CDPMatt Posted February 17, 2014 Share Posted February 17, 2014 "Because Wilson doesn't make a .40. Dumb, but yeah, that's the reason." I suggest you check the Wilson Combat website. They make several models in .40 S&W caliber. Yeah, get 'em to make one.... Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
45 Raven Posted February 17, 2014 Share Posted February 17, 2014 (edited) Are you saying that Wilson will not make a .40 if ordered, or sell one if available? There's one for sale here: http://www.covecreekoutfitters.com/gun-room/wilson-combat-classic-stainless-1911-40-s-w-with-upgrades Edited February 17, 2014 by 45 Raven Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steel1212 Posted February 17, 2014 Share Posted February 17, 2014 Actually....it's not. It's unavailable lol. I've never seen a Wilson in .40. I've seen them in all the other calibers though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
45 Raven Posted February 17, 2014 Share Posted February 17, 2014 I was told by Wilson some time back that .40 S&W 1911's make up around 7-8% of their orders, but they will make them if ordered. I admit I haven't tried to order one, but have seen one and a couple for sale on the internet. I'll back out of this discussion now at the risk of being more argumentative. I agree that it seems silly that .40 S&W, .45GAP, and 10mm pistols are not allowed in CDP Division, but hold different opinions on the reasons that it is that way. One of the most common-sense approaches seems to be the suggestion mentioned earlier in this thread to have major and minor autos and major and minor revolvers. But then I also think that IDPA is missing the boat by not encouraging the use of red dot sights that are now the size that can be used for daily carry as well as competition with a conventional holster. If they want to help improve defensive shooting and be part of its development, they should be receptive to technology. Oh well, back to other subjects! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chills1994 Posted February 17, 2014 Share Posted February 17, 2014 When this Tiger Teams thing was announced a year plus ago, I mentioned that we could just go to 4 divisions: 1. MAJSAP (major power factored semi auto pistol) 2. MINSAP 3. MAJREV 4. MINREV MAJSAP would be 165 PF plus and loaded to 8+1 MINSAP would be 125 to 164.99 PF loaded to 10+1 If you have a Colt Delta Elite, or a Kimber 10mm, or a Glock 20 you're just SOL. Makes sense. They lowered the ssp times to faster than CDP times so they obviously think they are close enough. If somebody was of an entrepeneurial nature ( no, not me!), given IDPA's recent "hiccups", such a person could use those 4 divisions listed above to design a shooting sport that say had time plus scoring with maybe a smaller cardboard target, 2 hits anywhere in the brown = neutralized, and allowed people to reload while on the move, that sport/organization might just take off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Watson Posted February 17, 2014 Share Posted February 17, 2014 I note that there is only a one second increment ESP to SSP to CDP expert, two second total spread, less than 2%. Likewise ESR to SSR. I guess you would have to offer two automatic divisions to keep the big bores busy, but I would shoot all revolvers together with the provision that moon clipped ammo had to make Major, speedloader did not. There are not enough revolver shooters to support two divisions and that is the only way I can think of to keep .38s and .45s in the New Game. There are enough outlaw matches sprouting up that somebody might well go this way. But I do not see a new sanctioning organization doing well, IDSA and TSA did not go far the last time somebody thought he was smarter than Bill Wilson. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tbarker13 Posted February 19, 2014 Share Posted February 19, 2014 (edited) I asked Joyce Wilson about this during an email exchange last summer.I don't feel comfortable posting her entire email, but she said they surveyed every match director around the world about a bunch of issues, including the .40 cal debate. This part I will quote from Joyce:"We found that while .40 is big in foreign countries and LE, less than 2% (if I remember correctly) shoot that caliber in the US."I'm not exactly sure how that justifies the decision not to include .40 in CDP, but that was her explanation. I'm assuming she means that less than 2 percent of IDPA shooters use .40 in matches. Of course, that number might grow, if we had the option of shooting it in CDP.But as has been said. It's really just as simple as: They own the game. They make the rules. Then each of us will decide if its worth playing. Edited February 19, 2014 by tbarker13 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alma Posted February 19, 2014 Share Posted February 19, 2014 Yeah, 2% sounds way too low. Since such a fuss is made about keeping .40 out of CDP then I can only imagine the heartburn over optics. I would love to see defensive optics incorporated into a division as it might dramatically improve the market and art of incorporating micro dots into slides of "combat" handguns. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
v1911 Posted February 20, 2014 Share Posted February 20, 2014 I don't see where .40 would have any advantage over .45. There would still be a capacity limit. And it's going to be a softer recoil making 165pf with .45 vs .40. There's only 2 shooters with .40s at my club. Both shoot SSP. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IHAVEGAS Posted February 20, 2014 Share Posted February 20, 2014 Because your favorite USPSA gun could then also be your favorite CDP gun. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steel1212 Posted February 20, 2014 Share Posted February 20, 2014 Because your favorite USPSA gun could then also be your favorite CDP gun. Well thats obviously why I want to do it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigdawgbeav Posted February 20, 2014 Share Posted February 20, 2014 The answer is obvious... God Himself handed down the. 45acp to John Browning. That is all anyone needs to know. Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sandbagger123 Posted February 20, 2014 Share Posted February 20, 2014 i would love to be able to shoot .40 in CDP. I can get .40 brass cheaper and easier. Have you priced 45 brass or tried to scrounge it? .40 like 9 is plentiful and cheap due to police use. I can also load one case for use in my 2011 and 1911. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
v1911 Posted February 20, 2014 Share Posted February 20, 2014 So I can see why the decision to make CDP .45 only was to protect its validity. From some of the responses as to why we want to run .40, it would do to .45 in IDPA CDP what 9mm did to the 38 super in USPSA Open. Is that a fair assumption? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GmanCdp Posted February 20, 2014 Share Posted February 20, 2014 yes that is correct, plus the 40 @ 165pf has a different kick/pulse to it and nobody that has a 40 will run 165pf at a monthly match around here.. Or so that I have noticed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steel1212 Posted February 21, 2014 Share Posted February 21, 2014 yes that is correct, plus the 40 @ 165pf has a different kick/pulse to it and nobody that has a 40 will run 165pf at a monthly match around here.. Or so that I have noticed. So your saying if .40 was let in CDP it would make the .45 extinct in the division? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rgkeller Posted February 21, 2014 Share Posted February 21, 2014 Probably because of something a SEAL said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GmanCdp Posted February 21, 2014 Share Posted February 21, 2014 I would say in most states the 40 would take over CDP in less then a year. I've shot and owned the 45acp for a little more than 40 yrs,and is the only reason I don't own a 40.. But that doesn't mean I've not shot a 40, which does pulse a good bit different then the 45..if the 40 got into CDP, I would buy one ,but till then I don't need one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steel1212 Posted February 21, 2014 Share Posted February 21, 2014 I just don't see it. .45 is still more popular is SS in USPSA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GmanCdp Posted February 21, 2014 Share Posted February 21, 2014 Take the great shooting state of Az and along with Ga,Al,Tn,Mo,Il,In,Oh and I think the 45 would be a minority in CDP.. I wouldn't dare say TEXAS, cause I would get a good whooping next time I shot there.. Seems as if the 165pf is a sweet spot for the 40.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IHAVEGAS Posted February 21, 2014 Share Posted February 21, 2014 In truth, it really ain't no thang. 40 is fun in esp & ssp, if the powers that be and/or some members with a traditional tint want a 45 acp class for traditions sake, what the heck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xdcr Posted February 21, 2014 Share Posted February 21, 2014 I asked Joyce Wilson about this during an email exchange last summer. I don't feel comfortable posting her entire email, but she said they surveyed every match director around the world about a bunch of issues, including the .40 cal debate. This part I will quote from Joyce: "We found that while .40 is big in foreign countries and LE, less than 2% (if I remember correctly) shoot that caliber in the US." I'm not exactly sure how that justifies the decision not to include .40 in CDP, but that was her explanation. I'm assuming she means that less than 2 percent of IDPA shooters use .40 in matches. Of course, that number might grow, if we had the option of shooting it in CDP. But as has been said. It's really just as simple as: They own the game. They make the rules. Then each of us will decide if its worth playing. 2% can't be right under any consideration. There must be more than that just in IDPA production not to mention a significant percentage in USPSA single stack. Hell, even GSSF, for what its worth, probably has more than 2% in 40. What is she talking about? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guns_and_labs Posted February 21, 2014 Share Posted February 21, 2014 It would be nice to have the same single stack in both USPSA and IDPA, which for me would be .40 (due to brass cost and loading simplicity). Or I could even start using my carry 10mm in IDPA... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steel1212 Posted February 21, 2014 Share Posted February 21, 2014 Or I could even start using my carry 10mm in IDPA... No way man carry guns arnt allowed ..... ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tbarker13 Posted February 22, 2014 Share Posted February 22, 2014 I asked Joyce Wilson about this during an email exchange last summer. I don't feel comfortable posting her entire email, but she said they surveyed every match director around the world about a bunch of issues, including the .40 cal debate. This part I will quote from Joyce: "We found that while .40 is big in foreign countries and LE, less than 2% (if I remember correctly) shoot that caliber in the US." I'm not exactly sure how that justifies the decision not to include .40 in CDP, but that was her explanation. I'm assuming she means that less than 2 percent of IDPA shooters use .40 in matches. Of course, that number might grow, if we had the option of shooting it in CDP. But as has been said. It's really just as simple as: They own the game. They make the rules. Then each of us will decide if its worth playing. 2% can't be right under any consideration. There must be more than that just in IDPA production not to mention a significant percentage in USPSA single stack. Hell, even GSSF, for what its worth, probably has more than 2% in 40. What is she talking about? It does seem like a strange figure. We were arguing about a few things - primarily I was seeking a better understanding of why they changed to the standing reloads, so I never really pressed her on .40 cal numbers. Maybe the MDs who responded don't have a good grasp of what their people are shooting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now