Jump to content
Brian Enos's Forums... Maku mozo!

Illegal Production Trigger Mods


Shadow

Recommended Posts

How many forum members know of USPSA Production shooters who are using internal set screws in/on their triggers, ejector blocks, or anywhere else to eliminate pre-travel/over travel? :ph34r:

I ask because I sent John Amidon an email a couple of weeks ago asking if these were legal. The short answer was no, IAW autorized modifications listed in Appendix D.

Do you think this is the Board's intent (to eliminate these internal trigger mods) with the current wording?

I know many of the local shooters had these mods done, and would guess that many have not removed them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 723
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Do you think this is the Board's intent (to eliminate these internal trigger mods) with the current wording?

While one BOD member voiced that opinion, that certainly didn't seem like the intent/direction when the latest rule book was being knocked around (prior to being adopted).

The changes and additions to the newest rule book were discussed quite a bit...Production triggers in particular.

This (now) would be a big blind-side hit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

John Amidon's Opinion is not rule. Until his opinion is written up and approved by the BOD it is just that, his opinion. From conversations with multiple BOD members, I don't think that was the intent and I don't think that opinion will be ratified by the BOD. This has been brought up before and needs to be dealt with.

Edited to add, I just emailed Amidon and asked him to make an official BOD ratified decision on this.

Edited by Lawman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

While one BOD member voiced that opinion, that certainly didn't seem like the intent/direction when the latest rule book was being knocked around (prior to being adopted).

I don't think it was the BOD's intent to allow you to AD into your foot on Can You Count and not be DQ'ed, but they did it. Intent and the ruleset that's generated from it are two totally different things! :o (and, yes, we need an update to the rulebook to correct that, and some other things... I'm sure Bruce Gary is tired of my emails, at this point :D ).

John Amidon's Opinion is not rule. Until his opinion is written up and approved by the BOD it is just that, his opinion.

True enough - and frankly, while I don't have a dog in the hunt in this (since I don't actively shoot Production), I'd like to agree with you and Flex on this. But - I don't see where your opinions (and the apparent intent of the BoD) are supported by the actual rules in print? In D4 - 21, the phrase "Strictly limited ot these items and their stated guidelines" is pretty clear - we hashed out that the polishing clause could be thought to apply to trigger jobs using stock parts, but I don't see how the "strictly" phrase allows you to turn "springs, safeties, slide stops, guide rods" into other parts?

From conversations with multiple BOD members, I don't think that was the intent and I don't think that opinion will be ratified by the BOD. This has been brought up before and needs to be dealt with.

Edited to add, I just emailed Amidon and asked him to make an official BOD ratified decision on this.

Unless I'm clearly missing something in the rules - the ratified opinion would have to be in the affirmative (ie, supporting your opinion) rather than the negative (supporting his opinion). It would have to state that various internal trigger parts are implied in a list of parts that don't include them that's to be interpreted "strictly" according to the rule.

I'm afraid that, at this point, you'd need to lobby the BoD for a rule change, and not try to get an opinion out of NROI... :(

(go ahead, ask me how I feel about the fact that, on soft surfaces, you can spray paint fault lines, now... ;) The new rulebook is awesome in many regards, but we all missed some glaring issues during rulebook review, unfortunately.... ).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

John Amidon's Opinion is not rule. Until his opinion is written up and approved by the BOD it is just that, his opinion. From conversations with multiple BOD members, I don't think that was the intent and I don't think that opinion will be ratified by the BOD. This has been brought up before and needs to be dealt with.

Edited to add, I just emailed Amidon and asked him to make an official BOD ratified decision on this.

How bout we just use the rule book? :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The changes and additions to the newest rule book were discussed quite a bit...Production triggers in particular.

This (now) would be a big blind-side hit.

indeed these things were discussed quite a bit before adoption. and i think the BOD got the exact rule they wanted...a very restrictive one.

one member of the BOD in particular was very vocal about how the old production rules were "abused." so i'm confident that when he looked over the new set of rules he knew the implications.

from the thread on uspsa forum, i posed the following questions to another BOD member prior to adoption of the new rules: [link here: http://www.uspsa.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=524&st=0 ]

from the draft rules:

Rule 20

Authorized modifications (Strictly limited to these items and their stated guidelines)

Internal throating and polishing to improve accuracy, reliability and function

Exchange of minor components (springs, safeties, slide stops, guide rods).

• Unless specifically authorized above, modifications are prohibited.

strictly read (which is how i assume the BOD wants these rules read), you've left very little room to do anything, even internally.

can i replace a glock connector? is that a minor component? the bulleted item seems to imply that i can't, since it isn't specifically authorized in the list of minor components that can be legally exchanged (rule 20).

[do amidon's previous NROI rulings still stand? if they do, shouldn't they be rolled into these new rules? can a legal part from one glock be added to another glock?]

it looks like you now want to stop anything beyond polishing. that means no more removing metal, changing angles, etc.

is a titanium striker (or any aftermarket striker) legal? looks like it's not.

can i replace my ejector housing? looks like i cant.

can i add an internal overtravel or pretravel limit? doesn't seem like it.

all of these things were previously legal, for years. i dont really get how you can make them illegal, and not know that you are going to affect huge numbers of guns.

the final rule didn't change much at all from the above draft. so i agree with xre...the rulebook is pretty darn clear.

Edited by driver8M3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not shooting production next year so I don't really care but it erks me that I can't change internal parts when I CAN mill the slide for different sights or even replace the slide. The real problem is that the board pushed through a division without thought to what they really wanted it to be. Reminds me of the revo division rule change after a lot of people bought 8 shot revolvers only to be told it was 6 shots before a reload.

There are a couple of old sayings that apply "Look before you leap" and "Think before you act". Shame no one on the board ever heard them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And to think, all I was worried about last year when the rules were discussed was minimum trigger pull. :(

I feel blindsided and am getting so sick of what the USPSA has apparently done with the Production rules that I'm ready to can Production for good and take my G34 with its Vanek Production trigger and just shoot Limited minor.

No one with any integrity wants to be a cheater, but why did Production morph into a box stock category? I'm seriously longing for the old rules at this point and guess I will take my Glock and play in another classification. But I sure as heck ain't happy about it. :angry2:

As I told someone today at a steel match, if I thought a high-bucks limited gun at three times the cost would be three times the fun, I'd sign up today. A couple of minor and economical mods that make a Glock more fun to shoot was all I wanted. All because of an internal set screw installed in a stock Glock trigger housing...who woulda thunk it :surprise:

Curtis

Edited to add: moderators, feel free to move this to What I Hate if you feel I'm inappropriately drifting this thread with this rant.

Edited by BayouSlide
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mr. Patterson, members of the BOD have indeed heard of those two sayings, and do our best to take them into consideration. That being said, we still find that sometimes, even after due consideration, via very minimal face to face time, and hours and hours of e-mail discussions and telephone meetings, we still miss one or three occasionally.

Speaking only for myself, I am still working on the walking on water exercise, but am still sinking in to about knee level.

Gary

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I feel blindsided and am getting so sick of what the USPSA has apparently done with the Production rules that I'm ready to can Production for good and take my G34 with its Vanek Production trigger and just shoot Limited minor.

The original draft of the 2008 rulebook has been available since January of 2007. The Production ruleset in that first draft is actually more restrictive than the drafts that followed, and the one that made it into play in the final rulebook. I'm sorry, but the only way to be "blindsided" by this is to have not actually read the rule until now, two years later.

but why did Production morph into a box stock category?

My understanding is that the original intent of Production division was to essentially be a box stock category, with minor modifications allowed. IPSC and USPSA implemented it differently, and both got some things right and some things wrong. USPSA took the opportunity in this rulebook to move the USPSA Production rule set closer to what they'd wanted Production to be in the first place. They also knew up front that this would require some folks to modify their guns to bring them back into compliance for this year, as any rule making things more restrictive would have to. They knew this would be unpopular, but regarded it as being a better change than allowing Production to become (or continue to be) another psuedo-race division.

That's my interpretation, and is not a representation of what the BoD actually thought or did ;)

I'm seriously longing for the old rules at this point and guess I will take my Glock and play in another classification. But I sure as heck ain't happy about it. :angry2:

All because of an internal set screw installed in a stock Glock trigger housing...who woulda thunk it :surprise:

And, it would appear that some of Vanek's Classic trigger job is not legal for Production, due to this. His GSSF trigger job should be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The thing to do is look at all of the rules that have been written/changed from day one. Every time a change was made, some mods became illegal and others became legal. Did it make any difference to the game not really, why? Because USPSA has never enforced the rules, when was the last time you saw a Production gun field stripped to check for a guns compliance to the rules? The rules are more or less guide lines that USPSA assumes everyone will follow to the letter. We all know nobody would purposely ignore the rules. The rules have been poorly written from day one and have continued to be written poorly.

Just my view from day one and counting, 8 years of counting.

Rich

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't know if his thinking has changed, but John mentioned that with all the controversy about the modifications, he was considering going to the board with a proposal for a 3# minimum trigger pull and be done with it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Exchange of minor components (springs, safeties, slide stops, guide rods)."

I guess I'd want to know if they originally meant "(springs, safeties, slide stops, guide rods)." to be EXAMPLES of the type things that are considered minor components, or an inclusive list of the only components in the "minor" category that are allowed to be changed.

My first read of that lines lends me to believe it was intended to be a few examples of the type thing they meant by minor components, and not the defining list. But there is always some pinhead out there that will read to much in to the rules as awkwardly written, without thought as to intent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Production is the single division that has the potential to require strict inspections. The problem is we don't have an inspection section that can travel around to every match in the nation to see if every Production Division gun is legal. The inspectors would have to be proficient in inspecting each gun that could possibly be used in Production as you never know what is going to show up.

Therefore we tried to control major components, almost all of which are visible from the exterior of the gun.

I fought this battle once before on minimum trigger weights as the weighing process leaves too much room to screw up, IMO. The placement of the weights can be critical in getting a correct measurement. Additionally an X pound trigger today may weigh X minus after several thousand rounds and dry fire. So now you can do as we do with our loads, build in a margin of safety and have it weigh X plus safety margin, or you can live dangerously.

The issue of internal over travel screws will not be addressed by weighing triggers. Something are best left alone. We promised a rulebook that would last for several years, and before the firs year is over, some want to tinker with it.

Gary

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We promised a rulebook that would last for several years, and before the firs year is over, some want to tinker with it.

some have already tinkered with it...

Specifically prohibited

modifications and features

•External plugs (such as Seattle Slug).

Title: Plastic Plug for Glock's in Production division

Created: 4/28/08

Updated: 5/06/08

Effective: 5/06/08

Rule number: Appendix D4

Applies to: Pistol

Ruling authority: John Amidon

Status: Released

Question: Can I now insert the plastic plug in my Glock and will it be legal for Production division?

Ruling: The plastic plug that fits flush with the heel of the grip is allowed, like the Jentra plug. Plugs that extend below the heel like the Scherer polymer slug plug or other similar models are not allowed. Metal, brass or the Seattle Slug plugs are not allowed either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Reading the clear language of Appendix D4, the only factory parts that may be EXCHANGED are the slide and barrel (with same length, contour and caliber as original), the sights, springs, safties, slide stops and guide rods.

The substitution of any other part is prohibited.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

John Amidon's Opinion is not rule. Until his opinion is written up and approved by the BOD it is just that, his opinion.

While this is true, who do you think is going to make the decision at the Nats when the situation comes up? Coupled that with the specific of the wording of the rule and you really have no shot at arbitrating the ruling.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Clarification of a piece of equipment, such as two plugs that go in the grip of a Glock. is one thing.

of course.

but...plugs have NEVER been legal in production. now they are, while things that have been legal for years are now NOT legal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Regulating anything you can't see or easily test is futile and can only encourage disparity in the division. There will be those that are going to push it, so if you aren't going to inspect then don't regulate. We don't need people wondering how much better another's gun might possibly be do to illegal mods.

There's a simple solution... control what you see and run what you brung.

JT

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My first read of that lines lends me to believe it was intended to be a few examples of the type thing they meant by minor components, and not the defining list. But there is always some pinhead out there that will read to much in to the rules as awkwardly written, without thought as to intent.

D4 21 says "Authorized modifications (Strictly limited to these items and their stated guidelines)". How does reading "Strictly limited" to mean "strictly limited" make one a pinhead, or end up being reading too much into the rules? Making it more clear how restrictive the rule is to be, under "Special conditions", it says "Unless specifically authorized above, modifications are prohibited." But, I guess someone that reads plain english is a pinhead, so...

If the rule is meant to be a list of examples, it sure would be handy to have ", etc." tacked on the end of the last bullet, or some language to the effect of "and other small parts not externally visible on the gun".

I do agree that enforcing the rule is pretty much impossible without some kind of inspection team, and that I've not yet seen anyone tearing production guns apart at a chrono station or something like that. Personally, I do feel that, if you're concerned about the "box stock-ness" of the division, trigger pull weight is about the only thing you can empirically measure to any practical degree for dealing with gun internals, but implementing that rule would have just as much (if not more) heartburn than anything else.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If their are no minimum trigger weight requirements, and all factory safeties function normally, why all the fuss?

In Production doesn't it really come down to minor scoring, 10+1 in the tube at the start and no more than 10 per mag after the start? No

spring (including connectors) or stop can defeat that. Nice triggers in SAFE guns should be accepted universally. The rest of this is just noise.

Jim

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok, then. To confuse the issue even more, what happens if you have a production gun that came from the factory, with factory parts and a factory trigger set screw installed by the factory? Cuz that's what my XD9 is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.



×
×
  • Create New...