Bucky Posted August 12, 2003 Share Posted August 12, 2003 Vinnie had asked a question about the cost of compliance say USPSA restricted production to 5", leaving out the Glock G34 or IPSC going to the box, allowing the G34. I missed the 3 day window (a gripe I'll post elsewhere), but I have two points I want to add that I didn't see mentioned in the thread. 1. If USPSA moves to the 5" rule, how will that make Glock feel? It is my understanding that Glock specifically designed this gun to fit the box. Will they be miffed that a rule changed severly lower the demand for a now how selling item? Glock is a VERY generous sponsor to this sport and it would be shame to loose them. 2. If IPSC went to the "box", how critical is it for everyone to upgrade from a G17 to a G34? Your casual (less serious) shooters, I'm sure, would continue to compete with their existing equipment. Recently USPSA started allowing long slide S_Is in Limited. While admittedly they shoot softer, I don't see everyone (including me) running out to upgrade. In this scenario, the cost could potentially be $0.00. - Bucky Pollard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vince Pinto Posted August 12, 2003 Share Posted August 12, 2003 Bucky, 1. Yes indeed, Glock designed the G34 & G35 to fit the IPSC box, but that was specifically in respect of IPSC Standard Division and IPSC Modified Divisions. The two subject Glock models were released years before Production Division was created by IPSC. 2. At that time, the USPSA never previously used the IPSC box. For reasons which I still don't know, the USPSA decided to use the IPSC box in respect of Production Division, as one of their completely different set of criteria for Production Division. 3. In any case, note that Glock models 17L and 24 do not fit the box so, no matter how you cut it, some models invariably get left behind. 3. However there are still 15 Glock models on the IPSC Production Division Approved Gun List, and I know the Glock factory is just as happy selling a G17/G22 as a G34/G35. I won't comment further on the "cost of compliance issue" which has been debated elsewhere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carlos Posted August 12, 2003 Share Posted August 12, 2003 Bucky wrote: "If USPSA moves to the 5" rule, how will that make Glock feel? It is my understanding that Glock specifically designed this gun to fit the box. Will they be miffed that a rule changed severly lower the demand for a now how selling item? Glock is a VERY generous sponsor to this sport and it would be shame to loose them." How would they feel? Maybe S&W knows - didn't some of their guns get ruled out of IPSC?. I do not claim to be a USPSA history buff - there are others here who know more about this However, its my understanding that not only did they get shafted by building 7 & 8 shot revolvers suitable for IPSC that were later dis-allowed w/ the 6 shot rule, but later they developed that 356TSW round but the rule changes doomed it. Of course, you could still find some used TSW guns out there on the market and CDNN blew out the remaining ammo so it is technically possible to scrounge up a TSW gun/ammo and then go shoot it in Open division - only that has not happened in the real world. Rather, the program was a flop as a result of rule changes. Now Glock guns will still rule the roost - especially in Production - under all of the proposed rules I have seen. If not the 34 then the 17. The 24C is gone but I think IPSC Modified division is not far behind. However, I think Bucky's concerns are valid & I would hope that USPSA will think long and hard about the financial impact on sponsors before they make any more rule changes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flexmoney Posted August 12, 2003 Share Posted August 12, 2003 The is no doubt in my mind...zero...none whatsoever...that if you exclude the G34/35 from USPSA, you WILL have a major revolt on your hands. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cpty1 Posted August 12, 2003 Share Posted August 12, 2003 I'm of a different opinion in the respect that while we tend to focus on what works competitively, all the various organized shooting sport participants put together make up only a very small percentage of a gun manufacturers customer base. In addition, I know a few really good limited and production shooters who choose to use 17s and 22s for the very reason that they don't like the extra sight radius. They feel with the majority of shots at any match being close range (relatively speaking) that they can index the shorter gun quicker on the targets. Should the 34 be deemed illegal for competitive purposes, Glock will still sell a ton of them just because they're fun to shoot. I think most shooters would simply compete in a different division (how many of us have guns that only allow us to compete in one division?) or go acquire the gun needed to continue to compete in the same division. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flexmoney Posted August 12, 2003 Share Posted August 12, 2003 Chris, I agree that a G17/22 is likely just as good (for the reasons you stated). I can't convince any of the other Glock shooters, however. The answer here isn't to exclude the G34/35 in USPSA, it is to include them in IPSC. Get rid of the gun list and go to a box. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vince Pinto Posted August 12, 2003 Share Posted August 12, 2003 Flex, The IPSC 5" barrel limit Vs USPSA's use of the IPSC box is smoke 'n' mirrors. The real issue is the modifications allowed under USPSA Production Division rules, where people are spending big bucks on trigger jobs (due to no minimum trigger pull), tungsten guiderods and no limits on internal modifications, which has brought an "equipment race" to a Division which is not supposed to have one. The rest of the world spends US$600 or less on buying a "Production-ready" gun but, judging from comments in other threads and in other forums, the equivalent cost in the USA is easily double but often more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bucky Posted August 12, 2003 Author Share Posted August 12, 2003 I'm of a different opinion in the respect that while we tend to focus on what works competitively, all the various organized shooting sport participants put together make up only a very small percentage of a gun manufacturers customer base While for most Glock sales, competition shooters are an extremely small percentage of sales, I would imagine that sales of the Glock 34 and 35, specifically, would be a somewhat higher percentage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flexmoney Posted August 12, 2003 Share Posted August 12, 2003 The real issue is the modifications allowed under USPSA Production Division rules, where people are spending big bucks on trigger jobs (due to no minimum trigger pull), tungsten guiderods and no limits on internal modifications, which has brought an "equipment race" to a Division which is not supposed to have one. I know lots of people are spending the "big bucks" of their Glock triggers. I am saving my money . All that is needed is a 3.5 connector and $5 worth of springs. The rest is just polish. I think any and all trigger mods should be allowed for any gun (competition is where we get the best innovation). USPSA does, indeed, have limits on what can be done in Production. There are internal modification(action work)...and, the sum of ALL modifications can't raise the weight of the gun by more than 2oz. The tungsten rods do make the cut...but, again, they are not needed. The rest of the world spends US$600 or less on buying a "Production-ready" gun but, judging from comments in other threads and in other forums, the equivalent cost in the USA is easily double but often more. You can find specific examples where people have spent this kind of money on a Glock, but I seldom see it. If there is a perception that USPSA Production Division is an "equipment race", I would have to say that is a false impression. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lynn jones Posted August 12, 2003 Share Posted August 12, 2003 i believe that a gun maker can not or should not make a pistol to compete in a particular division. if they want to, they have to accept the consequences. the population of USPSA/IPSC shooters is not enough to sustain a company. the uspsa/ipsc rules are for our members, not to align with or against the gun makers. just my thoughts. lynn jones Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twix Posted August 13, 2003 Share Posted August 13, 2003 Ah, the REAL ISSUE. VP, how does the rest of the world enforce the no modifications rule for production? Just curious about the 5 lb trigger pull for the first shot, what's the point? Seems a little canted towards the DA/SA guns. At least those shooters would get a lighter pull after the first shot, the Glocksters are stuck with the same pull ad infinitum. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vince Pinto Posted August 13, 2003 Share Posted August 13, 2003 Hi Twix, The point of the 5lb trigger pull is to prevent excessive "polishing" of internal parts, which is allowed under IPSC rules. Without this rule, you can imagine the extent of the "polishing" (e.g. $500 worth). Sure, the real men who shoot Glocks have the same trigger pull for every shot, while competitors with DA/SA guns have a heavier first shot and lighter subsequent shots, but the choice of gun is entirely yours, provided it's on the approved gun list. Each to his own. The trigger pull is checked for all guns at the chrono stage and, at bigger matches, we conduct random gun testing to ensure nothing inside the gun has been altered. If we suspect foul play, we summon Nurse Ana L. Hertzen to conduct a cavity check ................. Of course if you shoot a Wombat Model 99 pistol and the chrono guy has never seen one before, you might get away with having an unauthorised titanium firing pin or guide rod, but you'd be suprised how good some of our chrono guys can be. As you know, most IPSC shooters are "experts" at one popular brand or another so, if you want to pull a fast one, get an obscure make and model. Now, about those Wombat Model 99s .................. I'm having a sale Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Anderson Posted August 13, 2003 Share Posted August 13, 2003 At this year's FGNs, you could have shot just about anything in production. We had one stage where holster position was given a cursory check. No gun checks whatsoever. Then again, with internal mods allowed, as long as you didn't have a dot, you were OK anyway... Now about that speed bump... SA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vluc Posted August 13, 2003 Share Posted August 13, 2003 The point of the 5lb trigger pull is to prevent excessive "polishing" of internal parts, which is allowed under IPSC rules. Without this rule, you can imagine the extent of the "polishing" (e.g. $500 worth). Vince, not trying to start something, just not sure what you mean by this. Polishing is allowed but excessive polishing is not. At what point does it become "excessive"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flexmoney Posted August 13, 2003 Share Posted August 13, 2003 Vince, $500??? Come on. Even if you are joking, that is spewing forth some blatant mis-information. The most expensive Glock trigger jobs that I know of are under $200. I think that is too much, but a guy is entitled to make a dollor for his time. If the shooter so chooses, a match winning Glock trigger can be done by anybody that has a 3.5 connector, $5 worth of springs, and knows where to polish (and "where to polish" is simple, and is posted all over the internet...including the FAQ's in this forum's Glock section, I believe.) I understand that Beretta trigger work is fairly straight forward too. No shooter...no matter what double-action platform...should be saddled with the crappy trigger pull that comes from the factory. What next...an arguement that they aren't safe??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twix Posted August 13, 2003 Share Posted August 13, 2003 So under IPSC Production rules a $350 CZ 75 could be just as competitive as just about anything. I'm sure I'd wanta trigger job though, ends up costing about the same as a stock Glock 17. OK I could be persuaded. Thank you for the clarity and a vivid image of angry nurses. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vince Pinto Posted August 13, 2003 Share Posted August 13, 2003 vluc, You're quite correct that the word "polishing" is not definitive, which is why that word no longer appears in the proposed 2004 Handgun Rules and, instead, we now propose: 19. Original parts and components offered by the OFM as standard equipment, or as an option, for a specific model handgun on the IPSC approved handgun list are permitted, subject to the following: 19.1 Modifications to them, other than minor detailing, are prohibited. Flex, Production Division was created by IPSC as a home for non-SAO guns from mainstream manufacturers, with a few general restrictions (barrel length, trigger pull weight etc.) so, if the trigger from a particular manufacturer is not to your liking, don't buy it. And Happy Birthday! Twix, Yes Sir. An out-of-the-box CZ75 from the factory is most definitely competitive in IPSC Production Division and, internationally, CZ pistols are right up there in popularity with Glocks, Berettas and H&K pistols (which I refer to as "The Big Four"). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EricW Posted August 13, 2003 Share Posted August 13, 2003 OK Uncle Vinnie, I shudder to go down this road, but do you have any read on what the eventual fate of the Springfield XD/ HS 2000 will be? It's allowed in USPSA Production but not IPSC Production, if I understand correctly. Will it or will it not be a Production gun, do you think? Thx, E Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vince Pinto Posted August 13, 2003 Share Posted August 13, 2003 Hi Eric, As discussion of the Springfield XD Series (and HS2000) is likely to cause some controversy, I'll start a new thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flexmoney Posted August 14, 2003 Share Posted August 14, 2003 Flex,Production Division was created by IPSC as a home for non-SAO guns from mainstream manufacturers, with a few general restrictions (barrel length, trigger pull weight etc.) so, if the trigger from a particular manufacturer is not to your liking, don't buy it. I can tell you right now...I won't buy it. Not if I can't do something to make it actually resemble a trigger (instead of a lawsuit safety device). And Happy Birthday! Thanks!!! Here is another thought... If it is allowed in IDPA...then we would be silly to disallow in USPSA. (of course...we are using our own rules, not IDPA's) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spook Posted August 14, 2003 Share Posted August 14, 2003 Here is another thought...If it is allowed in IDPA...then we would be silly to disallow in USPSA. (of course...we are using our own rules, not IDPA's) I'm witcha on this. BTW, I never quite got the IPSC rules: 1) DA gun AND 5 lbs. first trigger pull. One would think that if you were to use a single action gun with a 5 lbs. trigger on every pull, you wouldn't be better off than a DA gun with 5 lbs. on the first pull. In other words, I thought the whole 5lbs. trigger pull would take care of the whole thing (to enable people to shoot production with standard gear that is). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GvU Posted August 14, 2003 Share Posted August 14, 2003 And I thougth Production was started to get rid of an equipment-race. The purpose was low level entry (new shooters / members). What has been made of that? A Simple translation of the production division: IPSC: Use as it comes from the box, with very limited modifications, want a better gun; look in the "approved list" and come up with maybe the most expensive gun. You better come up with the best gun (for you). USPSA: Have or buy gun and make as many modifications as you want, to be competitive you must? Sounds like a must to spend a lot of money to have a gun that could just as well compete in limited(10). IMHO this is not a low level entry division anymore in the USPSA version of production. The guns allowed may hide a bought competitive edge! The only deviation from IPSC I think is sound, is the 10-round limit for the USPSA with regard to the laws on magazine-capacity (because it has to be low level entry / new shooters). If you want to have this tricked out "race-gun", go open or limited to find out about your equipment and skills there. Limited 10: same reasoning; easier to get in the practical pistol shooting (spending a fortune on magazines alone!!) Revolver (standard); dito So I wonder what is the reason for all the modifications in production? I almost wonder if the reason is more in the direction of more difficult competitive field in limited(10). I personally think thats the reason people shoot modified as well. (more chance of winning?????). With regard to the (gun)manufactures; our sport is really of low importance, meaning we can change the rules what ever we want, they may even sell a couple of guns extra. And yes I think there needs to be "Production" and "Revolver", because worldwide we need more members / active shooters. Sorry, just my view on this matter. John By the way the box was introduced in IPSC for "standard" and "modified" when there was no "production". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flexmoney Posted August 14, 2003 Share Posted August 14, 2003 Jeez...this reminds me on the IDPA hardliners that say, "IPSC will get you killed" or "you need a $3,000 gun to compete". Repeat after me... There is no equipment race in USPSA Production. There is no equipment race in USPSA Production. There is no equipment race in USPSA Production. If I thought that there was an equipment race in USPSA Production, I would be the first one to jump up and down and cry foul. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chuck D Posted August 17, 2003 Share Posted August 17, 2003 It's human nature to want to "personalize" their own pistol. Those modifications should be limited the way IPSC limits them. On the other hand...while at the IPSC Canada Nationals last year...I noticed more than a few IPSC Production Division competitors using "race gun style" holsters. I thought that Production Division was a "low entry level cost" division. On one hand people are worried about the $200 trigger job BUT no one seems worried (from an IPSC standpoint at least) about the $150 plus race holster.Clean up the two versions of the division by implementing sensible "carry gun" type rules like a minimum trigger pull weight...minimum modifications(sights and grips ONLY) and no race holsters. Tell you what...you can spend whatever you wish on a trigger job for your Glock or whatever BUT heaven forbid you need to use it against another fellow "citizen". Stuff like that is a Defense Attorneys dream.......and yes, before you ask...I work in the Legal system. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vince Pinto Posted August 17, 2003 Share Posted August 17, 2003 Hi Chuck, What's the definition of "race-gun-type" holster, and how many of them work the same when worn "behind the hipbone"? Without a definition, one man's "race-gun" holster is another man's "quick release CCW holster". Also I, for one, certainly do not want to go down the "approved holster" route, as other shooting sports do. It drives me nuts just keeping the approved gun list current. Of course some competitors will also spend $500 on their IPSC shoes or the latest "Terminator" shades too. Such is the nature of the "IPSC Beastie Boy" 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