Illegal Production Trigger Mods

[Flexmoney]

Ara - having a set screw isn't a problem, if it came that way from the factory. Adding one aftermarket is the issue.

Unless...it was a custom shop modification...and not a "catalog" part. (are we having fun yet?)

[eerw]

Springfield lists under their custom shop heading in the new XD catalog..a XD Custom Production and a XDM Custom Production which lists the overtravel stop as a feature..

this is what is listed as the production package on the worksheet.

XD® “PRODUCTION” PACKAGE:

Competition action job; reduced overtravel & reset; Dawson adjustable fiber optic sights; extended mag release; Springfield Custom™ match grade

barrel; inspect & test fire.

kind of similar when CZUB and CZ-USA cataloged all the factory parts/ options that were available on all models of the SP01 and 75/85 series of guns.

Edited December 15, 2008 by eerw

[racerba]

Springfield lists under their custom shop heading in the new XD catalog..a XD Custom Production and a XDM Custom Production which lists the overtravel stop as a feature..

this is what is listed as the production package on the worksheet.

XD® “PRODUCTION” PACKAGE:

Competition action job; reduced overtravel & reset; Dawson adjustable fiber optic sights; extended mag release; Springfield Custom™ match grade

barrel; inspect & test fire.

kind of similar when CZUB and CZ-USA cataloged all the factory parts/ options that were available on all models of the SP01 and 75/85 series of guns.

Custom option vs. factory options. There's a slight difference.

Like buying a car - A/C is a factory option, but machine gun turret is a custom shop option, even though both can be done by the factory/dealer.

[eerw]

but machine gun turret is a custom shop option, even though both can be done by the factory/dealer.

that would be cool..my son would love that in our van..

so this can be very confusing for people...send a gun to the factory..and ask for a "production" trigger job...and they put parts in the gun...

Edited December 15, 2008 by eerw

[BayouSlide]

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.

I never could buy this argument, personally. Adding $200 total in parts to tune a $500 pistol isn't what I would call race or even pseudo-race. Now $2,000+ guns...now that's where racing starts to be racing IMO.

When I roadraced motorcycles on an amateur basis the Suzuki cup series was immensely successful, based on rules which allowed limited tuning mods to GSXR sports bikes. These sort of mods weren't expensive or limited to a few competitors, just made the bikes more responsive and more race-worthy...probably safer to boot. The Superbike or Formula classes were there for those wanted the ultimate performance and were willing to spend to get it. I've always seen the parallel to Production, Limited and Open classes. Maybe we need a claiming rule like in the Suzuki Cup series...any Production gun can be claimed by any other competitor after a match for, say, $700 . That ought to keep the mods reasonable

You make a very valid point when I overstated the case about being blindsided...I followed the draft rule discussions carefully but realize now that I was so focused on the proposed trigger pull proposals that I failed to see the other chickens apparently coming home to roost...not just setscrews in triggers but aftermarket connectors in question as well.

I've shot GSSF and, frankly, stock Glocks are nowhere near the fun of shooting one with limited trigger mods.

But that's my problem...like anyone else, if I don't like the rules, I don't have to play.

However, as I joked with Charlie Vanek in a recent e-mail: reading about politics, the economy...or now, Production rules...is a quick one-way trip to a bad mood and a ruined day

I still maintain Production wasn't broke, why did they try to fix it with rules to vague to be detailed and too detailed to be vague.

Curtis

Edited to clarify a point or two and because I hate typos

Edited December 16, 2008 by BayouSlide

[sfinney]

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.

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".

My point exactly. While the rule AS WRITTEN reads as only those named components are considered "minor components", I think it does not take a large leap of logic to see they probably MEANT it to be list of examples. There needs to be "etc." or "other small externally non-visible internal parts" added on to the existing wording for clarification.

[VegasOPM]

Well my plan has been to get to Production "B" and then go back to Limited. I'm glad that I'm pretty much there, because the Prodcution rules are getting silly. I have tried dozens of Production triggers on bunches of guns used at major matches (including class winners and top 3 finishers). Not one is stock, or close to it.

All this uneforceable rule is doing is either putting shooters at a handicap against the cheaters that can't get caught- or making them cheat to be competitive.

Edited December 15, 2008 by VegasOPM

[BayouSlide]

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.

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".

My point exactly. While the rule AS WRITTEN reads as only those named components are considered "minor components", I think it does not take a large leap of logic to see they probably MEANT it to be list of examples. There needs to be "etc." or "other small externally non-visible internal parts" added on to the existing wording for clarification.

You have a big Amen on that from me. I guess my problem was I was assuming the "etc." or "other small externally non-visible internal parts" was the intent and now, perhaps, it is being suggested that it was never the intent. Time for the BOD to clarify so we can put the uncertainty to rest.

Curtis

[rgkeller]

>>Time for the BOD to clarify so we can put the uncertainty to rest.<<

Yet again

[JThompson]

Run Open.... no silly ass rules to worry about.

[lcs]

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.

I never could buy this argument, personally. Adding $200 total in parts to tune a $500 pistol isn't what I would call race or even pseudo-race. Now $2,000+ guns...now that's where racing starts to be racing IMO.

You make a very valid point when I overstated the case about being blindsided...I followed the draft rule discussions carefully but realize now that I was so focused on the proposed trigger pull proposals that I failed to see the other chickens apparently coming home to roost...not just setscrews in triggers but aftermarket connectors in question as well.

But that's my problem...like anyone else, if I don't like the rules, I don't have to play.

I still maintain Production wasn't broke, why did they try to fix it with rules to vague to detailed and too detailed to be vague.

Curtis

+1

I too followed every post on the draft rule discussions and was so focused on trigger pull weight that the other implications never hit home. I don't shoot production, but my son soon will and I have to set up the gun for him.

It amazes me that USPSA allows over $1000 worth of mods (some changing the external appearance of a production gun) and then writes a rule to which prohibits tweaking the internal trigger components via a .20 cent screw.

The other thing that gets me is this thought that allowing trigger jobs on production guns is somehow going to turn production division into some psuedo-race division. Get real--technology limits what can be done to a trigger internally to about $125 worth of tinkering on production guns anyway.

IMHO, if the BOD meant to have a bone stock production division then the BOD sure didn't have a clue what the members wanted.

[BayouSlide]

Run Open.... no silly ass rules to worry about.

...just that $3,000 smoking hole in my bank account

Curtis

[BayouSlide]

IMHO, if the BOD meant to have a bone stock production division then the BOD sure didn't have a clue what the members wanted.

FullRace, you win the kewpie doll

Curtis

[JThompson]

Run Open.... no silly ass rules to worry about.

...just that $3,000 smoking hole in my bank account

Curtis

Well ya... there is that.

[BlackSabbath]

These continued attempted restrictions actually hurt the new shooter. Here's why:

I ran a G-17 with a Vanek trigger for a good long while. I made Master with that rig after a long lay-off from back surgery. I added that mod when I was ready...in other words, when I could afford to.

Recently, I purchased a CZ SP-01 Shadow from Angus at the CZ Custom shop. It's a great gun and I look forward to enjoying it. But, I had to put all that money up front because that's how it comes from the factory.

Most of the little guys and gals just starting out will go and buy a Glock, or some other gun at a big box store, or local gun shop with no mods. As they improve their skills, they'll want to make their guns better. We're locking out them of that process. We're telling them if they want an all-out Production gun, they can't take that route. Ever. We're telling them they must buy a certain gun to be on a level plaing field, and that's not what Production was intended for.

Edited December 16, 2008 by BlackSabbath

[XRe]

BlackSabbath - probably one of the best arguments I've heard for this stuff... The only thing is, Dave Sevigny shoots an almost stock Glock in Production...

The solution to all this (assuming that its desriable to keep Production reasonably stock, and competitive across a wide variety of platforms) is both simple and complex - and no one seems to want that, either - that is, trigger pull measurement. There are a few threads on the forum discussing the relatively merits/drawbacks of that stuff... There's really about three choices - limit (and inspect) modifications to a list (as had been done, minus inspections), measure trigger pull and allow whatever mods people want within that guideline, or you freely allow internal modifications to the gun with no restrictions (which will naturally also segregate out some platforms).

The problem that the BoD has had is that the original intent of the division (which apparently more closely matches the rules we have now in the 2008 book) are not what some vocal parts of the membership want - but the vocal parts of the membership don't agree, either, on what they want. So, they have to make a choice... and whatever choice they make is bound to be unpopular with some group in the membership. Throw into that the vocal desire to get the manufacturers to support the sport, and the pressure from the manufacturers to have a division where their guns can play (in my opinion, this is both legitimate and desirable), and you have yet another variable to satisfy. That would seem to drive back to one of the first two options above (ie, strict list, or trigger pull measurement).

Seems like it should be possible to devise a jig that allows trigger pull to be measured in a consistent way, that can be manufactured and purchased similar to a mag gauge. That would certainly ease the concerns - hell, the NRA measures triggers all the time (granted, not on striker fired guns, but...). Seems like we could figure it out if we wanted to... but, anyway, I'm rambling, so...

[Dan Burwell]

The biggest problem I see with these rules is enforcement. You know we all get on politicians about making more laws when they are not enforcing the current ones. We do not have this problem yet, but we will if these stick. There is no way of enforcing this. I mean most production guns have vastly differing triggers from the factory, some pretty nice others down right suck. From the box they can break in vastly differing places as well, not to mention what occurs with a bunch of use. There is no way of telling what has been done or not done to a gun just by pulling the trigger a few times at chrono.

You would have to tear down every gun and inspect it. You would have to have at least one guy that actually knew wht he was looking for once he had it apart. This is much harded than it sounds at first. Trust me I know I can do alot to a trigger that would not be noticible to avg gun guy looking into a gun. I have even had a couple gunsmiths that couldn't figure out what I had done.

Then we have the issue of putting the guns back together. What happens to the first guy that his gun takes a dump on the next stage after chrono, because someone didn't put their gun back together? Re shoot? worse what happens when some one looses a part while taking a gun apart. "Uhh sorry I guess your day is done?" You cannot expect every gun person to be able to completly tear down their gun and put it back together.

Please anyone BOD people watching this thread really think about how this is going to be enforced. I mean really think about the logistics of this.

[ima45dv8]

The board wisely decided not to implement a minimum trigger pull rule for USPSA.

Let's not try to convince them they were wrong.

[Flexmoney]

I'll throw this out there...like I've been throwing it out there for years now...

Off the shelf guns come with the burden of lawyers and accountants (which is understandable, but not desirable to the shooter).

With that, we get things like plastic sights and stamped parts...made by the low bidder.

It makes sense that people that are going to be shooting these guns more than most...are going to realize they need better sights, springs, minor components, and cleaned up triggers. (and some grip enhancements)

That's worked for us for years now, and it made Production into the most popular division (in my part of the country, if not the Nation).

Let's not forget IDPA's SSP. (We talk about aligning multi-gun rules...well, let's not get USPSA and IDPA divisions further apart, as there is REAL cross-over happening there)

[Chuck Anderson]

(assuming that its desriable to keep Production reasonably stock, and competitive across a wide variety of platforms)

Dave, I know you don't shoot Production, so I'll assume you just didn't read the rules all that closely and actually aren't smoking crack. To say the current rule book made any attempt to keep Production more stock is ridiculous. With the 2008 rule book a Production shooter can now buy a Glock frame, install a lightened connector, reduced power springs, checker the frontstrap, stipple the grip, buy an aftermarket slide, mill in a set of Bo-Mars, add a tungsten guide rod, polish and nickel plate the slide and Duracoat the frame with the message "This is my Production Gun...no seriously".

You can seriously argue that the intent was to make guns more "stock"? What I heard, and the only thing that makes any sense to me was that they were trying to come up with a set of rules that would allow the gun to be inspected at Chrono without dissasembly, and by someone with only a reasonable understanding of the gun. If it looks legal from the outside, it makes power factor and it makes weight, that's good enough.

[kgunz11]

What is the problem with a tuned trigger?

I thought you could make no exterior modifications, which means the trigger block set screw would be legal???

It would be impossible to make Production Division an "off the shelf" class now. You're always going to have some guy say "it came like that" and who can say it didn't?

I think the simplest thing for USPSA is to let Production run its course. Keep all mods internal, as long as it looks like XYZ on the outside, shoot it. For the minimum trigger pull stuff... as long as all safeties are still working, what's it matter? A light trigger only helps a weak shooter. The really skilled shooters don't seem to have a problem with 6# triggers. If Production shooters learned to be fast and accurate with a 6# trigger they would be a better shooter for it.

I have light triggers in my guns because I am a weak shooter. As I can become a better shooter, I hope to get away from that handicap. Just my thoughts and they are worth what you paid for them.

[Gary Stevens]

Danial97 you don't have to worry about me. I used much of your same arguement last year when all this got started. I do appreciate some new material though, that I will incorporate into my new arguements.

Now, what can you do to a trigger that can't be seen? Just saying.........

[Nik Habicht]

What I heard, and the only thing that makes any sense to me was that they were trying to come up with a set of rules that would allow the gun to be inspected at Chrono without dissasembly, and by someone with only a reasonable understanding of the gun. If it looks legal from the outside, it makes power factor and it makes weight, that's good enough.

I've recently had a conversation with people who were in the room when the Production Division rules were being discussed/voted on --- and what Chuck heard jives with their memory. (That list of minor components wasn't meant to be inclusive either, but apparently to serve as a list of examples) The whole concept was that Chrono shouldn't be in the business of disassembling guns......

Second: Anyone who advocates a trigger pull would need to advocate two, otherwise all striker fired guns will disappear from the game --- cause unless you set it at 1 lb. there's a significant difference between first shot and all subsequent shots....

[LPatterson]

Springfield lists under their custom shop heading in the new XD catalog..a XD Custom Production and a XDM Custom Production which lists the overtravel stop as a feature..

this is what is listed as the production package on the worksheet.

XD® "PRODUCTION" PACKAGE:

Competition action job; reduced overtravel & reset; Dawson adjustable fiber optic sights; extended mag release; Springfield Custom™ match grade

barrel; inspect & test fire. .........

It was my understanding that a manufacturer had to make a minimum of 2000 guns and submit documentation to NROI before a gun could be listed as Production which is why the M&P Pro is not on the Production list yet but the 9L is. So does that mean that a manufacturer can attach a model name to a gun and get it approved then make all kinds of internal modifications to bypass the original regulations that got it approved in the first place. Why should manufacturer installed parts be any different than parts I buy and put in a gun to upgrade it.

Maybe we should use GSSF rules and say if it isn't made by the manufacturer then a part can't be replaced. Except that may not work as my XD has an extended mag release because it is a 3rd party part available through the custom shop.

Production division is no different than any other competition orientated endeavor that some one finds a way to make it a little better. NASCAR Stock is a long way from stock but has some of the harshest rules around because of tech inspection which crew chiefs and builders still try to manipulate.

Is there an answer to box stock legal production division guns, only if we went to NASCAR rules and tore down the winners guns before awarding prizes. Until you do I am going to do anything and everything I can to place as high as I can. Adapt And Overcome.

[racerba]

...That list of minor components wasn't meant to be inclusive either, but apparently to serve as a list of examples...

Apparently JA wasn't there for that discussion.