mloch Posted May 8, 2017 Share Posted May 8, 2017 Hi! Searching for help ... might the new Apex Curved Trigger for the P320 be legal under current USPSA Production rules? https://store.apextactical.com/WebDirect/Products/Details/192575 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magsz Posted May 9, 2017 Share Posted May 9, 2017 No, its not legal. It doesnt fit into the parameters for "legal" production parts. Ask Gray Guns to talk to the USPSA board of directors to see if maybe they can legalize it....... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wtturn Posted May 9, 2017 Share Posted May 9, 2017 Who knows anymore. USPSA seems intent on turning the production equipment ruleset on its head.Sent from my MotoG3 using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edge40 Posted May 9, 2017 Share Posted May 9, 2017 They really are starting to turn every division into an arms race. Little disappointing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WiII Posted May 9, 2017 Share Posted May 9, 2017 Not currently legal. However, with the way production equipment rules are currently being molested it may be sooner or later. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blue Jacket Posted May 9, 2017 Share Posted May 9, 2017 Honestly though isn't every division an arms race anyway? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mloch Posted May 11, 2017 Author Share Posted May 11, 2017 @all: Thx for the info I will stick with my Gray Guns Trigger then ;-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sfinney Posted May 11, 2017 Share Posted May 11, 2017 Not sure why its not legal.... the GG PELT is an aftermarket trigger too. And looks different than factory offerings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DKnoch Posted May 15, 2017 Share Posted May 15, 2017 GG trigger has a similar profile and weight to the factory trigger. Also has gotten approval from NROI. I have not heard of Apex trying to get approval, but I may be wrong Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magsz Posted May 15, 2017 Share Posted May 15, 2017 20 hours ago, DKnoch said: GG trigger has a similar profile and weight to the factory trigger. Also has gotten approval from NROI. I have not heard of Apex trying to get approval, but I may be wrong Similar profile to the factory trigger? Why? Its curved? That's about all they share in common. Are you the same kind of guy that looks at a Porsche no matter the model and says's man, that's a nice 911! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DKnoch Posted May 15, 2017 Share Posted May 15, 2017 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DKnoch Posted May 15, 2017 Share Posted May 15, 2017 Sorry I misread your post in haste. I have both triggers and they're fairly similar. Much more so, than the Apex. Email Apex and tell them to submit one, it wouldn't be approved though. Even if it was, what difference would it make? Grayguns made a trigger that was similar enough to get approved, Apex can do the same if they choose Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DKnoch Posted May 15, 2017 Share Posted May 15, 2017 Not that different...you can point to the tab on the front of the factory trigger I guess. But that's the adverse trigger, Sig's original 320's didn't have the tab on the front. Like I said before, similar profile and weight. Apex is not similar. Question answered. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
f2benny Posted May 15, 2017 Share Posted May 15, 2017 The similar shape and weight analysis comes from GG site. Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magsz Posted May 16, 2017 Share Posted May 16, 2017 Rofl... That trigger is not the same profile and shape. The only thing it shares in common is that its a trigger. Shenanigans. Ah well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DKnoch Posted May 16, 2017 Share Posted May 16, 2017 I know words are tough, but I said similar not same. Keep bitching on the internet and I'll keep enjoying my grayguns trigger in my X5. By the way, I have a curved trigger in my X5, so complain about that too while you're at it. Also had to remove the factory magwell and can't use the extended mags that come from the factory. So there's more things to complain about being allowed in production. Didn't they approve an aftermarket hammer for a CZ lately too? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
f2benny Posted May 16, 2017 Share Posted May 16, 2017 The cz hammer issue is different because it is a factory shop hammer that is standard on a production gun. This is truly aftermarket with a new exception being created which creates the confusion. The lack of an official ruling is making people question it.Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wtturn Posted May 16, 2017 Share Posted May 16, 2017 3 hours ago, f2benny said: The cz hammer issue is different because it is a factory shop hammer that is standard on a production gun. This is truly aftermarket with a new exception being created which creates the confusion. The lack of an official ruling is making people question it. wrong Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
f2benny Posted May 16, 2017 Share Posted May 16, 2017 wrongHow is that incorrect? As I understood the ruling the cz custom shadow hammer was allowed as a replacement because czc is a factory shop. Please explain the ruling if this is wrong. Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wtturn Posted May 16, 2017 Share Posted May 16, 2017 (edited) 5 minutes ago, f2benny said: How is that incorrect? The DNROI hammer ruling specifically approves aftermarket hammers in contradiction of the rulebook. Cajun Gunworks is not OFM/OEM or an official CZ "custom shop" Here is the text straight from the USPSA site: "As long as the internal parts of the hammer used as a replacement function identically to the internals on the OFM hammer, replacing the hammer is allowed, despite the outward appearance. For example, an OFM hammer that functions as part of a decocking system can be replaced with an aftermarket hammer that looks externally different as long as it continues to function as a decocker hammer." Edited May 16, 2017 by wtturn Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
f2benny Posted May 16, 2017 Share Posted May 16, 2017 The CZC hammer is legal when last I heard the cgw was not. I did not mean to suggest Cajun was a factory shop. Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wtturn Posted May 16, 2017 Share Posted May 16, 2017 17 minutes ago, f2benny said: The CZC hammer is legal when last I heard the cgw was not. I did not mean to suggest Cajun was a factory shop. Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk That's the outrageous part of the ruling. The CGW hammer is now legal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
f2benny Posted May 16, 2017 Share Posted May 16, 2017 Yikes. Now I see the ridiculousness. Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wtturn Posted May 16, 2017 Share Posted May 16, 2017 Yep Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sfinney Posted June 10, 2017 Share Posted June 10, 2017 So, take more pics of the back of those two curved triggers (above which are visible in the gun when installed). They look pretty different in rib structure. Also, besides the missing tab mentioned (also visible installed), one has a much more curved radiused profile and is softer on the finger, and looks different. Similar, yes, but different. Similar story on the straight flat trigger comparison. These may seem like nit picking differences.... but they are externally visible differences ...... don't forget it wasn't that long ago that a Vanek Glock trigger with a barely visible mod difference on a FACTORY trigger was illegal. Before anyone gets bent out of shape that people are attacking Sig and GG, I have a GG PELT trigger in my P320. I like it. I just want to see something in writing as an actual posted ruling from NROI (not an email) stating the PELT is legal. Language like its "similar" does not inspire confidence. I guess it falls under the same logic as the rule above regarding the CZ hammer - but just substitute Sig for CZ, and trigger for hammer. Maybe since we have so many parts now being made legal, we should just expand the rule to allow any aftermarket parts that "function identically "internally even if the look slightly different externally. 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