HAS OPEN TECHNOLOGY PEAKED

[B_Seehawer]

This is really reminding me of the time guys thought Limited and SS minor were a thing because of capacity, but then didn’t work because of major scoring and HF....

[forkliftHIFI]

1 minute ago, Hi-Power Jack said:

Not really true.   Open gun can make a great house gun (or car gun for that matter).    

I don't doubt that it would be effective against the target.  I also like the hearing that I still have

 

 

[Hi-Power Jack]

Just now, forkliftHIFI said:

  I also like the hearing that I still have

 

I have too little hearing left to worry about   

 

But, you could put on a pair of electronic earmuffs.     

[theWacoKid]

1 hour ago, Chris iliff said:

This HOA by a CO caused me to wonder if the thinking for Open is stuck in the original paradigm?  Which seems to have always been pushing bullets faster and generating as much gas as possible to blow through a comp keeping the gun flat. 

 

So maybe that that is a better explanation of my thinking. 

Peaked? No. Slowed. Yes. 

 

The real reason we blow so much gas is because of one reason only. Major scoring.  If it wasn't for major scoring I'd be shooting 130 pf.  

 

So we don't shoot major because it shoots better, we shoot major because it scores higher. And thus we've figured out how to make the gun better while  enjoying major scoring.

[UpYoursPal]

I'm kind of surprised that nobody has experimented with electronic triggers in competition handguns yet.  Paintball has been doing it for years.

[Nevadazielmeister]

8 minutes ago, UpYoursPal said:

I'm kind of surprised that nobody has experimented with electronic triggers in competition handguns yet.  Paintball has been doing it for years.

 

The laws here would not allow this. Paintball markers also do not suffer anywhere near the forces involved with a firearm. If you have ever seen what happens to an open gun in slow motion, you would be surprised that it all doesn't fall apart every time. 

[Maximis228]

37 minutes ago, UpYoursPal said:

I'm kind of surprised that nobody has experimented with electronic triggers in competition handguns yet.  Paintball has been doing it for years.

 

We cant keep red dots working and you want to add additional electronics inside the gun. LOL

[Chris iliff]

11 hours ago, B_Seehawer said:

This is really reminding me of the time guys thought Limited and SS minor were a thing because of capacity, but then didn’t work because of major scoring and HF....

Really?  They did that because a minor gun beat an open gun for HOA in a major match with the best shooters in attendance?

 

I don’t remember that. 

 

 

[Sarge]

1 hour ago, Maximis228 said:

 

We cant keep red dots working and you want to add additional electronics inside the gun. LOL

^^This^^ "My trigger quit working" "Is it a V4?"

[motosapiens]

12 hours ago, B_Seehawer said:

This is really reminding me of the time guys thought Limited and SS minor were a thing because of capacity, but then didn’t work because of major scoring and HF....

ss minor is still a thing, and something like 30-40% of area matches in the last few years have been won by SS minor shooters.

 

and of course, just like in this situation, ss minor has a distinct advantage over ss major in steel challenge.

[MikeBurgess]

13 hours ago, Chris iliff said:

That about perfectly sums up what I’m thinking. Thanks for finding the brevity that eluded me, lol. 

 

Has CO exposed a possible strategy or possible design shift of an open gun?  

I think its more like CO has shown how much of a advantage a dot is on a hand gun. With open guns we have let our selves believe that comps and triggers and better loads and whatever else make a big difference, but when you start seeing good shooters shoot CO it becomes obvious that a CO gun is really only giving up Major scoring to a full house build Open gun, all the other crap is just noise in the actual scale of performance.

 

 

[BritinUSA]

I don’t think that technology ever really ‘peaks’, generally the innovation curve starts out very steep as new changes come in rapidly, over time it will start to level out and improvements will become smaller.

 

Some competitors will dive into these small changes in the hope that it will give them an edge, but the changes are so insignificant that a little training with existing equipment will usually accomplish the same thing.

 

The reduction in innovation is not going to end Open, but what will drive a stake through it is the cost. 

[Chris iliff]

44 minutes ago, MikeBurgess said:

I think its more like CO has shown how much of a advantage a dot is on a hand gun. With open guns we have let our selves believe that comps and triggers and better loads and whatever else make a big difference, but when you start seeing good shooters shoot CO it becomes obvious that a CO gun is really only giving up Major scoring to a full house build Open gun, all the other crap is just noise in the actual scale of performance.

 

 

That is definitely true. 

And you further define what what I am having trouble expressing. Thanks. 

 

Now, ...don’t think traditional “open” or “co” or even “production with optic.”

 

Take away all constraints on that CO build. What would be accomplished then?

 

I'm talking about a gun that hasn’t been built yet. An area not fully explored. 

 

With a frame mounted dot on a purpose built pistol for “minor”, ...could you achieve a flat shooting beast that was so good, it negated all the bells and whistles on a traditional open gun AND made major scoring less of an issue, maybe even a moot point?

 

Edited May 23, 2019 by Chris iliff

[motosapiens]

4 minutes ago, Chris iliff said:

With a frame mounted dot on a purpose built pistol for “minor”, ...could you achieve a flat shooting beast that was so good, it negated all the bells and whistles on a traditional open gun AND made major scoring less of an issue, maybe even a moot point?

 

 

No.

As long as major scoring exists, it will be an advantage. The only way to take that advantage away is to use all steel targets, like in steel challenge, or pro-am style events, for example.

[RJH]

Is this whole thread really about, "i want to build an open glock....."

 

[Chris iliff]

22 minutes ago, motosapiens said:

 

No.

As long as major scoring exists, it will be an advantage. The only way to take that advantage away is to use all steel targets, like in steel challenge, or pro-am style events, for example.

Hmmm, 

I’ll up your negativity with a resounding no, to your no. Lol

 

So you are positive, through your decades of testing and research, that a minor shooting  purpose built open gun that doesn’t have to follow the platform rules of “co” and could be built using open rules,... is simply a “no”. 

 

Thanks Moto, you have never disappointed me. 

 

Send me all that research and every single mod you tried and discarded. It’ll be a great time saver. 

[Chris iliff]

2 minutes ago, RJH said:

Is this whole thread really about, "i want to build an open glock....."

 

Not even close, lol. 

[zzt]

17 minutes ago, Chris iliff said:

With a frame mounted dot on a purpose built pistol for “minor”,

 

Anyway you slice it, that is an Open gun designed to shoot minor, not a modified CO gun.  As far as making a custom gun that shoots super flat, yes.  My newest Open gun will do that with 135PF ammo.  The dot doesn't move.  However, the brass just dribbles out so it isn't reliable.

 

As far as such a gun making major irrelevant, no.  USPSA is essentially a speed sport, as in how many points per second.  Unless you are a gifted shooter, getting all As requires aiming the second shot.  It is much quicker to time the second shot.  Going as fast as you can will result in a lot of then will be Cs.  Say you shoot a 32 round COF and end up with 18 As and 14Cs.  With the same time, you are giving up 14 points my shooting minor.  That's a lot.  For a 17.56 second time, that takes your HF from 8.3144 to 7.5171.  No thanks.

[motosapiens]

10 minutes ago, Chris iliff said:

Hmmm, 

I’ll up your negativity with a resounding no, to your no. Lol

 

So you are positive, through your decades of testing and research, that a minor shooting  purpose built open gun that doesn’t have to follow the platform rules of “co” and could be built using open rules,... is simply a “no”. 

 

Thanks Moto, you have never disappointed me. 

 

Send me all that research and every single mod you tried and discarded. It’ll be a great time saver. 

 

No need to take it personally. I'm good at math. I don't have to try every single mod to understand the advantage of major scoring and why it is so important.

Edited May 23, 2019 by motosapiens

[RJH]

2 minutes ago, Chris iliff said:

Hmmm, 

I’ll up your negativity with a resounding no, to your no. Lol

 

So you are positive, through your decades of testing and research, that a minor shooting  purpose built open gun that doesn’t have to follow the platform rules of “co” and could be built using open rules,... is simply a “no”. 

 

Thanks Moto, you have never disappointed me. 

 

Send me all that research and every single mod you tried and discarded. It’ll be a great time saver. 

 

If he lied and told you yes would you feel better?  In equal capacity guns with hit factor scoring, minor will never consistently win against major.  I am sure there would be an occasional outlier but NO, a minor gun will never equal major gun

[RJH]

Think of it this way, if carry ops allowed major, what do you think would win for the most part?  What about production?  Those divisions mandate minor, so minor can be competitive

[BritinUSA]

Unless you can achieve 100% Alpha’s in the same time (or faster) as the next shooter then it is the accuracy/speed potential of the other competitors that will determine if the concept is valid.

[CHA-LEE]

I think that the "Has Open technology peaked" question is too broad. The biggest variable that hasn't been talked about is the cost vs market cap for developing and deploying a completely new platform that will produce a performance level that is dramatically better than what currently exists today. Lets face it, even though high end Open guns cost $6000 - $9,000 the customer base is simply too small and too cheap to justify any company going out on a limb to develop a whole new gun design. The cost of development and testing would be huge and I don't see competitive shooters lining up to buy unproven Open guns for $20K - $30K just to win a plaque at a match or punch holes in paper in practice. Especially when the performance improvement over the currently available platforms would likely only be in the single digit percentile. Large gun manufactures who could afford to do it are not going to risk investing in that kind of product development. The potential sales volume or profit margin isn't there to justify it. The small gun manufactures who would want to do it wouldn't have the bankroll to deploy it before going out of business.

 

I don't think that we are going to see huge competition gun design changes that will make the current offerings obsolete any time soon. At least not until a competition shooter wins the power ball and is willing to throw away millions of dollars to develop one. That is not likely to happen either. We will have to accept the fact that what we have today will always be going through minor revisions to squeeze every ounce of performance out of it. This is simply because that is the current business model that works.

[motosapiens]

In a typical stage for typical GM's, the difference between major and minor is somewhere around .1-.15 seconds for a charlie. So for each charlie you shoot, you need to be at *least* 1/10 second faster shooting minor. Considering open gm's are already shooting .15-.20 splits on most targets, there's not really alot of room to speed up on 2nd shots. Where else is the extra speed going to come from in minor?

 

top open shooters are already shooting at least 3/4 alphas. Is it feasible for someone shooting minor with a new wonder gun to go the same speed and shoot 7/8 alphas? That's a pretty dramatic increase in accuracy.....

 

The problem as I see it is that many people assume that they can shoot faster with minor than with major. That may be true for beginners, or for hoser targets like 'can you count', but is it true for better shooters and typical USPSA targets? Is it true for steel? My only experience is anecdotal, but as a garden variety M, I shoot the same times for steel challenge whether i'm shooting major 40-45, or 9mm minor. I shoot a couple percent faster on hosing bill drills and such. Not really enough to be worth it. Would it be worth it for someone more skilled? I doubt it, but I'm happy to be proven wrong.

[Chris iliff]

20 minutes ago, motosapiens said:

 

No need to take it personally. I'm good at math. I don't have to try every single mod to understand the advantage of major scoring and why it is so important.

Oh you misunderstand me. Taking it personal couldn’t be further from the truth. 

 

Hence, the the light hearted lol. 

 

Seems like we managed some “extra speed” on a clunky CO gun?? It did win HOA. 

 

 I’m just wondering, if there could be enough more developments, hitherto undiscovered, to warrant a look?  

 

So far, I really haven’t heard much other than,...1 shot game vs 2 shot game. Which is valid. 

 

I’ve also gathered that we possibly could gain some innovation in “open” steel guns. I mean the results alone warrant a fresh look at “open” steel guns and the generally agreed upon conventions surrounding them. 

 

Again, we skyrocketed along a certain paradigm with an open gun,.....outside of Steel guns, that look exactly like traditional open guns, no one has ever went full bore the other direction. 

 

I find it interesting. 

 

YMMV.