Ipsc Production Gun Changes

[chuckw]

I believe CZ & Tanfoglio were treated unfairly by the IPSC BOD.

They're not the only ones. Jericho guns were all scrapped from the list after being there for 3 years and that sucks more than what happened to CZ and Tangfolio.

The other thing is if you read between the lines at the IPSC forum, I get the feeling the IPSC BOD decision was not unanimous, and maybe it was just a case of Nick issuing a directive. I'd sure like to be a fly on the wall at their next meeting.

[driver8M3]

...but even I've grasped the concept that it's not the gun ---- it's the shooter.

me too. i've never walked away from a match thinking those that finished ahead of me did so b/c of the gun they were using. i get beat by better shooters...not better guns.

[Gary Stevens]

Thanks Nick, I understand your point now. Maybe we can have any changes made by IPSC on their list immediately show up in Red on our list and not be automatically removed until affirmative action by the USPSA BOD is taken. I don't know if this is computer possible or not. I'll ask Rob Boudrie. This would solve the problem of a gun automatically disappearing from the list without any action by the USPSA BOD. One of the problems I had with the XD was that IPSC told the members it was OK, the members went out and spent their money, and then the gun was removed. This bothered me and I voted to re-instate the XD based on that reason and the fact that I didn't think it was substantially different than a Glock.

I don't want to say that I will vote that way on the current issue or not, but that it had been previously approved and then removed will be a factor in my vote.

[EricW]

From the IPSC Global Village web-site:

IPSC Global Village

1. The following guns are no longer approved:

CZ P-01 and SP-01 Series

Tanfoglio Stock Custom

Sphinx 3000 Series

The reason is that the above guns all have long dust covers.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Is this the real and only reason the SP-01 is not approved? Is the SP-01 shown in Front Sight actually the pistol in question?

We have got to go back to a box rule and stop this nonsense.

[lynn jones]

EricW

Is this the real and only reason the SP-01 is not approved?  Is the SP-01 shown in Front Sight actually the pistol in question?

yes!

[Flexmoney]

We have got to go back to a box rule and stop this nonsense.

Amen.

We are seeing some of the problems with having "lists".

1. Somebody has to maintain the list. In the case of USPSA...we have, in all practical reality, farmed the majority of that job out.

2. Those that we farmed the job out to...they are NOT using objective criteria to maintain the list. (The test shouldn't be "if it walks like a duck, talks like a duck...it must be a duck." We are better than that. Use measureable criteria.)

3. Time lag. Even if somebody is looking hard at the list...it takes time to add/subtract items. (It's been more than a few days now...and the USPSA list hasn't seen any action one way of the other.)

Ah heck...I could go on and on about "lists". I have in the past...when I debated the issues with Vince. (well before USPSA went with the list)

[Chuck D]

Carlos:

The"well over a grand " statement came from both the dollar values listed by IPSC members complaining (and rightfully so) about their lost investments (listed in Euros and converted to U.S. Dollars) on the IPSC Global Village.

Secondly, I have access to an FFL and the retail dollar values I personally referred to came from the wholesale outlet RSR. I can only refer to the values I have in front of me...IN PRINT FORM.

Lastly, my entire post is "of my own opinion" and I claim NOT to have a monopoly on either the decision making process or the worthyness of offering an opinion. Seeing that I own a Tanfoglio HC Limited gun...I feel it correct to compare it to the Stock Custom. Both guns are virtually identical EXCEPT the D.A. first shot feature.

I'm not going to go "back and forth" about dollar values and/or personal preferences. Both of these guns and the 5 inch 5906 are in my opinion "purpose built race guns" for Production Division. If you look hard enough, you'll find posts between Vince Pinto and myself discussing "purpose built" Production Division guns and the problems they MAY create down the road. Low and behold....look what happened !

Yes, it's the singer not the song as many of you so correctly point out BUT it is also common knowledge that the best "tool for the job" makes the job easier. If it didn't...why would there be a thriving accessory business or why would factories build pistols such as the Tanfoglio Custom Stock?

If it was 100% the singer not the song...we'd all have bone stock guns and snap-top leather holsters instead of the marvels of mechanical function and Safarilaminate holsters most of us currently own.

Having been on the receiving end of rules changes ( anyone remember the .356 TSW Limited Division gun fiasco? ) I understand FULLY what you and others are saying about these guns. The time to handle this has LONG SINCE PASSED and by doing so now...IPSC has virtually assured that a sector of the membership will be upset to say the least. These guns should have either never been allowed in the Division or it should be like Standard Division...anything goes except single action guns. My opinion is that they shouldn't have been allowed in the first place.

[Flexmoney]

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.

Carlos,

How does what is on the shelves in Europe help the USPSA shooter? Further..."available for weeks"?

If we go with the criteria from the old red book...it read: 2,000 produced, one YEAR

Sizable quantities? Available to everyone?

My understanding was that, if I wanted one of these guns, I would have had to get it through Angus and that there were only going to be about 20 available?

Say I buy one of these guns (get lucky enough to get one of the first 20 off the boat)...then I go around and start doing well in Production at matches. I show my gun to some other shooters...they ask where they can get one...

Can they go to the gun shops in their area and pick one up?

The Jerico 941's (baby Eagles), the P-01's...those are on the shelves. Shooters can touch and feel those guns at the shop...and trade their money to take one home. THAT is Production.

Let's not put the cart before the horse on this particular gun. They shouldn't be on the way.

[Carlos]

In his post above on this page, Angus wrote:

"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)"

There being few export restrictions between the countries of the EC, some of those 1000 are in the hands of IPSC shooters right now while others sit on Europen store shelves for sale as we speak. However, you asked how that applies to USPSA. If they are on store shelves, why didn't CZ overnight them to the USA? Because the DOJ's BATFE and Department of Homeland Security's ICE control the import of new models of non-US made handguns and only they can determine a new model's sporting purpose based on "point value" - a system that has been with us since GCA'68 & which can take weeks or months to complete. But for import delays & time for CZ-USA to add the gun to its inventory (create parts support, manuals, etc) some of the 1,000 additional SP-01s Angus spoke of would be for sale here. IF a company like CZ wanted to "test the waters" & see if a new model would make it through USDOJ & DHS scrutiny, an initial sample of 20 guns would be a reasonable way to do it. It is my understanding that CZ did not send only 20 to "ration them out" but rather to make sure they would be approved for import. Anyone could have gotten on Angus' list of buyers for those 1st 20 guns. No favoritism or special treatment; 1st come, 1st served. After that first 20 guns, the SP-01 was to be a regular catalog item for sale to anyone. Unlike S&W, the SP-01 was not a "custom shop special".

Angus - please correct me if I am wrong but from everything posted on the SP-01, I believe this is correct.

Angus also wrote: "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."

I would be very surprised if they have not put production on hold until this mess can be straightened out. As for CZ restricting sale of the SP-01 to certain competitors, I have not seen any evidence to support that. Historically, anything CZ brought to the US was for sale to anybody.

As for the old red-book rule of 2000 produced, that is a verifiable number based on fact & I would not have any problem if USPSA resurected that rule (even though it might limit that Custom Shop S&W production pistol). Such a rule would be fairly applied to all manufacturers. Equally. I agree that a gun on the Production list should be available to anyone with the money to buy one and without having to battle the "custom shop/special order" screening process.

D.C. Johnson

[Flexmoney]

Carlos,

I'm not doubting any of the facts that you or Angus posted.

What I am suggesting is that the cart not be put before the horse.

We shuold have lots and lots of the guns...available on gunstore shelves everywhere BEFORE the gun can be allowed in Production.

And, you and I seem to also be on the same page regarding factory "custom shop" guns in Production. Custom shop does NOT equate to Production, IMO.

[davidwiz]

The Glock has an extended dust cover. So, by some people's reasoning, it should be disallowed from Production.

[Nik Habicht]

What I am suggesting is that the cart not be put before the horse.

We shuold have lots and lots of the guns...available on gunstore shelves everywhere BEFORE the gun can be allowed in Production.

And, you and I seem to also be on the same page regarding factory "custom shop" guns in Production.  Custom shop does NOT equate to Production, IMO.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I'm on the same page here as well --- and would like to see some BOD discussion vis-a-vis resurrecting these guidelines for inclusion on the USPSA list. If we're going to look at potential guns available here (US) only --- I could probably with a production run of 1000 and a year's availability on shelves. However, that's not the situation we find ourselves in now --- and I'd like to see that those guns formerly on the list, that were removed/might still be removed from the IPSC list be reinstated to the USPSA list. From comments I've read on the German IPSC site, it sounds like all guns featuring full dustcovers made of Steel or Stainless are on the chopping block. I don't want any shooter to be in the position where he bought a handgun that was legal to compete in Production Division --- and now isn't. Certainly the P-01s and Jericho's etc. should be allowed back in.

I've proposed a guideline, governing removal of a gun from the List for reasons other than safety, earlier in this thread.....

[Nik Habicht]

The Glock has an extended dust cover.  So, by some people's reasoning, it should be disallowed from Production.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

That's why you need to shoot the 34 or 35 --- no extended dustcover......

[slavex]

well I've been watching this for a bit now, and feel the way I think most of you feel. That IPSC screwed up big time. if the gun was on the list, it should stay on the list, period. end of story. If it got approved then it stays.

As for the guns being race guns, so what? There really is only so much you can do, before it's just eye candy. There is nothing in any of those guns that were removed that made them significantly better performers in GM hands than pretty much any gun on that list (the Dlask being one notable exception ). Up here I know that some of the talk is pretty harsh in regards to the people that made this decision, and I wouldn't want to be in their shoes at the Worlds as I would imagine there will be some spit flying as people "talk" to them. There is still time for this to be sorted out, and wrongs righted. It'll just take someone with balls to do it.

[EricW]

Let's have Hawley, Grams, or EGW build some boxes and go back to the shooting. What the hell do I care if Kalishnikov wants to build a Production-legal pistol with a goddamned anvil molded into the dustcover and ghostring fiber optic sights? As long as there's 2K of them on the street, let's race.

[SRT Driver]

John Flentz's new S&W looks like a 5906 with a 952 upper. Both are "production" items. Not as a package yet but...

I suppose someone could do the same if they were so inclined. In a past issue of Front Sight, JA said that any parts that were available from the mfgr could be used (in reference to the extended Glock mag release and slide stop). And as long as the bbl is 5.5" or less, by the rules, it's legal. Or at least, should be. The question is, did S&W ever offer a 5" DA M39, 5906 or ?

There was also discussion regarding revolver barrel length. JA said the same thing..if it was offered by the OEM at any time, it's legal. SO I could put a 6"bbl in a M25, if I wanted.

So if the "intent" is the reason for illegality, if I were to "build" a G34 on a 2nd generation frame (without finger grooves) that was originally a G17, does that make my pistol illegal for Production?

[Clay1]

Can't answer the question as it relates to "production class" but can answer it as it related to SSP in IDPA. The second generation G34 never existed as a gun so it would not be allowed. It had to be offered at one point. The reasoning behind the Glock slide stop and ext. mag release is that at one time or another all of the guns were offered as such from the factory.

Rick

[SRT Driver]

Clay1,

True, a 2nd gen G34 does not exist in the US.

Maybe a European forum member could answer if G34's in Europe have finger grooves and the thumb dent.

If they don't, then it is a Production item and should be legal in IDPA too!!! It sounds unfair that a European IDPA member could not shoot the IDPA Nats with one, if it's made!!

[diehli]

The second generation G34 never existed as a gun so it would not be allowed.  It had to be offered at one point.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Wrong.

http://glockmeister.com/g34.shtml

[Clay1]

I stand corrected. Thanks for the info.

[David Olhasso]

I just skimmed thru this entire thread and I couldn't find anyone barking about the biggest thing that makes the SP-01 stand out from other production guns: CAPACITY! It has a factory extended magazine!

A production gun with a capacity of 19 (or it is 20) has a distinct advantage over another gun with a capacity of 17 such as the Glocks, Sigs, Berettas and S&Ws.

Just my opinion..

[dirtypool40]

yeah, I don't want the damned long dust cover, (I shoot a short DC gun in Standard) What I want is the magwell and long mags. Then you're damned near "Standard Minor".

[Carlos]

The capacity of the SP-01 is 18 rounds - only 1 more round than a Glock 17. You are correct, I believe, in noting that the ONE additional round is an advantage. I believe that the slight 1-round advantage is probably what drove certain non-Czech European IPSC teams to protest to the IPSC BOD after the IWA show. Apparently certain non-Tanfoglio teams also objected to Eric Graufel's sponsor, Tanfoglio, adding a mag well to the Stock Custom. Instead of mentioning the mag-well and +1 mag capacity, they claimed that a full length dust cover justified the ban. I disagree with the BOD's decision.

Here is a quote from the CZ site in the Czech Republic:

"The CZ 75 SP-01 (CZ 75 SP-01 Tactical) pistol is a big-size handgun designed for duty in law enforcement or military service, but also for target shooting or self defence having a large capacity double-column magazine holding 18 cartridges of cal. 9x19 and featuring classic DA firing mechanism (SA/DA). The pistol design is based on proved CZ 75 platform. Grip panels made of rubber are provided with checkerings"

Of course mag capacity only matters in IPSC, not USPSA where Production division mag capacity will remain 10 rounds for the forseeable future (as I believe it should -out of fairness to USPSA members living in NY, CA, and a few other unfortunate States). Here is the link to the quote listed above:

http://iwa.czub.cz/index.php?p=32&idp=1&ids=3&idz=16〈=en

Regards,

D.C. Johnson

[Turtle]

Hmmn.....mag capacity, now there's a can of worms. The Glock 17 mags can easily hold 18 rounds if the retaining plate is left out and new 13 coil springs are not used. By not limiting mag capacity, the door was left open for "gaming" or an "arms race" in IPSC in contrast to USPSA where everyone is loading 10 or less. It's just that now it's turned ugly since the whole "I'm taking my ball and going home now" antics....

[sfinney]

Hmmm. "Production".

Seems familiar.... I remember "Stock" Car racing - now known as Nascar (they can't call it "stock" anymore with a straight face - they are ground up fabricated race cars now). Originally the cars were factory cars, hopped up..... then the factories started making cars designed specifically to be aerodynamic for the racing track..... (Petty's Superbird?) - so everyone wanted to ban them. Everytime the manufacturers would develop some race inspired gimmick for the race cars, and include it in production cars so it would be "legal" for racing, someone would protest or outright ban the new tech. But eventually, all the cars became very far from "stock".

Sorry for the drift, seems related somewhat.....

Maybe what Production needs to be is more like an IROC series.... only certain plain jane models, no mods, all the same platform, capacity limit. Oh, wait thats what Production was SUPPOSED to be, right?