Ron Ankeny Posted December 21, 2004 Share Posted December 21, 2004 It is my understanding Robar is adding the beavertail for SA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary Stevens Posted December 21, 2004 Share Posted December 21, 2004 I heard that also, but they are adding it prior to it being sold from the factory, a sub-contractor so to speak,correct? Much like other aftermarket companies make parts for gun companies to complete into a final product prior to selling it to the public. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flexmoney Posted December 21, 2004 Share Posted December 21, 2004 Gary, I'll play devil's advocate here... If SA wishes to produce a model of their XD with a beavertail and others without it, then they will... Right. No problem there. But, lets see it listed as a specific "model" and then have that model looked at for approval on the Production Gun List. ...some models of guns have different features than others, i.e Glock 34 and 35 have slotted longer slides and other models don't. Agreed. And, these are specific models that are on the approved gun list. I would say all XD's are XD's Hmmmm...so, as long as they stamp "XD" on the side...anything goes? ...just like all Glocks are Glocks with some having different features. Well, maybe not. The Glocks are listed by the specific model. The XD's were aded to the list as "XD models"...kinda generic. But, at the time "XD" was enough to covered the bases. And, not all Glock make the cut. The G24 is out. And, so is the G17L. On top of that, Amidon has said that you can't put a 9mm barrel in a G35, because Glock doesn't make a G35 in 9mm. (Just pointing out that the precedent has been set to be "model specific".) The only thing to consider, IMO, is the numbers of XD's produced, and are they available to the general public. I agree completely. But, we lost that from the rule book when we went to the "approved list". (And, I think there are guns on the list that don't meet those requirements.) If SA makes them available to the general public, then they seem to me to be good to go. That was what I was asking...if they have done so. From some of the links, it kinda looks like they might have a model out call the "Tactical Pro". If so, shouldn't that model be considered on it's individual merits? Just like the Glocks? (BTW, I couldn't find that gun on Springfield's website...don't know if that means much.) If Glock, for instance, were to bring out a Glock with an extended beaver tail from the factory, then it would be a factory item, and legal, IMO, for Production Division. Well sure...I could go with that...IF they came out with it as a new model. But, if they take an existing model and doctor it up with "external modifications" thru a custom shop...then I don't think that fits into Production. (IMO) I just can't see "Custome Shop" as equal to "Production". As for special new models being a win-win.... I am not really sure about that either (devil's advocate hat still on). If they truely mass produce the models...then that should be OK. But, I don't think we want Production Division associated with the...you gotta have special/expensive guns to shoot that IPSC stuff... type of thinking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary Stevens Posted December 21, 2004 Share Posted December 21, 2004 The production numbers are part of the "approval" process and still in effect, even though they are not in the current rule book. SA has not asked for approval at this time, and who knows what they will call it if and when they do. Regardless it will still be a base XD with a few bell's and whistles on it. To answer your question about "anything goes", well yes and no. If it fits within the rules, then yes. For instance we have no rule that says mag wells are illegal per say. So if a company wanted to produce a pistol with a nice mag well included from the factory, and all other things being equal (rule wise), then IMO they would be OK. Of course John gets first bite at these approval things, and then we (the BOD) get to play Monday morning quarterback later Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flexmoney Posted December 22, 2004 Share Posted December 22, 2004 The production numbers are part of the "approval" process and still in effect, even though they are not in the current rule book. Well...I am going to continue on the contrarian path and disagree on that. I know that we have guns on the USPSA Production Gun list that haven't meet those requirements. (numbers produced and available to the general public) To answer your question about "anything goes", well yes and no. If it fits within the rules, then yes. I might be OK with that too... I'm not sure where that leaves the XD beaver tail in Production? Is it an "external modification" to an existing model? Or, is it a whole new model? (Which should be looked at on it's own merits to see if it makes the list, right?) So if a company wanted to produce a pistol with a nice mag well included from the factory I saw one the other day. The magwell looked like it would be at home of a Limited or Open gun. The shooter told me the gun was on the approved list. I couldn't find the gun on the company's website. I think it came out of this company's "Performance Shop", but I don't know. If so, is that a factory option, or is it an add on magwell (custom)? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary Stevens Posted December 22, 2004 Share Posted December 22, 2004 What guns do you know of that are on the approved list that should not be there, and how do you know it? Remember external modifications applies to the end user, not to the factory. USPSA can not tell anyone how to manufacture a particular pistol or what features to include on it. Our rules are fairly small in scope and leave a lot of room for factories to work in to produce a better mouse trap. I believe that was one of the objectives in Production to begin with, to get the factories to produce guns ready for use (competition or otherwise), without the end user having to put out additional money. many things on firearms today as standard equipment, used to be exotic gunsmith add ons. The factories looked, listened, and learned. Well most of them anyway Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duane Thomas Posted December 22, 2004 Share Posted December 22, 2004 As opposed to the Glock, the XD is light years better for two reasons: (1) you can actually hit the mag release and (2) the mags rocket out of the gun when you do. I can hit the extended mag release button on my G34 without shifting the gun in my grip, and the mags rocket out just fine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duane Thomas Posted December 22, 2004 Share Posted December 22, 2004 For instance we have no rule that says mag wells are illegal per say. So if a company wanted to produce a pistol with a nice mag well included from the factory, and all other things being equal (rule wise), then IMO they would be OK. Bruce Gray planned to shoot the 2002 Factory Gun Nationals with an HK that featured a mag funnel from the factory. He was told he couldn't - which he thought was rather raw since the gun met all the prerequisites of the division. The HQ argument was the gun didn't meet the "spirit" of Production division even if it met the letter of the law, and would have given him a competitive advantage. (Gasp, shock.) Rather than push it, Bruce shot the match with a different HK sans funnel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EricW Posted December 22, 2004 Share Posted December 22, 2004 As opposed to the Glock, the XD is light years better for two reasons: (1) you can actually hit the mag release and (2) the mags rocket out of the gun when you do. I can hit the extended mag release button on my G34 without shifting the gun in my grip, and the mags rocket out just fine. DT, I'm so very happy for you , but that's not the norm. Every time I am lucky enough to make it to a match, I see the same thing: The Glock, "Get that mag the heck out of my gun" shake. I do it too. For those of us with stubby fingers, there is at least another option for production. The XD certainly isn't a cure all, but for many it would drastically cut down on the reload learning curve. As far as all the ridiculous cheater XD Production customizing that's been bandied about.... I'll be all to happy to petition John Amidon for a new rule that any magwell on a production gun can be no wider than width the midpoint of the grip. Magwells do not belong in Production. Period. It's time to put the kibosh on the bastardization of production. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SRT Driver Posted December 25, 2004 Share Posted December 25, 2004 Every time I am lucky enough to make it to a match, I see the same thing: The Glock, "Get that mag the heck out of my gun" shake. It happens all the time with 10 rnd mags but the 4th (?) gen 17 rnd mags "seem" better so far. Has not happened since I quit using the 10 rounders. Not that it won't..just hasn't yet. XD's are nice but Glocks are the small block chevy of pistols. Everyone makes parts and you don't need an engineering degree to work on them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DougCarden Posted December 25, 2004 Share Posted December 25, 2004 Well, I hope someone gets it figured out, because I handled a beavertailed frame at SA last week and my frame will be going off for the treatment. I put over 1K through the gun after I got it last week and the frame beat up my web, similar to a 1911 with hardball and no beavertail. It is a must for me, and I want to shoot it in production. Oh well, beats the slice I get from my G34...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flexmoney Posted December 28, 2004 Share Posted December 28, 2004 What guns do you know of that are on the approved list that should not be there, and how do you know it? Gary, I'm trying not to call them out online. Drop me an email. 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