Garmil Posted November 11, 2015 Share Posted November 11, 2015 Then why even include my name? Look at the post... I quoted you and responded to your post. Then made sure to clarify I wasn't talking about you and made a new statement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
terrydoc Posted November 11, 2015 Share Posted November 11, 2015 What is "stroking the slide"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blairmckenzie1 Posted November 11, 2015 Share Posted November 11, 2015 What is "stroking the slide"? it is removing material from the back to the recoil spring tunnel so the slide travels farther to the rear. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sperman Posted November 11, 2015 Share Posted November 11, 2015 (edited) I feel like the rulebook is a little contradictory in this area. Milling of the slide to insert sights, add or remove serrations, such as cocking or flat topping, tri-topping the slide, lowering ejection ports, cuts that are minor and cosmetic in nature are permitted. Duplicating features that are on a factory, mass produced slide available to the general public is permitted. Cuts that are designed to specifically or significantly lighten the slide, such as holes, or slots, are ruled as competitive advantage and prohibited. What if a mass produced pistol had cuts that were specifically for the purpose of lightening the slide? Akai's web site states the slide is "internally lightened." The only way I can see getting away with that is if you are copying cuts on a "mass produced slide available to the general public." But again I ask, what if those cuts are specifically for the purpose of removing weight. Edited November 11, 2015 by sperman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
terrydoc Posted November 11, 2015 Share Posted November 11, 2015 thnx Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CHA-LEE Posted November 11, 2015 Share Posted November 11, 2015 If the slide has been internally lightened then its not legal for Single Stack. The rules are pretty clear in restricting the removal of slide material for the purpose of lightening it for a competitive advantage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
terrydoc Posted November 12, 2015 Share Posted November 12, 2015 I'm not a USPSA shooter but am an IPSC IROA and that sounds correct to me Char-lee Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RangerTrace Posted November 12, 2015 Share Posted November 12, 2015 If the slide has been internally lightened then its not legal for Single Stack. The rules are pretty clear in restricting the removal of slide material for the purpose of lightening it for a competitive advantage. Which makes absolutely no sense because thats exactly why we tri-top slides....... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shadyscott999 Posted November 12, 2015 Share Posted November 12, 2015 (edited) DNROI has already stated that stroking a SS is in fact legal. Shay asked before he built it. Dustcover is legal length. Colt 38 factory slides are internally lightened. The cuts in this gun match those. Edited November 12, 2015 by Shadyscott999 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SingleStackHawaii Posted November 12, 2015 Author Share Posted November 12, 2015 DNROI has already stated that stroking a SS is in fact legal. Shay asked before he built it. Thank you, Shadyscott. I'm glad you jumped in on the topic. I was really confused on the matter of stroking for SS. Can I ask if you know if DNROI gave an explanation with their answer. I'm just curious is all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shadyscott999 Posted November 12, 2015 Share Posted November 12, 2015 DNROI has already stated that stroking a SS is in fact legal. Shay asked before he built it. Thank you, Shadyscott. I'm glad you jumped in on the topic. I was really confused on the matter of stroking for SS. Can I ask if you know if DNROI gave an explanation with their answer. I'm just curious is all. That I don't not know. I will tell Shay about this thread and maybe he will chime in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shay1911 Posted November 12, 2015 Share Posted November 12, 2015 It is legal because there is no rule against it:) We followed the rules, but used every advantage possible, which is within the rules. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkCO Posted November 12, 2015 Share Posted November 12, 2015 If what is stated in this thread is true, then all I get from this thread is that the rulebook has become invalid. If you can get something approved by DNROI, the text of the rulebook is invalid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shay1911 Posted November 12, 2015 Share Posted November 12, 2015 We followed the rules, how does that make the rules invalid? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Poppa Bear Posted November 12, 2015 Share Posted November 12, 2015 Correct me if I am wrong but most of your cuts were for the purpose of bring the total gun weight down to a legal weight correct? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skatz11 Posted November 12, 2015 Share Posted November 12, 2015 I've been following this for entertainment purposes only. I don't see any rule violations. -fits in box -makes weight -correct length dust cover -no slots or holes milled through the slide Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkCO Posted November 12, 2015 Share Posted November 12, 2015 If the slide has been internally lightened then its not legal for Single Stack. The rules are pretty clear in restricting the removal of slide material for the purpose of lightening it for a competitive advantage. Colt 38 factory slides are internally lightened. The cuts in this gun match those. The gun in question is not a copy of a Colt 38, only one aspect is copied. I am not saying that what you did is wrong Shay, but I do believe that several rulings are silly and go against the common use of the english language. USPSA used to be a sport where you could read what was in the rulebook and interpret based on the common use of the english language. 99% of the time DNROI was asked a question, the answer came back consistent with prior rulings and the common use. That is no longer the case. When people are carrying around emails and such from the DNROI saying what they are using is legal when the common useage interpretation in in conflict with such, it makes the rule book invalid. It is not just one such issue, there are numerous cases in the recent past that have similar elements and slippery slopes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shay1911 Posted November 12, 2015 Share Posted November 12, 2015 I agree, some rules are very silly, such as weight limits and restrictions on holsters. Just look at IPSC Classic division. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
terrydoc Posted November 12, 2015 Share Posted November 12, 2015 What's wrong with IPSC Classic? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thermobollocks Posted November 12, 2015 Share Posted November 12, 2015 Depending on whether or not I read good, IPSC classic allows bull barrels irrespective of barrel length. They also finally allow accessory rails. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
terrydoc Posted November 12, 2015 Share Posted November 12, 2015 (edited) And is that good or bad? The barrel length isn't an issue as the gun still needs to fit in the IPSC box Edited November 12, 2015 by terrydoc Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thermobollocks Posted November 12, 2015 Share Posted November 12, 2015 In USPSA SS you're only allowed bull barrels for barrels below a certain length. In so many words it may function as a game-breaker to allow them on whatever fits in the box, since most factory 1911s don't have them. However, since I have no intelligent things to say about what NROI/IROI are trying to do with Single Stack/Classic divisions, I make no judgment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TDH Posted November 12, 2015 Share Posted November 12, 2015 D5 - 21 Milling of the slide to insert sights, add or remove serrations, such as cocking or flat topping, tri-topping the slide, lowering ejection ports, cuts that are minor and cosmetic in nature are permitted. Duplicating features that are on a factory, mass produced slide available to the general public is permitted. Cuts that are designed to specifically or significantly lighten the slide, such as holes, or slots, are ruled as competitive advantage and prohibited. The rulebook has two competing clauses. They need to define which one overrides the other. There are factory features specifically designed to lighten the slide. One statement allows it, the very next sentence says it is prohibited. Are external lightening cuts now legal since I can purchase this through S&W? If not, how are internal lightening slots allowed? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CHA-LEE Posted November 13, 2015 Share Posted November 13, 2015 I doubt that the "Approved" modifications listed in the USPSA Rule book were written with the intent that ANY feature from ANY combination of production manufactured 1911's can be combined to create a FrankinGammer 1911 that is still legal. NROI needs to step up and delineate what the interpretation(s) of the approved modification list should be. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thermobollocks Posted November 13, 2015 Share Posted November 13, 2015 Seems like a minimum slide mass rule would fix a lot of this crap. 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