Single Stack Division Legal?

[kgunz11]

Nemo, I'll send him the photo from above and we'll see what he says.

ETA: Wait, no need to send him that photo, I KNOW that's extreme and I'd look like an idiot for asking him or I'd appear to have an agenda, and I don't.

Best suggestion I can give is not to let your Smith cut on the slide so much that it might get you in trouble.

Edited November 9, 2009 by kgunz11

[Nemo]

Nemo, I'll send him the photo from above and we'll see what he says.

ETA: Wait, no need to send him that photo, I KNOW that's extreme and I'd look like an idiot for asking him or I'd appear to have an agenda, and I don't.

Best suggestion I can give is not to let your Smith cut on the slide so much that it might get you in trouble.

Amen.

[Carlos]

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.

No argument with your reasoning. If anything, I agree most with Flex's comment about this being a huge can of worms.

Problem with opposing the tri-top under S.S. rules would be that all the STI Commemorative USPSA single stack guns need to go away from USPSA competitions & USPSA would, honorably, have to refund that $14,000 which Dave Skinner donated to USPSA resulting from the sales of these guns. Seems that Pandora's box has been opened here.

"The STI Commemorative USPSA single stack has a tri top... "

Edited November 9, 2009 by Carlos

[GmanCdp]

Shooters are there to shoot..RO's are there to RO the shooters to be safe,chrony guys chrony ammo...my question is today the same as 3 or 4 yrs ago.. where are the shooters that got DQ'ed for slide lighting,and where are the pics of the ill'legal guns ??? just a question i can't seem to get answered..

[Gary Stevens]

The decision making will rest with the administration of USPSA and its matches. Yes it requires individual judgment, but most things we do requires it.

The discussion talks about cosmetics and the desire to put a "gunsmith signature" on a particular gun. It revolved around items such as cocking serrations and flat top cosmetic cuts.

It has been plainly stated that the goal is to not have the division be perceived as just another race division.

If a shooter/gunsmith decides to push the envelope then they put themselves at risk. Bring me a gun with the slide pictured in number 1 and I'll tell you "no".

Sometimes it is simply impossible to write a rule that maintains the vision without cutting off all innovation. The division was not intended to be a box stock 1911 division as that would never fly. It was intended to allow most all modifications, with a short list of exceptions, and use the box to control size and weight.

Common sense is sometimes an uncommon virtue.

[kgunz11]

+1 Mr. Gary.

Carlos, in the beginning of this discussion I also mentioned the unique cocking serrations on the STI SS Commemorative pistol. The tri-topping mentioned just previously was a personal opinion, and some RM's could feel the same way, who knows. Tri-topping the slide is something that could specifically be allowed, as it has definition. Other types of cuts NOT in the traditional cocking serration area could be prohibited. That's simple enough even for MY mind to grasp.

[mpolans]

So why not a some sort of minimum weight limit for slides so that we have a definite rule? Sure it wouldn't be something easy to enforce and likely to be checked at every match (probably only checked if someone protests), but that's not really the determining factor is it? After all, are folks checking all the CZ SP01s at matches to verify they have the firing pin block installed?

You could do set the lower weight limit equal to that of the tri-topped slide on the STI Commemorative USPSA single stack guns or a Colt Officers model, whichever is lighter.

[Gary Stevens]

That doesn't deal with my main worry of perception from a new shooter of a race division. Meeting the minimum weight, while drilling holes in the slide or cutting slots would send a message I don't want sent. Besides who would want their gun disassembled and individual parts weighed. The division has been in place for a few years now with very little problems. While some are asking about cosmetic issues and personalizing their gun, others are, I believe, attempting to move the goal post and poke at the edges to create something that was never intended to be.

[bofe954]

If you really wanted a light slide I imagine it could be done from the inside out and you wouldn't have to worry about rulings. You'd also preserve the "perception of the new shooter's" that Gary refers to. I am sure there are guns like that out there.

I shot Nat's last year with a guy who had a Springfield custom shop 40. Pretty typical slide, but squared off trigger guard, Koenig hammer, checkering all over, SVI interchangeable trigger. Real nice. No doubt a custom race gun. I doubt most of what it had really helped his performance, except maybe the trigger job which I am sure was awesome. We were both C's. I beat him with a Trophy Match that was stock except for springs.

I am having a 40 built because the 45 ammo is spendy. I like the tri tops because the sights sit low and a plain flat top (like a Trojan) makes the gun look like a glock to me. If I shoot the custom gun better it'll be due to practice not a tri top.

I think the rules could be clearer but I don't think it's necessary. As soon as it gets done it'll be on to checkering, frames and magwells, recoil masters. If someone thinks they can get a technical advantage with equipment they will and you won't stop them no matter what rule you write. They will still lose to superior skill and the rest of us will be stuck with annoying, picky rules.

[Gary Stevens]

Makes it look like a Glock

Quick, call 911 I feel the big one coming on.

[bofe954]

Makes it look like a Glock

Not that that's a bad thing...

[kgunz11]

Makes it look like a Glock

Not that that's a bad thing...

That makes it even worse!!! There is no, and never could be, any resemblance to a Glock from a 1911. To even say such is heresy. A tranny might look like a woman, but it's STILL a tranny.

[ima45dv8]

Let's face it. John Amidon is a busy man. We can't reasonably expect him to go over every variant of milled/modified slide with a fine toothed comb to determine whether they should be allowed.

To assist in this crisis, I volunteer to carefully inspect and test representative samples to determine their fitness for use in the SingleStack division. Please send fully functional pistols to my attention, with appropriate magazines and a few hundreds rounds of ammo, and I will evaluate them for suitability.

As I am selflessly offering this service at no charge, I cannot absorb return shipping charges and thus will keep the rejects in my personal possession to remove any temptation from the submitter of using them in matches.

Please hold your applause. I'm shy and embarrass easily.

[Merlin Orr]

Spirit and Intent.

Single Stack division is based upon the concept of "Spirit and Intent" of JB. The "Intent" of the division is to maintain the "Spirit" of the original 1911 design.

John has already ruled against a gun I had custom built to play in SS Division. $2,200 spent for an illegal gun..... It was a round top gun with a pretty stock look..except for the 3 holes in both sides of the slide.... Still weighted more than a tri-topped slide....

Personally... Specified weight minimum limits and No Holes or Slots should be a good starting place.

Some really interesting "cosmetics" shown in the photos.....

Random thought.... I wonder how many who shoot full dust cover guns with heavy metal guide rods think that slide lightning is an advantage...?

[steel1212]

Random thought.... I wonder how many who shoot full dust cover guns with heavy metal guide rods think that slide lightning is an advantage...?

Thats a very good question.

[Nik Habicht]

Personally... Specified weight minimum limits and No Holes or Slots should be a good starting place.

And aside from needing six sets of minimum weights --- Steel and aluminum for each of the three frame sizes --- for the entire gun, that would allow the weight to be checked at Chrono as easily as it is for production: The entire gun either fits in the allowable window or it doesn't.....

I'm assuming of course that commander and officer size 1911s may play in SSD?

[Merlin Orr]

Edited November 10, 2009 by Merlin Orr

[Gary Stevens]

At the risk of thread drift, I'll bite.

I shoot a Bedell Custom Limited Gun. It has lightening cuts. While I don't use a heavy guide rod, I use the STI recoil master, I personally think the cuts do make a difference. Less metal slamming back, seems to be a good idea. I'm sure some physics major could shed more light on this than I can.

Now with that being said, it might just be a mental thing of "I paid for these, and I want them to work". I really don't know.

What I do know is I love the gun, and wouldn't change a single thing about it.

[Flexmoney]

The Single-Stack division...isn't.

It is really the 1911 division, but not quite.

It is really the division of the "traditional" 1911.

How much innovation do we need?

[SA Friday]

I think some should be allowed. I have a Colt 1911 5" I use in single stack and I had cocking serations milled into the front of the slide. I prefer to use front serations. It lightened the slide, but not very much. Others produce 1911's with these on the slide already, so I figured it was a pretty safe modification.

Wouldn't you agree this is mod should be allowed? If so, then there has to be some lee-way in there somewhere.

Innovation? Now you are looking at defining the difference between innovation and modification. Is the series 80 trigger system innovation over the series 70 trigger system? I don't think so. What about flat topped slides vs round topped slides, wat it an innovation?

I still think you end up with a can of worms.

Edited November 10, 2009 by SA Friday

[Gary Stevens]

Since we are reviewing rules even as we speak, for those of you who want to refer to the can of worms, perhaps you could proffer a rule that doesn't include worms. Remember it has to be clear, clean, and leave no ambiguity for those of us who find shades of gray in everything they look at. Additionally it has to be easy to administer, from the club level to the nationals. and does no harm to the original intent of the division.

I eagerly await your submissions.

[SA Friday]

Since we are reviewing rules even as we speak, for those of you who want to refer to the can of worms, perhaps you could proffer a rule that doesn't include worms. Remember it has to be clear, clean, and leave no ambiguity for those of us who find shades of gray in everything they look at. Additionally it has to be easy to administer, from the club level to the nationals. and does no harm to the original intent of the division.

I eagerly await your submissions.

Uh, I thought I was agreeing with you...

[Flexmoney]

for those of you who want to refer to the can of worms, perhaps you could proffer a rule that doesn't include worms.

That sounds like you are talking about me, Gary.

I won't put up on this one, but I might shut-up. I don't shoot the division. Somebody that does could/should do the work.

I will offer up a few points for consideration:

- Our cousins in IPSC are talking about adding a SS division. Their debate seems to be on deciding if it will be a retro/traditional/nostalgic (1911) division...or, if it will be a single-stack version of Standard (where anything goes...bull barrels, Sig's, 945's, etc.).

- Our SS division certainly isn't "whatever fits in the box." Ours is based on a traditional 1911. So, I am confused with you using the term "innovation"? Seems like we should be careful there or end up serving two masters?

...

[kgunz11]

I think you should do like with some of the other divisions. List specifically what is allowed such as flat topping or tri-topping and milling only to provide a surface for cocking the pistol in traditional areas of traditional size in the front and rear of the slide. No other milling except for fitting of sights. Any milling can be done in the traditional cocking serration area as long as it does not cut through the slide.

The term innovation means a new way of doing something. It may refer to incremental, radical, and revolutionary changes in thinking, products ...

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Innovation

How much do we need? Very little, but freedom is a nice thing to have. For some, it is worth the ultimate price.

[Gary Stevens]

Innovation can come in many different packages.

What about AFTEC extractors? I would argue they are an improvement, and provide better functionality over a longer period of time than the original JMB original design. Should they be outlawed?

What about ramped barrels? Some of the rounds we shoot are higher pressure rounds than what the original 1911 was designed for. Should we abandon the safety the ramped barrels provide to maintain the original design? Should they be outlawed?

What about external extractors? While I prefer the AFTEC design, they are functional, yet not of JMB original design. Should they be outlawed?

What about improved sights? Should we mandate the micro sights on the original 1911?

I would argue that checkering the front strap is an innovation as it allows a shooter to hold on to the gun better. Should it be outlawed?

Just a few examples of how innovation has brought todays 1911 to a point of excellence that I believe JMB would be proud of, although I can't prove that.

Allowing for such innovation, IMO, is good. Although it is a difficult task to do and not allow innovations (modifications) that do harm to the original vision and intent of the division.

I guess the "still ended up with a can of worms" comment confused me.

Folks those of you who know me personally know that I am always looking for improvements in our sport. I have sponsored those improvements when I believed in them. Finding problems is fairly easy. Finding solutions though is a wee bit more difficult.

For the moderators, I have no antagonism in my comments.