New division/revamp Carry ops?

[IronArcher]

A rough draft of reorganizing that I think make sense.

 

Open: no changes

Limited: no changes

Production: no changes

Limited 10: Eliminated

Single Stack: no changes, other than allowing revolvers (Classic gun?)

Revolver. Eliminated, but allowed to shoot in SS.

Carry Optics:

1) Add magwell, but reduce to stock size mags... or no magwell and 140mm sticks. (Not an option for shooters to pick one. Just one of those 2 options made permanent)

2) Allow non-oem hammers/triggers/safeties.

3) Allow Single Stack SA guns/Revolvers.

 

This keeps the most popular divisions as is. (There is a reason they are the most popular, and changes would affect too many shooters).

 

It does eliminate L10 and doesn't really make Rev a competitive division. We could compensate them with a beer.... a six pack should cover it.

L10 guys can shoot Limited and in every communist state, everyone will be shooting L10 anyway (and Open10 and Production10 etc.)

Revolver guys can shoot in SS... change the name to Classic gun or some such thing.

Carry Optics becomes a LITTLE more fun to tinker with? But not really any more expensive.

Either add magwells and go to stock mags (now you actually get to USE your magwell maybe twice on some stages) or leave the 140mm and no magwell (not really needed there).

You can have some minor cosmetic changes but nothing that is really going to give you an unfair advantage.

Also, an otherwise SS legal gun w/optic can play... but you start hammer down like the DA/SA guns.

 

PCC: I don't care.

 

Not extremely thought through, but as long as we are spitballing....

 

 Reduces pistol divisions from 7 down to 5.

 

No guns are eliminated (though Rev would be hard to be competitive in... not impossible, but very hard)

 

 

[Overscore]

It seems CO was originally just production with carry optics.  Then they changed the round limit restriction, and it's in this awkward spot.  My ideal CO would be the same rules as limited, but add a carry optic to it.  Of course, I was this for selfish reasons, because I shoot a single action CZ and want to put a carry optic on it, and, in fact, carry it as such.  Because I want to shoot what I carry and shoot it how I carry it, I can only put an optic on my CZ and shoot it in Open as the rules stand now.  I obviously won't stand a chance against the people who bring their guns to the match inside a $200,000 Featherlite trailer.

[splashdown]

I like CO as is, but going from 10 rounds to full cap 140's changed the strategy a lot.  I would've liked to have seen a 15 round limit, but I'm biased b/c I shoot a .40.  

A 15 round limit would let any caliber compete equally with regard to capacity.  In my area, I was the first shooting CO in the summer of 2015 (with a .40 as noted) and the second guy to show up and play was shooting a G41 in .45 ACP.  It really doesn't matter enough for me to complain or "vote" on any changes.  I'd rather see it remain as is.  My second CO gun will be a .40 as well so that if I have to go to a backup, I'll use the same ammo supply.

[Dutycalls75]

Well with everyone offering how they would modify USPSA’s current divisions. Below is my thought:

 

Today USPSA has eight divisions:

 

Open, Limited, Limited 10, Production, Carry Optics, Single Stack, Revolver, and PCC

 

As an overview, USPSA has reached this current list of divisions through a slow process of modify and spilt divisions over time. In essence though USPSA has held to a basic tiered system for divisions, which has then been supplemented with additional unique division me the desires of shooters. The basic tier divisions are:

 

Unmodified firearms (Production)

Modified Firearms (Limited)

No holds bar (Open)

 

This tiered system is fairly simple and straightforward. Over time though, technology, refinement in skill, and rule changes have morphed the overall landscape of USPSA divisions. Because of these evolutions, old methods of dividing equipment in my opinion no longer apply. The issue that has arisen is that the with number of divisions currently in use, the divisions have little meaningful difference between them. For example, a Limited 10 gun is no different than a limited gun other than capacity change. Tuned production guns are not much different from Limited guns. Similar to NASCAR still using “stock cars” on the outside and everything under the plastic shell being a purpose built race car. At almost all levels of competition, shooters are using purpose built firearms for competing.

 

In my opinion, two major factors influence performance in practical pistol shooting, powerfactor and the type of sighting system. Everything beyond this is fine nuance. For example what is the actual difference in stage performance when using a DA/SA gun or a SAO gun with safeties, with all other variables equalized. Because of this, if I were king for a day, I would propose a division breakdown which accounts for the two main factors associated with performance.

 

My basic system includes: 4 Core Divisions and then 3 Specialty Divisions

 

Core divisions would be required to be provided at every match standard sanctioned match. It would be a match directors discretion whether to include Specialty divisions at level 1 matches, but it would be highly encouraged to do so. In addition, USPSA leadership would have the authority to sanction Specialty Division specific level 2 or level 3 matches. The Specialty divisions are the divisions that are unique in USPSA because they focus on a particular operating system, firearm or firearm type. Specialty divisions would also be allowed to have unique rule sets. I would limit the number of recognized specialty divisions to 3 for any particular year for higher level matches but this is a finer point which I am still back and forth on. By creating specialty divisions USPSA could include more firearms in its competitions while not affecting the Core divisions. In additional nationals would be structured to have a single Nationals for the Core divisions and then additional National level events can be held for the specialty divisions at Boards discretion.

 

The initial specialty divisions would be:

 

Single Stack

Revolver

PCC

 

Others could then be added like a compact carry division.

 

The Core Divisions or groups would follow the following setup for semi auto pistols. As a note I do not include names for these divisions as discussions on this topic when including names always seems to generate unneeded angst. The previous responses in this thread I believe illustrate this point. (After thinking about it, I prefer keeping the names as single letters and referring to them as Group A or Group B, similar to the auto racing industry. I think today a division’s name helps perpetuate limited discussion and constrains a division to match its namesake. Not to mention everyone debates about what it means to be “production” etc.) The basic premise is that of the four divisions each division or group is similar to the divisions, which are adjacent to it and different to the ones across from it.

 

	Optical	Iron
Major (40 cal min.)	A	B
Minor	C	D

 

Mag Length Maximum: 171.25mm Group A; 141.25mm Group C and B; 131.25mm Group D

 

Some additional notes, magwells would be legal for all 4 Core divisions. This is important because it would allow the consolidation of current limited 10. In all honesty the difference between a Limited gun and tuned production gun is minimal, and for this reason many people refer to production as limited lite. This overall system would allow production guns to be customized or modified to the extent limited guns are but outside of aesthetics, what performance measures can a limited gun use that are not available for current production guns? This change would also get rid of the production list need. (I am aware of the question what would be do with “gas pedals” or thumb rests. Simple answer is they would only be allowed for major scoring divisions)

 

An outlying consideration, which I have yet to come to an adequate conclusion on, is compensators. I have considered allowing all major divisions (A and B have them but I have also considered lumping them in with optics i.e (B and D). My initial thought is to use the latter choice, as it would only affect current carry optics shooters and would affect them minimally in my opinion. Many of the tactical shooters, which should be attracted by carry optics already in all likelihood, have a threaded barrel, so affixing a compensator should be a simple affair.

 

In regards to finer details divisions A and B would have similar holster rules and divisions C and D would likewise have identical holster rules. Specialty divisions would be able to use either major or minor holster rules or if really need be adopt specific holster rules for that divisions (though I think they should stick with one of the holster rules from the core divisions.)

 

My system of divisions has the following goals:

 

• Simplified ruleset that better accounts for actual differences in equipment that affect performance
• Streamlined system that is simpler to understand and to explain. Divisions A and B are identical except for one allows optics and compensators as well has a higher mag capacity the other does not. Division A and C are identical except one uses major scoring (including gas pedals) and the other uses minor scoring in addition to magazine limit differences.
• Inclusion of Specialty divisions allow “favorite divisions” to remain in the sport
• Simplified rules should improve the administration of level 2 and above matches

Edited September 8, 2017 by Dutycalls75

[Gooldylocks]

I'm bored, so I'll type up my thoughts.

Open: stays the same
Limited: stays the same
Production: stays the same, but get rid of the new/stupid hammer, trigger, and milling allowances
SS: same
CO: same
PCC: same, hopefully it grows enough to be soundly ejected from handgun matches and made into it's own standalone matches
L10: killed
Rev: killed

Resurrect modified, because super legit



Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

[StealthyBlagga]

How about:

 

- Minor scoring only.

- Must fit in the current USPSA box with a mag inserted (all mags must comply) and with the barrel parallel with the long axis of the box (avoids the expensive shenanigans that killed Modified).

- Production holster rules.

- No other restrictions.

 

This would be a very interesting new division, forcing choices such as irons/long mags vs. optic/short mags. Easy to enforce, pretty affordable, and the final gear configuration would be eminently carry-able. I would find such a division much more interesting and appealing than current CO rules.

[BritinUSA]

Most production guns would not fit into the box with a scope attached. There would need to be a cutout to accommodate the scope. 

[StealthyBlagga]

10 minutes ago, BritinUSA said:

Most production guns would not fit into the box with a scope attached. There would need to be a cutout to accommodate the scope. 

 

Then use a smaller gun! Or stick with iron sights and have more to hang on to. Your choice.

 

Like I said, my proposal would force hard decisions, which is what makes it so interesting.

Edited September 12, 2017 by StealthyBlagga

[waktasz]

I would trade the dot for a full size gun and full size mags , every time. 

Enjoy your Glock 26 with an optic

Edited September 12, 2017 by waktasz

[CleverNickname]

On 9/8/2017 at 8:44 AM, Dutycalls75 said:

	Optical	Iron
Major (40 cal min.)	A	B
Minor	C	D

 

I think your idea is a good starting point, but making Group A .40 caliber-only would piss off a lot of current Open shooters.

[IronArcher]

Never understood the reasoning for the .40 minimum. If it can throw a bullet hard enough, it should be major.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[Dutycalls75]

16 hours ago, CleverNickname said:

I think your idea is a good starting point, but making Group A .40 caliber-only would piss off a lot of current Open shooters.

 

When I conceived this idea, I knew that for the major powefactor groups, A & B, allowing 9mm into Group B would piss off a lot of current limited shooters and keeping the .40 cal min for group A would piss off current open shooters. 

 

In the end I reconciled it from the safety angle. 9MM major is pushing the cartridge to the limit and I am unaware of a single commercial entity that produces ammunition that qualifies for major and uses a 9mm bullet and 9mm case head size. Leaving Group A as .40 cal min allows for easier access to the division, plus under my system, if you want to shoot 9mm with a Optic Group C would be at your disposal.

 

In my opinion 9mm Major was born from gaining a capacity advantage. In my theoretical breakdown of new divisions I could be convinced to allow 9mm to make major but I would amend the divisional breakup to have defined capacity limits instead capacity based on magazine length.

[teros135]

3 hours ago, Dutycalls75 said:

 

When I conceived this idea, I knew that for the major powefactor groups, A & B, allowing 9mm into Group B would piss off a lot of current limited shooters and keeping the .40 cal min for group A would piss off current open shooters. 

 

In the end I reconciled it from the safety angle. 9MM major is pushing the cartridge to the limit and I am unaware of a single commercial entity that produces ammunition that qualifies for major and uses a 9mm bullet and 9mm case head size. Leaving Group A as .40 cal min allows for easier access to the division, plus under my system, if you want to shoot 9mm with a Optic Group C would be at your disposal.

 

In my opinion 9mm Major was born from gaining a capacity advantage. In my theoretical breakdown of new divisions I could be convinced to allow 9mm to make major but I would amend the divisional breakup to have defined capacity limits instead capacity based on magazine length.

 

I like him.  He funny.  

[Jeff226]

On 8/30/2017 at 9:32 AM, rowdyb said:

Open major. Open minor. Limited major. Limited minor. 10 round totally 100% stock division. Revo. There ya go.

I said the same thing a couple months ago but everybody went nuts because I had less than 50 posts.

 

Good Luck!

Edited September 18, 2017 by Jeff226

[Steve RA]

I think 1911s should be allowed in CO.  Quite a few people have one (or more) with a slide mounted dot to help with the vision problems getting older allows.  Any advantage gained by the better trigger would be evened out by the lessened magazine capacity.

[IronArcher]

 
When I conceived this idea, I knew that for the major powefactor groups, A & B, allowing 9mm into Group B would piss off a lot of current limited shooters and keeping the .40 cal min for group A would piss off current open shooters. 
 
In the end I reconciled it from the safety angle. 9MM major is pushing the cartridge to the limit and I am unaware of a single commercial entity that produces ammunition that qualifies for major and uses a 9mm bullet and 9mm case head size. Leaving Group A as .40 cal min allows for easier access to the division, plus under my system, if you want to shoot 9mm with a Optic Group C would be at your disposal.
 
In my opinion 9mm Major was born from gaining a capacity advantage. In my theoretical breakdown of new divisions I could be convinced to allow 9mm to make major but I would amend the divisional breakup to have defined capacity limits instead capacity based on magazine length.

.38 super?
.357 SIG?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[HCH]

On 9/13/2017 at 1:01 PM, Dutycalls75 said:

 

When I conceived this idea, I knew that for the major powefactor groups, A & B, allowing 9mm into Group B would piss off a lot of current limited shooters and keeping the .40 cal min for group A would piss off current open shooters. 

 

In the end I reconciled it from the safety angle. 9MM major is pushing the cartridge to the limit and I am unaware of a single commercial entity that produces ammunition that qualifies for major and uses a 9mm bullet and 9mm case head size. Leaving Group A as .40 cal min allows for easier access to the division, plus under my system, if you want to shoot 9mm with a Optic Group C would be at your disposal.

 

In my opinion 9mm Major was born from gaining a capacity advantage. In my theoretical breakdown of new divisions I could be convinced to allow 9mm to make major but I would amend the divisional breakup to have defined capacity limits instead capacity based on magazine length.

 

I like the idea of a fixed capacity limit, regardless of division. That way, there is no disadvantage to shooting a .40 in Open, or a .45 in Limited. 

[IronArcher]

 
I like the idea of a fixed capacity limit, regardless of division. That way, there is no disadvantage to shooting a .40 in Open, or a .45 in Limited. 

But a further penalty to shooting 9mm....


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[HCH]

1 hour ago, IronArcher said:

But a further penalty to shooting 9mm....


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

I should have explained further: make a differential magazine capacity limit for Major/Minor, such as is the case in Single Stack and Revolver. Perhaps limit Major to 18 rounds in Limited and 25 in Open, whereas Minor would be capped at 25 in Limited and 30 in Open. 

 

 

[IronArcher]

Now RO/SO needs to count rounds in every division? What that 25 shots or 26 shots? In all the excitement, I lost track myself.......
If limiting number of rounds instead of length of mag, you need to keep the numbers down.
Why do we need to worry about the .45 guys not being at a disadvantage to the .40 guys, but no 9mm major? (or .38 super, or .357 SIG)

(Just playing devil's advocate)

[HCH]

The way the magazine restrictions are now, a certain caliber is pretty much mandated in limited and open; .40 and 38 super/9major, respectively. In Open, there is absolutely no advantage to shooting Minor. 

 

That being said, do RO's have a mag gauge at the beginning of every stage to make sure that every mag used by a competitor falls within the length dictated by his/her division? Do RO's count the number of rounds in magazines before the shooter starts a stage? If someone is going to cheat, they're gonna cheat. 

[IronArcher]

I'm betting there aren't many who sneak in a 147mm mag for limited or CO or bigger sticks than legal in open..
Sure, if someone wants to sneak a few bigger than allowed sticks, and swap them out with the sticks they were checked on (at majors), yeah, they could do that.
Which is more likely, a competitor buying a bunch of legal AND illegal sticks and swapping them out depending on where/when they might be gauge checked, or a competitor over filling a mag by a couple rounds if/when the cheater can?