Major Caliber Requirements

[jakes10mm]

This was originally posted on the "9mm Major?" topic, but thought I'd open it up for more to review and comment on. My baseline concern is the requirement to use a .40 caliber bullet to make Major in Limited and Limited 10. The previous post goes like this:

Are we missing something here in Limited and Limited 10 divisions? We have 9mm Major now in Open, but are restricted to 40cal for major in Limited and Limited 10. Why are great rounds like the 9x23 and 357SIG being treated like minor rounds? No wonder why the 9x23 came and left as limited production guns. I currently shoot a 40S&W gun in Limited, but would much rather use a 9x23 in both Limited and Limited 10 divisions. You "push" a 9mm to make major while you'd download the 9x23 and 357Sig to make major. Hmmmm???

Can anyone explain the reason why it "has to be 40 caliber or larger"? I don't agree with the excuse that it is aimed at reducing the "expense" of getting involved. That's what Production and Limited 10 is about. Once you step into Limited, you're spending a "production pistol's cost" to by hi cap mags. Majority of the people I compete against are using the $2000 STI/SV pistols in Limited. I don't see any cost savings there. We are fueling the manufacturer's to make more 40S&W and 45acp pistols by disqualifying the 357Sig's and 9x23's. Does a Glock 22 cost significantly less than a Glock 31? If we actually evaluated the cartridges by their factory spec capabilities, we could open the field a bit. Eventually, we should see a positive impact on the offerings from the firearm manufacturers. I just don't see necessity of .40caliber to be "Major." Don't take me wrong, I like big bore cartridges, but I like fast, smaller bores too.

Just my two-cents worth.

[ErikW]

Can anyone explain the reason why it "has to be 40 caliber or larger"?

Because it's a medium-bore or bigger division. That's part of the challenge. That's one of the limitations of Limited. .355" Major makes more sense in Open, because it's more in line with the spirit of the division.

There are a few good reasons not to turn it into a .355" division.

It would require new pistols and magazines for thousands of competitors. Many would quit the sport in disgust at the resumption of the long-dormant arms race. Other than 9x19, brass would be much more expensive.

[Vince Pinto]

Hi guys,

From a historical perspective, the minutes of the Columbia Conference (24-29 May, 1976) state: "Scoring must encourage use of the big bore combat pistol, through calibre bonus". Moreover, the "Major" and "Minor" power factors were also agreed at that time, as were the scoring values "5, 4, 2" and "5, 3, 1".

From a current day perspective, Erik is 100% correct that if we were to abandon the minimum calibre for Major in divisions which have, from the very outset, required a minimum calibre for Major, a large number of handguns worldwide may become defunct and lose value.

Of course this argument does not apply to Open or Production Divisions, because these have never required a minimum calibre for Major, and Production does not even recognise or reward larger calibres.

Hope this answers your question.

[Bucky]

Can anyone explain the reason why it "has to be 40 caliber or larger"? I don't agree with the excuse that it is aimed at reducing the "expense" of getting involved. That's what Production and Limited 10 is about. Once you step into Limited, you're spending a "production pistol's cost" to by hi cap mags. Majority of the people I compete against are using the $2000 STI/SV pistols in Limited. I don't see any cost savings there.

Yes, people ARE using $2000+ guns with $500+ worth of magazines. These people don't want to fork out an additional $1500+ to stay in the game, just because of a rule change.

[kbear38S]

Yes, people ARE using $2000+ guns with $500+ worth of magazines. These people don't want to fork out an additional $1500+ to stay in the game, just because of a rule change.

What he said.

[james h]

OK dumb question time from a european IPSC shooter.

what is Limited ? (i think thats what we call standard)

is Limited 10 different ?

i.e. max of 10 rds in gun/mag.

if so what is the hassle about wanting to shoot 9mm as it gives no advantage if you are resticted to 10 rds and what the hell are you paying $500 for mags for?????? are they gold plated? mine cost Circa $180 for 3!!!

Dont forget the rest of the world might not want to change the .40 rule.

[IPSCDRL]

Limited is similar to Standard division only Limited guns do not have to fit "the box." Magazine length is limited to 140mm for double column magazines and 170mm for single-stacks. No optics or porting.

Limited-10 Division has all of the same requirements as limited, but resricts you to no more than 10 rounds in the magazine. US law forbids manufacture or sales of new magazines holding greater than 10 rounds to other than law enforcement and military. This makes pre-existing "normal capacity" magazines expensive since the supply is "limited".

“Don’t forget the rest of the world might not want to change the .40 rule.”

Many here in this part of the world do not want to change the .40 rule either. It would make a whole bunch of expensive gear less valuable.

The laws of supply and demand at work. For example, my nephew lost one of my Glock .40 magazines at a match three weeks ago. Because it was a 15 round mag with an Arredondo base on it, it will cost me around $150 US to replace. Sucks.

[Larry White]

Rember the days of super face, back when we first started to push 38 super to major, seperated cases and blown up guns everwhere. Well the world is full of 9mm pistols with unsupported chambers and questionable manafacture. A 9x19 loaded to major is a touchy, mean, little S.O.B., little variencies in powder charge that are not a problem in a larger bore all at once become real problems in a crappy little 9. Same reason we have min. bullet weight in open, if we did'nt some dummy would be trying to make major with a 70 gr. 380 bullet in a old single stack 38 super. When I ask a shooter if he's ready I like to expect that he will have 10 fingers and I will have two eyes when I ask if he's finished. Larry

[mcoliver]

. Moreover, the "Major" and "Minor" power factors were also agreed at that time, as were the scoring values "5, 4, 3" and "5, 3, 2".

Eh, Vince, you mean "5, 4, 2" and "5, 3, 1", right?

[Vince Pinto]

Mc Oliver,

Um, er, ah, I was just testing to see if anybody noticed, and you win a set of Ginsu steak knives for being the only one.

<groan> I really need a holiday .......... thanks - original post corrected

[Julien Boit]

I see very few interest in banning the .40 minimum caliber rule.

If you're competing in L10, this is not a capacity issue, so does the 357sig which has the same case dimensions as the .40sw.

I tryed a Glock32C in 357 sig and I can tell I don't like it.

Making major is possible in a fully supported barrel, but i wouldn't be next the guy who shoots it through a glock !

I'd rather stick to the .40

And that bigger bullet is a plus for touching that damn' line of the A zone

Shooting a major .38 in limited/standard would require not only to change parts, or entire pistol but also working a load, and train a lot as I believe the gun feelings would be different.

I also don't want to throw away my $$$$ worthy pistols !

[skeeter]

the only thing that i'd like to see is 357 mag back to being major agian. i know that it's good for revolver division, but i'd love to try L10 with an 8 shoot smith&wesson and not be scored minor.

[BigDave]

Well,why we're at, why don't we drop it all the way down to 25 ACP? How about that?

I believe 40 S&W/10mm is a good floor for Limited/L10 for Major PF. Although the empahsis in our sport is Speed, Speed and (did I mention Speed?), Power is one of the requirements. In the Limited/L10 divisions, there is a BENEFIT/BONUSto shooting more powerful ammo. Its a power thing, pure and simple. Major in 9mm is a different animal than is Major in 40 S&W or 45 ACP.

The arguments "it will make a whole buch of guns obsolete, blah, blah, blah". Come on guys, thats BS. True as it might be, that is a weak argument (my opinon) against the 9x19 argument. Its a power thing. I think we need to get away from the mindset that Minor is a handicap. It places emphasis on the Accurcy portion of our sport. Look at what David S. did at the FGN's? To me, that prooves that there is no disadvantage for 9mm.

Just my $.02

[Bucky]

I'm not sure what side of the fence you're on BigDave. The obsolete equipment issue IS a valid point. Thousands (or at least hundreds ) of people invested thousands of dollars in .40 caliber guns, because that's what the circumstances and the rulebooks dictated to be what was needed to be most competitive. Changing the rule, WILL impact that investment. Some people work very hard and it's a significant outlay to play the sport with the most advantageous equipment. These people don't want to minimize their investments due to the stroke of a pen.

As for what Dave S did at the Nats...? That was ONE shooter who did this at ONE particular match. Most of us are not in his category, so major / minor does play a factor. And to compare the masses to what Dave S can do as an argument that there is no difference, is somewhat naive.

[BigDave]

I agree with the 40 minimum for Limited/Limited 10.

I never stated that the equipment issue wasn't a valid point, it is and I agree with your points. I did state that I think it is a weak argument , and I still do.

Did I state that all shooters were the caliber of David S? No. Do I think they are? No. Am I? No. Are you? Don't know. I don't care how you do the math, 2A's in 1 second = 10.000 hit factor in BOTH Major and Minor scoring. But I do bring up Dave S's. feat at the FGN's to illustrate that at the top of our sport, Minor is not a handicap . Wouldn't you agree that, all else being equal, a competitor shooting less powerfull ammo should be able to make the same shots in less time than his/her competitor of a similar skill level? One might argue "well, if there was no real difference between Major and Minor, all of the SuperSquad would shoot minor". To that I say, why leave it to chance? The fact that David S finished so closely to TJ in the combined (not that it really matters, but they did decide to figure it that way for a reason) clearly illustrates that point. Well, to me anyway.

The same reason they don't allow 22 LR is the same reason there is a Major PF floor in Limited & Limited 10 - Power is part of our sport. Larger calibers present a more difficult shooting challenge and those who accept that challenge are awareded with more points. I choose to shoot 40 Major because I want the scoring bonus.

[twix]

"I think we need to get away from the idea that Minor is a handicap. It places emphathsis on the accuracy aspect of our sport."

Heh-heh. It's good we are still connected. I just don't want to hear any whining about the practices we are now doing and what you will be seeing when you get back.

(Insert maniacal laugh here) Bwaa haa haa ha.

Rhino was grounded for session one or else you would have already heard the moans I'm sure.

TommyB

[Jake Di Vita]

It doesn't matter what Sevigny did at FGN...if Production had been scored major, he would have had a better score.

I may be missing something, but what is it about major ammunition that makes it so much more difficult than minor?

No matter how you cut it, if you shoot 1 C in an entire match, minor is a handicap.

Go ahead and let 25 ACP in...if they can make PF with it, more power to them.

Here is what I would be happy with for a scoring system...Major A=5, B=4, C=4, D=1...Minor A=5, B=4, C=3, D=1.

[OpnBlstr]

The arguments "it will make a whole buch of guns obsolete, blah, blah, blah".  Come on guys, thats BS.

The problem is that it DOES make everyone who wants to remain at the top of the pack go out and buy new guns and mags for a considerable chunk of money.

You can (re)build modular 140mm 38S mags and fit 25(!) rimless 38 or 38TJ which places you on the line with 26 rounds in the pistol versus a 40 shooter with 20 or 21 (in a Para) rounds.

I don't think you could find many shooters who would stand at a table with two pistols - one holding six more rounds - say "geez, that's a tough one...I'll go with the low cap."

I agree that the top shooters would do very well and even continue to win with minor which makes me wonder if any of the top modular gun shooters have contemplated an extreme capacity minor limited pistol. Six rounds is a bunch!

[Joe D]

If you really wanted to make things interesting limit the mag capacity to 19 or 20 in Limited. Allow Paras and S_Is in .45 to use a 170 mm tube. Lets face it Limited is a one caliber Division. What we are talking about is really mag capacity not caliber. I think a Glock 34 shooting 9mm Major or a STI/Para .45 might be fun.

[Patrick Sweeney]

Capacity is the whole issue. We could make the rules more complex, and add a linked caliber-capacity-mag length rule.

For Major;

.45 Limited 170mm. 40 Limited 140mm. .38 Super Limited 126mm.

For Minor; (I know, I know, but we'll add it anyway)

.45 170mm, 38 & 40 140 mm

By the way, what do we gain by adding a .38 Super Major to Limited?

[jhgtyre]

Capacity is the whole issue. We could make the rules more complex, and add a linked caliber-capacity-mag length rule.

For Major;

.45 Limited 170mm. 40 Limited 140mm. .38 Super Limited 126mm.

For Minor; (I know, I know, but we'll add it anyway)

.45 170mm, 38 & 40 140 mm

By the way, what do we gain by adding a .38 Super Major to Limited?

I like that plan!

By letting .38 super make major in limited we gain the following:

• Consistency across the divisions - Revo and Open already let the little bullets in.
  
• Cheaper reloading costs for competitors - .355's are cheaper than .40's.
  
• A broader selection of competitive guns
  

Besides I have two .38 super limited guns (SS and STI) and I want to juice up my loads so I can shoot major pf!

-ld

[Joe D]

Patrick, I am certain this will never happen, but it would be fun having a choice of a snappy, quick recoiling Glock 34 or a slow push from a STI in .45.