attempt to put the horse back in the barn after a side of the barn collapsed. The worse kind of rule is one that tries to imply that if it isn't specifically authorized then it is proscribed. I doubt very seriously if the framers of the rules ever considered that people would seriously consider arguing that some paint on the inside if the frame was a competitive advantage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vluc Posted March 16, 2011 Share Posted March 16, 2011 No. Appendix D4-21 lists allowed modifications. If it's not listed, it can't be done. Using an absolutely literal interpretation of what is written in the Appendix then you are probably correct. However the rule change was an attempt to put the horse back in the barn after a side of the barn collapsed. The worse kind of rule is one that tries to imply that if it isn't specifically authorized then it is proscribed. I doubt very seriously if the framers of the rules ever considered that people would seriously consider arguing that some paint on the inside if the frame was a competitive advantage. I agree with your comments, but then they allowed stippling the grip (even though you cannot remove material or change the profile of the gun). Maybe if we stippled holes through the bottom that would be an acceptable solution if the ruling comes out that my little coloring is a competitive advantage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JAFO Posted March 16, 2011 Share Posted March 16, 2011 Well, if I have to remove my painted white dot, I guess I can always scratch a circle on my anodized frame. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flexmoney Posted March 16, 2011 Share Posted March 16, 2011 I think I am the originator of the "barber pole"...though the basis for the idea has been around for a long time (I believe I got it from BE and he used a dot of some sort). I had always ran a version of this in Production. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vluc Posted March 17, 2011 Share Posted March 17, 2011 I think I am the originator of the "barber pole"...though the basis for the idea has been around for a long time (I believe I got it from BE and he used a dot of some sort). I had always ran a version of this in Production. Got my idea from you years ago, but did not know if you still ran it or not, so I didn't link you earlier. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vluc Posted March 18, 2011 Share Posted March 18, 2011 So it seems the era of the barber-pole is gone. From John Amidon this afternoon: Vince, As Appendix D4 item 21.2a Slide refinishing states, “this clause is now interpreted to specifically allow refinishing the frame as well as the slide subject to the existing constraints on refinishing (cosmetic only, no competitive advantage). Putting a paint mark on the magwell as a reference point to insert the magazine, to me would fall under competitive advantage. John From: vluc Sent: Wednesday, March 16, 2011 11:06 AM To: dnroi@uspsa.org Subject: production question Is it legal to paint or mark inside the magazine well in production? See thread at Enos: http://www.brianenos.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=125129&pid=1413398&st=0entry1413398 Vince Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vluc Posted March 18, 2011 Share Posted March 18, 2011 Thread link sent to John Amidon for a definitive answer. I've been running the barberpole since forever (at least 2003) and have shot areas and sectionals on a yearly basis and have never had it called. My former area director was the chrono guy at one match 2 years ago and it passed muster. Not to say that the interpretation could not have changed! What was once legal may now be illegal. What was once illegal is now legal. Well, as you see, the answer is not what we may have thought it was. My glocks have been de-poled. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nik Habicht Posted March 19, 2011 Share Posted March 19, 2011 So it seems the era of the barber-pole is gone. From John Amidon this afternoon: Vince, As Appendix D4 item 21.2a Slide refinishing states, “this clause is now interpreted to specifically allow refinishing the frame as well as the slide subject to the existing constraints on refinishing (cosmetic only, no competitive advantage). Putting a paint mark on the magwell as a reference point to insert the magazine, to me would fall under competitive advantage. John From: vluc Sent: Wednesday, March 16, 2011 11:06 AM To: dnroi@uspsa.org Subject: production question Is it legal to paint or mark inside the magazine well in production? See thread at Enos: http://www.brianenos.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=125129&pid=1413398&st=0entry1413398 Vince So if we paint it all the way around, and call it artistic, will that change his answer? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skydiver Posted March 19, 2011 Share Posted March 19, 2011 So it seems the era of the barber-pole is gone. From John Amidon this afternoon: Vince, As Appendix D4 item 21.2a Slide refinishing states, "this clause is now interpreted to specifically allow refinishing the frame as well as the slide subject to the existing constraints on refinishing (cosmetic only, no competitive advantage). Putting a paint mark on the magwell as a reference point to insert the magazine, to me would fall under competitive advantage. John From: vluc Sent: Wednesday, March 16, 2011 11:06 AM To: dnroi@uspsa.org Subject: production question Is it legal to paint or mark inside the magazine well in production? See thread at Enos: http://www.brianenos...0 Vince So if we paint it all the way around, and call it artistic, will that change his answer? Devil's Advocate mode here: Since some people have put camo finishes on their guns, it's time to go retro and put the old WWII "Dazzle" pattern... Just let the pattern happen to have a nice pointy arrow showing where mags are suppose to go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
a.roberts Posted March 19, 2011 Share Posted March 19, 2011 So it seems the era of the barber-pole is gone. From John Amidon this afternoon: Vince, As Appendix D4 item 21.2a Slide refinishing states, “this clause is now interpreted to specifically allow refinishing the frame as well as the slide subject to the existing constraints on refinishing (cosmetic only, no competitive advantage). Putting a paint mark on the magwell as a reference point to insert the magazine, to me would fall under competitive advantage. John From: vluc Sent: Wednesday, March 16, 2011 11:06 AM To: dnroi@uspsa.org Subject: production question Is it legal to paint or mark inside the magazine well in production? See thread at Enos: http://www.brianenos.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=125129&pid=1413398&st=0entry1413398 Vince Isn't this just Amidon's "unofficial" personal opinion, at least until (if/when) it's posted on the NROI Rulings? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skydiver Posted March 19, 2011 Share Posted March 19, 2011 So it seems the era of the barber-pole is gone. From John Amidon this afternoon: Vince, As Appendix D4 item 21.2a Slide refinishing states, "this clause is now interpreted to specifically allow refinishing the frame as well as the slide subject to the existing constraints on refinishing (cosmetic only, no competitive advantage). Putting a paint mark on the magwell as a reference point to insert the magazine, to me would fall under competitive advantage. John From: vluc Sent: Wednesday, March 16, 2011 11:06 AM To: dnroi@uspsa.org Subject: production question Is it legal to paint or mark inside the magazine well in production? See thread at Enos: http://www.brianenos...0 Vince Isn't this just Amidon's "unofficial" personal opinion, at least until (if/when) it's posted on the NROI Rulings? Yes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobmysterious Posted March 19, 2011 Author Share Posted March 19, 2011 Glad I asked. Time to take some neon orange paint off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts