jasmap Posted October 29, 2007 Share Posted October 29, 2007 Ok, I may be missing the very obvious but is a 6" SightTracker possible? What could stop it from being a legit build? The barrels are made, the slide can be cut, frame is very available, etc... Would the slide flex too much or what else could be an issue? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt Cheely Posted October 29, 2007 Share Posted October 29, 2007 Sight tracker was only approved in a 5" 40 S&W configuration. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jasmap Posted October 29, 2007 Author Share Posted October 29, 2007 I knew that part but I guess I didn't clarify. Sorry bout that. What I mean is what can keep it from being a working build and not necessarily just USPSA legal? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kingman Posted October 29, 2007 Share Posted October 29, 2007 as for building sounds like an awesome blaster. Getting it approved for limited would be a pita. 2 things are possible 1. Call SVI and see if they have the documentation to prove they have built 500 of them 2. Call Wil Schuemann and ask him if he has sold 500 non ported .40 barrels that are 6" in length. From that point all it would take is submitting it to USPSA HQ for approval. I will say this though based on my 5" sight tracker a 6" would be pretty nose heavy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt Cheely Posted October 30, 2007 Share Posted October 30, 2007 Nothing to keep you from building one, though I think it would end up very front heavy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kingman Posted October 30, 2007 Share Posted October 30, 2007 I have a 5" and it feels a bit front heavy. I am sure it would be very odd feeling to shoot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HSMITH Posted October 30, 2007 Share Posted October 30, 2007 Would have a wicked front sight dip when it closes, I would discourage it. You will essentially have to build a new top end when you shoot it and don't like it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jasmap Posted October 30, 2007 Author Share Posted October 30, 2007 Would have a wicked front sight dip when it closes, I would discourage it. You will essentially have to build a new top end when you shoot it and don't like it. You're right I bet. But just to humor myself......what if the slide were lightened as a good 6" should be and the rise on the barrel hollowed out, just leaving room for a solid sight mount? I know this isn't Limited legal or maybe not even practical. I'm just throwing out something on my mind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt Cheely Posted October 30, 2007 Share Posted October 30, 2007 Would have a wicked front sight dip when it closes, I would discourage it. You will essentially have to build a new top end when you shoot it and don't like it. You're right I bet. But just to humor myself......what if the slide were lightened as a good 6" should be and the rise on the barrel hollowed out, just leaving room for a solid sight mount? I know this isn't Limited legal or maybe not even practical. I'm just throwing out something on my mind. Get it to weigh and balance the same as a 5" and you'd have something that shoots pretty good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jasmap Posted October 30, 2007 Author Share Posted October 30, 2007 Thanks Matt. I know it's goofy but it was on my mind and I had to ask. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry White Posted October 30, 2007 Share Posted October 30, 2007 Thanks Matt. I know it's goofy but it was on my mind and I had to ask. A light Fat Free 6 in with a bull barrel dips some so I would think a 6in sight tracker would really drop.---------Larry Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kingman Posted October 30, 2007 Share Posted October 30, 2007 he might have some sort of an idea. Take some weight out of it by fluting. The take some more by tritopping it and flattening a bit with the barrel as well. maybe even machine down some of the weight just prior to lockup. Going to have to look at the shape of a 6" hybrid barrel some. Not that I would build one, but something to look at. OK, let me play some. I am going to weight my 5" barrel and next time I am Frostburg I am going to flute it, maybe flat top it and see what kinda weight I can take off. Just for the heck of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SV_shooter Posted October 30, 2007 Share Posted October 30, 2007 lkytx, and HSmith: lkytx, after discussing this same topic with HSmith I have to ask... Wouldn't a 6" gun dip less if a bushing barrel shaves enough nose weight, reducing the dip? I found this pic (below)on benny hills site of a 6" fat free w a 6" bushing barrel. not a bull. I kinda liked the Hi-Power cuts and the full length guide rod.. HS as you have been helping me with my 6" thread, this one just brings more questions to the plate. (Sorry Jasmap) I see many fresh builds like dirtypools's "kool aid thread" and I don't think Dan has built 500 of his new 6" spitfire yet (could be wrong though), I am trying to understand the ruling of building your own 6"? since it is technically not a Production gun with over 500 produced, how does anyone with a custom build, legally shoot it in USPSA? Am I missing something here? Would the only way to follow the rules, be to buy a "production" racegun and modify it further to get what I want? I must be really missing something as almost Everyone in Limited, who have one off custom guns would be breaking the rules. I'm going to read the rulebook, but can you guys clarify whether or not its legal in competition to shoot your own build? thanks! here's that pic again. sorry jasmap! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HSMITH Posted October 30, 2007 Share Posted October 30, 2007 The dip is from the mass of the barrel moving forward into battery and stopping quickly. The bushing barrel reduces that mass enough. Lightening the slide helps a little bit, but doesn't stop it when using a bull barrel. STI has made enough 6" Eagles in both bushing and bull barrels to more than cover the 500. You don't have to have 500 of the EXACT gun, you need 500 of a similar configuration. Drastic changes in configuration need 500. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry White Posted October 30, 2007 Share Posted October 30, 2007 SV Shooter, you are right, a bushing barrel FF 6in does dip a lot less. When Benny started building the FFs they were almost all bull barrels, he quickly got away from that and now almost all are bushing guns. My first FF was a bull barrel with just the hi power cuts and it dipped a lot so we flat topped it and cut some pretty large slots in it and it still dipped so we fluted the barrel to match the slots. That helped a lot but is still dipped some. Benny had built a bushing gun for Kurt Miller that was great so almost all the guns have been like that. I just feel like a sight tracker type set up is going to fall like a brick.----------------Larry Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Radical Precision Designs Posted October 30, 2007 Share Posted October 30, 2007 (edited) Ok, I may be missing the very obvious but is a 6" SightTracker possible? What could stop it from being a legit build? The barrels are made, the slide can be cut, frame is very available, etc... Would the slide flex too much or what else could be an issue? Somehow I feel that I am being "baited" here. There is another thread going on concerning Sight Trackers. In that thread I posted about the (possible future) legality of a 6" Sight Tracker. I had a couple of talks with my good friends at SVI/Infinity about it. They never applied submitted for legality of that model to the USPSA because 6" Limited guns were not that "frontline" in shooting trends. Presently the trend and use is there, so it warrants a look and a question. While the recent trend towards 6" Limited guns tips in the "lighter is better" note, there is always a group that likes a little bit more weight out front, (or at least in the barrel). On that note I asked SVI/Infinity to build me a 6" stainless steel IBF slide.(I received that slide about two months ago.) I already had a 6" Sight Tracker barrel which I got around two years ago from Wil Schuemann on hand. Yes, Schuemann has built many of these barrels, and I believe that SVI has also completed and delivered an unknown number of them as factory guns. Of course, SVI can not and will not vouch for anything that it is not built by them. Perhaps if the demand for these guns was out there, SVI might consider submitting for the USPSA approval. As they say: "Money talks ..." Yes, I am building for myself such a gun ... I believe it will be an outstanding tool in the right hands. The slide will be lighter overall than a similarly sized bushing-ed slide. Frankly the only thing you are doing between a normal bull barrel and a Sight Tracker is switching the weingt into the barrel from the slide. That to me is the right direction. Does anybody wonder how or why bull barrels came to be used in 1911 guns ???? Or why they (we all) have continued to accept and use them in so many guns. Or why years ago they outlawed oversized or tungsten sleeves ??? Hey, can someone tell me why would anyone consider using a tungsten guide rod and tungsten recoil plug ????? As some of my colleagues have posted here, the real emphasis should be on actual weight distribution. The mass/weight of a returning slide under "heavy spring influence",with its carried inertia IS the major factor that will make the sigth dip. Witness the fact that most "lightening cuts" are performed into the slides of bull barrel guns, while very few actually flute the barrel to reduce its weight. If the bull barrel in itself was the offending issue, you would see the shooters switching the bull barrel for a bushing barrel. After all, if you remove the bull barrel and look you will find a "bushing cut" already there in the slide from factory. A few misconceptions have been spread around, without much foundation, against the bull barrels in a light gun. BUT WE KEEP ON USING THEM !!!!!!! There is a balance to be achieved. There is also a point of "diminishing returns" in either direction. Find a "happy medium" (and I don't mean a spiritualist !!) and go with it. Hey, it's ALL good . Edited October 30, 2007 by Radical Precision Designs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jasmap Posted October 30, 2007 Author Share Posted October 30, 2007 I didn't see the other post about the Sight Tracker Venry but I'm glad you posted on this. The idea of doing this came to me a few months ago and I've mentioned it to a couple of people but I wanted more input on it. I'd like to see it done to see how it runs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SV_shooter Posted October 30, 2007 Share Posted October 30, 2007 Thank you all for the clarification. it all is starting to make sense now. I appreciate the info gentlemen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HSMITH Posted October 30, 2007 Share Posted October 30, 2007 Makes me wish I had a bushing, bull and sight tracker barrel on hand to weigh.......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Radical Precision Designs Posted October 30, 2007 Share Posted October 30, 2007 Makes me wish I had a bushing, bull and sight tracker barrel on hand to weigh.......... Howard- Imagine having a pound of soft clay to play with. The only rule would be that you must end up with the same full pound after your play/work is finished. You can take some from here and there, and move it elsewhere where you think it may be more effective. Do I hear some wheels turning ??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HSMITH Posted October 30, 2007 Share Posted October 30, 2007 Yes, but you didn't take the bait and weigh the barrels LOL. I have been playing with the timing of the gun coming out of battery, weight returning to battery, distribution of weight, and slide speeds across all the other variations. I have found a very happy middle ground, some interesting ground, and some even more interesting ground. I have also been watching others shooting these variations closely, seeing what the gun does, what they see shooting it and impressions they were left with. I wish I could spend more time doing it.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ogiebb Posted October 30, 2007 Share Posted October 30, 2007 i asked about the same type of gun a few months ago http://www.brianenos.com/forums/index.php?...6+sight+tracker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jasmap Posted October 30, 2007 Author Share Posted October 30, 2007 Crap August. You beat me to it by a few months. And here I thought I was an innovator. Instead I'm just slow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Radical Precision Designs Posted October 30, 2007 Share Posted October 30, 2007 Yes, but you didn't take the bait and weigh the barrels LOL. I have been playing with the timing of the gun coming out of battery, weight returning to battery, distribution of weight, and slide speeds across all the other variations. I have found a very happy middle ground, some interesting ground, and some even more interesting ground. I have also been watching others shooting these variations closely, seeing what the gun does, what they see shooting it and impressions they were left with. I wish I could spend more time doing it.... I do stipulate there is an increasing difference. But when the overall final weight is the real issue, the other cogs just have to be balanced into compliance. There are some calculations that need to be done concerning total distance travelled with the slide and factor in the total mass. The same for the barrel. Since the barrel cycle timing is contingent as only a smaller portion of the total travelled distance of the slide, then is a no brainer. This is because while barrel and slide compose the total mass ( the pound of soft clay) in the beginning, and both arrive (together) at the point of breech opening, and that total momentum/inertia is transferred to the frame momentarily, then the remaining energy will carry on the amount of mass left (the slide) into completing its rearward travel and deliver the rearward "slap". Now, when the "recoil spring" comes into play to return it all back, it is again "the combined" mass/weight of slide and barrel after interlocking again what will give/provide that forward slap. (or dip?) I don't believe for a moment that you will quit your research just because of lack of time. They will probably bury you with a caliper, a scale and a calculator in your hands, when you finally kick the bucket. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ogiebb Posted October 30, 2007 Share Posted October 30, 2007 (edited) Crap August. You beat me to it by a few months. And here I thought I was an innovator. Instead I'm just slow. Jason, Great minds think alike.....right now im thinking of Tera Patrick and Jenna Jameson... how about you? Edited October 30, 2007 by ogiebb Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now