Limited Optics

[Rich406]

44 minutes ago, BritinUSA said:

If LO is minor-only then I suspect a significant number of CO shooters will throw a mag-well and perhaps even a thumb-rest on their gun and move divisions. 

 

It will take a few months for 2011 shooters to start showing up at L1 matches, I don't know how many 2011 Limited~Minor guns are out there at the moment, I suspect it's very few. So they will need to invest some significant dollars to get a custom 2011 set up for LO.

 

Now if they keep LO as Major/Minor then I don't see many people in CO switching to LO. 

 

Another reason why they should make LO as Major/Minor, if its just Minor then its too similar to CO.

Not many major caliber 2011s out there. 9mm is far more common. Most manufacturers don’t even have an option for anything other than 9mm. 

[deerslayer]

12 minutes ago, RJH said:

I see 2011 minor guns at just about every match I shoot. Sometimes several. Lack of Sao minor guns won't be an issue 

 

I've seen one shoot USPSA and have seen a couple at IDPA matches.  

[deerslayer]

2 hours ago, CC3D said:

Absolutely acknowledge there is some risk involved in deciding to mill an expensive gun for the provisional division. But with that in mind- in order for there to be a provisional division in the first place, a good number of people are going to need to make that decision/ investment or no one will be participating... outside of those throwing a mag well on their current CO gun. Hope I'm making sense with that point. 

 

Makes perfect sense.  However, instead of milling, like you said some may take their current CO gun and just slap a magwell on it.  Some Shadow 2 or Beretta shooters may start shooting cocked-and-locked.  And if you believe all the hoopla, nobody will have to mill anything because current 9mm 2011 owners are going to fill up matches before anybody else can sign up.

Edited February 14, 2023 by deerslayer
na

[Neomet]

On 2/13/2023 at 12:22 PM, CC3D said:

Not what you asked specifically, but the second LO gets the green light my limited TSO is getting sent off for milling and a 9mm barrel. 

Mine should be coming back any day now. I shoot irons with the accuracy of throwing rocks and figured I would beat the rush. Worst case scenario I use it in 2-Gun.

[firerain]

On 2/13/2023 at 2:01 PM, RJH said:

Lo for me. Will mainly be shooting open minor till then 

Agree. Plan to do the same.

[Johnny_Chimpo]

On 2/13/2023 at 7:35 PM, RJH said:

I see 2011 minor guns at just about every match I shoot. Sometimes several. Lack of Sao minor guns won't be an issue 

 

Maybe where you live.  Around here only a few instagram bros show up with theirs and usually leave with their tail between their legs.

[Johnny_Chimpo]

On 2/13/2023 at 9:28 AM, Superkaratemonkeyfighter said:

so how many here would change from CO to LO ? it. 

 

There will be a rush of D and C class guys who think SAO + dot + minor + magwell will be the ticket

Edited February 15, 2023 by Johnny_Chimpo

[Racinready300ex]

10 hours ago, Johnny_Chimpo said:

 

Maybe where you live.  Around here only a few instagram bros show up with theirs and usually leave with their tail between their legs.

 

I've only seen a couple. But for a couple people to show up and shoot open because no division exists makes me think their may be something to this. I don't remember any guys shooting CO guns in open pre-CO. 

 

I'd bet the first club match I go to it'll have a better turn out than L10, Rev, SS and Prod combined. Maybe Limited too. Of course that's not really a high bar around here. 

[RJH]

Another interesting thing, the people shooting guns that would be legal in limited optics but that are now having to shoot them in open around here that I've seen are a GM, a couple of A class shooters, a couple of B class shooters, and a couple of noobs. Kind of all over the spectrum. And those are just the people that I've squadded with over the last few months, I don't know how it works out on the whole match. So at least in my area, that blows the whole "just a couple of noob tacticards" theory out of the water LOL

 

In contrast, I don't think I saw a single carryops shooter till a few months after carry-ops became provisional. And then it was just one or two guys for a while, until they upped the capacity and such

Edited February 15, 2023 by RJH

[Boomstick303]

LO will not be proliferated with a ton of Tactical guys.  There might be some who are just showing up to shoot, but it will mostly be made up existing USPSA shooters for some time.  It is not like the Tactical guys have any remote idea (in general) what is going on with USPSA rule sets.  Yet, people somehow think this rule change is placating them.  

 

Again there should be a place for SA minor guns to where they are not at a scoring disadvantage.  

 

Edited February 15, 2023 by Boomstick303

[motosapiens]

39 minutes ago, Boomstick303 said:

 

Again there should be a place for SA minor guns to where they are not at a scoring disadvantage.  

 

there should be a place in basketball for short and clumsy people where they are not at a scoring disadvantage.

[Boomstick303]

There it is....

[Racinready300ex]

12 minutes ago, motosapiens said:

there should be a place in basketball for short and clumsy people where they are not at a scoring disadvantage.

 

This logic would make more sense if we still only had Open division. But, I already see more LO shooters than I do revolver, L10 and SS at typical club matches. It doesn't make sense to exclude a more popular gun while carving out divisions for guns no one shoots anymore. 

[shred]

It will be populated at first by a rush of USPSA shooters thinking "it's the one" they can do well in, and many will at first as there will be more chances before everything settles out on what works and what doesn't.  Then the committed people put more time in and pull away, the results stratify and people slowly drift back to whatever they feel more-better at.

 

[Rich406]

33 minutes ago, shred said:

It will be populated at first by a rush of USPSA shooters thinking "it's the one" they can do well in, and many will at first as there will be more chances before everything settles out on what works and what doesn't.  Then the committed people put more time in and pull away, the results stratify and people slowly drift back to whatever they feel more-better at.

 

 

Personally, I'd shoot it just for a change of pace. Ive been shooting CO for 5 years and could use a change up that isn't open.

 

I shot a match 2 weekends ago, there were at least 3 people shooting open minor with a slide mounted 2011.

 

There was a lot of resistance to CO back in the day as well. Imagine if it hadn't been given a chance. USPSA would be well behind the curve at this point. 

 

2011s with a dot weren't even a thing 5 years ago. But today it's more and more uncommon for any pistol not to come from the factory dot ready. Technology can change rapidly, USPSA should be keeping up. 

[shred]

10-round CO was a snoozer when it first came out.  Very few people cared one way or the other and there was minimal resistance except the usual "what do we need another division for?".  USPSA even put in the dumb "must have a dot" rule because they were afraid of too many non-dot shooters in CO.

 

Every major maker was showing optic-ready pistols at SHOT 7 or 8 years ago, including STI, but there was minimal customer demand for them then besides Tac-Tim Gucci Glocks. 

 

[sfinney]

Yep, the hicap part, and raising the weight to allow heavy steel and tungsten guns really kick CO in gear. 

Besides the Production rules CO was based on becoming "basically whatever you want".

 

I like single action triggers, but will probably shoot LO with a M&P or Canik or whatnot. I did have my eye on a Remington Limited Pro model in 9mm the other day though (para type frame) - not a 2011.

[Rich406]

32 minutes ago, shred said:

10-round CO was a snoozer when it first came out.  Very few people cared one way or the other and there was minimal resistance except the usual "what do we need another division for?".  USPSA even put in the dumb "must have a dot" rule because they were afraid of too many non-dot shooters in CO.

 

Every major maker was showing optic-ready pistols at SHOT 7 or 8 years ago, including STI, but there was minimal customer demand for them then besides Tac-Tim Gucci Glocks. 

 

 

When CO came in the general remarks I heard, were how stupid a dot on a gun was. And then there were the usual statements of, "they can shoot open" or "dots are for Timmy's".

 

Yes manufacturers displayed guns with dots on them over 5 years ago. but they have really come into their own in the last 3ish years. 

 

All I'm really saying here is this. Once something has been around long enough to determine that it is not a fad. there should be some serious consideration about making a place for it in USPSA.  Slide mounted optics are here to stay, and 2011s are a popular pistol. There should be a place for it other than open.

Edited February 15, 2023 by Rich406

[RJH]

1 hour ago, shred said:

It will be populated at first by a rush of USPSA shooters thinking "it's the one" they can do well in, and many will at first as there will be more chances before everything settles out on what works and what doesn't.  Then the committed people put more time in and pull away, the results stratify and people slowly drift back to whatever they feel more-better at.

 

 

 

I don't really think that will happen. I think everybody knows the best guys are going to win regardless of what gun you give them. I think it just boils down to 2011's and other single action guns are very popular, 9 mm is the most popular caliber in America, people like optics, but people also like reasonable price and guns that work without much tuning. Add all that together and you get limited optics

[BritinUSA]

5 hours ago, Racinready300ex said:

I don't remember any guys shooting CO guns in open pre-CO. 

I did in 2014, L1 matches, Area 3 and part of Nationals (until I had pinned magazine issues). There was a write up on Area 3 in Front Sight that year.

 

2 hours ago, shred said:

USPSA even put in the dumb "must have a dot" rule because they were afraid of too many non-dot shooters in CO.

This is false. The rule was added to ensure an accurate measurement of people who had actually purchased/used a dot on their gun.
 

If iron sights were used then it would skewed the results of the experiment to determine if there was a demand for the new division.

[Racinready300ex]

26 minutes ago, BritinUSA said:

I did in 2014,

 

I stand corrected, there was one guy. 

[Racinready300ex]

27 minutes ago, BritinUSA said:

This is false. The rule was added to ensure an accurate measurement of people who had actually purchased/used a dot on their gun.
 

If iron sights were used then it would skewed the results of the experiment to determine if there was a demand for the new division.

 

If that's true they should of taken it out once it became a full division. It seemed like they were worried about Stoeger winning Nat's with a production gun. They did add that rule after he joked on his podcast about doing that. 

 

They should probably allow irons in LO. Since so many shooters shoot Limited with minor guns, I think they might be better off shooting minor to minor against dots instead of shooting irons to irons against major guns. Or at least give them the option. 

[Boomstick303]

32 minutes ago, BritinUSA said:

The rule was added to ensure an accurate measurement of people who had actually purchased/used a dot on their gun.

 

This is fine once they have a baseline for divisional participation numbers, but should be removed once that baseline is established.  I think as a provisional you keep the rule till once again a baseline is established. 

[motosapiens]

1 hour ago, BritinUSA said:

This is false. The rule was added to ensure an accurate measurement of people who had actually purchased/used a dot on their gun.
 

If iron sights were used then it would skewed the results of the experiment to determine if there was a demand for the new division.

lol, in an odd coincidence, they only made the dot rule after Stoeger started sh*t talking about winning CO nats with iron sights just to flex on everyone.

 

At any rate, it sure isn't necessary now, and the world would be a better place if CO simply *allowed* dots instead of requiring them.

[MikeBurgess]

2 hours ago, motosapiens said:

 

At any rate, it sure isn't necessary now, and the world would be a better place if CO simply *allowed* dots instead of requiring them.

And this would fix the NROI gymnastics required to not either/both, bump to Open (dot is required!) and/or DQ (5.1.8-10.6 removing sight without RM approval) a shooter whos dot falls off during a stage.