Possibility Of Modification Tightening In Uspsa Production

[Nik Habicht]

Having talked with several Area Directors recently, the topic of the Production Division Rules came up. Apparently the Board is talking about the divisional criteria, and possibly will be moving to change some of those criteria ---- with the division perhaps moving closer to stock, as delivered from the manufacturer, and away from custom shop and after market modifications.

I have no knowledge of specific items on the chopping block, or even up for discussion, but I'm curious as to what the Enosverse thinks. It would be helpful, if you'd tell us whether you shoot production or not, and if you'd be more or less inclined to do so, if the rules are tightened.

I'll start:

I think that there are core things that make Production (terrible name by the way) different from the other divisions:

• DA/DAO/Safe Action only. Basically a no 1911 or other Single-action division.

• Iron sights

• Ten round limit

• No mag well

• Minor scoring

• Approved gun list --- so manufacturer’s can’t build a limited # of game guns that aren't available to anyone, and are even discouraged from building $2000 (essentially Limited) guns for the division.

I think intentionally stifling innovation runs contrary to IPSC principles --- the test has historically been “What works best?,” and has now been amended to “What works best, given a few criteria?” (I.E. Limited tests what’s best given the restrictions of No optics, ports, or comps, .40 minimum for major; L-10 further refines it with a capacity Limit, Revolver tests what works in a six round cylindrical thing.) Why make production a whole different ball game?

I'm also opposed to telling shooters that parts that they've used to tune their guns need to come out now ---- even though they may need 13lb. recoil springs to make the guns run with their 130 power factor 147 or 180gr. load. (I'm sitting on about 13,000 heads right now --- it would suck to have to switch back to 115s just to make my gun run.

Bottom line for me when it comes to divisional rules:

I'm about rules that make it easier for more of the guns that people already own to be legal in more divisions. For example, I'd prefer it if SingleStack would be open to ALL single-stack guns, not just those of 1911 design. I want to run club matches for 80 shooters, not for 15-20.....

[Vlad]

I'd like to see a trigger pull minimum weight. I know that some people have spent money on trigger jobs and they might be upset. I don't want trigger jobs banned because clean triggers are nice, but I also think that the sub 2lb Glock/XD/soon M&P triggers are way out line with what the division was supposed to be about. Otherwise I agree with Nik.

[Loves2Shoot]

10 round limit needs to go...

[jasmap]

10 round limit should go (like IPSC), allow major scoring (for .40 and up), continue to allow sight changes, and keep the rest the same.

[Jim Norman]

L2S,

Keep the 10 round limit for Production. Why? Because 10 rounds makes more guns usable in the division. You can shoot a 9MM, a .40 Cal or .45 Cal. Take away the limit and you essentially have 9mm division only. One need only look at Limited. Virtually no one shoots a .45 anymore. Why? because you can stuff 21 or 22 .40's in a 140 mm mag, but only about 16-17 .45's. This is just too big an advantage to overcome for most mere mortals. True TGO can beat most anyone with a single stack, but he could probably beat most of us usiong a musket.

I chose to shoot a .40 for several reasons. I can use the same heads, brass and powder in both my Limited and Production Guns. If the capacity is raised to the maximum that can fit loaded flush, then my production gun is useless.

And I do shoot Production.

Jim

[Kimberkid]

Getting rid of the 10 rd. limit, or allowing major scoring or both would pretty much kill the division immediatly. Why not just call it "double action Limited" and be done with it. I agree that sub 2 lb triggers dont really fit with the idea of a "production" gun, but seeing as probably 90% of production guns have some form of a greased up trigger, it will be a long lonely road to get a trigger pull restriction.

As far as what does Production test? I think it further refines the Limited test with DA triggers (be it not very important since it is a super slick DA) and minor scoring for everyone in that division. I think the 10 rd. rule and minor scoring are the most important points for the division to exist. Why must we turn everything into Limited class?

Edit to add: I vote to leave the rules as they are. I dig that is can get a bit confusing, but if you read the rulebook and err on the side of caution and good sportsmanship, you should be fine.

Edited August 20, 2006 by Kimberkid

[sfinney]

Ban all external or internal mods, only minor internal polishing allowed. Min trigger weight of ? (maybe 3.5 pounds).

By the way, "no external mods" would include sight cuts not factory made.

Keep the 10 round limit for all the reasons mentioned above. We don't need Production to become a "Limited Minor" category, which is just about whereProduction is headed now, full cap mags would cinch the deal.

[glock_40_caliber]

My vote would be to leave everything alone as it is. If I want to be able to shoot capacity mags, or score major, I shoot Limited or Open.

[EricW]

We're already so close to the solution, I can't believe we're going to change the rules...again....sigh..... If USPSA can make headway with making running an IPSC-rules match fairly transparent and painless, then we could let the market decide on which ruleset it prefers. Run USPSA rules and IPSC Production rules side by side. Let the better vision win. Beating this issue to death on the internet is not how this "problem" will get resolved.

All I want to see for Production is a set of rules that are *MARKETABLE*. I think we all need to set our egos aside and allow the market to define what it wants the division to be.

[mscott]

There have been a couple of threads on this already. Is something really going to be changed or is this a big bad rumor? Why does the trigger pull weight keep coming up? I suppose every club will now have to get the same calibrated trigger pull gauge and then train folks on how to use it. How does everyone measure a Glock trigger? From the middle, tip, or what? I'm not trying to be a grouch about this, but I don't see a way to monitor it completely. I also would like to see mag capacity left alone for reasons already stated. I shoot a G35 in production, but would probably buy a different gun if necessary. It doesn't really matter what gets changed, because someone will start finding ways to push the edge of the rules or a new holster, or something and we'll have to change things again. I guess that it's all part of the game.

[Blockhead]

Seems to me that in many cases, Production is the "Entry Level" division in our sport. I think that's a good thing because it allows a new shooter to enter the sport and feel reasonably competitive without a huge initial investment (worked for me). IMHO, Any changes should support that functionality.

Also, some states still have the mag. cap. Some of us are less sensitive to the issue than others . However, for a new shooter it can be a significant concern.

As for setting limits on mod.s, whatever they do, it has to be clearly measureable and/or obvious to the naked eye. Trigger pull limits could work if you can find a consistent means of reasonably calibrating the measuring device. Look at what we have to go through with a chrono. Also, how would a 2# minimum trigger-pull apply to a DA/SA pistol?

FWIW, I'd like to see it stay the way it is (If it ain't broke...). That being said, the BOD has the difficult task of writing reg.s that will work best for the sport here in the USA. Creating and maintaining an environment that's friendly to new shooters has got to stay high on our priority list if we want this sport to be around for our grandkids.

[XD Niner]

If it ain't broke, don't fix it. I think that the Production Division is pretty attactive to new and old shooters just the way it is. Why change it?

[Ron Rodgers]

Change the equipment rules??? Please say this is a bad rumor and that USPSA isn't trying to find some way to piss off a large segment of it's members.

The Production Division equipment requirements aren't perfect, but they come pretty darn close. It provides a Division that can be entered into with a relatively small investment in any of a wide variety of commercially available firearms.

As it is now, serious competitive types can perform some limited "modifications" to match their firearm to their particular taste. I know an awful lot of shooters that aren't all that serious and they play the game just as happily with a box-stock firearm. Changing the Division requirements now could really screw over those that have played within the long standing rules and made some selected changes to their equipment.

What's next - mandating that everyone in Production Division must standardize on the same inexpensive factory ammo?

[Sestock]

Change the equipment rules??? Please say this is a bad rumor and that USPSA isn't trying to find some way to piss off a large segment of it's members.

Ron, E-mail sent. It ain't a rumor.

Edited August 21, 2006 by Sestock

[peashooter]

Why change it at all? The rules are pretty clear as is. Enforce the rules we have. What is so hard to understand about internal vs external. 10rnds or full capacity, I would prefer full capacity but I understand the reasons some feel it important to keep it as is.

Within the rules we now have it would be pretty hard to get away with much. Add more rules to the list and we will need range Gestapo to monitor who is legal and who isn't.

Lets just load & make ready.

[Chuck Anderson]

The problem is the Production rules really aren't that simple. For an example look at some of the most heated threads on this forum. Most are about some inane aspect of Production that some people think should be one way and other think should be the other way. For example, Vanek triggers, Bo-Mar sights, and metal guide rods.

I've said it before, and I'll get on my soapbox again. Before USPSA screws with the rules, they need to decide what the division should be. Everyone, including the board members have their own idea of what the division should be. Some of them just don't live in harmony together. How can you have a division designed to be entry level that allows shooters to use $1500.00 factory guns, or have $1000.00 worth of work on a $500.00 gun? How do you have a division where you expect manufacturers to step up and develop better products when they don't know if it will be allowed or not, or if there is some kind of price cap. Some want it a pure carry division, others want it to be DA Limited.

Honestly, I shoot Production, but I really don't care where this falls. I'll probably shoot the same, IPSC legal stock G17 I shoot now. I just want some direction before they start making more or worse rules that don't serve a purpose. If you come out and say, this is primarily an entry level division, then a price cap and extremely limited modifications would be the rule of the day. If you want DA Limited, well that's a whole different critter.

From my perspective I'd like to see the 10 round limit stay. I enjoy doing my reloads and not hosing rounds. We should allow sight changes regardless. At least to notch and post without changing the dovetail. Keep grip tape allowed. Personally I don't care if you refinish the gun in the stuff. It's cheap and anyone can get it.

Don't use a factory parts rule like IPSC. It creates way too many problems. It would require Chrono Staff or someone at a match to be familiar enough with the guns to know the difference. That would lead to inconsistencies. Unfortunately we've got folks that would take advantage of it. I know because I've shot several majors in the last two year with folks that have a rather interesting view of what's legal and what's not. (if I don't get caught I'm golden).

As far as minimum trigger pulls go. If you have to implement one, implement two. There should be one for DA guns and one for Striker guns. Does anyone think that a 5 pound limit on a Glock is the same as on a CZ with a 6 pound first shot and a 1 1/2-2 pound pull on every other shot?

[Bob Hostetter]

Changing up Production Division huh..............

While I think the are problems with the Production rules as they are written I would recommend being very careful about making big changes.

Things I would leave alone.

The 10 round mag limit

Minor only scoring

holster rule

No external mod's

Things I might change

Eliminate any machining of the slide (and I say this having buried BoMars on my G34)

Change mag holders rule to same as L-10

No aftermarket parts, internal or external including barrels, modify them as you will

[Loves2Shoot]

The only reason I want to drop the 10 rounds is because it is a leftover of the Klinton era. I hate everything behind the reasoning for 10 rounds restricted mags.

I'll load my 16's to 10 as long as everyone else does.

On trigger pull, getting people to measure it the same and the DA/SA issue Chuck stated would definitely mix things up.

(FYI, I do have an income from making XD's shorter travel and/or lighter pull.)

[Vlad]

If I was king of USPSA, a minimum trigger pull would mean just that, minimum. I don't care what trigger you have, the lightest pull, DA, SA, Striker, should not be less the X. That means that if the number is 5lb then your Glock's every pull should be no less then 5lb, and my CZ's SA should be no less the 5lb.

BTW, I shoot a CZ and I will fully admit that the DA first shot is not that much of a pain, and it MAY add .10 to my draw. The rest of the shots are the majority and they should be subject to the minimum trigger pull. Some people could argue that if a Glock has a 5lb trigger, the CZ SA should be allowed to be 4lb, but I think that pointless complexity.

[Nik Habicht]

Things I might change

No aftermarket parts, internal or external including barrels, modify them as you will

So no aftermarket springs? Nobody downloads heavy bullet loads to 130-135 pf anymore?

If I was king of USPSA, a minimum trigger pull would mean just that, minimum. I don't care what trigger you have, the lightest pull, DA, SA, Striker, should not be less the X. That means that if the number is 5lb then your Glock's every pull should be no less then 5lb, and my CZ's SA should be no less the 5lb.

Ooooh! Evil! I like it.......

[Radical Precision Designs]

Nitpicking should be left to "hairdressers" to handle, otherwise you can spread it like a disease.

Production/factory, should remain just that. The problem I see is that "dictating" certain parameters will have the influence of changing the "route" for future designs versus "free enterprise" by the factories. Every time someone "meddles" with "genetic engineering" of anything we end up with something that looks like clones of a bad nightmare.

Limiting the guns to eliminate "all" normally (non Glock feeling or similar style) single action guns is ludicrous and detrimentally leading. It's hard for me to undertand how so many presently existing non-1911 single action guns are excluded from the mix so arbitrarily. It indeed pushes manufacturers to design Glock and Beretta clones "only" in the future, in spite of the many S/A safe designs out there. That is of course, while sneaking a "selected" few disguised ones through????

Yes, many normally available "production/factory" guns presently sold ARE 9mm by "buyers choice". If this indeed is meant to entice these shooters, why should we penalize them by pushing the "major power trend dogma", and relegate them to second class penalized shooters? Leave it at minor, as it won't give an advantage by power factor alone. I still find it laughable that you can shoot 9mm bullet sized cartridges in Open so long as they are loaded "major", but you can not do the same in Limited.

As for magazine capacity? We fought it very hard to reverse the High Cap ban, yet we are imposing our own????? Presently if shooters wish to use 10 rounds mags by choice or State law it is (or should be) irelevant to our "game" law makers. Perhaps a simple ban on non-flush mags would be sufficient, and leave the actual "normal" capacity choice to the "gamers" and see which particular guns will go to the top after scrimage. But, please allow some new shooters to be able to participate, even if all they have is an old /new Browning HP or Beretta S/A, or even and old Polish "Radom" or Star PD or B, etc. It is a start, and to penalize "new" shooters unless they go out and buy a new first shot D/A or DAO gun is ridiculous. You have no idea how many shooters I know that presently wish to shoot "Production" either as a start or as an alternative will not do so because they have nothing in their sometimes extensive "arsenal" of "actual production" guns that will qualify with the arbitrary rules as they are. (That is, unless they go and "specially buy" a NEW gun from the approved LIST?)

I can understand the desire and need to keep the 1911 single stack from the mix, and it is commendable, so long as they have created a niche for it in a class. But this single stack class precludes oh so many non 1911 that have no place to go, and ARE legitimate PRODUCTION guns both old and newly made.

There, my $0.02 and got it off my chest. Boy, oh boy. I feel so much better. (maybe I should start a new thread as a "rant" in the "Hate" forums about this! )

Edited August 21, 2006 by Radical Precision Designs

[Vlad]

Production/factory, should remain just that. The problem I see is that "dictating" certain parameters will have the influence of changing the "route" for future designs versus "free enterprise" by the factories. Every time someone "meddles" with "genetic engineering" of anything we end up with something that looks like clones of a bad nightmare.

Limiting the guns to eliminate "all" normally (non Glock feeling or similar style) single action guns is ludicrous and detrimentally leading. It's hard for me to undertand how so many presently existing non-1911 single action guns are excluded from the mix so arbitrarily. It indeed pushes manufacturers to design Glock and Beretta clones "only" in the future, in spite of the many S/A safe designs out there. That is of course, while sneaking a "selected" few disguised ones through????

Do you really think manufacturers care that much? I think people will develop firearms that work for military, police, and self-defence, and only then worry about competition. Lets face it, there are a few other division not placing design limits and I note that they are RULED by a single design. So much for innovation and variety. At the same time in the restricted production division we have true variety. That is because placing limits allows different designs and ideas to compete on their abilities as defensive firearms, not the amount of lead pills you can fit in it, and how light the trigger can be. And, yes, the 10rd limit is one of those things making things better. It is not about the ban or state laws. To me it is about skill, stage planning, and practical considerations. Heck, I don't even care is the number gets changed from 10 to 15 or 17 or whatever, as long as a rational limit exists to contain a capacity arms race, though I do like the 10 just fine.

As for magazine capacity? We fought it very hard to reverse the High Cap ban, yet we are imposing our own????? Presently if shooters wish to use 10 rounds mags by choice or State law it is (or should be) irelevant to our "game" law makers.

Yeah .. but most USPSA production shooters I know like the limit. I'm refering to people who shoot production at most matches they attend. Their opinion should matter, don't you think?

Perhaps a simple ban on non-flush mags would be sufficient, and leave the actual "normal" capacity choice to the "gamers" and see which particular guns will go to the top after scrimage.

Actually part of that is a really good idea, flush fitting mags only should be part of the spec.

But, please allow some new shooters to be able to participate, even if all they have is an old /new Browning HP or Beretta S/A, or even and old Polish "Radom" or Star PD or B, etc. It is a start, and to penalize "new" shooters unless they go out and buy a new first shot D/A or DAO gun is ridiculous. You have no idea how many shooters I know that presently wish to shoot "Production" either as a start or as an alternative will not do so because they have nothing in their sometimes extensive "arsenal" of "actual production" guns that will qualify with the arbitrary rules as they are.

Outside 1911's and its spawn, how many single action designs are on the market right now? A few specialized CZ's and EAA's? Even the current Browning HP is trying to go DA. Oh, and they would be welcomed in L10.

[Loves2Shoot]

Yeah .. but most USPSA production shooters I know like the limit. I'm refering to people who shoot production at most matches they attend. Their opinion should matter, don't you think?

FWIW

We are having new shooters shooting limited minor because they think the 10 round limit is dumb and they think they need more rounds... 10 round limits gives an advantage to the better shooters and not the newbies.

But voting on it would be interesting. I think it probably depends where you are. Maybe reduce the limit to 6 rounds and combine production and revolver. (just kidding folks)

I've been shooting production lately a bit and shooting minor is fast and fun. I could care less about the mag changes. It is still fun, if I couldn't do them ok they might be frustrating.

Edited August 21, 2006 by Loves2Shoot

[Nik Habicht]

On the capacity limit: I like it primarily because it lets more guns play on a level field i.e. the 13 round Beretta .40 shooter or the 13 round Glock .45 shooter (shooting what they already own) aren't at a handicap going up against an 18 round G17 or a 19? round CZ SP-01 Tactical.....

[smokshwn]

+1 with Chuck.

I bought a CZ last year simply because I thought it would afford fun breaks from open once in a while. In doing so I started paying more attention to production rules etc.

It definitely seems that the BOD has some diametrically opposed goals for production which is where rule confusion takes place. If you want an inexpensive introductory division then it will require a whole different set of rules than if you want manufacturers to start actively participating with new designs. etc. etc. etc.