Illegal Production Trigger Mods

[Singlestack]

I agree Nik, and that is my point. I've mentioned several times in this thread it's about the Indian, not the arrow. I know this thread is about legal/illegal trigger modifications and more than once folks have stated a Glock specifically was not competitive unless it has modifications to it which may or may not make it legal. I feel a stock Glock with some internal polishing CAN be competitive, and it's been proven in competition. That's all. I was trying to use the facts to back up my view, not opinion or emotion.

I don't recall anybody saying that. Because YOU feel it can be competitive without modifications matters not to the next guy that thinks it does.

The facts do not "back up" your view.

The facts support most want to modify their triggers.

Weather or not Dave S. modifies his trigger is not what we are talking about. I could care less what he does to it just as I could care less what you do to yours.

Leave mine alone too thank you.

[Loves2Shoot]

I was trying to use the facts to back up my view, not opinion or emotion.

Fact is most people want to improve the stock Production pistol with reasonable mods. Pointing to full time sponsored shooters who get paid to do thing a certain way backs up your point of view how? Does Dave us the stock Glock sights? New sights isn't minor polishing, those are aftermarket parts. Dave has solid reasons for what he does.

Fact is most people do the sport for recreation/hobby/socializing/escape and those folks like to tinker and improve their guns. This tinkering creates a small market and testing ground for aftermarket products. If the products are good enough, then the general gun consuming product gets to buy them also and use them to improve their service pistols.

You can preach Indian not the arrow all day long, but the fact is that doesn't help innovation or product improvements, which I believe is a very good thing for the gun consuming community. There are folks who want to stay stuck in the 80 equipment wise, sort of like Cowboy action shooters want to stay in the wild west times, but that doesn't advance technology or sport.

[Chuck Anderson]

I feel a stock Glock with some internal polishing CAN be competitive, and it's been proven in competition. That's all. I was trying to use the facts to back up my view, not opinion or emotion.

The problem is, Amidon's ruling, as written would preclude polishing as internal modification. So do you feel a Glock withOUT that polishing can be competetive? Because if not you're proving everyone elses point, not your own. I absolutely believe a Glock with some minor internal work can win. A Glock, absolutely stock, would have a much harder time. Plastic sights, 5 pound gritty trigger and slippery grips. No thanks. You seriously need to read what has actually been posted, not what you think was.

[Loves2Shoot]

The other thing I think that is being overlooked is what a trigger job actually does.

A trigger job makes it easier to pull the trigger without moving the gun. Why is this a big deal? Because it is important to decide who you are going to penalize by making the change in rules. You will not penalize the A+ shooters, because we can pick up a stock gun and do OK with it because we have the skill to manipulate crappy triggers. You will penalize the new shooters who don't have that skill.

Having upgraded a couple thousand pistols, I get the call/e-mail all the time, that I made a customer's gun "more accurate" by improving the trigger. My general reply, is no I don't, it was always that accurate, I just reduced the skill level required to achieve that accuracy.

[Flexmoney]

Time out.

- Admin

-----------------------------

Re-opened. Lets avoid going after any recent post or posters.

We've seen a whole lot of pages and posts here. Much has been said. Play nice. Stay above the fray. Etc. and all that.

- Admin.

[00bullitt]

Lets try and focus on a fix to the wording in the rule book so that we can prosper in Production as we have been. An addendum is in order that needs to be mailed to the entire membership to ensure the revised rules are received by the membership. Or any other suitable means of transmission that reaches the membership.

My two cents is this:

Remove the phrase-"strictly limited to these items and their stated guidelines" and be much more specific of what is allowed and what is not in general on the inside and outside of the gun.

Reword to say......

---Polishing of internal parts to improve action,accuracy,reliability and function....remove the term throating unless a direct instance in a gun can be related to throating. I'm not sure I can pair throating with a production gun. Even the Para LDA's come with ramped barrels....what else needs throating?

---Exchange of internal components that follow factory configuration. Parts can be aftermarket assuming they follow factory configuration.

This will allow replacement sears and parts in guns such as the XD,Beretta,and CZ,and aftermarket connectors in Glocks and so forth.

Only allow replacement of any external part that is factory made and in use on other models and quote the current ruling "in" the addendum to the rulebook.

Currently under the rules....aftermarket slide stops and safeties are allowed and I think this is one part of the rule that can be reversed as per previous rulebooks and rulings.

All external modifications should be prohibited except for checkering,stippling,grip tape or grip sleeves as specified in Appendix E4,aftermarket barrels regardless of caliber,aftermarket slides that are the same length and conotur of factory and that are within the production gun weight limitations. And milled in sights should remain allowed.

Weight requirements should state that the gun cannot weigh more or less than 2 ounces of factory with an empty magazine inserted. Currently it only states weight in excess of. But it should go above and below in my opinion.

The weight requirement actually restricts alot.

And now the external plug rule can be removed and clarified as per the current ruling

Everything else seems good to me but I'm sure we as the Benosverse can disect it a little further to give the BODs some insight and a poke in the direction we would like this division to continue.

We just have to remember that a train has left the station on a one way track. And yes I know I recommended reversing something above. It may or may not be a good idea.....thats why we need to solve this as a group.

Instead of bashing these ideas or there shortcomings.....lets try as a group to work through them and come up with something workable to aide the BOD in a fix.

Getting this thread locked helps no one.....hint hint Bobby

Edited January 25, 2009 by 00bullitt

[Gary Stevens]

And what do I do with my sights that are milled in per the previous rule book?

To me the issue revolves around trigger work. We have been able to survive fairly well until the trigger work monster reared it's head.

I am in favor of simply saying internal trigger work is good. Trigger work that extends to the outside (External) of the gun is bad.

That leaves everyone else alone that has installed sights, stippled, checkered, or installed some part that was previously approved.

Gary

[00bullitt]

And what do I do with my sights that are milled in per the previous rule book? You leave them....I forgot to include milled in sights above

To me the issue revolves around trigger work. We have been able to survive fairly well until the trigger work monster reared it's head.

I am in favor of simply saying internal trigger work is good. Trigger work that extends to the outside (External) of the gun is bad.

That leaves everyone else alone that has installed sights, stippled, checkered, or installed some part that was previously approved.

Gary

I still think a few other things besides just trigger work will clarify and preserve the rules into the next few years. But if trigger work is all that needs fixin.....we can focus on just that. I just figured we could cover several items to give the BOD plenty of insight from us.

Edited January 25, 2009 by 00bullitt

[rgkeller]

>> am in favor of simply saying internal trigger work is good. Trigger work that extends to the outside (External) of the gun is bad<<

Hopefully, your view will prevail.

[sfinney]

Yes, this should be worked out as a group. Some of the best and creative minds in USPSA frequent this forum. To discount these contributions as opinions of only a minor part of the overall USPSA shooting group is pretty short sighted.

Likewise, if you peruse any of the on-line forums for Glock, Sig, HK, Beretta, XD, CZ, etc you'll see one of the most popular topics being trigger jobs, sights, grips.... those are very popular mads for ANY gun owner, not just IPSC gamers. If the target audience of Production is supposed to be the average Joe Gun Owner, you can't pass any rules that are going disallow trigger jobs, sights, etc. without sending lots of potential new USPSA shooters to other shooting sports.

Edited January 26, 2009 by sfinney

[RIIID]

If there is going to be re-wording to the rules for Production lets not deal with just trigger work, lets get the Production rules resolved completely. And while we're at it lets get a misssion statement established so we don't have to deal with the "I thought is was supposed to be this..." or "the spirit of the division".

Rich

[00bullitt]

Mission Statement?...........I like it Stephen Covey?

Edited January 26, 2009 by 00bullitt

[Gary Stevens]

Nice idea Rich, but the statement and proposed rules will need to incorporate the "mistakes" as the starting point, and go forward from there. The alternative is to undo those things we have already allowed, and I don't think anyone wants to go there. I honestly don't think the rules are broken, however I do think some clarification and adjustment is in order.

Bullitt, I do like the additional wording that gives further clarification of what tinkering is allowed.

I supposed a glue in page could be send out via the Front Sight magazine that could be paced into your existing rulebook with any Production Division changes. It seems we did this once before for some rule change in the past.

Gary

[XRe]

I supposed a glue in page could be send out via the Front Sight magazine that could be paced into your existing rulebook with any Production Division changes. It seems we did this once before for some rule change in the past.

In fact, there are a couple of other minor updates (that Mr. Gary has) that would be good to send out as an addendum along with this - and I think you're right, Gary, that there's precedent for a "glue in" or "stick in" kind of page being sent out in the past with an interim update/clarification for various things. I can't remember exactly what rulebook that was with, though...

A "mission statement" would be useful in that it would at least give a basis to use for dealing with any other uncertainties that might arise...

[Gary Stevens]

Can some who has a good understanding of the English language provide an example that might pass muster?

[George Jones]

Have we learned nothing from the 1994 AWB?

As soon as you restrict things by name or by method, someone is going to name it something else or change the method (while still accomplishing the same thing).

So just keep it simple:

Internal: OK

External or visible externally: NONE, except for the previously allowed items (which need to be clearly specified).

My .02

[double_pedro]

It seems to me that for the most part, only D.4.21 needs to be corrected. Here's a draft as a starting pooint (items in red were changed from current rules):

Authorized Modifications (drop the "Strictly limited to..." business so as to avoid potential conflict with past or future NROI rulings that may not fall neatly under an existing authorized modification)

•Internal modifications to improve action, accuracy,

reliability and function (i.e. "trigger work" and "reliability work").

•Sights – trimmed, adjusted, replaced, colored, or

fiber-optic.

•Slide – refinishing. Milling of slide – only as

required to insert sights.

•After-market slides and barrels – provided they are

the same length, contour, weight (+/- 5%????) and caliber as original factory

standard.

•Grips – Internal beveling. Checkering, stippling, and

addition of grip tape or grip sleeves. (see Appendix

E4)

•Exchange of springs, safeties, slide stops, or guide rods with OEM or aftermarket replacements.

•Exchange of external components between approved models.

•Exchange of internal components (choose one: OEM, OEM or equivalent aftermarket, no restrictions).

Edited January 26, 2009 by double_pedro

[ima45dv8]

Have we learned nothing from the 1994 AWB?

As soon as you restrict things by name or by method, someone is going to name it something else or change the method (while still accomplishing the same thing).

So just keep it simple:

Internal: OK

External or visible externally: NONE, except for the previously allowed items (which need to be clearly specified).

My .02

A simple, elegant, and enforceable position that I would support.

[DaveM]

OK so everyone is arguing.I'm confused. I just got another glock and was going to get back into production some this year. So according to the current ruling what can I do to it. My old production gun (sold a couple years ago) had aftermarket sights and barrel, steel guide rod and trigger polished. Can I get by with this under the current rules? I don't care I'll shoot the dang thing bone stock happily as long as everyone else does, but how do you enforce that? It's obvious from the post we need clarification though. Man just reading the rulebook I can't see how they read all this into it. By listing the accepted mods in parenthesis it implies that they are examples and shouldn't preclude trigger polishing but if that's what the ruling is OK I just need to know.

[rgkeller]

Have we learned nothing from the 1994 AWB?

As soon as you restrict things by name or by method, someone is going to name it something else or change the method (while still accomplishing the same thing).

So just keep it simple:

Internal: OK

External or visible externally: NONE, except for the previously allowed items (which need to be clearly specified).

My .02

Exactly

[00bullitt]

OK so everyone is arguing.I'm confused. I just got another glock and was going to get back into production some this year. So according to the current ruling what can I do to it. My old production gun (sold a couple years ago) had aftermarket sights and barrel, steel guide rod and trigger polished. Can I get by with this under the current rules? I don't care I'll shoot the dang thing bone stock happily as long as everyone else does, but how do you enforce that? It's obvious from the post we need clarification though. Man just reading the rulebook I can't see how they read all this into it. By listing the accepted mods in parenthesis it implies that they are examples and shouldn't preclude trigger polishing but if that's what the ruling is OK I just need to know.

Well.....currently I am cheating with my Glock the way it is configured. But not intentionally. We are awaiting an interpretation/ruling from the BOD on this. If you want to be legal within the guidlines as they are written now.....you can't do much of anything on the inside except change springs and guiderods. Polishing the trigger parts is still kinda up in the air on how to interpret that one.

If the rules are not changed.....I guess I've got an excuse to buy a sig X5 All Around. But I feel positive things will be ironed out rationally in the next week or so.

[00bullitt]

Have we learned nothing from the 1994 AWB?

As soon as you restrict things by name or by method, someone is going to name it something else or change the method (while still accomplishing the same thing).

So just keep it simple:

Internal: OK

External or visible externally: NONE, except for the previously allowed items (which need to be clearly specified).

My .02

I'm good with it if it solves the problem???? But something tells me it is gonna be more complicated.

I just wanna continue shooting with what I have been shooting without consequence. And your solution allows me that.

[ciscoip]

Have we learned nothing from the 1994 AWB?

As soon as you restrict things by name or by method, someone is going to name it something else or change the method (while still accomplishing the same thing).

So just keep it simple:

Internal: OK

External or visible externally: NONE, except for the previously allowed items (which need to be clearly specified).

My .02

So, if I have LWD .40/9mm conversion barrel for a Glock 35, would that be an internal modification and okay?

[George Jones]

So, if I have LWD .40/9mm conversion barrel for a Glock 35, would that be an internal modification and okay?

I guess, as long as you close your eyes.

[Flexmoney]

That is a pretty important question, as we haven't allowed that in the past because of the 9mm barrel in the 40 guns giving a 'bull barrel' effect.