Jump to content
Brian Enos's Forums... Maku mozo!
Sign in to follow this  
MWP

Possible Elimination of ESR

Recommended Posts

I would like to see a 625 5inch allowed again. There are a lot of them out there that are not being used in uspsa since the 8 shot has been added to revolver division. Pete

If it would save ESR I would be all for it. I would much rather see expansion than elimination. As far as the argument about every day carry, we all know a 4" 625, glock 34, or 5" 1911 is not exactly a pocket pistol anyway. I do have a 3" model 25 that I have carried, as well as shot BUG with, so although it can be done, my 4" n frames are for home defense and competition. It isn't realistic to say all guns in SSP,ESP, and CDP are every day carry so lets not use that excuse and close our options to attracting more shooters.

Edited by enemeth

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are still quite a few people that carry revolvers every day.Thats what IDPA is all about, semi's & revos. I don't want to see any revolver go. Merge them together or whatever, I don't think we'll have many revo shooters crying over it if they do put them together. Different breed..... Pete

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think merging the two divisions and trying to make them equal again would be a mistake. ESR and SSR were created to give each type of revolver a place go shoot on even footing. But everyone voted (by participation) and ESR isn't popular enough to keep. Why would/should they risk destroying the division that did work to support a gun that has already proven itself to be unpopular. As the old saying goes...Why cut off your nose to spite your face?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I expect if you merge ESR with SSR, at least on the first try, it's likely someone will win and someone will loose. Being allowed to shoot moon clips in SSR is better than being banned, but I don't expect to be welcomed with open arms if it turns out the rules don't put moon clips at some disadvantage. Revolvers are too diverse to lump them all together easily. I am also thinking about the majority of revolvers that people really carry, with small frames and short barrels. Even though they are not banned from SSR they are a non factor. Sometimes you end up with a defacto ban based on the way the rules are written. Uncertainty in the future of revolvers causes more rule instability and adds new problems that IDPA didn't need to create.

Edited by enemeth

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

+1. Incorporating moonclip guns into "Revolver" would be better than banning them from IDPA. There have been enough suggestions as to how that could be done without creating an unfair competitive advantage for either speed loader guns, or moonclip guns. It should, at least, be considered and given a try.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wish IDPA would give a little more warning. I spent a lot of money to get set up for ESR with a 625, new holster, lots of moon clips, bullets, powder, etc. Rule changes with seemingly little reasoning behind them have cost myself and others money with past rulings and this one will be the most expensive to date for me. I like my 625 and will keep it even if I can't shoot it in IDPA as I originally intended, as there are still other venues to shoot in. Perhaps as someone said there will be a massive influx of new shooters for the new divisions and the ones that don't renew their membership will not be noticed as much. Just my .02 worth.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought IDPA had implemented a Rules/Equipment Stability period of two years. This would seem to go against that idea. They should certainly find a way to allow to ESP guns to continue to compete. Obviously easier said than done.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good points on giving warning and equipment stability.

"Progress, far from consisting in change, depends on retentiveness. When change is absolute there remains no being to improve and no direction is set for possible improvement: and when experience is not retained, as among savages, infancy is perpetual. Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it." - George Santayana

By the way, is there anyone out there who was around before ESR was created that could give some insight on what shooting together in only one revolver division was like?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The issue before the separation was that both moon clipped and speed loader guns were at 125pf. At the same power factor, the advantage goes to the moon clipped gun.

Now 105pf is SSR's power factor, it's a puff load. 165pf in a gun with no reciprocating mass is pretty tough on the sight picture and the hands.

I think owners of both guns should take both out of the safe and go run some stages and drills. Shoot the classifier. Shoot every stage twice. Pay attention to stage times AND points down.

I did, and the results aren't what they appear. My stage times were within a second, and not only one way, both guns won stages.

So IDPA only has 3% of it's membership shoot ESR at sanctioned matches. How many members are they claiming to have now? 15k? 20k? There are many more IDPA members that shoot and or own ESR legal equipment than 3%.

At today's prices, it's 1000$ to play in ESR with a 4" 625 and accessories. So in theory, using IDPA's very low numbers, that's roughly 450-600 people. Thats 450k-600k$ in equipment with no place to play?

I've heard that S&W makes 500 625s per year. That's why when a potential ESR shooter wants to start, he has a tough time finding a one. I don't know of anyone personally who owns a 4" 625 for anything other than IDPA. That seems like a lot of hard earned money and time spent towards a sport, wasted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With such few shooters attending sanctioned matches, is it even possible to achieve match bumps? Are classifiers the only opportunity to move up?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I picked one up at the Carolina Cup. SS to EX in SSR. One bump to MA from EX happened at indoor nats in SSR. Other than that, they are pretty rare as far as I know.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With such few shooters attending sanctioned matches, is it even possible to achieve match bumps? Are classifiers the only opportunity to move up?

Even in SSR, match bumps are pretty rare. I won four sanctioned matches this year in SSR/SS, and the biggest turnout in my class was four other shooters. Three of these matches were state championships.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At this point 635's will only be competitive in IPSC and ICORE only! Not so happy about the change but i wont sit here and complain either! There is no "Fair" way to have both moonclip guns and speed loaders in the same division... I did however here that many moons ago they were in the same division... Some of the "old Time" idpa shooters should share what the outcomes where back then

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was just reading about the status of USPSA Revolver.

Since they allowed 8 shot Minor revolvers to compete with 6 shot Major revolvers, first, everybody had to have an Eight Shooter. The low recoil and extra shots were worth more than Major scoring.

Then people quit caring and revolvers of any sort became scarcer than ever.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was just reading about the status of USPSA Revolver.

Then people quit caring and revolvers of any sort became scarcer than ever.

You lost me here, USPSA revolver has had it's largest turnout ever the last two years with a stand alone nationals. Like the 8 shots or hate them, they made USPSA revolver division a new one gun game, a gun thats actually still built. Smith lists, I believe, 7 different 8 shot revolvers for sale, as opposed to 1 moon clipped competitive 625? The 8 shot rule saved revolver division in USPSA.

Now how do we save ESR and or its equipment?

Edited by MWP

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You lost me here, USPSA revolver has had it's largest turnout ever the last two years with a stand alone nationals. Like the 8 shots or hate them, they made USPSA revolver division a new one gun game, a gun thats actually still built. Smith lists, I believe, 7 different 8 shot revolvers for sale, as opposed to 1 moon clipped competitive 625? The 8 shot rule saved revolver division in USPSA.

Now how do we save ESR and or its equipment?

There were a couple of more shooters at the 2013 Nats (without 8-shot guns) than in 2014 (with the 8 shooters).

The stand alone (with Single Stack) Nationals did more for the division than moving to 8-shooters, in my opinion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Would the person or persons out there who submitted the rule change recomendation to drop ESR please stand up?

We all know that a lot of members who were concerned about the flat footed reload submitted recomendations when the rules were open for comment. Nobody I know or any of the postings I saw about rule change suggestions even mentioned dropping ESR.

I apopogize if the members really want ESR dropped and I am just out of the loop. If no one owns up, then maybe HQ should still be open to consider member feedback even if it has to be through forum posts since the official comment time period is closed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was just reading about the status of USPSA Revolver.

Since they allowed 8 shot Minor revolvers to compete with 6 shot Major revolvers, first, everybody had to have an Eight Shooter. The low recoil and extra shots were worth more than Major scoring.

Then people quit caring and revolvers of any sort became scarcer than ever.

Huh? We had more revolver shooters at the Rocky Mountain 300 this year than SS and L10 combined. This is a match where the minimum round count on each stage is more than 60.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Would the person or persons out there who submitted the rule change recomendation to drop ESR please stand up?

We all know that a lot of members who were concerned about the flat footed reload submitted recomendations when the rules were open for comment. Nobody I know or any of the postings I saw about rule change suggestions even mentioned dropping ESR.

I apopogize if the members really want ESR dropped and I am just out of the loop. If no one owns up, then maybe HQ should still be open to consider member feedback even if it has to be through forum posts since the official comment time period is closed.

I saw a couple of them. They didn't want ESR dropped, they were division merger requests. They were hidden in TONS of noise, though. I couldn't comment on the requests, or I would have. I knew one of the submitters by name. He was also one of the several pushing hard for 6major/8minor in USPSA. He'll have to out himself, though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I suggested during the comment period that the power factor in ESR be dropped to 150. I read that many others did likewise. I sure didn't expect the entire division dropped!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's my point. Those comments were to improve ESR or consolidate revolver shooters to improve competition.The point of those comments was not to "eliminate" ESR.

HQ's response "we know that this will make a few people unhappy,", "we have also decided to eliminate the ESR Division.", and "looking at the possibility of adding these guns back to SSR". This makes me nervous, there is no assurance that consolidation will happen.The track record for eliminating equipment, based on reasoning that has been questioned as being somewhat subjective, is why I am concerned.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder what percentage of IDPA membership a division has to have to keep from being eliminated? That would be useful information for people about to spend large sums of money on firearms and necessary competition gear.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I dont think member generated requests drove the drop of esr. I think they wanted to add a division and then looked around to see who could be cut. And taht would be esr.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree members did not request this. Then it would follow that if another division is created in the future another would be eliminated.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...