USPSA BOD Meeting

[BritinUSA]

Was this proposed change to the division requirements made public prior to the BOD meeting, so that the opinion of the members could be taken into account by their respective BOD representatives?

[Strick]

One thing I see is that CZ's stock will go up.

[Rob Boudrie]

By all means, if you disagree, or agree - push back and let your AD know.

I have an open mind on the merits of the decision itself, but I consider assertions that it is "impossible to test" a distraction from the real issue. I would also like to see how a standardized weight based measurement would do with the "out of the box" triggers claimed to be 2.5lbs (as I have frequently found manufacturer claims of light trigger pulls to be somewhat exaggerated). I personally doubt that many of these "2.5 lb guns" would fail a "3.0 test", especially if the test was designed to err on the side of caution with regards to an adverse finding for a shooter.

For what good? To perpetuate the myth that a trigger under 3# gives you an advantage? You would think a room full of smart guys would know better, and it only sounds like 2 did.

If it's not an advantage, why do people pay big $$ for it, and why is it important? It seems to fall into the old "This is not an advantage and don't you dare take away the advantage I want to purchase" argument which, by its very nature, is oxymoronic.

Can anyone name a production gun, not sold as a specialty competition only gun, that has a sub 3lb trigger? Remember, "real production guns", not "specialty competition guns" are what Production division was supposed to be all about.

This is the first I've heard of allowing the competitor to do the trigger pull test themselves and I would strongly oppose that. Way too many variables and the way Rob described it would be violating the vertical 180 in the hands of a competitor. I don't see a reason to compromise safety rules for this. Does anyone have any other ways of doing it?

I think it's silly to conclude that it's fine to reload with a round in the chamber, the finger outside the trigger guard, and a muzzle pointed over a berm - but it's a safety violation to do a vertical trigger pull on a gun verified as unloaded by two people.

That being said, one could also design a weight on a pully to apply the force horizontally, or a "containment box" to render vertical a safe direction.

But, as I said before, this is a distraction from the real issue - should there be a trigger weight limit?

This translates to "should competition guns in Production be servicible self defense guns, or should they be guns no one in their right mind would ever carry?". I based my vote on the answer to this question being the former but, if the overwhelming consensus is that Production should be specialty guns for match shooting, then the entire concept of what we claim production represents should be rethought.

[vluc]

The NRA checks the trigger weight on a lot of bullseye, international, and Bianchi guns. I don't know about PPC. All guns shot in a CMP Leg match are supposed to be weighed before shooting. ISU Guns used in international shooting (that's not IPSC) get measured all the time. There's a lot of history and procedures there already.

I think the real argument is whether or not to weigh them at all.

Thanks. Interesting bit of information. Wonder why this did not come up years ago when the issue of weighing triggers was first proposed. If such procedures are available, they certainly were not brought out during the discussions then and USPSA must not be aware of them either.

How do they measure a Glock or CZ trigger, for example?

[waktasz]

Can anyone name a production gun, not sold as a specialty competition only gun, that has a sub 3lb trigger? Remember, "real production guns", not "specialty competition guns" are what Production division was supposed to be all about.

Then why weren't the rules written that way from the get go?

There's another sport where people argue about the intent of the founders all day long with regards to how the rules should be interpreted, are we doing that now too?

[vluc]

Was this proposed change to the division requirements made public prior to the BOD meeting, so that the opinion of the members could be taken into account by their respective BOD representatives?

hehehe.....funny man.

[Avezorak]

If the intent of the division was that trigger weight could only be of a certain weight, why wasnt that included in the original rules? When did things change? What is the reasoning behind changing it now?

[Rotwang]

How do they measure a Glock or CZ trigger, for example?

I've never seen one in bullseye but for Action Pistol matches they hang the weight from the trigger and rotate the gun backwards far enough to keep the weights hanging in the middle of the trigger. So the barrel's not vertical but it is somewhat standardized. They'll lift the pistol as slowly as they can to get it to pass. All the weight has to do is clear the table.

1911s are easy, a lot of the international pistols have a groove across the trigger to hold the weight in the center.

[Rob Boudrie]

Then why weren't the rules written that way from the get go?

The BOD policy statement from March 7, 2009 sums it up nicely:

The broad intent of the Production Division remains intact; to provide an equipment category where stock or nearly-stock guns can compete on a relatively level playing field. Due to unsupported member assumptions, a wide variety of internal and external modifications have been seen in competition. USPSA’s intent, with this ruling, is to re-level the playing field, respectful of both members existing investments in guns and current modifications, and the desire to have the Division remain viable for typical carry-suitable guns.

The last sentence pretty much sums it up "viable for typical carry-suitable guns". We are arguing if guns that are not viable for carry should be allowed. (I'm going out on a limb claiming a 2.5lb trigger renders a gun unsuitable for carry, but I think that it's a pretty sturdy limb).

The reason it was not included in the start was an underestimation of the extent to which competitors would go to work around the intent of the rules to gain a perceived advantage.

[Flexmoney]

By all means, if you disagree, or agree - push back and let your AD know.

I have an open mind on the merits of the decision itself, but I consider assertions that it is "impossible to test" a distraction from the real issue. I would also like to see how a standardized weight based measurement would do with the "out of the box" triggers claimed to be 2.5lbs (as I have frequently found manufacturer claims of light trigger pulls to be somewhat exaggerated). I personally doubt that many of these "2.5 lb guns" would fail a "3.0 test", especially if the test was designed to err on the side of caution with regards to an adverse finding for a shooter.

That kinda makes me scratch my head, Rob...

Can anyone name a production gun, not sold as a specialty competition only gun, that has a sub 3lb trigger? Remember, "real production guns", not "specialty competition guns" are what Production division was supposed to be all about.

I think that position misses out on the realization that a HUGE part of the population (well beyond our meager competition numbers)...these folks are already cleaning up their triggers.

[Loves2Shoot]

It is important if a shooter thinks it is or if they have other trigger with similar weights that they shoot regularly. You might be surprised to find this out, but by far the 3-3.5 trigger pull is much more requested than the sub 3# trigger.

We charge the same for a 2.5# trigger as a 3.5# trigger so cost is not the issue as you stated it.

Who does any trigger pull restriction benefit?

I've shot enough matches with triggers over 3# and under to know it is a myth that .1 # trigger pull will effect your performance. Heck, most people can't feel 1 # unless they are staring at a scale if it is a good trigger. Dave pretty much put the myth to rest with his years of shooting and you get guys like Rob who want a tickle me trigger, but he shot a better score at this years SC with a heavier trigger. Go figure that for blowing away the light trigger makes you shoot better myth.

[Loves2Shoot]

This translates to "should competition guns in Production be servicible self defense guns, or should they be guns no one in their right mind would ever carry?". I based my vote on the answer to this question being the former but, if the overwhelming consensus is that Production should be specialty guns for match shooting, then the entire concept of what we claim production represents should be rethought.

Rob,

The standard carry weight is 4# by industry standard, so big miss with 3#'s. I don't care if you made the limit 1#, I would still think it stupid.

Do you think that USPSA need a IDPA division? IDPA does not restrict trigger weight and they are the ones who try to make their sport "real world."

This is what I can not understand, why is make putting on a match harder and making participant compliance harder a good thing for anyone?

Put this to a vote of the people who shoot the division and put on matches and see what the results are and see how in touch the "leaders" are with the people who chose to shoot the division.

[Avezorak]

This translates to "should competition guns in Production be servicible self defense guns, or should they be guns no one in their right mind would ever carry?". I based my vote on the answer to this question being the former but, if the overwhelming consensus is that Production should be specialty guns for match shooting, then the entire concept of what we claim production represents should be rethought.

Rob,

The standard carry weight is 4# by industry standard, so big miss with 3#'s. I don't care if you made the limit 1#, I would still think it stupid.

Do you think that USPSA need a IDPA division? IDPA does not restrict trigger weight and they are the ones who try to make their sport "real world."

This is what I can not understand, why is make putting on a match harder and making participant compliance harder a good thing for anyone?

Put this to a vote of the people who shoot the division and put on matches and see what the results are and see how in touch the "leaders" are with the people who chose to shoot the division.

And now I agree with Scott 100%....

[Loves2Shoot]

Can anyone name a production gun, not sold as a specialty competition only gun, that has a sub 3lb trigger? Remember, "real production guns", not "specialty competition guns" are what Production division was supposed to be all about.

I think that position misses out on the realization that a HUGE part of the population (well beyond our meager competition numbers)...these folks are already cleaning up their triggers.

Competition shooters doing trigger jobs is a "drip" in the bucket of the trigger work we do.

[vluc]

If the logic behind the decision is to get to a more production type gun, what's next after triggers? You comment that no stock gun has a trigger below 3 pounds. Will recoil springs be next on the list because stock production guns do not come with 11 or 13 pound springs? Internal polishing eliminated because no production gun comes with internals polished?

Will bullet weights be established because most production pistols in 9mm are designed around a 115 or 124 grain bullet? You allude to a 2.5# trigger being a possible issue for a carry gun, propagating that old nonsense about tweaked guns being used for self-defense giving the opposing attorney reasons to convict you for self defense in a lawsuit. That same argument could go for anything you allow in Production, even grip tape.

If you want stock guns only then come right out and say you want box stock only, no modifications and be done with it. "Level the playing field" is such a trite and useless term that means nothing because the field will never be level even with box stock guns. Age, dexterity, height, weight, vision, et. al. all are factors. In my opinion, these minor modifications allow for those who do not have a skill in one area to compensate. Can't run as fast, hmm, maybe that little extra ability to break a shot faster can make a difference or help.

I can see footwear becoming an issue down the road to "level the playing field".

Edited December 23, 2011 by vluc

[MarkCO]

The standard carry weight is 4# by industry standard, so big miss with 3#'s. I don't care if you made the limit 1#,

Where do you get the 4# number from? I'm pretty sure I have read all of the Federal standards when it comes to triggers and I have never read such a thing. By my math, your 4# is low as well.

[Paul Burtchell]

One thing I see is that CZ's stock will go up.

+1

Just like in IPSC

Edited December 23, 2011 by Paul Burtchell

[Shadowrider]

Do you think that USPSA need a IDPA division? IDPA does not restrict trigger weight and they are the ones who try to make their sport "real world."

This is what I can not understand, why is make putting on a match harder and making participant compliance harder a good thing for anyone?

I don't understand it either. I also don't understand why they voted to approve a rule when they haven't a clue on how to implement it.

I guess I won't be getting any upgrades to my Production classification any time soon, because I doubt that my gun will conform to this. And I ain't changing it.

[Strick]

If trigger weight is now the determining factor in what is considered a Production will we see 1911's allowed? How about all the other guns out there that are not on the approved list, will the be legal now since they are bone stock production guns with >3lb trigers?

[vluc]

One thing I see is that CZ's stock will go up.

+1

Just like in IPSC

Interesting point.

There is a place in USPSA for restrictions to Production guns. It's called IPSC. If the clubs want to run Production with 15 round mags and trigger pull restrictions, they have that opportunity. Just like there is room in USPSA for .22 rimfire. It's called Steel Challenge.

Wasn't it one of the posters in this thread that made that same claim to Old West Granny who wants a place for rimfire in USPSA? That USPSA as an organization can accommodate all of these under its umbrella? Let the clubs choose what they want to run (be it USPSA, IPSC or Steel Challenge), then see what the market is asking for rather than trying to change USPSA to accommodate everyone else.

Edited December 23, 2011 by vluc

[Sarge]

also don't understand why they voted to approve a rule when they haven't a clue on how to implement it.

I must admit that was a huge mistake. It makes no sense to try to figure something out after arbitrarily deciding to make it a new rule.

I would think the more logical approach would have been to form a committee to research the viability of a proposed rule change before voting to implement it by a certain date.

[Loves2Shoot]

The standard carry weight is 4# by industry standard, so big miss with 3#'s. I don't care if you made the limit 1#,

Where do you get the 4# number from? I'm pretty sure I have read all of the Federal standards when it comes to triggers and I have never read such a thing. By my math, your 4# is low as well.

Many of our gunsmith magazines, Vickers, Ayyoob, Weigand, Gunsmith guild, yada yada yada.

[driver8M3]

But, as I said before, this is a distraction from the real issue - should there be a trigger weight limit?

rob: i appreciate you asking the question. perhaps it should have been asked before the vote.

in fact though, it was asked, a few years ago before one of the other production rules re-writes. and i believe the expressed feelings ran against a trigger weight limit by a pretty sizable margin.

so maybe shoving it down our throats was the right way to get it done this time.

[vluc]

I would think the more logical approach would have been to form a committee to research the viability of a proposed rule change before voting to implement it by a certain date.

I believe that same comment was made in 2007 by the now newly elected Area Director from your neck of the woods.

Edited December 23, 2011 by vluc

[beltjones]

The more you legislate Production division the more you kill it. That is a fact. It has been working up to this point, why on earth would you continue to mess with it?

My question for the BOD, and the one that I will be sending to my area director, is this: What data did you use to make this decision? Did you poll new shooters? Existing shooters? New shooters who are hesitant to try USPSA?

What on earth told you that the thing that is holding Production division back is the lack of a minimum trigger pull weight?

Does data matter to anyone, or are people content to just guess and hope they are right?