Jump to content
Brian Enos's Forums... Maku mozo!

USPSA vs IPSC


rbebeau

Recommended Posts

USPSA has divisions to line up with political misfortune, common ground with the fishermen, etc. IPSC does its thing and we do ours.

It is a lot to keep track of. A move towards standardization would be great but I don't see it happening anytime soon.

I think the equipment is the easy part, the rules, stage designs, and exclusive use of the "classic" target (why have a place for Bravos in the results? I don't see how to shoot one) would be more difficult to get used to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Short answer -- because IPSC is played in a whole bunch of countries without a Second Amendment, they are more politically correct and willing to appease.....

Whereas Americans are notoriously challenging, if not downright recalcitrant, have a healthy disdain for anyone who tries to tell them what to do, and are covered by there Second Amendment, as well as the remainder of the Bill of Rights.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Short answer -- because IPSC is played in a whole bunch of countries without a Second Amendment, they are more politically correct and willing to appease.....

Whereas Americans are notoriously challenging, if not downright recalcitrant, have a healthy disdain for anyone who tries to tell them what to do, and are covered by there Second Amendment, as well as the remainder of the Bill of Rights.....

I don't see how the IPSC rules are more restrictive as to gun laws. There is still "Standard" and "Open" so mag capacity isn't a factor. In fact you can have more rounds in production.

Do other countries have their own sets of rules like USPSA?

I think the equipment is the easy part, the rules, stage designs, and exclusive use of the "classic" target would be more difficult to get used to.

Agreed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Short answer -- because IPSC is played in a whole bunch of countries without a Second Amendment, they are more politically correct and willing to appease.....

Whereas Americans are notoriously challenging, if not downright recalcitrant, have a healthy disdain for anyone who tries to tell them what to do, and are covered by there Second Amendment, as well as the remainder of the Bill of Rights.....

I don't see how the IPSC rules are more restrictive as to gun laws. There is still "Standard" and "Open" so mag capacity isn't a factor. In fact you can have more rounds in production.

Do other countries have their own sets of rules like USPSA?

I think the equipment is the easy part, the rules, stage designs, and exclusive use of the "classic" target would be more difficult to get used to.

Agreed.

Other countries don't have their own set of rules, but some have legal restrictions. As per Canadian law all magazines are restricted to 10 rounds max. Different countries have different minimum barrel lengths. Some restrict the caliber that can be used. I believe Australia doesn't allow FMJ's - lead only.

I agree with Nik - IPSC is going more politically correct. Target shape and size restrictions. Air-soft division?????

Other differences make no sense at all, especially in Prod Div - is minimum trigger pull good or bad? Are internal mods restrictions enforceable? A race holster in IPSC Prod? These are a few things I believe the two governing bodies will never agree on. (at least while VP is still making rules)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Minimum trigger pulls are bad -- unless we want to break striker fired autos out from traditional DA/SA.....

Really -- the reasons behind the differences have been pretty well hashed out here......

There are threads on this topic going back ten years or so, including some where Vince weighed in, back when he was a contributing member....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Diverging visions.

For more than a decade, the IPSC leadership has sought to take the sport in the direction of being more "reputable" in the eyes of world governments. Coming from a gun-banners paradise (the UK), I can appreciate the pressures they are under. The high point (or low point, depending on your point of view) was the failed attempt to get Olympic sanction as an exhibition sport some years back. Creation of the Classic target, followed by elimination of the Metric target, was just a step in this progression. The sport is now curiously bipolar; participants like the idea of the martial origins, yet realize that migration towards a more stylized sport is inevitable. This is why we see such curious rules as allowing race holsters but mandating that they be placed behind the hip.

During the same time-frame, USPSA has moved AWAY from the stylized sport it was becoming in the 90s, and is once again loud and proud about its martial heritage. The growth of civilian firearm ownership for personal protection (CCW) is a big part of this, as is the heightened awareness of the 2nd Amendment amongst the American populace. To a lesser extent, market pressures from IDPA, 3-Gun etc. have pulled USPSA in this direction too.

I'm sure I am not alone in thinking there is a lot of good in both rules sets, and I would love to combine the best of both into one unified document, but I fear the window of opportunity to do so is long past. In the future I foresee nothing but growing divergence.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The other thing that was going against the IPSC sanctioning is the current established place that ISSF (formerly UIT/ISU) has in the Olympics. ISSF provides the governing rules for all currently existing Olympic shooting events and they have specific verbiage in their rules about distancing themselves from any "practical shooting sports". See the Wikipedia article about ISSF.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Personally, I always thought the notion of IPSC in the Olympics was harebrained at best. One, it was never going to happen anyway, and secondly why would you want it to happen? Was the notion that we didn't have enough rules and needed even more rule making bodies sticking their fingers in the pie somehow appealing?

Whatever the reason, that hopeless attempt drove IPSC towards political correctness exactly the time USPSA was driving the other way. That's fine by me, I like seeing USPSA being dragged kicking and screaming into a more modern world and I really don't care what IPSC does. The new USPSA 3gun rules are a good thing and I'm glad to see USPSA swinging in that direction.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

What is the Magazine Rules of IPSC for Standard Div Magazine Extensions? I have shot USPSA since 2008-09. Is it the 140 or not? I looked up the Rule book and I am still unclear. I am referring to a Glock 35 specifically. I have family in PR and would like to shoot a major match while visiting, but they only have Major IPSC matches. Any help will be greatly appreciated.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Check your Glock 35 fits the IPSC (not USPSA) box as well. Magwells and the like are the usual problem. There is only about 1/8" extra room front-to-back in the box with a factory stock G34/35.

That said, I suggest making every effort to go. Shooters are shooters the world over and it will be fun no matter how you do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is no length in IPSC for Standard. The gun with magazines inserted has to fit in the box. Therefore the length of the magazine is dependent on the size of the gun.

So would a standard Dawson 140 Mag extension on a Glock 35 be ok?

It is very unlikely for 140 magazine inserted in a gun to fit into 150mm wide box.

From Infinity web site:

IPSC Standard Division: 124mm magazine with +2 Wedge for SV pistols (other manufacturers pistols may require a +1 basepad to fit the IPSC box)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...