Chico Posted January 11, 2005 Share Posted January 11, 2005 Read the reply I received from Mike Benedict at Talon- Tactical below. Still no answer from IDPA Headquarters. My holsters are still legal as they are really designed for carry. As I understand it Blade-Tech non-offset origional holsters without the tech-loc are legal. If I can do anything for you please let me know. Mike Subject: IDPA Approved Holsters After reading all of the flames from forum postings on the new IDPA rule book, I am not sure what is a legal holster and what is not. Have you or any of the other holster manufacturers actually spoken with IDPA HQ? Let me tell you what I have currently: A 1 3/4 " Wilderness instructors belt Blade-Tech standard straight drop kydex holster for a gov't 1911 Uncle Mikes standard belt straight drop kydex holster for a Glock 34 (17/22/35) Blade-Tech mag pouches for the 1911 Uncle Mikes mag pouches for the Glock From what I interpret from reading the rule book: The Uncle Mikes holster is NOT allowed due to the off-set spacing from the waist to the holster. After measuring the mag pouches and each mag, they both cover 50+% (narrowly) of the magazine and they both have one or more tension screws. So am I to surmise they are legal? Strangely, the Blade-Tech holster would be legal with a thick 1 3/4" leather type belt, but NOT with the Wilderness belt. Your A10 appears to conform to the new rules. Does it still? The desert climate lends itself to synthetics and I would prefer not to switch back to leather. Mike Benedict \r\nTalon Tactical Holsters \r\nWWW.talontactical.com\r\n Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lndshrk Posted January 11, 2005 Share Posted January 11, 2005 I tried my Blade-Tech holster for Kimber Compact (commander size) and Dillon 1.5" heavy duty leather belt and was pretty certain it would pass the "no sunshine" test, as belt loop narrows in front to closely hug belt. Also pretty certain my Sooper Hooper will not pass the "no sunshine" test. Thanks Mike! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ted Murphy Posted January 12, 2005 Share Posted January 12, 2005 My glock bladetech (with loops) does pass the test. My S&W K frame bladetech (with loops) doesn't. The revolver holster also sticks out 1" from my body too. Quite a lot of offset on that one sucker. Ted Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MBaneACP Posted January 12, 2005 Share Posted January 12, 2005 Now Ted, does that make sense to you? By my measurements, my Blade-Tech original for my now-banned-in-SSP LDA 18.9 doesn't make it. Nor do my Tek-Lok mag pouches. mb Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MBaneACP Posted January 12, 2005 Share Posted January 12, 2005 BTW, my ancient Gordon Davis Chuck Taylor Special may actually make it, even though Bill W. made sure it was banned in the *original* rule book (over my protestations!)! That's because it's *twice* the holster...oh, never mind!!! mb Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ted Murphy Posted January 12, 2005 Share Posted January 12, 2005 Now Ted, does that make sense to you?By my measurements, my Blade-Tech original for my now-banned-in-SSP LDA 18.9 doesn't make it. Nor do my Tek-Lok mag pouches. mb FWIW, I think the extra offset on the blade tech is due to the cylinder and how they made the holster. As best as I can measure, it has about 1-1/8" offset compared to about 1/2" on my Glock holster. Funny part is, I spurned both my safariland and Talon tacical holster for the bladetech this year because the blade tech had such a nice offset. (the talon and safariland are legal) Ted Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary Stevens Posted January 12, 2005 Share Posted January 12, 2005 Specifically why are the Blade Tech tek-lok holsters now illegal. Type slowly, I only have a public education Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobbyblaze Posted January 12, 2005 Share Posted January 12, 2005 I contacted Bladetech and I spoke with their customer service manager and he said that their holsters meet the criteria for the new IDPA rulebook e-mail him at bobby@blade-tech.com and he will e-mail you back with a letter stating the rules and blade-tech holsters. I have the IDPA belt holster used for SSP (glock 34) and with the Tactical Tailor riggers belt it works perfect. www.tacticaltailor.com. I also have the teklok IDPA holster and it works tooo! it is little under a half of a inch from my body. E-mail Bobby Mcgee and he will get you squared away, bladetech has top notch customer service. I am happy with their products and I prefer kydex over leather Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chico Posted January 12, 2005 Author Share Posted January 12, 2005 Here is Blade-Tech's reply. It answers many of our questions: January 11, 2005 Subject: IDPA Equipment Rule Change Reference: Blade-Tech Industries Holsters and Magpouches To Whom It May Concern: According to the 2005 IDPA rulebook; Blade-Tech IDPA Belt and Tek-Lok holsters fall under the “POUCH” holsters. Stated in the 1-D (page 29) “pouch style holster” Blade-Tech Industries holster do meet the criteria stated on page 29. “QUOTE” from the current rulebook. This design features a “pouch” that holds the handgun and usually has a separate back piece attached to the back of the “pouch” which attaches to the holster to the belt. This “back piece” can either be a belt tunnel, belt slots on either side of the pouch, or a paddle that slides inside the pants. Blade-Tech holsters are not designed/ and are not marketed as “competition” equipment. The Paddle, and the Tek-Lok holsters or “POUCHES” are cant adjustable for a “3 position” cant. However or holsters are FIXED in one position only! Meaning you cannot rotate or pivot from a fixed position manually. In order for a Holster to be transitioned from a straight cant to a “FBI” cant or a muzzle rearward cant you physically have to remove the “Back piece” from the holster, reposition and lock down the attaching hardware. Blade-Tech Industries “IWB”, “IDPA belt holster”, “Paddle holster”, and magpouches meet and exceed the criteria stated in the current rule book. Blade-Tech holsters and magpouches are utilized by Ken Hackathorn. In a recent conversation with Ken Hackathorn, Ken mentioned that there should be no problem with Blade-Tech holsters according to the new rules. Blade-Tech holsters listed above meet the demands of every day real world application; which is used by Elite Military units, Undercover Law enforcement Agents, Officers, Instructors, Civilians, and IDPA/USPSA competitors. Regards, Tim Wegner President, CEO Blade-Tech Industries www.blade-tech.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MBaneACP Posted January 12, 2005 Share Posted January 12, 2005 Gary Stevens...it's hard dealing with you "mouth-reader" types, but here goes: Sometime around Christmas, a UFO landed in or near Berryville, Arkansas (which is, if you follow these sorts of things, EXACTLY the sort of place UFOs typically land!). The pilot of craft, who had previously paid a visit to then-President Clinton on the eve of his Monica testimony to discuss the meaning of the word "is", delivered a manifesto to certain parties in Berryville. The manifesto read that "concealment" doesn't actually mean "unable to be seen." Instead, "concealment" is actually a measurable set of metrics, as defined by...etc. The net result of this manifesto was to send Duane Thomas, a normally supremely sane individual, sprinting for his cigarette lighter and Ted Murphy, an equally sane person, hunting for his heat gun. One of the other consequences was to render the Blade-Tech vertical belt holster, probably the single widest used concealment holster on earth, OCCASIONALLY not "concealable" as defined by the UFO manifesto. The manifesto also rendered the best cheap holster in the world, the Uncle Mike's kydex, "not concealable." I'm not saying this is the point of the manifesto, but credible witnesses in the Berryville area reported that the saucer featured signage for Zippo Lighters, Amce Heat Guns and some holster company! Seriously, can you imagine that at this late date we're supposed to be "rolling our own" holsters with ciagrette lighters and heat guns and drilling holes in gun frames to meet some PURELY ARBITRARY set of standards that will in all likelihood change as soon as the NEXT saucer sets down in Berryville? mb Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
diehli Posted January 12, 2005 Share Posted January 12, 2005 What I don't get is isn't modifying Kydex holsters so that they fit the rules of a game antithetical to what it is that IDPA supposedly is trying to promote? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeyG23 Posted January 12, 2005 Share Posted January 12, 2005 Gary Stevens...it's hard dealing with you "mouth-reader" types, but here goes:Sometime around Christmas, a UFO landed in or near Berryville, Arkansas (which is, if you follow these sorts of things, EXACTLY the sort of place UFOs typically land!). The pilot of craft, who had previously paid a visit to then-President Clinton on the eve of his Monica testimony to discuss the meaning of the word "is", delivered a manifesto to certain parties in Berryville. The manifesto read that "concealment" doesn't actually mean "unable to be seen." Instead, "concealment" is actually a measurable set of metrics, as defined by...etc. The net result of this manifesto was to send Duane Thomas, a normally supremely sane individual, sprinting for his cigarette lighter and Ted Murphy, an equally sane person, hunting for his heat gun. One of the other consequences was to render the Blade-Tech vertical belt holster, probably the single widest used concealment holster on earth, OCCASIONALLY not "concealable" as defined by the UFO manifesto. The manifesto also rendered the best cheap holster in the world, the Uncle Mike's kydex, "not concealable." I'm not saying this is the point of the manifesto, but credible witnesses in the Berryville area reported that the saucer featured signage for Zippo Lighters, Amce Heat Guns and some holster company! Seriously, can you imagine that at this late date we're supposed to be "rolling our own" holsters with ciagrette lighters and heat guns and drilling holes in gun frames to meet some PURELY ARBITRARY set of standards that will in all likelihood change as soon as the NEXT saucer sets down in Berryville? mb Pretty good Mr. Bane........ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duane Thomas Posted January 12, 2005 Share Posted January 12, 2005 What I don't get is isn't modifying Kydex holsters so that they fit the rules of a game antithetical to what it is that IDPA supposedly is trying to promote? Not if it makes the holster more body hugging and concealable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ted Murphy Posted January 14, 2005 Share Posted January 14, 2005 What I don't get is isn't modifying Kydex holsters so that they fit the rules of a game antithetical to what it is that IDPA supposedly is trying to promote? Whiffing kydex fumes is kinda fun.... Just kidding, they smell real bad. Ted Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TDean Posted November 22, 2005 Share Posted November 22, 2005 (edited) Bobby...is that you? Edited November 22, 2005 by TDean Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lbritt Posted November 23, 2005 Share Posted November 23, 2005 OK, somebody give me some guideance here on a holster issue that I just don't understand. I think we all agree that it has been made very clear in the new IDPA rulebook that Uncle Mike's Holsters in general are "not suitable for concealment or IDPA". I have seen some local clubs follow that rule by issuing FTDR's to shooters who used Uncle Mike's holsters. Personally, it does not affect me as I use Blade-Tech exclusively. Now for the part I don't understand. Reading the lastest issue of IDPA's Tactical Journal I noticed that under the "Nationals Equipment List" that there were something like 16 Uncle Mikes holsters used by competitors at the 2005 National Championship. What gives??? Why is one particular brand of holster banned by IDPA but then allowed to be used at thier (IDPA) Nationals? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tangram Posted November 23, 2005 Share Posted November 23, 2005 Now for the part I don't understand. Reading the lastest issue of IDPA's Tactical Journal I noticed that under the "Nationals Equipment List" that there were something like 16 Uncle Mikes holsters used by competitors at the 2005 National Championship. What gives??? Why is one particular brand of holster banned by IDPA but then allowed to be used at thier (IDPA) Nationals? Uncle Mike's or brand XXX holsters were not baned. Individual holsters that ran afoul of the "light gap rule" or other rule were disallowed. If you had a Uncle Mikes holster and modified it to eliminate the problem my understanding is that it is legal. The IDPA does not have an approved holster or disallowed holster list. It has examples of stock holsters that don't as pictured meet the standards. Each holster and shooter combination are looked at to see if they meet the rules. A holster might be legal on one shooter but because of body shape not be legal as worn by another. The rules and illustrations are posted on the IDPA web site. 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