2011 and Carry optics

[Blaize]

5 minutes ago, RJH said:

 

I will address this one, I can't be convinced that minor is competitive at this point even though Nils won limited with it. I think that could very well be an anomaly. However, Nils, Mason Lane, Dave svigney, Robert Vogel have all one in divisions with major power factor while shooting plastic guns against 2011s. There's also been many others in the top five and top 10. So plastic guns can clearly compete with 2011s on equal footing 

I share that viewpoint also. Competing in other divisions and outlaw style matches, this seems to be proven over and over again. 
 

I think the power factor and the 9 major/ 40 caliber rule sets have more to do with it all than the guns themselves.

[Racinready300ex]

9 minutes ago, Boomstick303 said:

@Racinready300exI do have a questions about IDPA though.  How exactly is allowing SA guns in CO affecting the standings there?

 

I thought SA only 2011s were allowed to play in CO but maybe I am wrong.

 

Have you ever IDPA'd? 

 

[Boomstick303]

5 minutes ago, Racinready300ex said:

Stupid poors. 

 

I guess IDPA is full of Stupid Poors........

[Boomstick303]

8 minutes ago, Racinready300ex said:

Have you ever IDPA'd? 

 

I have not that's why I asked.  It's ok, I assumed the correct answer and I was right.  @Bakerjdconfirmed my assumption.

 

Edited October 18, 2022 by Boomstick303

[RJH]

4 minutes ago, Racinready300ex said:

 

This is a interesting point. The guns currently in CO in your opinion are s#!tty. And you're point how how people just wan to shoot good guns. Which is vary different than the past points about how these CO guns are just as good. 

 

I can think of several guys who would immediately jump to a 2011 because they think it's better. I know I can shoot my 2011 better than I can my current CO gun. It's easier to shoot, end of story. 

 

But, we're making the case that all the equipment is equal and those people who can't afford to jump to a new non "s#!tty" gun just need to suck it up because they can still shoot their s#!t gun if they want to. Who cares what they think anyway. Stupid poors. 

 

That's where we are at now. 

 

S***** as in not fun as to shoot, not s***** as in not good enough to win as has been proven over and over and over and over again.

 

You can be poor and still shoot a 2011. Rock Island makes a viable one for under $1,000, how much is that CZ people are shooting?

 

Springfield's looks promising for only $1,500, that's only like $800 less than a CZ

 

There's also Browning high powers if somebody wanted to do something a little different.

 

Or if they love czs they can buy a single action CZ for like $1,400 that's race ready out of the box. That's probably less than they spend on a Glock after they add several hundred dollars worth of tungsten, a light, and a $250 Johnny Glock trigger.

 

Looks like that blows your argument of a cheap gun out the window

 

So while my point is most people would choose a 2011 because it's more fun to shoot your point seems to be we should force them to shoot a gun that they don't really like but they will put up with because of they get a DOT and cheap ammo and 140 mags. 

 

 

[BritinUSA]

What if they had a Limited Optics with Major/Minor but it had to fit into a box with magazine inserted? You would obviously get fewer rounds with Major than with Minor.

 

Those with existing Limited guns could just get the slide milled and be good to go with the benefit of Major scoring, while others might opt for the extra rounds instead with a new 9mm.

 

Those who shoot CO could also shoot in Limited Optics if they wanted to add magwells, thumb rests etc.

[GigG]

3 minutes ago, BritinUSA said:

What if they had a Limited Optics with Major/Minor but it had to fit into a box with magazine inserted? You would obviously get fewer rounds with Major than with Minor.

 

Those with existing Limited guns could just get the slide milled and be good to go with the benefit of Major scoring, while others might opt for the extra rounds instead with a new 9mm.

 

Those who shoot CO could also shoot in Limited Optics if they wanted to add magwells, thumb rests etc.

 

 

I think that is the best way to do it with the exception of the box.  Just allow 141mm mags like CO. 

[Johnny_Chimpo]

8 hours ago, RJH said:

 

This is 100% a sunk cost fallacy argument. 

 

The.org made a bad decision originally by not allowing Sao guns to compete in carry-ops because of a incorrect assumption that plastic guns could not compete with Sao guns. That assumption has been soundly disproven the past several years in limited. The other incorrect assumption was cost, but since Accu Shadow 2 that are over $2,000 apiece are allowed and there are several Sao guns that cost considerably less than that, that was also an incorrect assumption.

 

So now instead of correcting a mistake your idea is to double down on it and force everybody to spend even more money on guns they don't really want. It's still early in the carryops division lifespan, now is a perfect time to fix a mistake based on incorrect assumptions.

 

And I say that as a guy who has spent my hard-earned money on a carry-op's gun and I do not own a carry-ops type 2011.

 

 

 

Carry Optics began as Production with a dot.  It was that way from day 1.

 

SAO pistols have never been allowed in Production.

 

The weight limit was raised from 35 (approx) to 46 (approx) within a year of CO being created.

 

So the argument that CO was a hider division for lightweight plastic pistols is false.

 

Just like Production, it was never meant to include SAO handguns because those have already plenty of places to be competitive in.

 

So sorry that you don't like DA/SA or striker fired pistols.

 

 

[Johnny_Chimpo]

6 hours ago, Blaize said:

guys just wanna take out their new Sig/Canik/2011/ whatever cool high cap 9mm minor pistol they just got, learn some skills, make friends and be competitive without having to load 9 major, or shoot 40 cal. And they can to a degree, but it’s like, “hey we know you just got this cool pistol with all these doo-dads in the box, but you can’t use them all here”, well, “you can but here’s the catch, your at a big scoring disadvantage”. 

 

So you're saying people are not shooting USPSA CO because they won't turn a screw and slide off a magwell that came with their Canik or SIG?

 

I'd rather they'd just stay away then.

[RVRSE]

10 minutes ago, Johnny_Chimpo said:

 

So you're saying people are not shooting USPSA CO because they won't turn a screw and slide off a magwell that came with their Canik or SIG?

 

I'd rather they'd just stay away then.

Although im not the poster you're replying to I do have thoughts on this.

Its not a simple question of removing the magwell or not but how the next generation of shooters view USPSA culture and its also representative of how gun culture and expectations are shifting. 

 

For example one group of new shooters that i've introduced to USPSA who are in college came out to their first uspsa match and brought their carry guns which also happen to have carry magwells.  When i told them that they'd have to remove their magwells to compete in carry optics they were initially very confused about this because in their view, carry optics is for "carry guns" and their carry guns have magwells so why couldn't they compete with their carry guns?  Many in the group felt that this rule was out of touch and didn't hesitate to label some aspects of USPSA as "fud rules".

 

Tastes and preferences for what a carry gun has shifted as has gun technology. Many guns from the factory, like the sig 365 x macro now are coming with compensators and people are carrying them, is this not a factory gun that is in common usage? What happens when consumers come to expect a "carry comp" to come standard on new weapons?

 

USPSA rules have formed because they were a reaction to emerging equipment not necessarily anticipatory and that that in my view is a part of the issue.

Edited October 18, 2022 by RVRSE

[Johnny_Chimpo]

6 minutes ago, RVRSE said:

For example one group of new shooters that i've introduced to USPSA who are in college came out to their first uspsa match and brought their carry guns which also happen to have carry magwells.  When i told them that they'd have to remove their magwells to compete in carry optics they were initially very confused about this because in their view, carry optics is for "carry guns" and their carry guns have magwells so why couldn't they compete with their carry guns?  Many in the group felt that this rule was out of touch and didn't hesitate to label some aspects of USPSA as "fud rules".

 

I see it as a reaction from a generation that has never been told "no". 

 

The concept of conforming to a standard that they might not necessarily agree with is foreign to them.

 

They can start their own shooting sport for all I care.

[RVRSE]

6 minutes ago, Johnny_Chimpo said:

 

I see it as a reaction from a generation that has never been told "no". 

 

The concept of conforming to a standard that they might not necessarily agree with is foreign to them.

 

They can start their own shooting sport for all I care.

The firearms that are at market or coming to market represent how expectations have shifted and technology will continue to change; thinking of this a generational attitude issue complete misses the point.

 

[Joe4d]

12 minutes ago, RVRSE said:

Although im not the poster you're replying to I do have thoughts on this.

Its not a simple question of removing the magwell or not but how the next generation of shooters view USPSA culture and its also representative of how gun culture and expectations are shifting. 

 

For example one group of new shooters that i've introduced to USPSA who are in college came out to their first uspsa match and brought their carry guns which also happen to have carry magwells.  When i told them that they'd have to remove their magwells to compete in carry optics they were initially very confused about this because in their view, carry optics is for "carry guns" and their carry guns have magwells so why couldn't they compete with their carry guns?  Many in the group felt that this rule was out of touch and didn't hesitate to label some aspects of USPSA as "fud rules".

 

Tastes and preferences for what a carry gun has shifted as has gun technology. Many guns from the factory, like the sig 365 x macro now are coming with compensators and people are carrying them, is this not a factory gun that is in common usage? What happens when consumers come to expect a "carry comp" to come standard on new weapons?

 

USPSA rules have formed because they were a reaction to emerging equipment not necessarily anticipatory and that that in my view is a part of the issue.

Why would you even tell them anything ? They didnt read the rules,, were new shooters so why would it even matter ?
Lets see first time I shot IDPA, IPSC, USPSA, Bowling Pins, and Steel challenge,, I walked up to sign up, MD asked me what kinda gun / caliber I was shooting,,, He checked a block and sent me on my way..
Shoulda done the same , checked Open, wished them well,, If they cared about results, they would look at them and look at the rules for the next match and figure out to drop the magwell next time,, or just contiune having fun and shoot what they brung

 

[RVRSE]

Just now, Joe4d said:

Why would you even tell them anything ? They didnt read the rules,, were new shooters so why would it even matter ?
Lets see first time I shot IDPA, IPSC, USPSA, Bowling Pins, and Steel challenge,, I walked up to sign up, MD asked me what kinda gun / caliber I was shooting,,, He checked a block and sent me on my way..
Shoulda done the same , checked Open, wished them well,, If they cared about results, they would look at them and look at the rules for the next match and figure out to drop the magwell next time,, or just contiune having fun and shoot what they brung

 

Yeah why on earth would I bother talking to my friends or try and introduce new people to the sport? 

This is besides the point though about how gun culture's tastes and preferences are shifting with technology.  SAO will eventually come to carry optics whether people like it or not.

[Johnny_Chimpo]

33 minutes ago, RVRSE said:

The firearms that are at market or coming to market represent how expectations have shifted and technology will continue to change; thinking of this a generational attitude issue complete misses the point.

 

 

No, I didn't miss the point at all.  They could comply but chose to whine and complain instead.

 

Sports have rules.  You can't cork a bat in baseball, even though that increases performance.  You can't carry a basketball six steps, even though that increases performance.  You can't touch a soccer ball (unless you're a goalie) even though that increases performance. 

 

You can't use a magwell in CO or Production, even though that increases performance.  You can't use a compensator in CO even though that increases performance.  You can't have your sweet SAO trigger in CO.  If you want a sweet SA trigger you gotta get trough the DA.  I know, that's too hard.

 

 

Edited October 18, 2022 by Johnny_Chimpo

[motosapiens]

20 minutes ago, Johnny_Chimpo said:

They can start their own shooting sport for all I care.

i'm totally down with people starting another sport instead of EVER allowing comps in CO. Stupid idea for carry too. Even little girls can control 9mm recoil, and the comp is even more of a danger to hearing in a carry situation with no earpro. F** that.

[Joe4d]

7 minutes ago, RVRSE said:

Yeah why on earth would I bother talking to my friends or try and introduce new people to the sport? 

This is besides the point though about how gun culture's tastes and preferences are shifting with technology.  SAO will eventually come to carry optics whether people like it or not.

dont think you got my point,  If I had a friend who wanted to check out USPSA and he had a glock 17 with a couple Timmy add ons and a couple mags, Id just tell him to load to capacity and shoot limited.....     with minor  and have fun. VS trying to get into a laundry list of "why 's" 

 

Edited October 18, 2022 by Joe4d

[Johnny_Chimpo]

4 minutes ago, RVRSE said:

SAO will eventually come to carry optics whether people like it or not.

 

LOL we'll see about that.

[motosapiens]

6 hours ago, RJH said:

So while my point is most people would choose a 2011 because it's more fun to shoot 

 

 

i think people would choose a 2011 because' it's objectively faster and easier to shoot. Sure, a few sponsored shooters with lots of talent, resources and drive can overcome the disadvantages of carry/duty guns, but the overwhelming majority of people who spend their own money and don't get paid to shoot are going to go with the high performance option, even if it costs more and is dumb to carry.

[Joe4d]

2 minutes ago, Johnny_Chimpo said:

 

LOL we'll see about that.

SAO  with no manual safeties are already in CO,, USPSA just prohibits the ones with external hammers AND thumb safeties for some reason..
Personally I think striker guns with no external thumb safety should be prohibited in Limited,, cause its not fair to the 2011 guys to have to sweep a thumb safety.

But serious,, while I see no logical reason to prohibit 2011 designs from competitive standpoint,, also see no benifit in changing the existing rules.

[motosapiens]

1 hour ago, BritinUSA said:

What if they had a Limited Optics with Major/Minor but it had to fit into a box with magazine inserted? You would obviously get fewer rounds with Major than with Minor.

 

Those with existing Limited guns could just get the slide milled and be good to go with the benefit of Major scoring, while others might opt for the extra rounds instead with a new 9mm.

 

Those who shoot CO could also shoot in Limited Optics if they wanted to add magwells, thumb rests etc.

This seems like the only approach that isn't retarded and wouldn't destroy the most popular division. It seems clear from talking behind the scenes that lim optics with major/minor is really the only thing being considered, and that seems like a good idea to me. I think it would be reasonable to have some discussion about whether to allow longer mags for minor (we already have a 170mm gauge), and also allow 9mm major (with 140mm mags). 

 

I think it would cause limited to be even less popular, but seems to be the way it's going anyway, so I might as well get some use out of my limited gun.

[outerlimits]

1 hour ago, BritinUSA said:

What if they had a Limited Optics with Major/Minor but it had to fit into a box with magazine inserted? You would obviously get fewer rounds with Major than with Minor.

 

Those with existing Limited guns could just get the slide milled and be good to go with the benefit of Major scoring, while others might opt for the extra rounds instead with a new 9mm.

 

Those who shoot CO could also shoot in Limited Optics if they wanted to add magwells, thumb rests etc.

so you just sh$tcanned all the 6" limited guns as well.

[Joe4d]

1 minute ago, motosapiens said:

This seems like the only approach that isn't retarded and wouldn't destroy the most popular division. It seems clear from talking behind the scenes that lim optics with major/minor is really the only thing being considered, and that seems like a good idea to me. I think it would be reasonable to have some discussion about whether to allow longer mags for minor (we already have a 170mm gauge), and also allow 9mm major (with 140mm mags). 

 

I think it would cause limited to be even less popular, but seems to be the way it's going anyway, so I might as well get some use out of my limited gun.

with steel challenge trying to follow along with USPSA divisions, I wonder how a Limited Optics major minor would play out there... I mean no point to major,,, you would just basically have a 2011 optic division and a everything else optic division..|
COnsidering I basically just shoot straight up anyways,, I have a hankering for an open minor gun..

[Johnny_Chimpo]

10 minutes ago, outerlimits said:

so you just sh$tcanned all the 6" limited guns as well.

Not everyone can get what they want

[outerlimits]

1 minute ago, Johnny_Chimpo said:

Not everyone can get what they want

could care less-shoot open.  too many divisions anyway.