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

Shadow 2 OR in Production


WxGuy

Recommended Posts

@ broadside72.  Thank you for the clarification.  My mistake.  Hope my memory is good enough to remember that "OR" is optics ready and "Orange"

 

@ shred. An article in Front Sight carries no weight regarding rules for USPSA.  Even the NROI column does not carry the weight of a rule or ruling unless it specifically states that is the publication of an NROI ruling or rules approved by the board.  And then, the the officially published rule change or ruling counts if there are wording issues between the two copies.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This line on the list should cover the OR

 

"Orange", "Black" and other variants of the CZ 75, Shadow, Shadow 2, and SP-01 are approved, provided they meet other Production criteria for action type.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, Foxj66 said:

This line on the list should cover the OR

 

"Orange", "Black" and other variants of the CZ 75, Shadow, Shadow 2, and SP-01 are approved, provided they meet other Production criteria for action type.

Found the text in the "fine" print at the top of the CZ - CESKA ZBROJOVKA Production list on USPSA site.  Cannot believe the S2 OR is not a variant of the S2.  Certain the pistol didn't gain 12 oz. in weight for the optics ready changes.  So, why did Troy say not legal?  May he should be asked again by the originator of the thread.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, GeneBray said:

Found the text in the "fine" print at the top of the CZ - CESKA ZBROJOVKA Production list on USPSA site.  Cannot believe the S2 OR is not a variant of the S2.  Certain the pistol didn't gain 12 oz. in weight for the optics ready changes.  So, why did Troy say not legal?  May he should be asked again by the originator of the thread.

 

 

You didn't read far enough down the thread.  Troy didn't say it wasn't legal, his email was misinterpreted.  It's legal.

""Orange", "Black" and other variants of the CZ 75, Shadow, Shadow 2, and SP-01 are approved"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/29/2021 at 12:58 PM, broadside72 said:

You followed just fine.

 

Look at the production list and you see the Shadow 2 but not the Shadow 2 OR. Now look at the rules for production and you will see that you can replace the slide and even cut the slide. So you can buy the Shadow 2 OR slide by itself and install it on a regular Shadow 2 and be production legal, but if you buy a Shadow 2 OR from the factory, you are not production legal. 

 

And you are correct, it is crazy. But unless the production list starts tracking serial numbers by model they really don't know if you your gun was built at the factory OR or if you added an OR slide afterward. Any reasonable RM would understand this. 

 

This has been the rule forever.  A Glock 22 with a Glock 17 slide/barrel/ejector is not production legal because a Glock 22 was never offered in 9mm.  The same is true here.  Even if the assembled gun would be allowed in Production, Production only allows specific models that are on the Production list.  If it isn't there, it isn't allowed.

 

There is no room for interpretation here, so the RM has no such discretion.  And any arb committee formed would have people who know the rules, so you would lose and you would get the bump to Open.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, twodownzero said:

 

This has been the rule forever.  A Glock 22 with a Glock 17 slide/barrel/ejector is not production legal because a Glock 22 was never offered in 9mm.  The same is true here.  Even if the assembled gun would be allowed in Production, Production only allows specific models that are on the Production list.  If it isn't there, it isn't allowed.

 

Given that the 22 and 17 (and 37) use the exact same frame, how would this not be production legal?  It's the slide that denotes the "Model" of Glock in the case of a common frame (e.g. it's not a 17 frame, it's a "small frame" in Glock parlance).

 

Under the current D4/21.3 rule, you'd be just fine swapping out the slide/barrel combo even IF the frame was specific to a model.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, twodownzero said:

 

This has been the rule forever.  A Glock 22 with a Glock 17 slide/barrel/ejector is not production legal because a Glock 22 was never offered in 9mm.  The same is true here.  Even if the assembled gun would be allowed in Production, Production only allows specific models that are on the Production list.  If it isn't there, it isn't allowed.

 

There is no room for interpretation here, so the RM has no such discretion.  And any arb committee formed would have people who know the rules, so you would lose and you would get the bump to Open.

 

As soon as production rules changed to allow any slide/barrel/bushing, and other changes like they do now, then the production list because a "frame" list (with some caliber caveats). Your Glock example is one of those caveats as the list says "22 .40S&W".  Look at CZ and all the interchangeable uppers and lowers for a easy example of what I am talking about.

An example of my point was, until it was just added to the list, the Bull Shadow 2. It's a Shadow 2 frame with legal slide/barrel swap that originally was declared not legal for Production by NROI because you bought it that way, but was declared legal if you bought an S2 and sent if off to have the same gun upper and modifications made since you can swap those parts in.  The box you get the BS2 in says Shadow 2 on it. CZ USA serial number is for a Shadow 2. The ATF sees it as a Shadow 2. CZC did not mfg the frame and how all documentation around the firearm is based. 

Before the A01-LD was on the list, you could buy that slide and put it on an approved frame and be legal (if it made weight at that time).  If Zev directly sold Glock 19s all tricked out but otherwise production legal are you saying they should not be on the list? Because it should be legal because I can build my OFM Glock 19 the exact same way. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, broadside72 said:

If Zev directly sold Glock 19s all tricked out but otherwise production legal are you saying they should not be on the list? Because it should be legal because I can build my OFM Glock 19 the exact same way. 

 

As long as it's on a Glock frame.  Lots of folks butthurt that their P80's aren't legal in Production.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks all for commenting as I'm the OP.  Rowdy said it all and what I was looking for from the NROI was a simple (to me) "yes" or "no".

Thanks everyone!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...