Poll on 3lb trigger limit in Production

[Bwana Six-Gun]

OK, I tried to wade through all of the pages of this discussion, but finally gave up and will just state my opinion. (Take it for what it is worth.) Production has a list of approved firearms. That is fine and good, but they are not all in complicance with what the rules are, except for the exception they put in for striker fired pistols. If the first shot is supposed to be double action, why do they allow the Glocks, Springfields, and S&W M&P's play? When they chamber a round, they become a single-action pistol and have a definate advantage over the DA pistols. Don't get me wrong, I don't shoot Production now, but I plan to get classifed in it in the coming year, just so I can say I have a card in all divisions. Back to the point, what is the difference in a 1911 with the hammer cocked and safety on and a Glock or S&W or Springfield that is striker fired? They are all shooting single-action for the first shot.

I say leave production alone or open it up to other platforms that are equal to some of the ones already there. Putting in a first shot trigger pull is just going to cause more problems than it is worth, as many have already pointed out as to who and how is going to measure it.

I will be contacting my area director about this and suggest everyone else do also.

My $.02

[LPatterson]

OK, I tried to wade through all of the pages of this discussion, but finally gave up and will just state my opinion. (Take it for what it is worth.) Production has a list of approved firearms. That is fine and good, but they are not all in complicance with what the rules are, except for the exception they put in for striker fired pistols. If the first shot is supposed to be double action, why do they allow the Glocks, Springfields, and S&W M&P's play? When they chamber a round, they become a single-action pistol and have a definate advantage over the DA pistols. Don't get me wrong, I don't shoot Production now, but I plan to get classifed in it in the coming year, just so I can say I have a card in all divisions. Back to the point, what is the difference in a 1911 with the hammer cocked and safety on and a Glock or S&W or Springfield that is striker fired? They are all shooting single-action for the first shot.

I say leave production alone or open it up to other platforms that are equal to some of the ones already there. Putting in a first shot trigger pull is just going to cause more problems than it is worth, as many have already pointed out as to who and how is going to measure it.

I will be contacting my area director about this and suggest everyone else do also.

My $.02

I had the same question in the beginning but as usual the BATFE got involved and made some stupid decisions. Seems because the Glock striker is only partially cocked when loaded, that it needs pulling the trigger to finish cocking the striker. The XD is a SWAG maybe because it needs the grip safety squeezed then the trigger safety squeezed before the stiker can fall (total guess).

If we can't convince the BOD to change it then I suggest that every trigger pull must be at least 3#. This would turn off the move to CZ custom shop guns advertised at 4# DA 2# SA.

[RickB]

The other interesting stat, at least right now is that less than 20% of frequent shooters support, a little over 20% of less frequent support and 33% of never shoot support. The less experience you have with the division, the more you want a trigger pull limit.

The question I have is are those votes because they know what's better for Production, or is the trigger pull now holding them away from shooting Production. If its the latter there might be some validity to the cursed thing.

I'm in the "I dont shoot Production and am against it" group, because I don't see it doing anything constructive; are there really so many shooters in Production with sub-3# triggers? Is the issue competitive equity within the division, or mechanical safety, or what? Some are concerned about all the shooters who will have to have their 2# triggers bumped up to 3# to be legal, but are there really very many people in that boat?

I think the rule adds a lot of complexity to major match production without really changing anything on the competitive front, and that's reason enough to be against it.

I would have supported a 5# or 6# first pull, as a sort of backdoor means of making Production more of a "stock gun" division (reducing or eliminating the "need" for trigger work). There's no need for striker-fired race guns to have their own division when they can already compete in Limited or L10.

[BlackSabbath]

This is really unfair to striker-fired guns. The double-action/single-action platforms can go as light as the gun will fire after the first shot. My CZ is 6 lbs for the first shot, and a low 2 from the second shot on. I've felt some lighter than that.

The new shooter to this sport will usually start off with an Xd/Glock/M&P rig. The lighter weight helps them develop trigger control. To the experienced shooter it doesn't make any difference.

The rules are good the way they are. No make or model of gun has a capacity advantage because of the 10 round rule, and just look at the top-3 at the World Shoot this year...Wasn't it Glock, Beretta and CZ?

This issue came up a couple of years ago and it didn't happen. Production has been wildly successful so why mess it up? And as for who makes the rules, members are what make USPSA, not the other way around.

.

[West Texas Granny]

I guess I just don't see what the point of the new rule is. Production is fine as it is. If anything is holding it back, it's the seemingly unending series of asinine rule "interpretations" coming out of NROI/USPSA HQ. If we want to do away with "no external mods" and go to something simpler, sure I'll give you that "3lb first pull" is indeed simpler, but y'know what's simpler still? No rule at all. But somehow I doubt that what we're truly trying to maximize is simplicity.

In fact, I have no idea what we're trying to accomplish. And until I see a solid chain of reasoning laid out, my position will remain "no changes, please".

This.

BoD (present company excepted) likes to blame shooters for pushing the boundaries, but for every boundary that was overstepped there is a DNROI ruling that says it's ok. Maybe they should start there?

Even if all Production shooters were issued the same guns there would still be a race for the best ammo, the best holster, the best shoes, the best grip lotion, the best eye protection, and so on. As long as people want to win there will always be equipment races, and the key to making new shooters comfortable is not to assume you can lower anything to their level, it's to get them involved in the sport earlier and with better information. Instead of blaming the perception that modified triggers are what helps people win, how about pushing the concept that PRACTICE is what helps people win?

BINGO we have a winner. You can have the best gun, all of the mods, the gear but it doesn't mean you know how to use that gun. Only dedicated practice sessions on a regular basis will allow you to effectively use your weapon of choice. Be it as a carry weapon,hunting or a competition. Want to hit that target then you have to put in that practice time on a regular basis under all conditions.

There is no magic field leveling in a mandated 3 pound first TP. So please drop this silly rule in regards to TP and the magnetic pouches. Don't destroy the success of that the production has experienced.

I feel some thread drift coming on.

So Happy New Year and may all your shots be on target. Have a Happy 2A kind of year.

Edited January 1, 2012 by West Texas Granny

[downrange72]

I shot a bone stock XD 4" and a M&P pro with Apex trigger in Production last year. My performances were fairly consistent with both guns. I would finish consistently in the top 1/3 to 1/2 at local matches (15-20 shooters). I like the Apex, because it cleaner and crisper than the stock M&P trigger. Trust me, there were some newer shooters with bone stock "whatevers" that would and still do give me fits. I think it is about ability, not trigger pull, that makes someone a competitive shooter. If this question came up a year ago, I would have disagreed with my statement above.

[steel1212]

If we can't convince the BOD to change it then I suggest that every trigger pull must be at least 3#. This would turn off the move to CZ custom shop guns advertised at 4# DA 2# SA.

This would make more sense but if that happened I would never shoot the division again and sell my tuned cz.

[LPatterson]

If we can't convince the BOD to change it then I suggest that every trigger pull must be at least 3#. This would turn off the move to CZ custom shop guns advertised at 4# DA 2# SA.

This would make more sense but if that happened I would never shoot the division again and sell my tuned cz.

Corey, thank you for understanding how some of the rest of us feel about this rule. It is not that the change will keep me from winning my class, it is because I bought something that was legal to try to improve my chances and now the BOD wants to change the rules and possibly make my equipment illegal. We have some new BOD members who have heard what we are asking so maybe telephone calls are in order to see if as many BOD members still feel they should let the rule stand.

[bbbean]

There's no need for striker-fired race guns to have their own division when they can already compete in Limited or L10.

The Glocks, M&Ps, and XDs that grace millions of bedstands, duty holsters, glove compartments, CCW holsters, and are collectively the most popular design currently marketed to casual shooters are race guns?

I think there's a big difference between a tuned production gun and a full fledged race gun. My 6" limited gun is a race gun, but the M&P that I changed sights on and tuned the trigger to suit my taste is just a personalized gun. I've actually done more work on my carry pistol (EMP 9mm) than I have to my production gun. I fine tune the car I drive too, but adding a chip and a few accessories doesn't make it a race car.

BB

[atbarr]

There's no need for striker-fired race guns.

It's pretty obvious you don't shoot production.

[justaute]

Exactly...

To make it more ludicrous -- if 3#-weight is required for every trigger-pull, then all striker-based guns should be required to have longer trigger-pull in order to "even" the playing field with DA/SA guns, which have longer DA pull. Although logical, the sliding will continue on this ever-moving slippery slope.

Here is more of the slippery slope sliders:

- Let's just pick the same gun for all to compete.

- Each gun must be QA and "certified" at the factory so no competitor can have "unfair" advantage/disadvantage as a result of manufacturer's inconsistent production quality.

- Absolutely no after-market modification and addition.

- ... etc.

- Oh, and all shooters must have similar built...

If we can't convince the BOD to change it then I suggest that every trigger pull must be at least 3#. This would turn off the move to CZ custom shop guns advertised at 4# DA 2# SA.

This would make more sense but if that happened I would never shoot the division again and sell my tuned cz.

Edited January 1, 2012 by justaute

[Racer377]

OK, I tried to wade through all of the pages of this discussion, but finally gave up and will just state my opinion. (Take it for what it is worth.) Production has a list of approved firearms. That is fine and good, but they are not all in complicance with what the rules are, except for the exception they put in for striker fired pistols. If the first shot is supposed to be double action, why do they allow the Glocks, Springfields, and S&W M&P's play? When they chamber a round, they become a single-action pistol and have a definate advantage over the DA pistols. Don't get me wrong, I don't shoot Production now, but I plan to get classifed in it in the coming year, just so I can say I have a card in all divisions. Back to the point, what is the difference in a 1911 with the hammer cocked and safety on and a Glock or S&W or Springfield that is striker fired? They are all shooting single-action for the first shot.

I say leave production alone or open it up to other platforms that are equal to some of the ones already there. Putting in a first shot trigger pull is just going to cause more problems than it is worth, as many have already pointed out as to who and how is going to measure it.

I will be contacting my area director about this and suggest everyone else do also.

My $.02

I had the same question in the beginning but as usual the BATFE got involved and made some stupid decisions. Seems because the Glock striker is only partially cocked when loaded, that it needs pulling the trigger to finish cocking the striker. The XD is a SWAG maybe because it needs the grip safety squeezed then the trigger safety squeezed before the stiker can fall (total guess).

If we can't convince the BOD to change it then I suggest that every trigger pull must be at least 3#. This would turn off the move to CZ custom shop guns advertised at 4# DA 2# SA.

Which model is advertised at 4DA/2SA?

[JohnGaultsGun]

This decision seems to penalize safe-action pistol shooters more so than DA pistol shooters in Production. If this is a question of having the gun more like "stock", then the trigger weights should be adjusted in the same manner as other characteristics. For example, the weight restriction is currently 2 ounces over the factory weight (as opposed to one weight fit all). Instead, have something like pull weight cannot be less that 60% of factory weight.

A Glock going from 5 to 3 pounds does not seem like too severe a modification as compared to a CZ going from 15 to 3 pounds. If you take a CZ and reduce the pull weight to 9 pounds (which is 60%), that's offset by the advantaged gained by having subsequent 1.75 (or thereabouts) pound shots. I may not be 100% correct on the CZ trigger weight example, but it's close enough to illustrate my point.

I think that some characteristics can have a division wide ruling such as the current provision allowing replacement of the sights or barrel. But the mechanical difference between safe-action and double action are as wide as the difference between the weight of a Glock versus CZ.

A byproduct of this type of decision may also bring more production shooters into the argument as all production guns would be affected instead of one segment of the division.

My 2 cents...

[Lee G]

Which model is advertised at 4DA/2SA?

There is no advertised model, but the shadow can be set up for this weight running an 8.5# mainspring and lots of polishing.

[steel1212]

A Glock going from 5 to 3 pounds does not seem like too severe a modification as compared to a CZ going from 15 to 3 pounds. If you take a CZ and reduce the pull weight to 9 pounds (which is 60%), that's offset by the advantaged gained by having subsequent 1.75 (or thereabouts) pound shots. I may not be 100% correct on the CZ trigger weight example, but it's close enough.

Stock cz trigger is more like 7-8 not 15. Plus a shadow comes with a 5-6 DA so there for any CZ can work off that poundage.

[EkuJustice]

I think Production should be PRODUCTION. THAT takes the equipment race out of the equation. Shoot it box stock or don't shoot it at all. And if you shoot the same gun in production at Bianchi, it has to have a 3.5lb trigger anyway

The problem is what is "Box stock". Do you really consider custom shop "production" guns to be box stock?

Would I mind having the restrictions lifted on modification to the trigger as long as it is 3# plus? No

All it would mean was someone would simply order the Vanek kit etc with no pretravel and a 3 pound pull. The problem is too many people have alot of money invested in guns to really change at this point might be a costly thing. If it is still in effect in 2013 when it starts, Im dropping the trigger group right out of my old limited glock in the 34 and bumping the pull over 3 pounds with the striker spring weight. I also agree it does make one more chance to go into open. You over trigger weight and then shoot the gun more and more and the pull drops under 3 pounds due to springs wearing, Chrono guy places the weight to low on the trigger(definate concern on pivoting triggers) and welcome to open.

Edited January 1, 2012 by EkuJustice

[JohnGaultsGun]

A Glock going from 5 to 3 pounds does not seem like too severe a modification as compared to a CZ going from 15 to 3 pounds. If you take a CZ and reduce the pull weight to 9 pounds (which is 60%), that's offset by the advantaged gained by having subsequent 1.75 (or thereabouts) pound shots. I may not be 100% correct on the CZ trigger weight example, but it's close enough.

Stock cz trigger is more like 7-8 not 15. Plus a shadow comes with a 5-6 DA so there for any CZ can work off that poundage.

: :blush: :blush:

[Neomet]

Not to continue the thread drift to what CZ triggers can be brought down to but......... 4.0/1.75 triggers on Shadows are like Bigfoot. I really doubt they exist and if they do there are maybe one or two of them. I live in the land of CZs and have about the lightest Shadow trigger around (thanks Stuart) at 4.75/2.25. Triggers from Matt or Angus are not quite that light. Yes, if you measure the SA at the break point it is lighter, but most of your shots are going to have to go through the trigger return spring.

Regardless, I still think the proposed rule change is a bad one for the sport.

[Henry625]

I just shot a match yesterday,...70 shooters present, 41 were shooting in Production Division, you can do the math,....Production is by far the most accessible and most popular division, if it ain't broke, don't fix it!

[38supPat]

It's interesting that more people are responding to this poll than shoot the class, or close to it!

Rob

I only shoot Production occasionally....but I like changing my vote every few days just to screw with people....lol

[38supPat]

Not to continue the thread drift to what CZ triggers can be brought down to but......... 4.0/1.75 triggers on Shadows are like Bigfoot. I really doubt they exist and if they do there are maybe one or two of them. I live in the land of CZs and have about the lightest Shadow trigger around (thanks Stuart) at 4.75/2.25. Triggers from Matt or Angus are not quite that light. Yes, if you measure the SA at the break point it is lighter, but most of your shots are going to have to go through the trigger return spring.

Regardless, I still think the proposed rule change is a bad one for the sport.

Have a look at how Production looks in Canada. Completely dominated by one pistol, and if someone shows up for a match or expresses interest in IPSC they are almost always told to sell the gun they have (Beretta, Sig, XD, M&P) and get a CZ "Because you need it to be competitive"

I like seeing the diversity of guns you see in production in USPSA, this rule may not stop that but it will have an effect.

[steel1212]

Very good point Pat! That is pretty much what will happen. The people complaining about their gun not being competitive and this gun will make their gun more competitive have no idea that this rule will actually knock their gun completely out of the picture.

[HuskySig]

Where's the poll option that says "Shoots Production often, doesn't care about the rule?"

[EricBudd]

The bigger question is how is this going to be measured consistently at both major and local matches? The rules for a "simple and straight forward" chronograph check take up pages of the rule book- and they should. How are we going to accurately and consistently measure trigger pull? I'm not well informed, but my limited understanding is that extactly where and how the weight is hung can make a huge difference. Can't wait for the arbitrations.

Maybe wiser heads can explain how this will work in real life. (Not that it matters to me, my CZ is nowhere close to 3 lbs SA.)

Eric

[LPatterson]

Eric, for some of use that is the problem. It is more than what the weight X#'s is, it is the underhanded way that someone used to push the motion through without the membership being aware it was on the table for discussion. It is like saying I don't shoot a full auto gun so let's not let average people use them. Or semi-automatic shotguns are too lethal for bird hunting so let's limit them to pumps and break action guns. Once new limits get started then someone will be arguing that they are not limiting enough.

Or to go the other way, Single Stack was supposed to be as John Browning designed it. Now the only restriction seems to be on weight. Sight's abound as do mag wells and trigger pulls in the ounces, not to mention the light rails.

So if Production needs to back to box stock, so should Single Stack go back to 1911 Society rules and where did the magazine length come from in Limited and Open?

Is the sport (USPSA) supposed to go forward for new shooters or back up and piss off people like me. (That is a word allowed on TV now)