Jump to content
Brian Enos's Forums... Maku mozo!

New Carry Optics weight in USPSA 59 ozs.


Aircooled6racer
 Share

Recommended Posts

Hello: So they now allow the weight in carry Optics to be 59ozs so what will you change? I am thinking Legion grip, tungsten grip weight, and a tungsten guide rod. That should still be under 59ozs with a magazine with metal base pad. What are you going to try? Thanks, Eric

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is a point of diminishing returns on weight.  Think transitions.  I am sure there is a weight that starts to hinder HF.  What is that weight for any particular person?  Only the timer will tell.

 

This had to come from pressure by the heavy gun companies.  I could care less, but you have to ask why?  What does this add?  

 

Ho Hum

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hello: I am sure the metal pistol companies wanted the weight change since they couldn't make weight at 45ozs. I do agree that weight can be the killer of speed if you can't drive the gun to the target on transitions. Finding the balance is always the best thing. I am going to try the tungsten grip weight with just a steel guide rod. For me I think the weight further back in my hand will work better than the weight out front. Thanks, Eric

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't shoot Production or Carry Optics myself so these gun weight rule changes don't directly affect my personal enjoyment of USPSA. But as a Match Director these changes make my match officiating and rules adherence policing much easier. If someone thinks that they need a PRD/CO gun setup for a fighting weight of 59oz to be competitive then they can have at it. Many will go through the gun config churn to push the weight envelope and just as many will realize that the optimal overall gun weight is usually in the 35 - 45 oz range.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am going to try and complain about something in my division that is "unfair" and "not right". I want to whine and whine until I get my way. When I think of it, I will let you all know and then moan whenever I don't win a match. Because... it is the equipment dammit!!

 

Gotta be my equipment... that's it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I’m sorry, but I don’t like this change.  I had considered lightning the slide on my Stock II, but found a way to avoid. If you had a Shadow II, it was basically a must.  Now all of the people who did lighten their slides to make weight did it for nothing.  Since CO is no longer a provisional division, I would like to see the USPSA admin quit changing the rules whenever they please unless it is for safety or some competitive equity issue.  I chose to shoot this division because I like dots and it is relatively cheap, relatively stock guns.  Glocks, M&P, etc will be at an even greater disadvantage without some serious grip work.  I shoot a Sig so I dont have a dog in that fight so it doesn’t affect me personally, but I don’t want to see that for this division.  There are plenty of divisions available for any who wants to shoot more expensive or modified guns (not a basically stock, mass produced gun).  Except for maybe Dan Wesson CZ or Alien, there aren’t any stock guns I am aware of weighing this much.

As far as a MD goes...first, thank you for volunteering your time Charlie (and all the other MDs out there).  I can’t imagine anyone in this game for a while doesn’t realize cheating can occur at a level I.   All of the Level I matches I have ever shot have not chronoed ammo so if someone wants to cheat, they can.  If they want to cheat by weighing too much, most people in the division know they are over the weight limit based on the setup.  Since we are not winning money at a level I, if someone wants to cheat, we all know it and that is good enough.  I would never expect or want a MD to check weights, chrono, check mags at a level I.  At every level II I have been to (which is admittedly not many) they have a chronoed, weighed the guns, and checked mags.  The cheater isn’t going to get away with that at a level II or III.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I realize my last response was rather long so here’s the Cliff Notes.  CO was the fastest growing division in the last couple years. Why did it need a rules change of such drastic proportions?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No problem for me … I already have a steel grip and very heavy scope on my

KelTec P11 - my carry gun already weighs about 57 ounces.

 

Tough on my pocket, but, damn, I get great splits with it.   

 

(This should be in the Humor Section, I guess). 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, B585 said:

I realize my last response was rather long so here’s the Cliff Notes.  CO was the fastest growing division in the last couple years. Why did it need a rules change of such drastic proportions?  

Gun manufacturers lobby!

Uspsa corporation wants the ad, sponsor money

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, jcc7x7 said:

Gun manufacturers lobby!

Uspsa corporation wants the ad, sponsor money

Just wait until you have Carry optics "light"

 

IPSC created it last year due to lobbying from certain European makers of plastic guns. (Production Optics Light)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, OPENB said:

Has there been any word from a BoD member or the president about why this was necessary?

 

Bruce Gary has posted a bunch in “BOD February Rules” thread or a thread titles something to that degree

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you step back and look at this whole situation from an overall gun manufacturing/market vs competition legal perspective these rule changes make total sense. First, all of the new gun designs with modular setups where receiver chassis can be swapped into a wide array of grips or the whole grip can be swapped makes validating "Approved" gun types very difficult. The way the old rules were defined, you had to first determine the exact gun type so that the base weight could be identified and 2 oz added to that so the gun could be accurately weighed in order to see if its legal weight or not. Then you had the complex listing of approved or prohibited modifications to verify on top of that. With this endless churn of interchangeable grips, slides, frames and whatever else it makes the old weight and modification verification process very difficult to enforce at major matches and impossible at local matches. If you have rules that are unenforceable due to the complexity of it then what is the point of having the rules?

 

USPSA realized that their old rules were restricting new shooter participation by making it too confusing or difficult for new shooters to determine if their existing gun was legal or not. They also realized that the old rules were unenforceable at all levels of matches which in itself is a really bad thing. The vast majority of sanctioned USPSA matches are local Level 1 club matches. It makes ZERO sense to have a super complex or restrictive rule set that can't be enforced at level 1 matches. The final thing that USPSA has to come to terms with is that as much as they think Competition drives gun design and manufacturing, it actually doesn't. Gun and after market parts companies are in business to make money by producing products that sell to the masses regardless of it being legal within USPSA or not. USPSA changing the division rules in a manner that minimize restrictions and reduce complexity of the enforcement process promotes a scenario that makes most of what manufactures want to produce legal. That is a win/win scenario that scales as products evolve.

 

For all of the PRD & CO shooters who now think that their existing gun is no longer competitive because USPSA upped the maximum gun weight to boat anchor levels, I call bulls#!t. It has always been the "Indian" getting the job done not the "Arrow". This rule change isn't going to invalidate that reality. If people put as much effort into practicing with what they currently have as they did whining about things that don't matter then they would be much better off in the long run. Man up and master the gun and gear you currently have. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, CHA-LEE said:

Man up and master the gun and gear you currently have. 

Or open your wallet and buy the latest division hotness (isn't that what gun manufacturers want anyway?). They don't make any money off you shooting the same gat year-over-year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, TrackCage said:

Or open your wallet and buy the latest division hotness (isn't that what gun manufacturers want anyway?). They don't make any money off you shooting the same gat year-over-year.

 

There is always going to be the "Next" gun, gear or widget. There are also always going to be shooters willing to throw down their hard earned cash to buy these "Next" products simply because its the "Next" cool thing. The same people whining about their gun/gear being obsolete by this new rule change are also the same people that endlessly churn through equipment anyway. So I just don't get the butt hurt associated with this rule change that promotes inclusion verses restriction. It gives them an easy excuse to buy more stuff which they are going to do anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, CHA-LEE said:

If you step back and look at this whole situation from an overall gun manufacturing/market vs competition legal perspective these rule changes make total sense. First, all of the new gun designs with modular setups where receiver chassis can be swapped into a wide array of grips or the whole grip can be swapped makes validating "Approved" gun types very difficult. The way the old rules were defined, you had to first determine the exact gun type so that the base weight could be identified and 2 oz added to that so the gun could be accurately weighed in order to see if its legal weight or not. Then you had the complex listing of approved or prohibited modifications to verify on top of that. With this endless churn of interchangeable grips, slides, frames and whatever else it makes the old weight and modification verification process very difficult to enforce at major matches and impossible at local matches. If you have rules that are unenforceable due to the complexity of it then what is the point of having the rules?

 

USPSA realized that their old rules were restricting new shooter participation by making it too confusing or difficult for new shooters to determine if their existing gun was legal or not. They also realized that the old rules were unenforceable at all levels of matches which in itself is a really bad thing. The vast majority of sanctioned USPSA matches are local Level 1 club matches. It makes ZERO sense to have a super complex or restrictive rule set that can't be enforced at level 1 matches. The final thing that USPSA has to come to terms with is that as much as they think Competition drives gun design and manufacturing, it actually doesn't. Gun and after market parts companies are in business to make money by producing products that sell to the masses regardless of it being legal within USPSA or not. USPSA changing the division rules in a manner that minimize restrictions and reduce complexity of the enforcement process promotes a scenario that makes most of what manufactures want to produce legal. That is a win/win scenario that scales as products evolve.

 

For all of the PRD & CO shooters who now think that their existing gun is no longer competitive because USPSA upped the maximum gun weight to boat anchor levels, I call bulls#!t. It has always been the "Indian" getting the job done not the "Arrow". This rule change isn't going to invalidate that reality. If people put as much effort into practicing with what they currently have as they did whining about things that don't matter then they would be much better off in the long run. Man up and master the gun and gear you currently have. 

Your points on trying to determine if guns are “stock” enough is valid.  This has been an issue for years.  Measuring weight is not hard to enforce and I fail to see how raising the weight 14 ounces fixes that issue.

 

In terms of participation (and I am only referring to weight), I disagree.   Glocks are very common guns for people getting a start in competitive shooting.  A G19 weighs about 1/2 the new legal limit.  Even in Minor, that is a significant disadvantage.  Seeing this, I would bet a lot of new competitive shooter will turn elsewhere.  Competitive shooters tend to be a significant factor in making their voices heard when it comes to politics/gun rights.  We need as many voices as possible to be heard when legislators start talking about gun rights.  A group of USPSA guys went to the recent VA gun rally which was 5+ hours away.  Again, Making common guns such as Glocks having a significant disadvantage is not good for the sport.
For the record, I am shooting a Legion and I don’t feel a need to find a heavier gun so this doesn’t affect me personally.  If I was less experienced I do think the Legion might now be a little light.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hello: I think if you practice what you are going to use in competition you will soon find what works best for you. Use a timer and play around with different combos and loads to see what works best for you. I know some really good Glock shooters that can shoot them very well. For me I have tried heavy and light and prefer them more on the lighter side with lighter bullets. I am sure the rule change came about for CZ, Tangfoglio and some other all steel pistols wanting to play the game in stock form without lightening the slides. I think it will be a good thing. Thanks, Eric

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...