Nik Habicht Posted April 13, 2005 Share Posted April 13, 2005 The only problem I see is that if the USPSA list/criteria allows a gun that is not IPSC approved, you could not use it at a WS or other IPSC match outside the US. For 99% of the USPSA members that is probably OK but what about the 1 % ? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> I'm pretty sure that Sevigny & all the other Glock 34/5 shooters who went to the last World Shoot in South Africa already figured out how to deal with the situation....... I think that the 1% will do o.k. --- especially since they can practice with WS guns at any US match, if they choose...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AikiDale Posted April 13, 2005 Share Posted April 13, 2005 2A: Do not shoot the RO (Guy with the timer)2B: Do not shoot anyone else on the squad. 2C: Do not shoot RO's truck. 2D: Do not shoot yourself. 2D1: Failing any of 2A through 2C, feel free to ignore 2D Jim <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Now that's the SPIRIT! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aXXman Posted April 14, 2005 Share Posted April 14, 2005 I saw one of those CZ's in the gunstore the other day, and the only reason I didn't buy it (for like $400) was that it was illegal in production. I ended up just getting a .22... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flexmoney Posted April 14, 2005 Share Posted April 14, 2005 You sure it wasn't an a P-01 model or something. I think that Angus got the first 10 SP-01's in the country...on Monday..in Arizona. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clay1 Posted April 14, 2005 Share Posted April 14, 2005 Axxman, buy as many of the sp-01 for $400 as you can carry and give me a call. I'm a hell of a marketing agent. I bet we can sell those $1000 guns for $700 and make a killing. It's just nice to know that IDPA isn't the only shooting org with controversy. Can't I just pull a trigger and have fun - politics is about interests, not about principals. Rick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Anderson Posted April 14, 2005 Share Posted April 14, 2005 I guess I've never bought into the equipment race thing. I've only done this for three years, so I never had to sell a .45 open gun to get a 38s. How about this rule? Production is like pornography. You know it when you see it. I'm also not real sure about the "whatever some guy has in his closet should be good enough to win nationals" theory. Is there a team Ruger? Maybe there should be. Magwell? I bet you could gently flare the edge of any polymer frame and get a better reload without affecting carryability. That would go over big at the gun shops I know of. I can hear it now..."When you hear glass break at 3 in the morning, don't you want to be able to reload another 15 rds as fast as possible after you shoot the three ninjas terrorozing your subdivision for political gain?" I guess the number sold idea is pretty good. You do need to define sales...Can Glock sell 2000 to one distributor and make criteria? I bet they could talk their best customer into buying 2000 of anything. (well, maybe not those knives and shovels ) This is something most folks don't know about the music industry...when you hear a million sold, that means one million shipped to distributors, NOT retail sales. Theoretically, you could go gold without a single retail sale. Sorry to ramble...gotta go practice. Just don't ban my XD. That'll piss me off. SA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sfinney Posted April 14, 2005 Share Posted April 14, 2005 Street price on an SP-01 is $495...... good luck selling them for $700.... especially if they don't get USPSA Production blessing Axxman, buy as many of the sp-01 for $400 as you can carry and give me a call. I'm a hell of a marketing agent. I bet we can sell those $1000 guns for $700 and make a killing. It's just nice to know that IDPA isn't the only shooting org with controversy. Can't I just pull a trigger and have fun - politics is about interests, not about principals. Rick <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EricW Posted April 14, 2005 Author Share Posted April 14, 2005 It's just nice to know that IDPA isn't the only shooting org with controversy. Can't I just pull a trigger and have fun - politics is about interests, not about principals. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Let's just make a clarification here. USPSA is NOT the problem here. USPSA has an EXCELLENT track record on making the right decisions for Production division. Nobody at USPSA ever dreamed of turning Production into the "The Semiautomatic Pistol, As It Existed Circa 1994 Division" The problem is obvious, and it is simple to fix, and the sooner we do it the better. If I was an exec at CZ and Tangfolio, and someone from IPSC or USPSA called and asked me to borrow a paper clip, I'd just hang up the phone. USPSA depends on shooting industry support. It cannot survive much less grow without it. Unlike IPSC, Bintang Beer and the First Bank of Umpalumpa won't be sponsoring a U.S. match anytime soon. We need to restore industy sponsors' confidence in the sport *well before* Nationals and the rest of the remaining major matches this season. If that means dumping IPSC to the point of deaffiliation, so be it. "This aggression will not stand!" /Big Lebowski Mode Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
XRe Posted April 14, 2005 Share Posted April 14, 2005 If that means dumping IPSC to the point of deaffiliation, so be it. <{POST_SNAPBACK}> That might be taking it a bit far.... we've got a lot of precedent for USPSA being different than IPSC - Limited is quite different from IPSC Standard, and we lump IPSC Modified in with Open. US shooters have been aware of these differences for a long long time, and have successfully dealt with them in the past with no issues. I don't see why this can't be treated the same. If successful (and I can't see how it won't be), cooler heads may prevail and the world body might move in our direction. Otherwise, those manufacturers might choose to, say, only support USPSA matches, and not IPSC matches on a world level (which is certainly their right...). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clay1 Posted April 14, 2005 Share Posted April 14, 2005 sfinney, the P-01 has the street price of $495 not the SP-01. There is quite a difference between the two models. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthew_Mink Posted April 14, 2005 Share Posted April 14, 2005 No, actually the SP-01 has a street price of $495, just ask the people that just bought them for that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aXXman Posted April 14, 2005 Share Posted April 14, 2005 You sure it wasn't an a P-01 model or something. I think that is what it was now that I think about it... Boy do I feel stupid for not buying that one now... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EricW Posted April 14, 2005 Author Share Posted April 14, 2005 XRe, I know that I seem reactionary, but my opinion (that I just came to very recently) is not based on just two guns, it's based on the arbitrary and capricous nature of how they were excluded. I would like someone to show me the "Spirit of Production" clause in either the ISPC or USPSA rulebooks. Until that nonsense comes to an end, how can a manufacturer have any confidence to support the sport? Springfield Armory spends a boatload of money on us. What happens when someone gets a bug up their butt at Rob and decides that the "Loaded" series of Springfields aren't in the "Spirit of Limited" because someone bought a competitive Springfield Lim-10 gun for $700, while some other sorry schmuck shelled out $1900 for a Dawson? I've done some really serious thinking about this over the past couple of days, and I think the difference between USPSA and IPSC is the difference between Capitalism and Socialism. The two just don't mix. There's a reason they're still driving Studebakers in Cuba. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
XRe Posted April 14, 2005 Share Posted April 14, 2005 I would like someone to show me the "Spirit of Production" clause in either the ISPC or USPSA rulebooks. Me too And a clear definition of it that can be used as a gauge to determine if a gun meets it, as well.... Until that nonsense comes to an end, how can a manufacturer have any confidence to support the sport? ... What happens when someone gets a bug up their butt at Rob and decides that the "Loaded" series of Springfields aren't in the "Spirit of Limited"<{POST_SNAPBACK}> Yeah, definitely a little reactionary :) IPSC can't say anything about Limited, remember !!!! Its just a US thing. More to the point of what I'm getting at - I think that immediately disassociating w/ IPSC is not the right plan, here, and I do feel its a little overreactionary - though I fully appreciate what you're getting at! I think a better plan would be to implement a non-arbitrary set of criteria for the US (as you've proposed), give it a year, then have Voigt go to IPSC and say "Gee, guys, this works and your system doesn't, you should do this." If they still don't, and still continue to make many arbitrary decsions about equipment rules, etc, then start thinking about more drastic measures.... Wouldn't it be a hoot if European gun manufacturers wouldn't support matches in Europe, but *would* support them in the US, due to this??? That alone might send a strong message.... FWIW - I *abhor* games that involve arbitrary judging and rules (equipment or otherwise). I guess that's why I agree with what you want to do here - make it clear and transparent so that everyone knows what to expect - that's the only way to be fair to everyone involved... none of this "we'll know it when we see it" BS. That's just crap, period. Childish, ignorant crap.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chuck D Posted April 14, 2005 Share Posted April 14, 2005 Having been of the receiving end of my gun being "banned" from a Division (.356 TSW Limited Division gun) I understand where people are coming from. It would also be wise to remember that the .356TSW and the Graig/Caspian Arms thingy was a USPSA botch...not an IPSC botch. I can see where the CZ decision makes no sense but the Tanfoglio Stock Custom is completely different story. Put a Stock Custom and a Limited HC gun side by side and besides the D.A. first shot feature...can you point out a difference between the two? There seems to be some question as to how many CZ SP-01's were in the country (USA) before they were deemed legal for Production Division. The 2000 number seems reasonable enough for me. I'm DYING to see what USPSA does or says (if anything) about the 5 inch 5906 S&W John Flentz (sp?) will be using this year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clay1 Posted April 14, 2005 Share Posted April 14, 2005 Mathew, was it the Tactical that was about $1000? Hell of a deal for $500 for the regular handgun. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthew_Mink Posted April 14, 2005 Share Posted April 14, 2005 AFAIK, both the SP-01 Tactical and the regular ole SP-01 are $495. If you think about it, there really isn't much difference between the SP-01 and the CZ-75B. Full length dust cover, extended controls, rubber grips, what else? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sfinney Posted April 14, 2005 Share Posted April 14, 2005 Only difference between the SP-01 Tactical and SP-01 that I can see is that the Tactical has a decocker instead of a thumb safety? And, having just purchased a plain SP-01, yes they are $495... (for either version I was told, but that could be wrong). The only $1000 CZ I can think of is the race oriented Champions, and the Tactical Sport (formerly IPSC Standard)... both single action guns. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chuck D Posted April 14, 2005 Share Posted April 14, 2005 AFAIK or is it a fact both are 495 dollars ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthew_Mink Posted April 14, 2005 Share Posted April 14, 2005 The thumb safety model, the SP-01, is definately $495. The SP-01 Tactical I believe is the same price, but don't know for sure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carlos Posted April 14, 2005 Share Posted April 14, 2005 The CZ SP-01 retails in the US for $495. The Tanfoglio Stock Custom's dealer price has also been established through their importer in the United States. I know because the store were I work part time previously ordered 5 of them from EAA (we have since cancelled the order). We had previously planned to retail the Stock Custom for about $950. How do those prices sit with you when Beretta has been selling the USPSA & IPSC - approved model 92 Steel I for $1600??? Has that 40+ Oz. Beretta gun run away with every Production match since hitting the market nearly a year ago? No, of course not. Matt wrote "The only $1000 CZ I can think of is the race oriented Champion, and the Tactical Sport (formerly IPSC Standard)... both single action guns." True. Both are factory tuned guns with about 1.5 lb SA only triggers. They are meant only for Open division and IPSC Standard division. At under $1500 & $1200 respectively, they are value priced options for either IPSC or USPSA. Regards, D.C. Johnson www.shootersparadise.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flexmoney Posted April 15, 2005 Share Posted April 15, 2005 I agree with EricW on just about everything he has posted here...except... USPSA isn't faultless. We (USPSA) had a perfectly great system going (red book). And, with the green rulebook, our leaders decided to fall in step with IPSC. To what end, I don't know. I can't see how going with a "list" was ever a good idea (I gave Vince a lot of crap about that list...before USPSA caved to it. This would be a good place to insert my "I told you so." ). And, with going to the list, USPSA has failed to maintain it themselves. We have 9 elected USPSA officials, and a couple of appointed (and paid) officials. We dropped the ball. It needs fixed (without the list, but I fear we might be stuck with it until the next rule book). It needs fixed today. We shouldn't have to go through another weekend of matches with this hanging over our heads. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EricW Posted April 15, 2005 Author Share Posted April 15, 2005 Flex, You are 100% correct. I completely glossed over that point, and a good one it is. Originally, I thought aligning USPSA with IPSC was a good idea. I was absolutely, unequivocally wrong, and a very notable GM let me know in advance that I was wrong. I should have listened. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flexmoney Posted April 15, 2005 Share Posted April 15, 2005 I only mention that we (USPSA) made mistakes so that we can keep the heat on our boys that can make a change. And, for the record, I don't have any problem with USPSA and IPSC rules aligning as much as possible. But, I do believe that our (USPSA) leaders need to first look at what is best for the USPSA shooters. Aligning with ISPC needs to be a side benefit. Looking back at the last rule book...it seems there was effort made to get the two organizations closer together. In that flawed goal, we had some rules go through that just weren't what was best. (The goal should be the best rule, not what we can compromise to get in step.) I'd really liike to get way up high on my soapbox here (the next level). But, we are probably already pushing the bounds of what we are allowed to talk about on this forum. Perhaps we should shift our focus to solving the problem(s). Positive feedback. Suggestions. ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nik Habicht Posted April 15, 2005 Share Posted April 15, 2005 I'd really liike to get way up high on my soapbox here (the next level). But, we are probably already pushing the bounds of what we are allowed to talk about on this forum.Perhaps we should shift our focus to solving the problem(s). Positive feedback. Suggestions. ? <{POST_SNAPBACK}> Oh, Please do --- even if it's via e-mail or PM....... 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