Polymer 80 in carry optics?

[avastcosmicarena]

On 1/21/2020 at 10:10 AM, bret said:

it is not a manufactured gun, it is an 80% frame kit.

There are many companies out there offering P80-frame-based guns nowadays. For example: Brownells Hellfire/Patriot, etc. They aren't 80%. They are serialized.

If the OZ9 frame is allowed, P80 frames should be allowed too. And Nomad Defense, Shadow Systems, etc. frames.... It's all still glock based. It's not like anyone is going to have an unfair advantage.

Edited January 26, 2020 by avastcosmicarena

[davsco]

yep with aftermarket slides etc being allowed, aftermarket frames should be allowed also.  there are 1000s and 1000s of these out there, let folks shoot them in competition.

[PatJones]

If the OZ9 frame is allowed, P80 frames should be allowed too. And Nomad Defense, Shadow Systems, etc. frames.... It's all still glock based. It's not like anyone is going to have an unfair advantage.

They built a minimum of 2000 OZ9s and filed the paperwork with USPSA. There is nothing stopping anyone else from doing this, it's not a conspiracy.

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk

[davsco]

25 minutes ago, PatJones said:

They built a minimum of 2000 OZ9s and filed the paperwork with USPSA. There is nothing stopping anyone else from doing this, it's not a conspiracy.
 

 

the prob is uspsa wants sales of complete guns.  i'm just saying that if poly80 or anyone else sells 2000 frames, uspsa should make the frames legal and then folks can get aftermarket slides just like they already allow for glocks etc.  or heck, since they allow aftermarket slides irrespective of # sold, just do the same for frames and allow aftermarket irrespective of # sold or produced.

[bret]

2 hours ago, davsco said:

the prob is uspsa wants sales of complete guns.  i'm just saying that if poly80 or anyone else sells 2000 frames, uspsa should make the frames legal and then folks can get aftermarket slides just like they already allow for glocks etc.  or heck, since they allow aftermarket slides irrespective of # sold, just do the same for frames and allow aftermarket irrespective of # sold or produced.

selling 2,000 paperweights that will be finished by an individual is not the same as producing 2,000 frames, they are not selling frames, they are selling 80% frame kits to get around ATF laws.

The company selling them are not making the frames, the people buying them are.

19 hours ago, avastcosmicarena said:

There are many companies out there offering P80-frame-based guns nowadays. For example: Brownells Hellfire/Patriot, etc. They aren't 80%. They are serialized.

If the OZ9 frame is allowed, P80 frames should be allowed too. And Nomad Defense, Shadow Systems, etc. frames.... It's all still glock based. It's not like anyone is going to have an unfair advantage.

OZ9 are not 80% kits being finished by the buyer, they are a firearm that must be transferred to the buyer and they went through the process to get them added to the USPSA approved list, they sold 2,000 units and submitted paperwork to get them approved.

[davsco]

10 minutes ago, bret said:

selling 2,000 paperweights that will be finished by an individual is not the same as producing 2,000 frames, they are not selling frames, they are selling 80% frame kits to get around ATF laws.

The company selling them are not making the frames, the people buying them are.

they are also selling 100% frames, serialized.  either way, why not let folks use them?  in the same spirit as allowing aftermarket slides, why not allow aftermarket frames?  it's still basically a friggin' glock so pretty sure the sig and cz guys have nothing to worry about.

[bret]

34 minutes ago, davsco said:

they are also selling 100% frames, serialized.  either way, why not let folks use them?  in the same spirit as allowing aftermarket slides, why not allow aftermarket frames?  it's still basically a friggin' glock so pretty sure the sig and cz guys have nothing to worry about.

take it up with Troy, but per the rules, the Manufacturer of the firearm has a process they have to follow to get their guns approved, ZEV, CZ, Glock, Smith and Wesson, HK and others have gone through the process, why should these people be exempt from the rules?

Why should one company get special treatment while everyone else follows the rules?

[davsco]

i understand the current, longstanding rules.  we have this recent pretty major phenomena and i'm just thinking the rules should be changed to take this phenomena into account.  there are multiple companies making 80% and 100% frames.  they're basically very similar to longstanding existing models.  again, given we're allowing aftermarket slides & barrels & triggers & etc, what's the harm in allowing aftermarket frames, whether 100% or with a little milling and drilling being done?  And if you want to keep the minimum manufacturing/sales numbers, just change 'complete guns' to 'frames and/or slides.'  what's the harm?

[PatJones]

Frames are not firearms. It is supposed to be a division comprised of production-line guns.

I don't have a problem with aftermarket slides and barrels. Some of these companies won't sell you a new slide if yours breaks.

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk

[PigSnowball]

I can replace the frame on my p320 and that's legal right?

[bret]

11 minutes ago, PigSnowball said:

I can replace the frame on my p320 and that's legal right?

Above is the frame, I am sure you can replace it if you want.

 

[davsco]

44 minutes ago, PatJones said:

Frames are not firearms. It is supposed to be a division comprised of production-line guns.
 

shouldn't rules change (or at least be reviewed) to reflect the times.  i get that uspsa (and us members) didn't want joebob in his garage making the cheatingnest gun that wouldn't be available to anyone else.  but years ago there was no such thing as buying a frame from one company and a slide from another.  now there is.

[PigSnowball]

3 hours ago, bret said:

Above is the frame, I am sure you can replace it if you want.

 

That's the FCU sitting in an FCU chasis.

[blueorison]

5 hours ago, davsco said:

i understand the current, longstanding rules.  we have this recent pretty major phenomena and i'm just thinking the rules should be changed to take this phenomena into account.  there are multiple companies making 80% and 100% frames.  they're basically very similar to longstanding existing models.  again, given we're allowing aftermarket slides & barrels & triggers & etc, what's the harm in allowing aftermarket frames, whether 100% or with a little milling and drilling being done?  And if you want to keep the minimum manufacturing/sales numbers, just change 'complete guns' to 'frames and/or slides.'  what's the harm?

 

I agree with you. I waited a year after I pre-paid, to get the serialized ODG full size frame. I see both sides; that USPSA wants people to buy "factory" pistols, but I do think they should amend to allow POLYMER-only frames (not weighted, etc.) into Prod/CO. I don't have skin in the game; I don't plan on using the P80 frame in USPSA. But I think they should amend it to allow all the firearm enthusiasts to shoot it; it would encourage more to come out and shoot.

[PatJones]

shouldn't rules change (or at least be reviewed) to reflect the times.  i get that uspsa (and us members) didn't want joebob in his garage making the cheatingnest gun that wouldn't be available to anyone else.  but years ago there was no such thing as buying a frame from one company and a slide from another.  now there is.

The 80% Glock frames are legal in Limited and Open if you want to use one.

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk

[Akkid17]

Some one is making 80% p320 style FCU’s. A person could get one of those and finish it themselves and then run it in a factory grip and aftermarket slide/barrel and no one would be able to discern that it’s illegal for the division without checking for a serial number. Just food for thought 

[PigSnowball]

I think the real question is... aren't they legal now in production? If I can switch the grip on my P320 to an X-Five legion grip/frame, why can you not do the same with a glock?

[OPENB]

1 hour ago, PigSnowball said:

I think the real question is... aren't they legal now in production? If I can switch the grip on my P320 to an X-Five legion grip/frame, why can you not do the same with a glock?

Because in a 320, the grip is separate from the frame. In a Glock, they are one and the same. And, no, they (Polymer 80) aren't legal in production.

Edited January 28, 2020 by OPENB

[ss+P]

Just make a new division again.

[PigSnowball]

On 1/28/2020 at 1:35 PM, OPENB said:

Because in a 320, the grip is separate from the frame. In a Glock, they are one and the same. And, no, they (Polymer 80) aren't legal in production.

That's not true, the grip module IS the frame.

[OPENB]

2 hours ago, PigSnowball said:

That's not true, the grip module IS the frame.

 

On a P320? You're mistaken. A P320 grip module is no more a frame than grip panels for a 1911 are.

[ima45dv8]

1 hour ago, OPENB said:

 

On a P320? You're mistaken. A P320 grip module is no more a frame than grip panels for a 1911 are.

Or the grip on a 2011.

[OPENB]

1 hour ago, ima45dv8 said:

Or the grip on a 2011.

Exactly, probably a better analogy. 

[Marcus1911]

Why are majority of products out of stock on Polymer 80's website? Past few months I've seen only basic stuff in stock but everything else such as their frame kits, lowers and basically 80% of the entire site says out of stock. Is it because they are dealing with so many law suits right now? Just last month I saw the city of LA is now suing Polymer 80. I feel like everyone is trying to sue these guys out of all angle. 

[Marcus1911]

Are these Polymer 80 products legit?