Illegal Production Trigger Mods

[Gary Stevens]

Well if I am wrong in all the ways I have tried to state my understanding of the Production Division issue, then I would have to agree that it also applies to Limited and L-10.

Man is this going to be interesting.

[kgunz11]

If a Production Division trigger is pulled in the forest, and USPSA is not there to hear it, did it actually get pulled?

Put another way, if were not willing to develop the expertise to technically inspect the triggers, of every conceivable Production Division gun, at every match, since our rules apply at all level of matches, then this is all just a mental exercise

how many shooters got DQ'ed due to the trigger mods last yr???

They don't get DQ'd, they get bumped to Open. Your answer might be found in the Limited/Production Nat's scores, although it is not listed why someone got bumped into Open.

[sfinney]

00bullitt has the best point yet, the very same language is being intrepreted very narrowly in one case, Production, and ignored or read more liberal for other divisions. Can't have your cake and eat it too. Which is it?

[Gary Stevens]

Bruce. Calling Bruce.

[driver8M3]

If I shoot Production at a match with Skateboard tape covering the slide, a magwell, a raceholster and with fully loaded hi-cap match and the RO bumps me to open because I have too many rounds in the gun

that's not quite the same chuck, and anyway, if you showed up at the next match with all that illegal crap minus the high-cap, you'd probably be pretty pissed that the RO didn't mention any of your other illegal crap the first time.

the vanek ruling certainly could have reasonably been interpreted as allowing internal modifications. now, couple that with john amidon telling me exactly that in an email, and tell me again that i'm completely off base for jumping to the conclusion that internal trigger mods are ok, and external mods are not. yeah, i get it that emails from john are not rulings. but i wasnt asking for a ruling, and i didn't get one; i got his interpretation of the ruling. since he had just made the ruling that very week, that seems completely reasonable to me.

Edited January 23, 2009 by driver8M3

[rgkeller]

Looks like pretty much everyone will be shooting Open.

[ima45dv8]

00Bullitt wrote:

A committee may need to be assembled to discuss common moifications to Production guns so that all bases are covered.

I would change that to "....a QUALIFIED committee...."

Other than that, a great post!

[ima45dv8]

Everyone speeds, doesn't make it legal.

I agree, but speeding is an act of will. Running afoul of rules/targets that move is not.

[jobob]

This whole debate is making my butt tired! We're all finding creative ways of saying the same things over and over. I think I'll bow out and wait for whatever the BOD rules. If it goes against the Production shooters, I'll probably bow out of that too.

Never shot IDPA. Maybe it's time to give it a shot! (Pun intended!)

[Chuck Anderson]

If I shoot Production at a match with Skateboard tape covering the slide, a magwell, a raceholster and with fully loaded hi-cap match and the RO bumps me to open because I have too many rounds in the gun

that's not quite the same chuck, and anyway, if you showed up at the next match with all that illegal crap minus the high-cap, you'd probably be pretty pissed that the RO didn't mention any of your other illegal crap the first time.

the vanek ruling certainly could have reasonably been interpreted as allowing internal modifications. now, couple that with john amidon telling me exactly that in an email, and tell me again that i'm completely off base for jumping to the conclusion that internal trigger mods are ok, and external mods are not. yeah, i get it that emails from john are not rulings. but i wasnt asking for a ruling, and i didn't get one; i got his interpretation of the ruling. since he had just made the ruling that very week, that seems completely reasonable to me.

I thought the exact same thing, so I don't think you're completely off base. I'm just saying that just because Amidon disallows a trigger becasue it's visible on the outside, doesn't automatically mean anything inside is fair game. Guys, I'm not saying I don't want internal trigger work, and I'm not saying I want a box stock division. I think both would be detrimental to the division. I think if you don't allow trigger work you restrict the number of guns that are competetive to the companies that are willing to tailor make guns for us. The big part of that being ligther triggers.

What I am saying is that until the BOD comes up with a uniform statement or decision about what Production will be the rules aren't going to make any sense. I talked to enough BOD members last week I'm convinced there is not a consensus about the division. When you have that lack of consensus you end up with rules that allow stippling and checkering, but disallow trigger work. My ideal division would be IPSC rules on the outside of the gun and anything goes inside. By that, grip tape and sights that fit in the factory dovetail (no milling for sights) but allow the shooter to make any mods inside the gun for trigger etc. I think that would still appeal to the new shooter because at least the gun looks production, while allowing several platforms to be competetive.

So what does that do for the folks who checkered, stippled and magwelled their guns? Not much. I can't imagine any reason that was allowed in the first place. The milling of sights I think we're stuck with just because they've been there forever. At least the grip mods have only been the last year. I haven't seen that many people that did them. Could be different in different areas though.

Have a grace period so people can get their guns in compliance. Right now people, even people on the BOD don't have one view of what Production should be and that's why everyone has these different views. If you look at the rules from the perspective of someone who thinks it should be a box stock division, the rule is clear, no trigger work and no mods. If you view it from the point of view of someone who thinks creative mods should be allowed, you get, well creative views.

[XRe]

Well if I am wrong in all the ways I have tried to state my understanding of the Production Division issue, then I would have to agree that it also applies to Limited and L-10.

Let me put this one to bed for you right now (and save us all the heartburn). Read D4 21, then read D2 21 (for Limited) and D3 21 (for L10). There is something conspicuously present in D4 21 that is not in the other two... that little phrase "(Strictly limited to these items and their stated guidelines.)". No strict limit for Limited and L10. If Production didn't have that phrase, we wouldn't be having this discussion in the first place

[CDRODA396]

Wow, this thread is really something! It took my slower than average self three days to read the entire thing! but well worth the effort IMO.

Having said that, I'll also say that it is threads like this one that make this site so awesome...you've got members of the BOD, past and present, GM's on the top of our sport, M's, A’s through just picked up the sport, SC's, Major gunsmiths, retailers, and no telling who else that I don’t recognize because of their screen name, all engaged in what is for the MOST part a civil discussion on something that has a major impact on ALL of us associated not only with Production, but as someone pointed out, our entire sport. There is some very informative history and insight included in this thread by those that were involved right back in the beginning....awesome, and I want to personally thank everyone who has participated in a respectful manner, especially those on the not so popular side that have had the where-with-all to stay in the kitchen despite the heat...its a major part of what makes this site so useful, addictive, enjoyable...You Guys ALL ROCK!

Now I feel I should add some insightful, helpful or meaningful input and to be honest I don’t envy the BOD at all, and am not sure I have anything new or exciting to add.

I understand bgary's position that the BOD should be looking at the long term health of our sport, and agree with him or not, he is attempting to "secure" the Production Division well into the future based on lessons of the past....I don’t know what the position description for member of the BOD or AD is, but at least he is attempting to do the right thing for the future and you can’t argue with the virtue of his intentions.

However, I shoot production exclusively...with a G34 with TruGrip, Heine rear/Dawson front, steel guide rod, ISMI spring and......, a Vanek Classic trigger....I didn’t even know I was cheating until I started reading this thread on Tuesday night....thought I was well within the rules and had pointed out numerous times that the beauty of Production was that my box stock G34 was competitive right out of the box, and that even customizing it to my tastes had cost me at the time about $675, including 6 magazines, which didn’t even approach the over $3000 it had taken me to get my Edge up and running, complete with sights, trigger components, guide rods, grip work, slide lightening, coating, magazines, etc.

Around here there is a match hosted on Fort Bragg that offers free 9mm or .45 to any Active Duty Military shooter. Every month 5 or so guys from one of the many units on post will show up with whatever they have, not knowing it’s a match, thinking they are going to get free ammo to shoot their Kimber’s, SIG's, H&K's, etc. and do whatever they want....when they show up, you can tell which one’s they are, because they’ll be the one’s standing around with that "lost look" wondering what should they do when someone will scoop them up, explain what is really going on, make sure then have enough magazines, ammo pouches, a safe holster, etc. to compete, then make sure they get squaded together so they can "mentor" them through the day...usually you'll see 2 or so out of 5 show back up the next month, this time with enough mag pouches, mags, etc. all ready to "get after it." No one I've run into and I've been shooting this particular match since Oct 2005, has ever said, I'd love to get into the sport, but even your Production Division is so costly, or equipment race oriented that why bother? No one....quite the opposite...they generally are thrilled to be able to add the drop in trigger kits, or spring packages, or let the Pro's tweak if for them and shoot their “baby.”

I have to say, that in this case, the rule intended to protect the Division well into the future is the rule that might well be the one to weaken it. It certainly won’t kill it, but it would/will have a measurable impact I think...I sold my Edge and everything associated with it because I was tired of the $125 mags getting stepped on and getting out of "tune" and worrying about do I need the new 21 round mag to stay competitive....and now, if there was any way to enforce the rules, would be driven back to Limited because as fond of the Tupperware as I have grown, I won’t compete with one that has a box stock trigger...not gonna happen. So, I guess I’d have to sell the -34, pick up a -35, add a magwell and some mag bases…oh, damn, how many rounds do I get with what bases…maybe Limited 10…I really don’t want to go down that road and took an exit off of it once already…I just want to shoot my G34, with a “tuned trigger” that retains the stock geometry and all functioning safeties and call it a day.

NASCAR is a good example of what I think bgary is trying to avoid.. it started out as “stock cars” on the beach…then as it grew, you could add safety equipment, roll bars and fire walls and the like…then you could remove seats…and next thing you know, the only thing that even remotely resembles the “stock car” is the outline or profile of the car that is enforced by the templates….a noble cause and I laud you/him for attempting to prevent that in our sport…I just don’t think there is an enforceable manner to do it….

There are only two choices in my opinion….1) make rules you cant enforce, especially at the local level which is where our future is planted, grown, nurtured, renewed at, and gain nothing at all, but possibly alienate some that see it as asinine to have rules you cant enforce, and/or are cheaters as defined by the letter of the law….

Or 2) Develop a NASCAR-like template for each approved Production gun, a “drop in” or “mold” of the approved external appearance of the gun, so that at a match a MD simply has to pull out the mold, drop the gun in, it either fits or it doesn’t…then develop a “Safety Check” for each weapon and publish it, it would be easy enough to develop, the Army has a safety check for every weapon system it operates….ask anyone that’s been in how to perform it for the M16 and even if they’ve been out for years probably still knows it…then its easy, the MD performs a “Profile Check” and a “Safety Check” and the gun is either DQ’d (didn’t maintain factory profile or striker followed during the safety check) or its good to go….

The reality is there are more than a few shooting striker fired guns with virtually no modifications to be able to solidly argue that all the Glockworx or Vanek triggers in the world are not a GM going to make…is my Vanek Classic Trigger going to push me over the B to A edge this month…I seriously doubt it, hopefully it’s my study of the sport, coupled with a mix of dry fire and match experience that is going to make the difference…and I think most people see that with Production fairly clearly

Don’t know if any of this has made any sense, but like voting I have at least made an effort here, and will contact my AD…oh, I think he’s on here ( …isn’t this place awesome)…and voice my opinion there too!

Edited January 23, 2009 by CDRODA396

[ciscoip]

If I shoot Production at a match with Skateboard tape covering the slide, a magwell, a raceholster and with fully loaded hi-cap match and the RO bumps me to open because I have too many rounds in the gun

that's not quite the same chuck, and anyway, if you showed up at the next match with all that illegal crap minus the high-cap, you'd probably be pretty pissed that the RO didn't mention any of your other illegal crap the first time.

the vanek ruling certainly could have reasonably been interpreted as allowing internal modifications. now, couple that with john amidon telling me exactly that in an email, and tell me again that i'm completely off base for jumping to the conclusion that internal trigger mods are ok, and external mods are not. yeah, i get it that emails from john are not rulings. but i wasnt asking for a ruling, and i didn't get one; i got his interpretation of the ruling. since he had just made the ruling that very week, that seems completely reasonable to me.

I thought the exact same thing, so I don't think you're completely off base. I'm just saying that just because Amidon disallows a trigger becasue it's visible on the outside, doesn't automatically mean anything inside is fair game. Guys, I'm not saying I don't want internal trigger work, and I'm not saying I want a box stock division. I think both would be detrimental to the division. I think if you don't allow trigger work you restrict the number of guns that are competetive to the companies that are willing to tailor make guns for us. The big part of that being ligther triggers.

What I am saying is that until the BOD comes up with a uniform statement or decision about what Production will be the rules aren't going to make any sense. I talked to enough BOD members last week I'm convinced there is not a consensus about the division. When you have that lack of consensus you end up with rules that allow stippling and checkering, but disallow trigger work. My ideal division would be IPSC rules on the outside of the gun and anything goes inside. By that, grip tape and sights that fit in the factory dovetail (no milling for sights) but allow the shooter to make any mods inside the gun for trigger etc. I think that would still appeal to the new shooter because at least the gun looks production, while allowing several platforms to be competetive.

So what does that do for the folks who checkered, stippled and magwelled their guns? Not much. I can't imagine any reason that was allowed in the first place. The milling of sights I think we're stuck with just because they've been there forever. At least the grip mods have only been the last year. I haven't seen that many people that did them. Could be different in different areas though.

Have a grace period so people can get their guns in compliance. Right now people, even people on the BOD don't have one view of what Production should be and that's why everyone has these different views. If you look at the rules from the perspective of someone who thinks it should be a box stock division, the rule is clear, no trigger work and no mods. If you view it from the point of view of someone who thinks creative mods should be allowed, you get, well creative views.

I like your definition of Production, with the exception that I'd like to have conversion barrels allowed. The difference in weight is negligible and it helps out those with .40 caliber guns who don't reload and want to save money by shooting cheaper and lighter recoiling factory 9mm.

[ong45]

Sorry in advance if this has been suggested alredy, but why not a minimun trigger pull weight ala ipsc?

[BayouSlide]

Sorry in advance if this has been suggested alredy, but why not a minimun trigger pull weight ala ipsc?

This proposal prior to its elimination in the final 2008 rules created as heated a controversy as the present...ahem...discussion

[Ben Stoeger]

After some serious consideration I have decided to throw my two cents in.

Obviously, we have a pretty serious issue here. Many people are afraid that their guns will not be legal. I am confident that the BOD will issue a ruling making it so that the membership is happy. However, I think we have a larger problem. There seems to be a disconnect between what is actually written in the rulebook and NROI rulings issued based on those rules.

For example:

The “Vanek Trigger” ruling:

The Vanek trigger, much like the Speed Bump trigger, has an external modification that makes it illegal for Production division. The Speed Bump trigger has the travel screw mounted to the rear of the trigger and is visible externally, the Vanek trigger, has relocated the pivot pin about 3/16" above the factory specs, and has filled in the original hole with a black material that is still visible on inspection.

The “guide rods” ruling:

Exchanging guide rods or springs with after market guide rods or springs in its self is legal, but you must keep in mind the fact of not adding more weight than two ounces over the factory specified for the model approved on the handgun list. Guide rods, like barrels are not considered an external modification.

Now, reading over both of these rulings, they seem to have little to do with the actual rules. Regarding the Vanek trigger, they ruled it illegal because it was “visible externally”. There is no prohibition in the rules against having a mod be externally visible. The part of the rules that specifically prohibits external mods only does so if they are devices used to control recoil. Obviously a trigger job doesn’t aid in controlling recoil.

The mechanism in the rules for determining whether or not something is or is not legal is whether or not it is on the approved modifications list. (it appears to me that the “specifically prohibited” list is for clarification purposes) The NROI ruling should have noted that the Vanek trigger relocated the pivot pin. Relocating a pin is not on the list of approved mods, and as such they could have ruled the Vanek trigger illegal on that basis. Instead, their ruling doesn’t seem to be grounded in the rule book.

The guide rod ruling suffers from the same problem. Guide rods are specifically mentioned as being an approved change. Of course, the gun must remain within 2oz of its factory weight. That is all the ruling needed to say. The ruling instead said that guide rods were not considered an external mod. Saying it isn’t an external mod is pointless…unless you want to confuse people.

In my view, these NROI rulings and others didn’t seem to be based in rules. Especially the Vanek trigger ruling. The ruling simply doesn’t square with what we actually have in the rulebook. Instead, these rulings muddied the waters. These rulings confused people. These rulings misled reasonable people.

Now, I am not saying the Vanek trigger should be legal or shouldn’t be legal. That isn’t my point. I am not trying to say where I think production should or shouldn’t go. What I am saying is that it seems NROI rulings are not very good.

Now, I think a lot of this confusion could have been avoided with better rulings from NROI. It is my understanding that JA comes up with these rulings and then the BOD votes them up or down. I am not sure what the process is… but I think this controversy has shown us that it needs to be changed.

I think it would be better if there was a 3 person committee appointed by the BOD. These people should not be members of the BOD. (kinda like Supreme Court members aren’t in the Senate) This ruling committee should issue rulings based on the rules. They should more carefully cite the rules that they are ruling on. These rulings should not be subject to a BOD vote.

In my view, the current process is deeply inadequate. I think a clear and consistent interpretation of BOD rules would help the BOD craft better rules.

What I would like to see is that the rules written in the rulebook actually line up with what is allowable in the division. I think we are headed towards having any sort of internal trigger work be allowable in the division. I am not saying that is bad, that is actually good. That is what I would like to see. However, we need to make sure the BOD does a good job of articulating that in the rules. Simply having the NROI issue a ruling that is not based in the rules would be more of the same. I think it is time for this process to change.

[Flexmoney]

Sorry in advance if this has been suggested alredy, but why not a minimun trigger pull weight ala ipsc?

For Open Division ???

(sorry James... )

[Flexmoney]

Thanks for posting, Ben. That is worth some thought.

[RIIID]

Ben,

There is a ruling that isn't listed on the USPSA site any more it dealt with internal mods that effect the exterior of the gun. It helped in making the Vanek ruling, it basically said internal mods were ok but they could not effect any portion of the exterior. It came about when somebody was changing the internal notch on a mag release to extend it to one side or the other.

Rich

[rgkeller]

At the next iteration, those responsible should decide what they want the rules to mean and then have someone professional and experienced translate the meanings into clear, unambiguous and organized English.

[CDRODA396]

The “Vanek Trigger” ruling:

The Vanek trigger, much like the Speed Bump trigger, has an external modification that makes it illegal for Production division. The Speed Bump trigger has the travel screw mounted to the rear of the trigger and is visible externally, the Vanek trigger, has relocated the pivot pin about 3/16" above the factory specs, and has filled in the original hole with a black material that is still visible on inspection.

I just have to mention that there is more than one Vanek Trigger, the Classic Trigger does not move the pivot pin, therefore makes no external modification...but does include an overtravel stop....it consists of:

Modified Smooth Faced Trigger Bar

Tuned/Tweaked 3.5 lb Connector

Modified Firing Pin Safety Plunger

Modified Spring Cups

Springs

Trigger Housing with (preset) Adjustable Over-Travel Stop.

Edited January 23, 2009 by CDRODA396

[Loves2Shoot]

Sorry in advance if this has been suggested alredy, but why not a minimun trigger pull weight ala ipsc?

Too much work for already overworked staff for no payback.

[chendersby]

Chris Endersby, area 2 director, replied and said the BOD will address this in a phone meeting next week. He also said he doesn't shout Production, but he didn't otherwise give any clue as to where he stands.

Where I stand is production "should" be a zero modifications division. I didn't even like the sight replacement rule. But as we have no inspection teams running around to matches checking equipment, it is impossible to realistically have a zero modification rule. So for me this is a black or white issue. Right now the rules have a lot of gray. So we don't want inspections or measuring trigger weights and we can't make illegal what was previously legal. For me the logical thing to do is allow internal modifications with external mods limited to what we allow now.

What I got from reading this entire thread, besides the headache, is that we USPSA shooters are a competitive group of equipment tinkerers. I am reminded that this sport was founded on the idea of developing methods and equipment to accurately put holes in targets in the shortest amount of time. Why should we expect it to be any different in Production Division.

As for the arguement that the equipment race will turn new shooters off. I think that the perception that you need a $2000 base gun to start before modifications may turn shooters off but the fact they can use what they already have or start with a $500 gun won't scare people away.

[Nik Habicht]

What I got from reading this entire thread, besides the headache, is that we USPSA shooters are a competitive group of equipment tinkerers. I am reminded that this sport was founded on the idea of developing methods and equipment to accurately put holes in targets in the shortest amount of time. Why should we expect it to be any different in Production Division.

As for the arguement that the equipment race will turn new shooters off. I think that the perception that you need a $2000 base gun to start before modifications may turn shooters off but the fact they can use what they already have or start with a $500 gun won't scare people away.

That mirrors my experience with production --- virtually everyone wants either to modify their gun a little to suit their tastes, or to buy the next level of performance improvement. For most members who hang around, the tinkering slows down after a while, when the realization that it often interferes with reliability raises its head.....

And cost is a factor --- so it's cool that you can enter the game with a $400 police trade-in Glock and spend a little money over time to build a better blaster....

[ammowaster]

As for the arguement that the equipment race will turn new shooters off. I think that the perception that you need a $2000 base gun to start before modifications may turn shooters off but the fact they can use what they already have or start with a $500 gun won't scare people away.

That mirrors my experience with production --- virtually everyone wants either to modify their gun a little to suit their tastes, or to buy the next level of performance improvement. For most members who hang around, the tinkering slows down after a while, when the realization that it often interferes with reliability raises its head.....

And cost is a factor --- so it's cool that you can enter the game with a $400 police trade-in Glock and spend a little money over time to build a better blaster....

That is why I started in production. I felt like I could learn quite a bit with a pistol I already owned. When I got hooked I bought a similar pistol a little better suited to USPSA. Now that I am finding my groove and got classified I am looking at things I can do to fine tune my pistol. However I think I will leave it alone for the moment

I cant remember ever having lost and thinking that my gun was the cause. I have always thought the minor tweaks are just that minor. I am a firm believer that the nut pulling the trigger is the bottom line. I am currently a C shooter and am close to making B. I would bet a 100 dollars that almost any high B or A shooter could beat me with a stock gun.

I would like to thank everyone who has chimed in because it has helped me understand a little bit about what production has come from. I do not use the USPSA forums at all(didnt know they existed until recently) so I am glad it was brought up here

Quick question

With the exception of replacement slides and grip stippling which are both fairly new apparently is there a IDPA division that has rules in place that are what we want for production??