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

Poll for possible changes for CO


zhunter

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 134
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

BASE

My CO gun cost $450 (CZ P-09) and the dot was about $500 (they can be had for less). I shot "PO" before it was a provisional division in both wildcat local matches and in Open shooting minor with 10 rounds in the mag. The early shooting was with a CZ Shadow and Optic, the "CO" shooting has been with a CO legal gun, the P-09. Both guns are very good, both have different strengths. The lighter weight gun draws and transitions better, but heavier gun is better for splits and longer/tighter shots. In my opinion, it is a wash. I think the Shadow might win out because of the trigger. I have my P-09's trigger very light, but no one has yet designed a Disco for the P-09 that will lesson the SA pre-travel. Can it be done? Yes, absolutely, but it has to be monetarily worth it to the gun parts gurus and as of now it is not.

I have no idea if it would be better or worse in the long run for CZ and CZC but the weight limit seems to have made a lot more people take a hard look at the P-09 and will likely prompt more rance parts and support in the future for this line of CZ guns. Realistically most people are going to buy another gun to shoot the division anyway, although I completely understand the desire to keep platforms similar across multiple divisions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

IMO get rid of the weight limit, keep everything else the same.

Amen ...

This really isn't that hard ...

WRT names .... I believe when this was first considered (and voted down) by the BoD is was called Production Optics .... It only later morphed into Carry Optics with all the drama about gun manufacturers ...

BTW, USPSA is a competition sport, not in any way, shape or form tactical, self defense, etc, etc. If you want to get all involved in shooting guns in the real world I suggest heading to your nearest Army recruiter ... They will hook you up ...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

IMO get rid of the weight limit, keep everything else the same.

Amen ...

This really isn't that hard ...

WRT names .... I believe when this was first considered (and voted down) by the BoD is was called Production Optics .... It only later morphed into Carry Optics with all the drama about gun manufacturers ...

BTW, USPSA is a competition sport, not in any way, shape or form tactical, self defense, etc, etc. If you want to get all involved in shooting guns in the real world I suggest heading to your nearest Army recruiter ... They will hook you up ...

In the explanation of how the division cane about, they said it was about guns that people carry, people carry guns for self defense, the name is carry optics.

Talk to the BOD's if you have an issue, they brought it up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

IMO get rid of the weight limit, keep everything else the same.

Amen ...

This really isn't that hard ...

WRT names .... I believe when this was first considered (and voted down) by the BoD is was called Production Optics .... It only later morphed into Carry Optics with all the drama about gun manufacturers ...

BTW, USPSA is a competition sport, not in any way, shape or form tactical, self defense, etc, etc. If you want to get all involved in shooting guns in the real world I suggest heading to your nearest Army recruiter ... They will hook you up ...

In the explanation of how the division cane about, they said it was about guns that people carry, people carry guns for self defense, the name is carry optics.

Talk to the BOD's if you have an issue, they brought it up.

As Nimitz mentioned above, the division first was proposed as Production Optics. Carry Optics was created by HQ (primarily Phil I believe) in response to what he was hearing from S&W, Springfield, Glock, and Sig. Phil stated the false notion, that these polymer pistol manufacturers have, that one cannot be competitive in Production without a heavier pistol. Phil stated that their concerns were valid, hence, the creation of Carry Optics with a weight limit.

If this division is truly about carry, perhaps it should be mandatory IWB carry since most of us that carry do so IWB. Additionally, if there are weight limits, perhaps there should also be a max barrel length of 4" to be more in line with the spirit of the majority of carry guns.

Edited by d_striker
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can truly understand one wanting to keep with one platform. Humm, what are my chances of a 9mm 1911 for Carry Optics if the weight limit goes away. :)

I believe ZERO chance as it is SA only.

I doubt this new division will allow SA only guns, but who knows.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Florida State Championship

1 carry optics

7 L10

9 revolver

I guess they will take 1st and last place.

Odd. A State Championship is typically a Level 2 Match (per Appendix 1). The last time I looked at the CO (provisional) division documentation from USPSA HQ, CO was only recognized at Level 1 matches. I wonder if this has changed, or if I misunderstood something... or if somebody screwed up and did something out of compliance... ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Florida State Championship

1 carry optics

7 L10

9 revolver

I guess they will take 1st and last place.

Odd. A State Championship is typically a Level 2 Match (per Appendix 1). The last time I looked at the CO (provisional) division documentation from USPSA HQ, CO was only recognized at Level 1 matches. I wonder if this has changed, or if I misunderstood something... or if somebody screwed up and did something out of compliance... ?

Correct, this was pointed out in a DELETED post.

It is being offered as a curtesy, but the low number of CO shooters signed up is a result of it not being recognized in a Level 2 match yet.

I'll be shooting Production Optics at the Florida Open in Feb. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry, I haven't been following this too closely. Are they considering changing the basic rules for this division for the upcoming year? Not complaining, I would love to shoot my revolver with optic sights if it would be legal...

Skip

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry, I haven't been following this too closely. Are they considering changing the basic rules for this division for the upcoming year? Not complaining, I would love to shoot my revolver with optic sights if it would be legal...

Skip

Then the argument would be that us revolver shooter's would be at a big advantage even though we would be 2 rounds short of the maximum load. I think if allowed revolver would dominate, but that is just my opinion.

Edited by revoman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If they changed the rules so that they are the same as production is today, but you can add an optic sight, wouldn't that allow revolvers to compete. I've been playing with my 627 and 929 with optic sight and they are really easy/fun to shoot. With my eyes getting worse, I'm considering shooting open with my 929. I wouldn't be competitive at all, but it would be fun.

Skip

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I shoot my optic revolver in open at my local club. You would be amazed at how well it can compete on a head to head in classifiers that require reloads and Virginia count. Some courses when set up can also be shot just as fast. Just have to shoot more accurate as it will be minor scoring.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

IMO get rid of the weight limit, keep everything else the same.

Amen ...

This really isn't that hard ...

WRT names .... I believe when this was first considered (and voted down) by the BoD is was called Production Optics .... It only later morphed into Carry Optics with all the drama about gun manufacturers ...

BTW, USPSA is a competition sport, not in any way, shape or form tactical, self defense, etc, etc. If you want to get all involved in shooting guns in the real world I suggest heading to your nearest Army recruiter ... They will hook you up ...

In the explanation of how the division cane about, they said it was about guns that people carry, people carry guns for self defense, the name is carry optics.

Talk to the BOD's if you have an issue, they brought it up.

As Nimitz mentioned above, the division first was proposed as Production Optics. Carry Optics was created by HQ (primarily Phil I believe) in response to what he was hearing from S&W, Springfield, Glock, and Sig. Phil stated the false notion, that these polymer pistol manufacturers have, that one cannot be competitive in Production without a heavier pistol. Phil stated that their concerns were valid, hence, the creation of Carry Optics with a weight limit.

If this division is truly about carry, perhaps it should be mandatory IWB carry since most of us that carry do so IWB. Additionally, if there are weight limits, perhaps there should also be a max barrel length of 4" to be more in line with the spirit of the majority of carry guns.

This ....

If this new division is really about carry guns then I think the rules should reflect the realities of carry guns as was mentioned above. Outside of those LEOs who compete I suspect that there aren't a lot of people who carry their competition Production gun for self defense ... I certainly don't.

Edited by Nimitz
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Just read this in the USPSA Down Range email. AFAIK, The official minutes have not yet been posted...


USPSA NEWS
Board approves changes to the provisional Carry Optics Division facebook2.pngtwitter2.pnglinkedin2.pngemail.png USPSA
USPSA continues to embrace the evolution in firearms technology and innovation. Numerous handgun manufacturers are now offering optics-ready platforms. The recent SHOT Show displayed more optics-ready carry guns than ever before. Custom gunsmiths often upgrade these factory offerings with front cocking serrations, cosmetic cuts, stippled grips, undercut trigger guards, buried optics and co-witnessed sights.

In July of 2015, USPSA announced the provisional Carry Optics Division. During the past few months, the provisional division has exhibited slow but steady growth. The members interested in this division have spoken, and the USPSA Board of Directors has listened. The division will remain provisional, but for the remainder of 2016 will have some new opportunities.

The changes for Carry Optics Division will make it truly unique from other divisions, and will include:

  • Authorization for all levels of USPSA and Steel Challenge
  • Expanded stippling, contouring and texturing of the grip frame to include undercut trigger guard and grip reduction
  • Expanded slide profiles to include serrations and cosmetic cuts not completely through the slide
  • Increased weight limit of 45 ounces, including optic and empty magazine, allowing more pistols to compete
  • Required use of a slide-mounted optic, prohibiting guns without an optic.

The next review of the provisional Carry Optics Division is scheduled for late January 2017.

Please note that making some of the changes now allowed in the provisional Carry Optics Division will render your handgun illegal for Production Division. A new appendix has been added to the online rulebook to aid shooters and match officials with the changes.

-USPSA President Mike Foley and USPSA Board of Directors

Edited by ChuckS
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I had no problem with the weight limit, polymer guns are generally much cheaper than the steel guns and most major gun manufacturers had polymer guns that met the weight requirement, CZ, Tanfoglio, Springfield, S&W, Glock etc… all the big names that sponsor our sport already had guns that could be used in CO, in fact the weight restriction could have led to more sales of those types of guns.

I think the BOD has made a huge mistake with these changes. The concept that I and others were pushing was a low-cost read dot division, we have seen the cost of guns in Production go through the roof over the past few years and now the absurdly titled CO division will go the same way… and why is it still called CO ???

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I love the changes, Production Optics/Carry Optics was never about cost to me, it was only about shooting a production gun with a slide mounted optic and minor ammo.

Cost, not important. I can afford any gun I want. I always laughed at the "welfare" remarks

Why to go BoD

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The average American has far less disposable income than in the past, that is a consequence of a recession that has lasted for years. USPSA had an opportunity to provide a division that would allow more people to participate and be competitive with lower cost guns.

I can afford any gun I want to, but its not about what it good for me or you. Its what would enable someone with a lower paying job to compete in this sport, or how a parent could provide a gun for their kid so they can take up the sport with a red-dot without having to drop thousands of dollars.

There is a bigger picture here and the BOD is either unaware of it, does not thinks its important, or is pandering to the CZ/Tanfoglio crowd.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I love the changes, Production Optics/Carry Optics was never about cost to me, it was only about shooting a production gun with a slide mounted optic and minor ammo.

Cost, not important. I can afford any gun I want. I always laughed at the "welfare" remarks

Why to go BoD

So, right there in your own words it's not about cost. It's about shooting a cheap open gun.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Brit

The P-09 I have been using is a great gun, low cost and will not hurt anyone. Your article about equipment from last years nationals proved that both steel and plastic guns are competitive. Or did you forget?

It's always better to have choices

Edited by zhunter
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...