Round_Gun_Shooter Posted January 8, 2005 Share Posted January 8, 2005 If you have the money to travel you probably have the money to get a diffrent holster/gun. Definately not true. Many of us shoot local major matches and travel on vacation time to one or two "away" matches bringing the very understanding wife as a holiday. No trips to the beach or mountains for vacation jsut a trip to the range. I know AWARE will get my money this year. Regards, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigDave Posted January 8, 2005 Share Posted January 8, 2005 Roy, No one has said that USPSA/IPSC is without its faults or errors, and I don't think that anyone, anyone is overlooking the examples you state. What we are saying is that in USPSA members do have a formalized platform to voice upon. Please, Roy, be open minded when it comes to differing opinions. It is clear to me that you are very passionate about shooting and IDPA. And, like you, the same people who are currently displeased with some of the new rules want the same things I imagine you do: an active, healthy, fun, succesful and challenging shooting sport. Let's (everyone) see where this discourse leads us and what we can learn from it as well? After all, we're only talking here. Dave Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waktasz Posted January 9, 2005 Share Posted January 9, 2005 As far as the Uncle Mike's holsters, it really sucks for them because even if they change their design to make it more IDPA friendly it still isn't legal because it's specifically mentioned Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duane Thomas Posted January 9, 2005 Share Posted January 9, 2005 The pf of 165 for "enhanced revolver" doesn't make any sense to me. It's because in Stock Service Revolver as it previously existed, the gun to have was a clip-loaded .45 ACP firing poofy 130,000 pf ammo. Which was probably about as far away as you could get from real-world factory ammo and still be legal for IDPA. What IDPA is saying here is, "Yeah, you can still fire your .45 ACP clip-fed revolver in the sport - but you're going to have to fire it with real ammo." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duane Thomas Posted January 9, 2005 Share Posted January 9, 2005 As the owner of a company, he showed total disregard for a segment of his customer base with his changes in the product, IDPA Competition, without notifying the paid up customers (Those who hold valid IDPA cards). Actually, we have all been notified of the changes. It's called posting the new Rule Book on the web and sending a mass e-mail to every IDPA member in the world with a valid e-mail address to let them know it's been done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duane Thomas Posted January 9, 2005 Share Posted January 9, 2005 When I paid my membership fee I purchased a product. With no warning and no notification, the product has changed. IDPA has been saying for years the new Rule Book was a work in progress. What, was this a surprise to you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duane Thomas Posted January 9, 2005 Share Posted January 9, 2005 As for your statement At this moment HQ is addressing possible "fubars" in regards to revolver weight issues and others. No Official word has been posted here or anywhere else I have read that this is true. So far it is unsubstantiated hearsay. I would like to see Mr or Mrs Wilson post on the IDPA web site that this is the case and show the customers that they have at least some respect for their feedback. Joyce Wilson HAS addressed that matter here: http://www.brianenos.com/forums/index.php?...pic=19637&st=50 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duane Thomas Posted January 9, 2005 Share Posted January 9, 2005 I would like for IDPA to explain one thing. We used to have a holster list. There have been long waits for some holsters to be approved. Now, who approved all of the holsters on the list? It would seem like if you put it on the list it would be good forever, right? One would think so. However the problem was that certain manufacturers submitted certain holsters for approval, then, once they were approved, made changes to the design to make it more competitive but less concealable, then sold the modified design under the same name. So we had "approved" holsters that never would have been approved in their current state. What IDPA has done here is say that the name of the holster doesn't matter. The more I think about it, the more I become convinced that IDPA's current approach is a brilliant solution to the problem. By placing the emphasis on how the holster fits the wearer's body instead of its name or (within reason) design features, the new rule recognizes that (as Patrick Sweeney put it) "one man's rule beater is another man's problem solver," i.e. that a holster design that is neither body hugging nor concealable on one person might well, on a different person with a very different body type, be both. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duane Thomas Posted January 9, 2005 Share Posted January 9, 2005 Here is my problem with the way IDPA is heading. If you read the new rules you will see that they are making the game more geared toward low level shooters. This was apparent at the recent Nationals with the excessive number of stages that required six shots on three targets in three different strings of fire. I feel if I am paying alot of money to go to a major match, I should get to shoot complex stages with higher round counts and alot of movement. These stages are what separate the good shooters. Standing still and shooting three targets doesnt allow a top shooter to use his or her best skills. sgtglock, Very interesting ideas and observations. I hadn't thought of it that way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duane Thomas Posted January 9, 2005 Share Posted January 9, 2005 3) Everybody hates change. Well, not everybody. It depends on the change. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snokid Posted January 9, 2005 Share Posted January 9, 2005 Duane I know I won't be able to change your mind on what idpa has done....but.... 125 45's are now allowed in esp.... sure we all were thinking that there was a new rulebook coming out, afterall joyce even posted right here on Brian's forum that it was at the printers about a yr ago (use the search function) But then they come out with sweeping equipement changes and don't give the membership time to get ready for the new rules to take effect. I know that it's their business, but if coke switches to new coke the public would let them know if it's not what they want, and it looks like that might be whats happening with this.... overall I do like the new rulebook, there just is still too much silly stuff in it.... Bob Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roundgunner Posted January 9, 2005 Share Posted January 9, 2005 Any of you guys out there who are going to shoot at the S&W Winter Championships in a couple weeks don’t kid your self about the rules not taking effect for a year I e-mailed Harry Simonson to get the straight skinny and this is it. Harry I have not got any response from Berryville yet so I need to know are the S&W Winter Championships going to be done under the new rules or the old rules? If we shoot with new rules I need to do some load development and I don’t have a 4 inch 625 to chrono. Harry do you have a 165pf load for titegroup with a 200gr rn? My 2 inch is a bit fussy but it will qualify in the rule book and I have a versamax 2 iwb for it. Can I carry moon clips in my pocket like I would at the mall? Is there a factory load out there that will make power and not beat my 625-10 to death? Please respond with even a best guess. If we show up with one of those awful cheating tricked out six shooten 610s in a Bladetech will we be able to shoot and just not have it count? Harry’s response Hi Warren, Sorry, I do not have any guidance for you other than to say that the new rules are in effect immediately and we intend to conduct the match according to the rules. The SOs and MD will meet amongst ourselves to work out the details over the next few weeks. Moon clips in the pocket are fine. Regards, Harry So gentlemen its time to break out the wallet, buy some new stuff and thank God we live in America where we can go out and buy cool gun stuff. I just don’t think I will buy anything that has WC stamped on it. I’m personally lucky I can shoot the match without spending a lot of money but it pisses me off that my 610 is a outlaw. If anybody can get me on the right track for a 200gr 165pf with titegroup out of a 4 inch bbl that would be great. I don’t have a 4 inch 45 and if I try to get pf with a 2 inch bbl I will be doing +p+.45 pressure. I will post this in a couple threads but any help would be great. Shoot’em good Warren Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duane Thomas Posted January 9, 2005 Share Posted January 9, 2005 125 45's are now allowed in esp.... Not in ESR though. So the way I'm reading it, since the only criteria for ESP is that the gun be a semi-automatic of 9mm or larger caliber, I guess that technically means you could fire a downloaded .45 in the division. But why would you want to? Yeah sure, it allows you to fire the gun at a 125,000 instead of 165,000 power floor, but everyone else in the division has the same power floor. The next great debate: 9mm versus downloaded .45 ACP. (?) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snokid Posted January 9, 2005 Share Posted January 9, 2005 you are correct but it also allows 9mm to be 165000 Enhanced Service Revolver Division (ESR) Handguns permitted for use in this division must: A. Be any revolver of 9mm (9x19) caliber or larger Where do I buy 9mm ammo that makes pf? what happened to off the shelf self defense ammo? isn't this supposed to simulate real life? Bob Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duane Thomas Posted January 9, 2005 Share Posted January 9, 2005 I don't believe there's any factory 9mm load that will make 165,000 pf out of a 4" revolver. Now, the Winchester 127-gr. SXT +P+ does barely make USPSA/IPSC Major (165.8 pf) out of my Glock 34, but that's with a 5" polygonally rifled auto pistol barrel with no velocity-robbing barrel/cylinder gap. And while it may be technically possible to brew up some super-wazoo monster handload that could make it out of a revolver, I think what we have here is a situation where it's like, "Yeah, okay, it's technically legal....but why would anyone in their right mind want to?" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EricW Posted January 9, 2005 Share Posted January 9, 2005 As the owner of a company, he showed total disregard for a segment of his customer base with his changes in the product, IDPA Competition, without notifying the paid up customers (Those who hold valid IDPA cards). Actually, we have all been notified of the changes. It's called posting the new Rule Book on the web and sending a mass e-mail to every IDPA member in the world with a valid e-mail address to let them know it's been done. Duane, I think the part that's amiss in all of this is that there were two phases to the IDPA rulemaking process: (1) hearsay/rumors/absence of information/impossibility of obtaining information then.... (2) BAM! The word comes down from the mountain, and it's *effective immediately*. This is not good. People generally find this to be extremely alienating. I say this coming from a background of people management. I don't care if you are cramming Moet and Russian caviar down someone's throat, it's going to leave a bad taste in their mouth. Professionally run organizations will generally submit one or two proposed drafts of new rules to members for the very reason of catching errors and oversights and making the members feel included. This also allow members a grace period to accomodate new equipment requirements. The new rules may well bring the sport back to its roots, but the implementation is extremely shortsighted. If one believes the poll numbers, 80% of IDPA members are affected by the rules changes in the form of having illegal equipment. The real number is surely less than that, but even if the number is 40%, that's a whole lot of ticked off members. I just don't see how that can be healthy for IDPA. (And no, I don't shoot IDPA, but a heck of a lot of my customers do, so that's the basis of my interest in the matter.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duane Thomas Posted January 9, 2005 Share Posted January 9, 2005 If one believes the poll numbers, 80% of IDPA members are affected by the rules changes in the form of having illegal equipment. The real number is surely less than that, but even if the number is 40%, that's a whole lot of ticked off members. Oh I would say the number is WAY lower than that. I actually called up IDPA HQ yesterday to ask them about the response they've been getting in the form of phone calls from members in reaction to the new Rule Book. And actually, I was kinda looking forward to it, y'know. It was like, "Oh boy, this is gonna be really good." I figured, based on what I'd been reading on ye olde www.brianenos.com, they were being constantly besieged by a veritable Asian tsunami of outraged protest. Phones ringing off the hooks, office workers cowering in corners, like that. They told me, "No, sometimes the phones ring for awhile, sometimes we go hours without them ringing at all." "But," I asked (desperately looking for the "lot of pissed-off members" I'd been promised) "when they do ring, are the comments on the new Rule Book angry, congratulatory, somewhere in-between?" Reply: "Sometimes they're angry, sometimes they're complimentary, sometimes they're so-so." Doesn't really sound like a groundswell of member outrage to me. Truth is more boring than Internet rumor. Wotta letdown. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevin c Posted January 9, 2005 Share Posted January 9, 2005 If one believes the poll numbers, 80% of IDPA members are affected by the rules changes in the form of having illegal equipment. The real number is surely less than that, but even if the number is 40%, that's a whole lot of ticked off members. Oh I would say the number is WAY lower than that. I actually called up IDPA HQ yesterday to ask them about the response they've been getting in the form of phone calls from members in reaction to the new Rule Book. And actually, I was kinda looking forward to it, y'know. It was like, "Oh boy, this is gonna be really good." I figured, based on what I'd been reading on ye olde www.brianenos.com, they were being constantly besieged by a veritable Asian tsunami of outraged protest. Phones ringing off the hooks, office workers cowering in corners, like that. They told me, "No, sometimes the phones ring for awhile, sometimes we go hours without them ringing at all." "But," I asked (desperately looking for the "lot of pissed-off members" I'd been promised) "when they do ring, are the comments on the new Rule Book angry, congratulatory, somewhere in-between?" Reply: "Sometimes they're angry, sometimes they're complimentary, sometimes they're so-so." Doesn't really sound like a groundswell of member outrage to me. Truth is more boring than Internet rumor. Wotta letdown. You're lucky you're you, Duane. You actually reached somebody and got a reply, which is more than most folks down my way have accomplished. The founding members of my club have repeatedly told me that they have tried contacting HQ asking for advice, for information, to offer help, and simply are met with silence. As far as equipment goes, a majority of the shooters in my club use Kydex holsters, UM or similar. A lot of the newer shooters, including me, use them because its available, inexpensive, and effective. Many can't see spending more to start out with for a sport that they are still feeling their way into. Now their equipment is illegal, after having been legal (setting aside issues of what the manufacturers may have altered) with little advanced notice to them or to people who might have told them. Your comments in support of the new rules seem to me to reflect your understanding of the sport and of the thinking of some of the people making the decisions here, Duane. I appreciate your point of view. I just wish the rest of the rank and file had a chance to understand what was coming. The overall lack of input and advance notice, the seemingly arbitrary nature of the decisions, and HQ's apparant aloofness is very off putting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duane Thomas Posted January 9, 2005 Share Posted January 9, 2005 You're lucky you're you, Duane. You actually reached somebody and got a reply It wasn't really that difficult. I phoned, they picked up the phone. As far as equipment goes, a majority of the shooters in my club use Kydex holsters, UM or similar. I don't see where people get the idea that Kydex holsters are illegal. The Rule Book says that holsters must be made of "common holstermaking materials." Kydex is a common holstermaking material. No problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duane Thomas Posted January 9, 2005 Share Posted January 9, 2005 125 45's are now allowed in esp.... Oops, that's what I get for not reading the very first page of the Rule Book. ESP is for 9mm, .40 S&W, .45 GAP or .38 Super autos. So you can download the .45 GAP to 125,000 in ESP, but not the .45 ACP. Got it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevin c Posted January 9, 2005 Share Posted January 9, 2005 You're lucky you're you, Duane. You actually reached somebody and got a reply It wasn't really that difficult. I phoned, they picked up the phone. As far as equipment goes, a majority of the shooters in my club use Kydex holsters, UM or similar. I don't see where people get the idea that Kydex holsters are illegal. The Rule Book says that holsters must be made of "common holstermaking materials." Kydex is a common holstermaking material. No problem. Hmm, I'll ask Tom if he has the right # I misspoke - it's the models of UM, BladeTech and Fobus holsters which are sold to the pistol buying public as suitable for carrying their guns concealed, some of which were on the approved list of holsters for IDPA, that many of our shooters bought and are using in IDPA, and which they are now not allowed to, which is the issue, not the Kydex they are made of. That is a lot of shooters in my club, at least, and while it isn't 80% overall (there's leather and nylon too) it's a lot, and more among the new people. Perhaps HQ is trying to be responsive and adaptive, Duane. If so, their methods haven't been easily understood by many. Not here on these forums. A select/potentially biased group here in the Benosverse? Perhaps. But it's not just here that I hear these criticisms . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe D Posted January 9, 2005 Share Posted January 9, 2005 I for one do not have a real problem with most of the rule changes with the exception of the holster issues. Looks like an easy way to cure this would be for the local Match Directors to just ignore the new holster rules. If it was legal last year then it is legal this year. I don't see our club going with the new rules. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snokid Posted January 9, 2005 Share Posted January 9, 2005 125 45's are now allowed in esp.... Oops, that's what I get for not reading the very first page of the Rule Book. ESP is for 9mm, .40 S&W, .45 GAP or .38 Super autos. So you can download the .45 GAP to 125,000 in ESP, but not the .45 ACP. Got it. Duane using your logic then the 10mm is banned from esp also... Bob Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Merlin Orr Posted January 9, 2005 Share Posted January 9, 2005 125 45's are now allowed in esp.... Oops, that's what I get for not reading the very first page of the Rule Book. ESP is for 9mm, .40 S&W, .45 GAP or .38 Super autos. So you can download the .45 GAP to 125,000 in ESP, but not the .45 ACP. Got it. Duane using your logic then the 10mm is banned from esp also... Bob I think that would be IDPA logic........It is from their rulebook. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Round_Gun_Shooter Posted January 9, 2005 Share Posted January 9, 2005 As the owner of a company, he showed total disregard for a segment of his customer base with his changes in the product, IDPA Competition, without notifying the paid up customers (Those who hold valid IDPA cards). Actually, we have all been notified of the changes. It's called posting the new Rule Book on the web and sending a mass e-mail to every IDPA member in the world with a valid e-mail address to let them know it's been done. In reality, Duane, that is not the case. I have never received an e mail and am a member in good standing with a valid e mail address. Last issue of the "Tactical Journal" would have been a perfect venue for the big news. Regards, Gary Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts