Nroi Ruling On Vanek Trigger For Production

[Carlos]

Lawman wrote:

"Vanek triggers did not come out of nowhere. The fact that USPSA is only now making this ruling is an extremely poor choice. "

My issue from the start has been the timing issue and the current financial impact on shooters like Lawman. I don't shoot a Glock but I have two good friends who do; these are guys who I pushed to compete in USPSA and I have been to their homes to set up their Dillon 650s for Production; gave them load data, practiced with them, travelled to many matchs with them etc. They have both now surpassed me as far as their USPSA classification - with Glocks. It is very unfortunate to see this rule take its effects on my friends. This ruling (affecting the most popular Production gun in USPSA) should have been made earlier.

However, I have a hard time reconciling the prior NROI ruling on the speed bump trigger with those who would create an exception for the Vanek relocated trigger bar pin.

Driver8M3 is one of those friends. He makes a point about the guiderod pictured above. As far as the lighter springs on those rods, I can tell you that with our Production load, a different weight spring is REQUIRED to enhance reliability.

Does NROI require the use of the stock Glock plastic guiderod in Production? What about the polymer guiderod end cap that often pops off on its own?

Regards,

D.C. Johnson

[Chuck Anderson]

The speed bump trigger is a different issue. It changes the external dimensions of the trigger. The Vanek modification does not. In any way. The speed bump had a piece of metal poking out of the back of the trigger (Yes I know it was part of the trigger) The Vanek doesn't not modify the external dimensions of the trigger.

[Genghis]

Random thoughts after following this discussion:

Pushing the limits of the rules is natural, and is normally not cheating. Our sport is like golf, relying on the honor system in most cases. And it works. And this discussion is intended to improve the sport - so there's no need to "Rodney King" anyone for throwing in his $.02.

Brian ought to charge that same $.02 for each post. Call it "Two cents to add your two cents." Then he could change the title of this thread to "College Fund."

The definition of "reliable" at Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary (www.m-w.com) is:

1 : suitable or fit to be relied on : DEPENDABLE

2 : giving the same result on successive trials.

In shooting this word generally means "goes bang every time" rather than "easy to shoot accurately." And lightening triggers can decrease reliability. So the way the rule is written, trigger jobs should be out.

Smoothing the action should be a legit mod in Production. Changing the design of the gun is a different matter. Moving a pin, or shortening the pull, seems like a significant change to the way the gun is intended to work. So is replacing the factory guide rod with a heavier one. Nothing against Vanek or any of the other smiths - I'd love to have his trigger in my G35, but I shoot it in IDPA too, so I stick with the factory one for now.

Suddenly learning after several years that your expensive mod is illegal is a shock and a waste of your money. It seems that everyone believed Vanek and Sotelo triggers were legal for Production, but now they find out differently. The ruling seems like one reasonable interpretation of the rules, but the rules should be clear from the start.

A trigger weight rule would be a nice bright line rule, but it would likely result in actual production guns being deemed non-Production. I'd rather see a dollar limit for each division. We could have Open, $2500, $1500, $1000, $500, $250, and $100. If you can put a Dawson fiber optic sight on your Ruger for under $500, go for it. Don't add that new trigger, or it'll push you into the next higher division. Put a C-More on your Lorcin and see how you do against a stock Kel-Tec in $250 Division. Or even wield two Glocks side-by-side in $1,000.00 Division! Your imagination is the limit!

Some of the distinctions seem silly. Limiting mods to internal ones just makes them harder to detect. And allowing trigger work for "reliability" encourages nudging and winking.The rule could be easily clarified to say you can replace sights, barrels, and springs, add grip tape, and polish the original parts. Nothing else. (I'm sure I left something out).

[Matthew_Mink]

Dollar amounts will never work due to regional differences in pricing. Plus if I really wanted a cool $250 division gun, then I could do all the work myself, not charge myself anything and dominate.

[XRe]

then I could do all the work myself, not charge myself anything and dominate.

Not to mention all the other folks who would take this same tack and end up with unsafe guns in the process.... (not saying you would do this, Matt, but... others more than likely would... like maybe me )

[ima45dv8]

It seems that everyone believed Vanek and Sotelo triggers were legal for Production, but now they find out differently.

Just to clarify this point, the ruling said the Vanek trigger is not allowed in Production. There has been no ruling made that excludes the Sotelo. It is still a viable option.

[Rocket35]

It seems that everyone believed Vanek and Sotelo triggers were legal for Production, but now they find out differently.

Just to clarify this point, the ruling said the Vanek trigger is not allowed in Production. There has been no ruling made that excludes the Sotelo. It is still a viable option.

I think some people are missing the point. The product name doesn't necessarilly need to be listed to fall under the ruling and intent. Any tigger work that modifies any external dimension is ruled as being illegal equipment in production. Now if a 'smith modifies any external dimension- no matter the company name- that trigger is now illegal in production. Pretty simple really. I think Ralph's trigger may need the back of the trigger safety bar reduced in order to reset properly in some applications, thus making it illegal in production. Is this making sense? It is hard to describe sometimes without showing the part in question and I hope that this explains what I am trying to convey.

Ralph is a great guy and I don't intend to discount his work, but rules are rules.

[ima45dv8]

I think some people are missing the point. The product name doesn't necessarilly need to be listed to fall under the ruling and intent. Any tigger work that modifies any external dimension is ruled as being illegal equipment in production. Now if a 'smith modifies any external dimension- no matter the company name- that trigger is now illegal in production. Pretty simple really. I think Ralph's trigger may need the back of the trigger safety bar reduced in order to reset properly in some applications, thus making it illegal in production. Is this making sense? It is hard to describe sometimes without showing the part in question and I hope that this explains what I am trying to convey.

Ralph is a great guy and I don't intend to discount his work, but rules are rules.

Yep, it made sense. Somewhere back in this thread someone posted some pictures of what they called a "shaved" trigger on a Glock, and I looked at mine (a Sotelo) and it does appear to have that mod.

Has anyone requested a ruling from the NROI on that particular version yet?

[eric nielsen]

To the best of my knowledge the Sotelo [and 3 of my homemade jobs] has an unmodified pivot point in front & a redrilled spring hole in back. Usually requires sanding down the top of the safety trigger to make that work as intended [ie make the gun a safe gun]. Results in a 2.0 - 2.5 pound pull with the right combo of springs.

All of the above plus relocating the pivot pin in front can result in a 1.0 - 1.5 pound pull. That's the mod that has been banned for Production Division. It's visible if you know where to look - no matter who did the work - and it's more work than I care to do in my [doghouse] garage. Probably ruin 6 or 8 parts before I got it right.

I owe Brian $.08 so far.

Edited February 14, 2006 by eric nielsen

[Rocket35]

Once you sand on the trigger safety, it becomes an externally modified trigger. Thus making it illegal in production. Nothing wrong with the trigger, it just doesn't meet the division requirements.

Edited February 14, 2006 by Rocket35

[Carlos]

Once you sand on the trigger safety, it becomes an externally modified trigger. Thus making it illegal in production. Nothing wrong with the trigger, it just doesn't meet the division requirements.

Agreed- though the factory parts do vary by quite a bit.

When I raced motocycles, we always suspected that the factory teams would test a pile of engine parts for certain characteristics & select the best ones for race use. Result would be a motor with unaltered factory parts - yet with all the characteristics of a specialized race motor. The gains were small, but they mattered to the top teams.

[SRT Driver]

In regards to the shaved rear portion of the trigger safety, if the mod enhances reliabilty, (ie - allows the trigger to reset) it needs it's own ruling. Since the mod is external, barely noticable, and enhances reliabilty.

The Vanek ruling:

The Vanek trigger, much like the Speed Bump trigger, has an external modification that makes it illegal for Production division. The Speed Bump trigger has the travel screw mounted to the rear of the trigger and is visible externally, the Vanek trigger, has relocated the pivot pin about 3/16" above the factory specs, and has filled in the original hole with a black material that is still visible on inspection.

The ruling says nothing about the trigger safety mod. Or the other Vanek mod..contouring the face of the trigger safety.

The fact that the trigger safety mod enhances the reliability of the trigger should be legal. JA should address this also.

[Rocket35]

The point is the line has to be drawn somewhere. "Enhancing reliablility" or not. I think a lowered ejection port would enhance reliability, but that is still an illegal production modification. Food for thought....

[SRT Driver]

True.

But until a ruling is set in stone..any speculation is hypothetical.

Except for moving the pivot pin, everything in this thread are ideas about where the line should be drawn.

Only JA can actually draw it.

[Rocket35]

Yup, he is the cochise....There is always Limited 10!

[RIIID]

If USPSA wants to draw the line they need to ask the top shooters and gunsmiths how to do it. Because they are the ones who will find the way to do the mods within the rules that are written or not written. No offense to the rule writers but sometimes they don't see the trees just the forest.

Rich

[Bob Hostetter]

"Let the top shooters and the gunsmiths write the rules".

That would make for some interesting rules...................

[Rocket35]

Yeah, that would lead to "top shooters" and "gunsmiths" writting rules to suit their interests not necessarily the "right" way. There will be disagreements either way, but if people in the industry right the rules, it will just get corrupted into more of a product marketing sceam than there aready is.

[RIIID]

Bob-Rocket

Missing the point, USPSA writes the rules the pros show them how to get around what they have written and what they haven't. USPSA adjusts the rules to stop it before it starts. If they don't ask you have what we have right now, Production Division rules that are very gray.

Rich

Bob, you have miss quoted my post.

Edited February 15, 2006 by RIIID

[Clay1]

SRT said: "The ruling says nothing about the trigger safety mod. Or the other Vanek mod..contouring the face of the trigger safety."

Maybe I am reading more into it than it actually says, but I think that Mr. Amidon has said it quite clearly and he has said it twice: No external mods other than what has already been specifically allowed. Recontouring the face of the trigger or shaving the trigger safety seems straight forward to me as illegal for production.

[Wideload]

It seems that we're all over the place on this issue... Lets keep in mind that what we need to ask for is an enforceable set of rules that a RO or the guy running the Chrono stage can clearly say is or is not appropriate for a particular division. I believe it's already been stated that these guys are not all experts on every gun made and may not know what is a visible external modification -- i.e., the new pivot point on the Vanek trigger, shaved safety are couple examples of mods almost invisble to untrained eyes.

Furthermore, super light Production Division triggers is not just a issue with Striker fired guns. I've seen guys stone and work their triggers on their Production CZs to the point where they will only shoot (with confidence), hand loads with Federal primers.

Setting a trigger pull limit is a clear and concise measure that a Chrono Stage can effectively measure. It needs to be set at a threshhold that allows for a smoothed out trigger through normal wear or a cleaned up trigger that enhances reliability but not the super light - custom triggers. This also allows gunsmiths to also calibrate the triggers/packages for Production division.

[Yes this may mean rethinking/refitting my Sotelo trigger to the new standard as well but, I would rather do it once and be confident that I would not have to deal with further ambiguous or hard to enforce rulings on this topic.]

Keeping sveral boxes of Winchester White Box or some other common, commercial round in 9mm and .40 S&W at the Chrono Stage to test for "Reliability" at the Chrono Stage is another concrete, measurable option. (May want to think through on logistics and possible impact of shooting jacketed round through a barrel that may have heavy leadding. The latter may present a safety issue but it is still a concrete measure... Maybe use factory primed cases instead)

So circling back to the original argument, what other concrete and UNIFORMLY ENFORCEABLE measures are there?

[Matthew_Mink]

Furthermore, super light Production Division triggers is not just a issue with Striker fired guns. I've seen guys stone and work their triggers on their Production CZs to the point where they will only shoot (with confidence), hand loads with Federal primers.

Have those guys give me or Angus a call, we can set them up with guns that go bang with Win primers.

[driver8M3]

Keeping sveral boxes of Winchester White Box or some other common, commercial round in 9mm and .40 S&W at the Chrono Stage to test for "Reliability" at the Chrono Stage is another concrete, measurable option. (May want to think through on logistics and possible impact of shooting jacketed round through a barrel that may have heavy leadding. The latter may present a safety issue but it is still a concrete measure... Maybe use factory primed cases instead)

if you want to test for reliability at the chrono stage, you better have thousands of rounds on hand b/c reliability isnt 10 rounds out of 10 working ok, reliability is running hundreds of rounds (an entire match) without problems (strong hand, weak hand, etc.). the "reliability" phrase has no place in the rules. literally, it would mean that one person is allowed to do a particular mod but another person cant. same modification, some people are allowed to do it, others arent. thats completely unenforcable. unenforcable rules just complicate things...they do nothing to keep things fair. the 2 ounces over factory rule also needs to go. i've never seen a gun weighed anywhere, nor do i have the capacity to weigh my own gun. how many people have a trigger pull guage to be able to measure theirs to be sure they're within some proposed measure? who cares? the defining characteristics of USPSA production are minor scoring and the 10 round limit. i've not heard a single new shooter complain about any so-called equipment race in production and feels that he must go out and buy the latest greatest mods. anyway, modified production guns are still way below the cost of most limited and open guns, so it's still an entry level division (for those worried about financial issues associated with modifications). Edited February 15, 2006 by driver8M3

[GeorgeInNePa]

SRT said: "The ruling says nothing about the trigger safety mod. Or the other Vanek mod..contouring the face of the trigger safety."

Maybe I am reading more into it than it actually says, but I think that Mr. Amidon has said it quite clearly and he has said it twice: No external mods other than what has already been specifically allowed. Recontouring the face of the trigger or shaving the trigger safety seems straight forward to me as illegal for production.

Actually it's as clear as mud. The trigger safety mods were part of the question, but nowhere in the answer does he mention them.

[DaG]

anybody know who the goomerhead weenie is that cried foul and got this mess started in the first place? DaG