Possibility Of Modification Tightening In Uspsa Production

[Two Mikes]

But....devil's advocate here.....what makes grip tape so special? Why give it a pass, but not all the other stuff that's getting used in Production? The reason I ask is that I don't want my product banned, but holy cow, it's not like other manufacturers don't have a lot more invested in this gig than I do. I'm not sure I like treating manufacturers and gunsmiths like they're part of some conspiracy to ruin production. They're just giving the market what it wants: performance.

Grip tape offers some performance advantages but its primary benefit is a more secure grip, which is a safety improvement. Grip tape is unrelated to the mechanism of the gun or its original design, which remains box-stock.

Sight are similar in that new sights don't impact the mechanism of the gun or its orginal design. Better sights means more accuracy, which offers improved safety to a lesser degree than Grip Tape.

How is that for range lawyering without a license?

[Chuck D]

After being around this game for 20 years the one thing I can count on is that the guys at the top will seek out the mechanical advantage modifications offer and the rest of us will spend our last dime purchasing whatever technology the GM's deem necessary to perform at their best. To say that shooter X or Y doesn't need this or that modification is a non-starter. Yup, Dave Sevigny or TGO could beat me with a slingshot and a pocket of rocks but if they won a Nationals with that set-up, there was a time when I'd show up at my local gunshop with my Visa card willing to pay just about anything to purchase the winning combination. If I was willing to do so....how many people feel that they have to do so?

USPSA has 3 Divisions in which modifications/customizations are allowed...hell even encouraged. Can USPSA members have just one Division where a barrel change, guiderod change, and a 1.5 pound trigger are not perceived to be the keys to shooting better scores?

Whatever USPSA decides to do...they can do. My G21 will remain as it is, 99.5% stock Glock. For those pesky IPSC matches where capacity isn't restricted...my G17, set up identically as the G21, will be ready to go. I'll show up...hopefully I'll do as well as I think I can and I'll spend minutes if not hours explaining why my gun(s) don't have wiz-bang triggers, Wolff springs, Aftermarket connectors, and Bar-Sto barrels like Shooter X or Y. I'll offer up my answers which will most likely fall on deaf ears and will almost always be followed by "boy it's expensive to shoot this Division....."

P.S. Eric's grip tape rules.

Edited August 22, 2006 by Chuck D

[Two Mikes]

Mandating the use of factory ammo...wtf! Heck, stop all reloads so you have just one power factor for all to shoot, regardless as to how well or poorly their gun runs. Glocks supposedly run better with hotter loads, do we then allow that for them but not for another mfg? Is that a competitive advantage for them to use 135 or 140 over a 125 or 130?

Using off the shelf new manufactured ammo completes the "box stock" off-the-shelf philosophy. Reloaded ammunition is no different than changing out springs. Both are a form of customization to deal with recoil.

The ideal situation would be that a competitor could go to a gun store and pull ammo and a firearm off the shelf and compete without the need for gunsmithing or other mods.

I'd also get rid of the Single Action prohibition in Production. If a gun is box-stock, it should be able to qualify in the division, regardless of the action.

In my little kingdom the divisions would be broken out as follows

Production - Box Stock / Off-The-Shelf Firearms and Ammo

Limited and Limited 10 - gunsmithed, tweaked, and custom guns with customized ammo

Open - electronic sighted guns

PS - Eric's Grip Tape Rules

Edited August 22, 2006 by Two Mikes

[mscott]

I think requiring factory ammo is the worst thing I've seen in this thread yet. That would effectively double my ammo cost and I just wouldn't put up with that.

[EricBudd]

While I'm not a huge fan of the 2 lb Glock/XD/M&P triggers in production, I think they should be allowed so long as they are using stock parts in the factory configuration. If you can polish and trim springs to get the trigger you want - go for it.

I also don't like cutting the slide for a different sight dovetail or for Bowmars. but that ship has sailed. So long as the sights are notch an post, lets just shoot.

I don't think we should allow changeing the material/design of the guide rod. Shoot what came with the gun.

I don't care about springs. Use what works. A +10 wolf magazine spring or a differnt weight recoil spring doesn't matter.

Leave the holster and magazine rules the way they are. Works fine and eliminates the preceived need to buy expensive race holsters. It also makes production much more approachable to new shooters and IDPA crossovers.

Factory ammo is a no go. You have to reload in this game to keep costs down. Only way I see factory ammo for production is if every other division has to use factory ammo. Good luck on that.

Just tighten the rules so that thay are clear and unambigious and leave the division alone.

Eric Budd

[Bob Hostetter]

Production was supposed to be a division where you shot a Production gun, ala a 'stock' gun. Something you could buy off the shelf at any local sporting goods store. You were to be allowed internal reliability modifications and that was about it. This would keep the costs down, and ensure the winning difference would be the shooters skill and not the shooters pocketbook. It would be a little self servicing for anyone to honestly say we have stuck with that idea.

The 10 round rule ensures that all calibers fit the class, if you eliminate that then the 45's and maybe the 40's would disappear. If you went to factory ammo, the 45's and the 40's would be gone overnight. Springs are a reliability issue to match the ammo and the shooter so you need to be able to tune with them. Sight's are kind of a personal thing so if you want to change them out that should probably be ok as long as they fit in the stock dovetail and are the same notch and post design.

Otherwise they should be required to use 'stock' parts as delivered from the factory. That was the orginial idea and we should stay with that and make the necessary rule changes to ensure that happens.

PS: Nothing against Eric but grip tape is an external modification and shouldn't be allowed. AND if it is then checkering should also be allowed because they both serve the same purpose. The only difference between the two is cost.

[Jim Norman]

This has been said before, but a large part of the problem is not what we'd do if we were starting over with a clean sheet, but rather what can we do now to clean up the situation without really annoying and causing a great gnashing of teeth by all of those that have invested in Production Division under the rules as they currently stand and have been interpreted to mean.

I would have said reliability mods only.

Clean up the trigger, use any parts the manufacturer supplies, or identical aftermarket parts. Why? Because one thing you have to have is a rule that can be enforced with out having a factory Gunsmith present at every match form every conceivable manufacturer.

Grip Tape, OK, Checkering OK, Re-Configuring the shape, NO

Springs, certainly.

Guiderods, only if they match the original, that is, no Recoilmaster/Springco type. Only match the type and composition.

Sights, Adjustable yes, overhanging Bomars, No, but since they already exist, do we force everyone to change? No.

Equipment position, As current. Also, no Race Holsters.

10-Round limit retained, for all the good reasons mentioned. It allows more guns to play.

Waive the 1-year requirement, so long as the number is shipped. Not sure, how do we know what XYZ Firearms Company really shipped? The year requirement means they can't claim to have shipped 2,000 guns of a new special Production Rule design three weeks before the Nationals. The Factory team could have had them for a year to practice with, the rest of us would have at best a week. I think the year is a good thing. I might however lower the number from 2,000 to 1,000 units. I would not allow specials to be claimed to be the same, that is a G17 is a G-17 and a race version is a different gun, not a variant. This for the same reason as the 1-Year. We don't want the factory team to have what we can't.

Allow any darn finish you want on a gun. Why should we have to send a gun back to the factory to get it re-blued. Why can't we send it off to have it chromed or painted or anodized? (Yes, I know we can now. I would keep this)

Trigger, only the profile that is factory original. Same for barrels. (Glock C models and any other similar situations are addressed and I would keep this as an allowable modification.)

Speaking of Glock, and any other that this may apply to. G-17 Generation 1 is a gun, change the grip angle, add finger grooves, add checkering, etc. is this a new model? Or a generational change? Does it need to meet the 2,000/1-year mark to be allowed? We need to address exactly what is allowable in a generation change versus a new model. Just keeping the model number is not sufficient. Changing the name or model number should likewise not toss the gun from the list. This is probably one of the toughest items that will need to be covered.

More later, maybe

Jim

[bruce282]

P.D. rules could use a bit of "tightning up" actually.

Triggers: good luck...I honestly have no idea what to do there.

The rest of the gun seems quite simple....stock FACTORY parts only except sights.

I always thought that allowing "replacement, aftermarket" barrels went a little overboard.

10 round limit is a must unless you want to limit participation to 17 plus round 9mm caliber guns only.

I agree with Chuck, stock parts except sights (and grip tape ). I also have no idea what to do about triggers, I know I was pi$$ed when IDPA declared my SSP holster and mag holders illegal 2 days after I bought them, so I can feel for anyone who has had trigger work done, and now it might be illegal.

My Glock 17 has 1 non Glock part on it, the front sight, and the rear sight has been flipped to get rid of the white outline.

I don't care about trigger pull either way, checking it might get to be a bear at some big or not so big matches. I like 10 rounds, reloading is part figuring out how to shoot the stage, that said once I get my C card, I am going to shoot Limited Minor once just to be able to shoot a lot before reloading.

Bruce

[peashooter]

Just the number of responses on this thread tells me that if the rules are screwed with too much, we'll have an IDPA style rebellion on our hands.

Clarify the language, such as to define US Appendix D9 21.4 "action work to enhance reliability ( throating, trigger work, etc.) is alowed.

Remove the "etc" and define "action work to enhance reliability".

Might I suggest this: Action work to enhance function and reliability is allowed, such as; Throating, polishing of trigger and other action components, replacement of springs or spring units.

I add the spring units since some manufacturers use captured spring units.

[Chuck Anderson]

You want a real "Production" Division? Glock sponsors it and donates 50 Glock 17's to USPSA. They are available at all Area and National matches. Remington supplies the factory ammo. Shooter gets drawn at random to pick their bone stock gun and has 30 minutes to clean and inspect it each day. There you go, level playing field. Other than that, ain't gonna happen.

Here's the reason I like allowing some of the limited modifications. They allow cheap guns to compete with expensive guns. I've got about $100.00 into a G-17 as my Production gun. Sights, Grip Tape, ligther striker spring and a 3.5 connector. With these mods, I've got everything I want to compete. There isn't anything I would do to make it go faster.

That said I would feel at a disadvantage shooting a box stock 17 over some other guns.

The nice thing about allowing some of these mods is that I can go head to head with the $1200.00 PC5906 or the Stainless fancy Sig's or the Tanfoglio Custom Stock and feel right at home. What advantages do those guns have over my plain jane out of the box Glock? Well they've got better sights, got my replacement sights, check, they've got a better gripping surface with checkering from the factory, got my grip tape, check. and they've got a nice fancy trigger. Well now mine is decent too. So for $500.00 I've got a competetive gun. If I couldn't do any mods, would I still shoot Glock? Hell no. I hate the factory sights and the gun feels all slick with nothing on it in my hands. The modifications serve the purpose of allowing some of our less than perfect guns to get to a level playing field with minimal mods and minimal expense.

[smokshwn]

This would keep the costs down, and ensure the winning difference would be the shooters skill and not the shooters pocketbook. It would be a little self servicing for anyone to honestly say we have stuck with that idea.

I totally agree with an effort to have a division which maintains some sort of reasonableness (is that a word) with respect to cost. However to suggest that limiting modifications somehow makes it a "shooters" division is simply BS. It doesn't matter which division you shoot in the best shooter wins regardless of equipment mods. Take a look at Max's gun. It is not nearly as trick as a lot of guns out there. Hell he doesn't even run an AFTEC. What a maroon!!!! how can he win with that setup??

[Derwoodski]

You want a real "Production" Division? Glock sponsors it and donates 50 Glock 17's to USPSA. They are available at all Area and National matches. Remington supplies the factory ammo. Shooter gets drawn at random to pick their bone stock gun and has 30 minutes to clean and inspect it each day. There you go, level playing field. Other than that, ain't gonna happen.

Here's the reason I like allowing some of the limited modifications. They allow cheap guns to compete with expensive guns. I've got about $100.00 into a G-17 as my Production gun. Sights, Grip Tape, ligther striker spring and a 3.5 connector. With these mods, I've got everything I want to compete. There isn't anything I would do to make it go faster.

That said I would feel at a disadvantage shooting a box stock 17 over some other guns.

The nice thing about allowing some of these mods is that I can go head to head with the $1200.00 PC5906 or the Stainless fancy Sig's or the Tanfoglio Custom Stock and feel right at home. What advantages do those guns have over my plain jane out of the box Glock? Well they've got better sights, got my replacement sights, check, they've got a better gripping surface with checkering from the factory, got my grip tape, check. and they've got a nice fancy trigger. Well now mine is decent too. So for $500.00 I've got a competetive gun. If I couldn't do any mods, would I still shoot Glock? Hell no. I hate the factory sights and the gun feels all slick with nothing on it in my hands. The modifications serve the purpose of allowing some of our less than perfect guns to get to a level playing field with minimal mods and minimal expense.

+1 to lawman....I think you have hit on something here that is important, For the most part, stock auto pistols have come along way in function and reliability, and a new shooter(I am one.....six matches) don't have to break the bank to play. I can spend $400 on an off the shelf glock, taurus, CZ75, another 100 for Holster, mag holders, belt. Some extra mags an ammo and I am up and shooting. As long as the gun runs, it can out run all but the very best shooters. Why do we see 41% glock usage on this forum?? like lawman said, buy one, grip tape, sights(personal preference), mags , and you can be competitive. That said I placed 7th out of 16 shooters in production with a freakin HI-POINT 9mm for chrissakes, IN MY FIRST MATCH...and that is the cheapest of the cheap!! was it the gun???

the trigger job.....no....it was cause i PRACTICED WITH IT TILL MY HANDS BLED! I say Leave the Rules alone and go buy 5000 rounds of ammo....instead of some fancy widget...and get to shootin. May the best shooter (notice i didn't say best GUN) win!!

[RIIID]

To allow checkering is an even bigger oppurtunity to get a gun to fit your hand. Take a CZ/clone and checker all the way into trigger gaurd and then the bottom of the trigger gaurd. No big deal unless 50 to 60 thou or more are taken off first then checkered. Big change and to the average RM would never catch it. Allow checkering no way.

I don't think the BOD should be allowed to tell how a trigger job can be done internally. To do so opens up liability upon USPSA. Leave that to the gunsmiths.

I don't think the 2.oz over factory was added to stop people adding 1.9999oz of grip tape. It was in my opinion to let the shooter use a tungsten guide rod and keep it in check. Where else or how would you add weight to a gun that can't have external mods. Oh wait, put strips of lead on the grip and cover it with grip tape.

It's in the nature of the sport and the shooters to have gun work done. If it wasn't allowed we would be shooting Revos and WWI 1911's right now. What the intended purpose of Production was never conveyed to the people that count, the shooters. Look at Limited Division it was supposed to be a way for stock iron sighted guns a place to play. Todays Limited Div. is in no way anything like what was invisioned in the beginning except for optics and ports.(now compensators are legal Trusight)

All suggestions and options should be looked at, new rules are put out for input and so should should Production changes. If there is a loophole, shooters will find it.

Rich

Edited August 22, 2006 by RIIID

[tptplayer]

You want a real "Production" Division? Glock sponsors it and donates 50 Glock 17's to USPSA. They are available at all Area and National matches. Remington supplies the factory ammo. Shooter gets drawn at random to pick their bone stock gun and has 30 minutes to clean and inspect it each day. There you go, level playing field. Other than that, ain't gonna happen.

Here's the reason I like allowing some of the limited modifications. They allow cheap guns to compete with expensive guns. I've got about $100.00 into a G-17 as my Production gun. Sights, Grip Tape, ligther striker spring and a 3.5 connector. With these mods, I've got everything I want to compete. There isn't anything I would do to make it go faster.

That said I would feel at a disadvantage shooting a box stock 17 over some other guns.

The nice thing about allowing some of these mods is that I can go head to head with the $1200.00 PC5906 or the Stainless fancy Sig's or the Tanfoglio Custom Stock and feel right at home. What advantages do those guns have over my plain jane out of the box Glock? Well they've got better sights, got my replacement sights, check, they've got a better gripping surface with checkering from the factory, got my grip tape, check. and they've got a nice fancy trigger. Well now mine is decent too. So for $500.00 I've got a competetive gun. If I couldn't do any mods, would I still shoot Glock? Hell no. I hate the factory sights and the gun feels all slick with nothing on it in my hands. The modifications serve the purpose of allowing some of our less than perfect guns to get to a level playing field with minimal mods and minimal expense.

Another +1

[n2ipsc]

...I know I was pi$$ed when IDPA declared my SSP holster and mag holders illegal 2 days after I bought them, so I can feel for anyone who has had trigger work done, and now it might be illegal...

Wait 'til your 5" 625 is declared illegal the same week you bought it...

(It's that "unprecedented stability" of the rules thing...tongue firmly in cheek )

[ipscbob]

How about asking ALL of the members to vote on future rule changes or adding divisions? This would probably require a proxy or ballot to go out to all members.

[Chuck Anderson]

Not sure that is a workable solution. BOD can barely get some stuff through with only 8 votes. I can't imagine having everyone vote. Best best is probably going to be letting your AD know how you feel and be vocal about it. I have been and I'm sure Bruce is getting sick of hearing from me.

[rishii]

I started shooting this game in 84, I became a life member in 94 and my original uspsa no. was A2812.

I've been reading these posts on production division for a while and it finally dawned on me why it sounded familier.

back when I started there was no open, limited, stock, revolver, production, BB guns etc divisions. everyone shot heads up, and you shot what you brung. if you wanted to shoot a smith model 15, fine, no problem, you just shot it against the guy with the full house boland comp gun.

back then the arguement was the gamesmen vs the martial arts.

the gamesmens pushed the rules, they shot the comp guns out of speed leather, in the quest to find the best way to win the match.

the martial artists, myself included, on the other hand wanted to hold ipsc to the basic foundations of the sport, which was the use of competition to find the best way to use a handgun in combat. we viewed the jedi knights with their compguns as ruining our sport. for many years my ipsc gun was my dept. approved sig 226 out of a desantis thumb break holster worn behind the hip. I never won a match, I don't think I even came close to winning a stage back then shooting against those damned gamer guns.

then I was seduced, I shot a racegun, I felt the power of the dark side and became one of them. I had a new lord and almost never looked back.

the gamesmen won, the martial artist were also seduced or fled to start a new game.

and don't get me started on the range lawers vs the stage designers flap.

now in 2006, in production division, there is a rift forming

the gamers are pushing the envelope on gun modifications, in the quest to find the best way to win a match.

the purest, wants production to be just that, box stock, no mods. buy it the gun store, take it to the match, and be competitive. and probally think, those damn gamer guns are ruining the division.

the middle ground, wants to allow some mods as spelled out in the rule book, but can not agree on how much should be allowed.

does it sound familar?

no matter what the BOD decides, they are not going to make everyone happy, and may just piss off a few. but if they drasticly change the rules after 6 years they run the risk of pissing off the majority to please a few.

my take on it,

tighten enforcement of the current rules, it started with the difficult ruling making that glock V***** trigger illegal in production, and should continue.

other than that, leave it alone.

[Irishlad]

Not that my inexperienced opinion matters much, but you have to be careful changing rules "midstream" when the Production category has increased so much...but!

It is a shooting "sport"...target shooting of sorts, so people like "improvements" that help shooting(more fun) with large round counts...unavoidable IMHO. It would be interesting to know how many people "improve" their gun or really just shoot it "stock".

Regardless, a minimum pull weight for all trigger pulls should have been implemented from the start because the only reason these non-SA type pistols even exist, is the heavier and longer trigger pulls. Take that away and what's the point of seperating handguns between SA and non-SA. That's an easy one IMO.

I can't see how modifying the grip to fit an individual's hand is a competitive advantage?

Adjustable or fixed sights...one is more money than the other, but an advantage?

If you want to keep it really "stock" and cheap, then you would have to have a "cap" on the cost. Because, as mentioned, it's okay to buy a $1200 gun with all the "goodies", but not modify your own gun up to the same standards? Waiting for "factory" improvements is not the best idea IMO. If you keep the "essence" of the gun, i.e heavy, longer trigger pulls, basic shape, weights of "stock guns", then "slicking up" the gun shouldn't be much of an issue I would guess.

I had a great analogy with Stock Car Racing, but it would take too long and you could argue the point either way . But, one thing is for certain, they take "great pains" to make sure the equipment is not the "deciding" factor.

[Hank Ellis]

This whole discussion reminds me of when I was motorcycle drag racing. It's like deja vu all over again.

I raced in C/S with a Kaw 900 Ninja. C/S stands for C Stock. The rule book for Stock was larger than several other classes combined. The intent of the division was to be entry level, bring your stock ride, slap on the number plate and let er rip. Didn't work out that way. Every little tiny bit of the bike was covered by the rules. How far down the fork tubes can you mount the triple clamps. What constitutes a 'working' generator. What fuel is legal. Swapping parts destined for other countries for US parts was common. My bike had Canadian jets and needles in US spec carbs. Degreeing of cams was OK. Ad nauseam.

The guys at tech inspection hated to a see a S, SS, or XS bike. The safety items was a given. They were looking for how blatant was the cheating. They would find something. I would whip out the rule book and we would have an on site discussion of the 'intent' vs 'the letter' of a particular rule. I'd still be there after 3 or 4 others had gone in, tore down, got blessed and left. No, I never got dinged on a ruling. But I did push it. We racers had a joke, "Glad the rules in the book is in a soft binder so they can bend." My gaming paid off. I set 3 of the 4 records. Speed and ET in the 1/8, ET in the 1/4.

What does this have to do with Production? Plenty. If we are not careful we can go down this same slope and have a division that is out of control on the rules. In my opinion the current USPSA rules work. It allows out of the box guns and shooters to compete on a level field. The slight customizing I see doesn't give a significant advantage. It still boils down to the shooter.

Sweeping changes isn't what's needed. A tweak here, a tweak there should do it. Be careful what you wish for, you might get it.

[ipscbob]

Not sure that is a workable solution. BOD can barely get some stuff through with only 8 votes. I can't imagine having everyone vote. Best best is probably going to be letting your AD know how you feel and be vocal about it. I have been and I'm sure Bruce is getting sick of hearing from me.

Didn't say it was possible today, but it IS neccessary for the organisation to grow and progress. Right now input from the membership is limited to a very small minority. Based on recent changes and additions to divisions and rules, it is obvious to me that the BOD is reacting to "special interest groups" and not the bulk of the membership........This is unhealthy and needs to change.

[toowide]

Every gun in my safe has been modified in some way to improve performance. Whether it is for carry, hunting or competition, something has been changed on it to make it work better for me. Doesn't everyone,if they can, change something to make it fit or function better or more to their liking. I am not saying go nuts with mods to production guns but the way the rules stand now seem to be working. as it has been said before in this string and requoted many times it is not necessarily the gun but the shooter that wins the match. And as for changing sights, anyone with a factory glock front sight that hasn't had it fall off yet... just wait.

[peashooter]

Here's a thought to ponder. It has been said that the PD is and was intended to be an "entry level" division. Uh, if that is true then why do we have GMs, Ms, and A and B class shooters in PD? It may have been thought to be an entry level division years ago, but it, like every other aspect of our sport, has evolved into something more. That "more" is a highly competitive division where more and more shooters who normally shoot Open or Limited, are shooting Production as a second gun. That is where a large number of the growth in PD has come from.

Leave it alone and let it continue to evolve.

[Derwoodski]

Here's a thought to ponder. It has been said that the PD is and was intended to be an "entry level" division. Uh, if that is true then why do we have GMs, Ms, and A and B class shooters in PD? It may have been thought to be an entry level division years ago, but it, like every other aspect of our sport, has evolved into something more. That "more" is a highly competitive division where more and more shooters who normally shoot Open or Limited, are shooting Production as a second gun. That is where a large number of the growth in PD has come from.

Leave it alone and let it continue to evolve.

+1

I don't expect to be competitive with a GM (or an A or B for that matter) and no amount of super duper mods Is gonna make the difference. Case in Point- I know of a certain Production shooter that has about $500 in mods to an XD 9mm tactical, 2lb trigger, buried bomars, who knows what else...still cant hit the broad side of a barn.....and there are those i have seen with guns that I know are stock...that kick #$$. Mods wont change a bad grip, poor trigger control, or slow reflexes.....Shooting is a physical skill. Rules will always be pushed to the very edge......otherwise we wouldn't need any.

[kdmoore]

My vote? Production = stock. Very few mod's. Use it to attract new shooters (everyone else can play, but it's not set up to cater to the experienced shooter). . As such, keep mod's to a minimum, as viewed by the checkbook. Trigger job = relative expense, so require all guns to be within an ounce of stock trigger. Same with weight. Same with sights (keep them stock).

IMO, it has NOTHING to do with the argument that shooters win matches, not guns (we all know that), and EVERYTHING to do with the fact that new shooters will shy from a division with any equipment race in it.

I like the idea of factory ammo. Keeps folks from tweaking springs/ammo to hit bare minimum threshholds. Not that these win matches (it's the shooter stupid ), but reloading can be seen as part of the equipment race. Allow reloaders to match a specific factory ammo so that they save their money? Well OK, but how much does it really cost to buy factory ammo for major matches? At the match, have that factory load, and test factory vs handload.

But what it really will come down to? Is it worth "rocking the boat"? I think so. All who complain that their mods are now wasted are also the ones who would be driving newbies away from an equipment race, or "encouraging" newbies to spend money to keep up. What gives them the right?

Is it worth the "administration"/gun checks? Well, I cave a little here. If you can agree to gun weight checks, trigger pull, chrono checks, not that big of a deal. Don't like the trigger check? Allow the competitor to perform one (with a calibrated guage) himself.

About me:

I shot IDPA for a couple of years. Shot a couple of USPSA matches and decided to shoot that + IDPA and then we lost our local match. As a relatively new shooter, and a potential "cross over" I can tell you that creating a niche where few mods/$$ will help. Newbies/Crossovers are still getting used to the idea of the cost to play.

Edited August 25, 2006 by kdmoore