3 Lb Trigger For Production?

[Clay1]

A little smirking emoticon is fine, Clay, though it's more helpful if you'd just say what's irrational about my post.

I'm not sure how you are morally effected by rule changes, but I can see there's a financial cost of making your pistol fit the new rule. How much would it cost to make your Glock trigger meet the 3lb minimum? And how much have you spent on your current trigger? These are serious questions. I don't know the first thing about the cost of Glock triggers.

Single stack had it right. That guy with the sunglasses means cool. On different gun forums you might very well be justified in being defensive, but one of the things that you will see on these boards vs. others is that most of us try to argue from a rational point of view and try to keep slander and nasty comments that are directed at people personally out of our posts. I thought that you did a good job of that by pointing out why you felt the way that you do and I appreciated that approach and so the cool comment.

On the morally effected point, I could have used another word I guess. I was trying to get at the point that I was doing nothing wrong. I was within the rules of this "GAME" I play to win and make no apology for it. Now they want to tell me something like, I was going against the pricipals of the game - like I was trying to cheat somehow. I take this rule change as an attack on my character. I did nothing wrong by playing by the rules.

I remember Michael Voight in one issue of "Front Sight" within the last year speaking about how they make decision on rules and one of his tenants of making a decision is to make it so that there is some stability to the rules. I find these new proposals don't meet that requirement in my own mind and feel let down. I feel that if anyone should have voted to keep the rules the way they are now MV would have been the man. The vote results that I saw did not find that to be the case.

Rick

[Leozinho]

This emoticon means "cool".

I'm pretty sure he was agreeing with you.

Back to the topic now.

Clay, please accept my apologies . I thought that was the "sarcasm" emoticon. It's been said before, but tone is often misinterpreted on these boards, and I'm guilty this time. Thanks for not raking me over the coals for me being too defensive too quickly.

Edited January 15, 2007 by Leozinho

[Clay1]

This emoticon means "cool".

I'm pretty sure he was agreeing with you.

Back to the topic now.

Clay, please accept my apologies . I thought that was the "sarcasm" emoticon. It's been said before, but tone is often misinterpreted on these boards, and I'm guilty this time. Thanks for not raking me over the coals for me being defensive too quickly.

That was very nice of you. As a guy that posts once in a while on other gun forums, one of the things that I appreciate about this board the most is how calmly most of us discuss our differences. Without naming other forums you might have experienced that at other places yourself.

I can see how the board wants to try and make things equal in their eyes, but whenever they change something it effects someone. I see many changes happening this time around. More so than normal.

Rick

[Leozinho]

Leo, I run faster than others...that's a competitive advantage. Some people are taller, have better eyesight, have faster reflexes... that can be a competitive advantage...we can go on and on. Hell, let's weigh shoes so no one person has a lighter shoe than another.

The playing filed is never level, no matter what you may try to do.

Rule change for the sake of change is nonsense, and the BOD, other than a brief comment on having a stock and a race division, have yet to address what problem exists with lighter triggers in production and how a minimum pull will solve that problem.

Vluc,

It's true that the playing field will never be level, but the fact that there is a Production division means there's been an attempt to keep it from getting too uneven for folks that want to shoot stock guns. (If there was no attempt to level the playing field we'd have only Open.)

My point about a competitive advantage is that kydex holsters and Glocks and light triggers aren't a competitive advantage if everyone has them. At that point, it's just a mini-equipment race to keep up with the Joneses so you aren't left behind. My frustration with some of the posts was the outright denial that a light trigger made a difference. Of course they do, or we wouldn't be getting them. Maybe no one wanted to say that light triggers are part of the equipment race, since that's the term that's often used to unfairly dismiss USPSA.

I wasn't around when Production division was formed, but my understanding is that it is a division that's meant to minimize the need to keep up with Joneses.

My opinion is also that Production division should also be for guns and equipment that you can use for everyday carry. I don't know if that was ever the intent, stated or otherwise, behind Production, but that's what I personally think the division should be. That's only my opinion and I know that many others will disagree with that. That's fine and I respect that. (I think that sub-3lbs triggers aren't a good idea for everyday carry. I know folks will disagree with that too, but I don't think we want the thread to drift into what's safe and what isn't. )

So there has to be rules. It's just never easy to figure out where to draw the line. But I see no reason to think that this rule change is just for the sake of change.

A lot of grief would have been avoided if this rule had just been around when Production was formed. That's why I asked about the cost of a trigger job. While Clay1 and others are out the $100(?) they spent on a trigger kit, the next guns they buy won't need it. (Or will it? they'll still need to get some work done to bring the trigger close to 3lbs and the equipment race is back on!!! Arrgh. )

Edited January 15, 2007 by Leozinho

[SA Friday]

The 3 lb rule only alters an equipment race. There will always be an equipment race of some form or fashion in every division of a freestyle shooting sport. Change it from no minimum trigger to 3 lbs, and everyone will start playing with this, that, and the other spring to have what they want in the trigger and pass (debatable) a trigger calibration test. A smooth and light trigger is advantageous over a heavy jerky trigger. Anyone that says different is smokin dope. So, when I get that light smooth trigger, why should it be necessary to worry about the trigger pull weight? Functionality takes care of going too light. If it doesn't consistantly light a fire when the trigger is pulled, your scores will reflect.

The problem is that, although it will change the way new shooters deal with the rule, the old shooters will be beating the drums about this in 5 years when the next rule book is written. It will probably be a new BoD too.

I shoot a lot of production. I have three glocks I shoot competitively and all are modified. I estimate the monetary impact will be less than $50 to make my trigger work at 3 lbs. The XD shooters with modified triggers are going to get absolutely hosed on this rule.

I get my a$$ handed to me regularly from two guys with Sig P226's and another with a CZ. Then again, I've beat Master class Open shooters when they come to production with the exact same Glock set-up as I have. To make the claim that strike fired weapons have an advantage over DA/SA weapons is false, incorrect, and a myth. Don't go tellin Angus his gun(s) are second best. I think he would disagree.

Lastly, this is a freestyle shooting sport. This is a sport shot for the sake of competition. Although it has it's benefits, it is NOT tactical training for LE, conceal carry, or military. I don't see GM's slicing-the-pie on corners. If one wants to shoot a stock trigger, great. They are not at that much of a disadvantage. In some cases they are at no disadvantage against someone with a ONE GILLION DOLLARS (pinky at the corner of my mouth) trigger mod. The point is we are not training, we are competing. If I was at T-Ranch, or Blackwater, or FLETC, or any LE/military training, my firearms would have no less than 4 lb triggers in them, my ammo would be smokin hot, and my springs would be as reliable as they could get. For military engagements, my gear would retain my equipment after a 10 foot fall from a blackhawk helo, and my holster would have an infallible retention device. I would also be wearing at least Level IIIa body armor.

You know why NASCAR stock cars are not stock? Because they are made to go fast in competition. Every time I hear this justification for box stock, I just scratch my head. NASCAR cars don't get driven to and from work..... They get raced. USPSA is a freestyle shooting sport. We race with guns.

[Nemo]

Lastly, this is a freestyle shooting sport. This is a sport shot for the sake of competition. Although it has it's benefits, it is NOT tactical training for LE, conceal carry, or military. I don't see GM's slicing-the-pie on corners. If one wants to shoot a stock trigger, great. They are not at that much of a disadvantage. In some cases they are at no disadvantage against someone with a ONE GILLION DOLLARS (pinky at the corner of my mouth) trigger mod. The point is we are not training, we are competing. If I was at T-Ranch, or Blackwater, or FLETC, or any LE/military training, my firearms would have no less than 4 lb triggers in them, my ammo would be smokin hot, and my springs would be as reliable as they could get. For military engagements, my gear would retain my equipment after a 10 foot fall from a blackhawk helo, and my holster would have an infallible retention device. I would also be wearing at least Level IIIa body armor.

You know why NASCAR stock cars are not stock? Because they are made to go fast in competition. Every time I hear this justification for box stock, I just scratch my head. NASCAR cars don't get driven to and from work..... They get raced. USPSA is a freestyle shooting sport. We race with guns.

B-E-A-utiful!

[vluc]

USPSA is a freestyle shooting sport. We race with guns.

wow....you are my new tag line at uspsa forums.

[Leozinho]

SA Friday,

Good points.

I'm tired of the NASCAR analogy too, though I'm not sure it serves your argument anyway. There's lots of restrictions and rules in car racing, isn't there? And lots of different divisions, with lots of rules to make some of the divisions more accessible to drivers, right? If you think racing karts is too slow for you and you don't like the restrictions, then you are welcome to move to another level of racing that has less restrictions. Obvious, right. Sounds kind of like if Production division is too restrictive for you, well, you're always welcome in Limited. But no one is keeping you from racing, not even if you choose to stay in Production.

I glad you don't have any Walter Mitty fantasies. I have to wear plates enough during the week and (occasionally) worry about falling out of a helicopter and don't want to play Army on the weekends, either. And I don't think I've heard anyone assert that "USPSA is tactical training" in a while. However, I do appreciate being able to test my gun handling skills with my duty weapon against folks running somewhat similiar equipment.

[JohnRodriguez]

When i got my M&P9, I had ipsc's 5lb rule in mind when I did the trigger. With the 3 qualifier matches this year, you would have to redue your light triggers anyways. Correct?

Anyways, the one rule I wish for the 2008 rule book in production would be "Magazine capacity subject to local and state laws".

[Nemo]

SNIP

However, I do appreciate being able to test my gun handling skills with my duty weapon against folks running somewhat similiar equipment.

And there, my friend, lies the beauty of it all! You can play with your factory Beretta and your rig of preference, and should feel very proud of yourself when you beat a gamer like me, who has a XD with melted BoMars and a $100 trigger job!

You don't have to have them, but it sure is nice to have the option.

[Lee Bell]

It's true that the playing field will never be level, but the fact that there is a Production division means there's been an attempt to keep it from getting too uneven for folks that want to shoot stock guns. (If there was no attempt to level the playing field we'd have only Open.)

Actually, the playing field can be quite level. It's the competitors that aren't, and in a division designed for those new to the sport, that's how it should be. YMMV.

Lee

Edited January 16, 2007 by Lee Bell

[Lee Bell]

Just out of curoisity?

How many of you "Pro- minimum" shooters are shooting Production?

I shoot single stack and, when the magazines arrive, will probably be shooting Limited 10 when the spirit moves me. I have several guns that would be suitable for the production class, but enjoy my 1911 guns too much to shoot production. There may come a time when I want to play with my higher capacity guns as well, but I'm a lot less tempted when I know that most of those I'll compete with have an advantage as significant as a trigger pull less than 3 lb.

More importantly to me, though, is what this issue means to those I try to get interested in the sport. Every chance I get, I drag one or more of my shooting friends along with me. I expect to introduce two to the sport this week. So far, every single person I've brought has used a bone stock production gun in 9mm, .40 or .45.

If we want to keep our sport alive, it's to our advantage to ensure we retain a division for new participants, one that really is about shooting and not an equipment race.

Lee

Edited January 16, 2007 by Lee Bell

[boo radley]

You must admit there's a certain irony in making Production so restrictive even IDPA'ers can't play (although I think this well of potential USPSA members has been long exhausted).

"Well, you *could* shoot Production with that G22, but you've enhanced the trigger for SSP....But don't worry -- you can still shoot, but just in 'Open.' It's cool...And hey, you can move your pouches up front."

[Tim James]

More importantly to me, though, is what this issue means to those I try to get interested in the sport. Every chance I get, I drag one or more of my shooting friends along with me. I expect to introduce two to the sport this week. So far, every single person I've brought has used a bone stock production gun in 9mm, .40 or .45.

So what's the problem? They can't learn, practice, compete, and win with those guns? What is it with men in any sport or hobby that think they can't even play the game without spending a bunch of money on equipment? It pissed me off back in the day trying to get friends to go drag racing or autocrossing: "dude, I need new tires, those cars are way too fast." It still pisses me off nowadays in USPSA. HEY IDIOTS, JUST COME HAVE FUN!!

Ahem.. thanks, I needed that.

On the other hand, I have a friend that is a little shy about handgun competition because he admits that he's not the best shot in the world and doesn't practice often. I can forgive him if he doesn't want to attend because it can be intimidating if you can't hit anything, though even that isn't a big deal if you have the right personality. (He is interested in our local close-range hosing 3-gun matches, so that'll work!)

Now that I think about it, most male newbies who say they are afraid to attend due to perceived equipment discrepancies are usually just embarrassed about their lack of shooting (or driving or stick-and-ball) skills. The ironic thing is that changing Production division doesn't remove the underlying ego issues, it just removes an excuse they can use and annoys existing competitors. USPSA needs to strike at the root if they want to bring in new shooters.

[SA Friday]

I'm tired of the NASCAR analogy too, though I'm not sure it serves your argument anyway. There's lots of restrictions and rules in car racing, isn't there? And lots of different divisions, with lots of rules to make some of the divisions more accessible to drivers, right? If you think racing karts is too slow for you and you don't like the restrictions, then you are welcome to move to another level of racing that has less restrictions. Obvious, right. Sounds kind of like if Production division is too restrictive for you, well, you're always welcome in Limited. But no one is keeping you from racing, not even if you choose to stay in Production.

Sigh...

The point is no matter what division, we are still racing.

I shoot in 3 divisions, one being limited.

Production suits me just fine, its very accessable and competative to everyone and would remain so regardless of a trigger rule.

My NASCAR analogy is dead spot on....

Thanks Vluc and Nemo. Now if I can convince the BoD to adopt my production rules I rewrote and posted on the USPSA Forum the future would be all green flags.

[GeorgeInNePa]

You must admit there's a certain irony in making Production so restrictive even IDPA'ers can't play (although I think this well of potential USPSA members has been long exhausted).

"Well, you *could* shoot Production with that G22, but you've enhanced the trigger for SSP....But don't worry -- you can still shoot, but just in 'Open.' It's cool...And hey, you can move your pouches up front."

+1

I still don't get why we need to make this division more restrictive. Is there that many uber-tactical guys that have no home?

No wait, I know, there are lots of shooters who can afford a gun, mags, holster, mag pouches, match fees, and thousands of rounds of ammo, BUT yet they can't afford a decent trigger job.

No, no wait, they just don't want to and they don't think you should either.

No? Then why?

[ampleworks]

I stopped watching NASCAR when they started all the garbage of telling folks what they could and couldn't do all the way down to whether they could have boxers or briefs.

I won't stop shooting USPSA but it surely won't be in Production. I don't mind the 10rd rule, it sort-of evens the playing field for Joe and his P220 versus Bob and his hicap G34.

I pity the chrono man at these matches should this garbage make it through. I hope he has thick skin.

[LPatterson]

If we all took these arguements over to the USPSA forum it would be a lot more meaningful. It doesn't do anything other than make the writer feel good to make complainants in this forum. If all you want to do is write feel good stuff then take your place in line behind our Senators & congressmen/women.

[ysued]

If we all took these arguements over to the USPSA forum it would be a lot more meaningful. It doesn't do anything other than make the writer feel good to make complainants in this forum. If all you want to do is write feel good stuff then take your place in line behind our Senators & congressmen/women.

+100

Let's take this to the USPSA Forum, where it actually matters and makes a difference!!

Y

[JasonK]

The 3 lb rule only alters an equipment race. There will always be an equipment race of some form or fashion in every division of a freestyle shooting sport. Change it from no minimum trigger to 3 lbs, and everyone will start playing with this, that, and the other spring to have what they want in the trigger and pass (debatable) a trigger calibration test. A smooth and light trigger is advantageous over a heavy jerky trigger. Anyone that says different is smokin dope. So, when I get that light smooth trigger, why should it be necessary to worry about the trigger pull weight? Functionality takes care of going too light. If it doesn't consistantly light a fire when the trigger is pulled, your scores will reflect.

"Functionality takes care of going too light." This is an interesting argument. What is interesting about it is that a Glock or XD trigger job can be reliable at sub-three pound levels. Please anyone name me a gunsmith that can make a Beretta, Sig or CZ reliable with a three pound first trigger pull. I'm can't wait to send my CZ to whomever this is. BTW, I had a Beretta 96 Elite with an Ernie Langdon "competition only" trigger job. First pull was slightly under six pounds.

[ysued]

The 3 lb rule only alters an equipment race. There will always be an equipment race of some form or fashion in every division of a freestyle shooting sport. Change it from no minimum trigger to 3 lbs, and everyone will start playing with this, that, and the other spring to have what they want in the trigger and pass (debatable) a trigger calibration test. A smooth and light trigger is advantageous over a heavy jerky trigger. Anyone that says different is smokin dope. So, when I get that light smooth trigger, why should it be necessary to worry about the trigger pull weight? Functionality takes care of going too light. If it doesn't consistantly light a fire when the trigger is pulled, your scores will reflect.

"Functionality takes care of going too light." This is an interesting argument. What is interesting about it is that a Glock or XD trigger job can be reliable at sub-three pound levels. Please anyone name me a gunsmith that can make a Beretta, Sig or CZ reliable with a three pound first trigger pull. I'm can't wait to send my CZ to whomever this is. BTW, I had a Beretta 96 Elite with an Ernie Langdon "competition only" trigger job. First pull was slightly under six pounds.

Who really cares about the first shot on a DA/SA??

When the rest of the shots are 1.5Lbs Single Action!!

[Lee Bell]

Now they want to tell me something like, I was going against the pricipals of the game - like I was trying to cheat somehow. I take this rule change as an attack on my character. I did nothing wrong by playing by the rules.

It think you're taking this a bit too personally. While I agree that the rule change does imply that those with lighter triggers have gone against the principals of the production gun division, I don't read that to mean that you, or any other shooter is to blame or, for that matter, that you've done anything wrong at all.

I see this more as an admission, by those that wrote the original rules, that they went against the principals of the division they were trying to establish, I don't know if the omission of a trigger limit on production class was intentional or accidential, but I'd be surprised if dedicated gun people would overlook such an obvious thing. I do know, at least to my own satisfaction, that not specifying a limit was a mistake in a class that was intended to accomodate new shooters, shooting what they had. I think that was, and is the purpose of production class and support the change on that basis. There are other divisions for those that want to shoot significantly modified guns.

I remember Michael Voight in one issue of "Front Sight" within the last year speaking about how they make decision on rules and one of his tenants of making a decision is to make it so that there is some stability to the rules. I find these new proposals don't meet that requirement in my own mind and feel let down.

No rule change is ever stable. The more important question, in my mind, is whether there is a valid reason for the change. I think there is. I think that the sport very much needs an entry level division where those that shoot what they have can work their way up the ladder, just like those that choose to shoot what they've built can. I think the sport is likely to die an untimely death if something like that is not available. YMMV

Rather than getting all upset by the change in production rules, why not push for another division, modified production, perhaps. It was done for us Single Stack shooters. It was done for those who were, and are limited to 10 round magazines. Why not for those that want to shoot production guns with significant performance enhancements, which a less than 3 lb double action trigger certainly is.

Lee

Now they want to tell me something like, I was going against the pricipals of the game - like I was trying to cheat somehow. I take this rule change as an attack on my character. I did nothing wrong by playing by the rules.

It think you're taking this a bit too personally. While I agree that the rule change does imply that those with lighter triggers have gone against the principals of the production gun division, I don't read that to mean that you, or any other shooter is to blame or, for that matter, that you've done anything wrong at all.

I see this more as an admission, by those that wrote the original rules, that they went against the principals of the division they were trying to establish, I don't know if the omission of a trigger limit on production class was intentional or accidential, but I'd be surprised if dedicated gun people would overlook such an obvious thing. I do know, at least to my own satisfaction, that not specifying a limit was a mistake in a class that was intended to accomodate new shooters, shooting what they had. I think that was, and is the purpose of production class and support the change on that basis. There are other divisions for those that want to shoot significantly modified guns.

I remember Michael Voight in one issue of "Front Sight" within the last year speaking about how they make decision on rules and one of his tenants of making a decision is to make it so that there is some stability to the rules. I find these new proposals don't meet that requirement in my own mind and feel let down.

No rule change is ever stable. The more important question, in my mind, is whether there is a valid reason for the change. I think there is. I think that the sport very much needs an entry level division where those that shoot what they have can work their way up the ladder, just like those that choose to shoot what they've built can. I think the sport is likely to die an untimely death if something like that is not available. YMMV

Rather than getting all upset by the change in production rules, why not push for another division, modified production, perhaps. It was done for us Single Stack shooters. It was done for those who were, and are limited to 10 round magazines. Why not for those that want to shoot production guns with significant performance enhancements, which a less than 3 lb double action trigger certainly is.

Lee

Lee

Let's take this to the USPSA Forum, where it actually matters and makes a difference!!

I wish I could. It'll be another 4 days before the website recognizes me. I officially joined after the 10th of last month and, as far as the website is concerned, don't exist until it's updated around the 10th of this month.

Lee

[ysued]

Let's take this to the USPSA Forum, where it actually matters and makes a difference!!

I wish I could. It'll be another 4 days before the website recognizes me. I officially joined after the 10th of last month and, as far as the website is concerned, don't exist until it's updated around the 10th of this month.

Lee

Lee,

I joined and started posting Immediately!!

Are you sure that you went to the right place??

Go here:

http://www.uspsa.org/forums/index.php?showforum=33

[LPatterson]

I keep seeing the INTENT of Production was this or that but I can't find an original Mission Statement stating what USPSA planned the Division to be other than a place where DA & 9MM guns had a chance to compete on an even playing field. The fact that USPSA allowed the Glock and then the XD to compete in a double action first shot division (don't forget the rule change allowing the hammer to be cocked after the start signal) indicates that they had no idea what they really wanted the Division to be. The biggest problem for this rule will be enforcement and the way the rule is written. It is impossible to check the trigger pull on a DECOCKED Glock or XD. So to keep every thing equal it would be necessary to cock the hammer/striker of every gun tested. How would USPSA go about training personnel on the appropriate method of testing? Does that mean a special class of range officer who has been trained & tested & provided with OFFICIAL testing devices? There is more to this than just setting a value for the trigger pull.

Would this be a personal problem for me, sure it would after buying an XD and getting a trigger job so I could compete against Glocks with something better than my Beretta. Nothing makes you appreciate a striker fired gun or a SA like Long Range Standards or any long range Virgina count stage.

[Jack Suber]

I went to the World Shoot and I don't remember them checking trigger weight (I didn;t see it). I am curious as to how it was done - at check-in when they were checking gear? Regardless, I think it will be a pain in the butt to do at big matches. I don't think it would be fair for Chrono guy to guage one pistol on "feel." In order for fairness, you would have tio check them all. Secondly, I know some guys who have made an art out of cheating. I am talking guys that switch ammo out after chrono or call their buddies shooting the next day to tell them to bring weak ammo because a certain match isn't chronoing. Glocks being as they are, it would be easy to switch one out after the check (and these guys would do it) wihtout anyone knowing. So, would you have to check serial #'s. I just think it would be a nightmare to enforce and to do so fairly.