Jump to content
Brian Enos's Forums... Maku mozo!

2" rule update


Sarge

Recommended Posts

Looks like the minutes from the latest BOD meeting include a revision to the 2"rule. Now Production and SS can be the width of an overlay (2 1/8th inches) And all other divisions can be the LENGTH of the overlay or a whopping 3 3/8 inches! I guess the only question is when will it take effect? I guess Jan 1?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looks like the minutes from the latest BOD meeting include a revision to the 2"rule. Now Production and SS can be the width of an overlay (2 1/8th inches) And all other divisions can be the LENGTH of the overlay or a whopping 3 3/8 inches! I guess the only question is when will it take effect? I guess Jan 1?

Don't forget about Carry Optics! :devil:

I thought that rule change was interesting. Were a lot of Open/Limited shooters complaining about the 2" rule?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looks like the minutes from the latest BOD meeting include a revision to the 2"rule. Now Production and SS can be the width of an overlay (2 1/8th inches) And all other divisions can be the LENGTH of the overlay or a whopping 3 3/8 inches! I guess the only question is when will it take effect? I guess Jan 1?

Don't forget about Carry Optics! :devil:

I thought that rule change was interesting. Were a lot of Open/Limited shooters complaining about the 2" rule?

OH right! How could I forget CO. They are 2 1/8 as well.

I didn't hear any rumors or complaints at all. Just seemed to come out of the blue.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When I first heard this was in the works, the change was to be to 2.125 to allow the overlay to be used since many ROs were already using it as a go/no-go gauge. The 3.375 was a surprise. But then, so was the weight limit in CO...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I find out odd that a rather major rule change come to the BOD from DNROI as a ruling and not as a motion to change the rules brought by one of the area directors.

In my head it seems that the DNROIs role should be to implement and clarify the rules and the elected BOD members should be the ones asking for and making changes to the rules. I know that could get a bit grey like the DNROI I think would be correct in asking the BOD to change from 2" to 2 1/8 because that is more of a implementation measure than a major rule change but changing half the divisions to 3 3/8 I think falls more in the new rule arena.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't forget the addition to rule 5.2.5.2 that pertains to this equipment position change.

5.2.5.2: Any competitor who fails the foregoing test will immediately adjust his holster or equipment to comply with the requirements of the relevant Division. The Range Master may make allowances for variations in these requirements due to anatomical considerations. Some competitors may not be able to fully comply. Any competitor who shoots a course of fire while out of compliance will receive a zero score for that course of fire, unless specifically exempted by the Range Master. If the RO suspects or is notified that a competitors equipment is out of compliance for their relevant division, the RO must measure the distances at that time. Penalties will not be retroactive and will be based solely on measurements taken on a particular stage. The RM must be informed of any penalties applied due to non-compliance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I suppose using something they should have on them already as a measuring device kind of makes sense. Not sure if the difference for open/lim/lim10/revo really matters.

In Open running a 90 degree mount you need a longer racker. Don't quite need over 3" though!
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wonder if the company that makes the overlays is ISO certified? I know this is not a Critical dimension for a life saving device, but now that these plastic overlays are used as an official measuring device. Should USPSA have some recourse to ensure consistency?

The other thing to consider in this ruling is that the heel of the pistol/gun still needs to be above the top of the belt per 5.2.7.2, and well all the OTHER stuff that falls under 5.2.7 .

Edited by Nghthwk1911
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not sure this was something that needed fixing as the 2" (50mm IPSC) distance seems reasonable with the allowance given to the RM/MD to accommodate body types that can't comply.

It would be interesting to know the back story on why this was deemed necessary and/or beneficial.

In my casual observations at matches it does seem there are a number of competitors who weren't in compliance with the 2" rule. So, I guess one benefit of making it 3 3/8" inches for the race holster divisions would be that it brings everybody (hopefully!) into compliance and is one less rule to deal with.

Yeah, when this gets implemented I'll be readjusting my holsters.

Edited by Bamboo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I spent $50 on the boss hangar to replace my DOH just to comply with the rules. Oh well. It makes sense for Limited and Open.

I think you'll still be better off with the boss than the doh. I wouldn't go back, regardless.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can't wait to see the 3.3 inch silly rigs. I've helped quite a few new guys that buy a holster and install every spacer that comes with it. There was a guy couple years ago at MI State that had one sticking so far out you could probably catch it on barricades leaving a position. He had modified it himself. Comical.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can't wait to see the 3.3 inch silly rigs. I've helped quite a few new guys that buy a holster and install every spacer that comes with it. There was a guy couple years ago at MI State that had one sticking so far out you could probably catch it on barricades leaving a position. He had modified it himself. Comical.

The other thing you guys missed is it is measured from the top of the belt. There are many shooters who are not currently in compliance measured from the top. One of the issues I have found the use of the double and triple belt set-ups has caused a number to be out of compliance. I would have prefered the SS be at 1", but that was a non-starter. :devil:

Oh well. Makes things so much easier to deal with and there is now a simple enforcement tool. Also, a penalty that is not the nucelar option of shooting for no score for the match, since the distance rule applied to all divisions.

Jay

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't see it that way.

5.2.5: Where a Division specifies a maximum distance that a competitor's handgun and equipment may extend away from a competitor's belt, the measurement shall be taken in the following manner: --perpendicular to the top of the belt at the point of attachment to the belt --from the innermost surface of the belt equipment (against the pants/body) to the closest point of the grip of the handgun and/or any reloading device --measurements may be made with an official USPSA overlay, using either the width or length of the overlay as ap

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not sure this was something that needed fixing as the 2" (50mm IPSC) distance seems reasonable with the allowance given to the RM/MD to accommodate body types that can't comply.

It would be interesting to know the back story on why this was deemed necessary and/or beneficial.

In my casual observations at matches it does seem there are a number of competitors who weren't in compliance with the 2" rule. So, I guess one benefit of making it 3 3/8" inches for the race holster divisions would be that it brings everybody (hopefully!) into compliance and is one less rule to deal with.

Yeah, when this gets implemented I'll be readjusting my holsters.

I agree with your idea that one less rule to worry about is a good thing, but if that was the idea then the solution would be to remove the distance requirement in the divisions where it was not wanted, not to change it to some other arbitrary dimension that will also not be enforced.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gonna game the hell out of this.

what's there to game? how much time do you imagine you will save?

Hopefully, that was tongue in cheek.

So far in my cheek I get written up in a biology journal.

I don't know how much of a difference it actually makes, since my Racemaster allows me to adjust angles to get something efficient within the constraints of the current rules. But, I've seen some Safariland duty holsters that totally don't make the 2" rule.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I will bet this change came about due to all the questions and issues with the DOH attachment (mainly in Production). As it is shipped from the factory, it is not legal. Shims must be added to make it legal. With this change, it should remove all the issues with the DOH, and also all the questions about its use.

Adding the shims ( finding the parts necessary to make it legal during a match) was most likely problematic. Who is gonna carry the necessary parts in their range bag?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...