ShootemGood Posted March 8, 2009 Share Posted March 8, 2009 I attended a state championship and one of the shooters in ESP class was using STI double stack 9mm pistol loaded too 10 plus one which I know is legal, but when he finished stage the SO questioned him about using Recoil Master spring system and told him not legal. MD was summoned and told SO and shooters that Recoil Master is not mentioned in rule book as illegal and therefore could continue too shoot. I am new too IDPA but there were several other experienced shooters who claimed it is not legal, can you please clarify? Thanks, Robert Walker Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Vigilante Posted March 8, 2009 Share Posted March 8, 2009 I just read the rules again and find nothing that wouldn't allow the Recoil Master spring system. However, I am not an expert on the IDPA rules and their interpretation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RickB Posted March 8, 2009 Share Posted March 8, 2009 Does the Recoil Master have any tungsten components? The rule book specifically allows changing guide rods, as long as they're made of material that's not heavier than a plain steel rod. It doesn't address the actual weight of the rod, but the material. So, if it's made entirely of steel, and/or something lighter than steel, it's legal. If a match official tells you it's not, just show him the rule book (page 22). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CDPMatt Posted March 8, 2009 Share Posted March 8, 2009 Robert from IDPA supposedly ruled the recoilmaster as a "competition only" device therefore they are illegal. Now, showing that to a shooter in writing is another story all together. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shawn Knight Posted March 8, 2009 Share Posted March 8, 2009 when he finished stage the SO questioned him about using Recoil Master spring system and told him not legal. MD was summoned and told SO and shooters that Recoil Master is not mentioned in rule book as illegal and therefore could continue too shoot. Just because a specific system is not listed in the rule book doesn't mean it is not allowed. The IDPA version of Amidon needs to make the call on it. The competitor should have been allowed to continue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe4d Posted March 8, 2009 Share Posted March 8, 2009 when he finished stage the SO questioned him about using Recoil Master spring system and told him not legal. MD was summoned and told SO and shooters that Recoil Master is not mentioned in rule book as illegal and therefore could continue too shoot. Just because a specific system is not listed in the rule book doesn't mean it is not allowed. The IDPA version of Amidon needs to make the call on it. The competitor should have been allowed to continue. Actually you are mistaken, This is one area the rule book is actually pretty clear on. IDPA doesnt list what isnt allowed. Saying, "It isnt mentioned as illegal so it's ok" isnt supporrted by the rule book. What the rule book has is a list of Permitted Modifications an "Inclusive list" anything not on that list is prohibited. A recoil master is not listed as permitted therefore the SO was correct in the rule and should have issued a FTDR IAW the rulebook. Now the STI is a stock feature in many guns but the term, "Modification" has been defined by HQ as a mod from the original design not from as issued. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shawn Knight Posted March 8, 2009 Share Posted March 8, 2009 Oh... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve J Posted March 8, 2009 Share Posted March 8, 2009 Joe4d, the STI Recoil Master is no more a modification than changing from a 16# standard recoil spring to a 14# variable power spring is a modification. The Inclusive List of Permitted Modifications simply does not apply here. It's just a recoil system. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe4d Posted March 8, 2009 Share Posted March 8, 2009 Convincing me or convincing yourself wont change the words in the rule book . By your own statement you called it a "recoil system" It's alot more than simply a different spring. Its two springs and two guide rods that collapse inside each other. Since IDPA hasnt published a definition of modification we can go ahead and use Webster. Pretty much anyone with a basic understanding of English would look at a single spring and compare it to a Recoil master call it a modification. Claiming it's "Internal reliability work" wouldnt fly either as the device is specifically marketed to reduce recoil not make things more reliable. Now personally I could care less. The gadgets dont do much and are prone to breaking. 9mm mousefart loads in a full size STI dont recoil anyway. I would never look for one, However if someone asks if they are legal or it was brought to my attention as a match official I would say it's not on the list. However after reading the FTDR penalty for illegal equipment I see the rule states the illegal equipment must )in MD's opinion) also make a travesty of the defensive shooting sport to earn the penalty. Therefore since now we are including the MD's opinion that it doesnt really do anything so yes it is illegal equipment but there isnt really anywhere in the rules to enforce illegal equipment that doesnt do anything. Man this rule book need a rework Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kyle O Posted March 9, 2009 Share Posted March 9, 2009 I was the MD, and I checked the rule book then. And now with an electronic text search. I searched "spring" and springfield ported barrels was the only hit. I searched "recoil" and only ported barrels are mentioned again. No place in the official rule book does it mention using "spring systems" to reduce recoil. Only "weight" is directly mentioned as illegal to the sport. The division was "enhanced" service pistol. The division itself mainly consist of full size 1911s in 9mm anyway. I had the competitor disassemble their firearm, so I could observe the mechanism. It looked just like the double spring system in my ultra compact 1911 that I regularly carry for self defense. It was made of steel and without weighing it, felt to weigh less than a solid steel guide rod would. I deemed it legal. To me, this is a "gray area" just like a close grease ring scoring call....it goes to the shooter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Vigilante Posted March 9, 2009 Share Posted March 9, 2009 Just wonderin' how this came to your attention? Would not be something you would normally notice, would it? Did someone "spill" the beans? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Storm52 Posted March 9, 2009 Share Posted March 9, 2009 (edited) Hey Kyle, I was there. First time attending (spectator) a match in over 25 years. Other than faster, more accurate shooters, guns that I couldn't easily identify, things hanging off gunbelts that hadn't been invented way back when, stages being modern and challenging, nothing has changed! One thing that hasn't changed is the bonds of friendship and fellowship. Weather was great, facility was too. My only issue was it being held on that Saturday (our non-profit worked concesions at a hockey game) and the damn spring ahead time thing the next day. Steve typos are an evil thing Edited March 9, 2009 by Storm52 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve J Posted March 9, 2009 Share Posted March 9, 2009 Held on a Sunday? Hey, Steve. I think you turned your clock too far forward. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Storm52 Posted March 9, 2009 Share Posted March 9, 2009 Steve: Kyle had previously noted my location and messaged me about coming out. Didn't get the opportunity to introduce myself but I was busy having a great time watching some amazing talent. I've almost convinced myself I need to buy something that has a slide instead of a cylinder. Steve P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glock3422 Posted March 9, 2009 Share Posted March 9, 2009 I was the MD, and I checked the rule book then. And now with an electronic text search. I searched "spring" and springfield ported barrels was the only hit. I searched "recoil" and only ported barrels are mentioned again. No place in the official rule book does it mention using "spring systems" to reduce recoil. Only "weight" is directly mentioned as illegal to the sport. The division was "enhanced" service pistol. The division itself mainly consist of full size 1911s in 9mm anyway. I had the competitor disassemble their firearm, so I could observe the mechanism. It looked just like the double spring system in my ultra compact 1911 that I regularly carry for self defense. It was made of steel and without weighing it, felt to weigh less than a solid steel guide rod would. I deemed it legal. To me, this is a "gray area" just like a close grease ring scoring call....it goes to the shooter. I am really glad to see some application of sense and not just common. I have always been disappointed in defining anything "we didn't think of" as not permitted. This is particularly disappointing in the area of Custom Defensive Pistol and Enhanced Service Pistol. Neither have a production requirement. Why wouldn't an individual be permitted to build their hot rod with less than x cubic inches/litres and less/more than y ounces/kilos as long as it fit the box? This isn't SSP and it isn't Production. I'm not sure why a sport would limit itself to a weapon where the patent expired long ago and then claimed it as a standard, with exceptions described by vague and undefined terms. It really does pervert the word "Custom" and limits "Enhanced" beyond the represented intent. Certainly, all sorts of enhancements could be perceived as "competition" modifications. Life is a competition. All gun fights are competitions. None of our guns are suitable to "hunting." Beyond subsistance hunting, where is a shooting persuit that isn't competition? OK, what about daily concealed carry? I don't see a recoil system or any other reliability feature as a competition only item. Limiting a universe to 1911, or any of its' current variants ignores and stifles progress. Mr. Browning was a revolutionary. I doubt he would support anything that would retard innovation. I have heard for some years that the Recoil Master is not permitted by IDPA. Yet, IDPA has never taken a position on a recoil system that has been around for quite a while. If IDPA wants to limit CDP or any other division to the original 1911, it is their option and their call. When they chose to describe a weapon as .45 cal., 41 oz. or less, single, double, or safe-action; they have opened the door wide to imagination and ingenuity. Handguns evolved to polymer frames a long time ago. Materials and methods have improved and it is time to recognize it. We should not define ourselves by 100 year old technology. Cowboy action shooting is available to those so inclined. After the player has walked through the door, it is a little late, and not honest, to disallow the use of their equipment because you didn't think of it first and you don't like the color of their method of applying your published rules. It is time that IDPA take a more objective approach to the rules of the game. They owe it to the competitors who might travel to other areas and officials charged with enforcing those rules to be clear and specific. Intent is subjective, open to interpretation, and a very slippery slope, on both sides of the hill. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kyle O Posted March 9, 2009 Share Posted March 9, 2009 Just wonderin' how this came to your attention? Would not be something you would normally notice, would it? Did someone "spill" the beans? One of my safety officers has the same or similar pistol, so he was familier with the particular firearm and saw it on the unload and show clear command. Thanks for coming out Steve, I hope you come by one of our local matches also. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikegot38 Posted March 9, 2009 Share Posted March 9, 2009 Sorry, it is illegal. Check with Robert or Ted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kyle O Posted March 9, 2009 Share Posted March 9, 2009 Sorry, it is illegal. Check with Robert or Ted. You don't have to be sorry. Please show me where in the rules, cause I could not find it. The official IDPA rulebook is MY only guide to the sport. If it is not there, then see my "gray area/close call goes to the shooter statement" And, Robert, or Ted were not present at my match. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe4d Posted March 9, 2009 Share Posted March 9, 2009 There is no Gray area, Page 21 PERMITTED MODIFICATIONS (Inclusive list) the inclusive means if it is not on the list it isn't permitted. Why is that so hard to understand ? Lots of things arnt mentioned in the rule book Stinger missles, belt fed machine guns, grenades, that's why there is an "INCLUSIVE LIST" of what is allowed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe D Posted March 9, 2009 Share Posted March 9, 2009 First of all the Recoil Master "system" is a waste of time and money. Yes, I have shot a gun with one. There is no advantage using one. Just another gimmick to relieve IPSC shooters of their money. There is nothing in the rule book that says you can't use one if you are so inclined. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glshooter Posted March 9, 2009 Share Posted March 9, 2009 If you cruise over to the IDPA forum, you will see that their has been a couple inquiries to IDPA HQ about this. It has in fact been ruled illegal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve J Posted March 9, 2009 Share Posted March 9, 2009 If you cruise over to the IDPA forum, you will see that their has been a couple inquiries to IDPA HQ about this. It has in fact been ruled illegal. Unfortunately, that's is all second and third hand information. IMHO the "competition only device" argument and the "illegal modification" argument just don't hold water and neither does the "I called IDPA HQ and they said xxx" argument. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve J Posted March 9, 2009 Share Posted March 9, 2009 (edited) There is no Gray area, Page 21 PERMITTED MODIFICATIONS (Inclusive list) the inclusive means if it is not on the list it isn't permitted. Why is that so hard to understand ? Lots of things arnt mentioned in the rule book Stinger missles, belt fed machine guns, grenades, that's why there is an "INCLUSIVE LIST" of what is allowed. You are right. There is no gray area. Changing springs is not a modification. Page 21 does not apply. ETA: The Recoil Master is simply a double spring system that replaces a single spring. It has the exact same effect as switching to a lower weight variable power recoil spring. Edited March 9, 2009 by Steve J Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AggieMM Posted March 9, 2009 Share Posted March 9, 2009 If you cruise over to the IDPA forum, you will see that their has been a couple inquiries to IDPA HQ about this. It has in fact been ruled illegal. Unfortunately, that's is all second and third hand information. IMHO the "competition only device" argument and the "illegal modification" argument just don't hold water and neither does the "I called IDPA HQ and they said xxx" argument. I agree. Remember, the IDPA Forums CLEARLY state: "This is an unofficial forum for folks to politely discuss IDPA-related issues. * It is not associated with the International Defensive Pistol Association, Berryville, AR." The only official publications that I am aware of are the rule book and Tactical Journal. Ryan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glshooter Posted March 9, 2009 Share Posted March 9, 2009 If you cruise over to the IDPA forum, you will see that their has been a couple inquiries to IDPA HQ about this. It has in fact been ruled illegal. Unfortunately, that's is all second and third hand information. IMHO the "competition only device" argument and the "illegal modification" argument just don't hold water and neither does the "I called IDPA HQ and they said xxx" argument. I agree. Remember, the IDPA Forums CLEARLY state: "This is an unofficial forum for folks to politely discuss IDPA-related issues. * It is not associated with the International Defensive Pistol Association, Berryville, AR." The only official publications that I am aware of are the rule book and Tactical Journal. Ryan So if the governing body says something is illegal, I don't have to listen to them if I disagree with their decision? Robert Ray is the rule guy in IDPA like John Amidon for USPSA. Apparently their rulings don't count. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts