glockrocker Posted October 1, 2006 Share Posted October 1, 2006 I know this probably has been answered in the past but I can't find it. Can I hard chrome the slide on my production glock? I see production shooters with colored slides of different sorts on production guns but I don't know if it is legal. I know the rules say no external mods and I don't want to start another debate on why can you mill a slide for sights and not do this or that etc.....I just want to know if changing the color of a gun is considered a modification. It obviously changes the appearance, but it does not change the function or give any advantage. I'm curious and would like to hard chrome my slide because I'm way too obsessive and would like my production gun to match my others. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flexmoney Posted October 1, 2006 Share Posted October 1, 2006 "It will be now legal in the US to have your Production gun finish cosmeticly enhanceed,eg.Teflon,NP3,hard chrome, matt finish hard chrome, bright finish hard chrome etc., the Board of Directors felt that there is no advantaged gained, nor is it a ruling that could be enforced consistently." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
glockrocker Posted October 1, 2006 Author Share Posted October 1, 2006 "It will be now legal in the US to have your Production gun finish cosmeticly enhanceed,eg.Teflon,NP3,hard chrome, matt finish hard chrome, bright finish hard chrome etc., the Board of Directors felt that there is no advantaged gained, nor is it a ruling that could be enforced consistently." Flex, Cool! I see that your reply is in quotation marks. Are you qouting from the rulebook? Just curious. Thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
warpspeed Posted October 1, 2006 Share Posted October 1, 2006 he got it from Here Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Moneypenny Posted October 1, 2006 Share Posted October 1, 2006 US legal but why? most of the produciton gun finishes are plenty tough.. and it's gonna get uglied up if you use it a lot anyway... Lots of things are US legal but not IPSC kind of sad but the way things are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BritinUSA Posted October 2, 2006 Share Posted October 2, 2006 yep, this is a big no-no in IPSC land. In fact I don't think you can even re-blue the gun to it's original finish under IPSC rules. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
racerba Posted October 2, 2006 Share Posted October 2, 2006 yep, this is a big no-no in IPSC land. In fact I don't think you can even re-blue the gun to it's original finish under IPSC rules. You CAN reblue your gun, as long as it is done by the OFM. BTW, you can also mill the slide in order to put on sights in USPSA, but not IPSC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chuck Anderson Posted October 2, 2006 Share Posted October 2, 2006 One word, SIG. Those things came with the worst finishes for years. I think it was one step better than cold blue, but barely. From what I understand the current finish is a lot better but there are tons of used Sig's on the market for cheap. And then there's the guys who bought the NP3'd Glock and want to use it for Production. Nothing wrong at all about changing the finish if you want to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Norman Posted October 2, 2006 Share Posted October 2, 2006 Yet another good reason to shoot USPSA as opposed to IPSC. Enforceable rules and rules that make sense. If, and I am under the belief that it is, it is true that one cannot reblue the slide on a production gun in IPSC, unless it is sent back to the OFM, can anyone tell me what match has been won by the great competitive advantage gained by having one's slide cleanly finished as opposed to having the finish worn off? Jim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
glockrocker Posted October 2, 2006 Author Share Posted October 2, 2006 US legal but why? most of the produciton gun finishes are plenty tough.. and it's gonna get uglied up if you use it a lot anyway... Just vanity. I think it looks good and as far as the finish goes I had the slide on my limited gun hard chromed at tripp research and the thing cleans up easier now than with the factory finish. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GENE S Posted October 2, 2006 Share Posted October 2, 2006 Jim, There was the... then again I think it was the, well, lets see. Maybe not then. Gene Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chuck D Posted October 2, 2006 Share Posted October 2, 2006 Any chance this may change with the 2008 set of USPSA rules ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caps Posted October 2, 2006 Share Posted October 2, 2006 Yet another good reason to shoot USPSA as opposed to IPSC. Enforceable rules and rules that make sense. You mean like the Vanek trigger ruling? can anyone tell me what match has been won by the great competitive advantage gained by having one's slide cleanly finished as opposed to having the finish worn off? Good question. I'd like to know the same answer about having my Glock 34 grip stippled at home with a soldering iron instead of being forced to stick on pre-cut grips or inserting a plastic plug in the rear channel to keep out range dust or adding a fatter mag release so my stubby thumb can reach it or shaving the backstrap to make my grip more comfy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Norman Posted October 3, 2006 Share Posted October 3, 2006 Yet another good reason to shoot USPSA as opposed to IPSC. Enforceable rules and rules that make sense. You mean like the Vanek trigger ruling? can anyone tell me what match has been won by the great competitive advantage gained by having one's slide cleanly finished as opposed to having the finish worn off? Good question. I'd like to know the same answer about having my Glock 34 grip stippled at home with a soldering iron instead of being forced to stick on pre-cut grips or inserting a plastic plug in the rear channel to keep out range dust or adding a fatter mag release so my stubby thumb can reach it or shaving the backstrap to make my grip more comfy. Wasn't the vanek determined to be an external modifcation as opposed to just a trigger job? The stippling of the grips to me is not a problem, BUT where does stippling end and recontouring begin? Dust plug? If it were just the palstic, OK, but evidently some saw fit to fill the hole with either brass or lead. Actually you can I think chage between "stock" parts, do if the G-14 for example has the release you want, you can install it on your GXX Jim Any chance this may change with the 2008 set of USPSA rules ? I for one hope not, if you mean will USPSA forbid refinishing. Jim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caps Posted October 3, 2006 Share Posted October 3, 2006 (edited) Wasn't the vanek determined to be an external modifcation as opposed to just a trigger job? Yep but you said changing the finish of a gun does not give you a competitive advantage, and I agree with you, but the rules are still inconsistent coz just adding a plastic dust plug with no weight does not give a competitive advantage and I don't think the Vanek trigger job that externally moves a tiny pin a few thou gives an advantage either. The stippling of the grips to me is not a problem, BUT where does stippling end and recontouring begin? I don't know but I do know I can add a rubber sleeve that "recontours" my gun and makes my grip fatter but I can't shave off a few thou to make the gun slimmer to fit my hand better. Why is fatter allowed but not thinner? Is one a competitive advantage and the other one not? Edited October 3, 2006 by caps Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ima45dv8 Posted October 3, 2006 Share Posted October 3, 2006 (edited) ......but the rules are still inconsistent coz just adding a plastic dust plug with no weight does not give a competitive advantage I would have to disagree. The infamous Butt Plugs weren't disallowed only because they permitted someone to slip some additional weight into the rear of their pistol, but because the BPs also acted as a mini-magwell in that they removed a couple of the surfaces upon which a mag could hang during a reload. A definite competitive advantage.... and I don't think the Vanek trigger job that externally moves a tiny pin a few thou gives an advantage either. Unfortunately, John Amidon did not share your view. .......but I do know I can add a rubber sleeve that "recontours" my gun and makes my grip fatter but I can't shave off a few thou to make the gun slimmer to fit my hand better. If by "recontour" you mean changing the OEM profile of the grip, I don't think you can: US21.6 Aftermarket grips which match the profile of the OFM standard for the approved handgun and/or the application of grip tape or rubber sleeves is permitted. Modifications to grips, other than previously mentioned, not allowed, such as grooves cut to reach mag release or size reduction. Looks like the rules are pretty clear that aftermarket grips and/or sleeves must match the OFM profile. Rubber grip sleeves which include finger grooves are legal only on guns which had finger grooves to start with (i.e., Glock Gen 3 frames). You would not be permitted to put that same slip-grip on a Glock Gen 1 frame. That these approved grip-slips happen to add some small measure of girth to the frame (while leaving the original profile unaltered) is no grounds for disallowing them. The material isn't made of paper, after all. Edited October 3, 2006 by ima45dv8 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flexmoney Posted October 3, 2006 Share Posted October 3, 2006 The original question has been asked and answered. Lets not start another endless debate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts