Revolver? Die on the vine?

[-JCN-]

I go down rabbit holes…

 

In thinking about the P938…

 

I have that 22LR slide and also a 9mm SAS slide and a threaded barrel traditional slide. 
 

I also have Kimber Micro 9 and 380s. 
 

I have played with dovetail mounted optics on Airsoft and aluminum 22LR slides on training CZ Shadow 2 setups. 
 

The dovetail is a little soft and can get galled and fail with repeated rocking wear. 
 

But I think with E6000 as a shock buffer and to offload wear to the dovetail, it will probably work okay. 
 

To that end, I was looking for dovetail mounts for the P938…

 

The only one I could find was a Trijicon one for the RMRcc. 
 

The RMRcc I think was a ridiculously arrogant business move on Trijicon’s part. Not going to pay $300-500 for one. 
 

Cheap Chinesium should be fine for what I need it for. 
 

 

Will see about setting up the P938 for 22LR. With the short muzzle I’m not looking to move her to this for a while. 
 

But I like options. 

[-JCN-]

Soooo bored. 

Family vacation 

 

 

 

Sitting around isn’t really my thing, but it’s for my daughter. 

[-JCN-]

Having expectations of others versus controlling the things you can control. 
 

A buddy of mine won IDPA Nats in his division.
 

He messaged me afterwards and it was the tone and mentality of a winner and someone who continues to improve. 
 

 

It’s the mentality of someone who continues to focus on minimizing errors knowing it’s the process rather than the result. 
 

As opposed to a lot of terminal B types who pat themselves on the back for winning first sharpshooter or whatever. 
 

THAT is a sure fire way to impede your own growth [chasing secondary instead of primary data]. 
 

————————

 

The contrast is the guy who put himself in harm’s way and got DQ’d from Nationals and subsequently booted from IDPA for not acknowledging his own contribution to a s#!tty situation. 
 

While technically legal, it’s a bone head move IMO. 

 

It’s just asking for a devastatingly bad call. 
 

Was it a bad call? Sure. But why the f*#k would you willingly put yourself in that position? Why not keep left hand on the left side and gun / right side on the right side?

 

Crossing body with the muzzle is just asking yourself to get abused. No matter if you got there legally. 
 

It’s poor situational awareness, IMO. 
 

It’s the equivalent situation of walking around “Code White” where you don’t acknowledge the potential harm that could befall you and instead double down on what you “should” be allowed to do. 
 

Expecting and demanding perfection from others is a recipe for heartburn and disappointment. 

 

It’s a more peaceful and healthy life (IMO) doing what you can to minimize exposure to harm systematically than expect people to act to a personal high standard. 
 

We don’t control others and the average person is… average. 
 

High achievers (myself included) often get into that pitfall when we start expecting our standard to be others’ standard. 
 

I’m adjusting my expectation for the training group too. It was starting to give me heartburn as I started to plan curriculum and the students already started to fall behind. 

I can only control what I can control. Getting bent out of shape in expectations of others wastes time and energy and ultimately hurts myself more than it helps anything. 
 

 

 

.

Edited August 22 by -JCN-

[-JCN-]

The analogy is the draw with uprange movement in USPSA. 
 

You have to draw before the hips turn past 180 or else it’s a DQ. 
 

There is a rigorous RO that really watches for the violation and others that will let it slide. 
 

That one RO was responsible for a number of DQs at a match but they were technically in the right. 
 

A young petulant competitor torched them online for the DQ until more level headed people brought it to their attention that they were in fact correct in the DQ. Even if it was a borderline call or if on video review it was 172 or 178 degrees. It doesn’t matter. 
 

Everybody lost in that situation. 

 

What’s the solution? It’s not getting anywhere near the border. It’s knowing it’s a potential threat and actively managing your own risks to not get burnt. 
 

I recommend to V that she take a lateral step or rearward step on draw before turning in order to make it abso-f*#king-lutely clear it’s rule compliant. 
 

Like if someone is going to keep trying to argue that a 175 degree muzzle isn’t past 180. They’re an a_-hole and missing the point. 
 

If they tried to show me a video with line plots demonstrating that their muzzle was 175 degrees and not 180, I’d want them to f*#k off too. I wouldn’t say it like that, but that’s what I would think. 
 

Personally I try not to get past 150 or so. I want margin on the table. 
 

I’ve been DQd for MEZ in IDPA before. It was a major match that I traveled for. Coming from USPSA, I didn’t know the closed port was a MEZ and the RO didn’t realize I didn’t know it. 
 

But rather than demand the rules be different, I chose to modify my port opening technique to the muzzle pop (with muzzle up at 45 degrees to reduce OOB chances). 
 

I usually ask myself “what can I do differently” rather than demand the world change around me. 
 

And if it’s not worth me changing then I find a different game or take the risk, but being salty and vengeful wrecks my happiness more than helps anything else. 
 

 

This is what I would estimate what I would consider a reasonable margin to avoid borderline calls. 
 

If I didn’t do my part to help the RO make good calls, then I could have done a better job. 
 

I usually try and focus on making myself better and making others better around me rather than demanding they give me what I think I deserve. 
 

I’m much happier at the end of the day. Because in reality people care more about character than performance. Nobody cares how I did at the end of the day. 

 

But they do care how I treated them. 
 

 

.

Edited August 22 by -JCN-

[Tape_Em_Up]

I didnt expect to see this in a revolver oriented thread and this will be the only reply I make because this is your thread for your opinions and I dont want to make it about myself.

We either have a rulebook or we dont. We are either 100% sure of a call or we arent. And if we arent, we dont make the call. Especially when the timer SO was the one with the better vantage point and wasnt the one who called stop.

I opened the port the way I did because I did not want to risk knocking my gun out of battery and causing a malfunction by muzzle striking the port. I did not point the gun to the right of the port because It was during a retreat and I did not want to risk breaking the 180. The way I opened this port was completely within the rules. I did not sweep myself at any point, nor did I violate any muzzle exclusion zone according to the written rulebook.

An SO should not be officiating the game if they are unable to accurate officiate at the speed at which the game is played. Many manage to officiate just fine because they will not make a call unless they are 100% sure. We dont DQ first and ask questions later because it 'was close'.

 

[-JCN-]

@Tape_Em_Up you are 100% making my point for me. 
 

At the end of the day you put yourself in a position to lose a lot and you lost. 
 

Your expectations of others are unrealistic and they burnt you. 

 

They continue to burn you. 
 

Life is not black and white, IMO. You’re putting your opinion out as fact. It’s not. 
 

It’s an opinion. 
 

I would say that if someone is 99% sure of a safety violation that’d be good enough for me. 
 

s#!t, I’d say even 90% would be good enough. 
 

Because IMO it’s on the competitor to give reasonable margin so that an RO doesn’t have to make a tough call. 
 

I would WANT an RO to flag anyone getting near the border of the rules in the interest of safety.

 

I would err on safety side rather than competitor feelings. 
 

Angling muzzle up to hit a port drastically reduces the risk of oob, especially if you can hit the dust cover instead of the actual slide. 
 

Try it! It’s quite slick. 
 

The other easy technique is to support / wrap the slide with your weak thumb when you hit the port. 
 

You’re hurting right now, but you’re not going to heal unless you can change the things you can change. 
 

Other people’s opinions aren’t going to be one of those things. 
 

 

.

Edited August 22 by -JCN-

[Racinready300ex]

So, "I'm not positive but I think you might of did the thing so go home" #90percentlife 

 

7 minutes ago, -JCN- said:

 

The other easy technique is to support / wrap the slide with your weak thumb when you hit the port. 

 

I'm trying to picture this, wouldn't putting your hand on the slide then putting the gun and hand into the MEZ get you DQ'd? 90% sure it would. 

[-JCN-]

10 minutes ago, Racinready300ex said:

So, "I'm not positive but I think you might of did the thing so go home" #90percentlife 

 

 

I'm trying to picture this, wouldn't putting your hand on the slide then putting the gun and hand into the MEZ get you DQ'd? 90% sure it would. 

Depends on your definition of positive!

 

I don’t DQ people unless it’s 190 degrees plus or flagrant disregard personally. 
 

In this case, the RO said they were 100% positive but they only had 90% fidelity. 
 

A person who is more conscientious might have had 90% positivity but 100% fidelity. 
 

The point is that we don’t control bad calls and the ROs have the power. 
 

Within that power will come with sketchy calls. 
 

Even if they’re 100% confident, they can still be wrong. Which is where adding margin can be useful. 
 

As for the thumb comment I’m talking about keeping both hands on the shooting grip. Just lifting the weak hand thumb in place to brace the side of the slide. 
 

 

 

.

Edited August 22 by -JCN-

[-JCN-]

7 minutes ago, Racinready300ex said:

I'm trying to picture this, wouldn't putting your hand on the slide then putting the gun and hand into the MEZ get you DQ'd? 90% sure it would. 

Also, if you never physically touched the MEZ with your hand it wouldn’t be a DQ. The weak hand could be on the gun anywhere. 
 

I’m 90% sure that’s correct, right?

[Racinready300ex]

26 minutes ago, -JCN- said:

Depends on your definition of positive!

 

I don’t DQ people unless it’s 190 degrees plus or flagrant disregard personally. 
 

 

This jumped out at me given the context here

 

 

24 minutes ago, -JCN- said:

Also, if you never physically touched the MEZ with your hand it wouldn’t be a DQ. The weak hand could be on the gun anywhere. 
 

I’m 90% sure that’s correct, right?

 

But, with your hand on the slide it'll be much harder for the SO to tell if that hand touched the port or not. Making the bad call he already made that much harder to call. This does not at all seem like a strategy I'd recommend to someone looking to reduce the chances of getting DQ'd.

Edited August 22 by Racinready300ex

[Racinready300ex]

28 minutes ago, -JCN- said:

As for the thumb comment I’m talking about keeping both hands on the shooting grip. Just lifting the weak hand thumb in place to brace the side of the slide. 
.

I get what you're saying now. Seems like it'd still be easier to just turn the safety on? 

[-JCN-]

2 minutes ago, Racinready300ex said:

 

But, with your hand on the slide it'll be much harder for the SO to tell if that hand touched the port or not. Making the bad call he already made that much harder to call. This does not at all seem like a strategy I'd recommend to someone looking to reduce the chances of getting DQ'd.

I agree with you! If you look at my original post it was just lifting weak thumb up with hands on shooting grip. 
 

I’ll try and take a picture to illustrate. 
 

I don’t do this personally. 
 

I’ve found that angling muzzle up and hitting dust cover has been idiot proof for me with my setup. 
 

People without full length dust covers might have different experiences, especially if their recoil spring is stupidly light.

[-JCN-]

Just now, Racinready300ex said:

I get what you're saying now. Seems like it'd still be easier to just turn the safety on? 

Depends on the gun. Certain guns like CZ still allow the slide to move out of battery even with the safety on.

[-JCN-]

@Racinready300ex if you’ve casually followed this thread, you know I like experiments and learning. 
 

When I get back in town, I think I’m going to do a port experiment where I remove recoil springs or use ultra light springs and test angles of port strikes in relation to oob. 
 

At least empirically, I’ve found punching or striking the muzzle off axis goes a long way with mitigating oob from a physics standpoint. 
 

Like even hitting cross corner of muzzle is pretty resistant to oob. 
 

The most sensitive is hitting crown flush on port, so I try very hard not to do that. 
 

But this seems like the kind of experiment that could use some data!

[-JCN-]

Ordered some additional books to read with my daughter including this one:

 

 

She was disappointed that the first six Star Wars movies didn’t have a balanced, modern view. 
 

“Where are the girl Jedi?!”

 

The European fairy tales we are reading now are pretty poor modern messaging with regard to girls and women. 
 

Things I didn’t notice as a kid but am more aware of as a father. 

[Racinready300ex]

16 hours ago, -JCN- said:

@Racinready300ex if you’ve casually followed this thread, you know I like experiments and learning. 
 

When I get back in town, I think I’m going to do a port experiment where I remove recoil springs or use ultra light springs and test angles of port strikes in relation to oob. 
 

At least empirically, I’ve found punching or striking the muzzle off axis goes a long way with mitigating oob from a physics standpoint. 
 

Like even hitting cross corner of muzzle is pretty resistant to oob. 
 

The most sensitive is hitting crown flush on port, so I try very hard not to do that. 
 

But this seems like the kind of experiment that could use some data!

 

I shoot a 2011, even my gun without a full dust cover I just hit ports with not concern about angle. I've run as light as a 8lbs spring and done this. If the gun is coming out of battery on impact it's going back in on it's own. Since your pushing on the barrel likely, with a 2011 the slide is only going to go back about 1/4" and then stop, and wont start pulling the round out of the chamber. So it doesn't take much for the spring to put it back forward. 

 

@Tape_Em_Up was shooting a 2011, so the safety would stop the slide from moving. But, it shouldn't matter the gun should handle that fine. But he was shooting a junky 2011 that has been giving him trouble lately. lmao. 

[-JCN-]

10 minutes ago, Racinready300ex said:

 

@Tape_Em_Up was shooting a 2011, so the safety would stop the slide from moving. But, it shouldn't matter the gun should handle that fine. But he was shooting a junky 2011 that has been giving him trouble lately. lmao. 

Can you help me with the logistics of this and check my understanding?

 

Assuming his compensated 2011 pushes directly rearward on the barrel if the compensator hits a port square on the muzzle, that’s not enough to come oob?

 

I have a compensated barrel Prodigy I can take a look at when I get home. Is that what he was shooting? 
 

 

 

 

[Racinready300ex]

43 minutes ago, -JCN- said:

Can you help me with the logistics of this and check my understanding?

 

Assuming his compensated 2011 pushes directly rearward on the barrel if the compensator hits a port square on the muzzle, that’s not enough to come oob?

 

I have a compensated barrel Prodigy I can take a look at when I get home. Is that what he was shooting? 
 

 

 

 

 

He was shooting a comped prodigy. 

 

I think it will likely push it out of battery, but it should return once the pressure on the barrel is gone. Unlike a 320 it wont fire OOB. 

 

That said, I can understand his reluctance to use the gun if he's not tested that. Similarly as he mentioned if he held the gun to the right of the port he'd be risking a 180 call. What he did should of been the safer move. 

 

Edited August 23 by Racinready300ex

[-JCN-]

1 hour ago, Racinready300ex said:

I think it will likely push it out of battery, but it should return once the pressure on the barrel is gone. Unlike a 320 it wont fire OOB. 

 

That said, I can understand his reluctance to use the gun if he's not tested that. Similarly as he mentioned if he held the gun to the right of the port he'd be risking a 180 call. What he did should of been the safer move. 

 

I’ve had some issues in general when light springs couple with full mags adding friction to not return to battery on some slides. 
 

I’ll test weak thumb on side of slide, with a large surface slide like a 2011 I think that would work really well. 
 

And the other, broader question is regarding universal technique rather than gun specific stuff from my personal point of view. 
 

I switch equipment a lot and I like learning about things so I have a strong preference for adopting practices that work for anything rather than something I have to change specifically for one gun. 
 

Things like compensated Glocks with light recoil springs (11#) or so have difficulty returning to battery because of the competing striker spring so that’s kind of my equipment benchmark for oob reducing port technique. 
 

The Alien I’m using now is a fixed barrel and full dust cover so it is extremely resistant to port impacts. 
 

But I still like learning and practicing universal technique.

 

 

Edited August 23 by -JCN-

[Racinready300ex]

1 hour ago, -JCN- said:

I’ve had some issues in general when light springs couple with full mags adding friction to not return to battery on some slides. 

 

It's IDPA so the mags are never full.

 

1 hour ago, -JCN- said:

And the other, broader question is regarding universal technique rather than gun specific stuff from my personal point of view. 

 

 

 

The universal technique would be the one that got the shooter DQ'd. Don't use the gun and the gun can't malfunction because of it. Use the gun and you're adding some level of risk the gun wont like it. 

[-JCN-]

1 hour ago, Racinready300ex said:

 

It's IDPA so the mags are never full.

 

 

The universal technique would be the one that got the shooter DQ'd. Don't use the gun and the gun can't malfunction because of it. Use the gun and you're adding some level of risk the gun wont like it. 

Everything is a continuum regarding friction and forces. Not binary. 
 

Universal technique of using the gun to open the port is the scenario I’m talking about. 
 

Otherwise you could say something daft like the actual non-DQ able universal technique is to head butt the port open and not use hands at all. 

[Maximis228]

23 hours ago, -JCN- said:

I would say that if someone is 99% sure of a safety violation that’d be good enough for me. 
 

s#!t, I’d say even 90% would be good enough. 

 

And this is why people have the mentality that ROs are anti shooter. 

[-JCN-]

1 hour ago, Maximis228 said:

 

And this is why people have the mentality that ROs are anti shooter. 

I think it depends. I’m not anti shooter, but I’m pro safety. 
 

Watching the video, it looks like the side RO was looking for a violation and middle port got his attention so he leaned in to try and call the right port (I think I saw his body language change) so the guy had an agenda. 
 

But if I were at a local match and there was a new shooter making a really aggressive move towards the 180 without any signs of slowing down, if there were people up range I would yell STOP before they broke 180 so they wouldn’t get to 220…

 

If you put me on a witness stand and asked if I were 100% sure they wouldn’t have stopped I’d say no. 
 

But I’m not going to apologize about being reasonably certain they were going to do something unsafe. 
 

I’ve DQ’d exactly one person. 
 

A spaz who sympathetically grabbed his trigger when clumsily moving backwards who launched a round sideways towards the sky. Thankfully caught by a barrel and didn’t hurt anyone in the neighborhood. 
 

He tried to argue that it was intentional. I told him no and I told him to review his video. 
 

I was reasonably certain of what happened. Due to my perfectionist personality, I NEVER say I’m 100% certain. Because there are always weird things that can happen and I don’t believe in absolutes when humans are involved. 
 

He came back after reviewing video and apologized and said it was exactly as I said. 
 

My point is that someone can be 100% certain but just plain wrong. 
 

And someone else can be 90% certain but 100% correct. 
 

As a general rule, I don’t think 90% certain is good enough.  But in some situations, when the impending threat is so dangerous (not this situation) then I think 90% certain is okay to prevent certain harm if correct. 
 

 

Edited August 23 by -JCN-

[Maximis228]

18 minutes ago, -JCN- said:

But if I were at a local match and there was a new shooter making a really aggressive move towards the 180 without any signs of slowing down, if there were people up range I would yell STOP before they broke 180 so they wouldn’t get to 220…

 

The "before the 180" part makes me cringe. Im all for safety but now you are making stuff up. 

[-JCN-]

5 minutes ago, Maximis228 said:

 

The "before the 180" part makes me cringe. Im all for safety but now you are making stuff up. 

Of course I’m making stuff up. It’s hypothetical. 
 

I also don’t mind if you cringe or not. I don’t know you, haha. 
 

I wouldn’t wait for someone to stab my family member to be 100% certain they were actually going to stab them. 
 

If they’re on their way to doing that, I’m going to try and stop them mid action. 
 

I don’t want to stop someone before the 180 but I also don’t want to let them get to 220 when people are at 220. 
 

So if I yell “STOP” as they’re moving aggressively past 170… I’m okay with that making some people cringe. 
 

Like I said, it’s never happened. But I’m not opposed to doing so.