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

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 392
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

If they already had limited 10 what was the point of single stack?

Thank you, thank you very much. That was pretty much the reaction in my neck of USPSA. That said it's about as popular as L10, maybe slightly ahead, but contrary to its name it doesn't allow all single stacks to compete. It should really be named the 1911 division......

Then SS could cover the singlestack guns..... :devil::devil:

Link to post
Share on other sites

isnt today the Board mtg that decides our Carry Optics fate?? Here's hoping that the 35 ounce weight restriction goes away.

Eric

I believe the discussion by the BOD will be "if" they have enough data to move CO from Provisional to a fully recognized USPSA Division. I would bet the weight issue would be a rule change down the road if Provisional status is removed.

I think lifting the weight would piss off more people than it would please. For those in the camp of "I want to use my ACCU Shadow(or what gun I have), are you really going to pay $150 for slide milling + 300 to 500 for an optic and change the purpose of a $1600 base gun?

We are not IDPA, but I see CO Division created to support guns you would really carry concealed. Concealed Carry licences are through the roof. Personally, I don't want to see Open type guns in CO. I shoot open 99% of the time, but as soon as I have a solid CO gun I will be shooting CO. I might even shoot the CO Nats in Barry. I have LE friends that carry Optic guns and they are making plans to shoot Barry.

I Thought USPSA wasn't about guns people carry.

Well, the division IS called Carry Optics.

Which is why it should be in IDPA.
Link to post
Share on other sites

isnt today the Board mtg that decides our Carry Optics fate?? Here's hoping that the 35 ounce weight restriction goes away.

Eric

I believe the discussion by the BOD will be "if" they have enough data to move CO from Provisional to a fully recognized USPSA Division. I would bet the weight issue would be a rule change down the road if Provisional status is removed.

I think lifting the weight would piss off more people than it would please. For those in the camp of "I want to use my ACCU Shadow(or what gun I have), are you really going to pay $150 for slide milling + 300 to 500 for an optic and change the purpose of a $1600 base gun?

We are not IDPA, but I see CO Division created to support guns you would really carry concealed. Concealed Carry licences are through the roof. Personally, I don't want to see Open type guns in CO. I shoot open 99% of the time, but as soon as I have a solid CO gun I will be shooting CO. I might even shoot the CO Nats in Barry. I have LE friends that carry Optic guns and they are making plans to shoot Barry.

I Thought USPSA wasn't about guns people carry.

Well, the division IS called Carry Optics.

Which is why it should be in IDPA.
Sarge, what is it exactly that you have against CO?
Link to post
Share on other sites

isnt today the Board mtg that decides our Carry Optics fate?? Here's hoping that the 35 ounce weight restriction goes away.

Eric

I believe the discussion by the BOD will be "if" they have enough data to move CO from Provisional to a fully recognized USPSA Division. I would bet the weight issue would be a rule change down the road if Provisional status is removed.

I think lifting the weight would piss off more people than it would please. For those in the camp of "I want to use my ACCU Shadow(or what gun I have), are you really going to pay $150 for slide milling + 300 to 500 for an optic and change the purpose of a $1600 base gun?

We are not IDPA, but I see CO Division created to support guns you would really carry concealed. Concealed Carry licences are through the roof. Personally, I don't want to see Open type guns in CO. I shoot open 99% of the time, but as soon as I have a solid CO gun I will be shooting CO. I might even shoot the CO Nats in Barry. I have LE friends that carry Optic guns and they are making plans to shoot Barry.

I Thought USPSA wasn't about guns people carry.

Well, the division IS called Carry Optics.

Which is why it should be in IDPA.
Sarge, what is it exactly that you have against CO?
Why not just shoot the gun in open? It seems one common denominator is old eyes. Old eyes wont be ultra competitive anyway so that's moot.

Most CO guns could be converted to full on open guns for probably less than $500 so the cost of open argument is weak.

Carry optics should be carry guns, not 5" barrel tricked out competition guns. Hence the IDPA fit.

USPSA tries to distance itself from real world defensive fighting. Hell, there's even a rule about offensive clothing. Some go as far as saying camo or tacticool gear is not appropriate. Why would we cater to carry guns anyway?

And ironically there is even a forum rule limiting how much we can talk about carry guns and self defense yet we have amassed hundreds of comments on carry guns.

Link to post
Share on other sites

isnt today the Board mtg that decides our Carry Optics fate?? Here's hoping that the 35 ounce weight restriction goes away.

Eric

I believe the discussion by the BOD will be "if" they have enough data to move CO from Provisional to a fully recognized USPSA Division. I would bet the weight issue would be a rule change down the road if Provisional status is removed.

I think lifting the weight would piss off more people than it would please. For those in the camp of "I want to use my ACCU Shadow(or what gun I have), are you really going to pay $150 for slide milling + 300 to 500 for an optic and change the purpose of a $1600 base gun?

We are not IDPA, but I see CO Division created to support guns you would really carry concealed. Concealed Carry licences are through the roof. Personally, I don't want to see Open type guns in CO. I shoot open 99% of the time, but as soon as I have a solid CO gun I will be shooting CO. I might even shoot the CO Nats in Barry. I have LE friends that carry Optic guns and they are making plans to shoot Barry.

I Thought USPSA wasn't about guns people carry.

Well, the division IS called Carry Optics.

Which is why it should be in IDPA.
Sarge, what is it exactly that you have against CO?
Why not just shoot the gun in open? It seems one common denominator is old eyes. Old eyes wont be ultra competitive anyway so that's moot.

Most CO guns could be converted to full on open guns for probably less than $500 so the cost of open argument is weak.

Carry optics should be carry guns, not 5" barrel tricked out competition guns. Hence the IDPA fit.

USPSA tries to distance itself from real world defensive fighting. Hell, there's even a rule about offensive clothing. Some go as far as saying camo or tacticool gear is not appropriate. Why would we cater to carry guns anyway?

And ironically there is even a forum rule limiting how much we can talk about carry guns and self defense yet we have amassed hundreds of comments on carry guns.

Sarge, you really didn't answer my question...you just gave a bunch reasons why you don't think it should be a division...what harm is this division doing you? What in this division is detracting from your shooting enjoyment? If you never have any plans to even shoot thisdivision, then why all the fuss? Life is too short to fuss over crap that isn't going to affect you one way or the other...That's my .02...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is the forum rule you quoted Sarge....

This Forum is for firearm, technique, and conceptual discussions pertaining to training and competition. (And various unrelated topics.) While the occasional defensive shooting post is not prohibited, in general, defensive shooting discussions or debates are discouraged.

I see no part of the rule which limits "how much we can talk about carry guns and self defense yet we have amassed hundreds of comments on carry guns."... We are talking about "firearm, technique, and conceptual discussions pertaining to training and competition." as Carry Optics is a provisional division of USPSA. Your argument might hold water if they forced people shooting CO to follow IDPA rules about reloads and such, but since they don't and won't, it is just a game, just like the game you are playing in Open, and there is nothing "defensive" about it.

Also, yes, there is a USPSA rule about "offensive clothing", but you are taking that out of context. We both know that by offensive clothing they mean they don't want people wearing shirts that have offensive sayings, or other inappropriate clothing. If they meant it the way you are describing, they would make everyone wearing 511 pants stop wearing them...as they are strictly made for tactical offensive/defensive situations.

You ask the question "Why would we (USPSA) cater to carry guns?"...I answer, why wouldn't we? Why leave out any segment of the gun owning population? I'm not saying make a new division for every single type/caliber/barrel length of gun out there, but they have made divisions for a myriad of different guns, why not those guns that are primarily used for self defense that have optics mounted on them?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm sure that the CO division isn't going anywhere, and I think it will grow into a fairly popular division at that. Companies are catering by producing guns that are capable without machine work, and I'm sure they wouldn't be if they didn't think that it wasn't going anywhere but up. Frankly I think it's kind of a cool division. I probably won't ever shoot it because I love limited too much, but there are a few regulars at the indoor matches I've been going to and the numbers seem to be growing.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Is there any evidence that a manufacturer other than Phil's new employer wanted a plastic only gun division?

Is there evidence that SIG was pushing for one? Efforts by SIG to make a line of Optics and to equip it's guns with those from the factory were ongoing long before CO was being seriously considered by USPSA. Also, SIG is releasing optic mounted guns not only for the P320 line but also many of the legacy heavy guns like the P226 and P220. Just because Phil got a job there doesn't mean that he has anything to do with things that have been set in motion for years. These conspiracy theories are ridiculous.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've posted this elsewhere......or similar......

CO actually started life as Production Optics........many threads and back and forth on this in different forums. Do a search.

A simple division using Production rules, but also a slide mounted optic.

I have been a proponent of "Production Optics/Carry Optics" from the beginning. Full disclosure....I am almost exclusively an Open shooter, Production is the furthest thing away that I'd even consider shooting.

I supported it because I could see that the concealed carry crowd was leaning towards optics. It was starting to be fairly common amongst them and the "new" set up.

I WANT USPSA TO BE ON THE CUTTING EDGE OF PISTOLCRAFT AND AT THE FOREFRONT OF DEVELOPMENT OF NEW TECHNIQUE AND GEAR. WE GET THIS AND HAVE ALWAYS DONE THIS BY PUSHING THE ENVELOPE

SO,.... What was discovered was........the very words PRODUCTION OPTICS rendered the "HATE THE IDEA CROWD" complete drooling troglodytes.. Those words were so powerful you could see the IQ ticker plummeting as they furiously typed and complained. While never once offering one idea why the division would hurt USPSA.

Anyway,...once this phenomenon was identified the name was changed to Carry Optics and more than half the naysayers disappeared..

I DONT KNOW IF IT WILL EVER TAKE OFF,... BUT I BACK THE DIVISION. I HOPE IT WORKS.

Upon reflection I now think naysayers can not stand the idea of getting beat by a minor gun with an optic. Admit it, most of us look at "overall" even though we know better. This new division shakes the status quo.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I really don't care what you guys do, I just don't understand USPSA HQ logic on limited 10, single stack or WO. I was hoping someone on here could explain it to me. WO was set up to fail in my opinion all the timmies that already have these guns cannot use theirs. They have done to much to the gun and 10 rounds in a gun that holds 17 from the factory is nucken futs.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've posted this elsewhere......or similar......

CO actually started life as Production Optics........many threads and back and forth on this in different forums. Do a search.

A simple division using Production rules, but also a slide mounted optic.

I have been a proponent of "Production Optics/Carry Optics" from the beginning. Full disclosure....I am almost exclusively an Open shooter, Production is the furthest thing away that I'd even consider shooting.

I supported it because I could see that the concealed carry crowd was leaning towards optics. It was starting to be fairly common amongst them and the "new" set up.

I WANT USPSA TO BE ON THE CUTTING EDGE OF PISTOLCRAFT AND AT THE FOREFRONT OF DEVELOPMENT OF NEW TECHNIQUE AND GEAR. WE GET THIS AND HAVE ALWAYS DONE THIS BY PUSHING THE ENVELOPE

SO,.... What was discovered was........the very words PRODUCTION OPTICS rendered the "HATE THE IDEA CROWD" complete drooling troglodytes.. Those words were so powerful you could see the IQ ticker plummeting as they furiously typed and complained. While never once offering one idea why the division would hurt USPSA.

Anyway,...once this phenomenon was identified the name was changed to Carry Optics and more than half the naysayers disappeared..

I DONT KNOW IF IT WILL EVER TAKE OFF,... BUT I BACK THE DIVISION. I HOPE IT WORKS.

Upon reflection I now think naysayers can not stand the idea of getting beat by a minor gun with an optic. Admit it, most of us look at "overall" even though we know better. This new division shakes the status quo.

I have carried a gun concealed since 1987, I know a lot of people that carry a gun.

I don't know of anyone that carries one with an optic.

I have never heard anyone I know say they would even consider an optic.

Link to post
Share on other sites

the rules are not set in stone yet ... the whole point of a provisional division is to get some time behind the idea before final decisions are made so these decisions can be made with real data instead of using "Internet Facts" as the basis ... our new Pres knows that things like the weight restriction are a 'negative' in the big picture and ideas like "plastic guns can't compete against heavy guns" is silly also ... pretty sure it's actually "shooters who never practice & suck can't beat shooters who train hard and do" ....

and as for post #138 ..... Chris, are you kidding me? If you continue to post well thought out arguments with actual logic and facts behind them Al Gore (the inventor of the Internet) will turn over in his grave and income taxes will be discontinued and replaced by a national consumption tax or flat rate tax ..... stop it ... you're killing me .................................... :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

so you know everyone across the country who has a CCW or have conducted a scientific poll of a representative sample of people who have CCWs and therefore your information should be taken as a fact?

Small sample sizes of random locations cannot be used as facts to support a certain side of an argument ....

If you look at the 2-day event known as the SS Nationals in isolation you would conclude that SS is a very popular division is USPSA. Anyone want to try and argue that's really the case .... ?

Link to post
Share on other sites

so you know everyone across the country who has a CCW or have conducted a scientific poll of a representative sample of people who have CCWs and therefore your information should be taken as a fact?

Small sample sizes of random locations cannot be used as facts to support a certain side of an argument ....

If you look at the 2-day event known as the SS Nationals in isolation you would conclude that SS is a very popular division is USPSA. Anyone want to try and argue that's really the case .... ?

Is it a recognized division or still provisional?

Is USPSA about carry guns? I was told it is not.

Last month our monthly match sold out, one or two guys shot it.

Someone posted there is 43 people out of all USPSA members classified in carry optics, 1 is only classified if CO.

Monster match, 2 carry optics shooters.

Florida state championship, 1 carry optics shooter.

Florida Open has 3 carry optics shooters registered.

More people shoot revolver and L10 than CO.

SS has a pretty fair amount of classified shooters and more people carry single stack than carry optics.

Edited by bret
Link to post
Share on other sites

At first I thought great another division to water down the sport and another place to hide. Realistically it does not even matter because their is not enough people shooting it to matter. Chris thinking that a WO shooter is going to matter in the overall is hilarious.:)

Edited by Onepocket
Link to post
Share on other sites

I've posted this elsewhere......or similar......

CO actually started life as Production Optics........many threads and back and forth on this in different forums. Do a search.

A simple division using Production rules, but also a slide mounted optic.

I have been a proponent of "Production Optics/Carry Optics" from the beginning. Full disclosure....I am almost exclusively an Open shooter, Production is the furthest thing away that I'd even consider shooting.

I supported it because I could see that the concealed carry crowd was leaning towards optics. It was starting to be fairly common amongst them and the "new" set up.

I WANT USPSA TO BE ON THE CUTTING EDGE OF PISTOLCRAFT AND AT THE FOREFRONT OF DEVELOPMENT OF NEW TECHNIQUE AND GEAR. WE GET THIS AND HAVE ALWAYS DONE THIS BY PUSHING THE ENVELOPE

SO,.... What was discovered was........the very words PRODUCTION OPTICS rendered the "HATE THE IDEA CROWD" complete drooling troglodytes.. Those words were so powerful you could see the IQ ticker plummeting as they furiously typed and complained. While never once offering one idea why the division would hurt USPSA.

Anyway,...once this phenomenon was identified the name was changed to Carry Optics and more than half the naysayers disappeared..

I DONT KNOW IF IT WILL EVER TAKE OFF,... BUT I BACK THE DIVISION. I HOPE IT WORKS.

Upon reflection I now think naysayers can not stand the idea of getting beat by a minor gun with an optic. Admit it, most of us look at "overall" even though we know better. This new division shakes the status quo.

I have carried a gun concealed since 1987, I know a lot of people that carry a gun.

I don't know of anyone that carries one with an optic.

I have never heard anyone I know say they would even consider an optic.

See post #125

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't care about the division, I don't see a valid reason for the weight limit.

If it's because people don't carry heavy guns, that is bull, I carried a Stainless Colt Combat Commander and full sized 1911 for over 20 years.

I don't know anyone that carries a gun with an optic.

If it were up to me, leave it as is minus the weight limit.

I don't see many people shooting it but I do know a Super Senior shooting it, it may keep him shooting longer since he is getting up there in age and he can't see his iron sights real well.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If USPSA wants to grow as some say then the focus needs to be attracting younger shooters. Those younger shooters grew up playing video games with dots on guns.

Manufacturers are making dot ready guns, so unless all of their marketing and research departments are inept it's going to be a thing. Not having a place for "the new hotness" to play is a guarantee those buyers won't shoot their new guns in USPSA.

There's obviously also a pretty severe public outreach problem when it comes to the sport. The average Joe at the local gun store thinks you need to be some sort of shooting god or hobby gunsmith before you can go to "a competition," instead of just going and having fun.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If USPSA wants to grow as some say then the focus needs to be attracting younger shooters. Those younger shooters grew up playing video games with dots on guns.

Manufacturers are making dot ready guns, so unless all of their marketing and research departments are inept it's going to be a thing. Not having a place for "the new hotness" to play is a guarantee those buyers won't shoot their new guns in USPSA.

There's obviously also a pretty severe public outreach problem when it comes to the sport. The average Joe at the local gun store thinks you need to be some sort of shooting god or hobby gunsmith before you can go to "a competition," instead of just going and having fun.

I have not seen one new shooter brought in by carry optics, it's people shooting it that are already in the sport, mostly old people, if it keeps them in the sport longer that is good but I don't see it bring new people in.

There is a kid shooting open that should not be, he should shoot carry optics instead or really not at all.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So many people talking about the low number of people shooting CO in matches. It's a new division. It won't happen overnight. I'm confident as time progresses the numbers will improve significantly. As more people start to shoot CO, more people on the fence will gravitate to it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...