Simple Production Division Pistol Rules

[ihatepickles]

Everytime I read a rules discussion, it eventually becomes a debate about the intent of the rules. There's a single way to determine the intent of the rules, request a ruling from the NROI.

[Z-man]

Seeing the turnout and level of competition at the recent production nationals, I would say that the division is running quite well. I'd hate to see a good thing screwed up. If we were to look closely at the guns used by the top shooters I don't think we'd see the supposed problem that keeps bringing these discussions up. My guess is that the majority of the guns used meet everyone's ideal for what production division should be (be it entry-level, inexpensive, not super-racy, etc.). I'm just not convinced that the rules need changing.

[Chuck Anderson]

Everytime I read a rules discussion, it eventually becomes a debate about the intent of the rules. There's a single way to determine the intent of the rules, request a ruling from the NROI.

That would be a great idea except the BOD can't decide what the intent should be. And NROI, and John Amidon had nothing to do with creating Production so why would they be the keeper of the secret special knowledge that the BOD doesn't know?

Production never started with an "intent". That is why things are goofy now and no one can decide how to fix them.

As far as the rules suggested, I'll pass on them. The any caliber that makes PF just doesn't do it for me. I'll stick with the 9mm minimum. Also, what would be the 5" bbl gun for ammo testing. Does the match have to keep that five inch bbl gun on hand? what if the shooter wants to shoot a .32 H&R Mag revolver with a 6" bbl? Will that make PF?

I think minor changes should be allowed. Allowing sight changes, guide rods, grip tape and some trigger work takes that cheaper, more accessible gun and puts it on a competetive level with those $1600.00 super Sigs and any other fancy gun that wants to compete.

[Loves2Shoot]

Tangfolio tried to build a better mousetrap for IPSC and it got banned, and it seems they were trying to stay within the rules. I would hate for USPSA to reject better mousetraps WHEN they come down the pipe.

I personally have XD's, Glocks, CZ, and Sig production guns. Most of the stuff people nitpick about don't really seem to matter much when it comes down to the shooting part, but I'm all for getting better and cheaper gun to the general public.

I don't get the DA production mentality, I understand it keeps the 1911/2011's out, but it still doesn't set well with me, especialy with the Triggers you can get on the XD and Glocks. There are several really good guns that meet the production criteria that are SA and not 1911/2011 guns.

The Division is a fun challenge and hope people don't get sidetracked about stuff that really doesn't matter and totally mess it up like IPSC did.

[chuckw]

And NROI, and John Amidon had nothing to do with creating Production so why would they be the keeper of the secret special knowledge that the BOD doesn't know?

How do you figure that? US production rules are totally different to IPSC production rules, so the NROI must've had a different specific intent to justify the change!!!

Edited October 29, 2006 by chuckw

[Chuck Anderson]

Because my understanding, and of course it could be flawed, is that the NROI enforces the rules and the BOD creates them. Kind of like the legislative and executive branch. It's like asking a cop what the intent behind a law is. You'll get his opinion but it's not from the people who made the law.

[Flexmoney]

If we were to look closely at the guns used by the top shooters I don't think we'd see the supposed problem that keeps bringing these discussions up. My guess is that the majority of the guns used meet everyone's ideal for what production division should be...

You sure would see these very issues.

From a shooting perspective...I really don't care what gun my competition is using. What I'd hope to avoid, and I'm not sure we are doing so with the loose clarity we have with the current rules, is the old saw "you gotta have fan$y equipment to compete in USPSA/IPSC". People believe that crap. And, when I look at some of the guns being used by top Production shooters...I can see that we aren't doing anything to negate that belief.

Chuck covered it pretty good here:

I think minor changes should be allowed. Allowing sight changes, guide rods, grip tape and some trigger work takes that cheaper, more accessible gun and puts it on a competitive level with those $1600.00 super Sigs and any other fancy gun that wants to compete.

[caps]

Because my understanding, and of course it could be flawed, is that the NROI enforces the rules and the BOD creates them.

I think you're right but why hasn't the BOD stated their intent behind USPSA production division rules?

[Chuck Anderson]

Because the BOD can't decide what that is. Some of the AD's think it should be one thing, other think it should be another. I doubt anybody sat down and said, "This is what Production should be." when it was started. As a result we have everyone with their own opinion.

[smokshwn]

If we were to look closely at the guns used by the top shooters I don't think we'd see the supposed problem that keeps bringing these discussions up. My guess is that the majority of the guns used meet everyone's ideal for what production division should be...

You sure would see these very issues.

From a shooting perspective...I really don't care what gun my competition is using. What I'd hope to avoid, and I'm not sure we are doing so with the loose clarity we have with the current rules, is the old saw "you gotta have fan$y equipment to compete in USPSA/IPSC". People believe that crap. And, when I look at some of the guns being used by top Production shooters...I can see that we aren't doing anything to negate that belief.

I am relatively new to USPSA but I have been active in the shooting sports my entire life. In all actuality there will never be an end to the old arguement that "I need XX gun or XX dollars to be competitive". As human beings it is somewhat of an inherent response to think we can buy instead of work toward competency. This arguement is never made by those who excel, it is only made by those who constantly make any excuse they can for their own lack of hard work and performance. Our sport is somewhat expensive to compete at an advanced level, but comparitively speaking it wouldn't even make the radar in almost any other form of shooting sport given an equal participation level. I won't even start to compare shooting to other hobbies (my neighbor spent almost $5k to go waterskiing/wakeboarding four times this year).

Given this production is about as good of an entry level division that we can offer a new shooter or shooter on a budget. People have to accept that there will always be a minimum level of investment regardless of the hobby.

[Z-man]

Flex, I wasn't at this Production nationals, but I have shot with some of those shooters and what they were using seemed pretty close to stock. I'm very interested to hear what the issues were that you saw (not naming names of course). As I said, I haven't really seen anything that concerns me.

[BBunin]

What I'd hope to avoid, and I'm not sure we are doing so with the loose clarity we have with the current rules, is the old saw "you gotta have fan$y equipment to compete in USPSA/IPSC". People believe that crap. And, when I look at some of the guns being used by top Production shooters...I can see that we aren't doing anything to negate that belief.

Huh?

I wasnt there, but from what I understand, Rob shot a stock XD with a trigger job and better sights.

Dave S shot a box stock Glock with a new set of sights

The others were much the same.

What am I missing here?

[Trey]

I think minor changes should be allowed. Allowing sight changes, guide rods, grip tape and some trigger work takes that cheaper, more accessible gun and puts it on a competetive level with those $1600.00 super Sigs and any other fancy gun that wants to compete.

+1

Amen to this simple concept!

[EricBudd]

I think minor changes should be allowed. Allowing sight changes, guide rods, grip tape and some trigger work takes that cheaper, more accessible gun and puts it on a competetive level with those $1600.00 super Sigs and any other fancy gun that wants to compete.

+1

Amen to this simple concept!

++1

Isn't this about what we have now?

[moverfive]

If the supposed problem with Production relates to the ultimate price tag of a gun, then nothing will ever solve that problem. You cannot change someone's first impression or easily change a formed opinion.

And I think trying to mold a division's rules around a misguided perception is bad policy.

Some of issues that I think people are insinuating as a problem seem to mirror very closely with the issue from several years ago when folks were claiming that if they didn't have hi-cap magazines, they were not competitive in limited or open.

People are too quick to blame equipment. Many of those same people are also too quick to forget that the top two finishers of the first two limited nationals were using single-stacks. In fact, Barnhart used ball ammo to win the first one. And this was against those unfair hi-caps. As Benny Hill likes to say - it is the Indian and not the arrow.

So again I ask - what is wrong with the current production rules that causes an unfair competitive advantage and thus is causing many to say the rules need to changed/severely modified?

[Ara]

My comment about the "intent" of Production being an entry level division stems from comments leaders have made, mostly in writing, probably in Front Sight. If you look at the official Single Stack rules, at the very beginning you will find the official "purpose" of the SS division. Interestingly, we don't have an official purpose for any other division including Production, so now we have MPD. (Multiple personality disorder).

The question isn't so much "what's wrong with Production" as much as "what can we do to attract more shooters into our organization"? I believe it was Andy Hollar that said Production was designed to attract new shooters in hopes of increasing membership. So they can take the gun off the shelf...etc...well, it didn't really do that. What I've seen is lots of cross overs like myself. So maybe its time to relook at Production with a fresh perspective not from a "this is not fair, that is not fair" but for the sake of the overall sport.

[moverfive]

Production is not a division for beginners. It is a division that was created to allow an easier avenue from which to begin competition and allow other disciplines to compete with their existing equipment. And this purpose is the same with Single Stack division - hence its stated purpose.

If any division was intended to be a 'beginner' division(s), it wouldn't have classifications above D - much less GM. And it sure wouldn't have a place in the Nationals.

Now if anyone thinks that improving the feel of the trigger, changing fixed sights to Bo-Mars, refitting the barrel presents an unfair advantage and is a deterrent to a new shooter.......those new shooters weren't going to remain in this sport in the first place. Assuming they even feel the need to spend that money to have a gun "like everyone else's gun," the amount for those upgrades is just a drop in the bucket for the dollars they are going to be spending in this sport.

Bottom line: their off-the-shelf gun in their hands is just as competitive as any other gun out there. Heck, I could put an open gun in their hands and they would still finish dead last in production division.

It isn't the gun.....but at the same we need to keep a separation between Production and Limited (or L-10). And I think the current rules do provide that distinction.

[Z-man]

+1 Ara

I like the idea of thinking about how to improve the whole of USPSA by bringing in more members particularly through Production rather than revamping something that seems to be working quite well. On a side note, I'm still curious though as to what people consider to be "wrong" with the division.

[raz-0]

Sorry everyone, it's my fault. I used to shoot L-10, so that's what everyone bitched about. now I shoot production, so it's what everyone bitches about now.

If I go out and buy an open gun, I really ahve to wonder what kind of complaining regarding the rules will crop up then.

My motto... "shut up and shoot"

Becasue frankly, unless you REALLY, HONESTLY feel that the difference between where you finished and first place in yoru division came down to the gear, that's what you need to be out doing.

[SA Friday]

There is an inherent expense to starting this sport. Those with the most money have an inherent advantage in starting regardless of what division. Why? They can afford bullets, brass and high-dollar instruction to help accel at a faster rate. No matter what is done with the rules in production, you cannot escape this simple fact. There are obviously other factors which will affect a beginners learning curve, but they are moot as it pertains to this discussion. Some people just have better eye sight or hand speed/coordination etc.

I agree with Flex that there is an impression to beginners that they need this gismo or that gun to be competitive, but I think this impression is derived from a lack of a beginners understanding as to what causes an elevation of skill. As I see it, the best way to stop this impression is mentorship of beginners by the more experienced shooters, not by modifying production rules. Dave S's Limited win this year did more to eradicate this misconseption than any rule change ever will.

I started shooting in March this year. I read the rule book before I started, and understood the production rules just fine. The rules are simple as is, and some learning curve is to be expected no matter what you change the rules to say.

I also agree with Ara that we should attract more shooters to USPSA, but once again I do not believe changing production rules is the best approach. Showing interested shooters that the rules could possibly change based on the prevailing winds is far from attractive. I suggest presentations to local gun club meetings would change beginner impressions more than changing production rules.

[ysued]

What happes if a Manufacturer produces a pistol that meets the specifications you listed but includes many of the features that you specifically prohibit adding as part of the base pistol? Integral magwell, high end sights, added weight, etc..

IMHO, that would be a simple Fix!!

The gun would not be Legal for PD!!

Why must we accept every gun that is mad out there??

There's nothing on the PD Rules that says that USPSA MUST Accept every gun manufactured for PD!!

IDPA Rejected the SS SIG 226 for weight!!

You will find that those rules would be unenforceable. Just like the ones we have now.

I saw a couple of shooters shoot Open and for No Score at the nationals, Rules were inforced!!

So, if rules can not be enforced, you say throw away the rules??

Wouldn't it make more sense to enforce the rules we have now??

[ysued]

Tangfolio tried to build a better mousetrap for IPSC and it got banned, and it seems they were trying to stay within the rules. I would hate for USPSA to reject better mousetraps WHEN they come down the pipe.

********************SNIP***************************************************

The Division is a fun challenge and hope people don't get sidetracked about stuff that really doesn't matter and totally mess it up like IPSC did.

I must agree here!! This decision by IPSC is beyond STUPID!!!

I have my hopes that USPSA will make better decisions!!

[Jman]

My head hurts.

[caps]

Tangfolio tried to build a better mousetrap for IPSC and it got banned, and it seems they were trying to stay within the rules. I would hate for USPSA to reject better mousetraps WHEN they come down the pipe.

I must agree here!! This decision by IPSC is beyond STUPID!!! I have my hopes that USPSA will make better decisions!!

Isn't the very same gun NOT approved by USPSA either?

[ysued]

Tangfolio tried to build a better mousetrap for IPSC and it got banned, and it seems they were trying to stay within the rules. I would hate for USPSA to reject better mousetraps WHEN they come down the pipe.

I must agree here!! This decision by IPSC is beyond STUPID!!! I have my hopes that USPSA will make better decisions!!

Isn't the very same gun NOT approved by USPSA either?

There you go!!

Some Folks whine because we don't approve every gun out there under the sun, whether they meed PD Criteria, but when a company spcifically follows the rules, what do we do????

Edited November 3, 2006 by ysued