Limited optics Vs Open

[Racinready300ex]

 

1 minute ago, mreed911 said:

Serious question: Will 2011's and 2011 variants not handle 9 major?

 

Without a comp? Shooting one doesn't sound super fun to me. The gun is certainly going to take a beating. But, smart or not if it was allowed people would probably do it and that would make it a requirement. 

[mreed911]

3 minutes ago, Racinready300ex said:

Without a comp? Shooting one doesn't sound super fun to me. The gun is certainly going to take a beating. But, smart or not if it was allowed people would probably do it and that would make it a requirement. 

 

Yes, without a comp.  I know that doesn't absorb it all, but I'm not suggesting 9 major on a 9 lb spring.  9mm minor is about 130PF, 9mm "duty" 147gr is about 150PF, 9mm major is about 170PF.  Most of the 9 major folks are running 7-9 lb springs with no significant differences in wear, but they're running guns made for 9 major.

 

If we're talking about major PF, there's no real difference in 9mm vs. 40 at the same PF in terms of recoil impulse.  The bigger difference is 9 major is often loaded longer than the OAL for 9 minor, requiring a chamber reamed for 9 major... just for safety.  I have no idea if 2011 manufacturers are reaming deeper (or not) to indicate support/lack of support.

 

Some people want the additional recoil impulse for the higher scoring bands major offers.  It's why we don't see a lot of open minor, but to your point I've never seen a 9 major open gun without a comp.

[zzt]

1 minute ago, mreed911 said:

but to your point I've never seen a 9 major open gun without a comp.

 

I have, but no one wants to shoot it.   It's not a danger to the gun (designed for major), but it certainly is to your hand.   Think 357 Sig, 115gr @ 1500fps out of a plastic gun.

11 minutes ago, mreed911 said:

The bigger difference is 9 major is often loaded longer than the OAL for 9 minor, requiring a chamber reamed for 9 major... just for safety. 

 

Not really.  I know a bunch of Open major shooters running OALs in the 1.12".  If you're running a CM, you can't go much longer than that.  No kabooms.  I load to 1.161".  Many load longer.  It isn't so much for safety.  it is for case capacity, especially if you are using non-compressible powders.  I want as much powder in there as I can get.

[Racinready300ex]

14 minutes ago, mreed911 said:

 

Yes, without a comp.  I know that doesn't absorb it all, but I'm not suggesting 9 major on a 9 lb spring.  9mm minor is about 130PF, 9mm "duty" 147gr is about 150PF, 9mm major is about 170PF.  Most of the 9 major folks are running 7-9 lb springs with no significant differences in wear, but they're running guns made for 9 major.

 

If we're talking about major PF, there's no real difference in 9mm vs. 40 at the same PF in terms of recoil impulse.  The bigger difference is 9 major is often loaded longer than the OAL for 9 minor, requiring a chamber reamed for 9 major... just for safety.  I have no idea if 2011 manufacturers are reaming deeper (or not) to indicate support/lack of support.

 

Some people want the additional recoil impulse for the higher scoring bands major offers.  It's why we don't see a lot of open minor, but to your point I've never seen a 9 major open gun without a comp.

 

I don't think you can say "no real difference" between 9 major and 40. Most open guns are running 125 gr bullets most 40 are 180-200. We know heavier bullets are softer at a given PF. There is also probably a reason ammo manufactures don't really make 9 major and I doubt any major gun manufacturer will recommend it in their gun or warranty it either.. Reloads are also all well over the data in reloading manuals. 

 

I imagine a well built 2011 can take it, but it'd be a hard hitting son of B that I don't want to shoot thousands of rounds out of. I don't think I'd try it in a striker gun. If I was going to set up a 2011 and shoot 9 major I'd just spring for the comp and shoot open. 

[RJH]

On nine major out of a non-comped gun: I think it could be done without any actual danger. I just looked and my carry loads do 162 PF out of a 5 and a quarter inch gun. Would probably make 165 out of a 6-inch gun. That's with a book load of long shot under a 124 grain bullet. You can probably see them out a little bit get a little more powder, or a little less pressure depending on what you needed. As far as doing 175 or something, I don't know about that. But I think you could make it well within safety, assuming you were using a 6-inch gun

[shred]

Stacatto says +P ammo is ok, but not +P+.  There are major PF 9x19 loads within +P.

 

[RJH]

6 minutes ago, shred said:

Stacatto says +P ammo is ok, but not +P+.  There are major PF 9x19 loads within +P.

 

 

The one that does 162 is not even+p. Just a full power load with a good powder. 

 

I think with a 6 inch gun, major with standard pressure loads would be possible 

[Boomstick303]

10 hours ago, Joe4d said:

I had a Viper in a Bomar adapter mount. Had screw issues,,, but that Optic lasted just fine, its still going strong in fact on my Steel gun.

 

I am by no means out of chill mode.  Just pointing out facts.  So you have tested every optic available and know if it can handle Major PF as a slide ride optic?  I am going to guess you have not.  Different optics had/have different issues.  I imagine there will be a mix of dots that can't handle it and some that can.  We just do not know.  That has been my point the whole time.  Someone claims that their optics never failed then tells us how he had to send some back for warranty work.  Not a very convincing argument.  Just like you cannot say that all optics will handle major PF in a slide ride application.

 

Rumor has it that SRO's fail faster on Shadow 2 pistols.  Is that really the case?  Is it something that is over blown?  Is it something that is real?  We have no idea.  Let's say Shadow 2s do destroy SROs.  Does this mean that SROs would not be adversely affected in Major PF applications?  Yes people have had SROs that have lasted 100k rounds.  There are also people that have had them fail after 200 rounds.  How do we know when a dot fails in a Major PF application was it due to the application of the optic or was it just a roll of the dice?  Like I said NO ONE knows for certain.  I doubt we will ever really know unless someone funded one ridiculously expensive test.  

 

Anyone claiming to know is speculating much like this whole discussion is.  A bunch of speculation.  

 

 

 

 

 

Edited April 26, 2023 by Boomstick303

[SufferInSilence]

On 3/5/2023 at 11:50 AM, Yoseppy said:

That last sentence is the biggest factor for me. I don’t really want to drop close to 4k on a gun that I could end up not shooting in competition.

Limited optics won’t be going anywhere.  It will absorb a lot of participation from guys that want throw that magwell on or Rick that hammer back to single action.  
mid day your safe investing in LO.  

[Fishbreath]

2 hours ago, RJH said:

I think with a 6 inch gun, major with standard pressure loads would be possible 

 

124gr with AA #7 at reasonable lengths calculates as major at around +P levels in Gordon's Reloading Tool, for what it's worth.

[SufferInSilence]

@Boomstick303 Correct.  You never know how gear is going to play out.  I’ve blown out the screen on Sig Romeo Pro on a p320 running a 12# recoil spring on a steady diet of 144pf ammo in just under 3 months.  
 

[Boomstick303]

Funny how we did what people wanted which was put LO to a vote and those same people are still bitching and whining that LO does not include Major. Comical. 

[mreed911]

4 minutes ago, Boomstick303 said:

Funny how we did what people wanted which was put LO to a vote and those same people are still bitching and whining that LO does not include Major. Comical. 

 

I think a lot of folks are just confused as to why this required another division.

[Joe4d]

9 hours ago, mreed911 said:

 

I think a lot of folks are just confused as to why this required another division.

Pretty much,, if was scored major at least there would be some kinda difference between it and CO.

[Racinready300ex]

9 hours ago, mreed911 said:

 

I think a lot of folks are just confused as to why this required another division.

 

It allows them to collect data, they have two years now to figure out what to do with it. They could have people shoot it for a year and half and decide CO and LO on the ground are the same and just kill LO and change the rules for CO. I don't see that happening, but it's a possibility. And it would certainly make sense to collect that data before you do anything that might change CO.

[shred]

Seems like they're afraid to touch the golden goose of CO.  Is what it is. 

 

I think LO as a major/minor division would have been a lot more differentiated and interesting (could have experimented with different PFs, different capacities/calibers for major/minor, etc), but we'll likely never know now.

 

[caspian guy]

30 minutes ago, shred said:

Seems like they're afraid to touch the golden goose of CO.  Is what it is. 

 

I think LO as a major/minor division would have been a lot more differentiated and interesting (could have experimented with different PFs, different capacities/calibers for major/minor, etc), but we'll likely never know now.

 

Agree. Allowing single action guns (which most striker fired guns with aftermarket triggers effectively are these days) and mag wells into CO would have been less trouble.

 

I think actual limited optic (with major and minor) would have been more interesting (but then I liked the original CO so what do I know?)

[motosapiens]

9 minutes ago, caspian guy said:

Agree. Allowing single action guns (which most striker fired guns with aftermarket triggers effectively are these days) and mag wells into CO would have been less trouble.

 

it would have been less trouble, but it also would have completely ruined the division, and turned CO into just another 2011-only division within a few years.

[caspian guy]

1 minute ago, motosapiens said:

it would have been less trouble, but it also would have completely ruined the division, and turned CO into just another 2011-only division within a few years.

Yep and that's a fair point. Competitor perception of advantage is probably more important than any actual advantage.

[Racinready300ex]

6 minutes ago, caspian guy said:

Yep and that's a fair point. Competitor perception of advantage is probably more important than any actual advantage.

 

This was always my concern. Not so much that the guns are so much better, but that there will be a perception that they are better/needed to do well.

 

I'm shifting more to the camp of maybe we shouldn't care what people perceive as a advantage. Striker guns have made huge leaps in the last few years. You can now easily set one up with a 2lbs single action trigger and a total weight of 40-50 oz. The guns are vary accurate and vary reliable. Really they're perfect for what we do, and I think a lot of people would continue to shoot them against 2011's. 

 

And if you're really stuck on a 2011 the entry price with the prodigy and the Girsan isn't much different then a legion or a Rival-S. 

[shred]

What would be wrong with that?  The idea is to figure out the most effective pistol for the job is, right?  

 

Rock Island has their 9mm Para clone (Metal Frame!  1 more round!) at half the price of a Shadow 2 OR.

[Racinready300ex]

18 minutes ago, shred said:

What would be wrong with that?  The idea is to figure out the most effective pistol for the job is, right?  

 

Rock Island has their 9mm Para clone (Metal Frame!  1 more round!) at half the price of a Shadow 2.

 

Is that still the idea? I'm not completely sure it is. Maybe it's find the most effective pistol with in certain arbitrary standards we can't agree on anyway. lol

 

 

[mreed911]

I remain unconvinced that having to make the first shot via DA vs. SA (or "getting to use SA vs. DA") will result in significantly different stage scores.

[Joe4d]

1 minute ago, mreed911 said:

I remain unconvinced that having to make the first shot via DA vs. SA (or "getting to use SA vs. DA") will result in significantly different stage scores.

Its been a ridiculous distinction since striker fired guns came out.

 

[Boomstick303]

8 hours ago, Racinready300ex said:

This was always my concern. Not so much that the guns are so much better, but that there will be a perception that they are better/needed to do well.

 

I'm shifting more to the camp of maybe we shouldn't care what people perceive as a advantage. Striker guns have made huge leaps in the last few years. You can now easily set one up with a 2lbs single action trigger and a total weight of 40-50 oz. The guns are vary accurate and vary reliable. Really they're perfect for what we do, and I think a lot of people would continue to shoot them against 2011's. 

 

And if you're really stuck on a 2011 the entry price with the prodigy and the Girsan isn't much different then a legion or a Rival-S. 

 

^^^^This^^^

 

I do not think the LO being completely populated by only high end 2011s will be a thing.  I think a lot of people will be in that mid tier market and play with those guns.  Hop them up as the can afford to.  That's why I cannot see how anyone sees LO as a dumb idea.  See how it plays out and then make decisions from there.  I was looking at the CO nationals squading today, and its crazy how full that thing is.  I can see why they did not mess with that division.  I am curious to how many are actually on the wait list.  

 

More than a few people in our section are already talking about playing in LO with Striker Fired guns, DA/SA guns and of course 2011 SA guns as well.  It will be interesting where it goes.

 

 

 

 

Edited April 27, 2023 by Boomstick303