Who Does It Affect? It Affects Us All.

[Skydiver]

Where the new XD's with the Powder River trigger the same model/ sku number?

My understanding is that it's the same model number and therefore on the Production list. I don't know about the SKU number.

[TGO]

The place where we have *not* made much progress is in the strategy of the org. It still seems to me like we are "drifting" - we have no clear statement about what direction we want to head, and no clear identification of the problems that keep us from getting there.

I would agree with this but I think that the direction MUST come from the membership. I don't believe that this forum presents a representative sample either. It definitely represents a specific demographic. Isn't it time to start polling the members directly? We talk a lot about how this is a member run organisation and maybe it is time to put our money where our mouth is on that issue. The way we accomplish asking the members for input to proposed rules today is at best laughable.

Take the divisions, for example. What we *have* done over the last 5 or 6 years is add divisions in sort of a knee-jerk, reactive fashion.

Yup, and as you stated Single Stack is a great example of the knee jerk reaction. Most of the locals I shoot with don't see a need for it and wonder if there is a hidden agenda being pushed.

One of the "problems" we have, IMHO, is growth.

-- maybe we're not marketing enough, or in the right ways? I have this feeling that there are huge untapped pools of potential USPSA competitors out there, who either don't know about us, or know about us and have decided that, based on what they've heard, we're "just not for them". In fact, arguably, there are 35,000 people out there who *have* heard about us and chose to no longer be members... maybe we should be marketing to *them*, finding out why they left and giving them reasons to come back?!?!

Marketing of our game is almost non existent in my area. It took me years to find out that USPSA existed and how to get involved. IDPA flyers were handed to me every time I purchased a gun. Because it is defensively oriented, I felt that IDPA wasn't for me but I damn sure knew about it every time I made a purchase. This simple grass roots marketing strategy is key. Why don't we do it?

As far as production division is concerned, It should be Stock with VERY few mods allowed if any. PERIOD. Shoot as they come right out of the box. Is that being considered?

Single stack a knee jerk reaction? It is the single most widely manufactured model in the United States! There are more of them than anything else. Everybody makes them, even rifle manufacturers with no previous pistol interests. Just because me and my local shooting buddies do not like a type of gun doesn't mean we do not see a need for them to have a category! Good Lord, that is the silliest thing I have read in any of these threads!

Some of the other things sound right to me, and you of course are entitled to your opinions, but why does my XDm having trigger work done to it bother you? I mean really, not trying to be an ass, I really don't understand the motivation to limit, within reason the ongoing improvement of a product within the rules and guidelines. I am not saying we ought to let everything go the way of open, heaven knows that has hurt us enough already, but if we are not intent in letting all types be modified to a level playing field, then we will create a spec class with everyone shooting the same thing. I'm sure that is not what you want, I know I don't.

BTW, for those reading who do not know, IDPA was formed because USPSA did not want it. It would have been called concealed or carry or something like that. We were approached with an intelligent marketing plan from interested parties and we told them m to take a hike. Not in as nice a way as that but I do not want to get in trouble here. I think all involved from that time have thankfully left our sport. Unfortunately we do not have had the real thing, which we morphed into SS and production to combat IDPA.

Rob

[beltjones]

Just because me and my local shooting buddies do not like a type of gun doesn't mean we do not see a need for them to have a category! Good Lord, that is the silliest thing I have read in any of these threads!

Not trying to be an ass or anything Rob, but that's pretty much exactly what you said about L10 on the other thread. Everything else you wrote I agree with.

If there is one thing I would like to communicate to the Directors of USPSA, it's that the way you raise awareness of USPSA (and ultimately the decision to join) is by reaching out to and connecting with shooters. You will never, ever gain a single new shooter by simply changing a rule or two, just as no one ever became a golfer because suddenly they could have 14 clubs in the bag instead of 13, or because a certain Driver or Putter was suddenly legal or illegal.

[Loves2Shoot]

Everyone keeps saying that "if it's not broken, don't fix it.". How many people realize that the BoD was trying to fix a problem about OEM vs aftermarket parts, but unfortunately the solution turned out to be completely separate from the original problem.

The original problem they were trying to solve so this: XD's can come from the factory with the Powder River trigger. This makes the part an OEM part if it leaves the factory that way. Now if you already have own an XD, can you legally drop in a Powder River trigger? The way the current Appendix D4 21.6 rule is written, the answer would be NO, because the part is aftermarket. I was not at the meeting and have not heard details of the meeting, but I can guess that the discussion went to how can you tell the difference between the OEM installed part and the aftermarket dropped in part? I can see how the question moved on to just defining a trigger pull weight minimum to side step the issue.

To me, it seems like a better solution may have been to ease off on D4 21.6 and allow aftermarket parts. Or would that opened a bigger can of worms?

Actually, contact NROI and ask them if and aftermarket part is made to OEM spec it is legal. The company made only made a mistake in naming it, they should have marketed it as a Springfield trigger. Being an OEM manufacturer, this is a way to keep things simple. But still, if NROI says you can copy a factory part and it is still legal for production if it matches factory spec, then there were some folks who either didn't know that is what they tell manufacturers, or didn't care because they want to make a direction change for Production.

The part in question doesn't do anything for trigger pull weight, feel, or anything else, it is a cheap overtravel stop.

[TGO]

Just because me and my local shooting buddies do not like a type of gun doesn't mean we do not see a need for them to have a category! Good Lord, that is the silliest thing I have read in any of these threads!

Not trying to be an ass or anything Rob, but that's pretty much exactly what you said about L10 on the other thread. Everything else you wrote I agree with.

If there is one thing I would like to communicate to the Directors of USPSA, it's that the way you raise awareness of USPSA (and ultimately the decision to join) is by reaching out to and connecting with shooters. You will never, ever gain a single new shooter by simply changing a rule or two, just as no one ever became a golfer because suddenly they could have 14 clubs in the bag instead of 13, or because a certain Driver or Putter was suddenly legal or illegal.

Not really. Is anyone actually complying with the federal and state laws regarding capacity? I have never known this to be the case. The guns used in L10 are usually just 10 rounds loaded in an otherwise limited setup. When you load that gun up to full capacity it is a limited gun. Now I know this means there are some guns that will not be competitive in Limited. Well, sorry. Most of those would not be anyway. Limited guns are too highly modified and tuned to let an otherwise inferior platform really be competitive. Now a good shooter can make up a lot of lost ground when it comes to the equipment, but a better platform is still a better platform.

There are lots of models that will not be competitive in production either regardless of the trigger weight, but you still can if you want shoot them. However there are more platforms that are competitive in production than all the others put together.

L10 as stated before was supposed to be SS, but the board thought no one would shoot it with un underloaded limited gun so they didn't try to rule against that happening. They would just shoot in limited! It was to be a place to let the MILLIONS of 1911 SS guns compete. Kind of throwing a bone to us SS shooters who were being murdered in Limited. And to deal with the upcoming magazine capacity limitations.

The first 2 Limited Nationals once it was separated from the open nationals were won with 1911 SS .45's. The last was 1995. L10 was and is poorly written, and it did not accomplish what was needed. The SS and L10 are now not in any way similar. SS is way more restricted. They were both intended to be 1911 SS gun categories. After that the similarities end.

I don't mind at all that you may want to shoot L10. As long as there is a category then go for it. I shoot it all the time to avoid having to shoot open. It makes for some fantastic nationals competition. That does not change the fact that L10 is not being used for what it was designed except in capacity restricted locations. If that is enough to keep it around then I am fine with that. Still does not change the facts of how it came around and I living in AZ wouldn't miss it being gone I don't think?.

A point I would like to make is that personally I couldn't care less what the allowed capacity of a division is, as long as all have to abide. I would gladly replace Limited with L10. I do not like the hi capacity classes, as I think they have made us as a group, poorer shots.

I could even give up SS to get rid of limited, and just have open, L10 and production. I can be competitive with my SS 1911 in a class where the capacity was not a disadvantage. However, SS is growing big time and more potential members own this type gun than any other.

The dinosaur class (SS) is an important segment in the industry, unlike limited 10 category guns. The manufacturers only produce the 10 round mags for guns that should hold more for a couple states. Nobody who produces 1911 Single stack guns wants to stop them from being produced, but we would all love to no longer have to produce, supply and market 10 round restricted capacity guns and magazines. Don't mean to hurt feelings, just the way I feel.

Rob

[Flexmoney]

The guns used in L10 are usually just 10 rounds loaded in an otherwise limited setup. When you load that gun up to full capacity it is a limited gun.

That is not what I see locally. Big matches...sure.

I would gladly replace Limited with L10. I do not like the hi capacity classes, as I think they have made us as a group, poorer shots.

That is a good point. How about L16 (+1) ?

(not that I'd mess with the divisions.)

[TGO]

Everyone keeps saying that "if it's not broken, don't fix it.". How many people realize that the BoD was trying to fix a problem about OEM vs aftermarket parts, but unfortunately the solution turned out to be completely separate from the original problem.

The original problem they were trying to solve so this: XD's can come from the factory with the Powder River trigger. This makes the part an OEM part if it leaves the factory that way. Now if you already have own an XD, can you legally drop in a Powder River trigger? The way the current Appendix D4 21.6 rule is written, the answer would be NO, because the part is aftermarket. I was not at the meeting and have not heard details of the meeting, but I can guess that the discussion went to how can you tell the difference between the OEM installed part and the aftermarket dropped in part? I can see how the question moved on to just defining a trigger pull weight minimum to side step the issue.

To me, it seems like a better solution may have been to ease off on D4 21.6 and allow aftermarket parts. Or would that opened a bigger can of worms?

Actually, contact NROI and ask them if and aftermarket part is made to OEM spec it is legal. The company made only made a mistake in naming it, they should have marketed it as a Springfield trigger. Being an OEM manufacturer, this is a way to keep things simple. But still, if NROI says you can copy a factory part and it is still legal for production if it matches factory spec, then there were some folks who either didn't know that is what they tell manufacturers, or didn't care because they want to make a direction change for Production.

The part in question doesn't do anything for trigger pull weight, feel, or anything else, it is a cheap overtravel stop.

Amen Springer, Amen. I think everyone thinks the PRP trigger is more than just a trigger. It is a great trigger, and it's my favorite in an XDm, but it's just a part that solves the over-travel issue easily and inexpensively. Kind of like everyone calls a photo copy a Xerox, you guys are starting to be associated with the mod or part being more than it is. I'm not trying to belittle you, hell you know how much I like the stuff you, Rich and Daniel make, just think that now, when someone says I put a Springer trigger bar in my gun or a PRP trigger, both which reduce over travel, it is a whole a whole trigger job. I'm beginning to wish you guys hadn't made all the great stuff. You guys are probably responsible for all this 3 lb. crap!

When I started shooting, we thought we had hot rodded our .45's by installing a set of Pachmayr rubber grip and a shock buff!! The die hards said that was not fair and that was why they were being beaten.

This whole 3 lb thing is crazy. We do not have all the facts and that has brought most of this on. They may have a reason for doing this, but I fear we may not like it when it does come to light.

Rob

[justaute]

Vince -- how prescient... to me, at least, as I've only been around USPSA/handgun for about a year.

Competence, competence, competence... a characteristic that is more and more difficult to find in management today.

"First they came for the Single Stack shooters, and I did not speak out - because I did not shoot Single Stack. Then they came for the Production shooters, and I did not speak out - because I did not shoot Production. Then they came for the Stage Designers, and I did not speak out - because I did not design stages. Then they came for the Division important to me - and there was no one left to speak for me."

[Chuck Anderson]

The guns used in L10 are usually just 10 rounds loaded in an otherwise limited setup. When you load that gun up to full capacity it is a limited gun.

That is not what I see locally. Big matches...sure.

I would gladly replace Limited with L10. I do not like the hi capacity classes, as I think they have made us as a group, poorer shots.

That is a good point. How about L16 (+1) ?

(not that I'd mess with the divisions.)

As usual I agree with Kyle. My experience with L10 at the local level is seeing very few "Limited" guns. Most of them are Glock's some 40 some 45, Browning Hi Power, XD .45, M&P .45. Basically lots of .45 and some .40s that people don't want to shell out the money for a $100+ Über hi-cap .40 mag.

I'm not planning on eliminating any divisions, but if I was Single Stack would be on the chopping block before the more inclusive L10.

[beltjones]

Just because me and my local shooting buddies do not like a type of gun doesn't mean we do not see a need for them to have a category! Good Lord, that is the silliest thing I have read in any of these threads!

Not trying to be an ass or anything Rob, but that's pretty much exactly what you said about L10 on the other thread. Everything else you wrote I agree with.

If there is one thing I would like to communicate to the Directors of USPSA, it's that the way you raise awareness of USPSA (and ultimately the decision to join) is by reaching out to and connecting with shooters. You will never, ever gain a single new shooter by simply changing a rule or two, just as no one ever became a golfer because suddenly they could have 14 clubs in the bag instead of 13, or because a certain Driver or Putter was suddenly legal or illegal.

Not really. Is anyone actually complying with the federal and state laws regarding capacity? I have never known this to be the case. The guns used in L10 are usually just 10 rounds loaded in an otherwise limited setup. When you load that gun up to full capacity it is a limited gun. Now I know this means there are some guns that will not be competitive in Limited. Well, sorry. Most of those would not be anyway. Limited guns are too highly modified and tuned to let an otherwise inferior platform really be competitive. Now a good shooter can make up a lot of lost ground when it comes to the equipment, but a better platform is still a better platform.

There are lots of models that will not be competitive in production either regardless of the trigger weight, but you still can if you want shoot them. However there are more platforms that are competitive in production than all the others put together.

L10 as stated before was supposed to be SS, but the board thought no one would shoot it with un underloaded limited gun so they didn't try to rule against that happening. They would just shoot in limited! It was to be a place to let the MILLIONS of 1911 SS guns compete. Kind of throwing a bone to us SS shooters who were being murdered in Limited. And to deal with the upcoming magazine capacity limitations.

The first 2 Limited Nationals once it was separated from the open nationals were won with 1911 SS .45's. The last was 1995. L10 was and is poorly written, and it did not accomplish what was needed. The SS and L10 are now not in any way similar. SS is way more restricted. They were both intended to be 1911 SS gun categories. After that the similarities end.

I don't mind at all that you may want to shoot L10. As long as there is a category then go for it. I shoot it all the time to avoid having to shoot open. It makes for some fantastic nationals competition. That does not change the fact that L10 is not being used for what it was designed except in capacity restricted locations. If that is enough to keep it around then I am fine with that. Still does not change the facts of how it came around and I living in AZ wouldn't miss it being gone I don't think?.

A point I would like to make is that personally I couldn't care less what the allowed capacity of a division is, as long as all have to abide. I would gladly replace Limited with L10. I do not like the hi capacity classes, as I think they have made us as a group, poorer shots.

I could even give up SS to get rid of limited, and just have open, L10 and production. I can be competitive with my SS 1911 in a class where the capacity was not a disadvantage. However, SS is growing big time and more potential members own this type gun than any other.

The dinosaur class (SS) is an important segment in the industry, unlike limited 10 category guns. The manufacturers only produce the 10 round mags for guns that should hold more for a couple states. Nobody who produces 1911 Single stack guns wants to stop them from being produced, but we would all love to no longer have to produce, supply and market 10 round restricted capacity guns and magazines. Don't mean to hurt feelings, just the way I feel.

Rob

Ah. I see your point, and your point is well taken.

I also must admit that the times I competed in L10 it was with a G35 - a gun that I easily could have used in Limited.

I think there is an opportunity with L10, and that is to allow people shooting minor to load to 15 rounds. Keep Production as it is, keep Limited as it is, and let people who have single action 9's to load a few more rounds. In doing so you would bring back the hi-powers and give the 9mm 1911s that people are buying for 3-gun a place to play. ...but I'm sure there are some problems with this idea that I haven't yet considered.

Edited December 29, 2011 by beltjones

[Loves2Shoot]

Rob, there was a reason I made my trigger parts so you can't see them, because that is what NROI told me was legal to do. I've also always submitted them to NROI for a ruling BEFORE marketing them to Production, so I'm not claiming a part of this mess. I'm not adverse to causing trouble by speaking up about things that I don't think are good for shooters or the RO-RM's who generously donate their time so I can shoot matches. I would have suggested letting single actions into Production had I been consulted in how to grow participation, but that would have pissed of the folks who are afraid of 1911's playing with polymers.

I guess we can market the new light stuff we are releasing as "too fast for USPSA Production, but IDPA ESP legal." Wow, did the rotation of the earth change?

[Nik Habicht]

The guns used in L10 are usually just 10 rounds loaded in an otherwise limited setup. When you load that gun up to full capacity it is a limited gun.

That is not what I see locally. Big matches...sure.

I would gladly replace Limited with L10. I do not like the hi capacity classes, as I think they have made us as a group, poorer shots.

That is a good point. How about L16 (+1) ?

(not that I'd mess with the divisions.)

As usual I agree with Kyle. My experience with L10 at the local level is seeing very few "Limited" guns. Most of them are Glock's some 40 some 45, Browning Hi Power, XD .45, M&P .45. Basically lots of .45 and some .40s that people don't want to shell out the money for a $100+ Über hi-cap .40 mag.

I'm not planning on eliminating any divisions, but if I was Single Stack would be on the chopping block before the more inclusive L10.

Rob,

having shot a few Nationals and Area matches -- and having talked to some shooters from the Western U.S. where SS seems to be popular -- I can see your point about L10.

I'm also certain that in my Section, at the local level, L10 fills a needed void, by making the sport more inclusive for folks who want to give it a try with a gun they already own.....

After that some shooters stick with it, others use that L10 experience as a gateway to other divisions....

[Skydiver]

Rob, there was a reason I made my trigger parts so you can't see them, because that is what NROI told me was legal to do. I've also always submitted them to NROI for a ruling BEFORE marketing them to Production, so I'm not claiming a part of this mess. I'm not adverse to causing trouble by speaking up about things that I don't think are good for shooters or the RO-RM's who generously donate their time so I can shoot matches. I would have suggested letting single actions into Production had I been consulted in how to grow participation, but that would have pissed of the folks who are afraid of 1911's playing with polymers.

I guess we can market the new light stuff we are releasing as "too fast for USPSA Production, but IDPA ESP legal." Wow, did the rotation of the earth change?

LOL! Yes, we've definitely moved into a Bizarro world if it comes to marketing like that. In fact, it may be cool to have a poster with that as the tag line.

Yes, Scott, thank you for all the innovation. You've definitely raised the standard for XD's to the point that where as I had previously dismissed an XD to replace my G-34, I'm back to considering XD's again after having your trigger work done on it. Keep on on innovating and pushing the envelope of the rules!

[bTW: Yes, I did see that later post that DNROI's opinion was if an aftermarket part fits OEM specs, then it's considered OEM. Now if only DNROI would makes it a ruling to make it official.]

[Flexmoney]

[bTW: Yes, I did see that later post that DNROI's opinion was if an aftermarket part fits OEM specs, then it's considered OEM. Now if only DNROI would makes it a ruling to make it official.]

Go look. That is one they messed up, in my opinion. (sorry Scott, I did not know you made a "catalog item") To me it's a backdoor that allows some companies guns extra parts...where others can't/won't have them.

[Loves2Shoot]

[bTW: Yes, I did see that later post that DNROI's opinion was if an aftermarket part fits OEM specs, then it's considered OEM. Now if only DNROI would makes it a ruling to make it official.]

Go look. That is one they messed up, in my opinion. (sorry Scott, I did not know you made a "catalog item") To me it's a backdoor that allows some companies guns extra parts...where others can't/won't have them.

See, you don't need to know who makes what if it is a catalog item. The kicker is it actually insures that EVERYONE can have them. If we can make a part that is dimensionally the same as OEM and a that part is not marked in any way who made it, then the RO can not have a reliable way to know where it was made, thus the opinion of NROI is logical. In SA's case, this is important, as they DO NOT sell parts that they use in their modifications. They have piles of stock parts that no one else can get that they modify for their trigger work, so without the aftermarket to make them (or improved substitute parts like we do), they have a monopoly on those parts.

We don't make any parts for SA, but we do for several other companies and when we do, we sell them as their part.

[Nik Habicht]

[bTW: Yes, I did see that later post that DNROI's opinion was if an aftermarket part fits OEM specs, then it's considered OEM. Now if only DNROI would makes it a ruling to make it official.]

Go look. That is one they messed up, in my opinion. (sorry Scott, I did not know you made a "catalog item") To me it's a backdoor that allows some companies guns extra parts...where others can't/won't have them.

Yeah, sort of. Except that some manufacturers source out small parts, often to multiple subcontractors. So if I need a replacement trigger bar for my production gun why couldn't I source the part from one of the subs that the gun's manufacturer uses?

[Skydiver]

[bTW: Yes, I did see that later post that DNROI's opinion was if an aftermarket part fits OEM specs, then it's considered OEM. Now if only DNROI would makes it a ruling to make it official.]

Go look. That is one they messed up, in my opinion. (sorry Scott, I did not know you made a "catalog item") To me it's a backdoor that allows some companies guns extra parts...where others can't/won't have them.

Yeah, sort of. Except that some manufacturers source out small parts, often to multiple subcontractors. So if I need a replacement trigger bar for my production gun why couldn't I source the part from one of the subs that the gun's manufacturer uses?

You can, as long as the trigger bar is fully an internal part since D4 21.5 allows both OEM and aftermarket. It's the external parts that 21.6 does not list as being allowed to be OEM or aftermarket, that should needs to OEM (or a catalog item.)

Nitpicking aside, though, I do get the thrust of your question, and it is a fair question to ask. I personally think that we should be allowed to get it directly from the subcontractor.

[Loves2Shoot]

How much stuff does Angus make for CZ? I've never heard anyone bitch and moan if they buy it directly from him, nor do I think they should complain about it.

[Steve Anderson]

"When I started shooting, we thought we had hot rodded our .45's by installing a set of Pachmayr rubber grip and a shock buff!! The die hards said that was not fair and that was why they were being beaten."

Very true, and very well stated.

If the trigger weight rule is supposed to "level the playing field" for new shooters, it will not work.

In fact, it could even make it worse.

People outside of our sports think that high skill shooting is based on fancy equipment. For cryin' out loud, My wife's uncle told me at a Christmas party that JJ Racaza is fast because he uses wax bullets. I had no idea...

What will they think if we remove the excuses and mandate box stock guns? They probably won't believe it.

It won't make them any more likely to practice if they weren't inclined to do so, and it won't make them come back if they have their egos damaged.

All men think they are great at 3 things: Shooting and driving are 2 of them.

[ihatepickles]

How much stuff does Angus make for CZ? I've never heard anyone bitch and moan if they buy it directly from him, nor do I think they should complain about it.

In the production line of parts: a comp hammer, a selection of main and recoil springs, sights, and grip panels. I think that's a fair representation of the things that would be hard to come-by without the CZ Custom shop putting forth the effort in making or having these made. It's not exactly a towering stack of competitive advantage. Cajun Gun Works is another popular source of quality parts.

[TGO]

"When I started shooting, we thought we had hot rodded our .45's by installing a set of Pachmayr rubber grip and a shock buff!! The die hards said that was not fair and that was why they were being beaten."

Very true, and very well stated.

If the trigger weight rule is supposed to "level the playing field" for new shooters, it will not work.

In fact, it could even make it worse.

People outside of our sports think that high skill shooting is based on fancy equipment. For cryin' out loud, My wife's uncle told me at a Christmas party that JJ Racaza is fast because he uses wax bullets. I had no idea...

What will they think if we remove the excuses and mandate box stock guns? They probably won't believe it.

It won't make them any more likely to practice if they weren't inclined to do so, and it won't make them come back if they have their egos damaged.

All men think they are great at 3 things: Shooting and driving are 2 of them.

And eating/drinking right?

Rob

[GrumpyOne]

"When I started shooting, we thought we had hot rodded our .45's by installing a set of Pachmayr rubber grip and a shock buff!! The die hards said that was not fair and that was why they were being beaten."

Very true, and very well stated.

If the trigger weight rule is supposed to "level the playing field" for new shooters, it will not work.

In fact, it could even make it worse.

People outside of our sports think that high skill shooting is based on fancy equipment. For cryin' out loud, My wife's uncle told me at a Christmas party that JJ Racaza is fast because he uses wax bullets. I had no idea...

What will they think if we remove the excuses and mandate box stock guns? They probably won't believe it.

It won't make them any more likely to practice if they weren't inclined to do so, and it won't make them come back if they have their egos damaged.

All men think they are great at 3 things: Shooting and driving are 2 of them.

And eating/drinking right?

Rob

And telling lies about fishing.

[beltjones]

How much stuff does Angus make for CZ? I've never heard anyone bitch and moan if they buy it directly from him, nor do I think they should complain about it.

In the production line of parts: a comp hammer, a selection of main and recoil springs, sights, and grip panels. I think that's a fair representation of the things that would be hard to come-by without the CZ Custom shop putting forth the effort in making or having these made. It's not exactly a towering stack of competitive advantage. Cajun Gun Works is another popular source of quality parts.

Really? They manufacture those in house rather than purchasing them from a supplier?

So if I buy from Angus (basically just a middle man as he isn't CZ exactly and doesn't actually produce the parts) a part made for a CZ by a supplier it's legal. If I buy a part directly from a supplier then it's illegal. Seems fishy.

[beltjones]

"When I started shooting, we thought we had hot rodded our .45's by installing a set of Pachmayr rubber grip and a shock buff!! The die hards said that was not fair and that was why they were being beaten."

Very true, and very well stated.

If the trigger weight rule is supposed to "level the playing field" for new shooters, it will not work.

In fact, it could even make it worse.

People outside of our sports think that high skill shooting is based on fancy equipment. For cryin' out loud, My wife's uncle told me at a Christmas party that JJ Racaza is fast because he uses wax bullets. I had no idea...

What will they think if we remove the excuses and mandate box stock guns? They probably won't believe it.

It won't make them any more likely to practice if they weren't inclined to do so, and it won't make them come back if they have their egos damaged.

All men think they are great at 3 things: Shooting and driving are 2 of them.

And eating/drinking right?

Rob

And telling lies about fishing.

And fencing (as I learned when I agreed to "fight" the captain of the fencing club in college).

[ihatepickles]

How much stuff does Angus make for CZ? I've never heard anyone bitch and moan if they buy it directly from him, nor do I think they should complain about it.

In the production line of parts: a comp hammer, a selection of main and recoil springs, sights, and grip panels. I think that's a fair representation of the things that would be hard to come-by without the CZ Custom shop putting forth the effort in making or having these made. It's not exactly a towering stack of competitive advantage. Cajun Gun Works is another popular source of quality parts.

Really? They manufacture those in house rather than purchasing them from a supplier?

So if I buy from Angus (basically just a middle man as he isn't CZ exactly and doesn't actually produce the parts) a part made for a CZ by a supplier it's legal. If I buy a part directly from a supplier then it's illegal. Seems fishy.

I think your question is the same as those brought up about the Powder River trigger that Springfield Armory offers as an OEM option from their custom shop.

My understanding is that CZ Custom puts their money forth to develop new parts which are manufactured to spec by suppliers. It's not much different than CZ-UB (The Czech manufacturer of CZ firearms) purchasing magazine tubes from a supplier and magazine springs from a different one. The magazine is a CZ mag, but they're not the actual manufacturer of the item.

(Note, I'm not 100% sure if CZ makes their own mags or not, the example is true of most companies though. I doubt there's a single firearm in the world produced solely by a single entity. Many parts come from specialized sources while being made to spec by the company that's putting their name on the side of it.)