31+1 Reloadable mags.... I just got Mine!

[Sharyn]

Many here have been at odds with Amidon's take on "or components". In the above, I'd say those 6in sight trackers are legal...

I don't quite understand this. I'm under the impression that the way Mr. Amidon interprets the rules is pretty much the way the rule should be understood...???

I think it's important that we understand the rules and how they're applied in our sport. I'm glad you brought up that side of the discussion, Flex. There are very few people who 'want' to compete with illegal equipment.

I sent Mr. Amidon an email asking about this and this was his response:

Hi Sharyn,

Magazines are not considered as a component to a manufactured handgun under this provision, only the handgun and the parts (components) to build it. Magazines are considered an accessory for this special condition. As we have rules in place to govern the overall length of the magazines, we are not concerned with how many rounds can be loaded into them, though some state laws do restrict over 10 round magazines, USPSA only restricts the overall length and those are listed in the various division requirements.

An example of this, some magazines can fit 28 rounds, some 29 and even some 30, but they are all 171.25 mm long, there is no way that any tuning replacement of followers, base pads or springs can be monitored, but overall length can be.

What is meant by components, is like the kits that Caspian makes, in the beginning they never made a complete assembled gun, but offered all the components to have a gunsmith produce one, in fact back in 1993, it was because of Caspian kits that this language was put in when Limited was formed.

Hope this helps clear things up for you.

Of course, if we do not all get out and vote in November, this all may be a mute point anyway. J

Feel free to post my response, it seems my name is getting mentioned enough already, once more shouldn’t matter.

Regards,

John Amidon

Thanks Mr. Amidon!

[Chris Keen]

Good to know.

Thanks

[Flexmoney]

OK....some more drift into rules talk.

Many here have been at odds with Amidon's take on "or components". In the above, I'd say those 6in sight trackers are legal...

I don't quite understand this. I'm under the impression that the way Mr. Amidon interprets the rules is pretty much the way the rule should be understood...???

It's better to take the Director of NROI's word on a topic as a well formed opinion. One backed by experience and knowledge. But, not gospel. He can, and does, make mistakes...just like we all do. In fact, sometimes the questions aren't put to him with all of the vital information. It is impossible to expect that the D-NROI is to be right all the time.

With that said, we are governed by the written rule book, and whatever "official rule interpretations" that are printed (as such) on the USPSA website. (Those official interpretations are put out after review by the BOD. My observations are that the BOD tends to follow Amidon's view, but not always.)

If you were to take an issue to arb at the Nationals, the arb would(should) be considered on what the rule book reads, not what one individual believes. (I think we all know that, and that is why arbs can be successful at any match...not matter who the Range Master is.)

.

.

.

Let me shine a light on this "or components" thing...

It has been asked (on this forum, at least) for a number of year now...how Robbie can shoot a Springfield double-stack gun with a 6 inch top end. It is commonly believed that Springfield has never produced such a gun. And, TJ shot a 6in Para last year (I think that Para just came out with a 6in version this year?).

I've justified Robbie's use of that gun under the rules by siting the "or components" wording of the rules. Springfield has certainly put out enough double-stack guns to meet the 500 requirement, and there have certainly been enough 6in top ends to meet the requirement.

Even though there is no such gun (or kit form) that has meet the requirements of the division, the various components for putting together a 6in Springfield or Para are readily available and meet the production requirements.

So, if that is legal...why isn't the 6in sight tracker legal? (Assuming your info is correct in that they have the numbers right for the components.)

There was/is enough lack of clarity in this area that we ought to clean up the wording. (and, the BOD did come in and give a ruling on this with the 5in sight tracker)

Anybody's head hurt after reading all that???

Anyway...I am really happy with Amidon's take on the mag thing...as it makes it much easier to police equipment for the match staff if the overall test is just if it fits the gauge. I'm not sure that the ambiguity is gone from the wording of the rule book, however. (which could leave us open to a third party arb...but, that is pretty unlikely)

[JThompson]

OK....some more drift into rules talk.

Many here have been at odds with Amidon's take on "or components". In the above, I'd say those 6in sight trackers are legal...

I don't quite understand this. I'm under the impression that the way Mr. Amidon interprets the rules is pretty much the way the rule should be understood...???

It's better to take the Director of NROI's word on a topic as a well formed opinion. One backed by experience and knowledge. But, not gospel. He can, and does, make mistakes...just like we all do. In fact, sometimes the questions aren't put to him with all of the vital information. It is impossible to expect that the D-NROI is to be right all the time.

With that said, we are governed by the written rule book, and whatever "official rule interpretations" that are printed (as such) on the USPSA website. (Those official interpretations are put out after review by the BOD. My observations are that the BOD tends to follow Amidon's view, but not always.)

If you were to take an issue to arb at the Nationals, the arb would(should) be considered on what the rule book reads, not what one individual believes. (I think we all know that, and that is why arbs can be successful at any match...not matter who the Range Master is.)

.

.

.

Let me shine a light on this "or components" thing...

It has been asked (on this forum, at least) for a number of year now...how Robbie can shoot a Springfield double-stack gun with a 6 inch top end. It is commonly believed that Springfield has never produced such a gun. And, TJ shot a 6in Para last year (I think that Para just came out with a 6in version this year?).

I've justified Robbie's use of that gun under the rules by siting the "or components" wording of the rules. Springfield has certainly put out enough double-stack guns to meet the 500 requirement, and there have certainly been enough 6in top ends to meet the requirement.

Even though there is no such gun (or kit form) that has meet the requirements of the division, the various components for putting together a 6in Springfield or Para are readily available and meet the production requirements.

So, if that is legal...why isn't the 6in sight tracker legal? (Assuming your info is correct in that they have the numbers right for the components.)

There was/is enough lack of clarity in this area that we ought to clean up the wording. (and, the BOD did come in and give a ruling on this with the 5in sight tracker)

Anybody's head hurt after reading all that???

Anyway...I am really happy with Amidon's take on the mag thing...as it makes it much easier to police equipment for the match staff if the overall test is just if it fits the gauge. I'm not sure that the ambiguity is gone from the wording of the rule book, however. (which could leave us open to a third party arb...but, that is pretty unlikely)

My head doesn't hurt, but it raises other questions that I will keep under my hat.

Edited April 2, 2008 by JThompson

[Flyin40]

Back to topic............How many rounds in the 40 with the tuned bolen pads. I sent an email and he said he would tune one up for me

I shot the Florida match this past weekend and can't see where shooting a 40 with 26+1 hurt me one bit. There has been matches where the reload makes a big difference. I can't remember which match last yr that had 3 stages in one match (might of been the Mich. Match) where having more capacity would of changed my strategy on the stage and helped me out. I think the mag capacity is way overrated until you get to those in the top of the sport. To those guys every little thing can make a difference when the race is close. I'm still making mistakes that no matter what my mag held, even 40 it wouldn't help me.

I'm still going for the higher capacity though, maybe a possible 28+1 in 40. Gotta love that.

Flyin

[Jake Di Vita]

I skipped over a lot of this thread, but one thing I will say. If I'm down by a bit going into the last stage which is a 32 round field course....not having to reload does really allow me to go for it.

You can bet on every reload costing you a minimum of .5 seconds regardless of where they happen. So on a 10 factor stage, that's potentially an extra 5 match points.

[Sharyn]

Anybody's head hurt after reading all that???

Yes.

And, were I to face a situation like this with a RM... my GM card in eyelash batting might come in handy.

Another reason for me to stick with Open... less rules. And I look forward to torture testing my 31+1 mag.

ETA: Flex, maybe you could break this into a .40/Limited/rules thread and the 31+1 thread, since this is in Open Gun Technical...???

Edited April 2, 2008 by Sharyn

[stockton]

Got my pads from Manny at Double Tap. NICE! Didn't have time to properly fit them, but big stick is 29 reloadable with NO twining and Grams internals. Had opportunity to shoot with Glenn Higdon again this year. I saw one of the new followers up close and visited about the upcoming springs. TOTAL combo is going to be THE ticket!

[f250sd]

I was tring the Bolen pads and followers, without a tuned tube, I still got an extra round. Bolen was telling me about his own springs, that should be out soon, is going to give even more room.

[XRe]

Got my pads from Manny at Double Tap. NICE! Didn't have time to properly fit them, but big stick is 29 reloadable with NO twining and Grams internals.

It just dawned on me - you were running those pads at the match, weren't you? You're frickin' nuts, Stockton!

[John Amidon]

Let me shine a light on this "or components" thing...

It has been asked (on this forum, at least) for a number of year now...how Robbie can shoot a Springfield double-stack gun with a 6 inch top end. It is commonly believed that Springfield has never produced such a gun. And, TJ shot a 6in Para last year (I think that Para just came out with a 6in version this year?).

I've justified Robbie's use of that gun under the rules by siting the "or components" wording of the rules. Springfield has certainly put out enough double-stack guns to meet the 500 requirement, and there have certainly been enough 6in top ends to meet the requirement.

Even though there is no such gun (or kit form) that has meet the requirements of the division, the various components for putting together a 6in Springfield or Para are readily available and meet the production requirements.

So, if that is legal...why isn't the 6in sight tracker legal? (Assuming your info is correct in that they have the numbers right for the components.)

Flex,

The Springfield and Para's were allowed as other companies had produced the required 500 in that configuration, thus allowing the complet gun or components of to build replicas, with regard to the 6" Sight Tracker, even though there may be enough parts to prodcue one, no one has produced 500 of them and signed the Limited Declartion form to that effect.

Until someone originally produces 500 6" sight trackers and signed the form and gone on record, it cannot be replicated, as it does not exist and only would be a prototype if one were made.

Regards,

John Amidon

[Chriss Grube]

Yep, Clear as mud!

[jasmap]

Yep, Clear as mud!

+1

[XRe]

So, if I read that right, someone can build a 5" Sight Tracker type gun on a Para or Springfield widebody frame, correct?

[jasmap]

So, if I read that right, someone can build a 5" Sight Tracker type gun on a Para or Springfield widebody frame, correct?

But not a 6" SightTracker type gun on any frame?

Edited April 3, 2008 by jasmap

[XRe]

But not a 6" SightTracker type gun on any frame?

Correct.

[scirocco38s]

So, if I read that right, someone can build a 5" Sight Tracker type gun on a Para or Springfield widebody frame, correct?

But not a 6" SightTracker type gun on any frame?

The deeper you dig the smellier it gets.

[HoMiE]

With Bolen 4mm basepad and follower, I was able to get 30 in my SV self tuned mags. Now to get 31...where's my mallet?

[Radical Precision Designs]

Let me shine a light on this "or components" thing...

It has been asked (on this forum, at least) for a number of year now...how Robbie can shoot a Springfield double-stack gun with a 6 inch top end. It is commonly believed that Springfield has never produced such a gun. And, TJ shot a 6in Para last year (I think that Para just came out with a 6in version this year?).

I've justified Robbie's use of that gun under the rules by siting the "or components" wording of the rules. Springfield has certainly put out enough double-stack guns to meet the 500 requirement, and there have certainly been enough 6in top ends to meet the requirement.

Even though there is no such gun (or kit form) that has meet the requirements of the division, the various components for putting together a 6in Springfield or Para are readily available and meet the production requirements.

So, if that is legal...why isn't the 6in sight tracker legal? (Assuming your info is correct in that they have the numbers right for the components.)

Flex,

The Springfield and Para's were allowed as other companies had produced the required 500 in that configuration, thus allowing the complet gun or components of to build replicas, with regard to the 6" Sight Tracker, even though there may be enough parts to prodcue one, no one has produced 500 of them and signed the Limited Declartion form to that effect.

Until someone originally produces 500 6" sight trackers and signed the form and gone on record, it cannot be replicated, as it does not exist and only would be a prototype if one were made.

Regards,

John Amidon

I guess, since the "giant thread drift ..." it was inevitable that "my ears would be ringing"...

Sometimes we get called to action before we are ready for it, or have set the time aside for it ... so it goes ... !!!!

I did not intend for this Forum to become a "battleground" regarding a subject being followed in a different thread, and the "official paperwork not quite ready yet".

As for the "Documentation" requirements, some are noted and verified right here in these forums:

http://www.brianenos.com/forums/index.php?...mp;#entry729552

This was posted by Mike Callaway, a "principal" at Schuemann Barrels, and can be made available in an "official" letter form. Brandon Strayer has also stated that he would make available another letter attesting to the fact that SV/Infinity has been making the complete guns available for sale to the public, and while a total number of 500 produced may not have been reached, they are indeed available as a completed gun. This would indicate that a ready source other than custom pistolsmiths (such as myself or Derek) is available for these guns. And I would not dare include either Schuemann Barrels or SV/Infinity as entities belonging in the "prototype" category as manufacturers. As for the 6" slides ? Well I don't believe that anyone will question that more than 500 have been made and documented.

Should this matter be brought to some sort of arbitration in its "clarity" when it is "ofiffially" brought forth ??? I really do not know as that situation has not arrived yet ... and as John Amidon stated ... it has not been requested yet by anyone. You can not have a ruling to an "officially non existing" issue. Conjectures at this point are totally non-conducive or helpful . Asking John Amidon for a ruling on an unsubstantiated issue is ... like "duh" ??? And it will not help the progress being done on the subject elsewhere. Theories can be fun, but let's not use them as fact until unrefutably brought forth. I believe that the USPSA and John Amidon will be more receptive to the subject when properly addressed through the accepted channels. Time, is on our side on this one, and some patience is dictated, just like so many other items that have become standard in our Sport.

[stockton]

It just dawned on me - you were running those pads at the match, weren't you? You're frickin' nuts, Stockton!

What about my frickin' nuts?! Ran one on a 140 and one on the stick. Didn't change guts, just the pads. I figured a flat bottom is a flat bottom.

I did fit the rest this evening. VERY slick! Looking forward to not cracking pads!

[f250sd]

Shot another 30rd hoser stage w/ 2 steel, yesterday, and made up a mike on a paper(oops), with out a reload.... crazy.

[steel1212]

Just curious on how these mags are holding up?

[Tzygä]

Just curious on how these mags are holding up?

Me too.

[Tzygä]

Just curious on how these mags are holding up?

Everybodies mags still holding great .

So now I have seen the light.

Anydody...

[HI5-O]

Due to the lack of comments, I would say the mags are holding up well