Why is recreating a gun on the Production Gun List against the rules?

[Vlad]

Did they though? If you ask the ATF, what caliber was the gun sold as? Do we have the equivalent of rifle "multi" for handguns now? Because if we do, then Glock and S&W and whoever else makes lego guns should start labeling their guns that way for USPSA. That would be fun.

[JAFO]

I'm not sure how the 250 2SUM kits were labeled, but I believe they boxed with a full size frame/slide/barrel and a compact frame/slide/barrel in with one fire control unit. They didn't come with two full sized slide/barrel combinations. And as I never bought one, I don't know how they were listed on the ATF form.

The striker-fired 320 is the same way, and from what I've read is more likely to be an actual contender for Production. It has interchangeable calibers and slide/barrel configurations. It also uses P250 grip frames. I suppose that might be another consideration because you could buy it with a medium frame, then switch to a small or large one to fit your hand. Does that change the profile? I don't know the "profile" as in the curves and lines of the grip relative to the rest of the frame haven't changed, but the outline of the grip compared to the original frame has.

I don't think modular guns are a fad, so they will eventually need to determine how to modify Production rules to fit them in.

[Parallax3D]

I think you're right JAFO. IIRC, the Sig P250 came with a full size and compact frame, and a full size and compact slide/barrel of ONE caliber. It was available in 4 calibers though, (9mm, .357 Sig, 40 S&W, and 45 ACP). It WAS designed to be able to change calibers though. Since the PGL DOES list all of the possible combinations of frame/slide for each caliber, for this specific gun changing caliber by getting a different top end should be legal, since that's the way the manufacturer designed it, (regardless of which caliber you originally bought it in.)

Edited July 3, 2014 by Parallax3D

[jdd817]

Just simplify the rules. Just look at the rules list for each division, that should be enough to say production needs to be simplified. Something along the lines of striker fired or DA/SA, fits in the box, no comp/ports, magwell, or optics, and all scoring is minor should suffice to keep the spirit of production while simplifying the rules.

Will it be gamed? Yes. Is it already gamed? Yes. Will it make things clearer and allow for things that should be legal but are not? Yes. Is there something I'm overlooking that will invoke the law of unintended consequences? Probably.

[EngineerEli]

Just simplify the rules. Just look at the rules list for each division, that should be enough to say production needs to be simplified. Something along the lines of striker fired or DA/SA, fits in the box, no comp/ports, magwell, or optics, and all scoring is minor should suffice to keep the spirit of production while simplifying the rules.

Will it be gamed? Yes. Is it already gamed? Yes. Will it make things clearer and allow for things that should be legal but are not? Yes. Is there something I'm overlooking that will invoke the law of unintended consequences? Probably.

I like the sound of that a lot! (But don't forget only 10 rds per mag at the start signal and I would probably still restrict custom fab work, IE. welding milling/machining)

Edited July 3, 2014 by EngineerEli

[Jaxshooter]

Marketing for the manufacturers? You can't buy a Glock 35 for Limited and convert it to a 34 for Production. You have to buy 2 complete guns.

[cnote]

I don't think glock gives one hoot more about Uspsa than ICORE

[kneelingatlas]

I dunno, I might argue the G34 was designed specifically with USPSA Production in mind.

[Craig N]

Since Glock frames aren't marked, unless the EQ check guy has a list of all the serial numbers per model it's going to be impossible for them to prove a G34 top end on a frame off a G32 isn't a G34. It's the honor system with Glocks.

[Nik Habicht]

I dunno, I might argue the G34 was designed specifically with USPSA Production in mind.

You'd be wrong......

Glock 34 was released in 1998, sized to fit the recently introduced IPSC box which imposed a size restriction on Standard Division......

Production came into being in 2001.....

(Disclosure -- I shot a G34 in IDPA in 2000; some USPSA friends persuaded me to try their sport in 2001, in part by talking up Production. I feel old now.....)

[Nik Habicht]

Since Glock frames aren't marked, unless the EQ check guy has a list of all the serial numbers per model it's going to be impossible for them to prove a G34 top end on a frame off a G32 isn't a G34. It's the honor system with Glocks.

That example won't work -- G32 frame is equivalent to a G19 frame -- you're not going to fit a G34 slide assembly to that.....

Now a G22, 24, 31, or 37 frame could work......

With the exception of some early frames, frames haven't been stamped with model numbers....

[kneelingatlas]

Thanks for clearing that up Nik, so it was a factory gamer gun for practical shooting, just not USPSA Production.

[Nik Habicht]

Thanks for clearing that up Nik, so it was a factory gamer gun for practical shooting, just not USPSA Production.

Yeah, pretty much, since the 17L and 24 were too big to fit in the IPSC box.....

Then production came along, and a perfect marriage was born for the better part of a decade.....

[duy]

so can i buy a 38 super eaa stock 3 and put a 9mm barrel in it?

[sfinney]

Yes.

Oh, are you asking if its USPSA legal? It appears to be so. Search the forum, lots of discussion.

[Golden Bear]

Just simplify the rules. Just look at the rules list for each division, that should be enough to say production needs to be simplified. Something along the lines of striker fired or DA/SA, fits in the box, no comp/ports, magwell, or optics, and all scoring is minor should suffice to keep the spirit of production while simplifying the rules.

Will it be gamed? Yes. Is it already gamed? Yes. Will it make things clearer and allow for things that should be legal but are not? Yes. Is there something I'm overlooking that will invoke the law of unintended consequences? Probably.

I like the sound of that a lot! (But don't forget only 10 rds per mag at the start signal and I would probably still restrict custom fab work, IE. welding milling/machining)

EE, Production Division provides a lowered cost of entry for new folks starting out in USPSA. All I need to do, as a gun owner, is shoot a pistol on The List (PGL) and I can start shooting USPSA (like I see all the high speed videos I've seen lately. The key phrase is easy entry; with the basic Glock/M&P/XD/whatever that I already have, all I need is a couple more magazines (download to 10 rounds) and a holster (a $30 Fobus is good enough). The Division holds the line on the equipment arms race.

The limit to factory guns (or some factory custom shop models) holds down the cost for entry for the new guy. I get excited when I see 3-gun nation clips of folks running around and shooting really fast (and maybe even hitting their targets!) and want to try that out myself. When I find out that a custom gun with all that fancy custom stuff (sight, mag well, weights, optical sight, etc) is puts the cost north of $2000, just to maybe "try it out," my excitement significantly decreases. Entry is no longer so easy.

Production division is a way to say "as it came from the factory". There is some latitude for some minor modifications (ie sights, some grip tape, etc), but Production guns are basically factory stock. Modifications not explicitly allowed are disallowed; please see the rulebook for comments about milling or external frame modifications.

Hey Everyone,

So here is the question that has been bugging me for a while. Why is it against the USPSA Production rules to recreate a gun from the production gun list (lets abbreviate with PGL). I can't exactly find the wording in the current rule book but I know I have heard it many times here and elsewhere that this is not "legal".

My examples:

Stock II - My unicorn production gun would be one of the Australian long barreled EAA Stock II's (on the PGL) with all the goodies from the Xtreme Stock II (also on the PGL). So why couldn't you simply get a limited in 9mm remove the magwell and swap out the single action parts with the double action parts. The limited is identical to the long barreled Stock II, except with single action only trigger, markings on the slide and 4 holes in the frame for the option to mount an optic, no functional difference. I would also be able to shoot this gun in limited or open with a separate barrel, and it is much easier to get your hands on this way than finding one of the Australian version Stock II's.

EE, you can recreate a gun from the Production list and shoot it in USPSA.

You can shoot the EAA Stock II (long barrel) in Production; it on the PGL.

You can shoot the EAA Stock II Xtreme with SA-trigger in Production; it's on the PGL.

You can not shot the EAA Stock II (long barrel) with Stock II Xtreme SA trigger in Production Division; that particular pistol/trigger combination is not a "factory offering", and thus not on the PGL.

You can put a Stock II Xtreme SA-trigger in an EAA Stock II (long barrel) and shot it in Limited Division (as well as L-10 and Open). That would be an allowed modification.

My logic:

If you can lesson the number of complete guns the shooter has to have to compete in different divisions whats so wrong with that? Also, as long as nothing done is giving the shooter an unfair advantage what is the problem? What exact working in the rules prohibits the above examples?

That can be done. The same EAA Stock II Xtreme with SA trigger (or 9mm Glock 34) can be shot in Production, Limited/L-10 and Open Divisions. Provided that there are no modifications done that would disqualify the pistol from Production division (optics, magwell, etc), at no time would the shooter have an unfair advantage.

Edited July 4, 2014 by Golden Bear

[Jim Watson]

You can shoot the EAA Stock II Xtreme with SA-trigger in Production; it's on the PGL

How's that? I thought Production had to be DA. Or can you leave the DA linkage in and drag it through with the SA trigger?

[Golden Bear]

You can shoot the EAA Stock II Xtreme with SA-trigger in Production; it's on the PGL

How's that? I thought Production had to be DA. Or can you leave the DA linkage in and drag it through with the SA trigger?

Based on the info EngineerEli presented in Post #1. EAA and EAA trigger options are not an expertise area for me. There is the possibility (probably high) I misinterpreted whatever he said.

[Skydiver]

DA/SA. First shot must be DA.

Let me amend that. A gun with an external hammer must start with the hammer down if it is a loaded gun start. In USPSA, if you wish, you may cock the gun to SA after the start signal of a loaded start stage. It is illegal to cock the gun in IPSC.

For an unloaded gun start, your first shot can be SA.

Edited July 5, 2014 by Skydiver

[EkuJustice]

I think the production rules are nuts which is why I avoid the division. Seems nuts that a guy can't dremel the finger groves and undercut his glock frame, put a 34 slide on an RTF frame which is basically Stippled yet they can stipple their gun yet since that would create an arms race yet the 2-3k CZs and Stock II are perfectly fine and do not create an arms race

[Vlad]

I think the production rules are nuts which is why I avoid the division. Seems nuts that a guy can't dremel the finger groves and undercut his glock frame, put a 34 slide on an RTF frame which is basically Stippled yet they can stipple their gun yet since that would create an arms race yet the 2-3k CZs and Stock II are perfectly fine and do not create an arms race

Correct. It is that crazy in there. I shoot production almost exclusively because I find it fun and a bit more challanging, but I've mostly given up in trying to make sense of it. I'm come to the belief that USPSA needs a rule book rewrite from scratch, but I don't see it happening.

[ac4wordplay]

Quote function failed.

Skydiver said:

...

A gun with an external hammer must start with the hammer down if it is a loaded gun start.

...

You meant to say "... must always start with the hammer down." Right? Not just on loaded gun starts.

Or do you think unloaded gun starts allow a hammer to start cocked?

Edited July 6, 2014 by ac4wordplay

[Vlad]

well it is a lot less relevant then, isn't it? Its not like you are going to require a DA first shot with an empty gun start.

[Skydiver]

Good catch. Unless otherwise specified, 8.1.3 requires the hammer down for unloaded starts as well.

8.1.3 ... When a Handgun Ready Condition requires a handgun be prepared with an empty chamber (or cylinder), the slide of the handgun must be fully forward (or the cylinder must be fully closed) and the hammer or striker must be fully down or fully forward, as the case may be, unless otherwise specified in the stage briefing.

But after the start signal, once you've loaded the gun, the DA/SA gun doesn't have be rest back to DA mode. You can fire your first shot SA.

Edited July 6, 2014 by Skydiver

[theblacknight]

I think the production rules are nuts which is why I avoid the division. Seems nuts that a guy can't dremel the finger groves and undercut his glock frame, put a 34 slide on an RTF frame which is basically Stippled yet they can stipple their gun yet since that would create an arms race yet the 2-3k CZs and Stock II are perfectly fine and do not create an arms race

I have noticed this. It's always shooters from other divisions who whine about production rules and want to suggest their grand version of what a division they don't shoot should be.

If you don't want to have the bare the terrible burden of buying those mega expensive 10$ equipment race soldiering irons to stipple your intent destroying Glock production race gun, maybe you should buy a gun that already has it, like a Gen4 Glock or a FNS.

Guess what? Spirit(and intent) is for cheerleaders and IDPA. Words have meaning .USPSA has a rulebook. Understanding that rulebook is part of playing the game. A gun either meets the rules of production or it does not. If a company designs a gun that is optimized for that rule set, that's called smart.

We could go to IPSC production rules and the whiners would still whine about the CZ's and Tangfos.