tbarker13 Posted November 4, 2014 Share Posted November 4, 2014 I can't tell if today's clarifications address the question of whether or not the Shadow Target is legal or illegal. The question asks if the CZ Custom Shop Accu-Shadow and Accu-Target are allowed in SSP. The answer is no. Obviously we know the Accu-Shadow has been ruled out. But unless I'm missing something, there is no gun called an Accu-Target. Were they just confused and really meant to say Shadow Target? Or do they mean an Accu-Shadow that has the fully-adjustable sights found on the Shadow Target model. Really not trying to re-start the debate over whether Accu-Shadow should or shouldn't be legal. But I just wish they hadn't further muddied the waters regarding the Shadow Target with this clarification. Maybe they'll come out later with a clarification of the clarification. I'm guessing they meant to say the Shadow Target is a no-no. But I'm a pessimist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elguapo Posted November 4, 2014 Share Posted November 4, 2014 Go buy a Wilson Custom Beretta. Then you're 100% legal even if some of what Wilson does to it would be illegal in anyone else's pistol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Watson Posted November 4, 2014 Share Posted November 4, 2014 I don't think so. Wilson makes a lot of flanged cone barrel guns that are not eligible for IDPA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rowdyb Posted November 5, 2014 Share Posted November 5, 2014 and the latest berreta they are promoting says the modified the frame. hardly seems ssp legal to me..... or the fact that they don't make enough of them in a year to satisfy the production requirements for ssp legality. but whatever.... obviously i would never buy anything from wc i'm so unhappy with them. as to the OP, if they did anything externally to the gun then assume you won't be legal in idpa. they dont consider czc a manufacturer. or the fact that cz usa carries them in their own official catalog. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GOF Posted November 5, 2014 Share Posted November 5, 2014 The problem would be solved and all CZs would be blessed if they sent some sponsorship dollars to Berryville .... and if CZ stops talking about how well their guns do in USPSA/IPSC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2MoreChains Posted November 5, 2014 Share Posted November 5, 2014 This whole business about the rule not allowing milling of the slide to accept a different style of sights is kind of weird IMO. I don't have the IDPA rulebook in front of me to cite the actual rule # and exact wording, but really? Three scenarios: You have a 3rd party custom shop (lets leave it at that) who thru their affiliation with the US branch of CZ UB provides them with a Shadow gun that has had its slide milled to accept a LPA low mount adjustable rear sight. CZC does the work and CZ USA sells the gun. Its like CZ USA outsourced the LPA work to CZC. Or at least that's the way I understand it. Or you have a local gunsmith who builds a 1911 from parts (theirs or others) and mills the slide with a bomar or LPA dovetail to accept an LPA adjustable rear sight (akin to the one on the CZ Shadow Target. Or mills it to take a Novak dovetail or countless other styles of sights. This happens all over the country and is not restricted to one or two gun shops. And lastly you have somebody with a XXX brand gun who doesn't like the dinky little stock rear blade 2-dot sight that comes OEM on so many factory guns these days, so he/she has the slide milled to accept a Novak lo-mount such as a Heinie Slant Pro or 10-8 U-notch rear sight. Which one of these is legal and which ones are not? Are better sights on a gun a competitive advantage? Sure they are, for me. I like a certain sight picture and if the sights are crap then my shooting will be equally craptastic. Changing out the sights for something that suits your personal preference is a fairly common thing among gun owners, especially those who compete with them, so why is the actual milling of the slide to accept the after-market sight of a different style against the rules? Because of cost? That's the beauty of the game, you can spend as little or as much as you like on your gun, gear, and cover garments as you like, but its not required that you have a high end high dollar pistol to compete. What's a WC or Nighthawk 1911 running these days? Or an SVI? I have a number of 1911's in my safe. Some have fixed rear sights (Heinie, 10-8, Novak), some have Bomar adjustables (Kensight, Dawson, STI). One of them that has a bomar style rear sight originally came from the STI factory just as a bald slide and I had my gunsmith mill the bomar dovetail when he assembled the entire pistol from parts. Legal or not? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
v1911 Posted November 5, 2014 Share Posted November 5, 2014 The difference is that the Accu Shadow isn't ESP legal on its own. It was only allowed to play there because it was SSP legal. Because it's been ruled a Custom build, third party or not, it no longer gets to play in SSP. Apples and oranges compared to a 1911. I hope I read your post right or all this is null and void. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2MoreChains Posted November 5, 2014 Share Posted November 5, 2014 The difference is that the Accu Shadow isn't ESP legal on its own. It was only allowed to play there because it was SSP legal. Because it's been ruled a Custom build, third party or not, it no longer gets to play in SSP. Apples and oranges compared to a 1911. I hope I read your post right or all this is null and void. I wasn't talking about the Accu-Shadow. Just the Shadow-Target and milling of the slide to accept a LPA rear sight, which is what I think is making it illegal for IDPA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GOF Posted November 5, 2014 Share Posted November 5, 2014 Interesting - because a LPA sight comes standard on a CZ 85B Combat... which is a legal IDPA SSP or ESP gun. (At least I think it is 'cause I got some trophies on the wall from sanctioned matches with it). I fail to see the problem with putting them on the other CZs? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
v1911 Posted November 5, 2014 Share Posted November 5, 2014 I believe you're right. Because milling the slide to accept another sight is against SSP rules. Not so for ESP, but the full rail of the shadow makes it illegal for ESP without its SSP status. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2MoreChains Posted November 5, 2014 Share Posted November 5, 2014 I believe you're right. Because milling the slide to accept another sight is against SSP rules. Not so for ESP, but the full rail of the SP-01 shadow makes it illegal for ESP without its SSP status. FIFY Just so we're clear, you don't see anything FUBAR with not allowing milling of the slide to accept a different sight style for SSP? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ac4wordplay Posted November 5, 2014 Share Posted November 5, 2014 This whole business about the rule not allowing milling of the slide to accept a different style of sights is kind of weird IMO. I don't have the IDPA rulebook in front of me to cite the actual rule # and exact wording, but really? ... 8.2.1.3.1 "Sights may be changed to another notch and post type but slides man not be machined to accept different style sights in SSP." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johes Posted November 5, 2014 Share Posted November 5, 2014 (edited) It's ridiculous. You're installing a common Bomar style adjustable sight. All the milling does is lower it a little so it looks a little better. Absolutely no competitive advantage and it's reasonable that someone would do it to a carry gun. Edited November 5, 2014 by johes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
v1911 Posted November 5, 2014 Share Posted November 5, 2014 SSP = STOCK Service Pistol. Nothing stock about milling a slide to accept a feature that it didn't leave the factory with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
2MoreChains Posted November 5, 2014 Share Posted November 5, 2014 SSP = STOCK Service Pistol. Nothing stock about milling a slide to accept a feature that it didn't leave the factory with. So using that rationale, internal action work to enhance trigger pull (8.2.1.3.7) should not be allowed, nor should after market extractors and pins (8.2.1.3.9), replacment of barrel (8.2.1.3.11) or any of the other permitted modifications listed since they didn't leave the factory that way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GOF Posted November 5, 2014 Share Posted November 5, 2014 Since the factory CZ 85B leaves the factory with a LPA rear sight, is that really a "different style" sight when you put it on another CZ pistol? And... +1 to the above post regarding trigger work, and pins/extractors "not leaving the factory that way". What criteria does IDPA choose to use regarding what is clearly "after it left the factory without that but the work got done later." Some level of consistency in such rulings would be appreciated. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elguapo Posted November 6, 2014 Share Posted November 6, 2014 SSP = STOCK Service Pistol. Nothing stock about milling a slide to accept a feature that it didn't leave the factory with. Do you even read the rulebook bro? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elguapo Posted November 6, 2014 Share Posted November 6, 2014 This the bottom line: IDPA has a hard on for CZ Custom and NO gun that they make or build, regardless if it appears on the CZ-USA Catalog as a production item, is going to pass muster with IDPA. S&W gets away with it because they pay the freight. The only difference between the S&W Performance Center and CZ Custom is one of semantics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillR1 Posted November 6, 2014 Share Posted November 6, 2014 I think the difference is that the slide milling IS an external modification. The extractors and pins are drop-in parts from other guns, and internal trigger work is already allowed because it's not visible. The LPA sight is not a drop-in part for the other CZs because the slide needs to be milled to accept it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillR1 Posted November 6, 2014 Share Posted November 6, 2014 The only difference between the S&W Performance Center and CZ Custom is one of semantics.Huh?The Performance Center is part of S&W...same company and location. CZ Customs is not part of CZ-US. They're different companies. That's a bit more than semantics... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elguapo Posted November 6, 2014 Share Posted November 6, 2014 The only difference between the S&W Performance Center and CZ Custom is one of semantics.Huh?The Performance Center is part of S&W...same company and location. CZ Customs is not part of CZ-US. They're different companies. That's a bit more than semantics... CZ Custom's products are SKUs/catalog items of CZ USA. S&W Performance Center's products are SKUs/catalog items of SMith & Wesson. Where's the difference again? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillR1 Posted November 6, 2014 Share Posted November 6, 2014 The only difference between the S&W Performance Center and CZ Custom is one of semantics.Huh?The Performance Center is part of S&W...same company and location. CZ Customs is not part of CZ-US. They're different companies. That's a bit more than semantics... CZ Custom's products are SKUs/catalog items of CZ USA. S&W Performance Center's products are SKUs/catalog items of SMith & Wesson.Where's the difference again? I thought I just explained that?CZ Customs is not the same company as CZ-USA. The Performance Center IS a part of S&W. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tbarker13 Posted November 6, 2014 Author Share Posted November 6, 2014 Maybe IDPA HQ just hates subcontracting.... If CZUSA had cut the slide, it would be fine. But since they paid someone else to do it, it's forbidden. Personally, I've given up on trying to make sense of IDPA's rule-making. I just accept that there's really not much logic behind the rules. I bought a Shadow Target a couple months ago, thinking I'd have a gun I could use for USPSA and some IDPA matches. But it looks like that's probably not going to work out. No worries, though. There are tons of USPSA matches in the area where I can use my gun. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Watson Posted November 6, 2014 Share Posted November 6, 2014 So using that rationale, internal action work to enhance trigger pull (8.2.1.3.7) should not be allowed, nor should after market extractors and pins (8.2.1.3.9), replacment of barrel (8.2.1.3.11) or any of the other permitted modifications listed since they didn't leave the factory that way. Right. Stock should be more nearly stock and there should be fewer restrictions on "Customization" and "Enhancement." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tbarker13 Posted November 6, 2014 Author Share Posted November 6, 2014 Yeah, they've taken a largely cosmetic approach to this. If it looks stock, it's fine - regardless of what sort of hidden modifications have been done to the "stock" gun. 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