Jman Posted September 25, 2008 Share Posted September 25, 2008 (edited) Just recieved from JA..as they relate to Production Division... Jim, A connector being replaced as a small part is fine, but, A connector that functions as a trigger stop, pretravel adjustment or other trigger enhancement – no John ..."other trigger enhancement" hmmm. Lone Wolf must be fine.....right? Jim Edited September 25, 2008 by JimmyM Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HoMiE Posted September 25, 2008 Share Posted September 25, 2008 It's unenforceable unless matches have tech inspections like NASCAR. And technically not official until there is a rule change or official posting on NROI. This is going to make a lot of production glock shooters very upset. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
00bullitt Posted September 25, 2008 Share Posted September 25, 2008 This again is what Flex speaks of. It is JA's opinion of how the rule should be interpreted. Not a ruling of NROI. Limiting overtravel internally has always been acceptable in the past. The speed bump trigger on Berettas was deemed illegal so people like Olhasso came up with a way to do it internally. I personally interpret the rule to say it is OK to use a connector such as the Ghost. But ultimately it is up to NROI to rule and post it on the website as the final word. I assume the overtravel screw being installed in the Glock trigger housing by all the Glock trigger gurus is not allowed as well? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BlackSabbath Posted September 25, 2008 Share Posted September 25, 2008 Agreed on Flex's take on this one. I want to see where it's specifically written in the rules. And, as Homie says: Totally unenforceable. You'd have to take the guns completely apart to do such a check. Whose responsibilty will that be? And, imagine some guy you don't know taking your gun apart at a big match and it not working right afterwards on your next stage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BayouSlide Posted September 25, 2008 Share Posted September 25, 2008 This is going to make a lot of production glock shooters very upset. Now when a minimum trigger pull weight was proposed, that was upsetting. Reason and the wishes of the apparent majority of Production competitors prevailed, but I hoped we didn't win that battle only to lose the war. Before the new rulebook, things were easy to understand, relatively easy to enforce and in keeping with what I understood to be the spirit of the Production class...basically no externally visible modifications other than sights and grip tape/grip sleeve, internal work like triggerwork, springs, guide rods, etc. all A-OK if the gun stayed with the 2 oz. rule. But now, sheesh, what gives with the new rules, a can of worms that seem to require three new clarifications each time something rather straightforward is seemingly clarified? How could someone possibly figure that it's OK to change out a Glock barrel to an aftermarket barrel (same caliber), but not to change a Glock 3.5 lb. connector for a Lonewolf 3.5...same type of part, just slightly reshaped for better function? A connector is just a shaped piece of spring steel, for all practical purposes. IMO the new rules are problematic because they are too specific to be vague but too vague to be specific. This merely serves to open the door to more and more questions, and seems to leave gaping holes especially when considering the Glock platform, arguably the most popular Production gun among the rank and file. Maybe I should be posting my feelings about USPSA's mucking up the Production rules in What I Hate rather than here If so, my apologies to the moderators and fellow BENOS members. Curtis Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Micah Posted September 25, 2008 Share Posted September 25, 2008 This is going to make a lot of production glock shooters very upset. Nah. By that statement only the Ghost Rocket connector is out. There are trigger housings that have overtravel stops. This again is what Flex speaks of. It is JA's opinion of how the rule should be interpreted. Not a ruling of NROI. +1. I recently had someone tell me that grip stipling was not allowed in Prod (not you Conrad). Their call,and they were wrong. The rulebook CLEARLY makes the calling on that one. In a worst case scenario I can go back to a Vanek tuned connector as it is simply a dolled up OEM connector. What made people pissed was paying Vanek money to get the best Glock trigger on the market, only to have the NROI kick it out of Prod. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flexmoney Posted September 25, 2008 Share Posted September 25, 2008 I know of a quick 4 common ways to reduce over-travel...in the Glock alone. <sigh> And plenty on the other guns too... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VegasOPM Posted September 25, 2008 Share Posted September 25, 2008 I have to say that I am okay with that ruling (insofar as it counts). Production is supposed to be the more level playing ground of USPSA. Open and Limited are already the deep pockets classes, leave Production out of the arms race. I figure that Production is for guns that I might actually carry, and a GLOCK with a 2# trigger with no travel isn't something that I'd carry. I also like the fact that my G17 can go directly from USPSA to IDPA to actual concealed carry. Yes, I shoot Production, and yes, I can afford the arms race- I just don't want to play that anymore. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vluc Posted September 25, 2008 Share Posted September 25, 2008 As stated, just JA's opinion and not a ruling, though I am relieved to hear it. I prefer the Scherer connector over the OEM, Ghost or LW anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jman Posted September 25, 2008 Author Share Posted September 25, 2008 too specific to be vague but too vague to be specific Amen Curtis... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Singlestack Posted September 26, 2008 Share Posted September 26, 2008 Just recieved from JA..as they relate to Production Division...Jim, A connector being replaced as a small part is fine, but, A connector that functions as a trigger stop, pretravel adjustment or other trigger enhancement – no John ..."other trigger enhancement" hmmm. Lone Wolf must be fine.....right? Jim The way I read his reply replacing a connector with a polished connector would be illegal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vluc Posted September 26, 2008 Share Posted September 26, 2008 Just recieved from JA..as they relate to Production Division...Jim, A connector being replaced as a small part is fine, but, A connector that functions as a trigger stop, pretravel adjustment or other trigger enhancement – no John ..."other trigger enhancement" hmmm. Lone Wolf must be fine.....right? Jim The way I read his reply replacing a connector with a polished connector would be illegal. Oh man! Next you'll be saying we can't polish the striker or the drop safety or bevel its edges or.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
00bullitt Posted October 8, 2008 Share Posted October 8, 2008 Has anyone gotten anything more official on JA's opinion? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
racerba Posted October 8, 2008 Share Posted October 8, 2008 (edited) Nah. By that statement only the Ghost Rocket connector is out. There are trigger housings that have overtravel stops. Then again, trigger housings with overtravel stops is not a minor replacement, is it? Sure, replacement slide is OK, even if it has front serration. Stippling grips is OK even though it's definitely external modification. Milling the slide is OK to install sights, even though it's external modification. Trigger jobs was OK as long as there are no external visible modifications. NOW - replacing a connector that enhances the trigger is NOT OK?!?! Somebody is on something... edited to be less antagonistic! Edited October 8, 2008 by racerba Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nik Habicht Posted October 8, 2008 Share Posted October 8, 2008 Sure, replacement slide is OK, even if it has front serration. Actually they're apparently not o.k. because they don't match the profile of factory originals..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
racerba Posted October 13, 2008 Share Posted October 13, 2008 (edited) Sure, replacement slide is OK, even if it has front serration. Actually they're apparently not o.k. because they don't match the profile of factory originals..... There was a thread here where someone ask JA specifically that question and his answer was that it is OK. Edited because I found a related thread: http://www.brianenos.com/forums/index.php?...25&start=25 OK - I said "a" because, as Kevin stated, JA did a complete 180 on his ruling. So as of May 2008, it is NOT legal to do so...my apologies for JA's inconsistency. Edited October 13, 2008 by racerba Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flexmoney Posted October 13, 2008 Share Posted October 13, 2008 Sure, replacement slide is OK, even if it has front serration. Actually they're apparently not o.k. because they don't match the profile of factory originals..... There was a thread here where someone ask JA specifically that question and his answer was that it is OK. Edited because I found a related thread: http://www.brianenos.com/forums/index.php?...25&start=25 OK - I said "a" because, as Kevin stated, JA did a complete 180 on his ruling. So as of May 2008, it is NOT legal to do so...my apologies for JA's inconsistency. I don't think JA did a 180, fwiw. My take on that is that he gave his opinion on it, and then...when it went to the BOD...he was reversed with the "official ruling." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
racerba Posted October 13, 2008 Share Posted October 13, 2008 I don't think JA did a 180, fwiw. My take on that is that he gave his opinion on it, and then...when it went to the BOD...he was reversed with the "official ruling." If that's the case, my apologies on my comment to JA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nik Habicht Posted October 13, 2008 Share Posted October 13, 2008 I'll throw in there that it's entirely possible that when replacement slides were originally ruled on, that no one mentioned forward serrations --- and that when the differences came to light, JA or BOD or both realized that they had erred, and moved to correct that error..... As much as I hammer the rules makers sometimes --- I do realize and appreciate that they are human, and therefore fallible..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mpolans Posted October 13, 2008 Share Posted October 13, 2008 I'll throw in there that it's entirely possible that when replacement slides were originally ruled on, that no one mentioned forward serrations --- and that when the differences came to light, JA or BOD or both realized that they had erred, and moved to correct that error.....As much as I hammer the rules makers sometimes --- I do realize and appreciate that they are human, and therefore fallible..... I thought the issue wasn't the forward serrations, but the fact that the ejection port was lowered, thus it didn't follow the contour of the stock slide. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nik Habicht Posted October 14, 2008 Share Posted October 14, 2008 Here's the official ruling: Title: Aftermarket Slides for Glock'sCreated: 5/08/08 Updated: 7/31/08 Effective: 8/07/08 Rule number: Appx D4 21 Applies to: Pistol Ruling authority: Director NROI Status: Released Question Is it legal to put a Lone Wolf after market Glock 34 slide and barrel on a Glock 17 and still be legal for Production division? Lone Wolf adds front cocking serrations, a lowered ejection port, a bull nose and is stainless steel. Ruling Glock's do not have the front serrations, an owner of a Glock is not allowed to mill their slide for anything but fitting a sight as per item 21 of Appendix D4, therefore, buying an aftermarket slide that has the front serrations cut into it, does not fit within the guidelines of the original factory contour or standard as specified in the same item. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sslav Posted October 23, 2008 Share Posted October 23, 2008 (edited) I figure that Production is for guns that I might actually carry I believe that that definition of production is entirely your own. I would not carry any of the guns that are competitive in production - too big for comfortable carry (by me anyway). Nor would I use a DOH kydex holster - the most popular production holster. If you think that spending $200-300 on mods will make one shooter more competitive than other, then what about spending $2k-$3k or more on practice ammo. Here is a grand idea - lets ban practicing in production division it is the only way to ensure that those with big bucks can not "buy" their way into winning. Edited October 23, 2008 by sslav Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vluc Posted October 23, 2008 Share Posted October 23, 2008 Here is a grand idea - lets ban practicing in production division it is the only way to ensure that those with big bucks can not "buy" their way into winning. People practice????????? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mike4045 Posted October 24, 2008 Share Posted October 24, 2008 It is an arms race. I know of several local shooters who have $1,500 in their setup.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chuck Anderson Posted October 24, 2008 Share Posted October 24, 2008 It really isn't an arms race. People can put however much they want into the guns. But the bottom line is the winner of Nationals in Production for the last several years has had less than $1000.00 in their whole setup. Glock 34's and a Springfield XD are the only guns that have won the Nationals in Production, at least in recent history. None of the guns used by those Division Champions has had more than about $200.00 in mods, most of that in the sights. And $200.00 is probably way overestimated. People can spend as much on the gun as they want. The bottom line is it is not needed to win. The same can not really be said about the other Divisions, except Revo. 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