Possibility Of Modification Tightening In Uspsa Production

[Flexmoney]

March/April 2004, Inside NROI on page four.

Flex,

You mean if John A. says something is illegal in Front Sight it doesn't count as a ruling/clarification so we don't have to abide to it?

Rich

JA's column in Front Sight isn't any more official than us posting here or a bunch of us gathering around a table in a bar after a match. He is stating his opinion. Kinda like we are stating our opinions here. That doesn't mean his doesn't carry a lot of weight though. He is, after all, the head of NROI.

Same thing when Troy, Jay, Rob, Bruce, Gary (either wearing his AD hat or his RMI hat) come along and post here. They are offering their opinions...which do have a lot of experience behind them, but they aren't posting in an official capacity. (It is very nice to hear how the top officials in the game view particular issues...lots to be learned there.)

Officially, we have the USPSA Rule Book, which governs all USPSA matches. Within that Rule Book, we have rule US 11.8.3, which states that we have official rule interpretations on the USPSA website.

So, we have the green book and the "official" interpretations on the website in the rules area. Beyond that, we have...within an actual match...the chain of command that starts with the RO's call and ends with Arbitration.

If you think about it, that is the way it needs to be. Without that, Jonny Gunwrencher might...for example...weld extended dust covers onto those new metal Glock frames after having a brief talk with some RMI that he ran into at the safe area of local Section match. (Which would be OK for Open, but wouldn't be Limited/L-10 legal unless he made 500 and had them out a year?) [edit to add: I don't know the details, and we don't need to go into them here, but I think USPSA had a law suit from a similar situation at one point. ]

When JA, or any top official do put their opinions down, we ought to pay close attention. We will likely see them in a match...

[Nik Habicht]

March/April 2004, Inside NROI on page four.

Flex,

You mean if John A. says something is illegal in Front Sight it doesn't count as a ruling/clarification so we don't have to abide to it?

Rich

Rich,

I don't see anything on that page that looks like a ruling. What I see is an announcement that the issue will be addressed in the next version of the rules.

In the upcoming rules, USPSA will be taking a line similar to the way IDPA regulates their holsters. The following is taken directly from IDPA rules, and will apply to holsters for our production division.

"Holsters and ammunition carriers may not be modified and they must be used in their original factory condition."

At this time we will not be putting together a list of holsters that are allowed, rather we will give guidance on how they should be designed. For example: ALL retention features of the holster MUST be used. All holsters must fully cover the trigger when the pistol is holstered. The front of holsters for autos may be cut no lower than 1/4-inch below the ejection port. Revolver holsters may be cut no lower than half way down the cylinder.

I've already had a few questions about this new rule:

And that's where I stop typing. I see no reference here to an actual rule ---- rather I see a suggestion that we can expect changes to come ---- and I don't think they've ever been codified into an actual rule or rules.....

For now, modifying holsters would appear to be legal....

[RIIID]

Nik,

Read on, John answers a question about modifying a holster. He states it would be illegal to do so.

Rich

[Vlad]

I'm sorry but my logic circuitry tells me that Mr Amidon is out of the rule book by some distance if he actually states that. Based on what rules in our current book can such a ruling be made? How can you prohibit mods to something you could make yourself out of an old pair of jeans with a pocket knife and some thread, while staying inside the rules?

[Nik Habicht]

Nik,

Read on, John answers a question about modifying a holster. He states it would be illegal to do so.

Rich

Rich,

I read the whole thing. And right above the string of Q&A, following what I transcribed earlier is this sentence:

I've already had a few questions about this new rule:

Followed by 4 examples, three of which he deems legal --- adding velcro to stabilize a magpouch, rounding an edge, heating and bending of kydex --- and two of which he deems illegal --- lowering the ejection port to more than a quarter inch, cutting off the bottom of a Glock 19 holster to allow a Glock 17 to share the same holster. Nowhere is the actual new rule cited ---- and I can't find a reference to it in the current rulebook. This leads me to believe that NO SUCH RULE EXISTS at the present time......

When I called Blade-tech to have the dropped and offset made for the G-21, I asked them to make the bottom straight, because I knew I already had the six inch upper coming. They manufactured the holster to my specs. The two dropped and offsets I own for the 9mm guns were bought within the same year --- yet they are different. Tough to police these holster rules, if they ever show up.....

[RIIID]

So why does USPSA allow John to write a column and give out false infomation? Did the person who was trying to get the g19 into a g17 holster go out and buy a new holster based on John's answer? People are relying on Johns info he gives out.

The whole point of the prior posts is to show how ridiculous the rules are in Prod. and how it is almost impossible to enforce the rules. This is probably why nobody even attempts to enforce them. There are shooters using illegal equipment and don't even know it. Some know that they're using illegal equipment and do so knowing that equipment checks are almost nonexsistent.

As to holsters and mag holders, the people who want Prod. to be box stock guns the allied equipment should also be box stock.

Whether modifying holsters and mag holders is legal or illegal right now only John can answer that. Correct? If Flex's comments are true about what John says it is just his opinion, why does everyone turn to John for an answer?

Lurking BOD members tell the membership the truth as to John offical status in his responce to questions. People are relying on what he says verbablly, e-mails, and Front Sight.

Rich

[ysued]

One more chance to beat a dead horse.

If the BOD wants to play with the rules it means nothing if they DON'T enforce them. They haven't enforced the rules we have now. So why would a new set of rules be any different. If you think I'm encouraging people to go out and cheat I'm not, USPSA has been doing it for the last 6 years.

All I have to say to the BOD if they declare existing equipment illegal, it is only going to hurt the organization. If one looks back, it is the "USPSA Way" to cost its membership money for their (USPSA's) own mistakes. Define what Production is first, then and only then can a set of rules can be effective. This needs to be in black and white printed in the rule book.

Rich

AMEN RICH!!

The BOD must first Define Production!!

OTOH, what do yo mean they don't enforce the rules??

I got put in Open in the 95 Area 3 for having a Plastic Grip plug in my G17!! I see that as enforcement!!

There are still a lot of people that don't think milling the slide is a benign change. Those folks who would have to sell their whole Glock because they have a, now, legal modification. Glock won't sell slides, Caspian won't sell slides. So if you've got a Bo-Mar now, you're f'ed. Just about any change in the rules is going to affect someone. If it's not done with a specific purpose in mind it's just pointless and arbitrary.

This Bomar issue is USPSA's fault, for approving the Milling of slides in the first palce!!

IMHO, this modification should have never been approved!!

Some are pissing and moaning over the SS Guide Rod, and calling it and external modification, then, WTF do you call milling the living crap out of your Slide to burry Bomars in it??

Guys, let's not turn every dovosion into LIMITED!!!

What next, allow Hi-cap frames in Single Stack??

[Chuck Anderson]

I wouldn't exactly say I was pissing and moaning Yamil. The milling of the slide is an external modification as well. One that is specifically approved in the rules.

[Steve Moneypenny]

IPSC doesn't allow the modification of the slide to install sights.. i'm sorry but XD's and glocks are just fine with heinie, sevigny and all other sights out there without lightening the slide. so all USPSA guns that have had that done are no longer IPSC legal which stinks.

[ysued]

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.

I don't know what you shoot, but with Winchester White Box from WallyWorld, my ammo cost is lower than Reloading, & I don't have to deal with the hassle of reloading!!

Reloading 9mm Costs:

Brass

Primers

Bullets

Powder

Cleaning Media

Cleaning Media Polish

Electricity to run the Tumbler

WWB 9mm $12.00 for 100

I wouldn't exactly say I was pissing and moaning Yamil. The milling of the slide is an external modification as well. One that is specifically approved in the rules.

Well, this is one of the things Bruce G is probably refening to.....

It says sights are OK, Not Milling the living $hit out of the slide to burry Bomars!!

The rules probably didn't mean "ALL" Sights, they probably meant on the "ORIGINAL" Dovetail, but then, this was a BOO-BOO in the writing of the rules and a detail that was left off!!

Thge rules need definition and lots of cleaning off, seems that the more loopholes are left on the rules, the more Production will go towards Limited DA!!!

Right now, unless USPSA wants to piss Off lots of shooters, the Bomars will have to remain, it's too late for that!!

but IMHO Bomars are a pain in the Arse!! more moving parts to break off at the wrong time!!

I have seen several Bomar Brades Fly off in the middle of a Stage, Pins Break and Screws shatter, but I have never seen a Heinie or a Novak Sight Break!!

Just my $.02

IPSC doesn't allow the modification of the slide to install sights.. i'm sorry but XD's and glocks are just fine with heinie, sevigny and all other sights out there without lightening the slide. so all USPSA guns that have had that done are no longer IPSC legal which stinks.

My point too!!

Thanks

[DaG]

A while back there was talk about USPSA aligning itself more with the rules of IPSC. Why doesn't USPSA go ahead and adopt the IPSC rule as it relates to holsters. I think this would put a stop to alot of the er,um discontent about the rule. Run whatcha brung so to speak. As long as the holster position is enforced, whats the big deal? Me personally, I'm actually slower with a race holster, but I am not going to complain if someone else uses one. Holster mods.....I love a DOH but without a small spacer, my thumb hits the offset every time. I'm still within the 50 mm rule also. I also understand that prod. was started to entice new shooters to come and play with everyday gear and maybe the powers that be think the new shooters perception is that they can't compete without a race holster. If more and more restriction are added, aren't we going to hurt the division rather than help it?

DaG

[ysued]

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.

You have hit the Head on the Nail

The problems lies in that the Rules are so loose and ambiguous, that some folks have interpreted them in the manner that suits them!!

I really don't thinks that the USPSA BOD really meant to allow Milling for Bomars when they allowed replacing sights on Production!!

Too late now!!

[Vlad]

I don't know what you shoot, but with Winchester White Box from WallyWorld, my ammo cost is lower than Reloading, & I don't have to deal with the hassle of reloading!!

Reloading 9mm Costs:

Brass

Primers

Bullets

Powder

Cleaning Media

Cleaning Media Polish

Electricity to run the Tumbler

WWB 9mm $12.00 for 100

Hmm $120/1000 Lets do the math on reloading. 124gr PD bullets $51/100, 4.2gr of TG works out to less the $10 per 1000, $20 for primers, brass is basically free, I can't remember when I last bought any, mostly I get it from all the people who think that WWB is cheaper then reloads and leave it on the ground. If you really want to buy it then you can pay about $20 without searching hard. Thats $101, but it should be about $81 which is what it cost me. To me $40 more is not cheaper

It says sights are OK, Not Milling the living $hit out of the slide to burry Bomars!!

Actually it does say that, as approved by NROI and the BOD. BTW, if you search for the related thread about bomars, you will note that no one actually thinks that milling the slide makes any competitive advantage. On a glock the weight you remove, you end up putting back with a steel sight instead of plastic one. It doesn't even matter if you like them or not, the guy next door does.

Production needs clearer rules. But it USPSA production, unlike IPSC production, needs to account for the realities of firearm ownership in the US. People who don't shoot IPSC, think it is perfectly sane to upgrade sights and do trigger jobs. That is part of the compulsive need American gun owners have to make their guns uniquely their own. And it isn't even a bad thing, considering the crappy factory triggers we see on most guns and the afterthoughts that sights are on a lot of guns.

As for holsters ... They are a last bastion of practicality when it comes to the rest of gear. What is practical about a limcat? I have no need to make Open and Limited shooters use realistic holsters, but Production should at least attempt to keep alive the flame.

[ysued]

Hmm $120/1000 Lets do the math on reloading. 124gr PD bullets $51/100, 4.2gr of TG works out to less the $10 per 1000, $20 for primers, brass is basically free, I can't remember when I last bought any, mostly I get it from all the people who think that WWB is cheaper then reloads and leave it on the ground. If you really want to buy it then you can pay about $20 without searching hard. Thats $101, but it should be about $81 which is what it cost me. To me $40 more is not cheaper

How's this... i don't want to reload 9mm!!

I'm waaay to busy for a few bucks I save, I can work and make up the money I save in one shoot!!

BTW, have you tried to buy components lately??

Ammo and Components has takedn a 25%+ Hike in the las 4 months!!

WWB 9mm at $130 for 1K is looking better every day now!!

It says sights are OK, Not Milling the living $hit out of the slide to burry Bomars!!

Actually it does say that, as approved by NROI and the BOD. BTW, if you search for the related thread about bomars, you will note that no one actually thinks that milling the slide makes any competitive advantage. On a glock the weight you remove, you end up putting back with a steel sight instead of plastic one. It doesn't even matter if you like them or not, the guy next door does.

Like I said before, Its too late now for the bomars!! But i still think the decision was wrong!!

Edited September 3, 2006 by ysued

[GeorgeInNePa]

Hmm $120/1000 Lets do the math on reloading. 124gr PD bullets $51/100, 4.2gr of TG works out to less the $10 per 1000, $20 for primers, brass is basically free, I can't remember when I last bought any, mostly I get it from all the people who think that WWB is cheaper then reloads and leave it on the ground. If you really want to buy it then you can pay about $20 without searching hard. Thats $101, but it should be about $81 which is what it cost me. To me $40 more is not cheaper

How's this... i don't want to reload 9mm!!

I'm waaay to busy for a few bucks I save, I can work and make up the money I save in one shoot!!

BTW, have you tried to buy components lately??

Ammo and Components has takedn a 25%+ Hike in the las 4 months!!

WWB 9mm at $130 for 1K is looking better every day now!!

It says sights are OK, Not Milling the living $hit out of the slide to burry Bomars!!

Actually it does say that, as approved by NROI and the BOD. BTW, if you search for the related thread about bomars, you will note that no one actually thinks that milling the slide makes any competitive advantage. On a glock the weight you remove, you end up putting back with a steel sight instead of plastic one. It doesn't even matter if you like them or not, the guy next door does.

Like I said before, Its too late now for the bomars!! But i still think the decision was wrong!!

Here's a few extra exclaimation points:

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I don't want to see you run out.

[Vlad]

How's this... i don't want to reload 9mm!!

I'm waaay to busy for a few bucks I save, I can work and make up the money I save in one shoot!!

Thats fine, my point was that they are not cheaper. On a lowly 550 It takes me about 2.5 hours to load 1000 rounds. With $40 savings that $16 per hour which is a hell of a lot less then I make for a living but it is not like I was going to rush to my office and work overtime for those hours anyway. Also, I like the way my ammo feel a lot more that WWB, which is almost more important then the savings to me. But seriously, keep on shooting WWB. I need the brass.

BTW, have you tried to buy components lately??

Ammo and Components has takedn a 25%+ Hike in the las 4 months!!

WWB 9mm at $130 for 1K is looking better every day now!!

Yup .. those prices are quoted are actual, today, you can buy them too, for real, prices. Yes I buy components all the time, as I use them up. Yes they are higher then the used to be but do you think Winchester buys their copper and lead from martian faeries? The prices on WWB are what they are most likely because of existing contracts, and won't stay there for long.

Edited September 3, 2006 by Vlad

[Flexmoney]

Hey kids...get a room, or get back on topic....mmm-k ?

(before some hardassed moderator type comes along and shuts this thread down)

[ysued]

Wouldn't they get bumped to Open?

I got bumped to Open at the 05 Area 3 because I didn't know that the Plastic Grip Plug was an external Mod, It was my bad for not interpreting the rules that were not expalined

Clarification is necessary

Just because you run an IPSC rules match you will start doing equipment checks for Production? What have you been doing for the last six years running under USPSA rules?

If the rules were enforced from day one in Production, we wouldn't have a six page thread about how to correct Production. It would have happened on day two. As long as there is no enforcement people will push the limit on poorly written rules.

Rich

My point exactly, rules are poorly written and are in need of clarification.

A complete re-write is not in the best interest of the sport, just a calrification of the rules and the enforcement of said rules.

Edited September 5, 2006 by ysued

[SA Friday]

My point exactly, rules are poorly written and are in need of clarification.

A complete re-write is not in the best interest of the sport, just a calrification of the rules and the enforcement of said rules.

Also my point, but I was more wordy. (Can you tell I write really long reports at work?)

Definitions don't really address if a tungstun guide rod should be allowed or if milling a Bo-mar sight into the slide is kosher. It can give you a basis to guide, but I think we are beyond the point where defining Production anything other than what we have now would do more harm than good to the membership of this sport.

This sport is fun and addicting, but expensive and intimidating to someone mulling over weather to give it a try. I like to believe the intent of Production was the BoD's way of trying to make it less expensive for beginners and less intimidating with average but evenly matched firearms. The BoD, in my opinion, met their initial goal. But... along the way, some of the established USPSA shooters figured out that production was a different "flavor" of the same game, and production evolved. The evolution wasn't so much from the aspect of equipment, but moreso in how Production was viewed and embraced as a legitimate part of the game by USPSA members. It was no longer just the entry level division, but a division with different challanges to master.

Polishing up the rules to production is just an extension of its evolution, and I cannot believe the BoD's intent is any more than just that at this point. General Jumper (used to be the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff) once said, "if you wait until you have 100% of a plan, you will get 0% accomplished."

[oddjob]

If the rules changed and you can't machine the slide (I hope it doesn't change). One could machine the "part" (like sights) to fit the slide. Then what? Anyways, my point is people will find ways to "bend" the rules.

[ysued]

If the rules changed and you can't machine the slide (I hope it doesn't change). One could machine the "part" (like sights) to fit the slide. Then what? Anyways, my point is people will find ways to "bend" the rules.

At this time, I think we are too far along to change the Bomar Ruling, IMHO it was a bad ruling, but wha's done is done, let's move on.

Some of us, me included are intent on making every division onto a form of "LIMITED", this IMHO is not the way to go. Clarify the Production Rules and move on!!

Y

[BBunin]

For all of you who seem to think that Production is turning into an equipment race and departing from the original intent, I've got a suggestion:

Return to the real world!

The real world can be found at the local matches, not the Nationals It can be found with the Unclassified or D/C shooter, not the GM/M shooters.

As someone who only began shooting USPSA in the last year, I can tell you that some of you are out of touch. The VAST majority of Production shooters are there because that's where you get started in this sport. There aren't a lot of new shooters that seriously think that they can beat the shooter who's been doing this for a decade or so. We want to shoot well, we want to go up in class, and yes, we want to win. But we have realistic expectations. Given that, MOST of us aren't worried abotu the equipment race at least in Production. We're there to have fun and get better. If we get enough better, we'll shift over to L-10 or Open and start with the serious mods. So what if the guy shooting before us has a trigger job? You can have one too, for not too much. So what if he's got FO sights? They're allowed and don't cost any more than the Trijicons many of us have on our bedstand gun.

Production should be a "Bring what ya got" division. Not a "You can only shoot it if it's still exactly the way it came from the factory" division. Most shooters personalize their gun a little. Keep the allowed mods to the things you'd see at the range; as it basicaly is, and leave it alone!

BTW, sorry if this seemed antagonistic, I didn't mean it to be. But I'm just not seeing the problems out at the local matches I'm shooting.

[ysued]

This argument was turned into a Moot Point at the last Limited Nationals!!

DAVID SEVIGNY!!

Nuff Said!!

Davids gun was a s plain as I've ever seen going into a Limited Nationals.

No Burried Bomars, no $300.00 Trigger Job!!

Guess what, That Bling is not necessary to win, take that Money, Buy Ammo and shoot!!

Y

For all of you who seem to think that Production is turning into an equipment race and departing from the original intent, I've got a suggestion:

Return to the real world!

The real world can be found at the local matches, not the Nationals It can be found with the Unclassified or D/C shooter, not the GM/M shooters.

As someone who only began shooting USPSA in the last year, I can tell you that some of you are out of touch. The VAST majority of Production shooters are there because that's where you get started in this sport. There aren't a lot of new shooters that seriously think that they can beat the shooter who's been doing this for a decade or so. We want to shoot well, we want to go up in class, and yes, we want to win. But we have realistic expectations. Given that, MOST of us aren't worried abotu the equipment race at least in Production. We're there to have fun and get better. If we get enough better, we'll shift over to L-10 or Open and start with the serious mods. So what if the guy shooting before us has a trigger job? You can have one too, for not too much. So what if he's got FO sights? They're allowed and don't cost any more than the Trijicons many of us have on our bedstand gun.

Production should be a "Bring what ya got" division. Not a "You can only shoot it if it's still exactly the way it came from the factory" division. Most shooters personalize their gun a little. Keep the allowed mods to the things you'd see at the range; as it basicaly is, and leave it alone!

BTW, sorry if this seemed antagonistic, I didn't mean it to be. But I'm just not seeing the problems out at the local matches I'm shooting.

[chp5]

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.

. . . 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?

I respectufully disagree with this statement and I also don't believe there's meaningful equipment race in Prod.

I've shot Dave S's G34 and it's stock, except for the guiderod, springs and sights. I've felt some Angus-modified triggers and, while the SA stage is light, the reset is long.

If you want to go spend $ on tweaking your Prod gun - then fine - it's your choice. You're looking for a hardware fix for a software issue. Part of the fun of this sport is messing with your set-up within the rules.

Making the rules more strict will lessen gun diversity because more people will likely gravitate to the gun that's best suited - straight from the factory.

If you beat me, it's not because you had a lighter trigger or Bomars melted into your slide.

Can the rules be clarified - YES. Do the rules need major changes - NO.

[Chuck D]

In PD...you see your share of modified guns...some modified so much as to be deemed "not in the spirit" of the division.

"If you beat me, it's not because you had a lighter trigger or Bomars melted into your slide."

I remember flying to Arizona in December of 1988 and having a "young" TGO tell me that the two most important modifications you can make to your pistol, other than tuning for reliability, that will most likely improve your scores were "triggers and sights."

It was true back then...and it's true now...and I'd be willing to bet that his XD he's using at Nationals this very day has buried Bo-Mars and a 2 pound (or less) trigger pull.

"Making the rules more strict will lessen gun diversity because more people will likely gravitate to the gun that's best suited - straight from the factory."

I don't advocate nazi type rules nor do I advocate wholesale changes...just a tweaking and clafification of what we already have.

It's a bonafide fact that people will modify their equiptment in whatever was possible to give them a competitive edge. If this were NOT true...why don't I see a wealth of "nearly stock" or "stock" guns in leather carry type holsters ?

Edited October 12, 2006 by Chuck D