Did Bill Wilson contradict the new IDPA Rulebook?

[Mark Perez]

As stated above, the only way this will be resolved is a scale.

The only way to resolve this would be to weigh the 5906 (using the same scale) that BW used to determine his reasoning.

Edited March 12, 2005 by Mark Perez

[Clay1]

On the weight issue being an advantage - Bulloney! Ask Dave Sevigney about the terrible disadvantage he is under shooting that plastic Glock 34.

I have read out of headquarters numerous times about "the original intent" or the "true spirt" of the sport. It was suppose to be shoot what you carry and forget things like Ghost holsters and mag pouches that aren't concealed. I'm fine with things like that. But this gun weights more than that gun by 1.2 ounces and it is illegal is just one way of rewarding one type of gun or manufacturer and trying to hold another one back.

As far as keeping out the true "out of the spirt of the game" weapons that is why we ALREADY have a box.

Duane, I might be wrong but I read in an interview with Ernie that as soon as he won with his Sig, he said that it would become illegal soon as a way to stop him from competing with that gun.

Let's face it boys. It is really less about the weapon that we choose and more about the skill level we develop. Get yourself an adequate weapon the actually learn how to shoot it, instead of pointing fingers at better shooters and saying they won because of an extra ounce of steel - I will repeat myself - BULLONEY!!!

I will agree that when every hundreth of a second counts there can be little advantages by gun design, but I will still stand that the biggest differences are in work ethic, range time and proper technique. Personally, I have a ways to go in my progress, but then again, I'm not complaining about an ounce here or there.

A case of government intrusion: creating rules to solve problems that didn't exist to justify their existance. Look at it this way, I didn't complain once in this thread about the crazy holster rules - (almost).

[joer]

How about a combined weight - shooter and gun?

[Merlin Orr]

This is starting to resemble our Saturday night poker game.

1. House rules.

2. My House - My Rules.

3. Rule questions to be referred to House dealer.

4. Rules subject to change to protect House percentage.

5. Dealers choice. - Maybe this should be number one...

6. Deuces Wild - if & when I say.

7. Raise the lid.

[Mark Perez]

MAYBE WE SHOULD ADD A SSP OPEN CLASS,

Already have one , it's called ESP.

[jkelly]

With 2 shooters of equal skills, the guy driving the 1911 will usually beat the guy driving the polymer something. ---Gun Geek

That's not what I've seen, but to those at the top of the skills list it might mean something, although isn't a glock shooter one of the best around? Most of the better shooters I've seen, shoot Golcks in SSP and I was under the impression that the Glock was the gamer gun when compared to the Smith.

What is strange, is that I've never heard any SSP shooter complain about a gun's weight in this regard. What I have heard is that the Glock had an advantage in SSP because the firing pin was partially reset (or something like that) and some thought it should be shot in ESP. I thought it was sour grapes myself.

Duane T. I remember you addressing Glock the firing pin before (I think), perhaps vs an XD-40 or something. I don't remember what you said, could you refresh my memory?

Anyway, the point I made with regard to the $2,500 Wilson Combat shooting against a $660 S&W1911 in CDP, is that some where in the extra $1840 ,that the gamers pay for the Wilson, is an advantage in function and accuracy.

And I believe that, with 2 shooters of equal skills, the guy driving the custom 1911 will usually beat the guy driving the carry quality 1911. (Not a dig, I just wanted to state it in similar words to yours.)

I guess "Advantage" is in the eye of the beholder (or some such cr*p).

Perhaps, just to be fair, Mr. Wilson should put a $1,000 dollar limit (Retail) on the cost of guns allowed in IDPA. Noooo, I don't think that will happen.

His game, his rules, that's cool!

Respectfully,

jkelly

[Crusher]

Bottom line is it's "Bill's Game" and we can chose (free will is really cool) to play or not.

If I was going to play in SSP the gun would fit witin the confines of the rules.

Wish list for 2:

2 Glock 17's (like the slide speed over the 34)

Both with Vanek Custom trigger set to 20-22 oz.

Both with Bar-Sto match barrel

1-Novac rear/ Dawson FO front -2 Novack Rear/Trijicon Front

Tuned recoil spring/Ammo (* Power factor set at 125 for LONGEST barrel lenght in division thereby allowing for a lower than 125 rating through the Glock 17)

As far as an SSP gun I don't think it can get much better, all well within the weight limit.

[Duane Thomas]

This statement implies that the limit was set to include the 5906. But per the above math, the 5906 is too heavy. This is the contradiction.

A contradiction that may well be Smith & Wesson's fault, not Bill Wilson's.

As stated above, the only way this will be resolved is a scale.

Yep. Like I said, until someone with access to both a 5906 (and, ideally, a 5906TSW as well) and a postal scale steps up to the plate, this all just blowing smoke.

Question: Whatcha wanna bet Bill Wilson has already done this?

[Round_Gun_Shooter]

Yep. Like I said, until someone with access to both a 5906 (and, ideally, a 5906TSW as well) and a postal scale steps up to the plate, this all just blowing smoke.

Question: Whatcha wanna bet Bill Wilson has already done this?

I doubt it. He neglected to weigh the revolvers

[Gun Geek]

On the weight issue being an advantage - Bulloney!  Ask Dave Sevigney about the terrible disadvantage he is under shooting that plastic Glock 34.

In the immortal words of Matt Burkett:

"Wait until you see what Sevigny can do with a 1911."

I have read out of headquarters numerous times about "the original intent" or the "true spirt" of the sport. It was suppose to be shoot what you carry and forget things like Ghost holsters and mag pouches that aren't concealed. I'm fine with things like that. But this gun weights more than that gun by 1.2 ounces and it is illegal is just one way of rewarding one type of gun or manufacturer and trying to hold another one back.

I'm sorry guys, but weight is an issue and it can provide an advantage. Will it make a Novice whip an Expert. No. Will it make a difference between 2 guys fairly evenly matched at say sharpshooter and above. I think it will.

Does it make a difference for me? Yes. I have a Kimber TLE/RL (a heavy steel fram gun with a light rail on the dust cover, about 1/2 oz under the CDP limit) and a Custom Tactical (alloy frame 4 or 5 oz lighter than the TLE/RL). On an IDPA target shooting 0's from 5 yards my best split times are about .20 with the TLE/RL and .25 - .27 with the Custom. I have done everything I can to make the Custom faster, I can't. The difference is that the TLE/RL just doesn't recoil as volently or as far as the custom. Having said this, I actually shot the Custom in competition because my transition and draw times are actually faster. Plate rack times are about 0.75 sec faster because of all the transitions. I feel if I practiced more with the heavier gun, it would be faster than the lighter one.

Look, if lighter were better, don't you think USPSA open guns would be made of as much titanium as possible?

As far a slight weight difference being not much of an issue, I agree. 0.5 oz or 1 oz or maybe 2 won't make much difference. But, you have to draw the line somewhere. Remember that these guns are 35 - 40 oz so 3 or 4 oz is 10% of the weight. For CDP (the one that Bill gets accused of protecting so he can sell more guns), by looking through the Wilson website, it appears that about 1/3 of his models don't play just beacuse they are too heavy. Do you truly think he would set a limit to spite other manufacturers that would exclude so much of his product line if he didn't really feel strongly about it?

OK, read the interview, page 23 of the Tac Journal

Top of the page:

"There was an equipment race starting, and we saw the handwriting on the wall.

The weight limit was aimed at new guns that were developed after IDPA and USPSA Production shooting became popular, and seemed to have been developed solely to give a competitor an advantage in winning those events."

About the middle of the page:

"A gun that weighs three quarters of a pound more than a loaded Glock 17 has an advantage on recoil control, period."

A little further down:

"We drew the line there [at the 5906] intentionally to keep out guns that were brought out later, solely to win matches like these, not to be suitable for personal concealed carry or law enforcement."

As the Brits say: Q.E.D.

You might argue with where he drew the line, but you can not argue with the thought process that got him to draw the line.

Wow, I never thought I would defend Bill!

[Gun Geek]

How about a combined weight - shooter and gun?

That'd be interesting.

[Gun Geek]

This statement implies that the limit was set to include the 5906. But per the above math, the 5906 is too heavy. This is the contradiction.

A contradiction that may well be Smith & Wesson's fault, not Bill Wilson's.

As stated above, the only way this will be resolved is a scale.

Yep. Like I said, until someone with access to both a 5906 (and, ideally, a 5906TSW as well) and a postal scale steps up to the plate, this all just blowing smoke.

Question: Whatcha wanna bet Bill Wilson has already done this?

Agree,

Perhaps I should have said "alleged" or "apparent" contradiction.

[Gun Geek]

And I believe that, with 2 shooters of equal skills, the guy driving the custom 1911 will usually beat the guy driving the carry quality 1911.  (Not a dig, I just wanted to state it in similar words to yours.)

Now this would be worth betting about. Stakes are who buys the first round! (of drinks that is)

[markm]

Are yall really serious?

[itento]

The weight of the 5906 doesn't really matter. The statement “We drew the line at the Smith & Wesson Model 5906. It’s an all steel 9mm, and it’s about the heaviest gun people are likely to carry concealed” doesn't make sense.

If 39 oz. is the heaviest that people are likely to carry, then ALL Divisions should be 39 oz. if this is a "CCW" practical sport!!! If the council has determined that only SSP should adhere to this philosophy, than so be it.

If wieght isn't the criteria for CCW (which we all know isn't), then some other criter should probably be used (like pf. ).

[BroncoGlenn]

Why not just weigh the silly gun, then mill out the reliefs under the grips until you make the weight limit?  You could also do some sneaky stuff underneath the slide.  There's a hell of a lot of extra meat under there. 

Who's going to know? 

Darn it! It's called "aggressive dehorning."

That's my story and I'm s-s-stickin' to it.

Glock has a chopped top slide to reduce slide weight. But it's allowed in that case because it was done by the factory.

So what if I send a blaster back to the factory's custom shop to have some stylish lightning bolts cut clear through the sides of the slide? The work was done by the factory. But what if it's not done to deliberately trim weight, it's done for the sake of styling. But regardless any doubt goes in favor of the shooter, right? Call me twisted by I have visions of a blaster with the 945's fish scale serrations and lightning bolts cut through the sides of the slide.

[jkelly]

Now this would be worth betting about. Stakes are who buys the first round! (of drinks that is)---Gun Geek

Yeah, that would be worth betting over!

Respectfully,

jdkelly

[jkelly]

I'd still like to know which gun(s) this rule was aimed at and which none gamer guns got caught up in it.

Any one know?

Respectfully,

jdkelly

[Round_Gun_Shooter]

I'd still like to know which gun(s) this rule was aimed at and which none gamer guns got caught up in it.

Any one know?

Respectfully,

jdkelly

JK,

It was the new line of SIG heavy weights. And yes, SIG is aware of it and not real happy.

Regards,

Gary

[revchuck]

The Beretta Steel doesn't make it for SSP, either. (Assuming you want to start hammer down, like a CZ.)

[spd522]

Para LDA hi caps don't make weight either. So much for Bill's statement about not being suitable for LE. Para markets some of these very guns built for LE. The SIG all stainless are marketed for LE- I know guys who carry them.

It seems to be a scam to keep those big $$$ contributors to IDPA (Glock and S&W) out front.

I wonder how long before SIG pulls it's ads in the TJ?

If there is going to be a weight limitation, it needs to be the same weight across the board in all divisions.

[Clay1]

On weight of different guns vs each other here is another thought: if you take a Glock 34 Vs. a Glock 34 and you internally add weight to one say 3 or 4 ounces - yes I can see the competitive advantage.

Now lets look at a HK USP vs. a G34. The G34 if substaintially lighter but the barrel bore is so much closer to the hand that the muzzle flip is reduced by design not weight, this is also a factor. I do think that this is one of the reasons that the polymer gun has a chance against the heavier guns.

Really what most of this is about is that I can shoot a $550 G34 and I know that the gun will be reasonably competitive against weapons that cost twice that amount. The difference is me and not the weapon. For me it is about stage planning and movement path and planned reloads and which target to engage in which order that will be the biggest difference in my scores and not an extra ounce here or there.

[jkelly]

Gary,

Thanks for the info, that does make this more interesting. I guess SSP stands for Stock Service Plastic.

Maybe they should just add an SSS division Stock Service Steel so that the heavy double action pistols can shoot against themselves.

Respectfully,

johnk

[Duane Thomas]

It seems to be a scam to keep those big $$$ contributors to IDPA (Glock and S&W) out front.

Oh please.

[Gun Geek]

Gary,

Thanks for the info, that does make this more interesting.  I guess SSP stands for Stock Service Plastic.

Maybe they should just add an SSS division Stock Service Steel so that the heavy double action pistols can shoot against themselves.

Respectfully,

johnk

OK,

I'm missing something.

The rules don't say these guns aren't allowed in IDPA, they just don't compete in SSP.

All of these guns still play in ESP, don't they? Is there something about these guns that will make them uncompetitive in ESP? Are the 1911's that live there that much faster?

If I'm, confused, be gentle and un confuse me. Otherwise, what's the fuss?

It seems to be a scam to keep those big $$$ contributors to IDPA (Glock and S&W) out front.

Why would going to ESP piss off Sig and Para. Why do you consider SSP to be "out front". Heck, if anything, CDP is the "out front" division. Is it just because SSP tends to have more people in it? When I look at match scores, (unless Sevigney is involved) the SSP times tend to be slower than the others. Pick your favorite club and look at a history. Compare times in each class and each division (SSP MM vs CDP MM vs ESP MM, SSP EX vs CDP EX vs ESP EX, etc)

This all sounds like great advertising to me. If I'm the Sig or Para salesman, my spiel goes:"IDPA recognizes that our guns give you such an advantage [Mr. police chief, FBI man, Joe Schmo buyer], that they had to move them to another faster division. We compete with S_I's that are 2x or 3x the cost of our product."