Joe D Posted February 25, 2008 Share Posted February 25, 2008 I know this topic has been discussed before, but here is the "official" ruling from IDPA/Robert Ray. A 9mm conversion barrel installed in a G22 or G35 is NOT legal for ESP. Same would apply for a G20 and a .40 conversion barrel. I have also asked for a ruling on the "tri top" slides seen on some STI/SVI guns. IMO they should not be legal as the slide has been lightened. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Watson Posted February 25, 2008 Share Posted February 25, 2008 That is just not half bright and will cost IDPA in attendance by those who buy big and shoot small. I think the slide lightening bit is bogus, too. How do they know the purpose of lightening the slide? I might choose a tri-top or otherwise lighten the slide because I think it looks kewl. I might lighten the slide to get the gun to function more reliably, as for a smallbore 1911. I guess a gun that does not malfunction is a competitive advantage, isn't it? So it would not be allowed to balance the gun to the load. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Freeman Posted February 25, 2008 Share Posted February 25, 2008 A 9mm conversion barrel installed in a G22 or G35 is NOT legal for ESP. Same would apply for a G20 and a .40 conversion barrel. Not legal for ESP? Surely you are kidding me. SSP I can, and am more than willing to buy, but ESP? I have also asked for a ruling on the "tri top" slides seen on some STI/SVI guns. IMO they should not be legal as the slide has been lightened. There is a hornets nest. I say tri-topping a slide not only looks cool, but makes the gun more reliable. Complete guns are coming out of S_I tri-topped. I remember an old crusty Master Sergeant telling me once, "Dont ask the question you dont want an official answer to. You might have a hard time keeping air in your tires..." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe D Posted February 25, 2008 Author Share Posted February 25, 2008 It appears that IDPA has been dancing around the 9mm conversion barrel issue for some time. Guess they finally decided to take a stand. IMO IDPA needs to decide if ESP is going to be the "gamer" Division and allow more modifications or keep it in line with "real world" guns. A 9mm STI 2011 is not what I would consider a real carry gun. OTOH there are those that would say the same thing about my G34. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Freeman Posted February 26, 2008 Share Posted February 26, 2008 It appears that IDPA has been dancing around the 9mm conversion barrel issue for some time. Guess they finally decided to take a stand. Taking a stand would be putting it in the rulebook.A 9mm STI 2011 is not what I would consider a real carry gun. But you didnt write the rulebook. My carry gun... 38 Super loaded with 17 rounds of +P Silvertip. OTOH there are those that would say the same thing about my G34 Dont get me started... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duane Thomas Posted February 26, 2008 Share Posted February 26, 2008 My carry gun... 38 Super loaded with 17 rounds of +P Silvertip. Sweet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
benny hill Posted February 26, 2008 Share Posted February 26, 2008 Joe, we all know that you worship at the alter of glock & kimber, but hey, some of us like to carry beer & bar-b-que guns everyday. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe D Posted February 26, 2008 Author Share Posted February 26, 2008 Benny, how in the world did you, of all people, figure out that I like Glocks and Kimbers? OTOH I did build a STI 2011 last year just for grins. It managed to find it's way into a friends hands. He seems to like it. Guess my position on STI/SVI 2011 guns has not changed yet - overpriced. I am yet to figure out why a gun that sells for $1800+ has to be tuned before it is reliable or has a good trigger. Seems like for that kind of money it should be perfect right out of the box. It is part plactic you know. My carry gun is one of those cheap, plastic G23s. Everytime I pull the trigger I flinch waiting for it to ka-boom. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aircooled6racer Posted February 26, 2008 Share Posted February 26, 2008 Hello: Like I have said before make a minimum weight for the slide and be done with it. It would be easy to police. Take the slide off and the barrel,bushing,guide rod,spring and weight it. If it weights under then it is illegal. Simple--really. That way we could have some really cool looking slides. Thanks, Eric Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jmorris Posted February 26, 2008 Share Posted February 26, 2008 In the permitted modifications list, cosmetic checker/seriating are allowed, one generally removes metal during the process (factory or not) then right below in the excluded list they have slide lightening. As an MD I can’t enforce rules that contradict themselves, so the benefit of doubt goes to the shooter (allowed). For another example rule 3 from the permitted list approves replacement of the barrel with one of factory configuration. So if I were to DQ a 35 with a 34 barrel, I would also have to DQ any Glock with a non-polygonal rifled barrel. See the mess that stirs up? What if I put an after market 34 barrel in a 35? If they do want to interpret the rule as you state above they are going to have to rewrite the book before this MD can enforce it. As far as the tri top argument you have to remember not all of the pistols you are talking about are 5” 1911s, so “lightened” from what? All STI has to do is rename a tri toped Ti slide pistol a “3011” and it’s within current IDPA rules. One thing I have to give IDPA is there are no other sports with 20,000+ participants that only have a 5”X8” 82 page rule book. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe D Posted February 26, 2008 Author Share Posted February 26, 2008 The logic applied by IDPA was a G22 or G35 was never offered in 9mm. Not enforce the rules???? Are you telling me you do not hand out a FTDR for dumping rounds either. The rules are what they are. We as MD's and SO's have to enforce them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
p99shooter Posted February 26, 2008 Share Posted February 26, 2008 I think the reasoning behind the decision can be found in Appendix A, section 1C. Non-IDPA-Legal modifications for all divisions: 1c - Heavy and/or cone style barrels without a barrel bushing. A 9mm barrel that drops-in to a G35 slide will necessarily have more metal surrounding the bore than a regular 9mm barrel or even a 40 S&W barrel. It's a "heavy" barrel. Question is: who wants to shoot 9mm in ESP anyway, when you've got a 10+1 limit at 125 PF? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jmorris Posted February 26, 2008 Share Posted February 26, 2008 If I enforce the rules based on “stock configuration” to the strictest of definitions, I wouldn’t allow barrels with non-standard rifling either. So until HQ puts it in the book, what they really meat, I’m not changing a thing. I enforce rules that are open to interpretation, with the benefit of the shooter in mind. If someone shoots more than the required # of rounds and they are on the retreat shooting strong hand only at a target 25yds away are you going to give them an FTDR if you come to find out they have more than the required amount of zeros? As to barrel thickness I have never had a problem shooting my SVI (with interchangeable breech face) configured in 9mm for ESP and 45 for CDP. I guess I can say both configurations are “stock” and the best part is that the tri-top is too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duane Thomas Posted February 27, 2008 Share Posted February 27, 2008 Question is: who wants to shoot 9mm in ESP anyway, when you've got a 10+1 limit at 125 PF? Lots of people. With a 10+1 limit and 125,000 pf, 9mm is a very popular cartridge in ESP. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duane Thomas Posted February 27, 2008 Share Posted February 27, 2008 In the permitted modifications list, cosmetic checker/seriating are allowed, one generally removes metal during the process (factory or not) then right below in the excluded list they have slide lightening. As an MD I can’t enforce rules that contradict themselves, so the benefit of doubt goes to the shooter (allowed). There's a big difference between cosmetic checkering which is specifically allowed, and slide lightening which specifically is not. Using the legality of one to ignore the illegality of the other hardly seems the way to go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duane Thomas Posted February 27, 2008 Share Posted February 27, 2008 If someone shoots more than the required # of rounds and they are on the retreat shooting strong hand only at a target 25yds away are you going to give them an FTDR if you come to find out they have more than the required amount of zeros? No, we would give them a procedural for firing more rounds than designated, regardless of the number of hits on target. Not really sure what that has to do with barrel switches or tri-topped slides..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jmorris Posted February 27, 2008 Share Posted February 27, 2008 The barrel switches/tri toped slides were addressed in the last sentence of the last post I made. If slide lightening is specifically not allowed, what weight are they judging that by? A “standard” slide weighs more than a slide with front and rear serrations (lightened, but remain legal, why?). The last statement you commented on was (off topic, yes) in reference to JoeD’s question about how I would call an FTDR. I was pointing out a situation where a shooter uncertain about his or her score would fire extra shots on a target regardless of the score they might have. I did this, as well as many others, at the 2006 nationals without penalty (yep, it was the long stage with the barrels). In any case, only if the stage were limited would an extra round result in a procedural and minus the best hit, (assuming you play by the rule book) as “round dumping” is only covered in PC 1. D. p15 of the rule book (under FTDR) and you are correct, it has nothing to do with tri-topped slides, as they are never mentioned in the rule book. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jmorris Posted February 27, 2008 Share Posted February 27, 2008 Sorry about that, I guess it’s that time of night. My point is that any competitor can have a CCF race framed glock with a Caspian slide in any caliber and be legal in ESP, so HQ would have to specifically mention it in the rule book before I’ll DQ a shooter shooting in ESP with a 34 barrel in a 35. That’s so obvious that they must mean SSP. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duane Thomas Posted February 27, 2008 Share Posted February 27, 2008 My point is that any competitor can have a CCF race framed glock with a Caspian slide in any caliber and be legal in ESP As long as it's a G34/35 length slide. An alloy CCF RaceFrame with G17/G22 length slide would violate the "no metal full-length dust cover" rule. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duane Thomas Posted February 27, 2008 Share Posted February 27, 2008 If slide lightening is specifically not allowed, what weight are they judging that by? A “standard” slide weighs more than a slide with front and rear serrations (lightened, but remain legal, why?). Because front and rear slide cocking grooves are a common factory feature on many 1911s, and the amount of metal removed is very small. There's a big difference between that and severely skeletonizing or otherwise removing huge amounts of metal to get the gun to cycle faster. The fact that front/rear slide cocking grooves are allowed has absolutely nothing to do with slide lightening for a competitive advantage. Apples and oranges. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Taylor Posted February 27, 2008 Share Posted February 27, 2008 My point is that any competitor can have a CCF race framed glock with a Caspian slide in any caliber and be legal in ESP As long as it's a G34/35 length slide. An alloy CCF RaceFrame with G17/G22 length slide would violate the "no metal full-length dust cover" rule. Not if you cut the dust cover back like mine. The rule says steel or stainless steel. All other metals legal. Best regards, Jim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duane Thomas Posted February 29, 2008 Share Posted February 29, 2008 Not if you cut the dust cover back like mine. We're seriously thread drifting here, but: I'm curious, does that leave a gap between the front of the slide and the front of the dust cover? There's not a lot of overlap there to start with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ted Murphy Posted March 7, 2008 Share Posted March 7, 2008 Perhaps the reasoning behind not permitting to put a 9mm barrel in a .40 cal glock is something other than the purpose and principles, or equipment rules. Glock does not recommend this practice (9mm bbl in a .40 pistol) in their guns. If a shooting sport were to permit doing this anyway against the manuf's recommendations and something disasterous happened (slim though it may be) they would find themselves in a very actionable position. IOW, the same reasoning and or fears that caused HQ to not permit the removal of any safety device may well be in play here. Not saying I agree, but this is what I was thinking when I first heard of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RickB Posted March 7, 2008 Share Posted March 7, 2008 What's a G34? Is that "one less" than a G35? How would I know one from the other? EXACTLY. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Taylor Posted March 7, 2008 Share Posted March 7, 2008 Not if you cut the dust cover back like mine. We're seriously thread drifting here, but: I'm curious, does that leave a gap between the front of the slide and the front of the dust cover? There's not a lot of overlap there to start with. Yes, about 1 inch. It is ugly, but shoots like a dream. Jim 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