Skywalker Posted April 21, 2004 Share Posted April 21, 2004 Roger, usual price for a Tanfoglio Stock is in the 1'000 euros ballpark (altough I'll have to check, I'm not up-to-date with prices), but unfortunately in Italy we can only sell guns to licensed people: I mean to purchase guns you have to be the holder of an italian-issued Defence, Sporting or Hunting weapons permit. I do not know about the possibility of selling guns to foreign people. For this reason you'd better contact Armeria Fracassi through the email listed on their website: Gavino (the armory owner) is also vice-president of IPSC Italian Federation and should be able to help. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RogerT Posted April 21, 2004 Author Share Posted April 21, 2004 Thanks, Sky. I intended to combine a social visit to my sister who at the present studies italian in Florence, Italy, with some gun shopping..... but I totally forgot about your peculiar gun laws that forbids 9x19 mm but allows 9x21mm for sporting purposes..... that does put weapons (used) from Italy out of my scope... Thanks anyway for the link, it's always interesting to "window shop" on the net. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iron guns rule Posted April 21, 2004 Share Posted April 21, 2004 roger, if you like cz, you'd better wait a little longer , i spoke to people of cz factory at the IWA show in germany, and there will be a brand new production class pistol out before the european championship (at least they were going to try that....) it will have all the goodie's you'll need (including 18 rounds in the mag.....) greetings gerben (who doesn't trust cz anymore since my 75b broke slidestop's at a rate of 1 every 2000 rounds......) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Angus Hobdell Posted May 7, 2004 Share Posted May 7, 2004 Good new for all CZ fans out there, CZ plan to produce a CZ75 B CSP, this gun should have everthing you need for IPSC production division and from the factory. more details when they are available Angus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vince Pinto Posted May 7, 2004 Share Posted May 7, 2004 The defence rests. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flexmoney Posted May 7, 2004 Share Posted May 7, 2004 The defense is looking thru a tunnel. (read as: That gun provides a competitive advantage. Therefore, a shooter without the right equipment is at a disadvantage.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vince Pinto Posted May 7, 2004 Share Posted May 7, 2004 Really? Who says the gun provides a competitive advantage? I said: ".... we want the gun manufacturers to offer better products to competitors, in accordance with Production Division rules, instead of competitors having to buy what is effectively a piece of junk which they must immediately send to their gunsmith to fix" Angus said: ".... this gun should have everthing you need for IPSC production division and from the factory" If the Prosecution's mind is already made up, so be it, but what CZ is reputedly planning to do is exactly what we hoped they'd do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Detlef Posted May 8, 2004 Share Posted May 8, 2004 Vince, are you therefore saying that the (or even just a) main purpose during conception of PD was to induce manufacturers into producing more/better IPSC competition-ready products? Really (hand on heart!)? Or are you just retroactively justifying and rationalizing the true (and unanticipated as well as unintended) *effect* that PD rules have had, namely the generation of yet another arms race (precisely what I thought PD sought to avoid)? *Buy the latest gadget* as opposed to *bring what you got* as main advice to PD shooters? *Manufacturer friendly* division as opposed to *shooter friendly*? Shaking my head.... Detlef Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vince Pinto Posted May 8, 2004 Share Posted May 8, 2004 are you therefore saying that the (or even just a) main purpose during conception of PD was to induce manufacturers into producing more/better IPSC competition-ready products? Really (hand on heart!)? Yes, right hand on heart, left hand holding the Bible, that's exactly what I'm saying. As I've stated ad nauseum, the primary criteria of Production Division is "no SAO handguns", however secondary criteria included (among other things) our desire to encourage mainstream manufacturers to offer better products off-the-shelf, to counter the (God awful) mindset which pervades IPSC of "buy a new gun, immediately fix it, and spend mega bucks in the process". And the "bring what you got" idea is yet another misguided urban legend, because if all I've got is a 1911 genre pistol I can't bring it to PD, now can I? POSTSCRIPT: I also remind you that manufacturers have previously created guns specifically for IPSC divisions. For example, the "CZ 75 Standard IPSC" is described by CZ as being "designed from the ground up for IPSC competition", and Glock created their G34/G35 models specifically to fit the IPSC box (i.e. for Standard and Modified Divisions). These are both examples of IPSC competition driving handgun development. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Angus Hobdell Posted May 17, 2004 Share Posted May 17, 2004 I will not go into this furtur untill we meet Vince. My finger do not have it in them. angus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vince Pinto Posted May 17, 2004 Share Posted May 17, 2004 Angus, Keep your bloody fingers away from me. I know where they've been Sadly I can't make the Europeans this year, but I wish you the very best of luck and I hope you can make me even prouder than I was after your performance in Cebu. If you can make it to Bali in November/December with the rest of the (20 strong?) UK contingent, the first beer (served by a hubba-hubba Bintang beer girl) is on me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Angus Hobdell Posted May 18, 2004 Share Posted May 18, 2004 Hey don't tell the story of my fingers Pleaseeeee. Sounds like a trip, I wanted to go to Thailand last year but could not make it, maybe Bali would be the place for production moderation and beer of course LOL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GvU Posted May 18, 2004 Share Posted May 18, 2004 These "new" models were they available for scrutinizing at either the ShotShow or IWA? As far as I can tell that is were the new production list is determined. So how about that Vince? DVC, John Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vince Pinto Posted May 19, 2004 Share Posted May 19, 2004 John, No, we don't limit ourselves to SHOT and IWA - we consider requests all year long, but of course we try to visit as many manufacturers as possible during the shows to keep tabs on things. In fact, only last week we approved the IMI Barak pistols. I've never seen one, but we investigated the guns credentials and are satisfied they meet all the criteria. As an aside, we were actually thinking of banning that gun on the grounds that it's too "Butt Ugly" for IPSC but, generally speaking, we're compassionate guys Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
omen Posted May 19, 2004 Share Posted May 19, 2004 >CZ plan to produce a CZ75 B CSP Please, oohhh PLEASE let it have at least a 4.2" barrel.... (anything shorter would make it an evil, "saturday night special' not suitable/legal for sporting purposes, where I live.... yuck.... ) Ohh, yeah, and if they fixed the 'mags don't always drop free' problem too, that would be just super. I love my 85Combat, but would love to take a look at what else might come up with... Damian Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Angus Hobdell Posted May 25, 2004 Share Posted May 25, 2004 Wow that looks a bit like my FN Five-seven. Shame i can't use that for PD, bullets a little small me thinks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vince Pinto Posted May 26, 2004 Share Posted May 26, 2004 Angus old son, When can I have details of the new CZ? If you want to use it in Production Division at the Europeans, I'll need a week to get it considered (and hopefully approved) by the Production Division committee and listed on the website. Extract thy digit! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Angus Hobdell Posted May 30, 2004 Share Posted May 30, 2004 Its comming. Send me an email angus@ghostholster.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
omen Posted June 27, 2004 Share Posted June 27, 2004 Oh, come on, some of us are dying to hear some of the details here ;-) Any hints/etc? omen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vince Pinto Posted June 27, 2004 Share Posted June 27, 2004 Pending a reply from Angus, here are details of a gun submitted yesterday to the Production Division Committee for consideration and possible approval. Despite being made in the CZ (Czech Republic), it's not made by CZ (Ceska Zbrojovka), but by Arms Moravia. Sounds like it's a case of, um, "Czech Mate" to me ......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vince Pinto Posted June 29, 2004 Share Posted June 29, 2004 FOLLOW-UP: I've officially received information about the "CZ SP-01 Tactical" but I regret that I cannot add it to the IPSC approved gun list as that particular designation and configuration gun comes from the factory with a "+2" baseplate as "standard equipment". In fact, as Rule 19.3 of Appendix D4 specifially prohibits such items, I'll need to specifically exclude the "CZ SP-01 Tactical" in it's current format from IPSC's approved gun list. Angus? ANGUS?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
omen Posted June 29, 2004 Share Posted June 29, 2004 Aaarrrggggg!!!!!!! No, say it ain't so?!?!? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RogerT Posted June 29, 2004 Author Share Posted June 29, 2004 But what if CZ didn't call them "+2" base pads, but called them standard high capacity magazines, then it would be OK? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vince Pinto Posted June 29, 2004 Share Posted June 29, 2004 NEWS FLASH: But what if CZ didn't call them "+2" base pads, but called them standard high capacity magazines, then it would be OK? Frankly, it's what they are, not what you call them, and the "it looks like a duck, it walks like a duck, and it quacks like a duck" analogy comes to mind. Having said that, I may have some good news for CZ fans. I already explained to CZ that we cannot approve any gun which has "+2" magazines as the standard configuration, and they quickly apologised for the misnomer, and they've sent me photos of the mags which seem to indicate that the baseplate does not offer "additonal capacity"contrary to PD rules. Basically an "optical illusion" occurs if you examine the mags from the side, because it looks deceptively like the plastic portion on the bottom is a "+2" extension. However if you examine the rear of the magazine, it appears to be metal all the way down, except for perhaps 3mm (?) of the plastic basepad. Although we're still investigating the gun and cannot offer you a final decision, my gut feeling is that, in view of the new "evidence", the subject CZ might make the grade. Watch this space ------> <------- for further announcements. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flexmoney Posted June 29, 2004 Share Posted June 29, 2004 Seems the wording says "provide additional capacity"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now