Latest Bod Minutes

[vluc]

As for a minimum trigger pull, what guns are this being directed at? My SIG 226 can't come anywhere close to that 3 pound, so it seems to be more directed to the striker-fired style pistols. Are we to penalize such technological changes?

Not at all. Please show me a production gun, from the factory, which is striker fired and comes with a trigger lighter then 3lb. Heck, most good bolt action rifles, technicaly striker fired, have triggers heavier then that. Hell, show me a single action 1911 which has a trigger that light from the factory. If single action only guns don't have triggers that light, what sense does it make to have them in the non single action division?

You are correct, straight from the factory they do not. But few guns for folks that actively shoot are the same as they were straight from the factory. Like computers, they are made for the "general" shooter. Those that do more with them, or want to make them handle and feel more reliably, will tweak and modify their guns. Be that a drastic change like altering the geometry, or more subtle like polishing and spring changes to match up with the ammo they shoot.

Playing Devils Advocate here....I still don't understand the need to set a minimum. Getting after folks who truly change the geometry and dynamics on a trigger bar is one thing, polishing and use and finding the right spring combinations is another. Both may result in the same thing.

A 2 pound glock trigger is no more or less safe than a 2 pound 1911.

[EricBudd]

A 2 pound glock trigger is no more or less safe than a 2 pound 1911.

Of course, playing devils advocate, a 1911 has a thumb safety and a grip safety. A glock as a little lever on the trigger called a 'safety'. Besides, change/race your glock all you want - in Limited or L10 - it just (arguablely) isn't a production gun anymore. Oh yeah, a 1911 with a 2 pound trigger isn't allowed in production either.

[Jim Norman]

- it is perfectly possible for a club match of 20 or more people to take place, where every single one of those people can take home 1st in class in their division.

Please explain how this is possible.

You have to have a minimum number of shooters in a division to award a Divisional First, and you need a minimum number of people to awared a Class First.

This being true, with 24 people at a match, if they were evenly divided between our current 6 divsions, you would have 4 in each division. This is below our minimum for a Dinision win. We could have 4 in one class in each division, so there could be 6 first place A-Class shooters at this match. There is no way that all the shooters at a match can win.

Do the math. You need 5 in a division and three in a class to pay out a prize. This equates to 16 shooters per division and with 6 divisions that means you need 96 shooters evenly divided across all the divisions and classes to pay a first in each division and class. To pay down to third would require, if my match is correct 456 shooters spread evenly across all divisions and classes. That is 15 per division plus an extra person to win the division.

I would also second a call to have the removal of a division voted on by a controlled poll on the USPSA web-site. As I have stated, the poll I started here is totally unscientific, although as far as I know, you can only vote once. It seems to point to a strong preference to keeping L-10. Limited is a great division, but for a very large portion of the population, it is not achievable. L-10 is. If you really want to have the divisions split, then move to O10- L10, Production, SS and Revolver. Eliminate Limited and Open as they currently exist.

(That ought to start a few fires)

Jim

[Vlad]

Playing Devils Advocate here....I still don't understand the need to set a minimum. Getting after folks who truly change the geometry and dynamics on a trigger bar is one thing, polishing and use and finding the right spring combinations is another. Both may result in the same thing.

There are two reasons. First, it is supposed to be production. A 2lb trigger is nowhere near. Secondly, what practical method can you think of to test for all geometry changes on all guns on the production list? That can not be done. However setting a trigger pull limit to a number that can easily be achived without drilling the frame eliminates the need for such testing.

[Flexmoney]

So, why not a 3lb (or 4lb, since that is what most "traditional" combat 1911 smiths will let out of their shops) trigger pull weight for the 1911 ?

[bgary]

'cuz... we're not trying to preserve the validity of a double-action trigger in the division(s) where the 1911 plays. We *are* trying to preserve the validity of mass-produced, DA or DA/SA or otherwise non-single-action triggers in Production.

Plus, getting to a 3-lb trigger (or even lighter) in a 1911 does not require moving pivot locations, or otherwise changing the "design" of the trigger mechanism.

Just off the top of my head...

[shred]

Hey.. if 3.5 lbs is a good PD trigger pull, we can put the Singlestack 1911's in Production, since they'll all be the same, right? The shorter reset will make up for the skinny mags...

[Tim James]

"Competition Dilution"

I've asked this before. Could someone please explain to me how I can go to an autocross with 80 people and 25 classes and still have a good time? I usually race against 2 or 3 other people, most often my friends or relatives that I bring out. I still feel the competitive drive to get a few tenths to beat one other person. Why am I having a thrilling time without 20 people in my class?

I can't believe I've brought up Ayn Rand twice in the last year, but this seems appropriate: "whenever you think you are facing a contradiction, check your premises."

[zhunter]

Thanks to the AD's that have enlightened us with their views. It is nice to see why decisions are made. We might not agree with them, but at least we understand the theories behind the decisions.

+1 on the USPSA.ORG poll

This is the BEST information gathering tool they could EVER hope to acquire!!!

Just my thoughts, your's my be different.

[Flexmoney]

'cuz... we're not trying to preserve the validity of a double-action trigger in the division(s) where the 1911 plays. We *are* trying to preserve the validity of mass-produced, DA or DA/SA or otherwise non-single-action triggers in Production.

Ya just said ya wanted the (highly popular?) 1911 division to be for non race guns.

Plus, getting to a 3-lb trigger (or even lighter) in a 1911 does not require moving pivot locations, or otherwise changing the "design" of the trigger mechanism.

Bruce, I can't speak for the other guns in Production. I shoot a Glock. Regardless of what you've heard, it doesn't take changing the pivot location nor the geometry of the "sear" to get a Glock trigger under 3lbs. Springs and polish/smoothing would have me worried about the 3lb limit.

With the box and the trigger pull measurements, it looks like we are putting together our own lab in USPSA...who is going to be the lab technician ??

"objectively proven or measured"... you're going to have to define a very specific step-by-step process for measuring the triggers if you have any hope of this being objective at all. I've mentioned this in the past (maybe not in the rules forum), but if you have ten different guys measure a Glock's trigger pull...you will likely get ten different results.

[RickB]

I've been shooting L10 almost since the day it was implemented; I think the rule book came out on a Friday, and I MD'd our club match on Sunday. I've hardly shot anything but a single stack .45, and have never felt at a disadvantage when someone showed up with a hi-cap (the more, the merrier). My L10 "race gun" is not SS legal. A lot of talk about diluting competition, at the same time we're debating getting rid of the one catch-all division we have. Whether you shoot a hi-cap .40 (but can't get hi-cap mags), or a Glock 9 (with a 2# trigger), or a single stack .45 (that's too big or weighs too much), you can shoot in L10. If we want to have as large a competitive pool as possible, let's make L10 the ONLY division, instead of getting rid of it.

OK, back to reality. I agree that people shoot USPSA to "race", and it's hard to go very fast with 8-round mags and all of your gear behind the hips. I've been shooting with SS gear a bit (still registering in L10, so I'll have someone to shoot against . . .), and it isn't any fun. I love the idea of consistent rules for single stack matches, so whether I'm in Washington, or Oregon, or Arizona, or Illinois, the rules will be the same, but for the typical USPSA match, SS is a drag.

IDPA shooters who want to shoot USPSA can get some 10-round mags, and they're ready to go. Get rid of L10, and I suspect you will see a DECREASE in the number of single stackers in USPSA. In providing a "home" with SSD, we might actually chase people away, as those who are now shooting a single stack in L10 won't migrate to SS, they'll go to Limited or Production. One thing that I've always been able to count on from USPSA, is acting in the interests of current members, even when claiming something is being done to attract new members; don't disappoint me now. On the other hand, if I can just get that 18th round in my P14 mags . . .

[vluc]

Plus, getting to a 3-lb trigger (or even lighter) in a 1911 does not require moving pivot locations, or otherwise changing the "design" of the trigger mechanism.

Just off the top of my head...

Bruce, my 5 year old G34 still has the original trigger in it - polished both by a dremel polishing wheel and the 13K or so rounds put through. 3.5 connector, lighter striker spring, lighter recoil spring and it is under 3 pounds.

Not one changed pivot, not one design change.

[SteveZ]

Wow..I think I'm the poster child for what RickB just posted. I started out shooting USPSA with a single stack before there was L10. When L10 showed up, I thought "great, now I can compete with other guys shooting the same number of rounds as I am". Like RickB, I've tried shooting SSD equipment while registered as Lim-10 (and shot a few specialty SSD matches) and didn't have any fun....but when I started hearing the rumors of L10 demise back in the spring...I decided I was going to jump ship .... before the ship sank from under me. So I sold off my single stack and bought a hi-cap limited gun and switched divisions.....just like RickB said....this is going to result in fewer people shooting single stack guns rather than more.

If SSD was never created...all of the discussion (here) and decisions on the USPSA's part for replacing/eliminating L10 never would have happened...and I'd still be shooting L10 today. It's funny how we've run with 5 divisions for years....but once a provisional division was added to the mix we SUDDENLY have way to many divisions and are facing a dilution of competion....and the provisional division (from what I've seen/heard) only account for a few shooters at your average club match.

I didn't realize the difference between 5 and 6 was exponential.

Edited November 21, 2006 by SteveZ

[vluc]

A 2 pound glock trigger is no more or less safe than a 2 pound 1911.

Of course, playing devils advocate, a 1911 has a thumb safety and a grip safety. A glock as a little lever on the trigger called a 'safety'. Besides, change/race your glock all you want - in Limited or L10 - it just (arguablely) isn't a production gun anymore. Oh yeah, a 1911 with a 2 pound trigger isn't allowed in production either.

Sorry, it is still a production gun under the current rules.

If they created a Ltd minor or an L10 minor, I'd jump over there with no problem.

[vincent]

From what I see most of the posts about the Production trigger pull weight are showing that a minimum trigger pull would help level the field. There are many guns that can't easily get to the sub 3lb triggers that are so easily obtainable on the Glock (per the info from the posts in this thread). Especially the DA/SA guns that the division was made to help promote. Are there a lot of CZ, Sig, and Beretta shooters that are worried about a 3lb min from "hammer down"?

[BritinUSA]

Bruce, thanks for your posts. I agree with everything that you said. I like the idea of the categories and the reasoning behind them. Four main divisions (+ revolver) seems to be the best solution I have seen so far. Those states that have a high number of L10 shooters will have enough for the category to be recognised and prizes awarded just as they do now for the L10 division.

I like the idea of limiting what we check on Production. I'm still on the fence on the whole trigger pull thing but not as vehemently opposed to it as I once was.

I like the 'no machining of frame or slide (except for sights)' and presumably we allow the frame and slide to be refinished, right ? I see no competitive advantage to even chroming your production gun. In some states with high humidity it could help prevent corrosion, perhaps this could be addressed in the 2008 draft rules...?

The box is going to make life easier for manufacturers to meet our requirements, they can build a box and drop their new gun into it.

I was wondering if the 2008 draft rules will have a section in it, kind of a 'Guide to Manufacturers' explicitly laying out in very detailed terms what kind of guns are suitable for each of the stock divisions. And perhaps some mechanism where they can submit their designs for approval (in confidence) before they start the expense of actually making them.

I think this will go a long way to enhancing our relationship with the gun makers. The last thing we want is another Tanfoglio fiasco.

Your thoughts as ever would be apppreciated.

Thanks again for all your efforts.

[ima45dv8]

I honestly thought there was absolutely no way I could or would ever say this, but I'm starting to get a bad feeling about the Life membership I invested in earlier this year. And yes, it was an Investment -- not an expense. I did it more as a show of support for the organization than as a way to reduce my membership expenses over the next 20 years. I probably won't even be able to shoot USPSA matches that many more years.

With great appreciation for the time and trouble it took for some BoD members to come here and state at length their rationale for the ideas of eliminating L10 and putting a minimum trigger-pull weight in Production, it did nothing to convince me that either of those plans has merit. And it scares the hell out of me to see how far and how fast these sweeping changes progressed based mostly on the conversations held between less than 15 people.

Of the 1,831 registered competitors at USPSA matches held in the Atlanta area in 2006 (so far), the 233 L10 shooters represent 12.7% of those attending. That's not a huge number, but dwarfs the Revolver and SingleStack shooters combined (1.58% and 6.39%, respectively). I support keeping these two smallers divisions, as many do, but cannot fathom this seemingly 'urgent need' to eliminate an even larger and more popular, steady-state division.

The argument that L10 is overrun with people shooting fat guns has not been proven to any degree. In my experience is simply is not true. Most of the L10 shooters I know welcome the chance to beat a fat gun in a match. Likewise, the idea that an arbitrary benchmark of a 3 lb. trigger pull is going to prevent an arms race in Production sounds like people crying they got beat by a gun instead of a better shooter.

This madness is all very depressing....

[EricW]

One of the most illuminating experiences of my life was serving on a Board of Directors. My opinions on proper governance changed substantially after serving on a BOD after being merely governed by the same. It is one thing to argue for one's own self interests, versus executing responsible governance of interests of a group of affected parties.

Try it sometime. You just might be singing a different tune.

[omnia1911]

The theory is, that we should have four divisions (OK, really 5 when you count revolver)

-- Two "Race" divisions (Open and Limited)

-- Two "Stock" divisions (Single Stack and Production)

If this is the foundation for building USPSA's future, why would you deny all the members that live in a 10 round restricted state the pleasure of competing in a "race" division. L10 provides that "nirvana". Making Limited a 10 round division would reduce the number of divisions, would not make anyone's equipment obsolete/unusable, or require any added costs to the members. Is that any more of a difficult decision to make than the ones now being contemplated. At least a Limited/L10 merger makes sense from a structural perspective.

L10 has already proved that both SS and widebody equipment can coexist on the same playing field under comparable capacity limits.

Why not?:

-- Two "Race" divisions (Open and L10)

-- Two "Stock" divisions (Revolver and Production)

It seems to me that the easiest way to reduce the number of divisions is to stop adding new ones. SS is not needed to support the 1911 platform. L10 will do that. IDPA CDP shooters aren't with that organization because of the equipment. It is the philosophy/rules/stage design differences that keep them away. SS division will never resolve these issues for them to consider crossing over.

Where is King Solomon when you need him?

Edited November 21, 2006 by omnia1911

[BBunin]

Don't mind me; I'm just a newbie C class Production shooter here.

But I'm going to weigh in on the Production trigger and L10 issues.

Let me give you the perspective I'm coming from.

I already owned ONE pistol; a completely stock XD9 5" last year and decided I wanted to try USPSA. So I brought it, along with the POS gear that came with it and shot. Had a wonderful time and decided to return.

Nosing around on the internet I learned that there were people out there who could make the trigger on the gun I aready owned significantly better. So I had CC do a 3.5# trigger job on it and mount some TFO sights. I'm just guessing, but the 4000+ rounds thru it since then probably have dropped it down to about 3#. This is STILL the gun in the nightstand....

Recently, I've decided that I want to try NOT shooting minor. So I got an XD40 5" that already had a 2# CC job on it. Obvoiusly, the only place to shoot this is L10, since it only has a max of 12 rounds.

Including the trigger work, neither gun is more than $600. Which is about as much as I can afford. STI/SVI guns are out of my price range.

Two points on this that affect me strongly.

1. If we do away with L10, am I supposed to shoot a plain jane XD with 12 rounds against guys with 28 rounds? That's an almost automatic +2 to 6 seconds in reloads! Or I shoot it in Production, where the .40 advantage is lost.

2. Um, you do know that Springfield doesn't sell parts for XD's right? So I don't even have the option of sending it BACK to Rich and paying him to undo the wonderful work he did! But I don't. You'd be telling every one of the shooters who have an XD with trigger work, that they have to buy a new gun!

I realize that I represent a small minority here, but is that really the message that we want to send to ANY of our shooter? Let alone the ones on the lower end of the investment ability range?

Edited November 21, 2006 by BBunin

[EricW]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but L10 isn't going entirely away. It's just going to be a category in Limited. L10 will simply no longer be a standalone division. At the match, you will sign up for Limited, then you'll be in the L-10 category in the overall results for Limited. No big deal.

[BritinUSA]

1. If we do away with L10, am I supposed to shoot a plain jane XD with 12 rounds against guys with 28 rounds? That's an almost automatic +2 to 6 seconds in reloads! Or I shoot it in Production, where the .40 advantage is lost.

No. You don't get any guns that make major and hold 28 rounds. Typically 20-21 is the maximum that you can fit in the 140mm magazines. 28 will work in 170mm with .355 calibre but that is not legal for Limited.

You would shoot your gun in L10 category or with Limited Division. Your choice...

Your local MD can then determine how to award prizes in the categories. If most of your competitors also shoot in L10 then you won't see any difference. As long as there are at least 5 of you then your MD can decide how to award prizes.

At the local level you probably won't see any difference.

[ima45dv8]

One of the most illuminating experiences of my life was serving on a Board of Directors. My opinions on proper governance changed substantially after serving on a BOD after being merely governed by the same. It is one thing to argue for one's own self interests, versus executing responsible governance of interests of a group of affected parties.

Try it sometime. You just might be singing a different tune.

Is this another one of those, "Run for the office or be quiet" rebuttals? I wouldn't think that's what you meant but I'd like to be sure.

You're right that serving on the Board isn't an easy task. To relieve some of the burden from those fine folks, what I would like to see happen (as I stated earlier) is a poll on USPSA.org to help discover just exactly what the general memberships thoughts are on these important issues. The results of surveys taken at one or several Area matches do not come close to representing a majority portion of the membership. USPSA and the Board have at their disposal a good tool (the USPSA website) to query members, and I hope they take the opportunity to do so before it's too late.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

I prefer to think of the BoD as being there to represent the interests of the organization rather than just to govern.

[Chuck D]

"You would shoot your gun in L10 category or with Limited Division. Your choice..."

What about the choice we have now...both being Divisions....

"Correct me if I'm wrong, but L10 isn't going entirely away. It's just going to be a category in Limited. L10 will simply no longer be a standalone division. At the match, you will sign up for Limited, then you'll be in the L-10 category in the overall results for Limited. No big deal."

Read some of the above posts...it IS a big deal...

"If this is the foundation for building USPSA's future, why would you deny all the members that live in a 10 round restricted state the pleasure of competing in a "race" division. L10 provides that "nirvana"."

Good question. If for a second people would put the needs/wants of members in 10 round States ahead of a plastic trophy or some arbitary number of shooters in a division at a club match...this issue wouldn't exist. Fact is...those advocating the death of one Division to make way for another won't care...until either 10 rounds is the law of the land nationwide or their locale is "hit" by the 10 round only disaster.

No matter how much "common sense" and "rationale" you put forth...you'll never get through.

When they come for your mags and your State becomes just like mine...expect the same "support" I got from you....

sold out for a cheap piece of plastic....

[EricW]

Chuck,

Please send me your address. I will be all too happy to refund your $40 USPSA membership fee if only to relieve your anger at how badly you have been injured by the organization.

Of course, the $40 comes with some conditions, but allow me to help. This is a genuine offer.

Eric