IPSC BOX question

[gmshtr]

I have a friend who shoots a Glock 35 with Heine Sights. He built an IPSC box, and it appears that his 35 won't fit...height-wise. He's trying it with the Arren. +3 base pads. It's REALLY close. Granted, his box is just a fraction under 45mm. Isn't the box actually 46mm? Who out there uses a 35 internationally? I'm thinking he could fit it in a 45 (+1)mm international box.

Any ideas?

Thanks, Phil

BTW, my Scott Warren fixed-sighted STI fits, even with my 19rd mag...as well as the other mags!

[Skywalker]

Phil,

you're talking about fitting the box height-wise (45mm -0,+1 mm) but I don't understand why a Glock 35 should be thicker than that.

Does it sport some sort of oversized magwell?

For reference, my SVI with an STI SS magwell is still inside the max allowed dimensions.

The international box is manifactured on the basis of 225mm x 150mm x 45mm. Then, for manifacturing tolerances, -0, +1mm can be added to the above dimensions, but there is no guarantee that each and every box you'll encounter will be 226mm x 151mm x 46mm, only that all IPSC legal boxes you'll encounter will be:

[min 225, max 226]mm x [min 150, max 151]mm x [min 45, max 46]mm

Any box combination inside these boundaries is legal.

BTW,

care to answer the last question here?

[Vince Pinto]

Phil,

If I'm not mistaken, the measurement which actually concerns you is the 150mm width (not the 45mm depth) of the box, because you mention sights and basepads. Anyway, the relevant rule can be found under Appendix D2 Standard and D3 Modified Divisions:

16. A handgun in its ready condition (See Section 8.1), but unloaded and with an empty magazine inserted, must fit wholly within the confines of a box which has internal dimensions of 225mm x 150mm x 45mm (tolerance of +1 mm, -0 mm). Note that all magazines must comply, failing which Rule 6.2.5.1 will apply.

Although the +1mm applies to each of the three dimensions, you should presume that the actual box to be used will be exactly 225mm x 150mm x 45mm (i.e. no "+" tolerance), and I suggest your friend build his test box without a tolerance (see image in next post).

[Vince Pinto]

Phil,

Here's an image showing the 150mm measurement, which might be useful. You'll also note that this particular box is made of metal, so there's probably no "give".

And, yes, I think the gun is butt ugly, but it complies with the rules

[gmshtr]

Yeah, I meant the 150mm part. Whoops.

I wish we had one of those wiz-bang mm rulers, so that we could be more exact with the measurements. Damn English System! The box builder says it's pretty much right on the money. I'm thinking his magwell may need to be trimmed JUST a bit. Still, it looks like the distance from the botttom of the mag to the top of the rear sight may be just a bit too long. I thought those Arrendondo +3's were specifically made for the Glock to fit. Oh well. If anyone uses a 35 with these base pads and Heine sights, I'm sure he would appreciate some reassurance.

Phil

[A33435]

I use both my 35's internationally, they both have melted in Bomarlike rearsights.

These are a fraction,so to much, higher then the standard glocksights.

When i use the arren. 3+ the guns doesn't fit the box

So i use other, custommade basepads.

When you have the standard sights on your G35 it will sure fit the box using the arren. 3+

Greetings

Adrie

[dirtypool40]

jeeezus, that gun looks like the punchline to "you might be recoil sensitive if..."

[Skywalker]

Vince,

I have a question concerning the box in your pic.

A friend of mine has an identical one (machined from aluminum) that we sometimes use during matches.

I have always wondered if it is completely legal: I mean, the corners are rounded (and I understand this is due to the impossibility of machining square corners from the inside with a mill, a radius shall always be present), but this doesn't guarantee the full 225mm or 150mm measure on the corners, thus it really doesn't comply with the 225 [-0,+1]mm and 150 [-0,+1]mm.

I guess it would be possible to have those rounded corners preventing the insertion of a gun with an aggressive looking magwell, or some kind of front sight that's positioned extremely forward on the muzzle.

Is this design acceptable, or could it be subject to arbitration?

[gmshtr]

Vince, I just can't over how ugly that gun is! I'm sure it shoots beautifully though.

See how that works. I push you away, then I reel you back in with the compliment!

[Julien Boit]

A lots of people here had talk about the legality of the boxes used.

I think that those boxes should be stamped as verified by something official.

I'm sure there are many offices who officailly control and /or calibrate measuring devices in every country.

It could end arbitrations about the legality of this box. Or should there be any mean (a caliper for example) available to measure the box in front of each and every shooter ?

The material used is also an issue : Aluminium is strong and unflexible but it's sometimes though with the sight.

Wood is very sensitive but it gentle with the sights.

Do the rulebook states anything about that ?

Oh and BTW, the pistol sure looks ugly and I saw it shooting not as flat as you should expect with that "ugly fat frame"

[Vince Pinto]

A lots of people here had talk about the legality of the boxes used. I think that those boxes should be stamped as verified by something official.

I've not physically handled or measured the box in the image (which was sent to me for adjudication on another rules dispute), so I don't know whether the rounded corners are curved inside or outside where a "normal" 90 degree angle would be. However I've already proposed an improvement to the subject rule:

16. A handgun in its ready condition (See Section 8.1), but unloaded and with an empty magazine inserted, must fit wholly within the confines of a box which has verified by the Range Master to have internal dimensions of 225mm x 150mm x 45mm (tolerance of +1 mm, -0 mm). Note that all magazines must comply, failing which Rule 6.2.5.1 will apply.

but perhaps we could take it one step further and add the text in red below:

16. A handgun in its ready condition (See Section 8.1), but unloaded and with an empty magazine inserted, must fit wholly within the confines of a box which has verified by the Range Master to have sharp 90 degree angles at all internal corners and internal dimensions of 225mm x 150mm x 45mm (tolerance of +1 mm, -0 mm). Note that all magazines must comply, failing which Rule 6.2.5.1 will apply.

This might be overkill, but I'd rather improve all aspects of a rule in a single pass.

[Julien Boit]

The best way (in my opinion) to make a box is to use 5 pieces bolted together.

This is the kind of box we currently use in France and there are no issues about the corner which are 90 degrees.

Vince: You proposed the box to be certified as compliant with the rules by an RO.

I think that having the box certified and stamped by an official measurement office would save any discussion, and the hassle for the RO to show each shooter that the box is ok.

But also about the dimensions, why the box shouldn't be constructed to the highest measurements ?

I mean, a pistol could be compliant and measure, let's say 225.8 mm x 150.4 mm x 45.6 mm but it wouldn't fit a box at its nominal measurements.

But, according to the measurements, the pistol should be legal.

What would happen ?

[spook]

Interesting question Julien. I've always wondered about that. I always figured that if your gun was too big to fit the smallest box (-1mm), you would just be lucky if your gun was measured in a larger one.

[Ted Murphy]

vince,

Perhaps the answer is for IPSC to sell (or licence to sell) an affordable box that would be considered the official box to use.

Phil,

Any good cabinetmaker could make you a box 100% to dimensions, metric or not.

Ted

[Vince Pinto]

Vince: You proposed the box to be certified as compliant with the rules by an RO. I think that having the box certified and stamped by an official measurement office would save any discussion, and the hassle for the RO to show each shooter that the box is ok.

Now that would be overkill but, mon jeune ami, I'll make you an offer: You get Philippe Crochard and Alain Joly to agree that Société Générale de Surveillance (SGS) must measure and issue a certificate for all IPSC boxes used in France, and I'll propose the same idea to the Rules Committee. Bon chance!

But also about the dimensions, why the box shouldn't be constructed to the highest measurements ? I mean, a pistol could be compliant and measure, let's say 225.8 mm x 150.4 mm x 45.6 mm but it wouldn't fit a box at its nominal measurements.

The measurements are as stated in the rules (225mm x 150mm x 45mm), and all handguns must comply with those measurement. However we allow a +1mm and -0mm variance to allow for miniscule wiggle-room in construction of the box, not in respect of the dimensions of the gun.

Personally, I pushed for zero tolerance, but my Rules Committee colleagues beat me up and called me names.

[Vince Pinto]

Perhaps the answer is for IPSC to sell (or licence to sell) an affordable box that would be considered the official box to use.

Ted, I wholeheartedly agree, and I even asked my closest Filipino pal over a year ago to find a cigar box manufacturer in the Philippines willing to make them in cheap, yet beautiful Narra wood (see below) but, despite a few reminders, nothing happened (Myro, is your face red yet?).

However if somebody wants to take on this project and submit a proposal to IPSC, you'd certainly get my full support, but I'd like the box to also incorporate a mag measuring scale or device (140mm & 170mm) as well (possibly inside the lid), so that we can kill two birds with one stone.

[Yoda]

Vince: You proposed the box to be certified as compliant with the rules by an RO.

I think that having the box certified and stamped by an official measurement office would save any discussion, and the hassle for the RO to show each shooter that the box is ok.

Julien,

it is the RM who needs to approve the box, not the RO. If shooters are not satisfied with this they might try to bring it into arbitration. If we need to have every box certified by a neutral institute it will involve some major unnecessary costs for match organizers. (value of box just a few US$, certification costs US$100-200)

But also about the dimensions, why the box shouldn't be constructed to the highest measurements ?

I mean, a pistol could be compliant and measure, let's say 225.8 mm x 150.4 mm x 45.6 mm but it wouldn't fit a box at its nominal measurements.

But, according to the measurements, the pistol should be legal.

What would happen ?

The +1 mm tolerance is just for construction purposes. The max. measurements of the gun are perfectly clear (225x150x145mm). If the gun is larger than this but within the max. tolerance of the box measurements the competitor is lucky when he encounters a box on the largest side of the spectrum and not lucky if he encounters a box of the exact dimensions. In construction people always work with a little tolerance. If you insist on having zero tolerance in producing the boxes - it will become nearly impossible to produce those things and they will be very VERY VERY expensive. Bottomline - don't trust on your luck and stay within the max. measurements of the gun.

[schoonie]

Vince,

Add a humidifier and you win the Grand Prize!

My Dominican Coronas would have a very nice new home.

[NPSA 86-259]

Hey Vince, nice gun, less recoil I think, where can I buy a piece?

[Jon Merricks]

STI and SVI should copy that.

[Julien Boit]

Hey vince, there is just one official box around here, this might not be a big problem

So I believe to avoid the cost of having a box certified and stamped, the RM ( and not the RO thanks Mr Yoda ) should put a caliper just next to the box and measure the box whenever asked. Or the measurement should be written down by the RM each morning at the beginning of the day when he calibrates the Chrono.

[Skywalker]

So I believe to avoid the cost of having a box certified and stamped, the RM ( and not the RO thanks Mr Yoda  ) should put a caliper  just next to the box and measure the box whenever asked. Or the measurement should be written down by the RM each morning at the beginning of the day when he calibrates the Chrono.

Julien,

why each day? Do lighting and temperature conditions have that much influence on the box dimensions?

Seriously, I guess that if the RM measures it at the beginning of the match, and declares it complying with the rules, that should be enough.

The Chrono is a whole different issue, since there are too many factors that could result in different readings on different days, not the least of which is the presence of electronics inside it (and we know how touchy is that stuff... ).

[Julien Boit]

You're right Luca, once should be enough.

I just wanted to give the RM a little extra work

As for the chrono, I've never seen it settled up according to the procedure, at least here

[Skywalker]

ssshhh, don't tell anybody...neither here...

[Garfield]

And you guys wonder why French and Italian people have a certain reputation ...