Production optics

[Nimitz]

> if you do not like it, don't try it

Fair enough. I'll continue to shoot my Delta-Point Accu-Shadows Open Minor. LOVE the trigger, easy breezy on ammo, and 20% down on scoring when I don't hit an "A".

But if the division ends up still-born, don't say it was because of lack of interest of red dot on a production gun. In my case it is because my production gun with a red dot is not allowed, and lack of interest in competing with a plastic gun with red dot.

BTW, my 'vote' as a dues paying member is allow full production list, and let the division grow/die based on _member_ interest to participate. If the Manufacturer's want a 'spec' class, let them promote/subsidize it and let that class grow/die based on that how well they execute or generate interest around that.

I have to agree with this wholeheartedly .... I was all set to put an optic on my CZ and shoot this new dvision until they made the arbitrary decision to restrict the weight so that only a subset of the approved Production guns could participate ....

I'd love to hear teh actual BoD explainiation for the weight restriction ....

[Sarge]

Continue to play or continue to be competitive?

They could play in open.

If this division turns out to be anything like normal production it will be the same story there playing but not competitive. Ive always thought production was supposed to be beginners with pretty stock guns. Not some of the best shooters with highly modified ones, that's what limited and open should be for.

where did you come up with that? I didn't realize that Production was only for beginners and once you become a good shooter you're supposed to move to open ....

You missed the memo!

[G T]

Wonder if the Bersa thunder pro XT would be the new hotness? 33.8 oz....

[Garmil]

Continue to play or continue to be competitive?

They could play in open.

If this division turns out to be anything like normal production it will be the same story there playing but not competitive. Ive always thought production was supposed to be beginners with pretty stock guns. Not some of the best shooters with highly modified ones, that's what limited and open should be for.

where did you come up with that? I didn't realize that Production was only for beginners and once you become a good shooter you're supposed to move to open ....

Not saying that's the facts just what I always thought while getting started. Putting the best drivers in the slowest cars Just seems backwards but maybe that's just me.

[kmca]

Continue to play or continue to be competitive?

They could play in open.

If this division turns out to be anything like normal production it will be the same story there playing but not competitive. Ive always thought production was supposed to be beginners with pretty stock guns. Not some of the best shooters with highly modified ones, that's what limited and open should be for.

where did you come up with that? I didn't realize that Production was only for beginners and once you become a good shooter you're supposed to move to open ....

Not saying that's the facts just what I always thought while getting started. Putting the best drivers in the slowest cars Just seems backwards but maybe that's just me.

Could be just you, but if I were a manufacturer, I would put my advertising into the division with the greatest market share for the general public.

[Ultimo-Hombre]

So what do you guys want?

Put a slide mounted optic on any gun you want...

Load your mags to 15 and score minor or major?

Magwells... Sure

A little bit of porting? Ok.

Junk carry... Of course.

Seems like you just want to make a division where you can finally beat that limited guy who you hate.

You whiners want to be a " protected class" so badly,

You wonder why so many guys clown you?

[BritinUSA]

I never wanted any of those things.

[teros135]

So what do you guys want?

<snip>

Uh-oh. That's going to cause some ruffled feathers .

Why don't we all let this new Division work itself out, and just have fun shooting?

Edited July 27, 2015 by teros135

[Ultimo-Hombre]

I never wanted any of those things.

Ok amigo,

Set me straight.

What do you want?

Straightforward in one paragraph, line me out.

[BritinUSA]

Production Gun and Rules with a slide-mounted red dot.

[alma]

Phil Strader's post to Facebook now on the USPSA Facebook page.

Carry Optics has definitely created some buzz among our membership. As is the norm with social media, there have been some inconsistencies and misinterpretations of the "why's" surrounding this new provisional division.

As was pointed out publicly, " talked with S&W, Glock, and Springfield, and that they were not going to continue to support us at the same levels, largely due to the perception that their guns were no longer competitive in Production." I have indeed talked with a number of representatives of these companies, and there are concerns that Production has become a division that cannot remain realistically competitive without a heavier pistol. As the trends have undoubtedly been favoring the heavy, metal framed pistols (some refer to them as Limited Minor pistols), their concerns are valid. With that said, some of these manufacturers have mentioned lessening their support of USPSA (not just at Nationals). Do I think that we would loose them completely? Probably not. Do I see a validity in their argument? Yes.

The spirit of Production was to allow a place for entry-level shooters to be competitive without having to spend Limited/Open equipment prices. Production Division was intended to comprise of carry pistols with carry equipment on a somewhat level playing field. The intent was sound, but many have argued that the division was not restrictive enough. My greatest fear is that the majority of Production Division will become exclusive to only a handful of manufacturers.

Another public statement was that I "urged the BOD that these manufacturers and Sig were very interested in this division, and would continue to sponsor because of it." The facts are, I have spoken to a number of manufacturers and other companies, and most are very interested in the viability of this division. It is my OPINION that many of them would support USPSA in it's effort to get this division off the ground, but I can't speak for them with regards to their sponsorship. I would never mention companies or contents of private conversations on a public forum, BUT I believe that many of them will stand behind our efforts.

Carry Optics is intended to address the growing trend in lightweight carry pistols with slide-mounted optics. The weight limit is there to maintain the spirit of the division and to ensure a relatively level playing field. Nearly every company that currently offers a Production pistol makes additional models that would meet the Carry Optics criteria AND remain competitive.

This division was not only intended for the hard-core Production shooter who wishes to give up on iron sights and fit an optic to their slide (not that I personally think there are many of these people out there)...it was also approved to give some of our competitors a place to go who need to transition to a red-dot sight but don't have the money to spend on competitive Open equipment.

Historically, USPSA has mandated division specifications, then challenged industry to keep up and build a better toaster. We are now presented with a unique opportunity to respond to an industry trend that could be the new norm for CARRY pistols.

I would ask that our membership give this division a chance as it stands. If the BOD receives constructive feedback from its members and helpful input from the industry, it will be able to make informed and thoughtful decisions about the direction Carry Optics should go.

Hope to see you on the range!

[alma]

What are you talking about?

Everyone who thought PO was a stupid idea is butthurt because the BOD approved it. Everyone who wanted PO is butthurt because of the weight limit.

It is what it is. Let's go shoot.

[kmca]

What are you talking about?

Everyone who thought PO was a stupid idea is butthurt because the BOD approved it. Everyone who wanted PO is butthurt because of the weight limit.

It is what it is. Let's go shoot.

I"m not hurt in any way. I've got at least 3 guns in my safe that I can use in that Division, as a matter of fact, I'm expecting a package with an adapter for my JPoint

[Garmil]

Continue to play or continue to be competitive?

They could play in open.

If this division turns out to be anything like normal production it will be the same story there playing but not competitive. Ive always thought production was supposed to be beginners with pretty stock guns. Not some of the best shooters with highly modified ones, that's what limited and open should be for.

where did you come up with that? I didn't realize that Production was only for beginners and once you become a good shooter you're supposed to move to open ....

You missed the memo!

Looks like he really did miss the memo ^^

[Sarge]

All arguing aside I truly feel sorry for the only TWO guys I know of who pushed so hard for this only to be left hanging in the breeze.

I think the prez actually had a good point in calling the premium production guns limited minor. If we want to level the playing field for the Glock shooters then put the metal framed guns in limited and actually make LM a division.

[ToddKS]

I agree with you in concept, but I don't think forcing the metal guns into Limited is the right way to do it. I think the board did the right thing with the weight limit for Carry Optics but it would be better if they had simply created a heavy class for the unicorns and a light class for the plastic fantastics. That way everyone could participate. I think they should consider splitting production the same way.

Edited July 27, 2015 by ToddKS

[leas327]

I think this division will take off on it's own. I think on a local level it will be a nice way for a parent to make the intimidation of a big steel array less scary for their kid. It will be just like their video game, put the red dot on the target and press bang.

On a National level I would be interested in a Co/ L10 combined nationals. Unofficially...10 minor with a dot v. 10 major with irons. Seems interesting...

[pskys2]

Phil makes good points on a weight limit.

Just a thought and at the risk of an arms race (which naturally happens at some point anyway), what of setting the weight limit but allowing lightening to make it with a heavier gun?

Adding weight to get closer to the maximum weight with a lighter gun? With the expense of adding optics/mounts it will already start inching up to a Limited gun price to be competitive.

[d_striker]

Phil makes good points on a weight limit.

Just a thought and at the risk of an arms race (which naturally happens at some point anyway), what of setting the weight limit but allowing lightening to make it with a heavier gun?

Adding weight to get closer to the maximum weight with a lighter gun? With the expense of adding optics/mounts it will already start inching up to a Limited gun price to be competitive.

I don't really think it's a good point. My XDm in 40 minor shoots much softer than my 9mm CZ's.

I went to the metal gun purely for accuracy. If Glock/Springfield/S&W want their guns to be more competitive, they should make their plastic guns more accurate.

Protective legislation is what kills innovation. Why be innovative or create a better widget when your product is protected?

[fishsticks]

Phil makes good points on a weight limit.

Just a thought and at the risk of an arms race (which naturally happens at some point anyway), what of setting the weight limit but allowing lightening to make it with a heavier gun?

Adding weight to get closer to the maximum weight with a lighter gun? With the expense of adding optics/mounts it will already start inching up to a Limited gun price to be competitive.

I don't really think it's a good point. My XDm in 40 minor shoots much softer than my 9mm CZ's.

I went to the metal gun purely for accuracy. If Glock/Springfield/S&W want their guns to be more competitive, they should make their plastic guns more accurate.

Protective legislation is what kills innovation. Why be innovative or create a better widget when your product is protected?

Well said.

I don't really understand how this got so far off track. Basically the proponents wanted production rules with a slide mounted dot. While we don't truly know what it will be, it sounds like it missed that mark for sure by limiting to Tupperware only.

All the other stuff about splitting production is completely off topic and not relevant at all. Personally I shoot production and haven't heard anyone complaining or wanting the division split up. Limited minor for metal hammer fired production guns? Give me a break!

[dirty whiteboy]

Phil makes good points on a weight limit.

Just a thought and at the risk of an arms race (which naturally happens at some point anyway), what of setting the weight limit but allowing lightening to make it with a heavier gun?

Adding weight to get closer to the maximum weight with a lighter gun? With the expense of adding optics/mounts it will already start inching up to a Limited gun price to be competitive.

I don't really think it's a good point. My XDm in 40 minor shoots much softer than my 9mm CZ's.

I went to the metal gun purely for accuracy. If Glock/Springfield/S&W want their guns to be more competitive, they should make their plastic guns more accurate.

Protective legislation is what kills innovation. Why be innovative or create a better widget when your product is protected?

Well said.

I don't really understand how this got so far off track. Basically the proponents wanted production rules with a slide mounted dot. While we don't truly know what it will be, it sounds like it missed that mark for sure by limiting to Tupperware only.

All the other stuff about splitting production is completely off topic and not relevant at all. Personally I shoot production and haven't heard anyone complaining or wanting the division split up. Limited minor for metal hammer fired production guns? Give me a break!

I don't like the idea of gun manufactures having an influence on uspsa rules, threatening to hold back on sponsorship funds is extortion. Tell them to take a flying leap, they need us, we don't need them.

[ToddKS]

It's not extortion for a company to express that they don't feel they are getting a fair return on their investment if they feel that is the case. They are under no obligation to support USPSA, it is a business decision.

That said if they really want ROI then they should do what Glock did with GSSF and make their own matches.

Edited July 28, 2015 by ToddKS

[RIIID]

The hot set up today will be a relic when a new trend is started, from one year to the next things change. What's old is new again and what's new becomes old. The biggest reason Tanfoglio"s and CZ's are popular is the trigger parts are better so a good trigger can be had. The weight is just a bonus, if the triggers were poor few would switch just for the added weight.

As for chasing after manufactures to stay supportive by providing a Division just for their product doesn't make good business sense. When their product isn't selling the numbers they want they will discontinue said product and move on to something else. Good marketing has sold a lot products that end up sitting in a safe or traded off for a fraction of the cost for the next hot new marketed product. Slide mounted optics have been around for almost 2 decades and all of a sudden they are the hot new item because of good marketing.

Rich

[Southpaw]

So when will the actual rules be published? By the time they publish the rules and I get a gun set up for the new division it'll already be too late for them to count my interest when they look at participation numbers in January...

Will slides that have been milled aftermarket for mini red dots be allowed or only guns that come from the factory already milled? What about buying a complete aftermarket slide milled for a red dot so I don't have to buy a whole new gun? Neither of these would be Production legal, but I'd think they should be allowed in this new division, right?

And why do we need two threads in different sub-forums discussing the same topic...

[Chills1994]

I really don't have a dog in this hunt...

But after reading Phil's spiel above, I am kinda left scratching my head.

I'll try to explain it this way...I think somebody is looking it kinda like the chicken and the egg. Sounds to me like cause and effect got confused.

USPSA shouldn't be adjusting its rules/divisions (the cause) in order to draw more industry to support USPSA (the effect).

Maybe a lesson from 3 gun nation from like 2 or 3 years ago.

Get the TV support first, for a nationals type event. Then all the sponsors should fall in line.

(I mean "hey-zeuss horatio cristos on a pogo stick", they put golf, bowling, and bass fishing on TV)

Maybe if the current format for a USPSA nat's is not all that TV'able, maybe it should be turned into a skins game like the old Colt Pro shootout (from which Phil's Pro Am was based on)

Throw enough money at something to make the stakes high, and somebody will think it is dramatic enough to watch.