USPSA - How about adding .22lr (RFPI, RFPO)

[Racinready300ex]

42 minutes ago, zzt said:

There is virtually no difference between race CO guns and Open in terms of muzzle rise and splits.  Last shoot a good Prod shooter showed up with a dot.  He has his heavy CZ milled for an SRO.  He ran 20 or 23 in a mag instead of 10.  He was way faster than his Prod times and beat all but one of the Open shooters.  He is B in CO.  The Open who beat him was an M.  The only reason he did beat him was major vs. minor scoring.

 

I think if you took Major away from open, it'd be a drivers race between the two.

[Sinister4]

54 minutes ago, zzt said:

There is virtually no difference between race CO guns and Open in terms of muzzle rise and splits.  Last shoot a good Prod shooter showed up with a dot.  He has his heavy CZ milled for an SRO.  He ran 20 or 23 in a mag instead of 10.  He was way faster than his Prod times and beat all but one of the Open shooters.  He is B in CO.  The Open who beat him was an M.  The only reason he did beat him was major vs. minor scoring.

Agreed, i looked up quite a few big matches, its pretty interesting when you chuck out major and minor and look at times. 

 

[Nolan]

4 hours ago, MikeBurgess said:

I would agree for a participation sport like 99% of drag racing really is, the question I guess is do we want USPSA to be a participation type event or do we want it to be a competitive type event? I think this is the big tension in the sport today and how we solve it is important for the future of the sport. 

 

I think this works well with my proposal, Local events can have a gazillion divisions but as the prestige of the match goes up the divisions get restricted to ones where actual competition exists. 

 

 

I would disagree with you about drag racing being a participation sport.  Have you been an NHRA competitor?  I've helped wrench a couple of my friends cars and motorcycle.  One to a division championship.  I guarantee you, it is a tooth and nail competition, even for the unsponsored, two car home garage effort of my friends.  

 

Nolan

[SGT_Schultz]

3 hours ago, zzt said:

There is virtually no difference between race CO guns and Open in terms of muzzle rise and splits.

 

This nonsense defies the laws of physics

[zzt]

15 hours ago, SGT_Schultz said:

 

This nonsense defies the laws of physics

 

All you have to do is observe and time.  Remember, I said RACE CO guns.  The CO shooter who placed second last match beat 11 Open shooters including an M.  His muzzle rose less than some of the Open guns.

[SGT_Schultz]

44 minutes ago, zzt said:

 

All you have to do is observe and time.  Remember, I said RACE CO guns.  The CO shooter who placed second last match beat 11 Open shooters including an M.  His muzzle rose less than some of the Open guns.

Calibrated eyeballs.....LOL now I've heard it all.

 

I'm sure shooter skill had nothing to do in your example.

Edited September 21, 2021 by SGT_Schultz

[Sinister4]

1 hour ago, zzt said:

 

All you have to do is observe and time.  Remember, I said RACE CO guns.  The CO shooter who placed second last match beat 11 Open shooters including an M.  His muzzle rose less than some of the Open guns.

well figure a CO gun at 125 pf vs the open gun at 170pf,you can have the same weight, same sights, same grips, same accuracy,.same trigger pull weight only difference is few more rounds in the mag, frame mounted sight

and the compensator

 

Edited September 21, 2021 by Sinister4

[MikeBurgess]

2 hours ago, SGT_Schultz said:

Calibrated eyeballs.....LOL now I've heard it all.

 

I'm sure shooter skill had nothing to do in your example.

Shooter skill and strength have lots to do with it, the "Flattest" gun I have ever seen (including Open super squad level shooters) is a Production Glock 34 shot by a local GM that has arms the size of my waist. 

 

 

[motosapiens]

Unfortunately my club is populated by national top 25 open shooters, but if other CO shooters can run with open shooters times, I guess I better stop making excuses and speed the hell up!

[Racinready300ex]

Max won HOA at A5 last year. Sure, he's Max but he beat Baker, Hyder and Vleiger. Those guys aren't exactly chumps, they're all top 10, super squad level guys. 

 

Certainly a ton of variables. 

[zzt]

At the shoot I referenced above, the top 10 shooters were (in order):

 

O, CO, O, O, O, CO, CO, O, CO, PCC

 

Eight Open major shooters finished out of the top ten, as did a junior Open minor shooter.

Edited September 21, 2021 by zzt

[llamasabound]

Not to be a jerk, but local results don’t indicate much. I’ve won HOA in production against Open Ms. 

 

That’s less testament to the equivalence of production and open and much more about the fact that I was 35 years younger than the open M and currently training.

2 hours ago, zzt said:

At the shoot I referenced above, the top 10 shooters were (in order):

 

O, CO, O, O, O, CO, CO, O, CO, PCC

 

Eight Open major shooters finished out of the top ten, as did a junior Open minor shooter.

 

Majors are more interesting, and they basically confirm what most people are saying: CO is a very fast division, typically close (but behind) open. Given shooters of equal skill (or the same shooter!), open times will typically be faster.

[Thomas H]

21 hours ago, llamasabound said:

Majors are more interesting, and they basically confirm what most people are saying: CO is a very fast division, typically close (but behind) open. Given shooters of equal skill (or the same shooter!), open times will typically be faster.

 

Yup.  Pretty much every example that people attempt to come up with to differ with this comes with a concurrent "but it was X shooter" where X is well-known to be far above the rest in skill.

 

And..since Open is shooting major and CO is shooting minor, attempting to compare raw times ignores the fact that if CO had major scoring or Open had minor scoring they'd probably be shooting a little differently.  After all, shooting 90% of the possible points on a stage means that Open can A/C literally every single target, while CO can A/C only half as many. 

 

Sure, yes, the majority of the really good shooters don't drop that many points (actually, apparently they do, stats to follow).  But Open shooters (in general) drop more because they CAN.  One point drop for a lot larger target area (and concurrent speed savings) makes a difference.

 

Got curious as to points, so I pulled data from the Area matches that have been held to date.  (Meaning every Area except 2 and 4.)  Pulled the percentage of points earned (not counting penalties) for the top five in Open and CO for each match, found the averages there.  Found the average of all of them together, compared the values.

 

In 2021, the top five Open shooters at Area matches shot 92.83% of the possible points, on average, while the similar set of CO shooters shot 91.09% of the possible points.  (So yeah, apparently they DO drop that many points!)

 

Given an average (roughly) of 350 rounds per match, Open shooters had the equivalent of 125 C-hits, while CO shooters had 78.  In other words, Open competitors shot 60% more C-hit-equivalents than CO shooters at Area matches, while still managing to keep a higher percentage of the possible points. 

 

...which means that for them, it is completely WORTH it to shoot faster and drop more C-hits. 

 

I'll note:  Is anyone attempting to claim that if Max shot Open _and_ CO in the same match, he wouldn't do better with the Open gun?  Similarly for any other good shooter that shoots both?

 

Saying that Open and CO guns will perform the same is....not supported by the data.   (Sure, the numbers are close, but....the major match historical results are pretty consistently clear.)

 

Note that this data is supposed to be added to the fact that we already know that Open times are, in general, consistently faster than CO times at majors among similarly-skilled shooters.

[Racinready300ex]

29 minutes ago, Thomas H said:

 

Yup.  Pretty much every example that people attempt to come up with to differ with this comes with a concurrent "but it was X shooter" where X is well-known to be far above the rest in skill.

 

And..since Open is shooting major and CO is shooting minor, attempting to compare raw times ignores the fact that if CO had major scoring or Open had minor scoring they'd probably be shooting a little differently.  After all, shooting 90% of the possible points on a stage means that Open can A/C literally every single target, while CO can A/C only half as many. 

 

Sure, yes, the majority of the really good shooters don't drop that many points (actually, apparently they do, stats to follow).  But Open shooters (in general) drop more because they CAN.  One point drop for a lot larger target area (and concurrent speed savings) makes a difference.

 

Got curious as to points, so I pulled data from the Area matches that have been held to date.  (Meaning every Area except 2 and 4.)  Pulled the percentage of points earned (not counting penalties) for the top five in Open and CO for each match, found the averages there.  Found the average of all of them together, compared the values.

 

In 2021, the top five Open shooters at Area matches shot 92.83% of the possible points, on average, while the similar set of CO shooters shot 91.09% of the possible points.  (So yeah, apparently they DO drop that many points!)

 

Given an average (roughly) of 350 rounds per match, Open shooters had the equivalent of 125 C-hits, while CO shooters had 78.  In other words, Open competitors shot 60% more C-hit-equivalents than CO shooters at Area matches, while still managing to keep a higher percentage of the possible points. 

 

...which means that for them, it is completely WORTH it to shoot faster and drop more C-hits. 

 

I'll note:  Is anyone attempting to claim that if Max shot Open _and_ CO in the same match, he wouldn't do better with the Open gun?  Similarly for any other good shooter that shoots both?

 

Saying that Open and CO guns will perform the same is....not supported by the data.   (Sure, the numbers are close, but....the major match historical results are pretty consistently clear.)

 

Note that this data is supposed to be added to the fact that we already know that Open times are, in general, consistently faster than CO times at majors among similarly-skilled shooters.

 

Open is certainly faster, but not by huge margins. I'd assume you'd probably agree that the speed difference comes more from the scoring system than the equipment of the two divisions. 

 

 

[llamasabound]

4 minutes ago, Racinready300ex said:

 

Open is certainly faster, but not by huge margins. I'd assume you'd probably agree that the speed difference comes more from the scoring system than the equipment of the two divisions. 

 

 

largely agreeing with you — the scoring strategies probably play the bigger part. That said the equipment differences play into the scoring systems too.
 

The ease of holding “center of brown” on a tight NS partial is still a factor. It is demonstrably true that a tuned open gun with a frame mounted optic stays visually closer to the point of aim throughout recoil and during multiple shots.

 

It’s not only that 2 quick charlies score well — it’s also easier to shoot 2 quick charlies on a challenging target presentation.

[Racinready300ex]

7 minutes ago, llamasabound said:

largely agreeing with you — the scoring strategies probably play the bigger part. That said the equipment differences play into the scoring systems too.
 

The ease of holding “center of brown” on a tight NS partial is still a factor. It is demonstrably true that a tuned open gun with a frame mounted optic stays visually closer to the point of aim throughout recoil and during multiple shots.

 

It’s not only that 2 quick charlies score well — it’s also easier to shoot 2 quick charlies on a challenging target presentation.

 

The equipment advantage is still there for sure. Primarily in follow up shots, my thinking being if it was all scored the same you'd probably aim the first shot vary similarly with either gun. And the comp and frame mounted dot would be helping for the second shot. Splits being the smallest chunk of time on the stage means the equipment has a pretty small advantage with out the help of the scoring system.

 

Changing the aiming strategy to take advantage of major on the other hand can certainly have a big effect on your time. 

[llamasabound]

22 minutes ago, Racinready300ex said:

 

The equipment advantage is still there for sure. Primarily in follow up shots, my thinking being if it was all scored the same you'd probably aim the first shot vary similarly with either gun. And the comp and frame mounted dot would be helping for the second shot. Splits being the smallest chunk of time on the stage means the equipment has a pretty small advantage with out the help of the scoring system.

 

Changing the aiming strategy to take advantage of major on the other hand can certainly have a big effect on your time. 

Agreed on all points. Among the many reasons Max hit the ground so dominant at CO is because he shoots it similarly to how he shot open. People coming from production need to revise their strategies more significantly.

[Racinready300ex]

15 minutes ago, llamasabound said:

Agreed on all points. Among the many reasons Max hit the ground so dominant at CO is because he shoots it similarly to how he shot open. People coming from production need to revise their strategies more significantly.

 

This years CO Nat's is going to be interesting I wish I could be there. I think several guys might be able to give Max a run this year.

 

I'm also curious to see how Max stacks up against Max in the overall. How much difference is there really between a minor/dot/pistol and minor/dot/rifle. 

[-JCN-]

On 9/22/2021 at 2:13 PM, Racinready300ex said:

 

The equipment advantage is still there for sure. Primarily in follow up shots, my thinking being if it was all scored the same you'd probably aim the first shot vary similarly with either gun. And the comp and frame mounted dot would be helping for the second shot. Splits being the smallest chunk of time on the stage means the equipment has a pretty small advantage with out the help of the scoring system.

 

Changing the aiming strategy to take advantage of major on the other hand can certainly have a big effect on your time. 

I got paper GM in CO and moved to Open and it’s WAY easier mechanically to shoot as fast or faster with the same accuracy than my CO gun. Plus I get an extra scoring benefit. In my mind there’s no contest. It’s easier to do better faster with an Open gun. 
 

It’s not just splits, it’s being able to track a frame dot on transitions plus mechanical index control with thumb rests. 
 

This is with an open gun. The back row are palm sized steel at 25 yards. I have a lot of trigger time with CO and I could NOT have done that with my CO gun  

 

It is faster and easier even without a scoring advantage IMO. 
 

 

Edited October 7, 2021 by -JCN-

[Racinready300ex]

10 hours ago, -JCN- said:

I got paper GM in CO and moved to Open and it’s WAY easier mechanically to shoot as fast or faster with the same accuracy than my CO gun. Plus I get an extra scoring benefit. In my mind there’s no contest. It’s easier to do better faster with an Open gun. 
 

It’s not just splits, it’s being able to track a frame dot on transitions plus mechanical index control with thumb rests. 

 

 

 

 

So you can track the dot during transitions better with a frame mounted dot? That's interesting. Your CO gun should cycle the slide in like .06 seconds. How fast are your transitions? Most good shooters transition by looking to the next target and then wait for the dot to catch up. It's interesting to me you made GM tracking the dot through transitions. 

 

Thumb rests don't matter. If you like them that's great, but the gun can be controlled with out one. 

 

Open still has a advantage and is easier to shoot, I'm not saying it isn't. In fact you quoted me saying "the equipment advantage is still there" I'm saying major scoring is the biggest advantage it has. I've shot matches where I was faster and more accurate than the open shooter who still beats me in the overall because he looses half as many points per Charlie. That's huge. And that's a big part of what makes open, open. 

[-JCN-]

35 minutes ago, Racinready300ex said:

 

So you can track the dot during transitions better with a frame mounted dot? That's interesting. Your CO gun should cycle the slide in like .06 seconds. How fast are your transitions? Most good shooters transition by looking to the next target and then wait for the dot to catch up. It's interesting to me you made GM tracking the dot through transitions. 

 

Thumb rests don't matter. If you like them that's great, but the gun can be controlled with out one. 

 

Open still has a advantage and is easier to shoot, I'm not saying it isn't. In fact you quoted me saying "the equipment advantage is still there" I'm saying major scoring is the biggest advantage it has. I've shot matches where I was faster and more accurate than the open shooter who still beats me in the overall because he looses half as many points per Charlie. That's huge. And that's a big part of what makes open, open. 

Last to first. 
If you were faster than the open shooter, they were a worse shooter than you. 
 

Open should be faster. It is for me. Less reloads, more make up shots available, steel falls faster. Easier reloads. Open for me versus my CO gun is faster. 
 

I’m a better internal control than you comparing to a random dude. 
 

That all steel match I went to was interesting. Because there is no major scoring. I handily beat guys with my Open gun that I would usually lose to with CO. 
 

That’s just ease of shooting and not scoring because steel. 
 

Yes I can track the dot better with a frame mount. Can you split in 0.06 with a double? Nope. There are oscillations and muzzle settling after the slide comes back. 
 

With a frame mount, the dot movement is more linear and easier to calculate nadir point and rate of deceleration earlier. 
 

With a slide mount the CHARACTERISTICS of the dot movement is complex and non-linear. The dot moves towards your face, down and up and then back to the slide and then you try and calculate the rate of fall after the slide closes so you lose the ability to calculate visually through the recoil in a way you can with a frame dot.

 

Does that make sense?

[Zincwarrior]

I'm confused, isn't this thread about adding .22lr?

[-JCN-]

The other part of frame mounted dot it seems to me is that I can track and judge the dot LIFT better than with a slide dot. 
 

It’s not just being able to see a dot, it’s being able to judge it. Simpler dot movement makes that easier. 
 

The dot lift characteristic helps me judge how hard to drive over on a transition. Like if you watch a quarterback pick an angle and immediately watching the release, it gives you information on where approximately to be to receive it. If you can see a predictable flight through it makes it easier to be where you need to be. 
 

With a slide dot I have a hard time visually judging rate of muzzle lift with the complexity of the movement. 

[GrumpyOne]

All this Open and CO talk needs to be in their respective forums. Let's get back on topic, please.

[-JCN-]

1 hour ago, Racinready300ex said:

It's interesting to me you made GM tracking the dot through transitions. 

 

Thumb rests don't matter. If you like them that's great, but the gun can be controlled with out one. 

Also, you are misunderstanding what I’m saying. 
 

I can track and calculate the initial lift better and then snap the eyes and head over to a WIDE transition and then “catch” / match the angle of rate of fall as it enters the window on target. 
 

But on a close transition like side by side targets on a classifier? Absolutely can track and judge through the entire COF. 
 

Also thumb rests matter but physics matter too. 
 

A lot of the garbage slide stop thumb rests are worse at controlling recoil than a standard thumbs forward because they are set too far back (like the Eemann tech S2 one). 
 

But a proper thumbs forward thumb rest? No contest. It’s pure physics. Saying they “don’t matter” is ignorant. 

Edited October 7, 2021 by -JCN-