Ipsc Production Gun Changes

[Jim Norman]

Phil,

Last I heard Angus was a US based shooter and the gun he shoots has been removed. Also, If I am correct, someone, somewhere put up money to import this gun to the US. That person now has a non-useful gun inventory for sale. The value has certainly diminished at least as far as use in USPSA. I have no idea if there are other venues where this gun would be competitive.

It is simply bad practice to add a gun to the list and then to remove it. I like Nik's idea, once the gun is on the list it must stay there for at least 6 years.

Jim

[Nik Habicht]

Phil,

Last I heard Angus was a US based shooter and the gun he shoots has been removed. Also, If I am correct, someone, somewhere put up money to import this gun to the US. That person now has a non-useful gun inventory for sale. The value has certainly diminished at least as far as use in USPSA. I have no idea if there are other venues where this gun would be competitive.

It is simply bad practice to add a gun to the list and then to remove it. I like Nik's idea, once the gun is on the list it must stay there for at least 6 years.

Jim

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

That's not quite what I said: If a gun's been on the list for any amount of time, 1 week or 1 year or ten years, the earliest it could be removed for reasons other than safety is five + years after publication of intent to disallow it. That way any shooter who just bought the piece, has five years to save up for a replacement. Why five years? Because most serious competitors also buy a backup gun, mags, parts, etc. It could take those of us living with less fortunate economic realities a while to change blasters.....

[diehli]

Hopefully USPSA (its Prez, VP/NROI roi, and BOD) will do the "right" thing and re-allow the previously-approved blasters back on the list in red. Glad to know it's an auto-update database thingamajiggy, Rob. Thanks for that 411.

AFA IPSC... *sigh*. Hopefully they'll feel the pinch with all the WS brouhaha and put more time and thought into this decision.

[Flexmoney]

A couple of things here...

1. USPSA has been lazy as can be with regards to the "Production Gun List". The USPSA list has never really been actively managed. It is a copy of the IPSC list...with a few obvious differences. We were doomed to a fate like that which has fallen upon us.

2. The CZ SP01 (the big fancy version)...the only shooter that has one is Angus. And, he is a factory sponsored shooter. So, the only person that taking the uber CZ off the list would effect is a factory sponsored shooter.

3. I don't think that a factory sponsored shooter should be the only one that has the chance to shoot a "Production" gun. And, if there are (or will be soon) 20-30 more of the guns in circulation...well, I don't see how that equates to being "Production". Heck, we require 500 produced for Limited.

4. While we are on the subject...the next thing to come up will be what modifications are allowed from the "factory". A couple of factories have "custom shops". I don't see how a "custom shop" gun can be a Production gun. (But, that is how IPSC looks at it.)

Again...the fix is easy enough. Go back to the red book criteria of 2,000 produced...one year. And, make sure they are available to the general public.

Oh...and USPSA needs to take care of their own...not rely on IPSC to do the work for us.

[Chuck Anderson]

I find it interesting that one of the arguments being used to rail against the removal of the CZ guns is that they are now useless hunks of non-competetive metal. That previous buyers are now stuck with a gun that can't be used. It seems to me that kind of proves IPSC's point. I personally don't care either way about the CZ. I do think that Tanfoglio went well overboard with their "Production" gun. The pictures that I saw look like a Tanfolio limited gun with full mag well, huge cap mags etc. I'm not thrilled with the way that IPSC went about it but it seems that there needed to be some limits put on what exactly a production gun should be. Since there were only a relative few SP-01 and Tanfoglio Production models in personal hands it seems like it was probably better to do it this year instead of waiting till more were available.

I don't know enough about the P-01 to comment. But comparing the steel dustcovered SP-01 to the 1/2 oz of plastic on Glock's "full dustcover" seems a bit disingenous. And for IPSC matches with a five pound DA first pull requirement, I really doubt that having a "single action" gun with a five pound + pull for every shot is anything resembling an advantage over the CZ's, Beretta's and Sig's that I have handled with a 6-7 lb DA first pull and 2 lb every additional shot.

[CzechM8]

2.  The CZ SP01 (the big fancy version)...the only shooter that has one is Angus.  And, he is a factory sponsored shooter.  So, the only person that taking the uber CZ off the list would effect is a factory sponsored shooter. 

Flex, that might be true within the US (although, supposedly, about 20 SP-01s are waiting for or have received customs clearance and should be ready to be shipped to the people on the factory waiting list within days or weeks).

In Europe, from my own limited perspective, I know at least five shooters (in addition to Adam Tyc, the factory team member and European & AustralAsian Champion) who have recently bought the gun. It is available to the civilian shooter. I have actually seen one in a gunshop yesterday - no special order, just come in and buy one.

3. I don't think that a factory sponsored shooter should be the only one that has the chance to shoot a "Production" gun. And, if there are (or will be soon) 20-30 more of the guns in circulation...well, I don't see how that equates to being "Production". Heck, we require 500 produced for Limited.

See above. I don't think the rule states that a certain number should be available in the US, does it?

Plus, the first production run of about 600 was supposedly prepared for an undisclosed special unit.

Sure, you have to wonder why it wasn't disclosed because gun manufacturers usually take pride in what units are using their guns...

But whatever the case, the figures should be OK, which is why the gun was approved for Production about eight months ago.

I'm not an SP-01 advocate or one of CZ, for that matter. What I'm trying to say is that such attempts to tune the rules to "perfection" without a solid decision making basis work to the detriment of the sport. All these decisions like "Yes...errr..no, just because we managed to come up with new rules to find a reason for the decision...but we don't really apply the rule on all the guns it should be applied to, neither is it a clearly defined rule" just leave a bitter aftertaste.

There are rules, so you (being a company) prepare a gun to fit the rules. Nothing wrong with that. But once you've invested all that money in R&D, marketing & advertising, the same people who established the rules give you the finger and are not even able to satisfactorily justify the decision.

It wouldn't really surprise me if CZ or Tanfoglio decided to withdraw their sponsorship of the WS.

[Bear1142]

There are rules, so you (being a company) prepare a gun to fit the rules. Nothing wrong with that. But once you've invested all that money in R&D, marketing & advertising, the same people who established the rules give you the finger and are not even able to satisfactorily justify the decision.

Exactly my point.

It wouldn't really surprise me if CZ or Tanfoglio decided to withdraw their sponsorship of the WS.

Hopefully, USPSA will do the right thing and maybe they will shift their support to our Nationals.

Erik

[EricBudd]

The SP01 was on the USPSA approved list in the recient past. The following is from the page cached on Google:

CZ 75 (all SA/DA and DAO models), CZ 75 SP-01 Tactical, CZ 75 SP-01, 85 (all models), 97-B, 99, 100, 101, 110, P-01

The current web page is now as follows:

CZ 75 (all SA/DA and DAO models except SP-01 series), 85 (all models), 97-B, 99, 100, 101, 110

[Rob Boudrie]

The SP01 was on the USPSA approved list in the recient past.  The following is from the page cached on Google:

CZ 75 (all SA/DA and DAO models), CZ 75 SP-01 Tactical, CZ 75 SP-01, 85 (all models), 97-B, 99, 100, 101, 110, P-01

The current web page is now as follows:

CZ 75 (all SA/DA and DAO models except SP-01 series), 85 (all models), 97-B, 99, 100, 101, 110

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I mentioned this in another thread, but here goes... The stuff in black on the USPSA list is obtained directly from the IPSC list in "real time" (via a connection to the database on www.ipsc.org). The instant IPSC changes their list, the black portion of ours changes.

The red stuff on the USPSA list represents our regional differences. If USPSA places the recently removed CZ guns on the US list, they will show up in red as US regional differences.

USPSA has not yet made any decision on the CZ issue, but will be looking at all relevant facts - which I expect will include a conversation with out rep to the world body (Michael Voigt).

[Angus Hobdell]

The fact of the matter as it stand is this.

CZ produced the SP01 for a special forces unit. First the made like 750 pieces with a follow up order of another 750 pieces completing the total order of 1500. The first 750 were delivered to the customer August ish.

I was in the factory for a visit before the Europeans. I ahd my fun guns with me ready to shoot the match.

In one of the design meetings they showed me the new SP01. I said right then and there without having even shot the gun that I would actively campaign with this gun in Prodcution.

IPSC was called photos sent and the gun approved.

I shot the Europeans with it and came second

Then Adam and I both used them in Bali to come First and Second in Match and First and second in shoot off's.

The world opnion was that they loved the gun. So with this in mind some months ago CZ UB then decided to run another 1000. These guns are not of course made overnight and the paper work to have them shipped world wide often takes longer (As anyone who has exported imported knows)

Handguns unlike donuts do not go stale but the money that is set aside to produce them is schedule to comeback sometime soon. The decsion to make so many MORE guns was not purely based on the IPSC production as it is well known that the guns will eventually be sold.

But the decsion to make 1000 run was.

So there is the long and the short of CZ's involvement in this whole MESS

[wide45]

CZ produced the SP01 for a special forces unit. First the made like 750 pieces with a follow up order of another 750 pieces completing the total order of 1500. The first 750 were delivered to the customer August ish.

I was in the factory for a visit before the Europeans. I ahd my fun guns with me ready to shoot the match.

In one of the design meetings they showed me the new SP01. I said right then and there without having even shot the gun that I would actively campaign with this gun in Prodcution.

IPSC was called photos sent and the gun approved.

So IPSC approved the gun before any had been produced for sale to the general public?

The world opnion was that they loved the gun. So with this in mind some months ago CZ UB then decided to run another 1000. These guns are not of course made overnight and the paper work to have them shipped world wide often takes longer (As anyone who has exported imported knows)

Handguns unlike donuts do not go stale but the money that is set aside to produce them is schedule to comeback sometime soon. The decsion to make so many MORE guns was not purely based on the IPSC production as it is well known that the guns will eventually be sold.

But the decsion to make 1000 run was.

To date only 1000 have been made for sale, and are mostly not yet available?

I'd say IPSC was premature in accepting the gun. The racelike nature of it is, a different issue.

We know how hard it is to put the cat back in the bag, but sometimes you've got to do what you've got to do.

[Turtle]

I'm not trying to start a flame war, so please don't read that tone into this...

The racelike nature of it is, a different issue.

I don't see how adding a light/accessory rail to a pistol makes it "racelike". It's a Production gun for goodness sakes. Is it the weight, then say so. Is it the thumb safety, then say so. Or does it just not look like the other Production guns?

We need well defined rules, not vague terms like: spirit of the game, racelike, unfair advantage, competition style, etc...

There are several issues here and not to beat a deceased equine, but...

1) The whole Approved, no just kidding Not Approved thing.

and

2) Criteria based approval vs. Arbitrary List Based approval.

It wouldn't really surprise me if CZ or Tanfoglio decided to withdraw their sponsorship of the WS.

Nobody likes to be treated unfairly and to have to hear "because we said so" as the only justification. Anybody who knows me would know that I would feel the same frustration with this issue if I had a "special" interest or not. It's the principle of the thing. I just hope that the damage can be repaired.

Regards,

Todd

[gmshtr]

Sounds like we need some SHOOTERS on the board making these decisions! We as SHOOTERS know that the equipment doesn't matter. OK, now...everyone together now...THE EQUPIMENT DOESN'T MATTER! THE EQUIPMENT DOESN'T MATTER! THE EQUIPMENT DOESN'T MATTER!

Oh, BTW...Robbie/Springfield's gonna be REALLY pissed!

[Gary Stevens]

Phil,

The board you would be talking about would be the IPSC World Body. The way you get a vote there is to be the USPSA President. As has been stated before the USPSA board had nothing to do with this decision. Since USPSA has placed IPSC unapproved guns on our approved list, this may happen again. The issue is not being discussed at this point though I am sure it will be at some point.

While not at your skill level, I consider myself a shooter none the less, and have always tried to represent the shooter in my decisions, as have all the rest of the BOD.

Your disparaging remark was uncalled for.

Gary

[EricW]

Oh, BTW...Robbie/Springfield's gonna be REALLY pissed!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

??????

The XD was *approved*. Why would RL or SA be upset other than the precedent of CZ and Tangfolio taking it in the shorts?

[Nik Habicht]

Oh, BTW...Robbie/Springfield's gonna be REALLY pissed!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

??????

The XD was *approved*. Why would RL or SA be upset other than the precedent of CZ and Tangfolio taking it in the shorts?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Eric,

I could be all wet here --- but I think he might have been on the Production team if the XD had been legal when the team was selected.....

[EricW]

Oh, BTW...Robbie/Springfield's gonna be REALLY pissed!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

??????

The XD was *approved*. Why would RL or SA be upset other than the precedent of CZ and Tangfolio taking it in the shorts?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Eric,

I could be all wet here --- but I think he might have been on the Production team if the XD had been legal when the team was selected.....

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Oh.

[gmshtr]

Sorry you took offense, Gary.

My comment wasn't directed to the USPSA board/world body rep/or any USPSA faction. I thought the thread started as "IPSC Production Gun Changes." I'm just not thoroughly educated in the administrative details. For the most part, I have faith in the USPSA Board's decisions. Hopefully, these issues will be addressed properly.

And, yes, Rob's intent was to shoot the XD on the US Prod Team. By the time he found out that the XD wasn't an IPSC approved Production gun, it was too late to get in those ever so important even/odd Area matches for the year to make the Standard Team.

What a disgrace.

[Chuck D]

As far as the XD's are concerned...sure was a round about way to get where we belonged ( with XD'S being accepted as legitimate Production Division guns).

I hope TGO brings one to the WS anyway.

I feel really bad for those in the IPSC world that spent the "long" dollar on the Tanfoglio and CZ models that have been "bounced" from the Division but the decision was necessary to bring the Division back to its intended purpose.

Next gun I'd take a good hard look at is the often spoke of but extremely difficult to obtain S&W 5 inch 5906. Nowhere to be found in a product catalog and unobtainable by the general public without a factory "connection."

[GeorgeInNePa]

As far as the XD's are concerned...sure was a round about way to get where we belonged ( with XD'S being accepted as legitimate Production Division guns).

I hope TGO brings one to the WS anyway.

I feel really bad for those in the IPSC world that spent the "long" dollar on the Tanfoglio and CZ models that have been "bounced" from the Division but the decision was necessary to bring the Division back to its intended purpose.

Next gun I'd take a good hard look at is the often spoke of but extremely difficult to obtain S&W 5 inch 5906.  Nowhere to be found in a product catalog and unobtainable by the general public without a factory "connection."

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

What is it's intended purpose? Where in the rulebook is this?

[Chuck D]

Whether you subscribe to an "implied" or "expressed" purpose...the Tanfoglio Stock Custom was nothing more, nothing less than it's Top shelf Standard/Limited Division gun with a double action/first shot feature. It is a purpose built "race gun" in a Division that via rules interp. discouraged at the very least "race gun" type modifications.

Only speaking for myself mind you...it's perfectly clear to me that the models effected (and I'd bet a few more are currently under consideration) defeated the intentions of Production Division as I believe them to be. Whether they are described in detail in a rule book or not isn't really relevant. From a personal standpoint, a two ton, mega capacity pistol with all the bells and whistles of a Limited Division gun costing WELL over a grand in U.S. dollars renders all else available to and purchased off the shelf of the local gun dealer by "joe average" obsolete. Again, we revisit the "I need a mega dollar pistol to compete" belief that consumed Open, Limited and arguably L10 Division.

[Nik Habicht]

From a personal standpoint, a two ton, mega capacity pistol with all the bells and whistles of a Limited Division gun costing WELL over a grand in U.S. dollars renders all else available to and purchased off the shelf of the local gun dealer by "joe average" obsolete.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Allowing the SP-01 (or its clones) to play in Production isn't going to make me stop shooting my G-34. I may be only a mid C-class shooter but even I've grasped the concept that it's not the gun ---- it's the shooter. I'll go up against anyone shooting one of those guns anytime ---- happily.......

The beautiful thing about a capacity limit is that it really takes gun out of the equation. My list of modifications that make a difference in Production --- in order:

Capacity --- fortunately not an issue here.

Decent Sights and trigger

Magwell ---- I've got a brass one on my Limited G-34. I don't notice a difference on the reloads; the gun's maybe slightly steadier than my Production G-34 --- but I've never really noticed the difference in a match.

Weight I believe is inconsequential --- some shooters prefer a heavy gun, and they're free to choose one now. Others like lighter guns --- and there's lots of choices there as well.....

The majort thing I've learned from thinking about this decision by IPSC and from the discussion that's followed is that IPSC Production is a totally different ball game from USPSA Production --- we might as well be comparing Modified to Open here. At first glance the divisions seem pretty similar ---- but in reality the mag cap makes a HUGE difference in how the game is played and what equipment is most suited to winning. I firmly believe now that USPSA can't key its list of suitable guns off IPSC --- I think USPSA needs its own standards.......

[Gary Stevens]

We do. That is how we added guns IPSC prohibited, such as the Glock 34-35 and the XD.

[Carlos]

Chuck, I respectfully disagree. You wrote:

[the smith & wesson is] "Nowhere to be found in a product catalog and unobtainable by the general public without a factory "connection." ""

That is just it; the SP-01 is on dealer shelves in Europe right now & has been for weeks and *was* on the way here to the USA in sizeable quantities for sale to EVERYONE. The P-01 has been for sale here for nearly a year & cost was on par or below the cost of a Glock 34 yet the P-01 was banned - the given reason being an aluminum dust cover. They banned an inexpensive gun the size of a Glock 19. Who uses the P-01? Every Czech police officer. Does not sound like a race gun to me.

[the Stock Custom is] "nothing more, nothing less than it's Top shelf Standard/Limited Division gun with a double action/first shot feature.

I believe that Standard/Limited guns from SPS/STI/SV start at about $1600 and a "top shelf" standard/limited gun runs well over $2000. CZ-USA did not have the chance to set a price on the SP-01 in the USA; the store where I work was given a confidential dealer price on the Stock Custom by EAA for US sales. The Stock Custom was going to sell for well under $1000 - RETAIL. We could order as many as we liked. In fact, our store had 5 Stock Custom on order from EAA for RETAIL SALE until this rule change. We cancelled our order through EAA. Less than $1000 retail does not sound like a "top shelf" race gun price to me.

[the stock custom] "defeated the intentions of Production Division as I believe them to be. Whether they are described in detail in a rule book or not isn't really relevant. From a personal standpoint"

I read that as:

"intentions"

"as I believe"

"personal standpoint"

I would prefer that this matter be governed by fair, clear rules that are published for all to see and that apply equally to every manufacturer. CZ & Tanfoglio followed the published rules of the divisions (IPSC and USPSA) & built guns just for our sport that should sell for under $1000 in the USA (if European pricing is any indication on the SP-01; I know EXACTLY how much the stock custom sold for retail). I believe CZ & Tanfoglio were treated unfairly by the IPSC BOD. It is my sincere hope that at least USPSA will correct what I consider a mistake by the IPSC BOD. This would certainly not be the 1st time that USPSA did not agree with IPSC nor the 1st time they excepted a Production division gun banned by IPSC (i.e., the Glock 34, 35, the Croatian HS-2000/springfield XD). Just to clarify, I am in favor of letting those guns, as well as the SP-01 & Stock Custom, in USPSA Production. That is, those guns along with the Elite II, the Sig 226 with the steel frame & long/ heavy dustcover, etc. Let the guns in & give shooters the freedom to shoot what they want. The mag capacity issue is a non-issue in the US anyway since we only load 10.

"costing WELL over a grand in U.S. dollars"

I believe this is a false statement. Can you tell us where you obtained this information?

Regards to all who are participating in this discussion,

D.C. Johnson

[Nik Habicht]

We do.  That is how we added guns IPSC prohibited, such as the Glock 34-35 and the XD.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Gary,

I understand that USPSA has in the past modified the list of acceptable Production Division Guns by amending the IPSC list with those guns denoted in red. However, as Rob Boudrie pointed out HERE, the moment IPSC removes a gun from the list or adds on to the list, USPSA's official list (on USPSA.org) also immediately changes. What I'm proposing is that USPSA's BOD needs to take charge of approving/disapproving all guns suitable for inclusion on the USPSA Production Division Handgun list and maintain that list independent of IPSC's, or needs to develop alternate rules for deciding which guns are legal. As Kyle already alluded to ---- the 13th edition rules of 2000 produced and available on the market for a year were not a bad way to go to ensure availability for any competitor who wants to buy a particular gun.