Legal to paint the inside of the magwell?

[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.

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?

Yes. But it's not a question of whether one is greater than another. Paint is illegal if it helps you align the sights quicker.

My question is, if sight black turns out to be legal, could I paint a black circle with it in the magwell of my stainless steel gun?

[Cy Soto]

Yes. But it's not a question of whether one is greater than another. Paint is illegal if it helps you align the sights quicker.

My question is, if sight black turns out to be legal, could I paint a black circle with it in the magwell of my stainless steel gun?

Oh, I see where you are going with this... Good Point!!

[driver8M3]

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?

wait...are fiber optic sights even legal? i can't find a specific rule or ruling that says "notch and post" can include fiber optic...

Please note that, during a match, a shooter may be

required to demonstrate that their gun is in compliance

with Division rules by identifying a specific

rules clause or published interpretation which authorizes

any disputed modification. If the shooter cannot

identify an authorizing rules-clause or published

interpretation, the RM shall rule that the modification

is PROHIBITED for Production use and shall move

the shooter to Open Division.

[Skydiver]

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?

wait...are fiber optic sights even legal? i can't find a specific rule or ruling that says "notch and post" can include fiber optic...

Please note that, during a match, a shooter may be

required to demonstrate that their gun is in compliance

with Division rules by identifying a specific

rules clause or published interpretation which authorizes

any disputed modification. If the shooter cannot

identify an authorizing rules-clause or published

interpretation, the RM shall rule that the modification

is PROHIBITED for Production use and shall move

the shooter to Open Division.

Yikes! Looks like a problem in the rule book.

In the original 2008 Blue book, Appendix D4.21 said this:

Authorized modifications (Strictly limited to these items and their stated guidelines)

•Internal throating and polishing to improve accuracy, reliability and function

•Sights – trimmed, adjusted, replaced, colored, or fiber-optic.

•Slide – refinishing. Milling of slide – only as required to insert sights.

•After-market slides and barrels – provided they are the same length, contour, and caliber as original factory standard.

•Grips – Internal beveling. Checkering, stippling, and addition of grip tape or grip sleeves. (see Appendix E4)

•Exchange of minor components (springs, safeties, slide stops, guide rods).

In the 2008 Blue book "With Board Of Directors Approved Amendments through July 2010", the highlighted text above is now missing.

As I recall, the "colored" was what allowed people to apply sight black or nail polish on their sights.

Edited April 8, 2011 by Skydiver

[kevin c]

Maybe we should ask Chuck to ask the BOD and NROI about the sight black/FO sights?

I think we've all laid out the problem in different ways, best described by Chuck with his review of how the current Production rules were arrived at. Seems that there is an unhappy compromise between bone stock and anything goes. By allowing some already existing mods for competitive advantage (and, except for the stuff that makes your gat "purty", ALL mods are about competitive advantage) but trying to cap others with the "only allowed if explicitly allowed" blanket rule, you get awkward situations like this. The ruling may seem arbitrary, but it is consistent with the current rules. Allowing the mod when the rules are clear that it should not be would be even more capricious.

The line between no mod and any mod has to be drawn somewhere, and will not satisfy anybody whose desired mod is on the wrong side of the line. Some of the consequences of the rules/rulings are deliberate (keep it close to stock, not too many expensive changes). Others might be unintentional - we really could ask for rulings on the sight black and FO sights, but would need to be prepared for answers we don't like, as pointed out by those raising the issues. My guess is that they'd be allowed, though.

The rules are far from perfect, but it's what we are obligated to work with in the sport. If there is enough sentiment in the rank and file that they need further major change then perhaps a future BOD will be voted in with that mandate, or someone of similar mind could volunteer to take over NROI from John and Troy. I'm OK with the rules as they are now.

Kevin C

Production Division shooter

[West Texas Granny]

Production is without a doubt a difficult one to "legislate," and I don't envy them the task. However, I really wish they would take a more pragmatic approach to some of these things. Grip aids are obviously ok and they provide a competitive advantage. Grip plugs and "speedways" are aids and they are ok despite the competitive advantage. So essentially aids are ok provided they are physical or mechanical in nature, but not visual? It makes no sense.

Basically you are saying the rules need to be simpler and consistent as now they are neither.

[West Texas Granny]

Because stippling is specifically allowed in the rulebook. Refinishing for a competetive advantage is specifically disallowed. The rule was probably not originally intended to prohibit a dab of nailpolish but rather to allow people to have their guns refinished so they looked pretty and still be legal. What they didn't want to have happen was some super finish that would provide a competetive advantage, like someone refinishing their slide with 120 grit and saying it's just a refinish. There had to be a line and this just happened to be where it ended up. You don't understand because you don't want to and you do want to argue about it.

When I think production I think of the gun as it was released to the public for sale. Any change to the gun from it's original specs would make it illegal for production. No custom shop guns. Just the gun as released to the public for sale. Stippling would make the gun illegal for production as it is a change from the original specs of the gun. Also let's be honest here as stippling is done for a competitive advantage.

[Vlad]

I say again, everything is competitive advantage and it is a bad unit of measure.

[vluc]

I say again, everything is competitive advantage and it is a bad unit of measure.

Just my thoughts off the top of my head:

Maybe instead of competitive advantage we should look at the notion of stock. Can any production pistol used be returned to a stock condition, could it go back into its-off-the-shelf box.

sights - yes, easily changed

grip stippling - no - it's a permanent modification

grip tape - yes, just remove it

plugs - yes, just remove them

paint - yes, just remove it

internal beveling of magwell - no, it's a permanent modification

slide refinishing - yes

slide work (cuts) - no, permanent modification

internal parts, yes - all can be replaced

I'm kind of torn on the whole argument. I shoot production virtually exclusively. I once had grip tape under my trigger guard, now I can't do it, and I notice no difference in my shooting. I had a mark in my magwell which is now gone, I notice no difference. I once had a super light trigger that I've since changed to a heavier one and I no longer notice the difference. I've used plastic and metal guide rods, and notice no difference anymore.

At one point they helped me become a better shooter - rather they helped me improve my technique and understanding to the point that I became a better shooter and realized that the parts themselves did not make that significant a difference. I think this is where we see the divergence in opinion on production - the utilization of parts to get us to where we do not need the parts anymore versus allowing any changes at all.

Edited April 8, 2011 by vluc

[West Texas Granny]

I think everyone is missing the point. There are 7 pages so far over a question of the rules. Any rule that generates this much discussion should be relooked at. It's like trying to divine what is is.

[aztecdriver]

I think everyone is missing the point. There are 7 pages so far over a question of the rules. Any rule that generates this much discussion should be relooked at. It's like trying to divine what is is.

There will be nitpicking about equipment as long as the rules are sufficiently simple. The only way to get explicit is to turn the rule book into one the size of the phonebook. I prefer it be discuss then bashed over my head.

[Flexmoney]

I guess it comes down the problem of defining competitive advantage...

I certainly put the barber poll marking in my gun as a means of competitive advantage. No mistake about that.

(Of course, my Glock was a Limited gun at the time, so.... )

[raz-0]

I tried to stay out of this really, but they need to pull their heads out from betwixt their buttocks on this one.

I've had a painted dot come out of a sight, so I scraped the other one out and painted them both in. By a rational person's interpretation, I repaired a box stock gun to as close as I could to box stock. With an NROI interpretation, I refinished to allow faster sight alignment.

So a $2 fix is going to encourage a gear race, but me repairing that gun with a $100 set of sights is not.

I can't fathom how the same people can be this orthodox about a line of nail polish, but can allow grip stippling.

Yes, technically, we were screwing over the hoards of guys with a glock and a soldering iron, so I guess they caved to be first time shooter friendly. But somehow a little paint on the sights is a deal killer fir that same first time shooter.

As a match director, when I see crap like this, I ask myself why I subject myself to representing these people on a monthly basis.

[Flexmoney]

BTW, Chuck...I appreciate you doing the work here. You are actually here, involved, and active.

[Singlestack]

BTW, Chuck...I appreciate you doing the work here. You are actually here, involved, and active.

Huge +1

[spanky]

BTW, Chuck...I appreciate you doing the work here. You are actually here, involved, and active.

Agreed.

[ima45dv8]

BTW, Chuck...I appreciate you doing the work here. You are actually here, involved, and active.

Me, too!

[kevin c]

Thanks, Chuck, for being willing to offer the informed perspective on these issues, and putting up with the protests.

[mpolans]

When does Amidon come up for re-election?

He doesn't. Ever.

This should change and the change is long over due. This ruling, the sight tracker, the FPB deal for CZs, the TruSight, IMHO, all of these should not have happened.

[Skydiver]

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?

wait...are fiber optic sights even legal? i can't find a specific rule or ruling that says "notch and post" can include fiber optic...

Please note that, during a match, a shooter may be

required to demonstrate that their gun is in compliance

with Division rules by identifying a specific

rules clause or published interpretation which authorizes

any disputed modification. If the shooter cannot

identify an authorizing rules-clause or published

interpretation, the RM shall rule that the modification

is PROHIBITED for Production use and shall move

the shooter to Open Division.

Yikes! Looks like a problem in the rule book.

In the original 2008 Blue book, Appendix D4.21 said this:

Authorized modifications (Strictly limited to these items and their stated guidelines)

•Internal throating and polishing to improve accuracy, reliability and function

•Sights – trimmed, adjusted, replaced, colored, or fiber-optic.

•Slide – refinishing. Milling of slide – only as required to insert sights.

•After-market slides and barrels – provided they are the same length, contour, and caliber as original factory standard.

•Grips – Internal beveling. Checkering, stippling, and addition of grip tape or grip sleeves. (see Appendix E4)

•Exchange of minor components (springs, safeties, slide stops, guide rods).

In the 2008 Blue book "With Board Of Directors Approved Amendments through July 2010", the highlighted text above is now missing.

As I recall, the "colored" was what allowed people to apply sight black or nail polish on their sights.

Here's the followup for Amidon when I asked about the omission above:

My question:

As the debate rages on about the latest ruling about paintin the magwell in the BEnoverse, it has turned up an interesting thing. Itlooks like there was an omission in the reprinting of the "2008 Rule book withthe Board of Directors Approved Amendments through July 2010" with regards tofiber optics, as well as, applying sight black or any other color on the sightsfor that matter.

In the original 2008 rule book the follow text was presentunder D4.21:

Authorizedmodifications (Strictly limited to these items and their stated guidelines)

•Internalthroating and polishing to improve accuracy, reliability and function

•Sights – trimmed, adjusted, replaced,colored, or fiber-optic.

•Slide– refinishing. Milling of slide – only as required to insert sights.

•After-marketslides and barrels – provided they are the same length, contour, and caliber asoriginal factory standard.

•Grips– Internal beveling. Checkering, stippling, and addition of grip tape or gripsleeves. (see Appendix E4)

•Exchangeof minor components (springs, safeties, slide stops, guide rods).

In the current rule book, the highlighted line is nowmissing. Does this mean that Production shooters who have a fiber optic intheir sights, or who have applied sight black, or painted their front sightwith nail polish or modeler's paint now get bumped to Open?

Amidon's response:

No it doesn't, fiber opticsights and sight black have been a standard allowance since the inception ofProduction division.

Edited April 9, 2011 by Skydiver

[driver8M3]

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?

wait...are fiber optic sights even legal? i can't find a specific rule or ruling that says "notch and post" can include fiber optic...

Please note that, during a match, a shooter may be

required to demonstrate that their gun is in compliance

with Division rules by identifying a specific

rules clause or published interpretation which authorizes

any disputed modification. If the shooter cannot

identify an authorizing rules-clause or published

interpretation, the RM shall rule that the modification

is PROHIBITED for Production use and shall move

the shooter to Open Division.

Yikes! Looks like a problem in the rule book.

In the original 2008 Blue book, Appendix D4.21 said this:

Authorized modifications (Strictly limited to these items and their stated guidelines)

•Internal throating and polishing to improve accuracy, reliability and function

•Sights – trimmed, adjusted, replaced, colored, or fiber-optic.

•Slide – refinishing. Milling of slide – only as required to insert sights.

•After-market slides and barrels – provided they are the same length, contour, and caliber as original factory standard.

•Grips – Internal beveling. Checkering, stippling, and addition of grip tape or grip sleeves. (see Appendix E4)

•Exchange of minor components (springs, safeties, slide stops, guide rods).

In the 2008 Blue book "With Board Of Directors Approved Amendments through July 2010", the highlighted text above is now missing.

As I recall, the "colored" was what allowed people to apply sight black or nail polish on their sights.

Here's the followup for Amidon when I asked about the omission above:

My question:

As the debate rages on about the latest ruling about paintin the magwell in the BEnoverse, it has turned up an interesting thing. Itlooks like there was an omission in the reprinting of the "2008 Rule book withthe Board of Directors Approved Amendments through July 2010" with regards tofiber optics, as well as, applying sight black or any other color on the sightsfor that matter.

In the original 2008 rule book the follow text was presentunder D4.21:

Authorizedmodifications (Strictly limited to these items and their stated guidelines)

•Internalthroating and polishing to improve accuracy, reliability and function

•Sights – trimmed, adjusted, replaced,colored, or fiber-optic.

•Slide– refinishing. Milling of slide – only as required to insert sights.

•After-marketslides and barrels – provided they are the same length, contour, and caliber asoriginal factory standard.

•Grips– Internal beveling. Checkering, stippling, and addition of grip tape or gripsleeves. (see Appendix E4)

•Exchangeof minor components (springs, safeties, slide stops, guide rods).

In the current rule book, the highlighted line is nowmissing. Does this mean that Production shooters who have a fiber optic intheir sights, or who have applied sight black, or painted their front sightwith nail polish or modeler's paint now get bumped to Open?

Amidon's response:

No it doesn't, fiber opticsights and sight black have been a standard allowance since the inception ofProduction division.

that response is great news...though i'm wondering what a match director will follow...the above response from john, or this statement, which is actually in the rule book:

Please note that, during a match, a shooter may be

required to demonstrate that their gun is in compliance

with Division rules by identifying a specific

rules clause or published interpretation which authorizes

any disputed modification. If the shooter cannot

identify an authorizing rules-clause or published

interpretation, the RM shall rule that the modification

is PROHIBITED for Production use and shall move

the shooter to Open Division.

[Skydiver]

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?

wait...are fiber optic sights even legal? i can't find a specific rule or ruling that says "notch and post" can include fiber optic...

Please note that, during a match, a shooter may be

required to demonstrate that their gun is in compliance

with Division rules by identifying a specific

rules clause or published interpretation which authorizes

any disputed modification. If the shooter cannot

identify an authorizing rules-clause or published

interpretation, the RM shall rule that the modification

is PROHIBITED for Production use and shall move

the shooter to Open Division.

Yikes! Looks like a problem in the rule book.

In the original 2008 Blue book, Appendix D4.21 said this:

Authorized modifications (Strictly limited to these items and their stated guidelines)

•Internal throating and polishing to improve accuracy, reliability and function

•Sights – trimmed, adjusted, replaced, colored, or fiber-optic.

•Slide – refinishing. Milling of slide – only as required to insert sights.

•After-market slides and barrels – provided they are the same length, contour, and caliber as original factory standard.

•Grips – Internal beveling. Checkering, stippling, and addition of grip tape or grip sleeves. (see Appendix E4)

•Exchange of minor components (springs, safeties, slide stops, guide rods).

In the 2008 Blue book "With Board Of Directors Approved Amendments through July 2010", the highlighted text above is now missing.

As I recall, the "colored" was what allowed people to apply sight black or nail polish on their sights.

Here's the followup for Amidon when I asked about the omission above:

My question:

As the debate rages on about the latest ruling about paintin the magwell in the BEnoverse, it has turned up an interesting thing. Itlooks like there was an omission in the reprinting of the "2008 Rule book withthe Board of Directors Approved Amendments through July 2010" with regards tofiber optics, as well as, applying sight black or any other color on the sightsfor that matter.

In the original 2008 rule book the follow text was presentunder D4.21:

Authorizedmodifications (Strictly limited to these items and their stated guidelines)

•Internalthroating and polishing to improve accuracy, reliability and function

•Sights – trimmed, adjusted, replaced,colored, or fiber-optic.

•Slide– refinishing. Milling of slide – only as required to insert sights.

•After-marketslides and barrels – provided they are the same length, contour, and caliber asoriginal factory standard.

•Grips– Internal beveling. Checkering, stippling, and addition of grip tape or gripsleeves. (see Appendix E4)

•Exchangeof minor components (springs, safeties, slide stops, guide rods).

In the current rule book, the highlighted line is nowmissing. Does this mean that Production shooters who have a fiber optic intheir sights, or who have applied sight black, or painted their front sightwith nail polish or modeler's paint now get bumped to Open?

Amidon's response:

No it doesn't, fiber opticsights and sight black have been a standard allowance since the inception ofProduction division.

that response is great news...though i'm wondering what a match director will follow...the above response from john, or this statement, which is actually in the rule book:

Please note that, during a match, a shooter may be

required to demonstrate that their gun is in compliance

with Division rules by identifying a specific

rules clause or published interpretation which authorizes

any disputed modification. If the shooter cannot

identify an authorizing rules-clause or published

interpretation, the RM shall rule that the modification

is PROHIBITED for Production use and shall move

the shooter to Open Division.

Well, since the new rule book went into effect Aug 11, 2010, and Nationals was held in Sept, and there wasn't a slew people who got bumped from Production to Open, nor was there a cry of outrage here on BEnoverse about fiber optics becoming illegal, I'm going to assume that it was considered legal at that match. (I'm trying to dig up photos from nationals showing production shooters with fiber optics, but my Google-fu is weak.)

I wonder how many people shot Productions at Nationals with paint in their magwell?

[adively]

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?

wait...are fiber optic sights even legal? i can't find a specific rule or ruling that says "notch and post" can include fiber optic...

Please note that, during a match, a shooter may be

required to demonstrate that their gun is in compliance

with Division rules by identifying a specific

rules clause or published interpretation which authorizes

any disputed modification. If the shooter cannot

identify an authorizing rules-clause or published

interpretation, the RM shall rule that the modification

is PROHIBITED for Production use and shall move

the shooter to Open Division.

Yikes! Looks like a problem in the rule book.

In the original 2008 Blue book, Appendix D4.21 said this:

Authorized modifications (Strictly limited to these items and their stated guidelines)

•Internal throating and polishing to improve accuracy, reliability and function

•Sights – trimmed, adjusted, replaced, colored, or fiber-optic.

•Slide – refinishing. Milling of slide – only as required to insert sights.

•After-market slides and barrels – provided they are the same length, contour, and caliber as original factory standard.

•Grips – Internal beveling. Checkering, stippling, and addition of grip tape or grip sleeves. (see Appendix E4)

•Exchange of minor components (springs, safeties, slide stops, guide rods).

In the 2008 Blue book "With Board Of Directors Approved Amendments through July 2010", the highlighted text above is now missing.

As I recall, the "colored" was what allowed people to apply sight black or nail polish on their sights.

Here's the followup for Amidon when I asked about the omission above:

My question:

As the debate rages on about the latest ruling about paintin the magwell in the BEnoverse, it has turned up an interesting thing. Itlooks like there was an omission in the reprinting of the "2008 Rule book withthe Board of Directors Approved Amendments through July 2010" with regards tofiber optics, as well as, applying sight black or any other color on the sightsfor that matter.

In the original 2008 rule book the follow text was presentunder D4.21:

Authorizedmodifications (Strictly limited to these items and their stated guidelines)

•Internalthroating and polishing to improve accuracy, reliability and function

•Sights – trimmed, adjusted, replaced,colored, or fiber-optic.

•Slide– refinishing. Milling of slide – only as required to insert sights.

•After-marketslides and barrels – provided they are the same length, contour, and caliber asoriginal factory standard.

•Grips– Internal beveling. Checkering, stippling, and addition of grip tape or gripsleeves. (see Appendix E4)

•Exchangeof minor components (springs, safeties, slide stops, guide rods).

In the current rule book, the highlighted line is nowmissing. Does this mean that Production shooters who have a fiber optic intheir sights, or who have applied sight black, or painted their front sightwith nail polish or modeler's paint now get bumped to Open?

Amidon's response:

No it doesn't, fiber opticsights and sight black have been a standard allowance since the inception ofProduction division.

that response is great news...though i'm wondering what a match director will follow...the above response from john, or this statement, which is actually in the rule book:

Please note that, during a match, a shooter may be

required to demonstrate that their gun is in compliance

with Division rules by identifying a specific

rules clause or published interpretation which authorizes

any disputed modification. If the shooter cannot

identify an authorizing rules-clause or published

interpretation, the RM shall rule that the modification

is PROHIBITED for Production use and shall move

the shooter to Open Division.

Well, since the new rule book went into effect Aug 11, 2010, and Nationals was held in Sept, and there wasn't a slew people who got bumped from Production to Open, nor was there a cry of outrage here on BEnoverse about fiber optics becoming illegal, I'm going to assume that it was considered legal at that match. (I'm trying to dig up photos from nationals showing production shooters with fiber optics, but my Google-fu is weak.)

I wonder how many people shot Productions at Nationals with paint in their magwell?

Try here.

[Skydiver]

Well, since the new rule book went into effect Aug 11, 2010, and Nationals was held in Sept, and there wasn't a slew people who got bumped from Production to Open, nor was there a cry of outrage here on BEnoverse about fiber optics becoming illegal, I'm going to assume that it was considered legal at that match. (I'm trying to dig up photos from nationals showing production shooters with fiber optics, but my Google-fu is weak.)

I wonder how many people shot Productions at Nationals with paint in their magwell?

Try here.

Thanks!

John Rasmussen competes in the 2010 Smith & Wesson USPSA National Handgun Championships. Photo by P. Erhardt

Note the red fiber optic on the gun. Looking at the results at http://www.uspsa.org/uspsa-display-match-results-detail.php?indx=175&division=Production&guntype=Pistol it shows that he was not bumped to Open.

[beltjones]

Wait, what is the determining factor here... Is it precedence, the rulebook, or emails from John???

Because according to the ruling anything not specifically allowed in Production is illegal. Therefore sight black and FO sights are illegal. But yet precedence (and John's email citing precedence) says they're legal. Again, it makes no sense.

Man, they have royally messed up the rules here. Good grief.

I'm not saying an emergency meeting is necessary, but what I do think is that someone on the BOD should stand up to John and tell him that the current letter of the law is unenforceable.

Let's be very honest: If they go to a "only as it comes out of the box" policy it will cause the greatest arms race the world has ever known, where Production shooters clamor to see what gun companies release the best production-ready guns. I can honestly and without hyperbole imagine a world where Production shooters change guns multiple times per year... "Oh man, CZ got the grip right... Wait, S&W got the sights right... Put away the M&P, Glock got the trigger right!" (Ok, just kidding about the last one, but you get my meaning). Some compromise for modification must be made. And making a rule that says, among other things, that anything not specifically mentioned is forbidden - then excluding things like sight black and FO sights - and outlawing common practices like the white dot in the magwell is just unacceptable.