IPSC Standard and USPSA Limited ???

[Esa1195]

On a slightly different issue: I'd be happy to work toward merging Limited and Standard...I'll give up my 6" STI and move my holster back two inches if IPSC allows 140mm magazines. It is a lot cheaper for half the world's shooters to buy new basepads than for the other half of the world's shooters to buy new magazine tubes

I had one 140 mm STI .40 tube. Shortening that 140 mm tube to 127 mm ( note: 1mm longer than standard 126 mm ) did cost 0 € to me, only few minutes of dremeling.

My opinion is that there is no real difference between Standard and Limited:

You can have:

- 1 + 19 capacity within IPSC box.

- 0.5x s draw from IPSC legal holster position

- 0.9x s mag change from mag pouch behind the hip bone.

Some things are just different, no real competitive advantage either way.

[Jim Norman]

On a slightly different issue: I'd be happy to work toward merging Limited and Standard...I'll give up my 6" STI and move my holster back two inches if IPSC allows 140mm magazines. It is a lot cheaper for half the world's shooters to buy new basepads than for the other half of the world's shooters to buy new magazine tubes

I had one 140 mm STI .40 tube. Shortening that 140 mm tube to 127 mm ( note: 1mm longer than standard 126 mm ) did cost 0 € to me, only few minutes of dremeling.

My opinion is that there is no real difference between Standard and Limited:

You can have:

- 1 + 19 capacity within IPSC box.

- 0.5x s draw from IPSC legal holster position

- 0.9x s mag change from mag pouch behind the hip bone.

Some things are just different, no real competitive advantage either way.

I would agree with this except for one thing. Slip with the dremel and your 140 is now no longer a 140 or a 126. It is so much expensive scrap metal. Change the box so the Limited gun will fit. As to getting rid of the race holster, why? Although , I will admit, that the holster and the mag pouch locations aren't the end all. Why should I have to give up my $140 holster and go buy another $65 holster?

My personal feeling is, both Standard and Limited work under Limited rules, Limited does not fit in Standard rules. Why not move towards Limited with Standard as a catagory???

Jim

[Mapzter]

I would agree with this except for one thing. Slip with the dremel and your 140 is now no longer a 140 or a 126. It is so much expensive scrap metal. Change the box so the Limited gun will fit. As to getting rid of the race holster, why? Although , I will admit, that the holster and the mag pouch locations aren't the end all. Why should I have to give up my $140 holster and go buy another $65 holster?

You wouldn't need to. Just move the holster behind the hip bone and you're good to go. I use a Safariland 012 for Standard division IPSC, no problem there.

My personal feeling is, both Standard and Limited work under Limited rules, Limited does not fit in Standard rules. Why not move towards Limited with Standard as a catagory???

Would you be willing to give up Special Condition 16 and 18? They're one of the major differences IMO.

[Jim Norman]

I would agree with this except for one thing. Slip with the dremel and your 140 is now no longer a 140 or a 126. It is so much expensive scrap metal. Change the box so the Limited gun will fit. As to getting rid of the race holster, why? Although , I will admit, that the holster and the mag pouch locations aren't the end all. Why should I have to give up my $140 holster and go buy another $65 holster?

You wouldn't need to. Just move the holster behind the hip bone and you're good to go. I use a Safariland 012 for Standard division IPSC, no problem there.

My personal feeling is, both Standard and Limited work under Limited rules, Limited does not fit in Standard rules. Why not move towards Limited with Standard as a catagory???

Would you be willing to give up Special Condition 16 and 18? They're one of the major differences IMO.

IPSC:

Special conditions:

16. A handgun in its ready condition (See Section 8.1), but unloaded and with

an empty magazine inserted, must fit wholly within the confines of a box

which has internal dimensions of 225mm x 150mm x 45mm (tolerance of

+1 mm, -0 mm). Note that all magazines must comply, failing which Rule

6.2.5.1 will apply.

18. Only porting of barrels is prohibited. Slides may be ported.

USPSA:

Special conditions:

16. Any complete handgun or components produced by a factory and available

to the general public for one year and 500 produced. Prototypes are specifically

not allowed.

17. Only porting of barrels is prohibited. Slides may be ported.

18. External modifications such as weights, or devices to control or reduce

recoil are specifically not allowed, such as but not limited to, thumb rest,

extended slide stops, etc.

IPSC 18 is same as USPSA 17

IPSC 16 refers to the box and I do not want to see that here. We have run without it for years and without any negative results. Why introduce it here and have it affect any number of shooters and force them to alter their equipment?

We do allow for a longer magazine in USPSA. Not likely I'll cut mine off. Maybe IPSC could adopt the 140MM and guage rules??

USPSA requires a minimum number of guns be built and available to the public. We prohibit prototypes. Apparetnly our rules would also prohibit guns available to only a factory team.

I would see no reason to give up USPSA Special Conditions 16 & 18. I might be convinced to use a box, providing that the magazines not need to be inserted.

Maybe we should all go back to first magazine needs to fit flush?

As to the holster, My error, I was under the impression that I could not use a Race Holster. I wear my CR nearly in IPSC position already. I have this thing about pointing my weapon at my gun.

Jim

[GeorgeInNePa]

I would agree with this except for one thing. Slip with the dremel and your 140 is now no longer a 140 or a 126. It is so much expensive scrap metal. Change the box so the Limited gun will fit. As to getting rid of the race holster, why? Although , I will admit, that the holster and the mag pouch locations aren't the end all. Why should I have to give up my $140 holster and go buy another $65 holster?

You wouldn't need to. Just move the holster behind the hip bone and you're good to go. I use a Safariland 012 for Standard division IPSC, no problem there.

My personal feeling is, both Standard and Limited work under Limited rules, Limited does not fit in Standard rules. Why not move towards Limited with Standard as a catagory???

Would you be willing to give up Special Condition 16 and 18? They're one of the major differences IMO.

Sure, as long as you'd be willing to give up the box. My slide racker and Ice Magwell won't fit in the box.

[Mapzter]

USPSA:

Special conditions:

16. Any complete handgun or components produced by a factory and available

to the general public for one year and 500 produced. Prototypes are specifically

not allowed.

17. Only porting of barrels is prohibited. Slides may be ported.

18. External modifications such as weights, or devices to control or reduce

recoil are specifically not allowed, such as but not limited to, thumb rest,

extended slide stops, etc.

USPSA requires a minimum number of guns be built and available to the public. We prohibit prototypes. Apparetnly our rules would also prohibit guns available to only a factory team.

I would see no reason to give up USPSA Special Conditions 16 & 18. I might be convinced to use a box, providing that the magazines not need to be inserted.

Sorry for not being more precise, I was only thinking of USPSA conditions 16 & 18. I see plenty of IPSC SD guns with thumb rests, which would be prohibited under USPSA 18. I also see prototypes (e.g. guns with custom barrels) often enough. I'm also concerned about enforcing USPSA 16. Do you require competitors to carry documentation that 500 have been built, and have been available for a year?

[Too_Slow]

I'm also concerned about enforcing USPSA 16. Do you require competitors to carry documentation that 500 have been built, and have been available for a year?

This part is certified by the factory to the USPSA to get the firearm allowed in the first place.

[wide45]

My take

IPSC Standard rules except;

Gun fits in box without mag.

Max. mag length 140mm. Actual 140mm, not 141+

Holster, equipment location on belt unrestricted.

IPSC Standard shooters will want to get new base pads.

Foward thinking USPSA Limited shooters are good to go with the gear they have.

[Jim Norman]

Just for the record...

Why do we care??

On or about 1 January 2008 USPSA will have our own rulebook. Here we shot Limited. When we run an IPSC match, we will have to run with IPSC gear, the rest of the time we run USPSA. Similar but different.

Jim

[JFD]

95%(est) of USPSA membership could care less what the IPSC rules are because we'll never shoot an IPSC match. Hopefully the BOD has enough sense to not go there.

I have a feeling the members would easily vote "get USPSA the hell out of IPSC" before they'd spend any money to deal with division equipment compromises between ISPC and USPSA. OR USPSA would get left in the dust of the new shooting sport that actually represents the interests of US shooters. I'd really hate to see that happen.

[GeorgeInNePa]

95%(est) of USPSA membership could care less what the IPSC rules are because we'll never shoot an IPSC match. Hopefully the BOD has enough sense to not go there.

I have a feeling the members would easily vote "get USPSA the hell out of IPSC" before they'd spend any money to deal with division equipment compromises between ISPC and USPSA. OR USPSA would get left in the dust of the new shooting sport that actually represents the interests of US shooters. I'd really hate to see that happen.

+1

[wide45]

I care.

There is no good reason why there must be difference between IPSC and USPSA divisions. It is just hard heads.

I think IPSC went the wrong way by persuing concealibility.

USPSA doesnt know how to say no

Things like this can be fixed, if everyone wants to fix them.

[bpowe]

Want to get away from problems with IPSC/USPSA differences? Do what I do... Shoot Open!

[Julien Boit]

There are also slight differences between USPSA Open division and IPSC Open division.

Minimum bullet weight (120 grains), and 170mm mag rule.

[dsb45acp]

The suggestions from Wide 45 make the most sense to me. I think that there can and should be a reasonable compromise. After all, I think most of us are just trying to shoot and have fun with it.

[bulm540]

95%(est) of USPSA membership could care less what the IPSC rules are because we'll never shoot an IPSC match. Hopefully the BOD has enough sense to not go there.

I have a feeling the members would easily vote "get USPSA the hell out of IPSC" before they'd spend any money to deal with division equipment compromises between ISPC and USPSA. OR USPSA would get left in the dust of the new shooting sport that actually represents the interests of US shooters. I'd really hate to see that happen.

+1

Ditto, Why fix something that ain't broke.

[chuckw]

I have a feeling the members would easily vote "get USPSA the hell out of IPSC" before they'd spend any money to deal with division equipment compromises between ISPC and USPSA. OR USPSA would get left in the dust of the new shooting sport that actually represents the interests of US shooters. I'd really hate to see that happen.

I still don't get it. If it's such a terrible marriage, why hasn't there been a divorce? At one time didn't IPSC tell USPSA to take a hike? If so, we didn't it happen? Better still, why doesn't the USPSA have a referendum and let the membership decide? Just put two questions in Front Sight magazine:

1. Stay under the control of a IPSC and use IPSC rules 100% or

2. Make a clean break and do things the American way -- and save money.

Any BOD types out there have anything to say? USPSA should give IPSC an ultimatum. Adopt USPSA rules or we quit!

USPSA is the dog -- IPSC is the tail -- let's get the wagging fixed up.

Edited October 28, 2006 by chuckw

[Jim Norman]

I have a feeling the members would easily vote "get USPSA the hell out of IPSC" before they'd spend any money to deal with division equipment compromises between ISPC and USPSA. OR USPSA would get left in the dust of the new shooting sport that actually represents the interests of US shooters. I'd really hate to see that happen.

I still don't get it. If it's such a terrible marriage, why hasn't there been a divorce? At one time didn't IPSC tell USPSA to take a hike? If so, we didn't it happen? Better still, why doesn't the USPSA have a referendum and let the membership decide? Just put two questions in Front Sight magazine:

1. Stay under the control of a IPSC and use IPSC rules 100% or

2. Make a clean break and do things the American way -- and save money.

Any BOD types out there have anything to say? USPSA should give IPSC an ultimatum. Adopt USPSA rules or we quit!

USPSA is the dog -- IPSC is the tail -- let's get the wagging fixed up.

Chuck,

I think that is exactly what is in the process of happening now. USPSA is writing its (our) own rulebook, It will go into effect in 2008. We will hold a minimal number of IPSC matches, essntially whatever number the member clubs decide, in order to choose a WorldShoot Team. Otherwise we will be shooting USPSA only. The 2000 dollars a year to IPSC is minimal, far less then the share that the US pays to the UN in a percentage basis, for which we get about the same treatment onj athe world stage. Anything US based must be bad.

SO while it will take a while to get the final decree signed, it looks like a divorce under the best possible of a lot of bad possible terms.

Jim

[GeorgeInNePa]

I have a feeling the members would easily vote "get USPSA the hell out of IPSC" before they'd spend any money to deal with division equipment compromises between ISPC and USPSA. OR USPSA would get left in the dust of the new shooting sport that actually represents the interests of US shooters. I'd really hate to see that happen.

I still don't get it. If it's such a terrible marriage, why hasn't there been a divorce? At one time didn't IPSC tell USPSA to take a hike? If so, we didn't it happen? Better still, why doesn't the USPSA have a referendum and let the membership decide? Just put two questions in Front Sight magazine:

1. Stay under the control of a IPSC and use IPSC rules 100% or

2. Make a clean break and do things the American way -- and save money.

Any BOD types out there have anything to say? USPSA should give IPSC an ultimatum. Adopt USPSA rules or we quit!

USPSA is the dog -- IPSC is the tail -- let's get the wagging fixed up.

Chuck,

I think that is exactly what is in the process of happening now. USPSA is writing its (our) own rulebook, It will go into effect in 2008. We will hold a minimal number of IPSC matches, essntially whatever number the member clubs decide, in order to choose a WorldShoot Team. Otherwise we will be shooting USPSA only. The 2000 dollars a year to IPSC is minimal, far less then the share that the US pays to the UN in a percentage basis, for which we get about the same treatment onj athe world stage. Anything US based must be bad.

SO while it will take a while to get the final decree signed, it looks like a divorce under the best possible of a lot of bad possible terms.

Jim

I've seen it posted by one of the AD's, I don't remember if it was Bruce or Gary, that if we were to walk away from IPSC, someone else would would run this region. There would be an IPSC region in the US, whether it's USPSA or another org.

There will be an IPSC following, if for nothing else than to get WS slots for the top shooters in this country. Then the limited number of sponsor dollars would be divided among USPSA and the new IPSC in the US.

Something to think about.

[chuckw]

I've seen it posted by one of the AD's, I don't remember if it was Bruce or Gary, that if we were to walk away from IPSC, someone else would would run this region. There would be an IPSC region in the US, whether it's USPSA or another org.

There will be an IPSC following, if for nothing else than to get WS slots for the top shooters in this country. Then the limited number of sponsor dollars would be divided among USPSA and the new IPSC in the US.

Something to think about.

Could we care less about another group taking over IPSC in the US? Are we so insecure that we're bothered if some organization with 123 members opens up when we have 20,000 members, a track record and national coverage? Sponsors will go where they get the most bang for their buck.

If USPSA holds IPSC matches we're still under their thumb! What happened to our pride? I say good riddance to IPSC and let's keep Limited the way it is right now and quit trying to appease a foreign organization.

[Jaxshooter]

I agree we should seperate from the IPSC. We should also stick to our rules regarding Single Stack if we are running the shoot . We should not have to comply to the Single Stack Society rules regarding holsters etc. This was brought up regarding equipment changes before this years SS Nationals.

What ever equipment rules are in place should stay in place so people don't have to modify or replace what they have been using. Look at IDPA changing the revolver barrel length from 5" to 4"' does it make a difference? NO

Edited October 28, 2006 by Jaxshooter

[Jim Norman]

My understandiong is...

USPSA will be the governing body just as it is currently is. Clubs will be free to run either USPSA Rules or IPSC RUles matches. USPSA will designate certain matches as IPSC Rules matches for the purpose of declaring a National IPSC Champion and selecting the World Shoot Team.

There is no reason for IPSC to put a competing orgainization in place.

First just who would run it and where would they shoot? If all the current clubs continued to shoot USPSA what ranges would be available? Would any of you change over your entire club and customer base to pure IPSC rules? No more Limited, L-10, SS? What about the changes to Production and Open?

Jim

[caps]

There is no reason for IPSC to put a competing orgainization in place. First just who would run it and where would they shoot? If all the current clubs continued to shoot USPSA what ranges would be available?

Sure there is. Wasn't it you who said the US -- the biggest member of IPSC should act like Japan or Guam -- the smallest members(?) -- and hold a token number of second-class lip-service IPSC matches just to hang on to the franchise? If it's only a matter of paying $2,000 to IPSC, that's only 100 members paying $20 or 200 members paying $10 -- hardly a big number for a new group to handle.

There are plenty of ranges to go around in the US so that won't be a big deal either. As to who would run it - anybody who wanted to shoot overseas and the world shoot and who wanted to run their own show.

Edited October 29, 2006 by caps

[Jim Norman]

Any your point?

USPSA can hold a the requisite number of IPSC matches. If you and your club and all the shooters that attend want to run under 100% IPSC Rules, no one is stopping you. However, remember much of your current USPSA Legal equipment will not work. And when you travel to a USPSA club, you may find that some of your IPSC legal gear won't be acceptable.

You say there are plenty of ranges an clubs. If so, why haven't you started an USPSA club or match at that range already?

Jim

[PhilTerry]

Any your point?

USPSA can hold a the requisite number of IPSC matches. If you and your club and all the shooters that attend want to run under 100% IPSC Rules, no one is stopping you. However, remember much of your current USPSA Legal equipment will not work. And when you travel to a USPSA club, you may find that some of your IPSC legal gear won't be acceptable.

You say there are plenty of ranges an clubs. If so, why haven't you started an USPSA club or match at that range already?

Jim

Can you give an example to support your statement " some of your IPSC legal gear won't be acceptable". I shoot IPSC Standard and Production all the time and can't think of one, but I may have missed something.