Sako92S Posted March 31, 2005 Share Posted March 31, 2005 What is this nonsense about magazine capazity. It really doesn't matter if CZ SP01 holds 18 rounds Baikal Viking MP446 holds 18 rounds Picture below and so does Para Ordnance LDA all 9mm models Picture below and both are on PD IPSC approved list. BTW my G17 holds 18 rounds in normal magazines without modification. Long dust cover i s the only criteria why CZ SP01, Jericho and Tanfoglio SC are not in approved list.(and that sucks, that's my opinion) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GeorgeInNePa Posted April 1, 2005 Share Posted April 1, 2005 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? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Maybe that's what it was supposed to be, but that's not what the RULES say. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jose_Rizal Posted April 1, 2005 Share Posted April 1, 2005 How about adding another division. Say, "glock" division. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clay1 Posted April 1, 2005 Share Posted April 1, 2005 Listen, whether you guys think a G34 belongs in Production or not, do you remember the IDPA uproar over making $15 Fobus and Uncle Mike holster's illegal? If you take a gun that has been on this list for years and make it illegal now and want to rewrite all of the rules you will have a backlash like you only think that you have now. I'm infavor of the 2000 made/year and bringing back the box. Quit changing the damn rules because someone finds out how to exploit them. They were our rules and now we call foul because someone followed them and made a better mouse trap. Bullony is my exact thought. Whatever us C class shooters shoot the GM and M shooters are still going to kick our rears. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Norman Posted April 1, 2005 Share Posted April 1, 2005 Well said Clay. Let's all be honest. Dave S. can beat most all of us witha musket, So can Todd or Robbie. There are almost always two matches in every division in every major match. The top dogs are going to be on top and they will run their race, the rest of us meer mortals will shoot agains our friends and the rest of the people in our class. We may judge ourselves by saying I did X% of JJ or Todd. but in reality,most of look at who is buying the first round and what gun we have, unless there is a really MAJOR difference, such as a very large capacity difference, the race is going to be to the better shooter and the shooter who knows his equipment as well as his mind. If I can psyche you out, i just might beat you, and one more ounce on a long dust cover is not going to make any difference. Jim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jkushner1 Posted April 4, 2005 Share Posted April 4, 2005 In alot of ways this whole matter is about the future of shooting - the future of our sport relies the youth of the future. We can argue the technicalities, thats fine, but lets point out some Macro issues at risk here as Nik H had referenced as well. Maybe Phil Terry and the IDPA have ever growing population of shooters, and I cant speak for IPSC, but I'm pretty sure that the population of young shooters entering shooting sports, shooting competitvely and defining our future is on a massive decline. I think the NRA can confirm this. What happened when Fritz, Nick and the IPSC boys pulled the Tanfo Stock and CZ SP-01/P-01 from approved lists. This is what happened.... First of all, to tool up for a production run on a new model (even on the same frame) a manufactuer spends millions and millions of dollars, and both Tanfoglio and CZ have already invested millions of dollars in these new models. Now, you take the two largest action pistol manufacturers in Europe and tell them to eat $3-4 million each because the guns they are already starting to build are no longer valid for their propsed application, or at least a good part of proposed application. Which equals greatly reduced sales of that model. Then, you consider that these two companies are the two largest Corporate Sponsors of shooting sports on the European continent (like Glock, Springfield, Kimber, Smith and Wesson, et al in the US). This type of sponsorship pays for 90% of every major event. Combine this fact with the re-emergence of the "factory team" and you now have the primary vehicle for drawing youth to the sport: Large, well promoted events and "Big Name" team shooters who quickly take on the sports idol roles for these prospective youngsters. IPSC, the USPSA and the all the manufacturers know that these methods are the most effective means to keep shooting sports exposure at the highest possible level, and this is the way to bring kids to the sport. In response, CZ has or is threatening to cancel their sponsorshop of World Shoot 05 and proobably every other major event that they had made soft commitments on. Tanfoglio will probably follow suit and is considering legal remedies in addition to whatever effect future pulled sponsorships would have. In one fell swoop, you eliminated our number one vehicle for drawing attention and participation to our sport, especially from the younger demographic. So this is more than just two or three gun models being removed from a list. Its a decision that may impact Europes shooting future in some magnitude. And if the USPSA just accepts and modifies their approved list to reflect Europe's decision, the US' future could be equally harmed. Especially when the next gun affected is owned in quantity by existing competitors. Jon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SRT Driver Posted April 4, 2005 Share Posted April 4, 2005 Jon - Excellent points. Let's be honest with ourselves. When..has one extra round made a difference? In the US, it doesn't matter but for the IPSC crowd? Has anyone lost a championship because the winner's gun held one extra round? And did the shooter "lose" because of the overall superiority of the extra round or long dust cover or due to a mistake they made earlier in the match? Last time I checked, the rules stated 9 rounds in an array. So that means movement of some sort in between arrays either changing positions or taking steps. Time for a reload!!! Skill wins...everything else is an ego soothing excuse. Just my 2c. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carlos Posted April 13, 2005 Share Posted April 13, 2005 The 1st batch of SP-01s in the USA went on sale yesterday or the day before. Retail price???: $495 So much for the "high dollar" argument - especially since the Production approved, accesory rail, all steel "Beretta 92 Steel I" retails for $1600. How much is that 18 shot Para LDA 9mm? ANd the mag capacity of the Para in IPSC Production? 18 rounds. In addition, there is a post on the IPSC Village that the long approved IMI Baby desert eagle (aka Jericho 941/IMI Eagle) has been restored to the list, EVEN THOUGH IT HAS A LONG HEAVY DUST COVER. I personally do not believe there are any valid arguments against the SP-01's use in USPSA or IPSC. The ball is in the BOD's court; I hope they make a wise decision. Regards, D.C. Johnson Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shred Posted April 13, 2005 Share Posted April 13, 2005 Jon - Excellent points.Let's be honest with ourselves. When..has one extra round made a difference? In the US, it doesn't matter but for the IPSC crowd? Has anyone lost a championship because the winner's gun held one extra round? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> FWIW, two rounds caused TGO and others to stop shooting the 9x25, and that was from 25 to 27. Round count is important. I'm all about adding the XD. I'm not all about factory-race guns in PD. I'm not convinced if the blasters in question are or not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sfinney Posted April 13, 2005 Share Posted April 13, 2005 The SP-01 and the Tanfoglio Stock Custom seem to have been painted by the same brush, but they are vastly different animals. If you check Tanfoglio's and CZ's websites, specs, and literature you can see what I'm talking about: The SP-01 has/is: made on a production line cheap black polymer finish, and rubber grips fixed sights no flared or added on magwell no checkering the appearance of a "general use gun" was developed for Military and Police use COSTS $495 US The Tanfoglio Stock Custom has/is: Custom shop assembled, or darn close? designed specifically for competition use Special competition inspired aluminum grips Adjustable sights checkering? Aluminum add-on Magwell Looks like a "Standard" gun Has scope mount holes drilled in the frame COSTS @ $1900 US (in Europe) If you look at pictures of the two, there really is no comparison other than the dust cover issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sfinney Posted April 13, 2005 Share Posted April 13, 2005 And if its really the dust cover issue that is keeping these guns from Production, why don't we just change the rules to add: specifically disallow any type of guide rod or barrel heavier than standard steel (or stock type and weight, wording needs work) in a Production gun that also possesses a full length steel dust cover. As most Production shooters that add weight to their guns seem to add it on the front with a heavy guide rod, this would help even the field somewhat. G34s etc could still add weight to the muzzle end, ending up with a similar effect - guns like the SP-01 would be prohibited from "double dipping" so to speak. Just an idea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EricW Posted April 13, 2005 Share Posted April 13, 2005 The IPSC BOD is off it's freaking rocker. What all this boils down to is this new "spirit of Production" criteria. The best thing USPSA can do is to dump the IPSC Gun List and do it ASAP. IPSC is hell-bent of self-destruction and we don't need to be a part of it. Should we dump the IPSC Gun List? Take the poll.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flexmoney Posted April 13, 2005 Share Posted April 13, 2005 I personally do not believe there are any valid arguments against the SP-01's use in USPSA... Well, I have one. Now. 2,000 and available to the general public. I think a Production gun ought to be on the shelves for eveyone to buy. The SP-01 sounds like it is well on it's way there. I just don't know if it is there quite yet. More importantly, this isn't realy about the SP-01...it is about all guns in Production. And, anything that might come out. I also think this needs to apply to factory "custom/performance" shop guns. If they can make enough of them available on the shelf...fine. If they are tweaking on a special run of a few hundred (or just tweaking in a custom manner)...forget it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sfinney Posted April 13, 2005 Share Posted April 13, 2005 On the SP-01 prod #s, From what I've read/heard, 1500 (2 batches of 750) were produced last year for contract to the military.... another run of 1000 is underway now..... 2500 should have already been met (or be met very soon).... and they are available to the general public in both Europe and the U.S. as we speak. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flexmoney Posted April 13, 2005 Share Posted April 13, 2005 I can't buy a gun in Europe. How many are available in the USA? Can I go down the street and get one at the local gun shops? (The red book rules said something about being around for 1 year, as well. I never understood if it was a year after 2,000 had been produced...a year after 2,000 had been available to the public...etc?) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Run n Gun Posted April 13, 2005 Share Posted April 13, 2005 I personally do not believe there are any valid arguments against the SP-01's use in USPSA... Well, I have one. Now. 2,000 and available to the general public. I think a Production gun ought to be on the shelves for eveyone to buy. The SP-01 sounds like it is well on it's way there. I just don't know if it is there quite yet. More importantly, this isn't realy about the SP-01...it is about all guns in Production. And, anything that might come out. I also think this needs to apply to factory "custom/performance" shop guns. If they can make enough of them available on the shelf...fine. If they are tweaking on a special run of a few hundred (or just tweaking in a custom manner)...forget it. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Flex, There you go again trying to use “common sense”! You know that usually doesn’t work around here, don’t you? Ed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aXXman Posted April 14, 2005 Share Posted April 14, 2005 I saw one two days ago in Portland, OR. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthew_Mink Posted April 14, 2005 Share Posted April 14, 2005 On the SP-01 prod #s, From what I've read/heard, 1500 (2 batches of 750) were produced last year for contract to the military.... <{POST_SNAPBACK}> But...but..but, IPSC told me that gun was purpose built for Production division to race in, why would any military want one?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shred Posted April 14, 2005 Share Posted April 14, 2005 Without verification, there's always the possibility for a gunmaker to declare a secret mystery order of 1000 or 2000 pistols to the Outer Doofistan Naval Reserves.. Such shenanigans have happend in the past when there was a 2000 limit. There's even a rumor that the original STI Limited-legal-ness floated in on an odd military contract that never really got filled, but I'm not sure I believe that one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aXXman Posted April 14, 2005 Share Posted April 14, 2005 I saw one two days ago in Portland, OR. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> No I didn't... it was a P-01. /lurkmode on Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wide45 Posted April 15, 2005 Share Posted April 15, 2005 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. So how many were available for sale to the general public? None? Then none would count toward the 2000 needed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sfinney Posted April 15, 2005 Share Posted April 15, 2005 I guess the crux of "2000 and available to the general public" as Flex keyed in on that needs defining is: Is it 2000 produced in any capacity, and now its available to the general public; or 2000 have to be produced that are specifically for release to the General Public? What if Beretta makes a Special Ops model of the 92X, and makes 50,000 for military use.... would they then have to make another 2000 specifically for public sale before the gun would be Production legal? Or would the 50K , and the start of release to the general public in any number be enough? I think the current 500 unit Limited rule took into account any kind of sales (like the STI example above). And just to clarify / reiterate for those coming in mid-thread here, these types of questions and what consitutes "spirit of the game" etc, how to define that while leaving room for innovation, is what's causing all the discussion; the list as it exists today is total junk, thus the poll . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tfs Posted April 19, 2005 Share Posted April 19, 2005 I was considering purchasing an SP01 for Production Division. I don't mean to offend anybody, but the Glock 17 has also a long dust cover, don't it? I used to own a Glock 17, and I found no advantage whatsoever using a pistol with a long dust cover. I'm beginning to suspect that there's a big "hand" involved in getting the P0-1 and the SP-01 out of the production list. Insecurities that these pistols will be successful in Production Division and many will purchase this pistol in favor of another? Possible. We're just not sure. Time will tell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alma Posted April 20, 2005 Share Posted April 20, 2005 I was considering purchasing an SP01 for Production Division. I don't mean to offend anybody, but the Glock 17 has also a long dust cover, don't it? The long polymer dust cover on the Glock does not even compare to a long HEAVY steal dust cover. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sfinney Posted April 20, 2005 Share Posted April 20, 2005 I was considering purchasing an SP01 for Production Division. I don't mean to offend anybody, but the Glock 17 has also a long dust cover, don't it? The long polymer dust cover on the Glock does not even compare to a long HEAVY steel dust cover. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> What about the long HEAVY steel dust cover on the Jericho and Baby Eagle, among others, which are still legal? Selective enforcement is not the way to proceed. 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