Why USPSA is the best action shooting sport

[RJH]

1 hit factor scoring. I know every other week people are coming up with some "better" option, but there is nothing invented yet that better balances speed, power, and accuracy 

 

2 multiple divisions: while I would be happy with maybe a few less divisions, realistically with the eight divisions we have there's a place for everyone. If you want to shoot locap major, low cap minor, high cap major, or high cap minor there's a division that you can do it in. There is really not a lot of room for complaints in the current divisions 

 

3 consistent equipment and stage rules: I know rules questions come up from time to time, but the fact that there's an easy way to find the answer, and that the rules are applied fairly consistently anywhere in the country is probably the biggest boon for USPSA 

 

4 it's fun 

 

Since we have a gripe thread every other day, I thought it'd be nice to have a what's good about USPSA thread. Y'all feel free to add what y'all like about USPSA

 

 

 

 

 

[motosapiens]

rules stability. Look at those other guys in IDPA, changing the rules all the time..... 

[BritinUSA]

In my opinion IPSC is better than USPSA at this point as their divisions now make more sense than ours.

 

Its a sad irony that one of the main reasons that USPSA split off rules from IPSC, was the latter was changing the rules too frequently.

 

I think IPSC missed the mark with splitting up Production Optics into Light and Heavy, I think they are trying to encourage more people to shoot polymer. Truth is I think the reason more people use CZ, Tanfoglio in IPSC Production divisions is the availability of factory competition parts.

 

Both CZ and Tanfoglio list competition upgrades available direct from there OFM so they are legal in IPSC Production. Many polymer manufacturers, S&W, Glock etc. have very few competition upgrades. I know Walther has released its competition trigger and I think that is now legal in IPSC, but they need and others need to offer guide-rod upgrades to so people can easily change recoil spring weight.

 

I will probably never shoot another USPSA match but I might shoot IPSC at some point.

[Schutzenmeister]

50 minutes ago, BritinUSA said:

[...]

 

I will probably never shoot another USPSA match but I might shoot IPSC at some point.

 

Come to Florida this fall ... I'd be quite happy to see you there!

[RJH]

58 minutes ago, BritinUSA said:

In my opinion IPSC is better than USPSA at this point as their divisions now make more sense than ours.

 

Its a sad irony that one of the main reasons that USPSA split off rules from IPSC, was the latter was changing the rules too frequently.

 

I think IPSC missed the mark with splitting up Production Optics into Light and Heavy, I think they are trying to encourage more people to shoot polymer. Truth is I think the reason more people use CZ, Tanfoglio in IPSC Production divisions is the availability of factory competition parts.

 

Both CZ and Tanfoglio list competition upgrades available direct from there OFM so they are legal in IPSC Production. Many polymer manufacturers, S&W, Glock etc. have very few competition upgrades. I know Walther has released its competition trigger and I think that is now legal in IPSC, but they need and others need to offer guide-rod upgrades to so people can easily change recoil spring weight.

 

I will probably never shoot another USPSA match but I might shoot IPSC at some point.

You seemed to have missed the point of this thread....

[Johnny_Chimpo]

17 hours ago, BritinUSA said:

Both CZ and Tanfoglio list competition upgrades available direct from there OFM so they are legal in IPSC Production. Many polymer manufacturers, S&W, Glock etc. have very few competition upgrades. I know Walther has released its competition trigger and I think that is now legal in IPSC, but they need and others need to offer guide-rod upgrades to so people can easily change recoil spring weight.

 

Or IPSC can get with the program and allow aftermarket internal parts.

[Johnny_Chimpo]

16 hours ago, RJH said:

You seemed to have missed the point of this thread....

 

21 hours ago, RJH said:

1 hit factor scoring. I know every other week people are coming up with some "better" option, but there is nothing invented yet that better balances speed, power, and accuracy 

 

2 multiple divisions: while I would be happy with maybe a few less divisions, realistically with the eight divisions we have there's a place for everyone. If you want to shoot locap major, low cap minor, high cap major, or high cap minor there's a division that you can do it in. There is really not a lot of room for complaints in the current divisions 

 

3 consistent equipment and stage rules: I know rules questions come up from time to time, but the fact that there's an easy way to find the answer, and that the rules are applied fairly consistently anywhere in the country is probably the biggest boon for USPSA 

 

4 it's fun 

 

Since we have a gripe thread every other day, I thought it'd be nice to have a what's good about USPSA thread. Y'all feel free to add what y'all like about USPSA

 

 

Agree 100%

 

You're right on the mark about our scoring.  It's really a brilliant concept.

 

As much as I try to like IDPA I can't get on board with the level of subjectivity and confusion in their rules and the incredible lack of knowledge and enforcement of them at the local level.  Their inexcusable lack of a central authority to decide rule questions and clarifications is just unbelievable to me.

[HCH]

1. I don’t have to dress up and give myself a funny name. 
 

2. No “Failure to Do Right”

 

3. Freestyle (mostly)

[Schutzenmeister]

3 hours ago, Johnny_Chimpo said:

 

Or IPSC can get with the program and allow aftermarket internal parts.

 

Conversely, USPSA could view Production as Production and not a build pretty much whatever you want division ...

 

Just sayin' ... Two ways to look at most things.

 

Not trying to declare war or anything, but Production did (in fact) start in IPSC and the basic idea was, at the time, go to the store, buy the straight from the factory (Production) gun of your choice and go to the range and compete with it ... sans modifications.  I think we can ALL agree it has decidedly morphed into something more, to put it mildly, customized.

 

Is that good or bad?  That's a relative question and the answer depends almost entirely on the viewpoint(s) of the person answering it.

[llamasabound]

Piggybacking on the original comment: mutual intelligibility of USPSA across regions and local club cultures. Because of rule and division uniformity, and hit factor scoring, I can reasonably understand results of a match I did not witness at a club I have not seen. 
 

I’ll add the classification system. That’s a massive benefit. It gives us little folks grinding away at our small local matches a quasi-objective measure of improvement, an interim goal, and the satisfaction of attainment. 
 

Lot’s of people find lots of other reasons to keep shooting, but for new folks especially I see classification as the tie that binds.

[motosapiens]

47 minutes ago, Schutzenmeister said:

Not trying to declare war or anything, but Production did (in fact) start in IPSC and the basic idea was, at the time, go to the store, buy the straight from the factory (Production) gun of your choice and go to the range and compete with it ... sans modifications. 

the result of this was that almost everyone in IPSC shoots custom shop 'production' race guns that are pre-modified for racing. Dumb, imho, and kinda like requiring all track athletes to wear the same brand and size of shoes, but I don't shoot production anymore, so I don't much care. Doesn't look like any one else really cares about production anymore either, lol.

Edited April 1, 2022 by motosapiens

[Schutzenmeister]

Damn @motosapiens ... I'd love to argue with you, but you make it difficult when you hit the nail on the head!

 

[Johnny_Chimpo]

5 hours ago, Schutzenmeister said:

 

Conversely, USPSA could view Production as Production and not a build pretty much whatever you want division ...

 

Just sayin' ... Two ways to look at most things.

 

Not trying to declare war or anything, but Production did (in fact) start in IPSC and the basic idea was, at the time, go to the store, buy the straight from the factory (Production) gun of your choice and go to the range and compete with it ... sans modifications.  I think we can ALL agree it has decidedly morphed into something more, to put it mildly, customized.

 

Is that good or bad?  That's a relative question and the answer depends almost entirely on the viewpoint(s) of the person answering it.

 

American enthusiasts simply want to adjust their equipment even in "stock" divisions.  It's true in shooting, motor racing, powerboat racing, skiing, hell just about anything.

 

I used to autocross years ago and even in SCCA Stock, some aftermarket components could be added to the car.

 

I don't have a problem limiting modification in Production (and in CO for that matter).  In fact I think the current rules went too far.  I do have a problem being limited to OEM parts and not being able to do DIY modifications like stippling that cost literally nothing but maybe an hour of time.

 

In this one instance IPSC got it wrong IMHO

 

The pre-2021 USPSA Production and Carry Optic rules were perfect with the possible exception of the 140 mm mags in CO.  I would have preferred both divisions had gone up to 15.

[BritinUSA]

The stippling issue always seemed a little weird to me too.

 

They allow grip tape to be applied, which on a steel frame gun works (and sticks) really well. But I've never found a grip tape that sticks well to polymer as the grip can flex a little over time and especially in high temperatures/humidity.

 

Also, I think they need an option for those guns with captured guide-rods that's allow the recoil spring to be changed to a lower poundage, as most guns are over-sprung for +P ammo. Some captured guide-rods are designed in a way that makes it impossible to change the springs.

 

Apart from these two gripes I think IPSC has Production just about right, and certainly far better than the customized division that USPSA has created.

 

As to the magazine capacity, I was ok with CO/Prod being 10 or 15, they never should have allowed 140mm magazines.

 

[Schutzenmeister]

@BritinUSA

 

IPSC rules do allow for changing springs:

 

Appendix D4 (PD ... PO and POL read the same)

 

18. Aftermarket parts, components and accessories are prohibited, except as follows:

 

[...]

 

     18.4 Aftermarket springs and trigger assemblies are permitted.

 

I did a LOT of communicating with the President of IROA a couple of years ago to confirm this.  You CAN put an aftermarket recoil spring and guide rod (if necessary due to design) in the gun.  But no, you cannot modify the OFM guide rod and spring to do the same thing.  (Yea, I know ... Dumb.)

 

Hence, the springs CAN be changed.

[Johnny_Chimpo]

32 minutes ago, BritinUSA said:

Also, I think they need an option for those guns with captured guide-rods that's allow the recoil spring to be changed to a lower poundage, as most guns are over-sprung for +P ammo. Some captured guide-rods are designed in a way that makes it impossible to change the springs.

 

Apart from these two gripes I think IPSC has Production just about right,

 

IPSC's insistence on no internal aftermarket parts (something even IDPA doesn't forbid in Stock Service Pistol) serves no purpose other than favor some OEMs over others.  Maybe not intentionally, but nevertheless that is what it does.

 

Even more incomprehensible is their prohibition on doing the most menial of tune up to OEM parts.  Strictly by their interpretation I can't remove the massive quantity of stamping burrs on Glock connectors and trigger bars.  Something that's basic workmanship and shouldn't have been allowed to leave the factory that way.

 

Somewhere between that ridiculous extreme and the equally ridiculous anything goes of USPSA P and CO today there was a happy medium.

[Johnny_Chimpo]

Just now, Schutzenmeister said:

@BritinUSA

 

IPSC rules do allow for changing springs:

 

Appendix D4 (PD ... PO and POL read the same)

 

18. Aftermarket parts, components and accessories are prohibited, except as follows:

 

[...]

 

     18.4 Aftermarket springs and trigger assemblies are permitted.

 

I did a LOT of communicating with the President of IROA a couple of years ago to confirm this.  You CAN put an aftermarket recoil spring and guide rod (if necessary due to design) in the gun.  But no, you cannot modify the OFM guide rod and spring to do the same thing.  (Yea, I know ... Dumb.)

 

Hence, the springs CAN be changed.

 

I stand corrected and I forgot about that change in the rules. 

 

Have they clarified what a "trigger assembly" includes?  I know what it means in a commonly accepted sense in manufacturing, but that doesn't help with equipment control.

 

And you still can't clean up, polish, and deburr OEM parts by a strict reading of the rules. 

[Schutzenmeister]

1 hour ago, Johnny_Chimpo said:

 

American enthusiasts simply want to adjust their equipment even in "stock" divisions.  It's true in shooting, motor racing, powerboat racing, skiing, hell just about anything.

 

 

And, respectfully, therein lies the problem.  The original intent of the division was to not allow this.  That, and the fact that as you say manufacturers started producing "race ready" Production guns ... (Ever hear of Pandora's box?)

[Johnny_Chimpo]

1 minute ago, Schutzenmeister said:

And, respectfully, therein lies the problem.  The original intent of the division was to not allow this.  That, and the fact that as you say manufacturers started producing "race ready" Production guns ... (Ever hear of Pandora's box?)

 

The problem isn't our desire to tune competition equipment.  That is normal.  What isn't normal is to expect people to not want to do so.

 

The race ready production guns were created by IPSC's unrealistic insistence in some sort of Production "purity"

 

Who should drive what the equipment divisions should be?  The shooters or the bureaucrats?

Edited April 1, 2022 by Johnny_Chimpo

[Schutzenmeister]

4 minutes ago, Johnny_Chimpo said:

 

I stand corrected and I forgot about that change in the rules. 

 

Have they clarified what a "trigger assembly" includes?  I know what it means in a commonly accepted sense in manufacturing, but that doesn't help with equipment control.

 

And you still can't clean up, polish, and deburr OEM parts by a strict reading of the rules. 

 

Trigger assembly definition ... Yes.  See the following: IPSC Competition Rules Interpretations - January 2019 - Final 30 Jan 2019

 

So, if XYZ makes shoddy guns, buy something else!  XYZ will eventually get the message ...

[Schutzenmeister]

5 minutes ago, Johnny_Chimpo said:

 

The problem isn't our desire to tune competition equipment.  That is normal.  What isn't normal is to expect people to not want to do so.

 

Desire is one thing ... Being allowed to within the rules is something else!

 

5 minutes ago, Johnny_Chimpo said:

 

The race ready production guns were created by IPSC's unrealistic insistence in some sort of Production "purity"

 

I wish I could argue with that, but you've hit the nail on the head.

 

5 minutes ago, Johnny_Chimpo said:

 

Who should drive what the equipment divisions should be?  The shooters or the bureaucrats?

 

There's enough problem getting a handful of "bureaucrats" to agree on the rules much of the time.  You really want to try to have a couple hundred thousand shooters (worldwide) agree on how to write them?  Seriously ... Sometimes you have to yield to the realities of getting things done.

[llamasabound]

I’m shocked, shocked, I tell you, to discover that a thread about what’s great in USPSA becomes a discussion of what’s wrong in IPSC.

[motosapiens]

6 hours ago, BritinUSA said:

 

Apart from these two gripes I think IPSC has Production just about right, and certainly far better than the customized division that USPSA has created.

 

As to the magazine capacity, I was ok with CO/Prod being 10 or 15, they never should have allowed 140mm magazines.

 

luckily you don’t shoot uspsa anymore.... i think the last few nationals have proven that most of your theories are completely wrong. it doesn’t really make any difference if you let people personalize their guns. more restrictive rules only hurt people who have non-average hands.

 

i think there should be a place for traditional locap guns to compete, but the way co exploded after capacity was expanded suggests keeping co a locap division would be luddite behavior.

[Kwontanamo]

I had IDPA shooters ask me why I shoot USPSA and when I told them my first stage consisted of 3 times and ammo and 5 times bigger…yea I wasn’t looking back. AND more modifications on guns?! It was over for me. 

[Russty]

1 hour ago, Kwontanamo said:

I had IDPA shooters ask me why I shoot USPSA and when I told them my first stage consisted of 3 times and ammo and 5 times bigger…yea I wasn’t looking back. AND more modifications on guns?! It was over for me. 

What???