d_striker Posted April 5, 2015 Share Posted April 5, 2015 It *does* affect me, both as a serious competitor and as an assistant MD. there's a limited amount of bandwidth in terms of time and effort for a national organization. I'm not convinced that PO is worth consuming very much of that bandwidth at this point. It means other topics will get less attention. Ahh, well I didn't think about that. Carry on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bikerburgess Posted April 5, 2015 Share Posted April 5, 2015 (edited) I see two issues coming up aging and again that I don't think are being directly addressed. One many seem to be saying adding a division is a nearly costless no down side proposition so why not just do it. My answer to that is yes and no, if adding a division is not a big deal then why don't we have 20 divisions, for compact guns, carry sized revolvers, old iron sighted open guns sub compact da only guns etc? Because there is a critical mass required for a division to be worth having (see the revolver division struggles of late) so of having 20+ divisions is obviously ridiculous, and i would say bad for the sport, then adding any divisions should be taken seriously. Second There are many proponents of a new division that want to make it a narrow as possible. The perported reason given to keep the division narrowly defined is to keep it cheep, eliminate a equipment race and create a level playing field. This sounds good till you look at what's happening in production division today. With the rise of expensive heavy steel framed competition specific "production" guns it can be argued that the biggest equipment race we have is in production division, so that part of the argument falls flat. We as competitors are our own worst enemy to keeping any division affordable , many of us are willing to spend vast sums of money in persuit of any advantage real or presumed. If containing cost and leveling the playing field is actually the goal then the only way to achieve that is through a spec class and I am pretty sure that would fly as well as a lead balloon. I still think if a new division is created it should be as broad as possible to cast the net wide and gather as many competitors as possible, then in the future if it grow to the point that it makes sense to break it up do it then. It would be better to have a combined optic division that in the future was split into a PO and SSO and a L10-O or whatever than to start so restricted it never gets going and dies Edited April 5, 2015 by bikerburgess Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ctay Posted April 5, 2015 Share Posted April 5, 2015 I think we should continue to beat this dead horse into jelly. Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bkreutz Posted April 6, 2015 Share Posted April 6, 2015 I think we should continue to beat this dead horse into jelly. Sent from my SM-G900T using Tapatalk It's well past the "jelly" consistency. It's just about to turn from liquid to a gas. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ultimo-Hombre Posted April 6, 2015 Share Posted April 6, 2015 (edited) I see two issues coming up aging and again that I don't think are being directly addressed. One many seem to be saying adding a division is a nearly costless no down side proposition so why not just do it. My answer to that is yes and no, if adding a division is not a big deal then why don't we have 20 divisions, for compact guns, carry sized revolvers, old iron sighted open guns sub compact da only guns etc? Because there is a critical mass required for a division to be worth having (see the revolver division struggles of late) so of having 20+ divisions is obviously ridiculous, and i would say bad for the sport, then adding any divisions should be taken seriously. Second There are many proponents of a new division that want to make it a narrow as possible. The perported reason given to keep the division narrowly defined is to keep it cheep, eliminate a equipment race and create a level playing field. This sounds good till you look at what's happening in production division today. With the rise of expensive heavy steel framed competition specific "production" guns it can be argued that the biggest equipment race we have is in production division, so that part of the argument falls flat. We as competitors are our own worst enemy to keeping any division affordable , many of us are willing to spend vast sums of money in persuit of any advantage real or presumed. If containing cost and leveling the playing field is actually the goal then the only way to achieve that is through a spec class and I am pretty sure that would fly as well as a lead balloon. I still think if a new division is created it should be as broad as possible to cast the net wide and gather as many competitors as possible, then in the future if it grow to the point that it makes sense to break it up do it then. It would be better to have a combined optic division that in the future was split into a PO and SSO and a L10-O or whatever than to start so restricted it never gets going and dies Agreed amigo.Never mind... Over it. Edited April 6, 2015 by Ultimo-Hombre Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SinistralRifleman Posted April 7, 2015 Share Posted April 7, 2015 Limited rules with a slide mounted optic are much closer to what people who actually own these guns already are running them as. Changing the minds of institutions and everyone involved takes time...it's easier to talk to an outlaw match director and ask him to run Limited Optics as a division to see what happens. If there's not enough interest, oh well guess I'll still shoot in open like I have been with my slide mounted red dot for the past five years (not that I shoot pistol only matches very often anyway). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gdboytyler Posted April 9, 2015 Share Posted April 9, 2015 Limited Optics division in an outlaw match . This horse ain't dead yet. http://blog.suarezinternational.com/2015/01/berrys-steel-open-limited-optics-division.html#.VLiqZcnh3kc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ron169 Posted April 16, 2015 Share Posted April 16, 2015 Just put a 34 MOS on Lay-away, 571 it the door... Let me know when PO is ready... Until then, I'll have fun in steel challenge Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PKT1106 Posted April 16, 2015 Share Posted April 16, 2015 Just put a 34 MOS on Lay-away, 571 it the door... Let me know when PO is ready... Until then, I'll have fun in steel challenge $571 with an optic, or just the pistol milled for an optic? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ron169 Posted April 16, 2015 Share Posted April 16, 2015 Just milled for an optic. Got a little while to decide which optic I wasn't on it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swanny10 Posted April 16, 2015 Share Posted April 16, 2015 Just milled for an optic. Got a little while to decide which optic I wasn't on it Color me ignorant but I thought the point of the MOS was that it was already milled. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trgt Posted April 16, 2015 Share Posted April 16, 2015 (edited) Just milled for an optic. Got a little while to decide which optic I wasn't on it Color me ignorant but I thought the point of the MOS was that it was already milled. It's milled for Glock MOS (Modular Optic System) adapter plate, included in the box plates for 4 different mounting patterns (Doctor, Trijicon, C-more, Delta point) for the optic you choose. Edited April 16, 2015 by trgt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ron169 Posted April 16, 2015 Share Posted April 16, 2015 Yeah comes pre milled so to speak. Trgt, guess I didn't research enough, is there a way to mount a burris ff3 efficiently? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trgt Posted April 17, 2015 Share Posted April 17, 2015 Yeah comes pre milled so to speak. Trgt, guess I didn't research enough, is there a way to mount a burris ff3 efficiently? I believe the Burris FF3 is compatible with Doctor mount pattern, so you'd use the Doctor / Meopta / Insight - plate 01 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ron169 Posted April 17, 2015 Share Posted April 17, 2015 Good deal. I went ahead and shot burris an email earlier Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BritinUSA Posted July 23, 2015 Share Posted July 23, 2015 According to the latest meeting minutes, the BOD has approved 'Carry Optics' as a provisional division, only Level 1 matches until January 2016. Oddly though there is no mention of the division's equipment requirements in the minutes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ron169 Posted July 23, 2015 Share Posted July 23, 2015 Time to buy a FF3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kmca Posted July 23, 2015 Share Posted July 23, 2015 (edited) Since there are no equipment requirements, can I shoot my XD with a JPoint on a sight adapter or do I need to get the slide milled to accept the JPoint directly? (I'm too darn lazy to do a search) Edited July 23, 2015 by kmca Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BritinUSA Posted July 23, 2015 Share Posted July 23, 2015 I'm surprised that the requirements were not listed in the minutes, I guess we will have to wait until they are published, I'm interested to see what the proposal is myself. I've been shooting my XDM with a Springer Precision mount and DeltaPoint for over a year now. Hopefully it qualifies under these new rules. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ron169 Posted July 23, 2015 Share Posted July 23, 2015 I believe Bruce Gary posted on Facebook, milled slides only, no frame mounts Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BritinUSA Posted July 23, 2015 Share Posted July 23, 2015 I believe Bruce Gary posted on Facebook, milled slides only, no frame mounts I'm just going to wait until USPSA publishes the official rule-set, there is no indication in the minutes as to when we can expect that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BritinUSA Posted July 23, 2015 Share Posted July 23, 2015 From the USPSA forum (Bruce Gary) The particulars were supposed to be published with the minutes. Working on that. In *broad* terms, Carry Optics will start out being any Production-legal gun with a slide-mounted optic, with a couple of guardrails -- max weight of 33oz, including optic and empty mag-- no box, but a max mag-length-- no more than 4 oz over the weight shown on the Production gun list-- all other Production-division rules (allowed modifications, etc) still apply I would make a couple of recommendations1) wait until the provisional rules are published before making any decisions2) be *sure* that any modifications you make to a production-legal gun don't make it illegal if you want to go back to Production3) tell us what you think. We're starting small, gathering data, and will be making decisions (changes, whatever) as we learn. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BritinUSA Posted July 23, 2015 Share Posted July 23, 2015 My XDM is 29 oz according to the Production Gun List, and I have 4 oz to play with. I'll have to get a set of scales that can go that high to check the gun, my powder scale tips out at about 6 oz so that's not much help. I'll try to get that done tomorrow and post the results. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BritinUSA Posted July 23, 2015 Share Posted July 23, 2015 With this weight limit it appears that it will prohibit a lot of the metal framed guns, so maybe the intent here is to even the playing field a little. I wonder if the BOD thinks that the metal framed guns have too much of an edge in Production and so want to make a more polymer friendly division ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kmca Posted July 23, 2015 Share Posted July 23, 2015 With this weight limit it appears that it will prohibit a lot of the metal framed guns, so maybe the intent here is to even the playing field a little. I wonder if the BOD thinks that the metal framed guns have too much of an edge in Production and so want to make a more polymer friendly division ? Not sure about that. Two lines down from the 33 oz weight limit, it says " no more than 4 oz over the weight shown on the Production gun list". 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