Legal to paint the inside of the magwell?

[Chuck Anderson]

I'm betting money you've never shot an IPSC match in Production to make that statement.

Which part? All of it? The last sentance?

Yes, without getting into an IPSC vs. USPSA debate they have way more issues enforcing the rules and dealing with the myriad of issues that arise from their rules. Speaking as someone who has shot IPSC as well as USPSA Production, I didn't see a single out of the box gun at either event.

Ok, granted.

But the ideal of having a Division where you bring a stock gun, are only allowed to change the sights, and grips (or add grip tape), nothing else, - maybe be on the list, or fits the box, whatever else - sounds appealing. Bur Reality sets in and our horse has left the barn, so all grumbling aside, we just have to make the best of the rules we have. I'm done ranting now

I would love for that to have been the direction Production went. I would love to run a match with sponsor supplied box stock guns that nobody messed with. Not necessarily USPSA, but I think it would be cool. Unfortunately, the rules weren't entirely clear on some modifications initially. Hey it was a new Division. People did stuff to their guns, that really wasn't legal under the guise that if it's internal it's cool. It got to the point that Production really strayed from being true Production. The BOD could have gone super strict on modifications, made hundreds of once legal guns illegal, and in the process pissed off hundreds if not thousands of shooters. Or they could codify the rules they had at the time and try to stop the division from spiralling any further than it already had. They went with the second one. The rules aren't going to make everyone happy. There is no rule set that will. But hopefully, they will keep Production alive and thriving.

[Vlad]

I would be extremely disappointed in any MD who took that approach. That's why two shooters from my section were bumped to Open at Nationals a couple years back because they had grip plugs in. Enforcement of the rules at local matches would have saved them a lot of heartache. People were doing a lot of things that weren't intended under the Production rules for a lot of years. That's why the new set kicked in a couple years ago. Hoping to clarify things and make it very clear what people can and can't do to their guns. The rule regarding refinishing has been on the books a long time. So what is it you want the BOD to do. Change the rule, since we only seem to screw it up every time we do? Issue a ruling from NROI that is contrary to what the rule says and cause more confusion? Someone asked the question, I asked the BOD/DNROI for clarification. When the answer wasn't what I expected I asked John to make a ruling on it so it would be out there for everyone. Would you rather have a CRO at Nationals decide to read the rule book and bump a bunch of people to Open for it?

I think most match directors don't care if they disappoint the BOD but do care about their shooters. The rule regarding refinishing was on the books, sure, but I don't think anyone ever thought that placing a marker on the mag well was refinishing. I have shooters that have been shooting the same guns for years, with the same markings, who have passed through multiple area and national matches and presumably some form of equipment inspection without being an issue before.

As for how you could have solved this, to my mind it is pretty simple. A bit of paint is not refinishing and it should simply be ignored. Apply the "random person on the street" test: Would someone not involved in the process look at a bit of paint on the inside of the mag well and consider it refinishing?

Edited April 7, 2011 by Vlad

[MoNsTeR]

This is THE most ridiculous ruling I have ever heard.

I can't say anything more about it without breaking the forum rules.

[kevin c]

"Why did you put on that color of grip tape?"

"Because I cannot change the inside color of the magwell, I changed the color of my grips"

Hell, that's actually a great idea.

Then it was done for competitve advantage, just about explicitly stated as such, and is possibly going to move the shooter out of Production.

If the shooter says, "Because I want it to match my eyes", then it is cosmetic, and is going to skate by.

This is Production Division. My impression is that, when the rule changes were being batted back and forth, there was a school of thought saying that the guns should be bone stock - no mods period. The counterargument ran that all those with already modded guns would be put out in a major way, and the compromise was some limited changes allowed and the strong statement that only expressly allowed mods would fly, nothing implied would.

NROI has always, as far as I can remember, been very conservative in their interpretation of the rules, as strictly by the book as possible. That runs across all divisions. I'm not suprised that they would interpret this one directly per the already established rule of no changes externally for competitive advantage. The only real suprises are that the inside of the magwell is considered part of the exterior (and it's not really too much of a stretch) and that it took so long to address something that many were doing that is counter to the rules of the division.

[Singlestack]

1) Nobody is going to bump a brand new shooter to Open

2) You are among the minority of people that do not understand the rule, and that is just because you don't agree with it.

3) If you think it is going to bother a brand new shooter that he can't paint the inside of his magwell, your wrong. A new shooter has so many other things to worry about that would way down the list.

4) What part of not changing the finish for a competitive advantage do you not understand? If it is not a competitive advantage, why are you so upset about it?

1) Are you saying the rules are different for Level 1 matches?

2) I understand the rule, what I don't understand is how a dot is refinishing for a competitive advantage, but stippling is not. It seems to me that either way you end up with a different finish on the gun that results in "improved" performance (though I don't care to speculate the extent to which performance is improved).

3) The "benefit" of having the paint or not would not impact a new shooter, I agree with you there. However, it's not the benefit I'm debating here, it's the rationale. It doesn't make sense.

4) I don't understand the part about stippling being perfectly ok, but a spec of paint is not. Both are "refinishing" by any definition. Again, for the record, I've never painted or otherwise marked my magwells. I honestly don't think there is a benefit to it. But that doesn't mean that outlawing it makes any sense given how the rest of the rules work, especially the allowance for stippling.

No, I'm not saying the rules are different for a lvl 1 match. I am saying that the new shooter would be allowed to shoot the first match without having to shoot in Open though. The rules would be explained and the shooter would be expected to comply upon return. We make a lot of concessions at lvl 1 matches for new shooters that would not fly at a higher level match. BTW, I have never seen a new shooter show up with paint/whiteout in their magwell. I've seen them show up with all kind of crazy equipment, but no paint in the magwell.

Once again, nothing has been outlawed or changed. It was the rule all along.

[Vlad]

As I ponder this (fume over, ruminate?) I guess it comes down the problem of defining competitive advantage, and perhaps a poor choice of words in the rule book.

Everything we do is to gain a competitive advanatge, from finding shoes that grip, to picking shooting lenses color, picking reloading powders or exercising and losing weight. How did we get to a point where we ban things because of competitive advantage.

I think a better choice of words would be unfair advantage but thats not right either because its not fair that my eyes aren't perfect or that JJ Racazza has some natural abilities that I don't and we don't to legislate against people in better physical shape.

I think it boils down to not being able to outspend someone else or make other shooters feel that they have to spend money to win, although even then someone who can afford to practice with 1000 rounds a month and trainers and coaches or purchase an "approved" gun thats hand built by a factory approved gunsmith might still be ahead. Can we ban practice as a competitive advantage? It may sound crazy but it leads into that direction .

Ultimately, my friend made what I thought was a great point as I was ranting to him about this issue. He asked "If I bring enough paint for everyone at the match, is still a competitive advantage?" For $50 I can likely get enough nail polish and white out to paint every gun shot in Production with a barber pole. So how can such a thing even be considered a competitive/unfair/whatever advantage?

[racerba]

Now my real take on this decision:

It wasn't banned before. People were doing it and nobody complained (that I know of). If people thought it was a competitive disadvantage that someone else was doing it, they had the chance to do it themselves. Now someone asks to be sure and it gets banned...instead of allowing it to stay.

So why was stippling allowed?!?!?! Somehow there is no competitive advantage in doing so?!?!?!

[Vlad]

It wasn't banned before. People were doing it and nobody complained (that I know of).

In before people tell you it was always banned. This also reenforces my belief that asking for rule clarifications from NROI/BOD is like rubbing the magic lamp and asking for your 3 wishes, how the genie decided to satisfy your wishes my not be how you meant them.

[Skydiver]

No, I'm not saying the rules are different for a lvl 1 match. I am saying that the new shooter would be allowed to shoot the first match without having to shoot in Open though. The rules would be explained and the shooter would be expected to comply upon return. We make a lot of concessions at lvl 1 matches for new shooters that would not fly at a higher level match. BTW, I have never seen a new shooter show up with paint/whiteout in their magwell. I've seen them show up with all kind of crazy equipment, but no paint in the magwell.

Once again, nothing has been outlawed or changed. It was the rule all along.

But you still let them shoot in Production with non-compliant gear which is against the rules. What I can see happening is that it is explained that they'll have to shoot Limited, or Limited 10 because of non-compliant gear for Production, but their gear would still work for another division today. They can fix their gear for Production for next time.

Or let me put it this way: If someone shows up with a Ruger P90 would you let them shoot in single stack? I'm guessing the answer is no because gear is not compliant due to it not being 1911-style. So if a shooter with a 1911 with a 5" bull barrel would you let them shoot single stack? The answer should still be no because of the bull barrel. As much as I would feel bad for them shooting 8 round magazines against Limited 10 shooters, it's the only way to comply with the rules.

[Skydiver]

:

4) What part of not changing the finish for a competitive advantage do you not understand? If it is not a competitive advantage, why are you so upset about it?

:

4) I don't understand the part about stippling being perfectly ok, but a spec of paint is not. Both are "refinishing" by any definition. Again, for the record, I've never painted or otherwise marked my magwells. I honestly don't think there is a benefit to it. But that doesn't mean that outlawing it makes any sense given how the rest of the rules work, especially the allowance for stippling.

:

Once again, nothing has been outlawed or changed. It was the rule all along.

Actually the old rule was that you couldn't even refinish the gun. The rules was rescinded in this ruling http://www.uspsa.org/uspsa-NROI-ruling-details.php?indx=17

The Board of Directors has reviewed an earlier interpretation of the rules, one regarding finishes to guns in Production division, and have decided to rescind this interpretation.

It will be now legal in the US to have your Production gun finish cosmeticly enhanceed,eg.Teflon,NP3,hard chrome, matt finish hard chrome, bright finish hard chrome etc., the Board of Directors felt that there is no advantaged gained, nor is it a ruling that could be enforced consistently.

USPSA’s interpretation April 13, 2004.

Question--My slide is getting scratched up and I would like to have a new finish put on. If I had the tenifer finish removed and the slide hard chromed, would my G35 still be Production legal?

Answer--Here is how the language of the US Production division reads in the new rules.

21.5 External modifications other than sights not allowed

Based on this, you would be able to reblue your slide, but not change it to chrome, it would have to be as originally offered by the manufacturer.

IPSC’s interpretation.

Appendix D4 - 19.1 Modifications to them, other than minor detailing, are prohibited.

Interpretation: In respect of the above rule, prohibited modifications are deemed to include changing the original colour and/or finish of a gun, and/or adding stripes or other embellishments..

Maybe there is hope to have the paint in the magwell rescinded?

[vluc]

Just P R A C T I C E - R E L O A D S

Can't practice...it would be a competitive advantage...and following the precedence of this and other rulings, NO you cannot practice to gain competitive advantage.

:roflol:

[beltjones]

One thing that is more than a little hilarious is that a bunch of people on the "Glock 34 slide on 17 frame" thread were proposing that a simple "no competitive advantage" clause ruling could be issued to make it ok for someone to swap the slides and frames on their Glocks. The response from the BOD et al was that USPSA is doing everything it can to get away from any language that includes the phrase "no competitive advantage" because it's too hard to enforce, and it involves a difficult judgement call on the part of the CROs. Then, a couple of months later, we have a ruling with that exact language.

[Skydiver]

One thing that is more than a little hilarious is that a bunch of people on the "Glock 34 slide on 17 frame" thread were proposing that a simple "no competitive advantage" clause ruling could be issued to make it ok for someone to swap the slides and frames on their Glocks. The response from the BOD et al was that USPSA is doing everything it can to get away from any language that includes the phrase "no competitive advantage" because it's too hard to enforce, and it involves a difficult judgement call on the part of the CROs. Then, a couple of months later, we have a ruling with that exact language.

ROFL! Nice one, beltjones!

[Skydiver]

Mark (ima45dv8) is going to hate this hypothetical from me, but I'll ask anyway:

So if a production shooter happens to be standing downwind of somebody painting steel and ends up getting some spray paint splatter in their magwell. Are they going to be bumped to Open the next time they come up to the line and told "Make Ready" and the RO notices the white dots?

I unfortunately have to say yes.

Edited April 7, 2011 by Skydiver

[Singlestack]

Mark (ima45dv8) is going to hate this hypothetical from me, but I'll ask anyway:

So if a production shooter happens to be standing downwind of somebody painting steel and ends up getting some spray paint splatter in their magwell. Are they going to be bumped to Open the next time they come up to the line and told "Make Ready" and the RO notices the white dots?

I unfortunately have to say yes.

He is not the only one who hates it. Please, get real.

[Singlestack]

No, I'm not saying the rules are different for a lvl 1 match. I am saying that the new shooter would be allowed to shoot the first match without having to shoot in Open though. The rules would be explained and the shooter would be expected to comply upon return. We make a lot of concessions at lvl 1 matches for new shooters that would not fly at a higher level match. BTW, I have never seen a new shooter show up with paint/whiteout in their magwell. I've seen them show up with all kind of crazy equipment, but no paint in the magwell.

Once again, nothing has been outlawed or changed. It was the rule all along.

But you still let them shoot in Production with non-compliant gear which is against the rules. What I can see happening is that it is explained that they'll have to shoot Limited, or Limited 10 because of non-compliant gear for Production, but their gear would still work for another division today. They can fix their gear for Production for next time.

Or let me put it this way: If someone shows up with a Ruger P90 would you let them shoot in single stack? I'm guessing the answer is no because gear is not compliant due to it not being 1911-style. So if a shooter with a 1911 with a 5" bull barrel would you let them shoot single stack? The answer should still be no because of the bull barrel. As much as I would feel bad for them shooting 8 round magazines against Limited 10 shooters, it's the only way to comply with the rules.

Nope, if paint is the only thing that is keeping them from being production legal, I let them go. I explain things and let it go.

How many times have you had a new shooter show up with a thigh rig? Do you send them home and tell them they can't play or tell them to get a different holster before they come back? Again, please get real.

[Vlad]

Well its not like we have other examples of rules going odd. If you told me that some shooter will get a procedural for holding towel because of a rule designed to stop shooter from using fake guns during a walk through, I would have said "Get real". Yeah different organization, but now I gotta check my gun for cleanliness lest some overactive RO decide I have intentionally marked it.

[Skydiver]

No, I'm not saying the rules are different for a lvl 1 match. I am saying that the new shooter would be allowed to shoot the first match without having to shoot in Open though. The rules would be explained and the shooter would be expected to comply upon return. We make a lot of concessions at lvl 1 matches for new shooters that would not fly at a higher level match. BTW, I have never seen a new shooter show up with paint/whiteout in their magwell. I've seen them show up with all kind of crazy equipment, but no paint in the magwell.

Once again, nothing has been outlawed or changed. It was the rule all along.

But you still let them shoot in Production with non-compliant gear which is against the rules. What I can see happening is that it is explained that they'll have to shoot Limited, or Limited 10 because of non-compliant gear for Production, but their gear would still work for another division today. They can fix their gear for Production for next time.

Or let me put it this way: If someone shows up with a Ruger P90 would you let them shoot in single stack? I'm guessing the answer is no because gear is not compliant due to it not being 1911-style. So if a shooter with a 1911 with a 5" bull barrel would you let them shoot single stack? The answer should still be no because of the bull barrel. As much as I would feel bad for them shooting 8 round magazines against Limited 10 shooters, it's the only way to comply with the rules.

Nope, if paint is the only thing that is keeping them from being production legal, I let them go. I explain things and let it go.

How many times have you had a new shooter show up with a thigh rig? Do you send them home and tell them they can't play or tell them to get a different holster before they come back? Again, please get real.

Actually, I saw an MD asked if the guy was active military or law enforcement. Fortunately, the the new shooter was, so the new shooter got to shoot with their thigh rig as allowed by 5.2.8 for Level I. At another place, I saw somebody show up with a shoulder rig. I think he was about to be turned away, but somebody found a holster for him.

[Skydiver]

Mark (ima45dv8) is going to hate this hypothetical from me, but I'll ask anyway:

So if a production shooter happens to be standing downwind of somebody painting steel and ends up getting some spray paint splatter in their magwell. Are they going to be bumped to Open the next time they come up to the line and told "Make Ready" and the RO notices the white dots?

I unfortunately have to say yes.

He is not the only one who hates it. Please, get real.

It's not that far a reach. I actually did get paint splatter on my old Beretta 92FS and the holster that it was in. After that I learned to try to stay upwind of anybody painting steel if at all possible.

[driver8M3]

Read the rule regarding refinishing the gun and tell me this ruling is wrong. You can argue the rule may be inconsistent with what you think Production should be but the ruling is dead on with the rule.

i didnt say the ruling was wrong...i said amidon could have (and i think should have), said that painting the inside of the magwell is specifically allowed. tell me, what would have prevented him from issuing such a ruling? would such a ruling somehow ruin the perfect record of consistency for what is legal and what is not legal in production?

by the way...is sight black legal now in production???

No, a competitor may not paint dots, stripes or anything to help them reload or align sights quicker,

i guess not...

[beltjones]

There is no way sight black is legal in Production.

[Cy Soto]

There is no way sight black is legal in Production.

How is it that Sight Black is not legal in Production?

[Nik Habicht]

1) Nobody is going to bump a brand new shooter to Open

1) Are you saying the rules are different for Level 1 matches?

Nope. I'm not SS, but I'll say that new shooters are different. They get scrutiny and lots of education and advice, including what division they should shoot based on the equipment they bring to their first, and in some cases to their first few, match(es).

That's why they wouldn't get bumped. I've bumped friends of mine from Production to Open, for busting rules they should have known better than to bust -- because I'm not spending any time on educating them. They're at the point where that's their responsibility, like it's mine to look out for my equipment.

New shooters get the effort and education, so they'll hang around to become old shooters. Rules are the same, application's the same, but we try to proactively prevent some calls...

[beltjones]

It's paint that helps you align the sights quicker and provides a competitive advantage. The ruling very clearly says "anything" that does so is illegal.

[Cy Soto]

It's paint that helps you align the sights quicker and provides a competitive advantage. The ruling very clearly says "anything" that does so is illegal.

But Sight Black is just matte black paint, isn't it? I mean, wouldn't using a Fiber Optic sight set offer an even greater advantage?