omen Posted June 30, 2004 Share Posted June 30, 2004 The standard new 10 round mags from CZ (which came with my CZ-85Combats) have a plastic bottom, but it's not really a +2 baseplate. Basically, they seem to cut the metal bit at the 10 round capacity, and then filled the rest of the mag length with a plastic baseplate. As far as I can see, that was done to make sure that the mags were 10 rounds. Could these mags be of the same type? One question: what's the barrel length on this new gun? This will make the difference if we can get it here or not... Thanks! omen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flexmoney Posted June 30, 2004 Share Posted June 30, 2004 omen, Do they look kinda like the Para 10 rounders? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vince Pinto Posted June 30, 2004 Share Posted June 30, 2004 Hi guys, You can see the image of the gun which was sent to me here. The reason I initially said "Um, no, I don't think so" was because the first image I received did not display the rear of the magazine, so I based my first call on the side view of the mag in the gun. Of course when I received the updated image, the little lightbulb over my head came on, and I said "Ahhhhh-so", which is Japanese for ""Ahhhhh". Anyway, the gun will be considered by the PD Committee over the next couple of days, and I suspect it will probably get a green light, despite my entirely reasonable objection "But, but, but ........... it's not a Glock!!" BTW, the barrel length is 120mm, but the external diameter of the barrel is 14mm, which is 2mm thicker than your garden-variety CZ75B. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Musky Hunter Posted June 30, 2004 Share Posted June 30, 2004 Is the fibre optic front sight allowed in IPSC Production! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dead Buff Posted June 30, 2004 Share Posted June 30, 2004 Except for the missing magwell and the adjustable rear sight (which often is not a good idea) this gun is a fully tricked out std gun.... Except for the double action first shot and shorter barrel - whats the diff between PD and Std then anyway? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RogerT Posted June 30, 2004 Author Share Posted June 30, 2004 Is the fibre optic front sight allowed in IPSC Production! It's allowed in Production since it is a factory standard sight!! And if CZ offers it as a accessory (without designating it specially for one model) it will be Production legal for all other CZ pistols if it fits without modification of the slide. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flexmoney Posted June 30, 2004 Share Posted June 30, 2004 Wow. What a great gun for IPSC Production. Long Dust Cover Light Slide (low reciprocating mass) 18 rounds (+1?) Fiber Optic Front Sight Ambi safeties 4.72 inch barrel Bull Barrel How is the mag well? (ah, heck...who cares. With 18+ rounds...you can reload anywhere) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skywalker Posted June 30, 2004 Share Posted June 30, 2004 Well, ok, it looks great, but I'm wondering if the long dust cover is an advantage or an obstacle when shooting 9mm. I mean, the recoil of a 9mm isn't that bad. With proper technique, you can fire a minor 9mm with almost nil muzzle flip (at least this is what I've seen from PD GMs), thus I wonder if the long dust cover slow down on transitions is balanced by the gain in recoil reduction... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flexmoney Posted June 30, 2004 Share Posted June 30, 2004 I think that slow down on transition stuff is a huge myth. Well, at least it is blown out of proportion some (IMO). I won't disagree on those little mouse fart Minor loads...but, I know everybody just loves a softer shooting gun...even in Minor. Whether it is an advantage in real life...or, simply perceived as such...the race is on! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chuck D Posted June 30, 2004 Share Posted June 30, 2004 This is what happens when you try to "control costs" in a particular Division. You develop and apply a certain set of rules strictly regulating what aftermarket accessories and/or modification(s) you can make to a "production" gun and low and behold...the factory responds with purpose built pistols. One glaring example is this gun comes with an extended magazine that's hidden by a piece of plastic wrapped around the portion of the mag that protrudes past the bottom of the grip. It's a "gamers" gun for a Division that is supposed to be "gamer free" in the equipment at least. Wanna bet that before too long Production Division will become an "anything goes except comps, ports, optics and single action only trigger systems" with the only requirements being the gun with a mag inserted will need fit into the IPSC box? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nik Habicht Posted June 30, 2004 Share Posted June 30, 2004 Wanna bet that before too long Production Division will become an "anything goes except comps, ports, optics and single action only trigger systems" with the only requirements being the gun with a mag inserted will need fit into the IPSC box? You left minor scoring off the list. Other than that, sounds perfect to me. Oh my, I appear to have been corrupted by the gamers... [/C3PO mode] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mcoliver Posted July 1, 2004 Share Posted July 1, 2004 I think that slow down on transition stuff is a huge myth. Several weeks ago I would have disagreed with this (ain't no myth!) having used an-all steel gun with a long dust cover to boot. However, after Phil S. spilled his secret about the wrist weights, and after having applied this in my practice sessions, I'd have to say "the gun transitions only as fast as you want it to." Btw, the jerichos also have a long dust cover. I really hope this gun gets approved. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dead Buff Posted July 1, 2004 Share Posted July 1, 2004 CD - My thoughts exactly! So bottom line: What is the use of PD if we'll again end up with what we've got not in Std - yes except for DAO and minor....... Oops, the LDA is already a "bypass" for the DAO..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vince Pinto Posted July 1, 2004 Share Posted July 1, 2004 This is what happens when you try to "control costs" in a particular Division. You develop and apply a certain set of rules strictly regulating what aftermarket accessories and/or modification(s) you can make to a "production" gun and low and behold...the factory responds with purpose built pistols. And what, pray tell, is wrong with a factory tailoring a gun to fit our rules? That's exactly what we want them to do!! I don't know the price of the new CZ versus the garden-variety CZ75B, but I'm willing to bet you a Benjamin that the difference between the old and the new models will be less than a Jackson. And dem's 2 to 1 odds, my friend In any case, we have never tried to "control costs". Our primary, numero uno criteria was "no SAO guns". Our secondary criteria was "as released by the OFM", with a few minor exceptions. Sure, with some guns (under IPSC rules), this will certainly translate into cost savings, but there are no dollar figures quoted in PD rules. As an aside, I have always supported the concept that the IPSC box be used as a "gun with mag inserted size gauge" (i.e. same as Standard Division), and I'll keep on lobbying towards that end, although the new CZ makes it a tougher change now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chuck D Posted July 2, 2004 Share Posted July 2, 2004 Vince....Buddy: I didn't say that IPSC or USPSA should or would or COULD for that matter "control costs". What I'm trying to say here is that at least in the U.S...Production Division guns (and the subsequent modifications made to them) were geared towards "limitations" meaning that the modifications made to the guns AFTER they were purchased were "controlled" in such a fashion that a form of "cost controls" were instituted via the rules. Example... Installing sights that did not require modifications to the slide to install. * Good fixed sights on a Glock...50 bucks. Low mounted Bo-Mars...150 bucks. A Glock 17 in my neck of the woods costs the shooter 575 to 600 bucks retail. I'd dare say that the "purpose built" CZ in the picture costs many more dollars than the Glock. As soon as the next price list comes from my local wholesaler...I'll check. Retail on the CZ IPSC model in 40 is 1175 bucks...The gun shown may not be that high but I'd bet its between 750 and 850 bucks. Problem here is where do you draw the line? Yes, it's great that gun manufacturers add "gadgets" to their guns that make them attractive to EVERY buyer...not just the IPSC shooter. Here is where my "wanna bet" statement comes in. Instead of betting Benjamins and Jacksons over the cost differences between the CZ in the picture and a CZ75B...lets bet those dead Presidents on how long it will take for IPSC (and USPSA) to ditch the approved pistol list and have Standard Division type rules (anything goes but....) for Production Division. I have TREMENDOUS respect for those that "sweat the details" and keep the list updated but sooner or later...the list will become useless as the factories will "trip over each other" trying to add "options" to a "stock gun". The end user (the shooter obviously) will both be the winner and loser here. On one hand...they'll be able to purchase much better product but on the other hand...it will be more expensive. We'll soon see the day of the over 1000 dollar Production Division gun. When THAT happens...what's the next "low cost" division IPSC or USPSA will create to draw the segment of the shooting population that can't or won't spend "big bucks" to compete in what is effectively a "stock gun" division ? Dead Buff asks a vaild question....how about addressing THAT? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vince Pinto Posted July 2, 2004 Share Posted July 2, 2004 ...... lets bet those dead Presidents on how long it will take for IPSC (and USPSA) to ditch the approved pistol list and have Standard Division type rules (anything goes but....) for Production Division. My crystal ball is very fuzzy (I use it for bowling too!), but I can't see the Approved Gun List ever being dropped, if for no other reason than the fact that IPSC wants control over deciding which guns fit the primary criteria (i.e. no SAO guns). If the list wasn't there, we'd have a truck load of disagreements all over the world about the Springfield XD Series (I use this as an example, not as the start of yet another debate on the XD). We'll soon see the day of the over 1000 dollar Production Division gun. When THAT happens...what's the next "low cost" division IPSC or USPSA will create to draw the segment of the shooting population that can't or won't spend "big bucks" to compete in what is effectively a "stock gun" division ? With all due respect to my American rules colleagues, this is and will remain a much bigger issue on US soil than anywhere else in the world, as a direct result of the modifications which are permitted under USPSA PD, but prohibited under IPSC PD. Having said that, you will always have guys who think that "more expensive" means "I will shoot better", and no where is this more evident than in Asia. In fact in Hong Kong, we've got more than a few guys (who would probably only rank as C graders in the USA), who each own between 3 and 5 custom race guns, which cost over US$5,000 a piece (yes, Virginia, some guys actually spend +US$25,000 on hardware here). On the flip side of the coin, the vast majority of PD shooters here buy Glocks for US$800 and they don't spend a penny more on them. So bottom line: What is the use of PD if we'll again end up with what we've got not in Std - yes except for DAO and minor....... Oops, the LDA is already a "bypass" for the DAO..... This is more crystal ball stuff, so I really cannot answer a prediction. Yes, the LDA qualifies for PD, but I can't recall ever seeing more than 2 used in PD at any of the dozens of matches I've attended since PD was launched in 1999. Glock and CZ are the dominant players and, while I continue to refute claims about dollar values being a criteria (even if made by others, and not by you guys), the bottom line is actually that PD is a roaring success if for no other reason than most people have migrated from having uncompetitive equipment in Standard Division to having totally competitive equipment in Production Division, and they made their migration without spending a penny. Now if that, in and of itself, is not a good thing then, dammit, I don't know what is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chuck D Posted July 2, 2004 Share Posted July 2, 2004 Vince...understand where I'm coming from. When PD was "sold" to us, the key selling point was that guys could compete with "stock...off the shelf guns" purchased at the local gun shop. A great deal of emphasis (in the USA) was placed on the fact that IDPA SSP and IPSC PD guns should be as similar in the rules department to allow "crossover". Here are a few examples of what I think is the beginning of the traveling down the "slippery slope"... 1. S&W 5906 in stock form...700 bucks S&W 5906PC Performance Center model...Not found in ANY S&W catalog as an "off the shelf" available pistol...1100 bucks. 2. Para Ordnance P18-9 Limited model..."purpose built" gun especially for PD. Retails for over a grand in New York State. 3. Tanfoglio "Stock" model, another "purpose built" pistol. IF you can get EAA to import one for you...895 bucks. EAA Witness in 9x19 in New York State...375 bucks. 4. The CZ in question. Another "purpose built" pistol. Costs unknown. CZ75B in New York State...475 bucks. 5. Beretta 92 in stock form...600 bucks retail. Beretta 92 Elite...900 to 950 bucks. What I'm getting at here is the "base pistol" fits the "spirit" of the division. The factory "race guns" are almost double in cost thereby defeating the spirit of a true "stock gun" division. I don't know about your location...but no law enforcement officer carries one of these "purpose built" guns here. Nor does any "civilian" that I know of. What KILLS me here is that IPSC will allow a CZ model with an extended magazine and an extended dust cover but I can't put a lousy 9 dollar grip plug or deburr the bottom of my slide where the cocking serrations are on my Glock 21 (to eliminate the slide eating up my hand) because they constitute "external modifications". My G21 was a gift but if I were to purchase one outright...575 bucks. See the irony here? The "spirit" of the rules have been manipulated in the name of technological advances. Sure, these advances make for better products for the consumer but they make for more expensive products for the consumer. And to assume that the shooter won't feel the "need" to own one of these tricked out blasters is fantasy. If the idea that "technological advances" are truly "options" were the prevailing trend, we would have no need for calculators to do our math, microwave ovens to cook our foods, e-mail to send quick instant letters and the compensator and red dot scope advancements to Open Division guns would have "died on the vine" because as some would have us believe...." you don't really need to spend money on that stuff to be competitive." Proof of this isn't too difficult to find...look no further than Standard/Limited Division. IPSC is losing control of PD. Soon it will look like Standard/Limited Division with the sole exception of the pistols trigger function. Another arms race only this time gunsmiths won't be reaping the benefits...the factories will. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skywalker Posted July 2, 2004 Share Posted July 2, 2004 3. Tanfoglio "Stock" model, another "purpose built" pistol. IF you can get EAA to import one for you...895 bucks. Wait..wait..wait.. Tell me where and I'd rush in there! Here in Italy the Stock sells for more that 1100 euros! (see Tanfoglio's official price list) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Dunlop Posted July 2, 2004 Share Posted July 2, 2004 1100 Euros, they are $2500 NZ which is 1.8 CZ 75s or 2.5 G17s. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dead Buff Posted July 2, 2004 Share Posted July 2, 2004 I will never see PD as a "saved cost" div - espeacially down here (I'll not go into the IPSC prices kills us debate here - I'll maybe start a new thread on that..... ). Example: Current exchange rate; ±N$6.50 = US$1.00. Thus according to the stated prices above a Glock would go for about N$3900 (US$600), when in fact it sells for N$6000 which is ±US$920. The same goes for the rest....(A CZ75B goes for N$7500 - thats more than a Glock.... ) It is currently cheaper to buy a good used CZ, Colt, Para, HP, etc (± US$350 - 450) and restore it, do changes, etc (±US$150 - 250) and be competitive - at least in this area of the world. Whats the first thing a new shooter to the sport buys if he/she pitches with there more-than-adequate pistol? Speed/sport holster, belt, mag pouches, etc - that sets you back another ±US$150 around here, thus more $$$-race..... - the reloading stuff/ammo/etc stay the same for all, no matter what. The PD is cheaper route thus does not gel.... I realy like the idea of PD, but not where it is going. Either keep it real strict - approved gun list and limit any mods to the pistols, thus creating a realy level playing field (one could even limit holster types and other acc to keep in the spirit) thus testing man and not machine - NO!!!! don't make it IDPA!!!!........or........Call it the DOA div - must fit box, DOA 5lb only, etc...thus creating the $$$$race again. I'm for keeping it real strict - specific guns with specific type sights, specific measurements (Box?????), specific acc/gismo's/thing-a-ma-call-it's, etc. off the shelf....this way the manufactures and smithies are all placed at a equal (dis)advantage and man will be tested. PD here is the "I'm getting into the sport" div, then most move to Std div and stay there. Very few go for Open due to the $$$$-race. In fact we have a zero growth in Open over the last 6 years, 300% growth in Std, and a steady amount of shooters in PD (since it started). After all the blah blah above - keep PD simple and thus competitive.....clear rules - no place for movement............ I'll now shut up! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vince Pinto Posted July 2, 2004 Share Posted July 2, 2004 Hi guys, Thanks for all your comments, which have been duly noted, but a discussion of one particular (potential) PD gun is rapidly driftng into a general discussion of the "Principles of Production Division". As I've repeated ad nauseum for years now, regardless of how PD was "sold" in various places, and despite the various urban legends which have subsequently emerged (e.g. "It's a division for beginners"), the primary criteria is (and remains) "no SAO only guns". Now if, one way or the other, PD develops into another dreaded "arms race for non-SAO guns", then so be it, because price never was (and I dare say never can be), a controllable criteria. However even under the "more relaxed" USPSA PD rules, I doubt there's anyway we'll see the cost of PD guns getting anywhere near the cost of a fully customised Open Division race gun. If I'm proven wrong, well, I'm proven wrong, but the bottom line is that provided we stick to our primary criteria, we've not strayed from the intent of Production Division. And I now return you to discussion of the exciting new CZ pistol .......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dead Buff Posted July 2, 2004 Share Posted July 2, 2004 It is a stunning pistol and we'll probably see them around alot soon Like the long dust cover - counters the weight of that long (heavy?) mag.... PD has brought us some nice toy after all Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skywalker Posted July 2, 2004 Share Posted July 2, 2004 ad nauseum [more thread drift] Sorry Vince, I won't be able to correct your english, but at least I feel qualified to correct your latin (since I studied it until high scool graduation: yes engineers do, sometimes, have a classic background... ). The right sentence is ad nauseam, since nausea is a feminine noun of the 1st declension: Singular case Plural case nausea______nauseae nauseae_____nausearum nauseae_____nauseis nauseam____nauseas nausea______nauseae nausea______nauseis Now, the correct sentence construction for the phrase is ad + accusative (sp?), then ad nauseam [/more thread drift] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dead Buff Posted July 2, 2004 Share Posted July 2, 2004 Engineers learn latin - must have missed that class Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ipsc1 Posted August 16, 2004 Share Posted August 16, 2004 Well the new CZ pistol doesn't do it for me. On the IPSC production list there is an entry " Stock Custom" under the Tangfolio pistols. Is this the "Stock" pistol shown on the Tangfolio website, or does that mean a "Stock" pistol plus whatever custom work I ask the factory to do. I'm looking at the accessories and one is a custom frame, if I get a custom frame for a "Stock" pistol, is it still a Production legal pistol? Christmas is coming and I'm think of a Tangfolio Stock pistol, with custom frame (long dust cover and magwell), big ambi safties like those shown on the gold custom, chrome mags with aluminum basepads. Would that combination be considered production legal? I'd hate to end up in Ecuador and be told, oops you're in standard division with that pistol. ipsc1 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