Production optics

[ZackJones]

And that's why milling for sights should not be allowed

Not allowing slide milling would limit the number of guns that could shoot in the division. Currently the M&P C.O.R.E. is not approved for production so that gun wouldn't be approved for PO division. As far as weight goes I would say modify the rule to allow base weight + 5 ounces versus +2 ounces. That should accommodate allowing for the slide to be milled and installation of an red dot.

[BritinUSA]

If the only reason for the box is to control the size of the magazine base-pads then perhaps it would be easier to measure the base pads and set a limit on their depth or better yet just measure from the base of the grip to the bottom of the base-pad and have a limit for that measurement. It would only take a few seconds per magazine to check.

I understand your point about moving weight from a milled slide and adding it elsewhere, that problem exists now with Production division and I'm not sure how much of a problem it is and whether there is a remedy for it.

Edited July 18, 2014 by BritinUSA

[bikerburgess]

Here is a silly question, would you feel out gunned if you were shooting against someone with a milled slide and yours wasnt?

[BritinUSA]

I think the degree of stress on the scope is proportional to the distance from the scope mount to the pivot point when the gun is under recoil. I may be wrong on that, but if I'm right then it could aid reliability of the scopes if they were closer to the bore line.

I don't have any difficulty picking up the dot on my XDM.

[bikerburgess]

What I was getting at is not so much just for mounting the sight but milling in general. In limited where it is legal I see lots of guns without slide cuts so my thought was if it isn't a big deal why make a rule against it?

[StraightUp_OG]

I am not a fan although I have one of these potential PO guns. But my vote would be no.

I paid $550 for the Gen4 19 and $600 for the RMR and $125 for the co-witness irons. So I have more in the cost of the sights than the gun itself and I do all my own gun work so there were no installation costs but lets just add $150 to the cost for the gunsmith. So almost $1400 to get the gun setup. You can buy a used Open gun for that. I just don't see more than the fringe cases buying into this new division.

If I want to shoot this setup at a match I already have a division to shoot it in.

Edited July 18, 2014 by StraightUp_OG

[kneelingatlas]

Straight Up!

[Chris iliff]

Wow!!

Most posts in the last 4 pages are rehashing stuff already discussed.

Including Motosapiens negativity.

I'll rehash some comments I've already made......

"If you build it they will come"

Did a lot of guys show up shooting 8 shot minor in revolver? Hell, did more revolver guys show up after the change?

NO

&

NO

The facts are that production division is the de facto carry gun division. Now, a lot of carry gun types are going Production Optic, it's the new wave and it's not gonna slow down.

Hence, the Production Optic division makes MORE sense than almost any other Division add. It gives USPSA the ability to reach out to a whole segment of shooters not currently enjoying USPSA.

As I've said before, it's kinda hard to reach out to a newer shooter, tell them to come shoot. Explain to them their gun has no division per se, but the uninitiated say you can shoot in Open. That ain't gonna fly.

Talk about a negative wake up call, yikes!!

Far better to build it, promote it, and grow it.

My purpose has and always will be to keep USPSA on the cutting edge of competition shooting. I want USPSA to be thought of first, before any other org.

I think Production Optics gets us the ability to go after a growing segment of shooters Not currently competing.

Edited July 18, 2014 by Chris iliff

[bikerburgess]

I agree and that is why I am advocating a broader more inclusive version of the rules, if you make it very narrow then you still have to tell the guy with the carry optic set up his aftermarket slide stop or miss placed stippling means he is in open anyway

[Chris iliff]

I haven't read this in awhile and was surprised to see the same stuff repeated over and over, .................

Does anyone read before posting?

I think most of the stuff bantered around in the last several pages were talked about previously in the thread. One such item was the so called, "BOX". This is easy and I believe the answer is "no box".

In fact, I believe there is a post somewhere that goes through the production rules and lists the ones that need to change or some such.

As for making it all inclusive and broad, that's gonna be difficult and IMHO add to the headache. I would star as simple as possible.

Production rules (with a few exceptions)

Slide mounted optic (no one SERIOUS is frame mounting optics and also carrying the weapon)

No box

No weight

Slide milling, duh of course, in order to mount an Optic, no more, no less. The whole "no milling the slide and only using guns with plate type or rear sight mounts" is just plain ridiculous. This is why there is a NO WEIGHT LIMIT.

Geez, it's all pretty much common sense. There is not ONE obstacle to this except FEELINGS & OPINIONS. Not one.

KISS principle to start. Easy.

Edited July 18, 2014 by Chris iliff

[bikerburgess]

So you would have a glock with a laser shoot open?

[Sarge]

NO WEIGHT LIMIT

This opens PO up to tungsten GR, heavy base pads, etc. there is no way this new division could have no weight limit

[Nik Habicht]

And that's why milling for sights should not be allowed

That doesn't make a whole lot of sense, since you're going to need to establish an acceptable weight for each gun with sight and empty mag......

.....unless you want to toss that whole check on modifications out the window....

[Nik Habicht]

NO WEIGHT LIMIT

This opens PO up to tungsten GR, heavy base pads, etc. there is no way this new division could have no weight limit

I agree with Kevin on that one....

Set a reasonable limit and then let people decide where they want to allocate the weight....

[BritinUSA]

+/- 5 ounces of factory weight seems reasonable to me.

[zhunter]

And that's why milling for sights should not be allowed

That doesn't make a whole lot of sense, since you're going to need to establish an acceptable weight for each gun with sight and empty mag......

.....unless you want to toss that whole check on modifications out the window....

+/- 5 ounces of factory weight seems reasonable to me.

I think BritinUSA has a reasonable answer. Anytime there is milling of the slide there is going to be gaming, but 5 oz. Should be fine

[Chris iliff]

NO WEIGHT LIMIT

This opens PO up to tungsten GR, heavy base pads, etc. there is no way this new division could have no weight limit

Why?

Who cares?

It's all within that division, again, with all due respect, this is the kind of stuff I'm trying to get people to let go of. None of these points matter. It is all within one division.

People are carrying Production Optic Guns, these guns have slide mounted optics and some are milled in the slide. Some might have tungsten rods, weighted base pads, etc...............

But I tell you, USPSA will figure out the best setup (generally) in short order, and that's the point, that's what USPSA does, it's the grind house. It will be figured out.

The point is to start it as simple as possible. If Billy Cool wants to run a tungsten guide rod in his production optic Glock 17, who really gives a fat baby crap? I don't.

You shouldn't either.

What are these guys carrying? Isn't USPSA the proving ground? Haven't we always enjoyed the reputation of pushing the envelope?

Why does everyone want to weigh It down and saddle an experiment with all kinds of rules.?

KISS

Edited July 19, 2014 by Chris iliff

[Nimitz]

Amen.

This sounds an awful lot like those who want to censor TV & radio. No one is tying you to your lazyboy & propping your eyelids open with toothpicks ... just change the channel.

Same here, if you are not interested in shooting a PO division, fine -- then don't. But please get out of the way as well.

Of all you out there saying PO is a bad idea, how many of your shoot L10 or revo? If not, shouldn't we get rid of those too as they are also probably diluting the shooting pool as well ....

[pmt]

NO WEIGHT LIMIT

This opens PO up to tungsten GR, heavy base pads, etc. there is no way this new division could have no weight limit

Why?

Who cares?

It's all within that division, again, with all due respect, this is the kind of stuff I'm trying to get people to let go of. None of these points matter. It is all within one division.

People are carrying Production Optic Guns, these guns have slide mounted optics and some are milled in the slide. Some might have tungsten rods, weighted base pads, etc...............

But I tell you, USPSA will figure out the best setup (generally) in short order, and that's the point, that's what USPSA does, it's the grind house. It will be figured out.

The point is to start it as simple as possible. If Billy Cool wants to run a tungsten guide rod in his production optic Glock 17, who really gives a fat baby crap? I don't.

You shouldn't either.

What are these guys carrying? Isn't USPSA the proving ground? Haven't we always enjoyed the reputation of pushing the envelope?

Why does everyone want to weigh It down and saddle an experiment with all kinds of rules.?

KISS

Quoted for truth.

[bikerburgess]

How about even simpler set a max weight for the whole division like in single stack

[The Antichrome]

NO WEIGHT LIMIT

This opens PO up to tungsten GR, heavy base pads, etc. there is no way this new division could have no weight limit

Haven't we always enjoyed the reputation of pushing the envelope?

Why does everyone want to weigh It down and saddle an experiment with all kinds of rules.?

KISS

Leave it in a Division that is 'open' to virtually all modifications and performance benefits...no worries about weight, milling, etc. We already have that, it's called Open.

It's strange that people want to explore the 'advancement' of technology, like red dot sights, but want to restrict any other performance advancement, like frame mounted dots and race holsters...or for that matter, porting, comps, magwells, etc.

We already have a Division that allows a 'limited' amount of modification. You think I'm narrow minded because I dont want another marginal Division, but you want a whole new Division for an incremental change. To me, thats myopic. Building an entire Division around one little specific feature, like a dot, is hardly "pushing the envelope"

...how many of your shoot L10 or revo? If not, shouldn't we get rid of those too as they are also probably diluting the shooting pool as well ....

Yes. Absolutely.

Edited July 19, 2014 by The Antichrome

[Chris iliff]

Leave it in a Division that is 'open' to virtually all modifications and performance benefits...no worries about weight, milling, etc. We already have that, it's called Open.

It's strange that people want to explore the 'advancement' of technology, like red dot sights, but want to restrict any other performance advancement, like frame mounted dots and race holsters...or for that matter, porting, comps, magwells, etc.

We already have a Division that allows a 'limited' amount of modification. You think I'm narrow minded because I dont want another marginal Division, but you want a whole new Division for an incremental change. To me, thats myopic. Building an entire Division around one little specific feature, like a dot, is hardly "pushing the envelope"

.

Have you read everything? We are way past the "we already have that division" argument, many pages ago.

NO we don't have the division, NOT EVEN CLOSE.

Is there a growing cadre of concealed carry shooters carrying around $5,000 race guns?

NOPE

Is there a growing cadre of concealed carry shooters carrying around $500 dollar guns with a slide mounted Optic?

YES

That's all this is, it is NOT EVEN CLOSE TO OPEN.

So yes, within that growing set of shooters there is a market. Yes, allowing PRO-OP as a division would quickly push the envelope for that type of platform. Shooters would quickly figure out the best set ups.

No, I don't believe it would be a marginal division. I believe it would ADD shooters who currently don't compete and quickly outpace REVO and LIM 10.

I also think initially some older guys would migrate to the division, or come back to the sport and re invest in PRO-OP because it is a reasonable platform that would be cost effective. When word got out and other shooters from different organizations found out, I believe we'd get an even bigger influx of shooters (new to USPSA).

KISS

[Thomas H]

NO WEIGHT LIMIT

This opens PO up to tungsten GR, heavy base pads, etc. there is no way this new division could have no weight limit

Why?

Who cares?

It's all within that division, again, with all due respect, this is the kind of stuff I'm trying to get people to let go of. None of these points matter. It is all within one division.

People are carrying Production Optic Guns, these guns have slide mounted optics and some are milled in the slide. Some might have tungsten rods, weighted base pads, etc...............

But I tell you, USPSA will figure out the best setup (generally) in short order, and that's the point, that's what USPSA does, it's the grind house. It will be figured out.

So---you don't really want this to be a PRODUCTION Optic division. More a Limited Optic division, yes? Because if all those mods will be allowed, then of course we aren't really talking Production guns either, and those folks who have "$500 guns with a dot on it" won't really be what drives the division, or necessarily even really competitive within it....if any other division (and its change-over-time-as-more-things-are-allowed) is a good predictor.

You are correct---we don't have a division at this time in which carry-guns-with-optics are competitive. (Legal, yes, but not competitive.) However, we all know that as competitors, people will push the allowed envelope as much as possible to gain any possible advantage (actual or merely perceived). As such, a "no weight limit" or other sort of simplistic start to the division will effectively make certain that "$500 guns with a dot on it" STILL won't be competitive compared to other, purpose-built non-Open raceguns.

I believe that is the problem, really. Making a new Production Optics division just isn't as simple as some people would like to believe, and I personally don't really want to deal with a "we'll just blast out something and improve the rules on it as time goes by" situation.

If you want those "$500 guns with a dot on it" to actually continue to be competitive, you are going to have to be pretty darn specific in your division requirements. (For comparison, reference the continual arguments from people about what should be legal in Production division.) If you don't care about them being competitive, then you argument about how they really aren't Open guns falls apart.

When you say "Shooters would quickly figure out the best set ups" --- the problem is, of course, that they'd figure out the best competition setups. This, of course, doesn't necessarily bear a strong resemblance to the best carry setup, which is the "growing cadre of shooters" that you are expecting to add to our sport, yes?

[BritinUSA]

This was my proposal:

Create a new Production Optics Division using the existing Production Division rules including magazine capacity, holsters etc. with the following alterations to accommodate the optics.

7. Maximum Size - Distance from the base of the mag-well to the bottom of the magazine base pad must not exceed 0.500".

13. Optical/electronic sights permitted - Yes, slide mounted red-dot scope only.

18. Weight - Within five (5) ounces of factory specification.

[Chris iliff]

This was my proposal:

Create a new Production Optics Division using the existing Production Division rules including magazine capacity, holsters etc. with the following alterations to accommodate the optics.

7. Maximum Size - Distance from the base of the mag-well to the bottom of the magazine base pad must not exceed 0.500".13. Optical/electronic sights permitted - Yes, slide mounted red-dot scope only.

18. Weight - Within five (5) ounces of factory specification.

I could live with that.

NOT SURE WHAT THE DISTANCE FROM BASE OF MAGWELL TO BOTTOM OF MAGAZINE BASE PAD ACCOMPLISHES.

My weight argument has more to do with keeping it simple. I just see adding a bunch of rules and limits as needless.

Can you do it in Production Division? Then you can in Pro-Op. If you can't do it in Production then you can't in Pro-Op, with a few exceptions that have been stated repeatedly.

I've been consistent on this throughout.

Thomas H..........

There is a distinct difference in a $2500 Limited gun WITH ALL THE BELLS AND WHISTLES and a $500 Production gun. So no, I do not want Limited Optic, that my new found friend, is OPEN......lol.

Again, I would practice the KISS principle.