Jump to content
Brian Enos's Forums... Maku mozo!

New Division Idea


ZackJones

Recommended Posts

What is so hard about mandating reloads between strings? I think that is a much more effective way to fix classifier problems than throwing them out. The argument about states not allowing high caps is bogus, because we still keep limited and open. I never said new shooters don't care about performance, but I don't think that the few guns that can't make the 15 rds should dictate the rules of a division. People from the crap states still shoot majors right? I don't care either way, I'll continue to shoot production. Revolver just got changed, so I don't think a division change in Prod would be that big a deal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 108
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Again, the idea is to make the Production division more accessible and convenient to new shooters. You are correct in that those 10-round States still have Limited and Open; however, generally speaking, it takes more work to navigate around those State laws in order to procure parts/equipment for those divisions. If you are new to USPSA and/or a new shooter in Kalifornia, and a casual shooter, it's likely much easier to shoot what you have or to buy what's readily available.

Production division used to be treated like a "red headed" step-child -- so I have heard -- because its low round-count and "inferior" equipment; and, the division was, and maybe still is, used to get new shooters in the door and then usher them to the other divisions. I've only been shooting about three years and PD has grown quite meaningfully during that period.

Although I have other issues with USPSA and the Production division, 10-round limit seems reasonable to me. If anything, blame those limiting States.

What is so hard about mandating reloads between strings? I think that is a much more effective way to fix classifier problems than throwing them out. The argument about states not allowing high caps is bogus, because we still keep limited and open. I never said new shooters don't care about performance, but I don't think that the few guns that can't make the 15 rds should dictate the rules of a division. People from the crap states still shoot majors right? I don't care either way, I'll continue to shoot production. Revolver just got changed, so I don't think a division change in Prod would be that big a deal.

Edited by justaute
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You're aware that only a handful of people shoot Revolver, and Production is one of the more popular divisions, right? So changing Production would impact more people than changing revolver would, and even still it was a hotly debated topic when they were deciding whether to try 8 rd minor in Revolver.

I agree about mandating reloads, but somehow the BOD missed that idea and they deleted about a dozen classifiers the other day. I'm afraid the same thing would happen again.

I don't know why this doesn't make sense, but 10 rd max states still have Limited and Open because a lot of those shooters have legacy magazines, or because they use loopholes to buy "parts" that they then assemble. New shooters don't have legacy magazines, and as an organization it's probably a bad idea to instruct people to skirt the law. Thus, to allow new shooters in those states it's a good idea to have a division they can readily jump into, and Production fits that bill nicely.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Right now there is a long list of guns that are competitive in Production. If you change the rules so that you can load to magazine capacity, it would obsolete any gun that isn't a 9mm, and put any gun that doesn't hold 18 rounds at a disadvantage. How would that be good for our sport?

What guns wouldn't be able to hold 15 rds that would be competitive and are on the list?

75b in 40? (oddly enough, that's what I shoot).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 rounds makes all the sense in the world.

No. It would alienate plenty of people in 10 round limit states who play in Production. It's just a preference by a few people who want to avoid a reload or two on a stage who can easily shoot Limited if they want to load up their magazines.

Now you go.

I think more highly of USPSA shooters in gun unfriendly states to believe that they would be alienated by less restrictive mag limits for matches in other, more hospitable climes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Again, the idea is to make the Production division more accessible and convenient to new shooters. You are correct in that those 10-round States still have Limited and Open; however, generally speaking, it takes more work to navigate around those State laws in order to procure parts/equipment for those divisions. If you are new to USPSA and/or a new shooter in Kalifornia, and a casual shooter, it's likely much easier to shoot what you have or to buy what's readily available.

Production division used to be treated like a "red headed" step-child -- so I have heard -- because its low round-count and "inferior" equipment; and, the division was, and maybe still is, used to get new shooters in the door and then usher them to the other divisions. I've only been shooting about three years and PD has grown quite meaningfully during that period.

Although I have other issues with USPSA and the Production division, 10-round limit seems reasonable to me. If anything, blame those limiting States.

What is so hard about mandating reloads between strings? I think that is a much more effective way to fix classifier problems than throwing them out. The argument about states not allowing high caps is bogus, because we still keep limited and open. I never said new shooters don't care about performance, but I don't think that the few guns that can't make the 15 rds should dictate the rules of a division. People from the crap states still shoot majors right? I don't care either way, I'll continue to shoot production. Revolver just got changed, so I don't think a division change in Prod would be that big a deal.

I would rather "blame" organization that impose rules tied to over zealous gun regulation in areas where those regulations do not exist.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

People laugh and joke and stomp their feet and cry when these type of threads surface and it's all in good fun.

But, with that said, I'm serious about Production Optic

Production Optic is the only other division I'd ever consider. It is becoming hugely popular with the carry crowd and will only continue to grow. Couple that with the fact that our membership is also maturing and the benefits of less recoil and easy to see sights speak for themselves.

I believe that USPSA will address this at some point. It just makes too much sense and the growth opportunity for this type of division is huge. It's one division that has the potential to draw some new shooters and actually KEEP shooters that otherwise might hang it up due to some of the physical demands of our sport.

PRODUCTION OPTIC

How would the physical demands be less in this then open?

In Open the recoil is straight back into the hand. Muzzle flip is negated by the comp, but the hand and wrist can still take a pounding. I know (at 46) that a mousefart production load of 130pf in a properly sprung production gun is very pleasant to shoot compared to my Open blaster shooting 173 PF loads.

I've heard it said jokingly that we all end up in Open (our eyes age) if we shoot long enough. Well, other things change too, like muscle density and strength.

This isn't a change of a division, it's an add, frankly, it could replace Limited 10 if we want to keep a set amount of divisions. It could also use any pistol, but limit capacity to 10 rounds, so.........

1911's and polymer types could compete side by side. There are a ton of ways to do it. I believe the possibilities are endless, but could be worked out easily enough.

This is going to happen.

It's completely logical and would be a win for older aging competitors and newer folks that might CC an optic mounted pistol. Plus, let's not forget, there is also a whole bunch of shooters that would do it because it's different and or they already have a gun set up for it.

As an almost exclusive Open shooter myself, I can think of some good reasons.

I'd do it just because the idea of shooting a nice soft production type load using an optic is very appealing to me. I could switch to lead, save a little $, shoot a little more, explore different stage breakdowns, really practice my reloads, etc, etc, etc....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While I would love a Production Optics div I was also serious about changing the Production div to allow you to fill your production mags to their capacity. I don't understand how the division can mandate that you must leave your gun in basically a production configuration but then artificially limit how many rds you can put in the stock mag? What does limiting the number of rds you can put in the mag have to do with it being Production representative or not? Who buys a Glock 19 and only loads 10 rds in it (in the non socialist states of course)?

Maybe by the time I'm ready to switch to Open, Production Optic will be a reality and i won't have to switch ....

You know how Production is an arms race, with everybody clamoring to get the new CZ/Tanfo hotness? Now imagine that it starts all over again with everyone trying to get the new Production gun that holds 20 rounds in a factory mag instead of just 17. This happened once before, and that's why IPSC stipulated 15 rounds in the first place. If you can believe it, at one point the Para LDA was the hot ticket because of mag capacity. Do we really want that to happen again?

Why hasn't USPSA adopted the 15 round capacity limit for production?

Not kosher in all states

Not all guns capable of meeting production division equipment rules are capable of holding 15 -- trust me this matters to the weekly match MD who has newbies showing up with Glock 23s, Beretta .40s, Sig 220s, etc.

Why fix what isn't broken?

I don't think that is a valid argument. Each division has allowances that make certain guns or gear more advantageous. 15 rounds is not keeping a new shooter with any of those guns from being competitive. And when a shooter is at the level where it is hindering their competitive ability, time for them to buck up and play the game for real. Production may be the entry level, and cheapest, and blah, blah.....but ammo and components are the real expense, and is what truly sets the level on the playing field.

OK. So shoot a six shot revolver in Production for a while, or a Glock 36 with standard mags, or just load mags of the gun you choose to 6 rounds only, and see how competitive you'll be going up against guns that hold four more rounds......

When I look at the six divisions from a match director's perspective, I see very few guns that wouldn't find a close to ideal fit in one of our divisions. That's an asset for growing the sport. We should be careful with making changes that could upset that balance. More than that, Production has grown significantly in the last 12 years, to the point where in some parts of the country it beats Open and Limited for most popular division, and in others its in second place (usually behind Limited and ahead of Open).

What exactly would the sport gain by making the change? Not you personally -- but the sport as a whole?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 rounds makes all the sense in the world.

No. It would alienate plenty of people in 10 round limit states who play in Production. It's just a preference by a few people who want to avoid a reload or two on a stage who can easily shoot Limited if they want to load up their magazines.

Now you go.

I think more highly of USPSA shooters in gun unfriendly states to believe that they would be alienated by less restrictive mag limits for matches in other, more hospitable climes.

Then I guess you've never run a match in those states......

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's the point I was trying to make belt jones. Allowing mags loaded up will simply lead to a production mag race.

There are plenty of divisions as is. Nothing is stopping the shooter from using a glock etc in limited and simply throwing on a magwell and some extensions and going.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 rounds makes all the sense in the world.

No. It would alienate plenty of people in 10 round limit states who play in Production. It's just a preference by a few people who want to avoid a reload or two on a stage who can easily shoot Limited if they want to load up their magazines.

Now you go.

I think more highly of USPSA shooters in gun unfriendly states to believe that they would be alienated by less restrictive mag limits for matches in other, more hospitable climes.

Then I guess you've never run a match in those states......

No, but I once told a guy from New York hoe I always loaded fifteen rounds in my G19 magazine and got no adverse reaction from him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 rounds makes all the sense in the world.

No. It would alienate plenty of people in 10 round limit states who play in Production. It's just a preference by a few people who want to avoid a reload or two on a stage who can easily shoot Limited if they want to load up their magazines.

Now you go.

I think more highly of USPSA shooters in gun unfriendly states to believe that they would be alienated by less restrictive mag limits for matches in other, more hospitable climes.

Then I guess you've never run a match in those states......

No, but I once told a guy from New York hoe I always loaded fifteen rounds in my G19 magazine and got no adverse reaction from him.

Is this a non-sequitur? What point are you trying to make?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

IMHO 15 rounds in production wouldn't make much difference. It might make a difference if you have multiple positions with few shots, but in the average match where each shooting position has close to eight shots it won't make much difference. If you can't reload your gun between ports in production you are not going to compete. Many, perhaps most, shooters agree that reloading at slide lock can be a bad thing. To take full advantage of 15+1 you would have to reload at slide lock. If you need seven make-up shots you are not going to compete. Good production shooters would dump on the ground a magazine with six or seven rounds instead of a magazine with one or two rounds in it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

People in New York get to sleigh riding several months a year.

Those living in Texas have the opportunity only rarely.

Do you believe New Yorkers should be banned from sleigh riding unless it is snowing in Texas?

Ok, I see the point you're trying to make. However, can you address the following:

1. Why is expanding mag capacity to 15 rounds a good idea? What net benefit will it have for the sport?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1. Why is expanding mag capacity to 15 rounds a good idea? What net benefit will it have for the sport?

I believe the OP wasn't as high as y'all are making at seem. His idea wasn't completely sound, because those who disagree are correct----His idea for a new division was too much like limited. But we do have a Limited 10 and Limited. I think it would be nice to have a Production and Production 10.

Look at it like this:

Another division like this would increase the purchase of gear and guns, which supports the industry in which we need. If nothing else, it would increase the "economy" of the shooting industry and further generate the life system of the sport we are all passionate about. And just like the Modified Division, if it isn't worth the effort, surely it can be eliminated without any damage being done to the integrity of the sport.

But the argument of the one's who are "anti" is that it not only would it not help the sport grow in any way, but it would have a negative impact. I very much disagree with that.

So I return the question in in a different light....

How much of a net benefit could something like this have? *

Modified as a division failed. But it wasn't a total failure. The organization attempted to broaden the sport. I'm sure the people who played it had a good time. It wasn't a loss. I doubt anyone quit playing the game because the new division was introduced, the sport didn't crumble because it didn't last.

The same can be said about this idea. I think it has nothing but potential, whether it remains or fades. It is a possible gain, and nothing else.

"It is better to try and to fail than to fail to try and forever experience the inestimable loss of what might have been."

I'm sure we could come up with a way to keep it from being an equipment race, and make it a fun and desirable mode of play for the courses we shoot. I see no harm in it, and would even venture to say that, broken into two divisions, could rival the player numbers in Lim-Lim 10 combined, in a few short years.

It could be the poor man's gun racing.

Edited by jabbermurph
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So basically your answer is, "why not?"

I think that is a oversimplification of a complex and fairly sound proposition I just made. But even so, what could you offer as an equally complex and fairly sound rebuttle? A reason to simply say "not?"

One thing to keep in mind, this isn't the politics of our current national environment. "If you don't like your new division, you don't have to keep your new division," is something that holds true to this organization. There is no mandate that it must stay.

I think it is a good idea, but if it wasn't I would have no problem admitting it.

But if it were to happen, and it did work.....would you be able to accept that your argument is wrong?

Not a personal joust----just trying to get you and others to open up to changes of this nature. I'm not trying to create a USPSA welfare program, so I don't feel like there should be such an iron gate of opposition. Just trying to be diplomatic, I suppose.

:cheers:

Edited by jabbermurph
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The NY/Texas sleigh-ride example is not a good one.

- Weather is a result of mother-nature. Gun-control laws are not. If NY people don't like the laws, then vote for those politicians with a different political-lean. If that doesn't work, then those who chose to live in that state should live with the consequence.

- USPSA, to the best of my knowledge, is trying to grow (LOL) and be as inclusive as possible. Thus, it has adopted the lowest common denominator, which is a 10-round law. I guess anything fewer than 10 would work, but obviously we want the maximum allowed.

- Do we want USPSA to publicly circumvent local/state laws? If I'm a noob in CA and want to shoot USPSA, generally speaking, I want to use what's readily available and easily accessible.

This is already getting tiresome. Y'all have fun debating.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...