New Rule Book

[John Forsyth]

What I find amusing in all this is that if you shoot a .40 or 10mm moon clip revolver, it has to make 165 PF, same as a .45ACP, but if you shoot a .40 or 10mm auto, it has to make 125 PF like a 9mm. When are we going to let 10mm play where it is supposed to?

[Clay1]

John, you think a 10 auto is closer to a 9 than a 45 auto?

Thanks to all of those that tried to work on the rule book. No matter what they did they were damned from the beginning.

I still don't like the new holster / mag holder rules because they got in my wallet on that one.

[vincent]

I just weighed my older S&W 625 (625-3, 45 Cal Model of 1989, hammer mounted firing pin) which has a factory 4" barrel with full underlug, Miculek grips filed a bit for my hands, Millet rear and SDM front sights, regular fluted cylinder that has been chamfered a bit. Pretty standard setup for an IDPA revo.

It weighs in at 40.2 oz on a digital postal scale. This is well under the 42.0 oz weight limit for ESR.

I can see that a 610 with an unfluted cylinder may go over, but I wonder if the newer fluted cylinder 625 guns are really over weight.

Have other guys weighed their guns?

[John Forsyth]

Clay, I have been telling IDPA HQ for years to get 10mm back into CDP, where it belongs. A Colt Delta Elite makes for a great CDP gun, but it lacks a little against those 9mm Springfield Loaded's in ESP.

[roundgunner]

I truly hope that Joyce Wilson will change the weight limit to include the 610 that I bought after my 5 inch 625 became useless. I think the reason for that change was to help S&W sell a bunch of guns in a hurry and I wanted to help so I did. I also bought a PC 625-10 for carry. With these rule changes (if not re-changed) I will be shooting my last IDPA match at the S&W Winter Championships this February with my 2’’ 625 sc as it is the last "race gun" that will qualify. I don’t think it is a very good idea to put thousands of power factor rounds through my PC625-10 sc so I will request that the unused portion of my 3 year renewal in IDPA be returned to me and if I find S&W had any part in making this rule change all future guns will be from someone else.

To my IDPA friends Ted, Craig, Harry, and any others who might have the ear of the single stack rule makers please try to get them to reconsider. The 6 or 8 round thing is probably not a big deal the 165fp is good but to make my second $600+ revolver no longer legal is.

Warren Baker

Past local IDPA club chairman, MD, RO, SO, long time IDPA shooter and pissed off.

[randywm]

Regarding the new rule book and the impact on us "low-life" revolver shooters...

I am quite disappointed in the BoD's motivation for these new, arbitrary and capricious changes. Hence, my posting is probably more for my therapy than anything else because I know the IDPA BoD does not give a "hoot" about what us grunt level IDPA loyalists think anyway. Afterall, I am not sponsored by any major gun manufacturer. I sponsor myself because I have really enjoyed the sport... let's not forget, this IDPA stuff is a sport that is directionally intended to represent some form of street defense reality... RIGHT? Here I go:

1. What is with the covered speed loader/moonclip carrier??? Did I miss the requirement that magazine carriers used in SSP, ESP, CDP must also have covering flaps? If that is not so, then the requirement that revolver shooters must use covered carriers makes no sense. If semi-auto competitors must also use covered magazine carriers... OK. If not, the requirement for speed loaders/moonclip carriers is punitive and has no relationship with what is street practical.

2. What is with the change in location of the second and third speed loader/moonclip carriers??? If you can stand in front of a RSO and extend your arms parallel with the ground and the carriers are not visible... why is the IDPA BoD making the dictate that they must be behind the body centerline? This should apply to semi-auto magazine carriers too. The rule should be... "Is the carrier visible?" If it is, move it. If it is not, let's go on and shoot.

3. Adding a new division, ESR, is silly. If 125 PF is approved for SSP, ESP and SSR, then that is "not broken" and does not need fixing. Competence with a speed loader vs. moonclips is a personal thing. I purchased and used moonclip revolvers because they make sense for the street. Why fumble around with a speed loader when a moonclip revolver is an alternative? I will point out that I have competed in numerous state matches and had my butt kicked by a couple guys using speed loaders. Making a new ESR division to keep speed loaders from competing against moonclip shooters is again, a fix to an issue that was not broken.

4. The revised holster requirements seem quite arbitrary and confusing. I have used Comp-Tac locking paddle holsers for all divisions for several years... Now they are illegal? I use those holsters for off-duty concealed carry and they work and conceal just fine. Gregg Garrett has supported IDPA shooters and his products work. Why is this an issue if it is not economically driven. Heck, my economics are driven into the "tank" because I have numerous Comp-Tac Locking Paddles that can now be sent in for melt down. That is not right! Well, if I have to buy new holsters, I can assure you, they will not be purchased from Wilson Combat. I hate that because they have always had high quality merchandise. I will not reward disloyalty to me for the same reason I will not buy a "Dixie Chic's" CD or pay to see movies with Susan Sarandon or Tim Robins. I will vote with my dollars.

5. I believe the revolver division was growing in the right direction. I now believe the BoD just wants to render revolver shooters obsolete. If this is not so, then why a bunch of rule changes for a problem that did not exist??? Maybe, the BoD wants to reward IDPA loyalty with punishment so ICORE/IPSC revolver shooters will be able to welcome new refugee competitors.

6. Come on... tell me the BoD did not check to see what a S&W 610 or 625 weighs??? Right... If the BoD is so out of touch with the reality of revolver shooters, I trust that anyone can see that THAT IS THE PROBLEM not moonclips vs. speed loaders.

7. IDPA belongs to me, and you. Not the BoD. If we all just let them dictate changes that don't reflect reality, then shame on us. We will just have to find another venue like ICORE/IPSC. I really don't want to do that. We must voice our opinions strongly so the BoD will hear. If we are silent, then we will get what we are given. I for one, am tired of remaining silent.

I love IDPA and practice hard and do the best I can at every match... although I have not met major success (the big name shooters do not have much to worry about).

I know I only have my voice, and my lone vote. The foregoing represents my vote. I only hope the BoD chooses to read my ballot.

RWM

Houston/Fort Bend Co.

[45 ACP]

2. What is with the change in location of the second and third speed loader/moonclip carriers??? If you can stand in front of a RSO and extend your arms parallel with the ground and the carriers are not visible... why is the IDPA BoD making the dictate that they must be behind the body centerline? This should apply to semi-auto magazine carriers too

Just to be clear, according to Appendix One Section D.1(F) of the 2005 rulebook:

"Magazine carrier must:

F. Be worn in a belt location that will position the front edge of the carrier behind the centerline of the body."

** edited for punctuation **

[LittlefieldK]

It appears that my S&W 1006 is no longer legal in SSP due the 39 oz weight rule. My SSR S&W 29 that I just bought blade tech gear for, is also illegal due to the new weight limit (looking at the rules I can't even figure out what a legal speed loader pouch would be, but I just bought a blade-tech).

While I will still use these guns for concealed carry they are no longer legal for the IDPA game (and yes I do carry the 44 mag concealed when ever I'm in rural areas).

I really wanted to work on a four gun rating this year, but it looks like it is back to CPD and ESP class, that is if I replace my uncle mike holster.

[Gun Geek]

OK

Gotta give my 2:

I think the idea behind the holster rules are right-on when you consider that IDPA's purpose is the practice the practical stuff. I carried a long time before I got into IDPA and thought it strange when the winners were all using slick kydex stuff. I bought a UM and started playing. I think the BOD is fixing a glaring problem.

When I carry now I don't use my UM, I use a Yaqi Slide from GALCO (hopefully this will be legal). IThe Yaqi is secure and if you take the gun out it doesn't look like an empty holster. I have been interested in one of the IWB kydex rigs, but the production rate seems to be low, so it takes lots of time to get them.

What I don't like about this is the abruptness of the change. However, if you think about it, there's not a really good way to make such a change. Reality is that a holster with an offset is faster than one with out (remember the uproar about the guy at last years Ohio match) If you grandfathered old ones, the guys using legal holsters would be at a disadvantage.

Another observation is that this will make the cost of entry higher for new shooters. I'm sure there are some chaper leather models out there, but most leather holsters are usually around $50. The UM stuff is $25 or so.

FWIW to me the mag carrier thing is pure BS. If it holds them secure, they should be legal (upside down shake test?)

Allright that's my 2

[MikeyG23]

You know looking at the fury that is taking place on not only this forum but several others it struck me what the real issue is.

Simply, there is nothing democratic about IDPA. Now before everyone starts flaming me for that statement I realized that it was not a democracy when I signed up. If it's not a democracy then it is most certainly a business and a "for profit" business at that. As a business we the shooters are the customers. It would seem to me that as a business they should be concerned about their customer satisfaction rating and I think that today, January 6, 2005 that rating is at an all time low. I know that I'm very dissatisfied. I wrote a letter to HQ a couple of weeks ago about the then rumored holster changes and I wrote another last night about the now factual holster changes and you know I haven't received so much as a courtesy reply to either. Even the mega retailers will at least acknowledge that your complaint was received.

The IDPA hierarchy is out of touch with the membership, that is the whole issue in a nutshell. If you aren't one of the anoited few your comments and concerns don't mean spit to these people. I'm thinking very seriously about casting a vote with my feet.

[roundgunner]

You know looking at the fury that is taking place on not only this forum but several others it struck me what the real issue is.

Simply, there is nothing democratic about IDPA. Now before everyone starts flaming me for that statement I realized that it was not a democracy when I signed up. If it's not a democracy then it is most certainly a business and a "for profit" business at that. As a business we the shooters are the customers. It would seem to me that as a business they should be concerned about their customer satisfaction rating and I think that today, January 6, 2005 that rating is at an all time low. I know that I'm very dissatisfied. I wrote a letter to HQ a couple of weeks ago about the then rumored holster changes and I wrote another last night about the now factual holster changes and you know I haven't received so much as a courtesy reply to either. Even the mega retailers will at least acknowledge that your complaint was received.

The IDPA hierarchy is out of touch with the membership, that is the whole issue in a nutshell. If you aren't one of the anoited few your comments and concerns don't mean spit to these people. I'm thinking very seriously about casting a vote with my feet.

Thats what I wish my fingers typed

[Sgtsvi]

Maybe the one way that IDPA can stop all the gaming and hi tech super speed equipment would be to stop taking down scores. everyone shoots and nobody wins. I can put on my comp tac holster with my SV cross comp and illegal mag pouches and compete with some tactical Tom with his HK USP with a lanyard and big laser, light mounted on the rail. We dont even have to tape targets after each shooter. That should really please some of the people that shoot at my club that think they are too good to tape. I can stiffen up my vest with roofing tin and lace up a pair of soccer cleats. Tactical Tom can wear his BDU's and Hi Tech magnum he bought at the gunshow while he was shopping for a inexpensive red dot scope for his SKS.

Doesnt this sound like fun.

Dave

[Round_Gun_Shooter]

RGS - I have a great deal of respect for you but I have to ask - what rounds did you intend to use in your 325 when you defended your life and liberty with it?

This minor disagreement will have no effect on our mutual respect.

To answer your question, the 325PD is my carry gun and it is loaded with Hydroshok ammo. I also carry 2 spare moon clips in front of the gun in a BladeTeck stacked carrier in the "Real World". I practice with the rounds and am comfortable with them.

My comment is related to "Match shooting" Shooting 250+ rounds of 165 PF loads from the light weight gun in a day is nonsense. I will not beat myself up with them nor will I beat up the light weight gun.

You ask about real world? If I have a confrontation that lasted more than the 18 rounds I carry, I should never have left home.

IDPA is a GAME.

Moon clips have been around longer than speed loaders. If they wanted a speed loader division they should have created one and left SSR alone.

CHanging where ammo carriers was another rediculous move. Seated and car stages will be nearly impossible for reloads. They treated revolvers again as an afterthought. They should have left well enough alone or put more thought and research into appropriate changes.

The general outlay of the new book is better. That is about the best I can say.

The changes will cost most shooters of all divisions money. The "Professional" or "Sponsored" shooters will get new gear and continue as before. The little guy (no wise cracks) will suffer along or leave.

All that said, I will still talk to you at the S&W Banquet. Please get us name tags so they throw stuff at you and not me

In another thread I told of how I learned that complaining is useless. I will now take my daughter's advice and just "Suck it up and deal". This is my last on the new rules, 38spl here I come. Watch out

Regards,

Gary

[kdmoore]

FWIW to me the mag carrier thing is pure BS.  If it holds them secure, they should be legal (upside down shake test?)

Spot on. In fact, I'm having a hard time coming up with a reason why this wouldn't be done.

[Planorick]

I had gone to the IDPA website last night and the default page was changed and had a link to the new rules book. I just checked it again and it is back to the old page with the old rule book.

[Melissa Ann]

I had gone to the IDPA website last night and the default page was changed and had a link to the new rules book. I just checked it again and it is back to the old page with the old rule book.

Hit refresh on your browser. The new website has a blue front page and at the top is a link to the new rulebook. However, if you enter the site (click on the guns), the old rulebook is still available in there. I just checked, the link to the new rulebook is definitely still there on the front page.

[Planorick]

You are correct!

[randywm]

I posted a lengthy reply earlier and the more I check back on comments, the more angry I become with the IDPA BoD, King, Czar or whatever...

MikeyG23 had a reply that improved on my earlier reply... Essentially, WE ARE BILL WILSON'S CUSTOMERS. IF ANY BUSINESS WANTS TO SCREW ITS CUSTOMERS... OK. ONLY THE STUPID CUSTOMERS WILL COME BACK FOR MORE.

I just realized, out of all the holsters I own, and I am sure it is in the thousands of dollars now, I DON'T HAVE A SINGLE ONE THAT WOULD NOW BE CONSIDERED IDPA LEGAL.

IDPA BoD HAS GONE THE WRONG DIRECTION ON THE VISIBLE RULE CHANGES. THEY MADE A BUNCH OF CHANGES THAT FIXED NON-EXISTANT PROBLEMS.

My conclusion is that the BoD is so out of touch with its shooting membership that arguing with them is futile.

Heck, if we have to get out rulers, micrometers and such devices to determine if a holster qualifies, WE HAVE GONE THE WRONG WAY. I KNOW THE HEAVENLY FEW AT IDPA, KNOW EVERYTHING... GUESS WHAT? THEY DO NOT KNOW WHAT THEY DON'T KNOW.

[redmist10]

Moon clips have been around longer than speed loaders.  If they wanted a speed loader division they should have created one and left SSR alone. 

AMEN!

If you look at the beginnings of this thread Ted points out that of the people shooting the 2004 IDPA National Championship there were only THREE people shooting speedloaders in SSR.

THREE !! - out of a record setting SSR division where more people competed and joined the ranks of SSR than any other time! THREE out of 48!

Talk about making decisions and not knowing a thing about the topic. KNOW YOUR AUDIENCE.

Can someone quote the numbers for the guns used in SSR out of the Tac Journal? I don't have mine handy but it would surely show a lot more 625's than model 10's.

[EricW]

Come shoot USPSA with me and Tony Phan. Feel the love.

[redmist10]

Come shoot USPSA with me and Tony Phan. Feel the love.

Watched Tony shoot in the 2003 IDPA Nationals with a wheelgun. Very impressive. He was a very nice guy to chat with afterwards as well.

IDPA has been my favorite shooting sport and after all the bad-mouthing I heard about how out of touch USPSA was I was pleasantly surpised at how much fun I had. It was very different, mind you, and I still think IDPA is more idealistically "practical" but I joined USPSA in 2004. Glad to be aboard.

[Ted Murphy]

If you look at the beginnings of this thread Ted points out that of the people shooting the 2004 IDPA National Championship there were only THREE people shooting speedloaders in SSR.

THREE !!  - out of a record setting SSR division where more people competed and joined the ranks of SSR than any other time!  THREE out of 48!

Which is exactly the point why they felt it needed addressing. As you said, only 3 guns were non moonguns. Neither of us can say with certainty why there were so few, but one theory is that people who don't own moonguns don't shoot the nats in SSR cause they feel they will get schooled. Even though I stunk at nats this year, I'm typically doing ver well with my K frames, and one of the things I like to do is try to show that moonguns are not needed to win. But the sad fact is moonclips are perceived as an advantage (and heck, I'm a fast loader with a K frame, but with a moongun it's so fast it's scary ) by many new shooters and that perceived advantage is what HQ wanted to address with the two divisions.

As I've said before, because of the perceived advantage the moongun was considered a "must have" for IDPA. In the past, IDPA has pretty much did away with anything that was considered an advantage, either real or perceived. I believe a second division was a whole lot nicer than banning moonguns, which seemed to be their other choice. The one thing they were set on not doing, was maintaining the status quo.

Let me ask you something,

If they did away with the 7 & 8 shot guns in ESR, would you feel better about it,

or do you believe in a single division? Does the PF have something to do with it?

If you prefer that all revolvers be in their own division, would you mind sharing with me why? Frankly, if the only difference between the two divisions was the issue of moonclips, the only reason I could see a shooter not liking the 2 divisions would be a slightly thinner pool of shooters.

I've shot in nats when there where 1-3 revolver shooters in each class, and now I've competed in one with over 25 in my class. SSR has certainly grown since its inception, and I'm willing to bet there is enough lettuce for another rabbit that way.

I can really see people taking issue with allowing the hi cap wheelguns in ESR, but otherwise I think the idea has merit.

Ted

[BigDave]

From the rule book:

H. Headquarters (HQ).  IDPA Headquarters is located at 2232 CR 719, Berryville, AR,  72616.  HQ maintains records of all members, sends out  membership cards, takes care of all pro shop orders, handles any  questions any members may have, produces the Tactical Journal  (the quarterly publication for members), makes certificates and  cards for safety officers, etc. All decisions that come from HQ are  based on what is best for the individual member, the club and the  sport. 

bold emphasis added - this sums it up for me. We know what's best for you! Now, shut up and drink this Cool-Aid.

BTW - 870-545-3886 are the digits if you feel like making a phone call to HQ.

[nipplehead]

Its all smoke and mirrors....WHAT A JOKE

Are equipment problems really the great concerns most shooters have with IPDA?

Will holster and mag changes really effect the outcome of the match,and ; if not is the cost of changing equipment justified?

SHOULD IDPA REALLY BE SPENDING MORE ENERGY TRYING TO IMPROVE THE JUDGING OF THE MATCHES THEMSELVES...LEAVE LESS TO INTERPETATION...MAKE RULES MORE CUT AND DRY LIKE DARE I SAY USPSA?..........

IDPA just committed a FAILURE TO DO RIGHT

[Thomas Moore]

dave, said it right here;

Maybe the one way that IDPA can stop all the gaming and hi tech super speed equipment would be to stop taking down scores

when there is a score card and timer involved there will always be gameing. get rid of the score card and timer and go have fun. isn't that what idpa is all about anyway, there isn't any money or prizes awarded for finishing top in class.

come over to USPSA, all six gunners are welcome.