Clay1 Posted February 8, 2006 Share Posted February 8, 2006 I came home from work and I found this link in my email from a friend: http://www.uspsa.org/rules/nroi_rulings.ph...on=edit&indx=22 I was surprised at first, but on second thought I can understand why. Still it should send SHOCK WAVES through the production ranks. Rick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gotm4 Posted February 8, 2006 Share Posted February 8, 2006 (edited) I came home from work and I found this link in my email from a friend: http://www.uspsa.org/rules/nroi_rulings.ph...on=edit&indx=22 I was surprised at first, but on second thought I can understand why. Still it should send SHOCK WAVES through the production ranks. Rick I forsee many many more people using the Ralph Sotelo trigger kit. Edited February 8, 2006 by gotm4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kimberkid Posted February 8, 2006 Share Posted February 8, 2006 wow, i would be really really mad if my $300 trigger that I have been using for several years is all of a sudden illegal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chp5 Posted February 8, 2006 Share Posted February 8, 2006 (edited) WOW!! I bet Charlie will figure out a way to produce a revised trigger that's Production legal. Charlie - any thoughts? Edited February 8, 2006 by chp5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt Cheely Posted February 8, 2006 Share Posted February 8, 2006 All hail the $.25 trigger job! But really, that is going to hit some people pretty bad. So are they just talking about the relocated pin being the illiegal modification, or is having the trigger farther back into the frame considered a no no as well? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
XRe Posted February 8, 2006 Share Posted February 8, 2006 Why does it have to take SO to get a ruling out on such things? The Vanek trigger job has been used (apparently against the rules) for over 3 years now, and has a lot of investment made into by folks shooting Glocks in Production. If this ruling had been laid down in 2003 or 2004, shortly after the trigger job came onto the market, it would have saved everyone a lot of trouble and expense - and given Charlie time to develop something that *would* be legal. Is there a program for folks to submit a product for inspection to NROI so they don't have to go down this road with their product, in the future? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carlos Posted February 8, 2006 Share Posted February 8, 2006 I am with Kimberkid on this one: its too late. Can NROI reasonably expect a guy who has $485 in his Glock 17 and close to $300 in his Vanek to just scrap the Vanek? After 3 years of use? Look, I do not shoot a Glock, but a friend recently earned a slot to the Nationals - and it was earned with a Vanek. Now, according to NROI, he is supposed to go back to the 5.5 lb trigger that came in the gun or go play "glock parts roulette" trying to figure what works for him? This seems to be poor timing on the part of NROI. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eric nielsen Posted February 8, 2006 Share Posted February 8, 2006 Ouch. Last I heard from Charlie, he was developing a drop-in trigger kit that did not have the [visible] hinge pin relocation, but does have some very effective internal mods. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SRT Driver Posted February 8, 2006 Share Posted February 8, 2006 Ouch!! Well, I guess I have the trigger for a future Limited G35. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wakal Posted February 8, 2006 Share Posted February 8, 2006 Well, that is easy enough. The titanium bits, the trick springs, the radiused parts, the polish, pretravel bolt, and overtravel bolt are all just fine since they are internal parts. The bit that He Who Must Be Obeyed fixated on was the exterior modification (as specified in black and white, there in the rules). I'm anxious to see what Charlie comes up with that DOESN'T move the pin, as already mentioned by Eric N Charlie...he was already My Hero for making the slickest Glock trigger I've ever shot, and now he has a ruling BY NAME...oh, he is Da Man! I like my Vanek G22; I guess when Liota and I get back to The World we will have to send her G34 off for the "new and improved" Vanek trigger Alex Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
driver8M3 Posted February 8, 2006 Share Posted February 8, 2006 here's my take on this: 21.5: external modifications other than sights not allowed. but wait...grip tape is allowed, isnt it? of course it is, by this rule: 21.6: aftermarket grips blah, blah, blah....is permitted. so 21.6 supercedes 21.5 on the matter of grip tape. so, why doesn't 21.4 ["action work to enhance reliability (throating, trigger work, etc.) is allowed] supercede 21.5 on the matter of the vanek trigger. 21.4 does not say that the trigger work must only be internal. so now, after 3 years, they've decided that although "trigger work" is specifically allowed according to the rules, moving a pin on the trigger is not allowed. how in the world is moving a pin on the trigger not considered trigger work??????? yes, i have a vanek trigger. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevin Kline Posted February 8, 2006 Share Posted February 8, 2006 Wow! What a shocker. I agree, why has this not been looked at until now. Charlie's triggers have been out for years and EVERYONE knew what and how they worked. For all the Glock shooters, Production shooters, and still tons of 1911 shooters, that was the talk of triggers. Everyone in our local club, (whether Glock/Production or 1911 shooters) knew of Charlies triggers and how they worked and how they felt. I agree, they should have looked at this before now. Charlie is a genius and Im sure he's coming up with something really trick to work around it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bgary Posted February 8, 2006 Share Posted February 8, 2006 Hesitating to jump in the middle of the storm, and... noting that I don't speak for NROI... There are two things that NROI has been *very* consistent about in their approach to rulings with regard to modifications in Production division guns: 1) If you can see it from the outside, it is an external mod. There are a couple of explicitly *allowed* external mods, such as different sights and grip tape, but... a trigger mod that is done by drilling new hole(s) in the frame - which are visible from the outside - so that a trigger pin can be relocated is pretty fundamental to what the Production division is about avoiding. 2) The gun is supposed to *function* the way it came from the manufacturer. It is supposed to be a "production" gun. So, again, a trigger mod that changes the way the trigger operates seems to pretty clearly be against the idea of what the Production division is about. Just as changing a gun internally from a blow-back to a gas-operated design, or whatever... even if you can't see the mods from the outside, if it has been changed from the way the factory made it, it is probably not kosher in Production. Note that there are some explicitly allowed mods, such as smoothing up triggers and detailing the action for reliability... but those don't change the *design* of the gun. Someone asked if there was a way to submit something to NROI to get a ruling before a big investment is made. Absolutely - it happens all the time. Pick up the phone or send an email to the director of NROI, and ask the question. He'll make a ruling, and if it is of broad interest it will show up in his Front Sight column as well. This was done with the unported hybrid rib (it was submitted for an NROI ruling before a vendor tooled up production), this was done with the "speed bump" trigger, etc. It should be noted that John has an unenviable job - trying to deliver interpretations that are consistent with both the rules and the vision for the Production division, and no matter what he does, his ruling draws a line that someone is going to be on the "wrong" side of - but in context he does a great job, and he deals with questions like this it all the time. So... there *is* a way to find out if something is legal, before plunking cash on the barrelhead. Bruce Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
driver8M3 Posted February 8, 2006 Share Posted February 8, 2006 but... a trigger mod that is done by drilling new hole(s) in the frame - which are visible from the outside - so that a trigger pin can be relocated is pretty fundamental to what the Production division is about avoiding.i appreciate your point of view. however, the pin that is changed is not a frame pin, it is a pin on the trigger itself. i'm having a hard time following the logic that doesnt consider that "trigger work." and US Appendix D9 21.4 specifically allows "trigger work." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
XRe Posted February 8, 2006 Share Posted February 8, 2006 Post a pic?? I haven't seen one up close.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rtr Posted February 8, 2006 Share Posted February 8, 2006 As someone who owns a G17 with a Vanek trigger, and spent a lot of money to get that trigger I'm not too pleased. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kimberkid Posted February 8, 2006 Share Posted February 8, 2006 This sucks for Charlie as his business is gonna take a rough hit. He was the pioneer of this whole thing and if I was him I would be crazy pissed. The redrilling of the trigger bar is what makes his job different from most of the others, and in some is probably the only thing done differently. I am curious to what prompted this to be brought to life. This isnt something NROI had no clue about and is just now coming to light, anyone with inside info know how/who brought this up? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GeorgeInNePa Posted February 8, 2006 Share Posted February 8, 2006 (edited) I came home from work and I found this link in my email from a friend: http://www.uspsa.org/rules/nroi_rulings.ph...on=edit&indx=22 I was surprised at first, but on second thought I can understand why. Still it should send SHOCK WAVES through the production ranks. Rick I forsee many many more people using the Ralph Sotelo trigger kit. I forsee many of us not spending another dime on Production. Edited February 8, 2006 by GeorgeInNePa Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chp5 Posted February 8, 2006 Share Posted February 8, 2006 There are two things that NROI has been *very* consistent about in their approach to rulings with regard to modifications in Production division guns:1) If you can see it from the outside, it is an external mod. There are a couple of explicitly *allowed* external mods, . . . I think that sums it up nicely. I too will have to take my Charlie trigger out of my Production G17, but it is what it is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Precision40 Posted February 8, 2006 Share Posted February 8, 2006 (edited) As someone who owns a G17 with a Vanek trigger, and spent a lot of money to get that trigger I'm not too pleased. The "stock" trigger bar can be modified to approximate the same dimensions as the vanek, without making any external mod's. With all due respect, it seems a little silly to outlaw the Vanek trigger on something so trivial, but rules are rules and I'm sure 99% of us will just press on with a stock trigger or wait until Charlie comes up with a fix. No problemo. Edited February 8, 2006 by Precision40 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vluc Posted February 8, 2006 Share Posted February 8, 2006 IIRC, the same thing happened with the Langdon Speed Bump. Okay for a bit, then, nope.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
diehli Posted February 8, 2006 Share Posted February 8, 2006 Several years isn't "a bit". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matthew_Mink Posted February 8, 2006 Share Posted February 8, 2006 What I think is crazy is the fact that Charlie can't move a pin, but we could mill our slides to put on a set of Bo-Mars. Those 2 rules do not make sense with each other. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GeorgeInNePa Posted February 8, 2006 Share Posted February 8, 2006 What I think is crazy is the fact that Charlie can't move a pin, but we could mill our slides to put on a set of Bo-Mars. Those 2 rules do not make sense with each other. +1 I was just coming back here to post the same exact thing! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chriss Grube Posted February 8, 2006 Share Posted February 8, 2006 One more reason not to shoot production. It's bad enough that it is only 10 rounds but now this silly crap? I gues I'll stick to open at least they can't screw the rules up too bad there! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts