9mm Major/38 Super In Other Than Open?

[Patrick Sweeney]

Gentlemen, the Professor is getting a little disgruntled. The discussion has evolved in a direction I see all too often in discussions: Going from the General to the Specific.

The question is not, "Can you reload in ten feet (or any other distance) well enough to offset capacity advantage?"

Yes, capacity killed SS and .45s in Limited. Along with other factors, but capacity was the most visible one. Had capacity not, I think we'd see a few more .45s in Limited, but the diffculty of getting a widebody .45 to feed compared to a .40 would eventually weigh against it. (And don't tell me you've got a widebody .45 that feeds just fine. You're arguing from the General to the Specific again.)

I suggested a future predicament. I laid out solutions to the problems it would raise. Problems we have faced in the past, and when blindsided by them, caused problematic "solutions."

I was looking for input to those proposed solutions, as I am not arrogant enough to think I have all the answers.

And just for the record, I was a commercial, full-time gunsmith for almost twenty years. I can fix or build you just about anything. I'm too busy writing and teaching to do any more gunsmithing, so I'm not in the market to build a 9mm genericMajor Limited or L-10 gun.

[XRe]

Patrick - sorry if I've contributed to your consternation

Personally, I'm all for the hypothetical discussion - and you're right, eventually, technology will evolve, and things will be possible that previously weren't. No reason not to discuss them ahead of time, to me. Frankly, the safety concerns of days past are behind us with a properly built firearm - and they obviously don't bug some folks all that much with all the talk about using things like Clays in .40 w/ a 200gr bullet!

In the context of L-10, I don't see why a Major 9-ish isn't possible, given the stipulations you discussed - one simple rule change to allow it to play. The division is already capacity limited, so you don't gain any advantage that way. In fact, I don't see why any "improved" .38 Super-ish (Super Comp, TJ, 9x23s, etc) wouldn't be viable in a ramped barrel config.

In the context of Limited - I object somewhat to making the rules more complicated (different mag lengths for different calibers), and I have a small fear of potential arms race due to capacity increase in longer mags. Those may be unfounded concerns - and I stand by my discussion above about why I think .40 would prove to be the more popular setup, anyhow.

Is that closer to what you were wanting to discuss???

Dave

[Loves2Shoot]

I for one would give 2 s@#ts about the change.

As far as capacity, if you can't find a decent spot to reload with 20 rounds in the gun the caliber of gun you shoot won't help you. Would I switch to 9mm, hell no, 38 super, maybe in about 100,000 rounds when my .40 barrel wears out , just change the breachface and get a new barrel

[XRe]

As far as capacity, if you can't find a decent spot to reload with 20 rounds in the gun the caliber of gun you shoot won't help you.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Bingo....

[Gary Stevens]

Just to correct one item. There is no 357 restriction in Revolver. By the rules you can make major with a 9x19 if you wish.

Nice try Patrick. I played this game with the same question applied only to L-10. Kept getting answers about what it would do to Limited.

[BSeevers]

Hmm I see quite a few .40 S_I's and VERY few .45 S_I's Its only a couple rounds right? I know the bank of 8 reasoning but why do we see so many .40's

I shoot a 165 gr in Limited and would probably shoot a 160 gr 38 Super in Limited. I don't think there would be much recoil difference.

[Loves2Shoot]

Hmm I see quite a few .40 S_I's and VERY few .45 S_I's Its only a couple rounds right? I know the bank of 8 reasoning but why do we see so many .40's.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Almost free brass

[Chuck D]

The single biggest negative USPSA/IPSC shooting has is that there simply is NO rules stability. Instead of carefully crafting a set of equiptment rules and leaving them alone for 5 or so years, the membership gets change after change after change that effects how they play the game but most importantly how much it COSTS to play the game.

The 40 caliber and larger rule has worked well in Standard/Limited Division up until now. What difference does it make if ammunition manufacturers come up with major power factor 9x19 or 38 Super factory ammunition? They already make ammo that meets the power factor in 40 and 45 don't they?

What do you tell the shooter with a 9x19 or 38 Super gun that wants to shoot Limited/Standard Division and score major.....you tell 'em to read the rule book, that's where you'll find the answer.

I couldn't care less if brass and bullets are cheaper. The crux of the discussion revolves around major caliber "factory ammunition." Who is going to deep 6 their progressive reloader and purchase case after case of factory ammo and CLAIM they're saving money? Likewise with the changing of breachfaces, slides and barrels.

The sole issue is magazine capacity. You could sure pile the 9x19's and Supers in a 140mm magazine can't you? Whether its 25,24 or 23...it's still more than 20 40 caliber rounds and 15 45 caliber rounds. In this game...more is better regardless of reload space and time. Allow .356 diameter rounds in Sstandard/Limited Division and we're off to the races once again.

I shoot a widebody 45 ( and yes it feeds great regardless of the fact that some might not want to hear that) because I both like the caliber and the set-up fits the rules of the Division. Rules that I would hope cound remain constant and stable for some reasonable period of time to justify my investment in rules compliant gear. I've said it before and I'll continue to say it until I finally get sick and tired of constant rules tinkering and neglect to send in that membership renewal check. Rules stability is the #1 most important issue facing USPSA and IPSC. All you have to do is look at the current state of Production Division to see how constant rules changes have "cheesed off" some of the membership. Why would you want to make the same mistakes ?

[Patrick Sweeney]

Chuck, you aren't paying attention. I did not say "Change the rules" I asked "When events get to the point where we might have to change the rules...."

"Rules Stability" is a phantom, an illusion. If we were wedded to Rules Stability above all else we'd still be arguing about red-dot scopes, hi-caps and do we really want to split into Open and Stock. Rules should not be changed capriciously, nor to advantage some favored sponsor. But rules must change when equipment changes enough to make the old rules invalid.

Despite the messy way we've gotten here, I think we have a pretty rational description and split among the Divisions, recognizing the real differences equipment creates.

I specifically addressed the problem of capacity (the only thing that could spark an equipment race) and feel that while my solution is not elegant, it would suffice.

The problem with the change in Production at the International level has come not from a failure to adhere to rules stability. The ruling came out of nowhere, with no public input, discussion, nor an apparent logical consideration of equipment. We don't need stability, we need rational and transparent rules adaptations.

Thus this discussion. What do we do at some future time, if....

[Caspian_45]

Some of you may want to hear this, some may not. Thia is just smoe info.

Pat I shot a club match today with my SS 45 and SS 38 super comp. Both were loaded to major (@172). I shot 5 stages, with one including strong and weak hand.

The hands down winner IMO is the 38. I had one jam with it that hurt me on one stage. This is just one test, so it might be different next time.

I shot the 38 faster and better points. This is what I would shoot if 9x calibers were allowed some day.

My opinion is that in L-10 it will make no difference. Limited would probably suffer.

I am for 9x limited 10 legal major.

[Run n Gun]

I say we raise major to 175!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I’ve read this thread twice, and the good Doctor’s suggestion is the most sensible one I’ve read so far!

Ed

[Duane Thomas]

It isn't safe to load. Simple. Designate a 9mm Major cartridge....Want to shoot Major with a 9mm in L or L-10? Your gun had better be chambered in Super or 356TSW.

I would add the .38 Super Comp and 9x23. Especially the 9x23 since it's a considerably stronger cartridge casing than the .38 Super/Super Comp.

[Chuck D]

Pat...I'm paying closer attention than you give me credit for.

I'm not interested in "splitting hairs" with you or anybody else for that matter. I'm only interested in one thing (as are others)...

Rules Stability. Real, Genuine, Achieveable Rules Stability.

and it's not an "illusion" as you so incorrectly infer.

[Bear1142]

Patrick,

Could you clarify exactly what questions you are trying to address. I've re-read you original post a couple of times and I can't really discern exactly what you're interested in discussing? Apparently, Jim, I, and several others got into a discussion that went in a direction that you were not interested in. Could you re-phrase your questions? I don't want to be accused of hijacking your thread.

Erik

[Patrick Sweeney]

1) Powder chemists are always at work.

2) Velocity sells.

3) We now have faster factory ammo than ever before, and newer will often be faster still.

Continuing those factors into the future, it may well come to pass that shooters have a selection of factory ammos that clearly and legitemately make Major, in 9mm/38 Super chamberings, in factory guns. (More likely, it will come to pass, and within a relatively short time period.)

(If you do not believe the above, consider the number of powders we have available now, that did not exist, or were not previously suitable, to make Major in the Super for Open. Back in the early days, we struggled to make guns run with Blue Dot and heavy lead bullets. Now, we have a bunch of powders to choose from, that make Major with 115 and 125 grain bullets.)

When that happens, what do we do? That is what this discussion is about.

Rules stability would have us tell the new shooters who want to use their (all factory-available) guns and ammo "Too bad, the rules say you cannot."

[Rob Boudrie]

Some thoughts:

1). 9x19 limited major does not buy a *new* benefit of cheap brass (at least in the US), as 40S&W once fired brass is already so cheap that it sometimes costs even less than the primers if you only use it once.

------------------

2). The business of "allow it if the manufacturer offers the gun in 9x19 major" would be a real can of worms:

- What is "offered" - a custom run, a generally available product, etc.?

- What is a manufacturer offers, then discontinues a gun in 9x19? Is that model forever "gunsmithable" to 9x19?

- How would match directors know what is offered by factories in all guns. This sort of thing changes all the time.

- It establishes a different standard for that one caliber. We don't ask that question of the 40S&W shooter, or of the super/supercomp shooter in Open. If we declare that manfacturer certification is necessary to be allowed, we would probably need to use that as a uniform safety standard for all guns.

- What is a manufacturer? For example, is Dawson a manufacturer or gunsmith? His operation has characteristics of both, but as long as he buys frames from SxI instead of making them from scratch in his shop, he could be considered by many to be a gunsmith.

------------------

3) If 9x19 is allowed as major, many will see it as the "winning ticket" even without a mag capacity increase. I even predict that there will be some people who would buy new 9's to replace their 40s while arguing they are not getting an advantage.

Resale values of USPSA/IPSC customized SxI/Paras in 40 would plummet instantly. People who spent $2500+ for their ultimate limited blaster would now have sub-optimal equipment. And no, this is not like "Technology evolution" since the equipment would be rendered sub-optimal by fiat, not technology.

I would be interested in hearing from some people who invested $2000+ of their own cash in limited 40's, and are not sponored or otherwise connected to get free guns, on this issue. If it's not you investment at state it's easy to say "so what?".

[Flexmoney]

Patrick,

The factory 9mm you are talking about may be available (or close) now, but I believe it will be quite a while before it becomes standard. Most off the shelf 40 hovers at, or above, Major.

[Ted Murphy]

Interesting thread. FWIW with some 9mm factory loads making major in the Glock platform I do not see the logic in allowing the .356tsw and not 9mm's.

Only plus I can see to this is that many of the widebody 9mm IDPA ESP shooters could come right over and play. I'm not sure how many shooters that would amount to though.

Been wanting to shoot my major 9mm carry ammo in my G17 in open just to see how it would go. As far as I'm concerned, I can go play with that in open and be happy- I have a G22 if I want to play in limited.

I think if they permitted 9mm major in Limited, I would stick with the .40 anyway. Probably be easier on my hands and ears long term.

Having said that, USPSA is about refinement & advancement in equipment and technique, perhaps with the improvements in powder and bullet technology, it is time to re-examine what constitutes "major". Even it it is a little painful to those that already have their guns.

I live in a cloud of ballistic ignorance and still believe that larger bores are better, but that sure isn't the only opinion out there to be sure.

Ted

[Ron Ankeny]

I put an 18 lb spring in my .38 Super single stack and torched off a half a dozen of my major .38 Super Open rounds. Anyone that would choose that over a .45 with a 230 grainer over Clays is just nucking futs.

[Caspian_45]

Ron I am using a Kimber 38 super gun with a STI light recoilmaster. You have way too much spring. You should use the same spring you use in a open gun.

I tested it with heavy springs and you are correct that it recoils much more.

[shred]

How long as .357 Sig been available?

How many people have seriously wanted it to be scored Major PF in Limited? Or even Limited-10?

Discuss.

This is not a new or even future issue.

[ErikW]

If it were just about power factor, then we could allow .17-.35 caliber centerfires. I'm sure somebody can whip up a .32 caliber 100 gr at 1,650 fps.

But it's not just about making power factor. There's a minimum caliber to play. And in Limited and L-10 there's a larger minimum caliber to play Major.

[Chuck D]

Bravo !

[faustulus]

The shooting public wants above all else logical, understnadable, STABLE rules

It is not logical that the same bullet/load would be major in one division and minor in the other.

I would like to see 9mm major in Limited, but it isn't that big of a deal (I shoot minor now) I like the 9mm and don't really own, nor have the reason to own, other calibers.

I am new, so maybe the controversy is lost on me.

[Azone41]

Years ago we had a term called "super face" it was when someone blew thier gun up. I know things are different and powders are better but if we start letting people load anything they want to major we are going to start having some accidents. This will not be good for the sport as people will start saying that we are not safe and it only takes one that makes national level media coverage to get this going. I have been the RO when a couple of guns came unhinged by an incorrect powder charge and it isnt fun. I say leave things as they are