Production gun approval and/or list

[The Antichrome]

I was speaking of a third party arbitration. Where another competitor might arbitrate gear that they believe is not legal. That did not happen, but it could have. I saw this brought up on forums before the match was over. I suppose it is easier/safer to talk about it here than the do an arb.

Or at least cheaper. No one would expect to win a 3rd party Arb vs. a celebrity competitor and their big money sponsor.

The illegal gun didnt make much of a difference, why risk $100 over 100th place?

I don't really get the bold text from Flexmoney. It's similar to what Vince Pinto always writes on the Global Village whenever someone implies something untoward happened at a world shoot.

Please note that I put that part of his text in bold...because that was the specific part to which I was responding.

[Nik Habicht]

I just looked. The gun still isn't on the list.

It would make for an interesting arbitration, I'd think.

What arbitration? There is no arbitrating the move to open. 6.2.5.2 anyone?

6.2.5.2 A competitor who is classified or reclassified as above must be notified as soon as possible. The Range Master’s decision on these matters is final.

I was speaking of a third party arbitration. Where another competitor might arbitrate gear that they believe is not legal. That did not happen, but it could have. I saw this brought up on forums before the match was over. I suppose it is easier/safer to talk about it here than the do an arb.

I'm not sure that can go to arb either. Certainly the appeal can go to the RM, who should investigate, and then make a determination.....

Reading 6.2.5 has me thinking that's totally up to the RM -- but I could be wrong.....

[matgyver]

Something needs to be done to clarify the whole list.

For Glocks, it seems as though they go by model number only. It's odd that Gen 4's are listed separately, considering there's no definition between Gen 1, 2, nor 3. Then again, depending on when you bought a Gen 4 they started coming with beaver tail grip adapters....then what about FDE or OD Gen 3 or 4 guns. They are not listed but we see them at all levels of competition.

You may say that color makes no difference in the eyes of the rules appendix 4, 21.2a, but that's in regards to REFINISHING a gun. Not a factory finish.

So then we look at other guns on the list, take Sig for example: the 226 USPSA two tone is listed separate from the black? They list different weights, but not sure if those specs are 100% accurate. Then we see the P226R 34oz, and a P226R two tone 34oz.

Beretta section says (Inox versions of approved models allowed)

So if we are following the list, green and tan Glocks are not allowed, you must have an original "no gen" glock because gen 2 and 3 aren't on the list. Or a new Gen 4, just has to be black? If this is the case we'd have A LOT of new open shooters!

Or we say The base model is GTG, we don't care the color....you know we tacticool guys love fde and od and don't want to be left out. We've got a guy buying a sig 229 elite scorpion. The gun says "P229 Elite"...that's all, does it pass the test...the Elite is on the list and the scorpion is the same gun, different color. Same thing goes for most manufacturers.

Edited October 30, 2013 by matgyver

[bikerburgess]

Something needs to be done to clarify the whole list.

For Glocks, it seems as though they go by model number only. It's odd that Gen 4's are listed separately, considering there's no definition between Gen 1, 2, nor 3. Then again, depending on when you bought a Gen 4 they started coming with beaver tail grip adapters....then what about FDE or OD Gen 3 or 4 guns. They are not listed but we see them at all levels of competition.

You may say that color makes no difference in the eyes of the rules appendix 4, 21.2a, but that's in regards to REFINISHING a gun. Not a factory finish.

So then we look at other guns on the list, take Sig for example: the 226 USPSA two tone is listed separate from the black? They list different weights, but not sure if those specs are 100% accurate. Then we see the P226R 34oz, and a P226R two tone 34oz.

Beretta section says (Inox versions of approved models allowed)

So if we are following the list, green and tan Glocks are not allowed, you must have an original "no gen" glock because gen 2 and 3 aren't on the list. Or a new Gen 4, just has to be black? If this is the case we'd have A LOT of new open shooters!

Or we say The base model is GTG, we don't care the color....you know we tacticool guys love fde and od and don't want to be left out. We've got a guy buying a sig 229 elite scorpion. The gun says "P229 Elite"...that's all, does it pass the test...the Elite is on the list and the scorpion is the same gun, different color. Same thing goes for most manufacturers.

This is why I think the list has out lived it's usefulness. YOu need to have lots of knowledge about many of the guns on or possibly not on the list to be able to know if any particular gun is legal in the state that it is presented for inspection. If we just had to make sure the gun met the basic specifications for the division (action type, size, sights) then anyone could accurately in force the rules. And no one would get exited every time a factory shooter shows up with a new or old model.

Mike

[beltjones]

A list is still very useful in that it prevents factory shooters from showing up with a new model (that may be advantageous, though in recent history probably has not been) and competing with it. This was probably an actual problem once upon a time before the mags were restricted to 10 rounds, and before basically everyone was shooting a tricked out Production gun.

The list, as it is currently administered, is not useful at all. That is probably the reason most ROs don't use it at the chrono station.

Making the list useful for the chrono guys to check competitors' equipment for compliance should probably be priority #1 when it comes to maintaining such a list. A table organized by make / model with approved submodels / calibers listed would be helpful. There could be fields for weight, barrel length, safety configurations, or other relevant data.

[Ben Stoeger]

This is why I think the list has out lived it's usefulness. YOu need to have lots of knowledge about many of the guns on or possibly not on the list to be able to know if any particular gun is legal in the state that it is presented for inspection. If we just had to make sure the gun met the basic specifications for the division (action type, size, sights) then anyone could accurately in force the rules. And no one would get exited every time a factory shooter shows up with a new or old model.

I have always kind of liked the idea of approving a gun for the division, then having it on a list. When a shooter is purchasing a gun, they can then check the gun against the list to make sure it works for Production. It seems simple and fair to me.

[56hawk]

On a similar note, I shot a match with an HK P7M13. The production list only says P7, but there are a lot of different variants. How are you suppose to know which are legal and which aren't?

[matgyver]

This is why I think the list has out lived it's usefulness. YOu need to have lots of knowledge about many of the guns on or possibly not on the list to be able to know if any particular gun is legal in the state that it is presented for inspection. If we just had to make sure the gun met the basic specifications for the division (action type, size, sights) then anyone could accurately in force the rules. And no one would get exited every time a factory shooter shows up with a new or old model.

I have always kind of liked the idea of approving a gun for the division, then having it on a list. When a shooter is purchasing a gun, they can then check the gun against the list to make sure it works for Production. It seems simple and fair to me.

BUT...there are guns allowed that are not on the list!

Seems simple and fair on paper, but the current state is far from that.

A list that is simple would be complete and clear and used at every event. We know that is not happening.

Factory shooters with guns not on the list (nor truly available to the US public)..is that fair?

I think the fact that it is the manufacturer's responsibility to put new models on the list is what has us in this this current state. Not all manufacturers understand the sales power of having the gun on the list, or know that the list even exists.

Like you I like the "idea or intention" of the list. I just wish it worked.

Edited October 31, 2013 by matgyver

[Strick]

I think the list and all the headaches that comes with it cause more problems then it is worth. I like the simple "if it weighs under 'x' and fits in the box, has a DA, DA/SA, or striker" it is good for Production. And this is from a Glock shooter so it isn't so that I can run my unobtanium tanfoCZsphynx.

I don't even have a problem with 1911's, sans magwell, playing in production.

[matgyver]

I don't even have a problem with 1911's, sans magwell, playing in production.

Hold your horses there! Unless you mean they would be scored minor as well, and triggers are required to be 7+ pounds and you must start hammer down....

[Strick]

Scored minor and start as normal for a 1911. If you want to give up a magwell and reload into a crack just to get a nice trigger........fine by me. A CZ only has a penalty on one shot (not every reload) to get a trigger pretty damn close to what a 1911 is and still gets a decent sized mag opening.

[Ben Stoeger]

This is why I think the list has out lived it's usefulness. YOu need to have lots of knowledge about many of the guns on or possibly not on the list to be able to know if any particular gun is legal in the state that it is presented for inspection. If we just had to make sure the gun met the basic specifications for the division (action type, size, sights) then anyone could accurately in force the rules. And no one would get exited every time a factory shooter shows up with a new or old model.

I have always kind of liked the idea of approving a gun for the division, then having it on a list. When a shooter is purchasing a gun, they can then check the gun against the list to make sure it works for Production. It seems simple and fair to me.

BUT...there are guns allowed that are not on the list!

Seems simple and fair on paper, but the current state is far from that.

That is kind of my feeling as well. I don't know if the solution is to clarify the list or change the entire process. In any event, I think it is important to be able to quickly determine if a specific model of gun is legal or not.

Edited November 1, 2013 by Ben Stoeger

[bikerburgess]

This is why I think the list has out lived it's usefulness. YOu need to have lots of knowledge about many of the guns on or possibly not on the list to be able to know if any particular gun is legal in the state that it is presented for inspection. If we just had to make sure the gun met the basic specifications for the division (action type, size, sights) then anyone could accurately in force the rules. And no one would get exited every time a factory shooter shows up with a new or old model.

I have always kind of liked the idea of approving a gun for the division, then having it on a list. When a shooter is purchasing a gun, they can then check the gun against the list to make sure it works for Production. It seems simple and fair to me.

BUT...there are guns allowed that are not on the list!

Seems simple and fair on paper, but the current state is far from that.

That is kind of my feeling as well. I don't know if the solution is to clarify the list or change the entire process. In any event, I think it is important to be able to quickly determine if a specific model of gun is legal or not.

I think it is just as important that no expertise on a particular gun be required to be able to tell if it's legal or not.

[JakeMartens]

The list is needed

but the list needs to be maintained and updated and needs to be something that is easy to follow and not have all these holes in it when it comes to variations of models.

Simply put the guy that we pay to do this needs to do a better job of maintaining it and make it easily available and up to date, maybe not monthly but at least quarterly so RM's and competitors can refer to it and know what is what

[bikerburgess]

The problem is identifying it as an on the list gun is only half the battle. What are ALL the legal modifications to every gun on the list? Do you expect that RO'S and RM'S will have that info?

[bthoefer]

The list is needed

but the list needs to be maintained and updated and needs to be something that is easy to follow and not have all these holes in it when it comes to variations of models.

Simply put the guy that we pay to do this needs to do a better job of maintaining it and make it easily available and up to date, maybe not monthly but at least quarterly so RM's and competitors can refer to it and know what is what

The big problem with the production list is that nroi has failed to keep it updated and enforced properly. The list is a good idea but needs better execution.

[bikerburgess]

How do you execute it so not only can any RO identify a specific model of a gun is on the list but also every part on the gun is legal?

[Nik Habicht]

Downloadable .pdf with hi-resolution color photographs of the guns. Dump that to a phone or tablet, and you have a reference for chrono......

Appendix D4 covers most of the mods by separating them into two categories: The ones you can see with the gun in battery -- which are typically limited to stock parts with minor exceptions (the guiderod is considered internal, even if you can see the tip of it) and the ones you can't where almost anything goes......

[bikerburgess]

I can see how that would work but it would be a massive project to put together and maintain. I just don't see what we gain over a simple set of criteria that is easy to enforce.

[Whoops!]

The list is outdated with current product and rules. So, I can only have a beveled mag opening if I spend the money on an expensive factory production gun with a beveled mag opening,but can't modify a lower priced version to have the exact same mag opening? So, I can have a 1 and a half pound single action along with my 5 pound double action first shot, even though no gun has ever come from the factory like this? So, I can't have a metal frame on my glock, but I can have an all steel anything on the list? The factory finish argument makes sense as well.

There are three main divisions now, Open, Limited, and Enhanced Production. I think they should call them what they are and enforce rules as such. There's no longer a factory class as was once intended . . . It's pretty much what happened to Nascar, lol. If you keep making guns with modifications that were once restricted to limited legal, you cease having a class that makes sense.

Edited November 6, 2013 by Whoops!

[Nik Habicht]

If you keep making guns with modifications that were once restricted to limited legal, you cease having a class that makes sense.

Depends perhaps on how you define the division.....

If you definition includes:

Looks like a production gun

DA/SA/DAO/Striker fired, no SA guns allowed

2000 units produced and available to the general public

10 round mag capacity limit

No dots, comps, or optics

Holster and mag pouch position restricted

That provides me with a clear picture of a division that's different than Limited. I've often said that the major thing USPSA got wrong when creating the division was the selection of it's name.....

And I've always maintained that asking the people attracted to this sport not to modify their guns, is a massive misunderstanding of the target audience....

[Whoops!]

That's my point, don't call it production if it ain't. Then the question arises, should there be an actual production class?

[Nik Habicht]

That's my point, don't call it production if it ain't. Then the question arises, should there be an actual production class?

Nope. USPSA shooters by nature will want to tinker/tweak -- trying to prohibit that totally probably won't work.....

[bikerburgess]

If you keep making guns with modifications that were once restricted to limited legal, you cease having a class that makes sense.

Depends perhaps on how you define the division.....

If you definition includes:

Looks like a production gun

DA/SA/DAO/Striker fired, no SA guns allowed

2000 units produced and available to the general public

10 round mag capacity limit

No dots, comps, or optics

Holster and mag pouch position restricted

That provides me with a clear picture of a division that's different than Limited. I've often said that the major thing USPSA got wrong when creating the division was the selection of it's name.....

And I've always maintained that asking the people attracted to this sport not to modify their guns, is a massive misunderstanding of the target audience....

Nick

Other than the "looks like a production gun" and the hard/impossible to verify min production run I think you have outlined a nice set of rules for "Production" division that even I could enforce correctly to all shooters on all guns.

Mike

[JAFO]

I can see how that would work but it would be a massive project to put together and maintain. I just don't see what we gain over a simple set of criteria that is easy to enforce.

This does seem like a better approach.

Sig, for one, is notorious for having a different model for every little cosmetic change in a gun. There are 36 variations of the 226 on the Production gun list!! A few have significant differences in the frames (beavertail vs standard, aluminum vs stainless steel) and triggers (DA/SA vs DAO vs DAK). I can understand pointing out that those are all acceptable. But most of the model designations only differ with regard to slide/frame finish, grips, sights, melt treatments, and coatings. Some are listed only for caliber differences.

And then Sig will have small T&E runs of maybe less than 100 guns with specific customer specs. For all intents and purposes, they are like every other 226, just a unique combination of coatings, sights, grips, rails, etc. But when they're released to the public for sale later, they're just marketed as P226's. You could be competing with one in Production and not know they never made 2,000 guns with that specific configuration.

An allowable feature list would make it a lot easier, even if the list was still maintained for the purpose of manufacturers submitting their proof of 2,000 guns produced.

Edited November 7, 2013 by JAFO