Limited optics Vs Open

[RJH]

1 hour ago, Darqusoull13 said:

 

 

A provisional division should, in theory, be proposed, debated, picked apart, tested and torn completely apart prior to being implemented. If an idea cannot go through the harshest criticisms on its own merit it should be reevaluated. 

However, I agree, as implemented LO seems to have taken almost no effort by USPSA. My perception has been it was merely rubber stamped as presented by makers. What fruit would their efforts bear if asked, "Is there a better way than what is currently done to grow the sport?" 

 

 

So where do you think they really missed the mark in limited objects? If it really comes down to Major power factor, I would just see that as foresight by USPSA.

 

Is there some other issue that you think they really screwed up on?

 

I do agree well it's provisional is the place to hash some things out

[OPENB]

How about since they allow magwells in LO, we make it a 10rd. limit, and make them reload like a production shooter, then roll it into CO. No need for a separate division.

[Darqusoull13]

29 minutes ago, RJH said:

 

 

So where do you think they really missed the mark in limited objects? If it really comes down to Major power factor, I would just see that as foresight by USPSA.

 

Is there some other issue that you think they really screwed up on?

 

I do agree well it's provisional is the place to hash some things out

Making a division to compete with Carry Optics. 

CO is the most popular division for so many reasons. Trying to directly siphon from the massive growth there to slap together Open Minor Division is where the waste comes from. Every second spent on pushing LO is a second not spent on growing the sport through CO. 

[RJH]

Just now, OPENB said:

How about since they allow magwells in LO, we make it a 10rd. limit, and make them reload like a production shooter, then roll it into CO. No need for a separate division.

 

I mean if the goal was to have nobody participate that sounds like a great idea

[RJH]

1 minute ago, Darqusoull13 said:

Making a division to compete with Carry Optics. 

CO is the most popular division for so many reasons. Trying to directly siphon from the massive growth there to slap together Open Minor Division is where the waste comes from. Every second spent on pushing LO is a second not spent on growing the sport through CO. 

 

I get what you're saying, I don't really agree with it but I do get the point. Honestly if nobody shot carry optics and everybody shot limited optics, that wouldn't actually hurt USPSA in any way that I can figure.

 

I was one of the ones that thought that allow magwells and saos in carry-outs was the actual correct answer, but most people didn't see it that way and that's fine.

 

I do think there's a huge market of Sao optics ready minor  guns that it would be wise for USPSA to have a place for them to play on equal footing, and now they do, so I fail to see any real negatives to add a limited optics division

[motosapiens]

46 minutes ago, RJH said:

 

Was tough not the right word? I felt tough was implied by how you like to talk a lot of noise about the manliness it takes to shoot a 50 Oz 40 cal

you may be confusing me with someone else. I know lots of small people and women and kids who shoot major without issue. I simply stated that it is more fun for me. I apologize if that upsets you.

[Darqusoull13]

1 minute ago, RJH said:

I do think there's a huge market of Sao optics ready minor  guns that it would be wise for USPSA to have a place for them to play on equal footing, and now they do, so I fail to see any real negatives to add a limited optics division

I think there's a perception of a market for those guns, thanks marketing and well placed influencers in the wild. In practice, at most gun stores, sales are what, 1000's to 10,000's poly fantastics to 1 SAO from X maker? 

What market then would you rather go after to grow the sport? 

[Boomstick303]

I cannot understand how creating a division to allow a person to shoot a gun they way they receive it hurts membership, regardless of how many people are "cannibalized" from CO or any division for that matter.  You do not affect current membership numbers by creating LO.  As long as a current member remains a member you do not hurt current membership numbers regardless of what division they shoot.  Does anyone honestly think creating LO is going to make anyone quit USPSA? 

 

You only create a division that is more appealing to a larger market of gun owners who can shoot they gun they bought without having to reconfigure it, change it, or download magazines.  Maybe I am not looking at this right, but I don't think so.  

 

Adding LO as provisional is most likely not going to hurt membership numbers.  As always Time will tell.  

 

LO is a division you can sell those 1,000-10,000 plastic guns AND those single digit sales of SA guns to play in the same division. I am curious to the make up of guns in LO a year from now.  That will tell the real story.  Then we truly see what people want to do. 

 

 

Edited May 11, 2023 by Boomstick303

[RJH]

3 minutes ago, Darqusoull13 said:

I think there's a perception of a market for those guns, thanks marketing and well placed influencers in the wild. In practice, at most gun stores, sales are what, 1000's to 10,000's poly fantastics to 1 SAO from X maker? 

What market then would you rather go after to grow the sport? 

 

I think the market is pretty big for 2011's and other saos right now. At least from what I'm seeing locally. 

 

The difference is we actually have two divisions already dedicated to polyguns and dasa guns. I know you might say we already have one for 2011s with a DOT and that is kind of true, but when you throw minor only in there and the slide Rider which is the way that these guns are coming, we don't have a division that actually fits those guns without a large competitive disadvantage in scoring. And there's really not a really viable factory open gun available anymore. And if we're talking saos there's really not much in the way of factory available viable limited guns anymore. So if you're going to shoot in limited or open chances are the price starts at about 3 Grand and goes up from there. But there's a bunch of guns that fit in limited optics that can be had for under three grand and quite a few for under two grand, and a few under a thousand

 

So if anything it looks like we would be able to keep the plastic and dasa guns, and add in a lot of these Sao guns with dots. Seems like a win-win if anything

[Boomstick303]

Many people in our section are excited about LO.  People have bought purpose bought guns just for the division, like the Prodigy.  A couple have already converted Shadow 2s to play in LO.  A couple of 3 Gunners have built purpose built guns for Stealth Division that can be used in LO.  A couple of people have indicated they will change their plastic guns over to shoot LO.  There is already a diverse number of guns competing in LO in our section in less than two weeks.  

 

Edited May 11, 2023 by Boomstick303

[motosapiens]

2 hours ago, RJH said:

Trust me I couldn't possibly care less what you have to say. <thoughtful prose snipped>

 

Appreciate your thoughts, but this seems like an odd way to not possibly care less what I have to say.

 

Good luck in LO. I hope it works for you and you enjoy it.

 

 

[GJM]

I wouldn't be surprised if there is enough interest in shooting dot pistols, over time, that we end up with production optics with lighter weight carry oriented pistols, CO as we know it now, and Limited Optics. 

[shred]

I still think it's funny that people think we need to cater to guns that are available in gun stores, yet when we do that (see: production division, allowable modifications, history thereof), nobody actually wants to shoot that.

 

The whole point of Cooper starting IPSC was to find out what worked best and drive it to be better.  Catering to what's there leaves you with whatever the equivalent of 7-round 1911s and .38 Special revolvers was to the 1970s when you draw the line.

 

Would CZ have made the Shadow 2 if it weren't for IPSC?  Maybe.  Laguo Alien?  Doubtful.

 

[RJH]

14 minutes ago, shred said:

I still think it's funny that people think we need to cater to guns that are available in gun stores, yet when we do that (see: production division, allowable modifications, history thereof), nobody actually wants to shoot that.

 

The whole point of Cooper starting IPSC was to find out what worked best and drive it to be better.  Catering to what's there leaves you with whatever the equivalent of 7-round 1911s and .38 Special revolvers was to the 1970s when you draw the line.

 

Would CZ have made the Shadow 2 if it weren't for IPSC?  Maybe.  Laguo Alien?  Doubtful.

 

 

 

Production division was pretty successful for about 15 years. So you could say overall it was a success, but maybe time passed it by a little bit.

 

I think overall we have found out what works best, and that's an open gun. But the problem with telling everybody to shoot an open gun is that it's a huge cost of entry to be competitive, and it's fairly more time consuming than most other guns to keep it running and such. I got a feeling cost and such was a huge driver of limited being created way on back, but I'm not positive

 

As to the third point of driving innovation in production style guns, there's no reason that can't happen in limited optics as well. I agree a lot of the basically stock race guns probably would not have happened had it not been for ipsc/USPSA. 

 

Edited May 11, 2023 by RJH

[Joe4d]

6 hours ago, Darqusoull13 said:

Making a division to compete with Carry Optics. 

CO is the most popular division for so many reasons. Trying to directly siphon from the massive growth there to slap together Open Minor Division is where the waste comes from. Every second spent on pushing LO is a second not spent on growing the sport through CO. 

 

2 hours ago, RJH said:

 

 

Production division was pretty successful for about 15 years. So you could say overall it was a success, but maybe time passed it by a little bit.

 

I think overall we have found out what works best, and that's an open gun. But the problem with telling everybody to shoot an open gun is that it's a huge cost of entry to be competitive, and it's fairly more time consuming than most other guns to keep it running and such. I got a feeling cost and such was a huge driver of limited being created way on back, but I'm not positive

 

As to the third point of driving innovation in production style guns, there's no reason that can't happen in limited optics as well. I agree a lot of the basically stock race guns probably would not have happened had it not been for ipsc/USPSA. 

 

To the former,, with the current rule Cannik and after market striker guns made divisions by external triggers irrational.
Far as production innovation... instead of LO and CO they should have created Open minor, and A fudgecicle nobody but a few crayon chewers and winder likkers want.
People wanted to shoot home gunsmith guns loaded to capacity with 9mm ammo.
I believe a 140mm mag limit production division would have taken off like CO did. ESPECIALLY if the goal is to bring in new shooters like USPSA keeps harping on.
THAT is what has been showing up to matches in the hands of new shooters for decades. a Poly double stack 9mm,,  and THAT has what the sport has been alienating for decades, as said folks are told they have to down load to 10 rounds and go buy another handful of mags,, OR shoot against guns being scored major.

 

[shred]

2 hours ago, RJH said:

I got a feeling cost and such was a huge driver of limited being created way on back, but I'm not positive

Not really.  It was cited like it always is when people are looking for excuses to make new divisions, but wasn't the main thing.  A full-house Limited gun was not a lot cheaper than an Open gun since they were basically the same custom pistols minus $400 worth of comp and dot. 

 

[motosapiens]

16 hours ago, shred said:

I still think it's funny that people think we need to cater to guns that are available in gun stores, yet when we do that (see: production division, allowable modifications, history thereof), nobody actually wants to shoot that.

 

The whole point of Cooper starting IPSC was to find out what worked best and drive it to be better.  Catering to what's there leaves you with whatever the equivalent of 7-round 1911s and .38 Special revolvers was to the 1970s when you draw the line.

 

Would CZ have made the Shadow 2 if it weren't for IPSC?  Maybe.  Laguo Alien?  Doubtful.

 

As usual, you make very valid points, but it's also worth asking what practical use the shadow 2 has. Would you carry one? I have one and I love it, but for me it's strictly a competition gun, and I still carry the same old p01 I've had for 12 years.

 

To me it makes sense to have full-on race divisions, and it also makes sense to have more practical divisions. Of course for most of us, shooting racier guns is more fun.....

[motosapiens]

16 hours ago, RJH said:

I think overall we have found out what works best, and that's an open gun. But the problem with telling everybody to shoot an open gun is that it's a huge cost of entry to be competitive, and it's fairly more time consuming than most other guns to keep it running and such. I got a feeling cost and such was a huge driver of limited being created way on back, but I'm not positive

 

 

I'm not sure there's a very large difference between custom 2011 open guns and custom 2011 limited or LO guns in terms of cost and maintenance, but mrs moto hasn't been shooting open all that long. For sure the gun was easier to get started with and get running than our limited guns, but that's because we bought a better gun from a better builder and all the stuff we learned about 2011's from limited still applied.

 

At any rate, it seems pretty certain that in a year or two, the overwhelming majority of LO shooters will be using custom guns costing north of $5k. 

[Boomstick303]

I will say, if people think they NEED a 2011 to compete at a high level that is on them. 

 

Something that has not been brought up in this discussion is people tend to buy and shoot 2011s because they love them.  It is their favorite gun.  They find it hard to want to shoot any other platform.  The fact that they are interested in a gun to an extent it makes them want to practice with it more.  Dry fire more, live fire more, they want to master that gun because they enjoy that gun so much more.  I know my 2011 does that for me.  So if you see a particular person start to excel and rise in the overall standings, is it because of this new interest in their equipment and not due to the platform itself.  Some (probably most) would not recognize from the outside looking in that person is putting in the work.  From the outside they just see that person shooting a 2011 and infers that is the reason for that particular persons increased performance.  

 

I for one never pay attention to anyone's equipment (unless it is constantly malfunctioning).  If I see a shooter rising in the overall standings, or as I watch them and see them shooting more confidently, closing the gap to the better shooters in the section, I infer they must be putting in the work.  Not buying the newest shiny toy to improve their performance.  I never sit back and say, ah they bought this gun so that is the reason. 

 

Alas, it is sad the perception that equipment matters all that much.  

 

To add to that, shooting sports is not the only place this exists.  

 

Edited May 12, 2023 by Boomstick303

[shred]

Manny Bragg used to clean house in Limited shooting a very utilitarian 2011, but there are tons of hard-chromed, custom slide-cut, metal-gripped, pimped-out Limited guns in holsters all over.   Won't be too long before LO pistols go that way too I'd expect.

 

[barry]

There is no reason other than people want pretty guns for an open gun to cost more than 3500 $. I've built all of mine and cost of parts is about 2000-2500$(if memory serves me) and 8hrs or so yo fit it up and get it running. i have a mill and a lathe and access to cnc machines that I am more than of capable of programming for any cuts i want but why put all that work into something that has a limited life span and is just a tool? The fancy cuts don't make the gun run or shoot better. And almost all of the fancy cut guns for 6000-8000$ I see at the matches I have to help people to get them to run.

[RJH]

9 minutes ago, barry said:

There is no reason other than people want pretty guns for an open gun to cost more than 3500 $. I've built all of mine and cost of parts is about 2000-2500$(if memory serves me) and 8hrs or so yo fit it up and get it running. i have a mill and a lathe and access to cnc machines that I am more than of capable of programming for any cuts i want but why put all that work into something that has a limited life span and is just a tool? The fancy cuts don't make the gun run or shoot better. And almost all of the fancy cut guns for 6000-8000$ I see at the matches I have to help people to get them to run.

 

I have wondered about this sort of stuff a little bit, but I'm not an open shooter other than just tinkering a time or two with dumb stuff, but maybe you'll know something like this thought plan would work LOL

 

 

The first question is, would something like an STI grandmaster be fairly competitive today? I would think so but I know comps are a little different and popple holes and super heavy grips are in Vogue right now, so I'm not sure

 

So if the answer to the first question was yes that a grandmaster could be competitive today, the next question I would have is could you just drop a comped barrel in something like a Springfield prodigy have the ultimate poor boy open gun? Because a grandmaster doesn't look much different than a prodigy with a comp would look. Not that it would be as good as higher end guns, but maybe that it would be better than a freaking open glock that never works LOL. If a prodigy with a comp would work, it would seem like you could have a complete open gun for around $2,500, maybe less if you caught sights on sale and such

[motosapiens]

14 minutes ago, RJH said:

The first question is, would something like an STI grandmaster be fairly competitive today?

a local buddy (who has an infinity on order) has been shooting a crappy rattly old tru-bor and has been successful with it. (first A at nationals, some overall wins, etc...)

 

I think a shooter who practices can always be reasonable competitive even with cheap, substandard and worn-out equipment, but I don't think you will see alot of such equipment on the top step of the podium, so no one else will want to use it either.

Edited May 12, 2023 by motosapiens

[MikeBurgess]

 

22 minutes ago, RJH said:

 

 

The first question is, would something like an STI grandmaster be fairly competitive today? I would think so but I know comps are a little different and popple holes and super heavy grips are in Vogue right now, so I'm not sure

 

 

100% yes, 

everyone talks about Open tech advancing, but aside from better dots  it really hasn't. 99% of what people say are advancements are just fashion trends. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[shred]

54 minutes ago, motosapiens said:

a local buddy (who has an infinity on order) has been shooting a crappy rattly old tru-bor and has been successful with it. (first A at nationals, some overall wins, etc...)

 

I think a shooter who practices can always be reasonable competitive even with cheap, substandard and worn-out equipment, but I don't think you will see alot of such equipment on the top step of the podium, so no one else will want to use it either.

I've been shooting a Dawson 38 SC open gun since the 1990s (new barrel and slide a while back, but same-same design and configuration).  I shot it back to back against a top 5 at nationals shooter's 9x19 open gun and it's right there with it.   I think it would not be all the way there if I just dropped a 9x19 barrel in, but wouldn't be very far off.  

 

Most of the top guns on the podium are halfway to worn out in a couple seasons because they shoot so much, and without any "factory" open guns, they have shops building them new guns.  Makes sense for said smith and shop to bling them up a bit as advertising.