Flexmoney Posted November 4, 2009 Share Posted November 4, 2009 But are they considered "mass produced"? Does it matter? What you are talking of doing clearly isn't "mass produced", right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary Stevens Posted November 4, 2009 Share Posted November 4, 2009 Flex, me conflicted???? I resemble that remark I am working with the DNROI to try to further refine this issue. I personally am not concerned with cosmetic signature features, only with the over and above removing of metal from the slide that sends a message, rightly or wrongly, that it is an out and out race division. We all know that the 1911 pattern guns shot in USPSA matches are for the most part, vastly "improved" from JMB's original platform. However, from 10 feet away they don't look all that much different. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kgunz11 Posted November 4, 2009 Author Share Posted November 4, 2009 But are they considered "mass produced"? Does it matter? What you are talking of doing clearly isn't "mass produced", right? Yes, it DOES matter. Tri-topping a slide reduces a considerable amount of weight, which as I understand, is prohibited. My point is Flex, that there are so many variations of slide serrations that it's hard to keep up with what is considered legal and what isn't. IMO, tri-topping the slide is milling the slide to reduce weight. That is not the answer I'm after, I want to know what freedom is allowed in slide serrations. Is a Wilson Combat considered a mass produced gun? What defines "mass produced"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flexmoney Posted November 4, 2009 Share Posted November 4, 2009 I know what your point is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nemo Posted November 4, 2009 Share Posted November 4, 2009 (edited) Bobby, I understand your concern but look at the images above. All factory guns or components (the Caspian frame) that are not identical to JMB's patented design. Serrations, flat tops, snake bellies, tritops, even the thinning of the forward part of the slide seems that have been done before. There are some pretty creative designs out there. I guess that as long as your endmills don't go through to the other side of the steel you'd be good to go. But I'm no Amidon... Edited November 4, 2009 by Nemo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kgunz11 Posted November 4, 2009 Author Share Posted November 4, 2009 Thanks for that Nemo. I just don't want to build some immaculately beautiful gun for a customer and it not be SS Division legal. I'm not even talking about doing anything radical, just different. Something unique to put MY name on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary Stevens Posted November 4, 2009 Share Posted November 4, 2009 (edited) Hang loose for a week or three, I think we can have a cleaner and clearer adjustment shortly. I believe what Bobby is asking for is where are the ditch lines. Once he knows where they are, he can stay out of them. The desire for a gunsmith to put their own signature on a gun they built is understandable. What we, USPSA, have to do is let gunsmiths work their trade, and at the same time protect the division from becoming something it was never intended to be. Thanks for raising the subject Bobby, perhaps we can make the water a bit more clearer for you. Edited November 4, 2009 by Gary Stevens Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kgunz11 Posted November 4, 2009 Author Share Posted November 4, 2009 Gosh, thank YOU Mr. Gary for providing some input to the powers at be for a little resolution in this matter. And you are again spot on with what I's asking for. If a guy buys a custom $1200.00 single stack gun from me and cannot shoot it in competition, he's not going to be happy with me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G-ManBart Posted November 5, 2009 Share Posted November 5, 2009 STI does catalog a 5" tri-top slide as a standard item....just FYI. I've seen more than one tri-top guns pass inspection at some pretty big matches Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bofe954 Posted November 5, 2009 Share Posted November 5, 2009 But are they considered "mass produced"? STI sells a tri-topped SS gun too, but it's a special order. The STI Commemorative USPSA single stack has a tri top... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boz1911 Posted November 5, 2009 Share Posted November 5, 2009 Hang loose for a week or three, I think we can have a cleaner and clearer adjustment shortly.I believe what Bobby is asking for is where are the ditch lines. Once he knows where they are, he can stay out of them. The desire for a gunsmith to put their own signature on a gun they built is understandable. What we, USPSA, have to do is let gunsmiths work their trade, and at the same time protect the division from becoming something it was never intended to be. Thanks for raising the subject Bobby, perhaps we can make the water a bit more clearer for you. Please keep us posted Gary, I've got a gun I want have some custom work done and the answers in this thread are conflicting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kgunz11 Posted November 8, 2009 Author Share Posted November 8, 2009 As handed down from the DNROI... Bobby,As long as there are no holes cut into the slide, extreme lightening of the material, or a competitive advantage gain, cosmetic enhancements are allowed. John That's exactly what I needed to know to proceed. Sounds like as long as you don't blatantly lighten the slide you are good to go. I guess it still leaves some room for interpretation, but there aren't many areas in the rule book that don't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary Stevens Posted November 8, 2009 Share Posted November 8, 2009 Don't you just love it when a plan comes together Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kgunz11 Posted November 9, 2009 Author Share Posted November 9, 2009 Yes Sir! Thanks for all your help in the matter! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mpolans Posted November 9, 2009 Share Posted November 9, 2009 (edited) Amidon said: "As long as there are no holes cut into the slide, extreme lightening of the material, or a competitive advantage gain, cosmetic enhancements are allowed." Okay, "no holes" is clear and concrete. But what constitutes \"extreme lightening?\" Is the thinning of the front as shown in kgunz11\'s first pic? How about these from Gans Guns? (Ignore the comps and swoop cuts, and the fact that some of them are for open guns . . . focus on the other milling work as some of it could easily be done for an iron-sighted gun.) 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. At what point do "cosmetic enhancements" remove enough metal to become a "competitive advantage?" Is there a certain minimum slide weight? Should there be one instituted to eliminate some of the ambiguity? Edited November 9, 2009 by mpolans Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G-ManBart Posted November 9, 2009 Share Posted November 9, 2009 At what point do "cosmetic enhancements" remove enough metal to become a "competitive advantage?" Is there a certain minimum slide weight? Should there be one instituted to eliminate some of the ambiguity? That's not a bad idea in theory, but in practice it would be a huge pain. Just imagine adding the time/trouble to break down every gun and weigh the slide to the chrono/box inspection and it wouldn't work at big matches. R, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flexmoney Posted November 9, 2009 Share Posted November 9, 2009 What a can of worms. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bofe954 Posted November 9, 2009 Share Posted November 9, 2009 That's not a bad idea in theory, but in practice it would be a huge pain. Just imagine adding the time/trouble to break down every gun and weigh the slide to the chrono/box inspection and it wouldn't work at big matches. Plus you'd have to establish the standard. Weigh every factory or mass produced slide out there and make sure you aren't going punish some guy who happens buy a stock gun with a light slide. Then there's the guy who shows up with a commander... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nemo Posted November 9, 2009 Share Posted November 9, 2009 What's the lightest factory single stack legal gun? An aluminum frame, bushing barreled, officer's size 45? Then that's the lightest a SSTK legal gun should be. We have a weight "ceiling" of 43 oz, then how about we also have a NO-HOLES weight "floor". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kgunz11 Posted November 9, 2009 Author Share Posted November 9, 2009 I agree with Nemo, BUT, you can do all kinds of things to add weight back in other places that's not on the slide. This then turns SS into a race class to see who can get the lightest reciprocating mass and still make min and max weight. Could be a good thing though, might spark more interest in the division. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nemo Posted November 9, 2009 Share Posted November 9, 2009 Amidon said: "As long as there are no holes cut into the slide, extreme lightening of the material, or a competitive advantage gain, cosmetic enhancements are allowed."Okay, "no holes" is clear and concrete. But what constitutes \"extreme lightening?\" Is the thinning of the front as shown in kgunz11\'s first pic? How about these from Gans Guns? (Ignore the comps and swoop cuts, and the fact that some of them are for open guns . . . focus on the other milling work as some of it could easily be done for an iron-sighted gun.) 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. At what point do "cosmetic enhancements" remove enough metal to become a "competitive advantage?" Is there a certain minimum slide weight? Should there be one instituted to eliminate some of the ambiguity? Of all these I'd only have second thoughts about number 1. How far is too far, how much is too much? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kgunz11 Posted November 9, 2009 Author Share Posted November 9, 2009 The problem is the interpretation. Here again we have something in the rules that don't give a definitive answer and the decision is left up to someone's opinion. I have no desire to radically lighten a slide, and that would be obvious in the work as it's presented, but what about how another guy looks at it? It's possible to have a RM, MD, and chrono crew that don't know what a slide weighs in factory configuration, and could consider just about anything "radical" in their opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nemo Posted November 9, 2009 Share Posted November 9, 2009 (edited) I agree with Nemo, BUT, you can do all kinds of things to add weight back in other places that's not on the slide. This then turns SS into a race class to see who can get the lightest reciprocating mass and still make min and max weight. Could be a good thing though, might spark more interest in the division. I know BK... Just an idea. Still, there's only so much material that can be removed before it's blatant lightening. Like mpolans pic no.1 from GANS. Like Flex says, it's a can of worms. However, and I hate I'm going to say this, we all know there is "the spirit" of the division and that should be part of the endmill guidance mechanism. I'd think we have to ask ourselves, if that slide is not on a frame and I look at it and takes me longer than 1/10 of second (to use a "small" time period) to recognize it as a 1911 slide then it may have gone too far. Do you have a sacrificial slide? Go all the way on it and mail it (or send pix) to Amidon and see what he says... Edited for unsafe keyboard handling. Edited November 9, 2009 by Nemo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nemo Posted November 9, 2009 Share Posted November 9, 2009 (edited) Then again at what slide weight is competitive advantage gained? Sometimes we want to look too deep into this kind of stuff without real merit. I completely understand wanting our guns to have a unique "personality" and we do the esthetic milling for that, but for how many of us would a lighter slide make a difference in our shooting when some mad scientist shows up with a stock and sightless norinco and wins. ETA more random unproductive rambling... Edited November 9, 2009 by Nemo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kgunz11 Posted November 9, 2009 Author Share Posted November 9, 2009 Nemo, in my opinion, tri-topping a SS makes a significant difference, so I wouldn't allow that if it were up to me. Flat top, ok, not so much removed there. I was just asking about slide serrations to start all this, and it could turn into a full blown mud fest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now