BritinUSA Posted July 23, 2015 Share Posted July 23, 2015 (edited) The way I read that; We have 4 oz over the specified weight but a max limit of 33 oz. So if you have a gun that is listed on the Production Gun List at 32 oz then you only have 1 oz to play with. Edited July 23, 2015 by BritinUSA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pmt 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 ? So in other words, the BOD doesn't really want this to work at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Racinready300ex 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". So that means you can't go over 33. So if your gun weights 30 you can only add 3. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sarge Posted July 23, 2015 Share Posted July 23, 2015 Is there PO in PS? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gooldylocks 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 ? So in other words, the BOD doesn't really want this to work at all. It would seem that if they wanted this to work, they should have used the whole production list. Cause I'm sure there are some people that wouldn't mind throwing a dot on their gun for a couple matches just to see if they like it but can't now (without shooting open, but let's not reopen that can if worms okay?). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Racinready300ex Posted July 23, 2015 Share Posted July 23, 2015 If they didn't want it to work, they could of just voted No. So I doubt they are going to put all this effort into something they are hoping fails. I think they are just trying to be careful and not allow it to turn into Open 10. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BritinUSA Posted July 23, 2015 Share Posted July 23, 2015 The trend in Production is currently leaning towards the heavier steel-framed guns (CZ, Tanfoglio and to a lesser extent Sphinx), and under IPSC rules the 5lb trigger requirement essentially makes it a tough sell for a striker-fired gun. By putting an upper weight limit it may lead to increased opportunities for manufacturers of polymer-framed, striker-fired guns (the first out of the box ProdOptics guns have all been this type). So I can understand the reasoning here and the more I think about it the more I can see the benefit. From what I have read elsewhere we will essentially have the Production Division ruleset with these amendments: Upper Weight limit: 33 oz Tolerance : No more than 4 oz over published weight with empty magazine Box : No but a maximum magazine length Removing the box seems like a good plan. In order for a gun to be on the Production List it has to fit in the box, and DNROI does that as part of the approval process. Because there are limits on the alterations allowed in the division, there should theoretically be no need to put every competitors gun into the box, if the gun is on the list and there have been no illegal mods then it should fit anyway. Using a magazine restriction instead brings it inline with the other divisions and should make it easier to check at a match (I presume there will be a gauge for this at some point). I think it was July 27th, 2014 that I published my proposal for this division, so its been almost a year waiting for this to happen, over the next few months it will be interesting to see how this develops. I suspect that Glock and S&W will get behind this in a big way and other manufacturers will jump in too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Moneypenny Posted July 23, 2015 Share Posted July 23, 2015 this document says a J point with battery weights very litte .5 oz http://www.jprifles.com/instructions/JPoint/JPoint%20Manual%2004.12.pdf This leaves you a lot of weight for a mount... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fishsticks Posted July 23, 2015 Share Posted July 23, 2015 I'm curious to see the actual ruleset. But - I think not allowing more flexibility at least initially may not be the best plan. Particularly with respect to weight and no frame mounts. Frame mounts would allow a lot of folks to sample the division without permanently altering their firearm. Same with weight. If I have a CZ that I shoot, and could hang a rail mounted optic to try the division, I might. If I have to mill a Glock slide, I probably won't try. If it takes off I'd be interested, but I'm not dropping the $$ for a slide and milling. I would consider rail mounted something however. IMHO, the more people you get to try it the better chance for long term success. Even if the ruleset ultimately doesn't allow these things in the future it would let people try in the interim. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pmt Posted July 23, 2015 Share Posted July 23, 2015 If they didn't want it to work, they could of just voted No. So I doubt they are going to put all this effort into something they are hoping fails. I think they are just trying to be careful and not allow it to turn into Open 10. Not necessarily. Continually voting NO will piss off people, claiming the BOD won't even give it a chance. By voting YES, a portion will be happy. The weight limit purposely eliminates half the guns currently used in Production, and by giving it until Jan 2016 doesn't give it much of a chance to get off the ground. They didn't put any effort into this decision - they want it to fail and go away. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BritinUSA Posted July 23, 2015 Share Posted July 23, 2015 There are plenty of mounting options that use the existing dovetail for the rear sight, and they are a lot cheaper than a frame mount or milling. The dot sits a little higher but if you're looking for something to try out and see if it works for you then the dovetail mount would be the way to go in my opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gooldylocks Posted July 23, 2015 Share Posted July 23, 2015 (edited) I'm curious to see the actual ruleset. But - I think not allowing more flexibility at least initially may not be the best plan. Particularly with respect to weight and no frame mounts. Frame mounts would allow a lot of folks to sample the division without permanently altering their firearm. Same with weight. If I have a CZ that I shoot, and could hang a rail mounted optic to try the division, I might. If I have to mill a Glock slide, I probably won't try. If it takes off I'd be interested, but I'm not dropping the $$ for a slide and milling. I would consider rail mounted something however. IMHO, the more people you get to try it the better chance for long term success. Even if the ruleset ultimately doesn't allow these things in the future it would let people try in the interim. Even the cheapest frame mounts out there are more expensive than most dovetail mounts that more than likely already exist for your particular gun. And using a currently production legal holster with a dovetail mount wouldn't make you have to buy a new holster, whereas a frame mount would require you to buy a new, full custom holster instead of just using the one you already have. Edited July 23, 2015 by Gooldylocks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MilkMyDuds Posted July 23, 2015 Share Posted July 23, 2015 The start of the downfall of USPSA? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Onepocket Posted July 23, 2015 Share Posted July 23, 2015 +1 on that. Water it down some more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
motosapiens Posted July 23, 2015 Share Posted July 23, 2015 You guys really think 7 or 8 guys shooting PO is going to water down real shooting? I'm not worried about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SinistralRifleman Posted July 23, 2015 Share Posted July 23, 2015 Looking for a few A-GM class people that want to shoot Carry Optics division http://www.warriortalk.com/showthread.php?125394-SUBMIT-YOUR-APPLICATIONS E-mail me your shooting resume's at russell@reddotglocks.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flatland Shooter Posted July 23, 2015 Share Posted July 23, 2015 You guys really think 7 or 8 guys shooting PO is going to water down real shooting? I'm not worried about it. I've been watching this thread quietly since its beginning. In time, you may need to rename this the "Old Farts Division". When able, I shoot in Open mainly because the red dot sight. I tried shooting Production a few years ago with disastrous results. I'm at the age its either a red dot sight or no sights at all. Open continues to get more and more expensive. This new division is perfect for those that don't want to spend the big bucks (especially just starting out) and want to shoot. When it hits a club in our neighborhood, I'll give it a try. Bill Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve RA Posted July 23, 2015 Share Posted July 23, 2015 I thought it was to be slide mount only, or did that change somewhere in the last 64 pages??? If this flies then we can try for slide mount only in SS !!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BritinUSA Posted July 23, 2015 Share Posted July 23, 2015 (edited) I think its still slide-ride only… We'll know for sure when the rules are posted which Phil indicated would be today or tomorrow (depends what time zone he was in when he posted that ) Edited July 23, 2015 by BritinUSA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
atbarr Posted July 23, 2015 Share Posted July 23, 2015 Not having a full year time trial, shows the BOD doesn't want this to work. Give me a break! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BritinUSA Posted July 23, 2015 Share Posted July 23, 2015 (edited) Its level 1 only until the start of 2016, then it runs from there until they can review at the next face to face meeting. According to the minutes there is no time limit on how long the division will remain provisional or be ratified or rejected, just that they INTEND to review it. The BOD will evaluate competitor participation and review the data at the next in-person meeting. It is the intention of the BOD to use this information, industry input, and member feedback to either approve or disapprove Carry Optics as a viable division for Level 2 and above events during 2016 and beyond. Carry Optics is a Provisional Division to ensure that necessary changes can be made without waiting the mandatory two years. This will ensure that pressing divisional changes can be immediately made based on member and industry feedback. Edited July 23, 2015 by BritinUSA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BritinUSA Posted July 23, 2015 Share Posted July 23, 2015 Hopefully USPSA will be able to get a write-up on this provisional division into the next edition of Front Sight to spread the word beyond the forums. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SinistralRifleman Posted July 23, 2015 Share Posted July 23, 2015 Someone please email me the actual rules as soon as they are posted. I have various media outlets I will be posting it to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BritinUSA Posted July 23, 2015 Share Posted July 23, 2015 Someone please email me the actual rules as soon as they are posted. I have various media outlets I will be posting it to. Phil said they would be on the USPSA web-site today/tomorrow. I'll be constantly checking Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
motosapiens Posted July 23, 2015 Share Posted July 23, 2015 Open continues to get more and more expensive. but these 'new' guns fit fine in open too. Open doesn't need to be expensive unless you feel some need to spend just as much as the big-spenders. I'm only 54, so still a long ways from open, but when I get really really old, I figure I'll just put a red dot sight on whatever gun i like shooting, and keep shooting it in open. 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