Comparing shooting skill should mean apples to apples.

[MiniUzi]

Howdy folks,

I'm relatively new ot the sport of multi-gun and I'm trying to make sense of the differences I see in various 3-gun competitions nationwide in regards to rules and gear requirements for the different divisions and in particular tac optics or tactical. I can enjoy and appreciate the different flavors and variation that is available out there but it seems to me the underlying rules for shotgun and rifle capacity are all over the place. In some places for shotgun it's 9 rounds max, others 9 before the beep and whatever you can hold after and I've yet to see any regulation on AR-15 capacity for tactical in any matches I've shot or seen online.

It seems to me that an event wanting to truly measure the best shooting skill between competitors (versus who has better equipment) for multigun/ 3-gun would want to use the highest common denominator such as a 9 roud max on shotguns and only 30 rounders for AR-15's? I see guys turning shotguns into jousting lances so they can cram in another few rounds after the buzzer for some of these matches. To me it looks rediculous. The same goes for the high capacity magazines such as surefire 60 rounders or the +18 extensions for pmags etc... some guys have em, some don't, but it seems most competitors feel they have to buy some just to stay competitive.

What got me pondering this was that I I saw that the USPSA multigun has gone in the direction of more rounds is better after the buzzer for shotguns (9 to start and anything goes after) which got me wondering why or how anyone could think that unevening the playing field was somehow a good idea. I'm a firm believer that a good competitor will do well behind any gun and that equipment, although important, is not as important as the mind and operator behind it. With that being said, I'd prefer to know my place in the ranks is a reflection of my skill compared to the others above and hopefully mostly below me

-Todd

[Bryan 45]

No offense intended, but it's because you are new to the sport that you feel this way. Get a couple years and a dozen or more major matches under your belt and you'll understand that equipment means very little in this game, assuming yours is reliable.

Search "level the playing field" and you'll pull up a couple dozen topics from the last 10 years, some of which discuss this very topic, with others on optics, shotgun loading, amount of movement, physical endurance, probably even everyone being required to eat the same food for breakfast.

Practice, experience, skill- this is what separates shooters, not equipment.

Edited May 20, 2013 by Bryan 45

[Rookie]

Your post ties magazine capacity to your perception of shooting skills/capability (just my interpretation). I don't see the same connection...

I have watched shooters go thru 2 or more 30 rounders on a rifle stage, while I shot the same stage with a single 20 round mag in my Heavy Metal division. I personally enjoy watching shooters start a stage with a few extra pounds of ammunition on the rifle. If they can beat me while putting 100 rounds thru the rifle in the same time that I need to shoot 20... more power to them. Most rifle stages don't require more than 30 rounds anyway... unless we're talking Ironman.

On an 18 round shotgun stage, shooters who start with 9 rounds at the buzzer generally have to load at least 9 more rounds to complete the stage, do we really care how many shells a shooter might choose to stuff in his weapon before he or she starts shooting? Somewhere on the stage, this person is going to have to load 9 rounds. I don't see this as a big advantage.

Just my thoughts.

[MiniUzi]

I'm a firm believer that a good competitor will do well behind any gun and that equipment, although important, is not as important as the mind and operator behind it.

^^ from my original post. thats my stance on indian vs arrow. I don't equate equipment to winning, I do however value the feeling of a win on level ground over one that slopes in my favor regardless the degree.

On an 18 round shotgun stage, shooters who start with 9 rounds at the buzzer generally have to load at least 9 more rounds to complete the stage, do we really care how many shells a shooter might choose to stuff in his weapon before he or she starts shooting? Somewhere on the stage, this person is going to have to load 9 rounds. I don't see this as a big advantage.

Just my thoughts.

I see your point but I think your example actually shows some inequality. For the guy who has a 10 round capacity in his tube he has one reload to make (he shoots 8 and reloads 9 for example) . For a guy with a 8+1 capacity he has at least two reloads to make unless he runs the gun empty which could be slower right as he has to put one in the chamber and close the bolt? Maybe it is my inexperience but when I picture the above scenario I picture the same shooter with both guns and then ask myself , would he be faster with one versus the other shooting the same scenario. Now extraploate that out to a course of fire with 24 shotgun targets and one guy with 9 round capacity and another with say 14 rounds. I think the potential gap widens.

Or perhaps this is dead horse that has been beaten to death.

-Todd

[Rookie]

"Now extraploate that out to a course of fire with 24 shotgun targets and one guy with 9 round capacity and another with say 14 rounds. I think the potential gap widens."

Now I'll beat the dead horse...

If you believe that a 14 round tube capacity is an advantage, then there is probably little that I or anyone else can say to alter your opinion. I see stage design as a means for leveling the field... for example, having the shooter engage targets thru ports while in a tunnel... this could make a shorter magazine an advantage. For me, it takes nearly twice as long (on the clock) to load 8 as it does to load 4. For many of the shooters that I compete with and against, it is loading the shotgun that takes lots of time, as opposed to emptying it.

10 years ago, most matches that I attended had some limitation on magazine capacity... it was either 8 rounds maximum tube capacity, or magazine could not extend more than 1" past the barrel. Something happened over the past decade that resulted in the rule sets that we have today, and I think these changes have had fairly broad and popular support.

At the end of the day... If someone was to put on a match that I wanted to attend, and they placed a magazine limit of 8 on shotgun, then I would strap on my 8 round tube and give it a go.

[abn-rgr]

I stopped reading when he said it looked ridiculous to have a long shotgun tube. I quit worrying about looks when I got married....

[MiniUzi]

points taken. 14 rounds was an arbitrary number pulled out of thin air just for the sake of an exmple. I'll chalk this up to the way it is and accept it and move on. I'm sure this too shall change in time.

Edited May 20, 2013 by MiniUzi

[abn-rgr]

The only time a larger tube is a big advantage is if you have to move to a shooting position. Longer tube allows you to load shells before you start shooting the stage. If you have a shotgun start where you have to start shooting right there, no advantage.

[Alaskapopo]

Everyone has a different opinion on what the rules should or should not be based on their own bias or preference. What really matters is the rules are the same for everyone.

Pat

[ziebart]

Loading past capacity after the buzzer also helps the RO not have to count rounds. If you made everyone have 22" guns then the guys who want to being out their duck gun with a tube thrown on cant play without cutting down their barrel which is a lot more expensive than buying a mag tube.

[alecmc]

Another point you have to remember is different state laws, here in nj we are limited to 15 rounds in a rifle and 5 or 6 in a semi auto shotgun, where other states have no limits.

[Jesse Tischauser]

Anything that limits magazine capacity is unconstitutional. Load them puppies up while we still can!!!

[Shooter115]

Bryan nailed it. Just last weekend I watched Eric Miller win the CMMG Midwest Championships Tac-Optics class for the second year in a row with a Glock 17, a shotgun with a 9 round tube, standard 30 round AR mags . Years of experience, stage savvy and phenomenal shooting skills mean a lot more than what kind of gear you're running.

That said I'll take any advantage I can get with gear to make up for my lack of experience, stage savvy and phenomenal shooting skills

[co-exprs]

I think that what miniuzi is proposing is 100% spec divisions or even one big spec division for everyone. Even though I have a higher rank in USPSA Limited division, at heart I am really a single stacker. Likewise, while I have all of the very best gear to shoot in Tac Optics division, at heart I really enjoy shooting the HM divisions. Both in USPSA pistol and in multigun, the spec divisions are always the smallest. I really think that deep down people like options and opportunity to tinker with gear to try and find that secret weapon which will give an advantage over the other guy. I honestly think that if we were all shoe horned into a tight spec driven division our sport would become boring and stagnate. Even though I run heavily in spec divisions myself, I really enjoy seeing the diversity in equipment. I like seeing all of the creative ways people solve stage problems and are always pushing the envelope of inovation. I think the example of the magazine tube length is self regulating by necessity. Any more than 12 in the magazine and the shotgun gets very long and nose heavy. Any less than 8 and you have a serious handicap. Everyone has the same opportunity to try different combinations to figure out the best equipment mix for his or her game.

[Langenator]

Heck, I loved what's probably the ultimate spec division seen in recent years - World War II Division at last year's LaRue. Everyone in the division had an M1 Garand (PING!) with all the shooters I talked to running the same ammo (Greek surplus), a 12ga pump with a 6 round tube, and a 1911 with 8 round mags.

That said, tinkering around with new stuff in Tac-Optics is fun too. And without that, you wouldn't have the element of show-and-tell and your local match, either.

You could take the skill contest to the extreme, and make all the shooters shoot the same actual guns, and with no chance to observe the other shooters. Be one heck of a time suck, though.

[ClutchUSMC]

I used to feel the same way you do. However, equipment makes little or no difference. I won a club match this year shooting a nova with a 5 round capacity and a single stack .45 with 8 round mags in TO, HOA combined. Now it wasn't a major match, but at the end of the day the guys that are junking me are doing it because they are better shooters not because they have a longer tube than me. We all have the same ability to read the rules and adjust our gear accordingly, most of us enjoy the variety that we get shooting 3gun. Suck at rifle go shoot the AR sectional, physical speciman go to BRM3G, rifleman go out to Tarheel, pistol wizards check out CMMG, etc.

Heck I shot a prismatic at the 3GN qualifer even though I was allowed a magnified optic because I felt like it gave me an advantage. Turns out I might have been on to something as I see pictures of DH shooting a 1x optic and an sbr...

Most of this game is mental. I'd say almost all of it actually. None of the targets we shoot are difficult. Take me for example, I've shot 90%+ stages in major matches, no I can't string 9 of them together, but I pull it off once or twice a match fairly regulary.I have sponsors and a good job and have all the gear that anyone could possibly want. It's not because I don't have all the tools in my tool box, my poor stages are almost always a mental issue. If you can figure out how to shoot consistenatly at your best it won't matter what guns or gear you use.

[Langenator]

I wasn't arguing the point, just pointing out that the WWII division was tons of fun.

Heck, there's a guy at our local match whose times with irons smoke mine with optics. And our MD is a long distance fiend - the area he calls "Hoser's Swamp", which has the closest rifle targets you generally see as his matches, starts at 150 yards.

But I'm not out there to win prizes, just to shoot better than I did last match.

[kurtm]

The "other Miller" who won Tac Irons at CMMG also runs only a 9 round shotgun tube, and also used G.I. 30 round mags (yes the aluminum ones! The other Miller uses those fancy P-Mags....the up start.). I did run a STI 9mm but no girly scope so I guess we are even then!

I will say this about the lance length mag tubes, I am seeing more signs of wear and more broken shell stops and now some wallowed out receivers due to shell surge while firing, and battering durring racking the shells out to unload durring practice. I am also seeing more malfs due to shell surge that are being blamed on all sorts of other things. Remeber...yes they are inertia driven but so is that big long collum of shells in the tube!

[Shooter115]

The "other Miller" who won Tac Irons at CMMG also runs only a 9 round shotgun tube, and also used G.I. 30 round mags (yes the aluminum ones! The other Miller uses those fancy P-Mags....the up start.). I did run a STI 9mm but no girly scope so I guess we are even then!

Sorry to leave you out bud. Kurt is another example of a guy using basic gear and extraordinary skill to win matches . Though using that STI is obviously an unfair advantage. The fact it can take down poppers at 1000 yards, shoot around corners and has self aligning sights with target seeking bullets, put's you in a whole nother class. I'm sure if I had a blaster like that I'd be winning every match I entered. I wouldn't even shoot the gun, I'd just drop it off at the stages and come back later to find out how awesome I did

[MarkCO]

You want to compare Apples to Apples?

Cool...Tear out Horner's right quad, his left ACL, put some Vaseline in his eyes, strap an 80 pound weight belt on him, break his right foot and we will run heads up!

It ain't about equipment once you meet a minimum level. I think I could do pretty well if all the top shooters were using single shot rifles and shotguns and maybe a revolver and I got to use my Tac-Ops gear on typical 3Gun stages. One you get to maybe 60 to 70% of the match winners it is about 2 things...improving your physical condition and improving your skillset. 3Gun is multi-faceted and when I push one skill forward, it makes the other lacking skills be more glaring, so I have to try and maintain that skill while working at another. In some part, that is the draw of 3Gun for me...there is NO ceiling, just the goal of gaining on the top guys who are also improving. I have been in many 3Gun matches where shooters with rule limited equipment have been HOA in the match and or on specific stages. I've shot twice in Open using Tac-Scope gear and finished maybe down a few places due to reduced capacity, but it was not a huge difference. Butler won Open with Tac-Scope gear, Fortin was 2nd in Trooper Class at Iron man with Tac-Scope gear...just a few examples of great scores with limited equipment in Open divisions.

[boomfab]

Long tubes can be very advantageous.

It's not really about cramming in an extra couple shells at the buzzer.

It allows a more flexible loading plan that could potentially save some amount of time.

[Jesse Tischauser]

I will say this about the lance length mag tubes, I am seeing more signs of wear and more broken shell stops and now some wallowed out receivers due to shell surge while firing, and battering durring racking the shells out to unload durring practice. I am also seeing more malfs due to shell surge that are being blamed on all sorts of other things. Remeber...yes they are inertia driven but so is that big long collum of shells in the tube!

I haven't see any shell surge problems even with 3" turkey loads but I do run a really long spring to keep things firm.

I have been running my 12 round tube since Pan American shotgun match in 2010. I haven't seen my receiver wear out yet but I'm trying!

The shell catch definitely can't be run as loose or light as a shorter tube. I had to pull mine out once and bend it a little to keep an occasional shell from slipping past during a reload.

[kurtm]

I had been told you ran the "little blue pill" to keep things firm.

I am also glad your gun hasn't been seeing excess wear, I will let the two guys who's guns had been battered so much they needed new receivers that it doesn't happen.

I do suspect however that they didn't run as stout a spring as you have and thus accelerated the problem.

Edited May 27, 2013 by kurtm

[Jesse Tischauser]

I had been told you ran the "little blue pill" to keep things firm.

Lets keep that little deal a secret;).

[barrysuperhawk]

If you want to run a "spec" class, it's very simple, Welcome to Heavy Metal Division!!

8 [or sometimes 10] round .45ACP 1911's,

20 round .308 rifles with IRON sights, and

8+1 Pump Shotguns.

It's just like Single Stack division in USPSA, the idea is everyone has as close to the same equipment as possible. All of the other divisions allow for a bit of "buying your place" because you are right, spending $150 on a mag does get you a bit of an advantage. So is a $3000 scope vs a $300 scope, or even a $30 scope.. OTOH, taken to it's extreme, look at open class, with saigas, mk1919's, and X-rails, and arredondo loaders. they also have disadvantages. Saiga and Mk 1919 guys run out of those monstrous magazines in the middle of a stage, Xrails weigh about 40 lbs fully loaded, and that's a lot to swing around, and the arredondo loaders are great at flinging shells on the ground at inopportune moments..

You want to compare Apples to Apples?

Cool...Tear out Horner's right quad, his left ACL, put some Vaseline in his eyes, strap an 80 pound weight belt on him, break his right foot and we will run heads up!

I doubt even that would slow him down enough for mortals to beat. He's just as fast on the trigger as Jerry...

As has been said above, being familiar with your gear is worth way more than the extra coin you spent on whatever do-dad you just bought. I have been running Heavy Metal in 3 gun matches since they were called Soldier of Fortune matches, and there were no classes. In fact, I shot my very first "official" 3 gun match almost 20 years ago today and I used almost the exact same equipment then as I did at CMMG the weekend before last. I switched from a FAL to a M1A, but that's mostly because of CMMG's little MGM's past 300 yards and the FAL front sight post is kinda fat. My 1911 is a bit shinier, but functionally identical, and I only this match debuted a new, parkerized Mossberg pump to replace my old parkerized Mossberg pump. It's not the arrow, it's the Indian, and my indian name, barrysuperhawk means shoots with a slowness....

Edited May 28, 2013 by barrysuperhawk