AIWB now legal in all divisions?

[olstyn]

So I just got an email from USPSA today, and it contained this:


In the February 2021 USPSA Board of Directors Meeting, a few rules were updated in the firearm equipment appendices to make placement of pistols and magazine pouches consistent in all USPSA Divisions. The goal is to make the process easier for members to understand and less subjectively enforced at matches, resulting in fewer competitors moved to a less competitive division for their firearm at registration, and even fewer moved to Open Division because of their holster or magazine pouch position. This less restrictive change will allow members to use their “every day carry” holster position for Production and Carry Optics Divisions without being moved to Limited or Open where the holster position is less restrictive.


I did some looking on the website and found the Feb 2021 BoD meeting minutes, which contained this:


App. D4, D5, D7, Item 12 – Removed reference to App. E3

Unless I'm very much mistaken, they just made AIWB legal in every division. Anybody see a different way to interpret that?

[cheby]

I'm so glad that Limited is my priority these days...

[jbrimlow]

I really like this rule change.

[GJM]

A functioning flashlight is now legal in CO.

[cheby]

A functioning flashlight is now legal in CO.

Make sure you replace the battery before the chrono stage

[cheby]

From what I heard, they also voted on Production to 15 rounds, and elimination of L10 Both motions failed

[miller_man]

Wow, I’m pretty shocked. Now to decide if I want to keep shooting CO in gamer gear or go full timmy.

Of course after I recently invested in new holster, mag carriers and belt for CO :(

[Elwin]

Oh, perfect! I was dreading being "that guy" and registering as L10 (minor) to shoot my 9mm 1911 using my carry gear. Now I can just deal with the disadvantage of shooting minor in SS... or I could shoot a .45 and not be weird at all.

This is an excellent rule change. IDPA should take notes, but they won't.

[CCT125US]

The possibility for unintended consequences exists. It will be interesting how this plays out.

If I'm not mistaken, this would cover Steel Challenge as well??

[Eyesquared]

The possibility for unintended consequences exists. It will be interesting how this plays out.

If I'm not mistaken, this would cover Steel Challenge as well??

I believe the division rules are separate in steel challenge.

[cheby]

The question that I have is why even have different divisions??

[GJM]

Wow, I’m pretty shocked. Now to decide if I want to keep shooting CO in gamer gear or go full timmy.

Of course after I recently invested in new holster, mag carriers and belt for CO :(

I am standing here wearing a timmie rig with my 5 inch CORE and an X300 in a Floodlight deciding whether to run it this weekend. The only thing holding me back is a TLR-1 weighs more and I don’t have a holster for that. :p

[olstyn]

The question that I have is why even have different divisions??

I'm going to take a wild stab here and say that it's because people who don't have $5K+ to drop on an Open gun want somewhere to compete against others who don't have $5K+ to drop on an Open gun. Holster position is far from the only thing separating the divisions...

[cheby]

I'm going to take a wild stab here and say that it's because people who don't have $5K+ to drop on an Open gun want somewhere to compete against others who don't have $5K+ to drop on an Open gun. Holster position is far from the only thing separating the divisions...

I think at this point, after last few years of the rules changes, the only difference should be iron vs optic, and major vs minor. Everything else, including trigger, weight, dimensions, holster position, and even mag capacity should be thrown away

[Elwin]

I think at this point, after last few years of the rules changes, the only difference should be iron vs optic, and major vs minor. Everything else, including trigger, weight, dimensions, holster position, and even mag capacity should be thrown away

So assuming iron sights and the same caliber, someone with a $5000, 55oz, comped 2011 style gun, with too many pointy things coming off of it for anyone to reasonably carry concealed, designed and customized specifically for the sole purpose of winning USPSA matches, should be competing against the guy who just wants to shoot the bone stock Glock 19 he carries concealed every day.

[GJM]

So assuming iron sights and the same caliber, someone with a $5000, 55oz, comped 2011 style gun, with too many pointy things coming off of it for anyone to reasonably carry concealed, designed and customized specifically for the sole purpose of winning USPSA matches, should be competing against the guy who just wants to shoot the bone stock Glock 19 he carries concealed every day.

Nope, they are different divisions.

[cheby]

Glitch

[Elwin]

Nope, they are different divisions.

Correct. My post was an admittedly more-snarky-than-necessary response to Cheby's suggestion that they should not be.

Apologies if something screwy tech wise is going on with the thread and I'm making it worse. Mods have full permission to edit my posts if they deem it necessary.

[cheby]

Correct. My post was an admittedly more-snarky-than-necessary response to Cheby's suggestion that they should not be.

Apologies if something screwy tech wise is going on with the thread and I'm making it worse. Mods have full permission to edit my posts if they deem it necessary.

I think we are going to the following direction:

1. Optic Open- major, compensator.

2. Optic regular - minor, no compensator

3. Iron Major

4. Iron minor

That's all. Everything else does not matter

[NoTacTravis]

Streamlight’s sales probably just jumped 20% after this release. ;)

[GJM]

68417

[Default.mp3]

I think we are going to the following direction:

1. Optic Open- major, compensator.

2. Optic regular - minor, no compensator

3. Iron Major

4. Iron minor

That's all. Everything else does not matterWheelguns and PCCs have no place in your world, eh.

Too bad the rule changes do nothing to help out my situation. Open for life, I guess.

[Elwin]

I think PHLster may be about to sell a lot more OWB Floodlights.

[GJM]

I think PHLster may be about to sell a lot more OWB Floodlights.

I have it on good information that they sold two more this morning, one in OD for an X300 and the other for a TLR-1 in wolf gray.

[cheby]

Wheelguns and PCCs have no place in your world, eh.

Sorry, those are special

[Artemas2]

As a 2 dimentional human who shoots production, easeing up on mag placement is far more exciting.

The new changes are not going to have me putting an x300 on my shadow2, but makeing the divisions more practical is not a bad thing.

[CleverNickname]

I can *almost* shoot my carry Glock 19 in CO now. Using an SCD gadget has been allowed for awhile now, I can now use my AIWB carry holster, and I don't have to take the light off, but it still has a (rather small) magwell so it's not quite legal yet. I might just take off the magwell and shoot a couple matches with it. Maybe even add a cover shirt like it's IDPA, before it gets really hot out again.

Probably I'll just move my first mag carrier an inch or three more to the front of my belt, instead of having it right at the edge of my hipbone.

[Archer1440]

68417

Tek-loc on a BOSS plate with a set of offsets?

[cheby]

I agree with those people that say now that's a matter of time till IPSC kicks USPSA out and a new IPSC region will be formed in the US. If you really care about the sport, then the rules integrity is very important. Getting as many timmies out as possible is a wrong goal IMHO.

[GJM]

Tek-loc on a BOSS plate with a set of offsets?

68425

[GJM]

I agree with those people that say now that's a matter of time till IPSC kicks USPSA out and a new IPSC region will be formed in the US. If you really care about the sport, then the rules integrity is very important. Getting as many timmies out as possible is a wrong goal IMHO.

I really like the new flashlight rule because it makes my EDC suitable pistol four ounces closer in weight to the CZ and Sig.

[JCN]

Who’s your daddy?

68428

68429

[CleverNickname]

I really like the new flashlight rule because it makes my EDC suitable pistol four ounces closer in weight to the CZ and Sig.
Someone needs to make a rail-mounted light that's 10% tiny LED powered by a CR2032 and 90% lead, for us polymer-frame shooters.

[cheby]

So who makes the heaviest flashlight right now? I really don't want to miss out

[cheby]

Who’s your daddy?

68428

68429

Seriously speaking, Shadow 2 is too nose heavy already. The flashlight is just gonna make it worse. It's not about the weight only. The weight distribution is also important

[Norville]

Interesting.

I read the uspsa email but didn’t download the new rule book.

I’ll probably stick with an owb holster, but definitely will run with and without an X300 on the timer soon.

[CleverNickname]

I read the uspsa email but didn’t download the new rule book.
The PDF at uspsa.org/rules hasn't been updated yet.

[Kirk]

I absolutely love this and will definitely be trying out AIWB with a WML in USPSA soon. My main goal right now is earning my GM card in Steel Challenge. Does anyone have any idea if WMLs will be legal in SCSA? I know that AIWB won't be allowed, but wasn't sure if the WML rule will crossover or not.

[Artemas2]

Who’s your daddy?

68428

68429

Some lok brass or ssi tungstans should get it ti 59:cool:

[Hot Sauce]

68417Which extended mag release are you running there?

[JCN]

Seriously speaking, Shadow 2 is too nose heavy already. The flashlight is just gonna make it worse. It's not about the weight only. The weight distribution is also important


Some lok brass or ssi tungstans should get it ti 59:cool:

With ammo, my TSO is about the limit of how heavy I can move a gun.

68436

I would think heavier grips or base pads could make the balance okay.

I don’t think it’s necessary for minor power though.

[Norville]

The PDF at uspsa.org/rules hasn't been updated yet.

I just saw that.

All in good time I suppose.

[CleverNickname]

I just saw that.

All in good time I suppose.
I literally just got an email from USPSA saying the rules PDF was updated, and an email from PF notifying you quoted my post, within a minute of each other.

[miller_man]

I guess I'm just naive or can't always go to full gamer like everybody else - does a little more weight from a WML add that much advantage?
I recall a lot of high level shooters were already talking about how foolish people will find the heaviest gun to shoot when Prod weight limit was pushed to outlandish.

Do we think all the top 20 finishers in Prod/Lim/CO Nationals will show up with WML this year?

[cheby]

Do we think all the top 20 finishers in Prod/Lim/CO Nationals will show up with WML this year?

Those top 20 finishers are also interested in IPSC. All this silliness is not allowed there. So no. Unless now they would make low light stages where you have to have it. Ugh...

[GJM]

I absolutely love this and will definitely be trying out AIWB with a WML in USPSA soon. My main goal right now is earning my GM card in Steel Challenge. Does anyone have any idea if WMLs will be legal in SCSA? I know that AIWB won't be allowed, but wasn't sure if the WML rule will crossover or not.

I don’t see more weight as an advantage in Steel Challenge, also I don’t think the light will help the draw.

[GJM]

Which extended mag release are you running there?

It is a Springer, and the raw metal one seems to work better than the coated ones (which I have to whittle on).

[GJM]

I guess I'm just naive or can't always go to full gamer like everybody else - does a little more weight from a WML add that much advantage?
I recall a lot of high level shooters were already talking about how foolish people will find the heaviest gun to shoot when Prod weight limit was pushed to outlandish.

Do we think all the top 20 finishers in Prod/Lim/CO Nationals will show up with WML this year?

I think the light will be largely irrelevant for those with 45-50 ounce Shadow 2 and Legion pistols. For my 30 ounce with mag, M&P CORE, four ounces on the rail is greatly welcomed. My buddy who used to shoot a M&P with a light in Limited, noticed a big difference between light and no light.

[Eyesquared]

I think there is a point to be made about the advantage of having a working WML when shooting ironsights in darker settings or when the sun is really low in the sky and the targets are in shadow.

[LittleLebowski]

I agree with those people that say now that's a matter of time till IPSC kicks USPSA out and a new IPSC region will be formed in the US. If you really care about the sport, then the rules integrity is very important. Getting as many timmies out as possible is a wrong goal IMHO.

I read this twice and this didn’t get it.

[cheby]

I read this twice and this didn’t get it.

IPSC and USPSA are not the same organization. They have different rules. Today there are over 100 active IPSC regions - https://www.ipsc.org/ipsc/regions.php
As of today USPSA is one of the regions of IPSC. If USPSA rules are drastically different, the question is when does IPSC kick out USPSA to be their own sport and a new IPSC region is formed in the US?

[YVK]

I read this twice and this didn’t get it.


Philosophy of current USPSA leadership is all-out increase in membership numbers and participation. This has been done through expansion of divisions, even controversial ones like PCC, and continuous relaxation of rules reducing participation hurdles.

There is an opposing opinion within the ranks, often represented by stronger shooters, who prefer to keep this, first, as a sport and not an adjunct to tactical or EDC training and, second, as a sport with a strong tradition. Semi-annual, or so it seems, changing rules runs contrary to this set of values and is viewed by number of members as a loss of sport's structure, original purpose, and, to some extent, dilution of talent pool.

That's my take on cheby's post, I could be wrong. I see he already replied while I was typing this.


In regards to the rule's change, I've this comment: last year a man lost his life during a match, and USPSA allowing non-drop safe guns or mods was partly responsible for the outcome. Would've been nice if, amidst this everything goes bonanza, they actually grew a pair and introduced a plan to phase out such guns. That would've taken all of my personal gaming guns out of the game, but I would've been OK with that.

[olstyn]

Philosophy of current USPSA leadership is all-out increase in membership numbers and participation. This has been done through expansion of divisions, even controversial ones like PCC, and continuous relaxation of rules reducing participation hurdles.

There is an opposing opinion within the ranks, often represented by stronger shooters, who prefer to keep this, first, as a sport and not an adjunct to tactical or EDC training and, second, as a sport with a strong tradition. Semi-annual, or so it seems, changing rules runs contrary to this set of values and is viewed by number of members as a loss of sport's structure, original purpose, and, to some extent, dilution of talent pool.

That's my take on cheby's post, I could be wrong. I see he already replied while I was typing this.

I think there's a balance to be struck there. Growing membership is generally a good thing, for a lot of reasons. Changing rules to make it easier for people to participate more easily is generally good for that reason. If experienced/stronger shooters want to avoid the newbs, there's an easy way - shoot major matches; very few newbs will spend $100+ on a match fee. Heck, even the longer weekend matches generally have far fewer newbies than the shorter weeknight ones. That said, I agree that frequent rule changes can be jarring, and that any changes should be carefully considered before being implemented.


In regards to the rule's change, I've this comment: last year a man lost his life during a match, and USPSA allowing non-drop safe guns or mods was partly responsible for the outcome. Would've been nice if, amidst this everything goes bonanza, they actually grew a pair and introduced a plan to phase out such guns. That would've taken all of my personal gaming guns out of the game, but I would've been OK with that.

Couldn't agree with you more on that point. Somebody somewhere is going to drop a gun, and it would be nice for everyone present if that gun would be drop safe.

[Kirk]

I don’t see more weight as an advantage in Steel Challenge, also I don’t think the light will help the draw.

You are definitely correct on both points, I was just considering setting up my training and competition guns with a WML so I could run the exact same setup in both USPSA and SCSA. I also have a WML on my carry gun so I'd have identical gear on all of my guns. Thinking about it though after reading your post, I think you're right that the added weight and slower draw would definitely hinder me in SCSA more than I'd like and is not worth the drawbacks.

[Elwin]

I’m a little perplexed at the idea that making USPSA more friendly to timmies, more aligned with EDC training, or however else we put it, is a problem, much less drifting the sport away from its original purpose. If I recall correctly, complimenting tactical training WAS the original purpose of IPSC, and it’s continual tendency to morph into a pure sport with fewer connections to the everyday carry of handguns for defensive purposes is something that’s had to be addressed in various ways throughout its history, whether by changing division rules, adding divisions to keep the timmies and gamers separate, or in the one case people taking their ball home and starting IDPA.

I guess gamers kvetching that the sport is “going to the timmies” just doesn’t make sense to me, because as far as I can tell the timmies were there first and the gamers are the ones who have always been encroaching. Not that the gamers shouldn’t have a place in USPSA, but the timmies certainly don’t need to be kicked out or kept out through elitist gate keeping either, and having an organization that works for both is going to require some updates every once in a while.

At any rate I’m still selfishly fine with this rule because I am a timmy, and IDPA doesn’t want my scary danger plastic in its game.

[YVK]

Personally, I am good with membership growths and timmies and everyone else. I started to shoot USPSA out AIWB myself. Where I do share some, should we say, eye roll is that all of the recent rule changes, whatever the intent behind them, has led to making it easier to buy performance. From introduction of PCC to Production rules changes to CO rules changes. This particular set, we gonna see people who have never carried with WML (most USPSA people I know don't carry at all) start hanging lights to their game guns for more performance. And why wouldn't they if it is legal now and if previous rulings on Carry-my-ass Optic expanded weight closer to 4 lbs, and people like me have been making an advantage of that? Other sports, from high technology like F1 to low technology like tennis, have been limiting how much performance can be bought from tech itself. USPSA seems to have taken an opposite approach, and I can understand how some may have an issue with that.

[GJM]

You are definitely correct on both points, I was just considering setting up my training and competition guns with a WML so I could run the exact same setup in both USPSA and SCSA. I also have a WML on my carry gun so I'd have identical gear on all of my guns. Thinking about it though after reading your post, I think you're right that the added weight and slower draw would definitely hinder me in SCSA more than I'd like and is not worth the drawbacks.

What divisions are you shooting in Steel Challenge? I shoot CO and PCC, and am just about to start shooting rimfire PCC optics with my Tippmann.


I’m a little perplexed at the idea that making USPSA more friendly to timmies, more aligned with EDC training, or however else we put it, is a problem, much less drifting the sport away from its original purpose. If I recall correctly, complimenting tactical training WAS the original purpose of IPSC, and it’s continual tendency to morph into a pure sport with fewer connections to the everyday carry of handguns for defensive purposes is something that’s had to be addressed in various ways throughout its history, whether by changing division rules, adding divisions to keep the timmies and gamers separate, or in the one case people taking their ball home and starting IDPA.

I guess gamers kvetching that the sport is “going to the timmies” just doesn’t make sense to me, because as far as I can tell the timmies were there first and the gamers are the ones who have always been encroaching. Not that the gamers shouldn’t have a place in USPSA, but the timmies certainly don’t need to be kicked out or kept out through elitist gate keeping either, and having an organization that works for both is going to require some updates every once in a while.

At any rate I’m still selfishly fine with this rule because I am a timmy, and IDPA doesn’t want my scary danger plastic in its game.

USPSA changes are like a general Presidential election, with half loving the changes and half hating them. I think the changes to CO, now and in the past are awesome, as they allow me to use a variant of my carry gun. I also believe CO competition has caused pistol optics to become more durable and have new features that have applicability for gaming and competition. Where I shoot, CO has become the division with most of the heat and overall the most shooters.

[Clusterfrack]

As long as Production remains lowcap minor, I don’t care that much. I won’t be adding a light to my S2s.

[olstyn]

As long as Production remains lowcap minor, I don’t care that much. I won’t be adding a light to my S2s.

Yeah, I'm fine with the holster position rule change. I may even take advantage of it and shoot some matches from AIWB in Production at some point.

The one I question is the lights - the rules on holsters say that the trigger must be fully protected while the gun is holstered, but that's basically impossible with a light-bearing holster, right? Until/unless we start seeing lights that are narrower than trigger guards, I don't understand how those rules don't conflict with each other.

[Eyesquared]

I’m a little perplexed at the idea that making USPSA more friendly to timmies, more aligned with EDC training, or however else we put it, is a problem, much less drifting the sport away from its original purpose. If I recall correctly, complimenting tactical training WAS the original purpose of IPSC, and it’s continual tendency to morph into a pure sport with fewer connections to the everyday carry of handguns for defensive purposes is something that’s had to be addressed in various ways throughout its history, whether by changing division rules, adding divisions to keep the timmies and gamers separate, or in the one case people taking their ball home and starting IDPA.

I guess gamers kvetching that the sport is “going to the timmies” just doesn’t make sense to me, because as far as I can tell the timmies were there first and the gamers are the ones who have always been encroaching. Not that the gamers shouldn’t have a place in USPSA, but the timmies certainly don’t need to be kicked out or kept out through elitist gate keeping either, and having an organization that works for both is going to require some updates every once in a while.

At any rate I’m still selfishly fine with this rule because I am a timmy, and IDPA doesn’t want my scary danger plastic in its game.

At the end of the day this is a rule change that upends a lot of existing competitors' gear setups, all in hopes of attracting timmies (who I think are not going to flock to USPSA in droves over this change). It's pretty annoying to be a USPSA member and have stuff like this rammed down your throat supposedly for the benefit of potential timmie USPSA shooters, who have historically never been particularly active or interested in the sport anyways. Just look at who is posting in this thread, almost all people who already shoot USPSA, not timmie converts drawn in by this rules change. I am not anti-timmie but it's unfair to the membership to pull shit like this IMO.

[GJM]

At the end of the day this is a rule change that upends a lot of existing competitors' gear setups, all in hopes of attracting timmies (who I think are not going to flock to USPSA in droves over this change). It's pretty annoying to be a USPSA member and have stuff like this rammed down your throat supposedly for the benefit of potential timmie USPSA shooters, who have historically never been particularly active or interested in the sport anyways. Just look at who is posting in this thread, almost all people who already shoot USPSA, not timmie converts drawn in by this rules change. I am not anti-timmie but it's unfair to the membership to pull shit like this IMO.

I don’t see the holster and mag changes as disruptive, since you can leave your holster and mag pouches where they are, or move them slightly while using the same gear. I don’t see the flashlight appealing to Shadow 2 and Legion shooters, although it will be very appealing to those of us shooting lightweight polymer pistols, where four ounces is significant. What changes will this cause you to make in your gear?

While there has been discussion about appealing to timmie shooters, is that speculation or something the board has said? I believe these changes will mostly be appealing to existing USPSA shooters.

[olstyn]

At the end of the day this is a rule change that upends a lot of existing competitors' gear setups

How so? Do you feel that you're in some way forced to shoot from AIWB now, or forced to run a light? I don't see either of those being true. It's permissive, not a requirement.

[cheby]

I am interested in growing and developing shooting sport as a competition of skills. Not in growing the membership. Those two things are not the same. If new shooters want to play the game, they should meet the criteria required. Instead it seems the criteria, that the people already invested time and money to be in compliance with, is changed to accommodate new shooters. Timmies are not the one who take the shooting skills to the next level. A bunch of middle aged dudes screwing around in the fantasy camps every weekend are not helping. With all due respect.
BTW, I have not seen any top shooters for the last two days who like these changes.

[olstyn]

I am interested in growing and developing shooting sport as a competition of skills. Not in growing the membership. Those two things are not the same. If new shooters want to play the game, they should meet the criteria required. Instead it seems the criteria, that the people already invested time and money to be in compliance with, is changed to accommodate new shooters. Timmies are not the one who take the shooting skills to the next level. A bunch of middle aged dudes screwing around in the fantasy camps every weekend are not helping. With all due respect.

With all due respect, you are looking at this upside down and backwards. In my mind, this rule change is taking something that didn't make sense and making it make sense. To me, at least, the Timmy/gamer aspect of it isn't even relevant. Imagine a world where there is no USPSA/IPSC and you're about to create it for the first time in 2021 when appendix carry is not just "not fringe," but borderline normal. Do you restrict holster position for certain divisions and not others, and if so, how do you justify it? I can't come up with a good reason why Revolver, Open, and Limited are unrestricted in holster and mag carrier placement but Production, Carry Optics, and Single Stack are. (Note that I don't consider "just because we want them to be different" to be a good reason.)

[cheby]

With all due respect, you are looking at this upside down and backwards. In my mind, this rule change is taking something that didn't make sense and making it make sense. To me, at least, the Timmy/gamer aspect of it isn't even relevant. Imagine a world where there is no USPSA/IPSC and you're about to create it for the first time in 2021 when appendix carry is not just "not fringe," but borderline normal. Do you restrict holster position for certain divisions and not others, and if so, how do you justify it? I can't come up with a good reason why Revolver, Open, and Limited are unrestricted in holster and mag carrier placement but Production, Carry Optics, and Single Stack are. (Note that I don't consider "just because we want them to be different" to be a good reason.)

Look, the holster position is basically irrelevant. If appendix carry prevented someone from participation in USPSA competitions, that someone does not understand certain things. Production is being fixed to extinction now.
Personally, it has no affect on me because I stopped shooting Production almost 3 years ago predicting where it was going. In the long run I can see competitors would migrate to divisions that have less limitations or more gun/gear features that make participating easier. Does it help focusing on developing shooting skills though?

[Eyesquared]

I don’t see the holster and mag changes as disruptive, since you can leave your holster and mag pouches where they are, or move them slightly while using the same gear. I don’t see the flashlight appealing to Shadow 2 and Legion shooters, although it will be very appealing to those of us shooting lightweight polymer pistols, where four ounces is significant. What changes will this cause you to make in your gear?

While there has been discussion about appealing to timmie shooters, is that speculation or something the board has said? I believe these changes will mostly be appealing to existing USPSA shooters.

I'm experimenting with different mag pouch placement for now. Not very interested in adding a light because I think it would be counterproductive on the Legion. I do think it's kind of dumb that I bought a pistol purpose built to fit the rules and within less than 2 years the rules have morphed so far that I should have bought a couple guns that cost half as much and would be just as competitive under the new ruleset. My mistake for thinking that the rules wouldn't change, but still annoying.

On the USPSA Instagram account the rationale given is that these changes will "[result] in fewer competitors moved to a less competitive division for their firearm at registration." Anyone who is an existing USPSA shooter would not be surprised if their carry gun and carry position weren't legal in CO or Production. That kind of issue is only really a factor for non-USPSA shooters IMO.


How so? Do you feel that you're in some way forced to shoot from AIWB now, or forced to run a light? I don't see either of those being true. It's permissive, not a requirement.

I am not going to shoot from AIWB in matches I take seriously. However the change in mag pouch placement is something I see affecting a lot of regular USPSA shooters who shoot Prod or CO. I am not going to add a light yet but we'll see. I shoot a heavier gun so the extra weight up front may be more of a hindrance than help.

This kind of stuff should be announced as a proposed change with a comment period, not decided and implemented without any discussion. I understand nobody is making this mandatory but some rules stability or at a minimum some advance notice would not be a bad thing. Every time the USPSA board makes big rules changes, anyone serious about competing has to think about what they need to change in their own setup, and it's annoying/distracting from the actual part of the sport where you train and get good. At the end of the day, prior to these rule changes, anyone who really wanted to compete with their carry gear could have done so and just Practiscore-what-ifed their results into the "proper" division to see where they stood.

[GJM]

I was speaking with a friend about the new rule changes. He shoots carry optics, limited and single stack. He said he had no heartburn with the new rules except for appendix carry. When I asked him why, he said “those guys will shove all that crap up front and then they won’t wanna bend over and pick up steel on stages.”

[YVK]

As long as Production remains lowcap minor, I don’t care that much. I won’t be adding a light to my S2s.

Doubt anyone will, to a 47 oz gun. Question is, especially for production and SS, are you moving your back pouches forward. I know I am.

[LOKNLOD]

I was speaking with a friend about the new rule changes. He shoots carry optics, limited and single stack. He said he had no heartburn with the new rules except for appendix carry. When I asked him why, he said “those guys will shove all that crap up front and then they won’t wanna bend over and pick up steel on stages.”

When shooting Lim-Min from AIWB, I always go straight for the steel it beats the crap out of waiting for the paper to get scored and then tape it up.

[olstyn]

Does it help focusing on developing shooting skills though?

This conversation feels a lot like one I had with a coworker a few years ago when the topic of guns came up where he suggested that I didn't need thing X or thing Y when it came to guns (mags above 10 rounds, etc.). My response was that it wasn't on me to justify needing thing X or thing Y but rather on him to tell me why I shouldn't be allowed to have it.

In that vein, I ask you again: how does removing restrictions on holster and mag carrier placement in Prod, SS, and CO hurt the sport? Does it hurt developing shooting skills? I really don't see how it's problematic, but I'm willing to have my mind changed if you can demonstrate some actual harm.

[JCN]

has led to making it easier to buy performance.

Well, to be fair... they did just move the HHFs a couple years ago, so they keep scaling the performance to achievement and progress. You could make GM a few years ago with what would currently be an M classifier run.

Eyesquared this stuff happens all the time and should be expected regarding equipment. Also see re: HHF adjustment a couple years ago. If you had a C-class friend who was sitting on a 59.9 and then all future classifiers got adjusted... they could complain that they were screwed out of their chance to make B.

What would you say to them?

Same thing with equipment. There are a number of GMs and Ms shooting Glocks and they won’t really have much sympathy about the Legion not having as wide of a performance gap on them.

[Hot Sauce]

It is a Springer, and the raw metal one seems to work better than the coated ones (which I have to whittle on).Thanks, I'll check it out.

[Eyesquared]

Well, to be fair... they did just move the HHFs a couple years ago, so they keep scaling the performance to achievement and progress. You could make GM a few years ago with what would currently be an M classifier run.

Eyesquared this stuff happens all the time and should be expected regarding equipment. Also see re: HHF adjustment a couple years ago. If you had a C-class friend who was sitting on a 59.9 and then all future classifiers got adjusted... they could complain that they were screwed out of their chance to make B.

What would you say to them?

Same thing with equipment. There are a number of GMs and Ms shooting Glocks and they won’t really have much sympathy about the Legion not having as wide of a performance gap on them.


1. There was a decently long stretch of rule stability before current USPSA leadership.

2. I'm not complaining about losing some kind of performance edge. I just think it's fucking annoying that one can't even buy a gun without the rules changing in less than 2 years to make that purchase unnecessary. Just my sour grapes at being committed to a system that is more expensive than it really needs to be now. If they had communicated these things in advance that might help.

3. In the end even for people shooting from concealment in their proper divisions, they will still have the handicap of shooting from concealment. IMO the argument that people will now be able to shoot in the division where they are most competitive misses the mark there. I hate the idea of adding yet more divisions but they should have just left prod and CO alone and put all this stuff into a separate division for timmies. Kill L10 to free up space.

[Eyesquared]

This conversation feels a lot like one I had with a coworker a few years ago when the topic of guns came up where he suggested that I didn't need thing X or thing Y when it came to guns (mags above 10 rounds, etc.). My response was that it wasn't on me to justify needing thing X or thing Y but rather on him to tell me why I shouldn't be allowed to have it.

In that vein, I ask you again: how does removing restrictions on holster and mag carrier placement in Prod, SS, and CO hurt the sport? Does it hurt developing shooting skills? I really don't see how it's problematic, but I'm willing to have my mind changed if you can demonstrate some actual harm.

The obvious answer is that constant rule changes result in having to try different equipment setups instead of working with what you have. Rules stability is good for creating a level playing field with clear expectations re: what equipment will work well which is inherently a good thing for a sport where that stuff all costs money. The mag pouch and holster placement rules don't necessarily cost money but this is apparently yet another change in a long series of changes.

[JCN]

I'm not complaining about losing some kind of performance edge. I just think it's fucking annoying that one can't even buy a gun without the rules changing in less than 2 years to make that purchase unnecessary. Just my sour grapes at being committed to a system that is more expensive than it really needs to be now. If they had communicated these things in advance that might help.

The point is that it was never “necessary.” You can make M with a stock-ish Glock or Walther.

Spend what you like on what you enjoy, knowing that it’s never an “investment.” :)

I have four lightened CO slides that are just sitting around unused. But thems the breaks!

If you ever want to sell your Legion and mags, I’ll buy them off of you! :D

[Eyesquared]

The point is that it was never “necessary.” You can make M with a stock-ish Glock or Walther.

Spend what you like on what you enjoy, knowing that it’s never an “investment.” :)

I have four lightened CO slides that are just sitting around unused. But thems the breaks!

If you ever want to sell your Legion and mags, I’ll buy them off of you! :D

I guess I see things differently. When I got into USPSA I wanted to just go out and buy a decent gun that would give me zero room for excuses. At the time that that meant Q5SF, X5 Legion, Stock 2 or 3, or Shadow 2. Obviously you can do well with a stock glock but even people like Ben Stoeger will argue that it is definitely a disadvantage. So I picked the cheapest "no excuses" gun.

In the near term I don't really intend to change it out for anything else given that I'm already committed to the platform with mags, spare parts, holsters etc.

[JCN]

I guess I see things differently. When I got into USPSA I wanted to just go out and buy a decent gun that would give me zero room for excuses. At the time that that meant Q5SF, X5 Legion, Stock 2 or 3, or Shadow 2. Obviously you can do well with a stock glock but even people like Ben Stoeger will argue that it is definitely a disadvantage. So I picked the cheapest "no excuses" gun.

In the near term I don't really intend to change it out for anything else given that I'm already committed to the platform with mags, spare parts, holsters etc.

Yes, but your gun is still fully prepped and isn’t at a disadvantage still.

The only thing that changed is that other people can now be more competitive (compared to being underprepped before) while spending less.

So you still have zero room for excuses and what other people do or shoot doesn’t change your performance. Just relative performance compared to underprepared people.

It’s like being annoyed that you paid X for a TV that was cheaper two years later. You got to use the TV for two years so what’s the problem?

[olstyn]

The obvious answer is that constant rule changes result in having to try different equipment setups instead of working with what you have.

If you're a top GM trying to eke out every last quarter percent vs the other top GMs, that might be necessary. Those guys won't spend a lot of time complaining about it, though; they'll get out on the range and determine whether it makes a real-world difference for them or not and act accordingly. For basically everybody else, I think the bolded section of your statement is hyperbole.


Rules stability is good for creating a level playing field with clear expectations re: what equipment will work well which is inherently a good thing for a sport where that stuff all costs money. The mag pouch and holster placement rules don't necessarily cost money but this is apparently yet another change in a long series of changes.

I can empathize with your position, as I've definitely experienced rules changes in other games which I personally disagreed with, and I agree that rules stability in general is good. I don't disagree that changing the rules less frequently would be good (I wasn't really a fan of the recent-ish max weight change for production, as it felt fairly silly), but the holster/mag pouch placement rule change makes sense to me. As I've said earlier in the thread, I feel that it's a course correction to how things should have been to begin with.

[Eyesquared]

Yes, but your gun is still fully prepped and isn’t at a disadvantage still.

The only thing that changed is that other people can now be more competitive (compared to being underprepped before) while spending less.

So you still have zero room for excuses and what other people do or shoot doesn’t change your performance. Just relative performance compared to underprepared people.

It’s like being annoyed that you paid X for a TV that was cheaper two years later. You got to use the TV for two years so what’s the problem?

IMO the difference is that everyone knows technology gets cheaper, you pay less for the same specs, etc. You can decide if you want to wait. Not a good analogy for rule changes that aren't communicated in advance. I don't think the USPSA board is anywhere near being that predictable. If you had asked me even last week what the odds were of this change happening, I would have have been totally off base. I'm sure some people will say they saw this coming but I think the vast majority of us did not expect flashlights to be allowed in all divisions. Certainly wouldn't have seen this coming from 1.5 years ago when I started shooting USPSA.

Like I said earlier in the thread it's more annoying that this stuff has to come as a surprise. It should not be hard for the board to propose rule changes for comment before making them. Or make some long range general statements about what they want to do to divisions before doing stuff.

[GJM]

IMO the difference is that everyone knows technology gets cheaper, you pay less for the same specs, etc. You can decide if you want to wait. Not a good analogy for rule changes that aren't communicated in advance. I don't think the USPSA board is anywhere near being that predictable. If you had asked me even last week what the odds were of this change happening, I would have have been totally off base. I'm sure some people will say they saw this coming but I think the vast majority of us did not expect flashlights to be allowed in all divisions. Certainly wouldn't have seen this coming from 1.5 years ago when I started shooting USPSA.

Like I said earlier in the thread it's more annoying that this stuff has to come as a surprise. It should not be hard for the board to propose rule changes for comment before making them. Or make some long range general statements about what they want to do to divisions before doing stuff.

In terms of how USPSA a operates, I think it is reasonable for the USPSA BOD to have a formal comment period for proposed rules, before they are implemented. That said, we have been discussing flashlights, appendix and holster/mag positions for years, so I am not sure what new would come from the comments.

[Eyesquared]

In terms of how USPSA a operates, I think it is reasonable for the USPSA BOD to have a formal comment period for proposed rules, before they are implemented. That said, we have been discussing flashlights, appendix and holster/mag positions for years, so I am not sure what new would come from the comments.

To be quite honest I have zero faith the USPSA board is paying that much attention to what people are saying. The comment period is for their benefit so they can get the rules right the first time instead of fuckups that they have to fix later. For example, original CO weight limits never should have been what they were prior to 59oz. It was so dumb that production legal guns needed slide lightening or lightweight grip panels to be CO legal.

[Eyesquared]

I don't think I have conveyed my point very well about the lack of predictability with these rule changes. How does it make sense for people to buy guns that will likely last for years for this sport when the rules changes happen every 6 months and are generally not predictable beforehand? If you had asked me last week whether flashlights would ever be allowed in CO, I would have said no. This specific rules change with the flashlights more or less brings people to level playing ground, but given how the rules seem to continually become more permissive, I don't think there's any guarantee that a currently competitive gun will remain competitive for much longer. At the rate we're going, I think we may or may not all be shooting ported red dot STIs in CO in a year, or maybe we won't be. Or maybe they can kill major scoring in Limited because too many people show up with the newer 9mm STIs. Who knows? Not me.

I would like to see some guesses on what the next big rules change will be and in a year we can see whether it's even possible to guess with any specificity what the board wants to do. As for myself I think the only reasonable thing to do is not spend any money on guns.

[JCN]

Eyesquared honest question for you... you say you wouldn’t have seen these things coming... but how many years have you been involved with USPSA? It was less than one handful of fingers, right?

I think GJM has been involved for almost 30 years...

[Eyesquared]

Eyesquared honest question for you... you say you wouldn’t have seen these things coming... but how many years have you been involved with USPSA? It was less than one handful of fingers, right?

I think GJM has been involved for almost 30 years...

I started shooting USPSA in the winter of 2019. If it requires 30 years experience to gain the knowledge required to buy the right gun for this sport that I can shoot for the next 5 years, something isn't right. This is all what if'ing assuming the rules get even more permissive but it bothers me nonetheless. I think someone who wants to get into the sport should be able to do some research and have some confidence their setup won't be made "obsolete" in the future. In my view the weight limit changes last year made some sense, this change is a meh for me, and I'm not optimistic about changes to come.

[GJM]

As long as I have been involved in USPSA, competitors have been messing with their equipment to try to gain an advantage. That happens with or without rule changes.

In terms of the impact on obsoleting equipment, these changes seem benign. Slide your existing holster and mag pouches around a bit on your belt. Appendix will be irrelevant to 98 percent of competitors, even if their EDC is appendix. Deciding to run a flashlight might cost you a new holster, but mostly I only see the lightweight polymer shooters hassling with that. Can not envision how putting a light on, obsoletes your pistol.

[JCN]

I started shooting USPSA in the winter of 2019. If it requires 30 years experience to gain the knowledge required to buy the right gun for this sport that I can shoot for the next 5 years, something isn't right. This is all what if'ing assuming the rules get even more permissive but it bothers me nonetheless. I think someone who wants to get into the sport should be able to do some research and have some confidence their setup won't be made "obsolete" in the future. In my view the weight limit changes last year made some sense, this change is a meh for me, and I'm not optimistic about changes to come.

Having lots of expectations is a sure fire way to be disappointed.

This seems like your first experience with a sport like this.

Here’s a pro tip. There will never be a “right gun.”

And another pro tip. It doesn’t matter for your game in the foreseeable future.

Commit to your brain that you’ll always lose between 2-5% in equipment. Just work to be that much better.

Bone stock Glock to my tricked out S2 is only about 2-3% in my hands.

I think you’re being overly rigid and dramatic. Don’t take your ball and go home.

Just relax a little and enjoy your sweet gun for what it is. There is never a long term plan in a sport like this.

[Eyesquared]

As long as I have been involved in USPSA, competitors have been messing with their equipment to try to gain an advantage. That happens with or without rule changes.

In terms of the impact on obsoleting equipment, these changes seem benign. Slide your existing holster and mag pouches around a bit on your belt. Appendix will be irrelevant to 98 percent of competitors, even if their EDC is appendix. Deciding to run a flashlight might cost you a new holster, but mostly I only see the lightweight polymer shooters hassling with that. Can not envision how putting a light on, obsoletes your pistol.

See my last sentence, for me these changes are "meh", mostly indifference. Not overly concerned about the lights as a CO shooter, just sour grapes that they didn't communicate this earlier and save me some money and effort. If I had somehow guessed this was coming I would never have bothered with p320s and my life would have been much simpler with only Glocks for carry and competition.

Also not happy generally that big changes continue to be surprises. I mean it when I say I have no idea if they'll do something else silly like make single action only guns CO legal or make porting production legal.

[Eyesquared]

Having lots of expectations is a sure fire way to be disappointed.

This seems like your first experience with a sport like this.

Here’s a pro tip. There will never be a “right gun.”

And another pro tip. It doesn’t matter for your game in the foreseeable future.

Commit to your brain that you’ll always lose between 2-5% in equipment. Just work to be that much better.

Bone stock Glock to my tricked out S2 is only about 2-3% in my hands.

I think you’re being overly rigid and dramatic. Don’t take your ball and go home.

Just relax a little and enjoy your sweet gun for what it is. There is never a long term plan in a sport like this.

I think you're reading too much into it. I don't hate the sport USPSA and have no intention of "taking my ball and going home". I just think this organization is being managed in a totally inept manner.

[45dotACP]

The single stack shooter in me knows the days of single stack are numbered...but also sort of hopes for the local matches to have a smaller round count so I can actually practice with a realistic representation of my carry gun instead of a 9mm 1911 with a bazillion mag pouches.

Sent from my moto g(6) using Tapatalk

[YVK]

I just think it's fucking annoying that one can't even buy a gun without the rules changing in less than 2 years to make that purchase unnecessary.

I sold an unneeded milled Shadow 2 slide to a nice gent through BEnos. They changed the weight rules several month after. What he paid me for that slide would've been almost enough to buy a whole Shadow 2 OR. To some extent I felt bad for him.




I think @GJM (https://pistol-forum.com/member.php?u=410) has been involved for almost 30 years...

More like 50 but he only got serious a couple of years ago. When his wife got into it and he realized his ass was gonna get kicked soon.

[GJM]

More like 50 but he only got serious a couple of years ago. When his wife got into it and he realized his ass was gonna get kicked soon.

I know that you would like to be shooting, but since you are stuck on call, all you can do is troll your friends. Everyone knows that 50 is the new 30. It has been so long that I regularly shot Limited, I have a classifier from 1995 still in my USPSA classification record. For the record, Limited was not black powder then.

[YVK]

I know that you would like to be shooting, but since you are stuck on call, all you can do is troll your friends...

Guilty as charged. February 21st was the last day I didn't have to go to work on, March 20th will be the next day like that. If Mike Foley sent someone to take my call tomorrow on a condition that I could only shoot a J frame out of Enigma during 2021 season, I may take that deal.



It has been so long that I regularly shot Limited, I have a classifier from 1995 still in my USPSA classification record.

In 1995 I pretty much didn't speak English.


I still don't but on a higher level.

[TicTacticalTimmy]

As someone who considers himself a timmie, I really like these rule changes.

The only gun specific OWB holsters I have are light bearing. Why? Because if Im going to carry a gun OWB, Im gonna carry a light with it as the extra weight/bulk is not very noticeable. Additionally because the only time I would open carry is innawoods where a light is very important or in a theoretical SHTF scenario where I want maximum capability. I dont want to buy or practice with a competition specific holster, I think thats dumb.

For the first time I can actually use a proper holster with my shtf/competition gun. (been using a safariland GLS which is universal)

In addition I think the option to shoot from appendix is really cool and helps bring USPSA more into alignment with its original mission. Obviously serious competitors will not be shooting from any type of concealment so this rule change is irrelevant to them.

I get that this *might* make plastic pistols more competitive with Shadows and Tanfos. I say so what?

In conclusion, as a casual-competitive type of USPSA shooter these rule changes make the sport much more appealing to me. Ill probably go to more matches with more enthusiasm once ammo prices return to semi-normal than I would have otherwise.

[JSGlock34]

Here's a thought - USPSA should offer the ability to select 'CCW' for those who want to shoot from concealment as a category in a manner similar to shooters self-designating as Military, Law Enforcement, Lady, Senior, etc. It will have zero impact on score or anything else, and would essentially work on the 'honor system' as far as enforcing actual concealment, but would allow a way for those who want to shoot from concealment the opportunity to compare scores against similarly equipped shooters. If Clubs want to recognize 'High Concealment', that's their option. Or not.

I'd suggest that (just like IPDA), it be considered acceptable to shed the concealment garment for a classifier stage.

[Clusterfrack]

Doubt anyone will, to a 47 oz gun. Question is, especially for production and SS, are you moving your back pouches forward. I know I am.

I'll probably move my pouches forward by one pouch width. I'm actually pretty happy about that because on my 31" waist, this will bring the 5th pouch into a more accessible location. I rarely use #5, but it's a reach.

[GJM]

I'll probably move my pouches forward by one pouch width. I'm actually pretty happy about that because on my 31" waist, this will bring the 5th pouch into a more accessible location. I rarely use #5, but it's a reach.

Every CO shooter I have discussed this with, is moving their first pouch forward some.

On the CCW designation, I don’t see a concealment draw and one reload adding more than tenths of a second to a typical stage.

[LittleLebowski]

Having lots of expectations is a sure fire way to be disappointed.

This seems like your first experience with a sport like this.

Here’s a pro tip. There will never be a “right gun.”

And another pro tip. It doesn’t matter for your game in the foreseeable future.

Commit to your brain that you’ll always lose between 2-5% in equipment. Just work to be that much better.

Bone stock Glock to my tricked out S2 is only about 2-3% in my hands.

I think you’re being overly rigid and dramatic. Don’t take your ball and go home.

Just relax a little and enjoy your sweet gun for what it is. There is never a long term plan in a sport like this.

Pepperidge Farm remembers a guy named Dave Sevigny and a stock Glock 34. To reinforce JCN’s point, I wouldn’t worry about a technology race.

[YVK]

So, I adjusted my pouch position, just a tiny bit.


68547



Now gotta remember to bring my 3G belt to matches for prone stages.

[Bucky]

I think many are blowing this holster thing out of proportion. The holster position rule was problematic. It wasn’t enforced well on both ends of the spectrum. Many didn’t enforce it, then others were getting jammed up by being an inch too far forward.

[Bucky]

From what I heard, they also voted on Production to 15 rounds, and elimination of L10 Both motions failed

I still see a need for these divisions. We have people that want to compete nationally but still live in restrictive states. If these motions were passed, it would severely limit their options.

[Bucky]

Oh, perfect! I was dreading being "that guy" and registering as L10 (minor) to shoot my 9mm 1911 using my carry gear. Now I can just deal with the disadvantage of shooting minor in SS... or I could shoot a .45 and not be weird at all.


I’d argue that, unless you are shooting an SS specific match (ie nationals), you are not usually at a disadvantage shooting SS minor. I know serious competitors that do it by choice.

[Bucky]

I'm going to take a wild stab here and say that it's because people who don't have $5K+ to drop on an Open gun want somewhere to compete against others who don't have $5K+ to drop on an Open gun. Holster position is far from the only thing separating the divisions...

Agreed. I got into this sport wanting to shoot something more practical. However, the equipment advantage was too much to compensate for. So, I burned money I didn’t have to get an open gun. Yep, there were no divisions when I started the game, I’ve been doing it that long.

[Bucky]

In regards to the rule's change, I've this comment: last year a man lost his life during a match, and USPSA allowing non-drop safe guns or mods was partly responsible for the outcome. Would've been nice if, amidst this everything goes bonanza, they actually grew a pair and introduced a plan to phase out such guns. That would've taken all of my personal gaming guns out of the game, but I would've been OK with that.

How do you enforce that? Are you going to drop test a competitors gun at the chrono stage?

I’m not saying the concept is a bad idea, but it’s likely logistically impractical.

[Bucky]

At the end of the day this is a rule change that upends a lot of existing competitors' gear setups, all in hopes of attracting timmies (who I think are not going to flock to USPSA in droves over this change). It's pretty annoying to be a USPSA member and have stuff like this rammed down your throat supposedly for the benefit of potential timmie USPSA shooters, who have historically never been particularly active or interested in the sport anyways. Just look at who is posting in this thread, almost all people who already shoot USPSA, not timmie converts drawn in by this rules change. I am not anti-timmie but it's unfair to the membership to pull shit like this IMO.

I don’t see me making any major changes to my gear. I may move the mag pouch forward an inch. I don’t think it makes a huge difference for the first reload, but it will allow better access to subsequent reloads. What it WILL do for me is, after I put on my rig, I won’t need to make silly adjustments to ensure it’s not 1/2 inch too far forward.

[GJM]

My wife is thrilled by the new changes and here is why. She is small waisted, with minimal circumference available to locate her magazine pouches. Now her pouches, especially her rear pouches, are in a much more natural position. The ability to use a flashlight is a,so helpful to her. She has been using a Legion in USPSA, as the weight helps her shoot splits faster. However in steel matches, she uses an X5 with a small grip module, as it fits her hand better. Now, she can use the small X5 grip module along with a tungsten grip weights and a flashlight to achieve near Legion weight and have the best of both worlds — weight and fit for her hand size.

Somewhere else, Hwansik Kim wrote that he tested a light on a steel frame Walther and the new PDP. On the steel frame the light didn’t help, but on the lightweight PDP, the light helped steady the dot. Testing a light on my M&P yesterday, I felt the gun was noticeably steadier with the light, so this rule change will help equalize the difference between lighter polymer pistols and the heavy, completion specific pistols.

[YVK]

How do you enforce that? Are you going to drop test a competitors gun at the chrono stage?

I’m not saying the concept is a bad idea, but it’s likely logistically impractical.


You set a requirement for a firing pin block on all guns by a specific date, and you can test if block is functional without a drop test. Pretty sure this can be done on all hammer guns very easily, and on Glocks with a little bit more work. However, I think that such rule would be important even without enforcement considerations.



If these motions were passed, it would severely limit their options.

How so? They continue to shoot with 10 round mags during in-state matches, and with normal capacity elsewhere. I once squadded with a full team that came to our state match from Hawaii. They didn't seem to have a problem transitioning to higher capacity mags during the match.

[Elwin]

You set a requirement for a firing pin block on all guns by a specific date, and you can test if block is functional without a drop test. Pretty sure this can be done on all hammer guns very easily, and on Glocks with a little bit more work. However, I think that such rule would be important even without enforcement considerations.


I do think this is a good idea, but I question whether it works for 1911/2011s absent some exceptions. Requiring a firing pin block is basically saying that every 1911 in SS has to be a Colt, Springfield, Sig, Kimber, or S&W (and for some of those makers, only specific models from there lineups), or a full custom that has Series 80 parts in the specs. I don't know enough about 2011s to make a similar list but I'd guess there's mostly the same issue?

You could perhaps require a titanium and/or 9mm/.38 size firing pin with extra power firing pin spring, which honestly may be the majority approach to drop safety among people who carry 1911s. That's just going to be really hard to enforce. Though like you said, I'm all for it being a rule even with imperfect enforcement. At the very least if someone did have a dropped gun fire, an USPSA was able to examine it and determine it wasn't compliant, you'd have the option of sanctioning that person.

[RevolverRob]

I have zero dog in the fight regarding holsters, mag pouches, and lights...because my 2011 is only legal in Limited. Since I don't care what other people do and I don't shoot USPSA to 'win', it's very 'whatever' to me.

But in this day in age there shouldn't be any non-drop safe guns used in USPSA. Personally, all my guns run titanium firing pins and heavy firing pin springs. The easiest thing to do is stipulate that either a firing pin block is present or absent a firing pin block - a firing pin of X weight and firing pin spring of Y weight must be used.

I honestly don't see the need to confirm when you chrono. But I would view it as a solid rule change that can clearly stipulate the correct thing to do. Competitors who violate that rule can be sanctioned, suspended, or permanently barred from USPSA Events depending on severity of the violation.

[YVK]

I do think this is a good idea, but I question whether it works for 1911/2011s absent some exceptions. Requiring a firing pin block is basically saying that every 1911 in SS has to be a Colt, Springfield, Sig, Kimber, or S&W (and for some of those makers, only specific models from there lineups), or a full custom that has Series 80 parts in the specs. I don't know enough about 2011s to make a similar list but I'd guess there's mostly the same issue?




I am pretty sure they could figure out how to put series 80 parts in 2011.

It goes without saying that ruling like this will put a huge burden on membership. All Open, Limited, SS and many CO and Production guns will be affected. Which is why this has to be introduced asap but with a significant grace period, like a decade or so, to allow folks to amortize costs of their current guns.

[Eyesquared]

Pepperidge Farm remembers a guy named Dave Sevigny and a stock Glock 34. To reinforce JCN’s point, I wouldn’t worry about a technology race.

This exact topic came up on Stoeger's podcast, with Matt Pranka on the side of the stock glock being usable to win Nationals, and Stoeger being surprisingly adamant that stock Glocks are not competitive anymore. IIRC he also hinted that back when rules were more restrictive, some supposedly "stock" glocks were not quite stock. Now obviously winning Nationals is different from winning a local match but if you get a consistent 3-5% performance increase that is actually a big deal to me.

These changes don't seem likely to cause a technology race BUT I have 0 faith in the board to have the level of foresight to prevent one from occurring with future rules changes. It just so happens that these recent changes don't offer an absolute advantage because gun weight has diminishing returns. However it's also pretty obvious from past rule changes that the board doesn't always think these things through. I suspect they did not expect non-timmie USPSA competitors to want to put on lights and I also don't think they considered the effect of being able to use a light with irons in different lighting, or the possibility that someone ends up making a "flashlight" that is basically an aiming device. If I recall the old X200 had a version that put out a beam that was like 8" wide at 25 yards.

[Manbearspider]

I'm excited about all this. I was getting into shooting USPSA for fun/to tighten up my skills, but the investment to get a rig up to snuff lost out in priority to getting my carry setup built and dialed in. I just couldn't wrap my head around spending that much on gear and gun that wasn't practical for any other use. Now I can participate in USPSA (and eventually deicide if I want to get deeper than shooting local matches for fun) while keeping the investments pretty focused when money is tight and ammo is pricy as hell.

[LittleLebowski]

Man, I wish that ToddG was here to see this.

[GJM]

This exact topic came up on Stoeger's podcast, with Matt Pranka on the side of the stock glock being usable to win Nationals, and Stoeger being surprisingly adamant that stock Glocks are not competitive anymore. IIRC he also hinted that back when rules were more restrictive, some supposedly "stock" glocks were not quite stock. Now obviously winning Nationals is different from winning a local match but if you get a consistent 3-5% performance increase that is actually a big deal to me.

These changes don't seem likely to cause a technology race BUT I have 0 faith in the board to have the level of foresight to prevent one from occurring with future rules changes. It just so happens that these recent changes don't offer an absolute advantage because gun weight has diminishing returns. However it's also pretty obvious from past rule changes that the board doesn't always think these things through. I suspect they did not expect non-timmie USPSA competitors to want to put on lights and I also don't think they considered the effect of being able to use a light with irons in different lighting, or the possibility that someone ends up making a "flashlight" that is basically an aiming device. If I recall the old X200 had a version that put out a beam that was like 8" wide at 25 yards.

Seems like a common theme to your posts in this thread is a distrust/displeasure/disrespect for the USPSA organization. Having been around this organization for quite some time, I believe the USPSA organization has made more good changes in the last few years than at any other time I can remember. Comparing USPSA to other action shooting organizations, I view USPSA’s leadership positively considering the website/classification/app development plus the various new divisions and equipment rule changes. If you feel differently, you should get involved more with the organization.

[Eyesquared]

Seems like a common theme to your posts in this thread is a distrust/displeasure/disrespect for the USPSA organization. Having been around this organization for quite some time, I believe the USPSA organization has made more good changes in the last few years than at any other time I can remember. Comparing USPSA to other action shooting organizations, I view USPSA’s leadership positively considering the website/classification/app development plus the various new divisions and equipment rule changes. If you feel differently, you should get involved more with the organization.

No offense but I usually find the "if you don't like things the way they are, change them yourself" argument to be an attempt at shutting people up rather than a serious suggestion.

Do you think someone like me has any chance at running for a USPSA board position, which is where these rules decisions apparently get made? Realistically speaking, I don't see any way for me to influence these kinds of decisions. I am active at the club level with helping to set up my club match, tear down stages, sync pads, inventorying our club supplies, etc. If someone wanted stage designs I'd be happy to provide some but we have a backlog of stage designs that have yet to be used. However I don't see any way to parley local club participation into having a voice at the table anytime soon. Maybe in 5-10 years. If you have any suggestions I'm all ears.

I would be very happy to change things myself but I don't see any way to do that or even come close to doing that in the near term. Until the time comes I am simply along for the ride. :)

[LittleLebowski]

What's important to me is that we grow the sport in today's political climate.

[GJM]

No offense but I usually find the "if you don't like things the way they are, change them yourself" argument to be an attempt at shutting people up rather than a serious suggestion.

Do you think someone like me has any chance at running for a USPSA board position, which is where these rules decisions apparently get made? Realistically speaking, I don't see any way for me to influence these kinds of decisions. I am active at the club level with helping to set up my club match, tear down stages, sync pads, inventorying our club supplies, etc. If someone wanted stage designs I'd be happy to provide some but we have a backlog of stage designs that have yet to be used. However I don't see any way to parley local club participation into having a voice at the table anytime soon. Maybe in 5-10 years. If you have any suggestions I'm all ears.

I would be very happy to change things myself but I don't see any way to do that or even come close to doing that in the near term. Until the time comes I am simply along for the ride. :)

Do you know your area director? I do, and he is open to listening to member opinions. You might ask your area person how you can get involved. Maybe cut the organization a little slack, and try to be constructive, and you will likely be more successful at influencing policy.

[Eyesquared]

Do you know your area director? I do, and he is open to listening to member opinions. You might ask your area person how you can get involved. Maybe cut the organization a little slack, and try to be constructive, and you will likely be more successful at influencing policy.

Do you mean that you know your Area Director or you know mine? I know who mine is and have heard good things but have never met him in person. I am curious to see what his response will be to some suggestions.

[GJM]

Do you mean that you know your Area Director or you know mine? I know who mine is and have heard good things but have never met him in person. I am curious to see what his response will be to some suggestions.

What I mean is I know our director, and he is involved and open to discussing issues. Might be worth reaching out to your guy and asking how you could become more involved.

[NoTacTravis]

I was listening to The PARAcast podcast this morning Season 5 Episode 9 and I found the general sentiment to be very close to what Eyesquared has been posting on this thread. I think the frame weight/flashlight thing gave a lot of people a general bad feeling for the rule changes who wouldn't have been nearly as upset if it was just holster and mag pouch deregulation.

Although many of the different viewpoints I've read on this thread definitely have plenty of merit and a couple have actually changed the way I think about the issue to some degree, I think it's of note that Eyesquared represents a viewpoint publicly shared by many people who are also experienced and accomplished within the sport.

I have to admit that the first thing I thought when reading the rule change was "greaaat, so we're doing frame weights and new holsters now?" Then I promptly googled cost of a TLR1.
(side note: I'm not planning on buying or running a light for at least a year regardless so this doesn't meaningfully affect me either way)

JCN pointing out that Shadow 2 owners likely won't run one and this just allows a cheap Glock some competitive equity it didn't have before is probably logically more sensible (and mentally healthy) than my first inclination to be annoyed at seeing the literal arms race ramp up another notch.


A comment by YVK though keeps coming back to me when I re-read this thread.


In regards to the rule's change, I've this comment: last year a man lost his life during a match, and USPSA allowing non-drop safe guns or mods was partly responsible for the outcome. .

I kind of have to wonder that if there's a rules change meeting of all the org's executive leadership which takes the time to bump the weight limit at SS by 2oz after the head of DNROI got bumped to open for being too heavy at SS nats, that doesn't address a death in the sport that could have been prevented with a rules change if people aren't correct in their evaluation of the motivations of leadership being suspect.

[JCN]

I was listening to The PARAcast podcast this morning Season 5 Episode 9 and I found the general sentiment to be very close to what Eyesquared has been posting on this thread. I think the frame weight/flashlight thing gave a lot of people a general bad feeling for the rule changes who wouldn't have been nearly as upset if it was just holster and mag pouch deregulation.

Although many of the different viewpoints I've read on this thread definitely have plenty of merit and a couple have actually changed the way I think about the issue to some degree, I think it's of note that Eyesquared represents a viewpoint publicly shared by many people who are also experienced and accomplished within the sport.

I have to admit that the first thing I thought when reading the rule change was "greaaat, so we're doing frame weights and new holsters now?" Then I promptly googled cost of a TLR1.
(side note: I'm not planning on buying or running a light for at least a year regardless so this doesn't meaningfully affect me either way)

JCN pointing out that Shadow 2 owners likely won't run one and this just allows a cheap Glock some competitive equity it didn't have before is probably logically more sensible (and mentally healthy) than my first inclination to be annoyed at seeing the literal arms race ramp up another notch.


A comment by YVK though keeps coming back to me when I re-read this thread.


I kind of have to wonder that if there's a rules change meeting of all the org's executive leadership which takes the time to bump the weight limit at SS by 2oz after the head of DNROI got bumped to open for being too heavy at SS nats, that doesn't address a death in the sport that could have been prevented with a rules change if people aren't correct in their evaluation of the motivations of leadership being suspect.


From last point to first, it's not necessarily firing pin blocks that are required to be mandated.
NoTacTravis I think a number of people (including myself) didn't realize we were making our Shadow 2's NOT drop safe by adding the RAMI extended firing pin that's touted on the internet as "standard upgrade" for USPSA.

YVK the Shadow 2 and TSO looks like it's relatively drop safe with a stock firing pin and spring, even without a firing pin block. The biggest offender seems to be the extended pin on testing that people did on Enos when the death happened.

From the letter of the rules, you could argue that the firing pin and spring are the drop safety mechanism (like an LCP) and by altering them, you've disabled a factory safety mechanism which I think is illegal anyway?

I think from the competitor standpoint, I think some people don't like change regardless of what it is. The more high strung the competitor, the more they dislike change and I can see that on podcasts you might see that opinion over-represented....

But the money to the organization comes from "regular Joes" and even a 1% increase in younger competitors or the new gun owners that don't want to get dedicated competition gear means a lot more to the future health of the organization than the top 0.001%.

There are over 110,000 USPSA numbers... only about 50-100 high level competitors. The organization lives and breathes from getting the next generation interested and invested.

[NoTacTravis]

I think from the competitor standpoint, I think some people don't like change regardless of what it is. The more high strung the competitor, the more they dislike change

This seems to be a fair assessment and pretty true across multiple sports and hobbies.

-When they changed the weigh-in times and IV rehydration rules in the UFC it caused a temporary uproar in multiple major camps.
-When they changed the jump height by a few inches in flyball whole teams completely reconfigured all of their dog relays.
-Minor changes in leg entanglement rules send the competitive BJJ world into a near annual rules bickering uproar.
-I think even autocross had a hubbub over R compound tires in various classes if I'm remembering my old SCCA drama correctly.


To some degree, these were all also rapidly growing small niche sports finding their way as they evolve over time into something more established. It would make sense at the end of the day that USPSA is going through similar growing pains as it finds its way.

I imagine USPSA will go through the same convulsions of expansion and growing pains to the same positive and negative fanfare that all the others did/do/will as it similarly evolves closer to its eventual final form. :shrug

[Stony Lane]

Does anyone see a problem with an right-handed AIWB shooter quickly turning and moving left while drawing his gun? Wouldn't it be very easy, in this example, to break the 180? (or a lefty going the other way)

[Gio]

TLDR (for the thread)

I love the holster and mag pouch rule changes, and I have no plans to shoot from AIWB. One year at Area 8 match, I was given the make ready command, started making ready, and the RO called, "STOP." I unload show clear, reholster, and he starts poking me in the side trying to find my hip bones. In his opinion, my mag pouches were too far forward, even though my hip bone could be felt in front of them. Despite having shot nationals and had my equipment inspected there and at multiple sectionals leading up to that match, he made me go to the safe area and "fix" my gear. I had a terrible run on that stage, and I still partially blame it on losing my mental focus right before it. I am glad that something so arbitrary as where gear is on my belt is no longer going to derail a stage or match for me anymore.

The weapon light rule is a move in the wrong direction in my opinion. I get what they are trying to do, but they essentially just created an arms race out of flashlights. The rules are also written in a very vague and unclear manner, where someone could potentially machine a tungsten frame weight to fit on the rail and put a tiny LED bulb in it and call it a flashlight. I don't think they should have added this rule at all, but if they had to do it, they should have created a flashlight "production list" with approved/authorized lights on it, possibly with approved/authorized weight limits for the lights so people can't fill them up with lead and tungsten. FWIW, I've been running a TLR1 body stuffed with lead on my USPSA limited gun since 2014.

That said, between a TLR-1, a tungsten guide rod, and a new heavy grip plug that I'm collaborating on, I'm going to be running a 40 oz Glock in production at nationals this year.

[GJM]

TLDR (for the thread)

I love the holster and mag pouch rule changes, and I have no plans to shoot from AIWB. One year at Area 8 match, I was given the make ready command, started making ready, and the RO called, "STOP." I unload show clear, reholster, and he starts poking me in the side trying to find my hip bones. In his opinion, my mag pouches were too far forward, even though my hip bone could be felt in front of them. Despite having shot nationals and had my equipment inspected there and at multiple sectionals leading up to that match, he made me go to the safe area and "fix" my gear. I had a terrible run on that stage, and I still partially blame it on losing my mental focus right before it. I am glad that something so arbitrary as where gear is on my belt is no longer going to derail a stage or match for me anymore.

The weapon light rule is a move in the wrong direction in my opinion. I get what they are trying to do, but they essentially just created an arms race out of flashlights. The rules are also written in a very vague and unclear manner, where someone could potentially machine a tungsten frame weight to fit on the rail and put a tiny LED bulb in it and call it a flashlight. I don't think they should have added this rule at all, but if they had to do it, they should have created a flashlight "production list" with approved/authorized lights on it, possibly with approved/authorized weight limits for the lights so people can't fill them up with lead and tungsten. FWIW, I've been running a TLR1 body stuffed with lead on my USPSA limited gun since 2014.

That said, between a TLR-1, a tungsten guide rod, and a new heavy grip plug that I'm collaborating on, I'm going to be running a 40 oz Glock in production at nationals this year.

What holster will be using? My Floodlight is not optimal, and I am not sure about the resistance from more pointy surfaces on the light. I know the draw doesn’t matter much in USPSA, but I hate to give up much there.

My wife thought the light helped on an X5, but doesn’t plan to use one with a Tungsten infused Legion lower.

68568

[Caballoflaco]

Does anyone see a problem with an right-handed AIWB shooter quickly turning and moving left while drawing his gun? Wouldn't it be very easy, in this example, to break the 180? (or a lefty going the other way)

Then they should draw before they turn.

I might catch some heat from the exact by the book rules guys on this, but at a local match if you’re ROing a new shooter remind them to draw and then turn before “shooter are you ready”

I still remember the RO telling me “Remember TURN then draw” before my first start facing uprange stage way back when, and a couple of times afterwards until they knew I was good to go.

[GJM]

Regardless of holster position, there are numerous 180 traps interspersed amongst stages, and navigating them while drawing, reloading and moving is just part of the game.

[cheby]

Here is a post from Mason Lane on Facebook. He's our current National champion in Limited. Just an example.


We complain because we care enough to practice daily.
If you love or even like @theuspsa you should be asking:
A. If there is an actual vision the rules are headed for, what is it? Why aren’t you as a member being consulted on it? Why do we only hear about these things after they’re set in stone? And

B. Are we satisfied with half baked major rule changes that aren’t part of a long term vision?
#uspsa #wml #magnets

[GJM]

Here is a post from Mason Lane on Facebook. He's our current National champion in Limited. Just an example.


We complain because we care enough to practice daily.
If you love or even like @theuspsa you should be asking:
A. If there is an actual vision the rules are headed for, what is it? Why aren’t you as a member being consulted on it? Why do we only hear about these things after they’re set in stone? And

B. Are we satisfied with half baked major rule changes that aren’t part of a long term vision?
#uspsa #wml #magnets

A few thoughts.

1) Mason Lane beat beat me at Nationals one year, shooting with just one hand.

2) given that he is Limited Nats champ, why would he give a hoot about these changes, since he can run his holster and mag pouches wherever he wants in Limited, and use a flashlight. Now he can have the same rules in other divisions

I see these changes reducing equipment variations between divisions, and making it more about the pure skill which he alludes to.

[cheby]

A few thoughts.

1) Mason Lane beat beat me at Nationals one year, shooting with just one hand.

2) given that he is Limited Nats champ, why would he give a hoot about these changes, since he can run his holster and mag pouches wherever he wants in Limited, and use a flashlight. Now he can have the same rules in other divisions

I see these changes reducing equipment variations between divisions, and making it more about the pure skill which he alludes to.

They recorded the episode with Ben berry podcast about it . No holding anything back...
As I said before, development of this sport should include coordination with IPSC for example. The rule integrity should be one of the major priorities. It's not clear that there's any strategy and long term vision right now considering this and last rule changes.

[GJM]

They recorded the episode with Ben berry podcast about it . No holding anything back...
As I said before, development of this sport should include coordination with IPSC for example. The rule integrity should be one of the major priorities. It's not clear that there's any strategy and long term vision right now considering this and last rule changes.

Leaving aside these particular rules, I believe it is a valid request to hear a short, medium, and long term vision for where the rules are going, what is reasonable notice for comments, and how the members will participate in settling on that vision.

[YVK]

YVK the Shadow 2 and TSO looks like it's relatively drop safe with a stock firing pin and spring, even without a firing pin block. The biggest offender seems to be the extended pin on testing that people did on Enos when the death happened.

From the letter of the rules, you could argue that the firing pin and spring are the drop safety mechanism (like an LCP) and by altering them, you've disabled a factory safety mechanism which I think is illegal anyway?



It probably is, although this would be a good question to Ceska Zbrojovka as to what their drop safety protocols and the whole -29 degrees deal are. Probably no less safe than series 70 1911s with XP and titanium firing pin.
From the standpoint that Bucky brought up, those kind of safety setups are unenforceable, which is why I'd still prefer a firing pin block.

Besides enforcement issues, I dunno if you were already on this site when I last mentioned me dropping a gun during National. That gun having FP block was actually reassuring in retrospect. Unfortunately the sob didn't run.

I dunno if changing out factory springs and pins counts for disabling a safety. I think that solution to that questiin could be borrowed from IPSC rulebook.

[RevolverRob]

I got confused by all the bitching in here.

Are flashlights viewed as a negative - because they competitive advantage or because now they'll promote Tac Timmies and drive the 'game' away?

[Clusterfrack]

I'm satisfied with the S2 and OEM FP. Even if inertial firing happened that's very likely to be muzzle down. As I've written elsewhere, allowing us to start with hammer down on the decock notch would be an added safety option.

[Clusterfrack]

I got confused by all the bitching in here.

Are flashlights viewed as a negative - because they competitive advantage or because now they'll promote Tac Timmies and drive the 'game' away?

Because as Gio wrote, it will lead to more stupid things you have to buy to be competitive. I do not want to have to spend $200 on a tungsten "light" that puts out 1 lumen. Weights don't belong in Production. But whatever, at least the division retains its core: minor, lowcap, iron sights.

[RevolverRob]

It probably is, although this would be a good question to Ceska Zbrojovka as to what their drop safety protocols and the whole -29 degrees deal are. Probably no less safe than series 70 1911s with XP and titanium firing pin.
From the standpoint that Bucky brought up, those kind of safety setups are unenforceable, which is why I'd still prefer a firing pin block.

Besides enforcement issues, I dunno if you were already on this site when I last mentioned me dropping a gun during National. That gun having FP block was actually reassuring in retrospect. Unfortunately the sob didn't run.

I dunno if changing out factory springs and pins counts for disabling a safety. I think that solution to that questiin could be borrowed from IPSC rulebook.

No one wants to hear my suggestion - Which is remove the steel CZs, Tanfos, Legions, Q5 SF, etc. from Production and Carry Optics.

Once those guns have to compete side by side with the 2011s - it will all go the same direction it once did.

But then maybe that's too Tactical and not gamer enough for Production. Or is it too Gamer in Production now?

[cheby]

How about this for the strategy?
I would love to see a practical shooting becomes an Olympic discipline. Even if it doesn't look possible today considering the current political environment, we should be trying. If the Olympic games are hosted in the "right" country (And today it is not USA or Great Britain unfortunately), it is possible to introduce practical shooting as a demonstration sport similar to taekwondo at the Summer Olympics in 1988 in Seoul. Such development would do more to our 2A causes then all timmies combined. I'd love to see USPSA as a way to get a scholarship in a good universities. I'd like to watch USPSA Nationals on ESPN. This is important because it looks like even among gun owners, majority don't know about it . The rules integrity and consistency are major requirements for it. We need to focus on the skills development first. This is a reason for example why 3guns is not doing well lately- it is a fun shoot where the rules depend on the club. No many serious shooters like it.
There's more to it, but here's the direction, for a change.

[GJM]

It probably is, although this would be a good question to Ceska Zbrojovka as to what their drop safety protocols and the whole -29 degrees deal are. Probably no less safe than series 70 1911s with XP and titanium firing pin..

I would give you a like for this post if you weren’t showing off your eastern bloc knowledge with the CZ spelling.


Because as Gio wrote, it will lead to more stupid things you have to buy to be competitive. I do not want to have to spend $200 on a tungsten "light" that puts out 1 lumen. Weights don't belong in Production. But whatever, at least the division retains its core: minor, lowcap, iron sights.

A guy has to draw a line somewhere. When you have more than my first car cost in your primary and back-up Shadow 2, that $200 could be the straw that breaks the camel’s back!

[cheby]

But whatever, at least the division retains its core: minor, lowcap, iron sights.

The core of production is iron sights, DUTY gun, minor. The DUTY part is increasingly becoming an issue. That's what is killing Production especially when the other alternatives are introduced.

[Elwin]

Because as Gio wrote, it will lead to more stupid things you have to buy to be competitive. I do not want to have to spend $200 on a tungsten "light" that puts out 1 lumen. Weights don't belong in Production. But whatever, at least the division retains its core: minor, lowcap, iron sights.

I'm not here to argue, this is a serious question. Are we already kindof at that point when people are running Shadows instead of their P07s or 75 Compacts, Q5 SFs instead of their PPQs, Legions instead of their 320 Compacts, etc.? As in, wasn't the guy who could only afford the pistols he actually carried already losing an arms race in a division that was initially supposed to be for guys like him? If that's the case, the guy who just has the G19 or M&P Compact he carries at least now has the option of closing the gap a little bit just by throwing a heavy light on it and buying a new holster, instead of buying a $1000 or more metal framed version of his carry gun or something like it just for games.

That said I'd agree that for the real purposes of allowing lights, you need a list and prohibition on modifications like you have for the guns themselves in Production.

[Eyesquared]

I'm not here to argue, this is a serious question. Are we already kindof at that point when people are running Shadows instead of their P07s or 75 Compacts, Q5 SFs instead of their PPQs, Legions instead of their 320 Compacts, etc.? As in, wasn't the guy who could only afford the pistols he actually carried already losing an arms race in a division that was initially supposed to be for guys like him? If that's the case, the guy who just has the G19 or M&P Compact he carries at least now has the option of closing the gap a little bit just by throwing a heavy light on it and buying a new holster, instead of buying a $1000 or more metal framed version of his carry gun or something like it just for games.

That said I'd agree that for the real purposes of allowing lights, you need a list and prohibition on modifications like you have for the guns themselves in Production.

You're absolutely right that the most favored production guns are basically production race guns. In all fairness these guns didn't really exist 10 years ago. IMO if USPSA had a minimum trigger weight in prod and CO that would discourage some of it. I'm convinced that a sub 3lb trigger is almost always an advantage in USPSA. The weight of the gun is somewhat of a preference thing.

That being said the lights rule seems to be something that sounded good in theory but has some unforeseen consequences. I really don't think the board intended for this rule change to start a trend of people slapping lights on guns solely for the weight or potentially as an aiming device. The other issue with a production light list is that it seems like it would be an issue to keep up with all the changes in lights and new models etc. If the goal is to allow someone to show up with their carry or duty gun and shoot without having to jump through hoops, trying to keep a production legal light list seems detrimental to that.

[Clusterfrack]

A guy has to draw a line somewhere. When you have more than my first car cost in your primary and back-up Shadow 2, that $200 could be the straw that breaks the camel’s back!

LOL! And the CO Shadow2 I only use for dryfire. You're right, it has zero to do with the $. It's just the idea that somehow rubs me the wrong way. It would be like if compensators were allowed in Production--except the weights won't make that much difference. I'll just keep on shooting my S2s and trying to get 0.1% better.

[Clusterfrack]

I'm not here to argue, this is a serious question. Are we already kindof at that point when people are running Shadows instead of their P07s or 75 Compacts, Q5 SFs instead of their PPQs, Legions instead of their 320 Compacts, etc.? As in, wasn't the guy who could only afford the pistols he actually carried already losing an arms race in a division that was initially supposed to be for guys like him? If that's the case, the guy who just has the G19 or M&P Compact he carries at least now has the option of closing the gap a little bit just by throwing a heavy light on it and buying a new holster, instead of buying a $1000 or more metal framed version of his carry gun or something like it just for games.

That said I'd agree that for the real purposes of allowing lights, you need a list and prohibition on modifications like you have for the guns themselves in Production.

I can't argue with that. The fake light that's actually a weight seems so dumb, but really who cares. And why not encourage people to shoot their plastic guns if they want? As long as it brings people to or back to Production, that's a good thing.

[Clusterfrack]

The core of production is iron sights, DUTY gun, minor. The DUTY part is increasingly becoming an issue. That's what is killing Production especially when the other alternatives are introduced.

I would go with a trigger weight restriction instead, like IPSC.

[cheby]

I'm not here to argue, this is a serious question. Are we already kindof at that point when people are running Shadows instead of their P07s or 75 Compacts, Q5 SFs instead of their PPQs, Legions instead of their 320 Compacts, etc.? As in, wasn't the guy who could only afford the pistols he actually carried already losing an arms race in a division that was initially supposed to be for guys like him? If that's the case, the guy who just has the G19 or M&P Compact he carries at least now has the option of closing the gap a little bit just by throwing a heavy light on it and buying a new holster, instead of buying a $1000 or more metal framed version of his carry gun or something like it just for games.

That said I'd agree that for the real purposes of allowing lights, you need a list and prohibition on modifications like you have for the guns themselves in Production.
These are very valid points.
Here's another strategy if you don't like my Olympic games and establishment strategy. This is at least some strategy. I mentioned it earlier but one more time:
Divisions are separated by what that actually matters
1. Production. Duty gun, no 50oz bullshit, 15rd capacity. Minor
2. Carry optics. Duty gun, again weight limit, 15rds, minor, optic
3. If you want to shoot irons but a real competition gun - major ammo and do whatever you want except optics and compensator.
4. Similarly Open - competition guns, compensator, major ammo, optics.

This separates divisions based on what matters. Holster position doesn't matter.

[cheby]

I would go with a trigger weight restriction instead, like IPSC.

Trigger weight is important, agree. But weight is more important in my opinion

[Bucky]

How so? They continue to shoot with 10 round mags during in-state matches, and with normal capacity elsewhere. I once squadded with a full team that came to our state match from Hawaii. They didn't seem to have a problem transitioning to higher capacity mags during the match.

So logistically how does that work? I mean especially with STI type guns the magazine can be the weak link. Where did these high Magazines come from? Do the shooters have to rent storage space outside the state to use it? What if they’re not near State lines? Do they borrow mags? I don’t know anybody that would want to do that, because they’re going to want to make sure the magazines work. Admittedly, many can make it work if need be. It is difficult for some, and for others they may be taking certain liberties.


You set a requirement for a firing pin block on all guns by a specific date, and you can test if block is functional without a drop test. Pretty sure this can be done on all hammer guns very easily, and on Glocks with a little bit more work. However, I think that such rule would be important even without enforcement considerations.



1. 1911s can be made drop safe without the firing pin safety.

2. A firing pin safety doesn’t guaranty drop safeness. Remember ALL P320s came with FPS.

[GJM]

My personal (timmie) baggage is my belief that self defense skills with a firearm allow me to live and recreate more independently, and at its core, I see USPSA as a way to do an activity that is both a sport and defensive shooting proficiency endeavor. The more my guns deviate from something suitable for defense, the worse I feel about the time I am investing. I feel better about adding weight with a Surefire, than getting a less practical heavier weight gun.

[cheby]

Here's the funny part. Or sad... It looks like the discussion about the rules changes are happening here only. There were 4 threads on Brian enos. All are locked up now. We should be able to discuss things that we really care about.

[Clusterfrack]

Here's the funny part. It looks like the discussion about the rules changes are happening here only. There were 4 threads on Brian enos. All are locked up now. We should be able to discuss things that we really care about.

I'm not surprised. I don't have the time or patience for BE. Meanwhile, on PSTG there's a similarly collegial and calm discussion. Most people aren't making major changes or freaking the fuck out.

I have another thought: what if the WML rule leads to tactically useful weighted WMLs?

[cheby]

I have another thought: what if the WML rule leads to tactically useful weighted WMLs?

I am more concerned with what if they make low light stages where the WML are nessesary? What if you have to have them? What is next?? Lasers? Bayonets?? What skills are we even testing now??

[JCN]

My personal (timmie) baggage is my belief that self defense skills with a firearm allow me to live and recreate more independently, and at its core, I see USPSA as a way to do an activity that is both a sport and defensive shooting proficiency endeavor. The more my guns deviate from something suitable for defense, the worse I feel about the time I am investing. I feel better about adding weight with a Surefire, than getting a less practical heavier weight gun.

I think a lot of gamer-critical people lose that fact.

When I got better with my gamer gun from OWB drop holster... I also got better with my carry gun from AIWB even without specific dedicated practice. Better skills translate to better skills.

[Clusterfrack]

I am more concerned with what if they make low light stages where the WML are nessesary? What if you have to have them? What is next?? Lasers? Bayonets?? What skills are we even testing now??

I would stab a target. And I know Mr_White would throw shuriken.

USPSA Ninja Division.

[cheby]

I would stab a target. And I know Mr_White would throw shuriken.

Yeah, that's what I call a fantasy dressed up camp.

[CleverNickname]

How about this for the strategy?
I would love to see a practical shooting becomes an Olympic discipline. Even if it doesn't look possible today considering the current political environment, we should be trying. If the Olympic games are hosted in the "right" country (And today it is not USA or Great Britain unfortunately), it is possible to introduce practical shooting as a demonstration sport similar to taekwondo at the Summer Olympics in 1988 in Seoul. Such development would do more to our 2A causes then all timmies combined. I'd love to see USPSA as a way to get a scholarship in a good universities. I'd like to watch USPSA Nationals on ESPN. This is important because it looks like even among gun owners, majority don't know about it . The rules integrity and consistency are major requirements for it. We need to focus on the skills development first. This is a reason for example why 3guns is not doing well lately- it is a fun shoot where the rules depend on the club. No many serious shooters like it.
There's more to it, but here's the direction, for a change.
It's before my time in competitive shooting, but didn't IPSC supposedly try to get some sort of action pistol shooting added sometime around the turn of the century? I'm pretty sure I remember reading something about that once.

That said, the IOC is a hive of scum and villainy, and it's probably best to stay as far away from the Olympics as possible.

[cheby]

My personal (timmie) baggage is my belief that self defense skills with a firearm allow me to live and recreate more independently, and at its core, I see USPSA as a way to do an activity that is both a sport and defensive shooting proficiency endeavor. The more my guns deviate from something suitable for defense, the worse I feel about the time I am investing. I feel better about adding weight with a Surefire, than getting a less practical heavier weight gun.

I have to disagree with you on this. I am pretty sure that an average gamer would beat an average timmy with any duty gun. Opposite is not true. Average timmy has no chance against an average gamer with the gamer gun. This is just a fact of life. You are a good shooter not because of your timmy baggage, quite opposite.
Of course, this is the rabbit hole we went to before and never got back

[cheby]

It's before my time in competitive shooting, but didn't IPSC supposedly try to get some sort of action pistol shooting added sometime around the turn of the century? I'm pretty sure I remember reading something about that once.

That said, the IOC is a hive of scum and villainy, and it's probably best to stay as far away from the Olympics as possible.

Agree on the IOC. And it is not easy for sure. Politics is the art of compromise...
But if MMA is on major TV channels, it should be possible for the shooting sports as well. Remember they tried to outlaw it in New York. The popularly prevented that.

[JCN]

Here is the beginning of my 12oz Glock flashlight...

68580

The flashlight is actually 300 lumens...

[Caballoflaco]

Agree on the IOC. And it is not easy for sure. Politics is the art of compromise...
But if MMA is on major TV channels, it should be possible for the shooting sports as well. Remember they tried to outlaw it in New York. The popularly prevented that.

The shooting sports are boring as hell to watch, unless you’re a shooter yourself. But, luckily big TV right now is culturally and economically where newspapers were back in the early 2000’s so I don’t know if chasing that goal is really worth while for the future of the sport anyways. (Also consider that YouTube is constantly demonitizing firearms related content because traditional corporate sponsors don’t want to be associated with firearms)

I think that focusing on well produced organic content (livestream big matches and provide well edited recaps at the end of the weekend) and doing targeted digital advertising would probably be a better use of resources as entertainment rapidly becomes more niche and specialized.

[LittleLebowski]

I am more concerned with what if they make low light stages where the WML are nessesary? What if you have to have them? What is next?? Lasers? Bayonets?? What skills are we even testing now??

That’s not practically feasible. It’s hard enough getting everything set up as is. Non-issue.

[LittleLebowski]

I think a lot of gamer-critical people lose that fact.

When I got better with my gamer gun from OWB drop holster... I also got better with my carry gun from AIWB even without specific dedicated practice. Better skills translate to better skills.

Ayup. Shooting makes you better at shooting.

[TicTacticalTimmy]

I would go with a trigger weight restriction instead, like IPSC.

Absolutely. And make it a reasonable weight for a "practical pistol" in PROD/CO. like 6lbs for DA's and 4lbs for strikers


I am more concerned with what if they make low light stages where the WML are nessesary? What if you have to have them? What is next?? Lasers? Bayonets?? What skills are we even testing now??

You dont need to worry, that is not happening ever. However, it would be badass if it did. It would test important Practical Pistol skills, given that the world is dark roughly half the time.

[YVK]

No one wants to hear my suggestion - Which is remove the steel CZs, Tanfos, Legions, Q5 SF, etc. from Production and Carry Optics.



I wouldn't have much problems, except for obvious annoyance about loss of personal investment, with that but where do you draw the line? Are Glock 34 or Performance Center MP or purpose designed Beretta Elite 2 OK?


How about this for the strategy?
I would love to see a practical shooting becomes an Olympic discipline.



Dude, I was drunk when I said it and you took it for realz...



Seriously though, fuck Putin and Russian doping fuckers. If not for them and Russia could get summer Olympics in near future, we'd be seriously looking at IPSC as a demonstration sport.


I would give you a like for this post if you weren’t showing off your eastern bloc knowledge with the CZ spelling.




I was being humble. If I was really throwing it down, I would've spelled it with those blimps over the letters , like that Česká zbrojovka.



So logistically how does that work?




Not sure. As I said, I shot with a full squad from Hi and they had it happen. I am also in A1, along with California folks, and there are enough Open, Limited and PCC guys out of there who shot major matches with normal mags. Perhaps some of them could pitch in. The organization and neighboring states could help out too.
Production dropping in popularity while CO skyrocketing seems a well agreed on thing, which started to happen coincidentally with CO mag capacity expansion. I don't know if it is good for the future of this division to stay hostage to political influences of anti-gun states.






1. 1911s can be made drop safe without the firing pin safety.

2. A firing pin safety doesn’t guaranty drop safeness. Remember ALL P320s came with FPS.

Yes, possibly, I mentioned that in #131. Best said, it could be made to pass California drop safety requirements. I think this is as much as we know about it objectively. One of my series 70 that's not for games is sporting Ti pin and XL spring. As I said, it is your concern for enforcement, which I share, that makes me prefer the block.

Well executed safety, including that of current P320, is close. I don't think we should be basing policy developments on fuck-ups such as early P320 fiasco. That said, even those 320s passed SAAMI protocol so, frankly, I'd take that over heavily modded guns that never been tested.

Regardless of enforcement issues and actual efficacy, demanding some drop safety standards is important from mission and legal standpoints. If mission is to promote safe shooting sports than having no drop safety standards at all doesn't jive with current state of affairs in gun design. Legally I think that an event like one in NYS last year has a potential to bring the entire organization down.

[Gio]

What holster will be using? My Floodlight is not optimal, and I am not sure about the resistance from more pointy surfaces on the light. I know the draw doesn’t matter much in USPSA, but I hate to give up much there.

My wife thought the light helped on an X5, but doesn’t plan to use one with a Tungsten infused Legion lower.

68568

I’m using a custom holster made for me by Rick Nitchke of RLN custom. He also made Vogel’s limited holsters and Matt Mink’s production gear back in the day. I wish it fit a boss mount, and ive ordered an RHT for that, but this will do for now.

68586

[RevolverRob]

Absolutely. And make it a reasonable weight for a "practical pistol" in PROD/CO. like 6lbs for DA's and 4lbs for strikers

10 and 5. Make y'all work for it.

It kind of blows my mind that the purpose of making 1911/2011s into Single Stack and Limited was to make production "less gamer". Then they made legal 50 ounce pistols with DA and SA triggers so light they won't always reliably touch off hard primers.

I'll go on record as being opposed to practical shooting as a marquee sport. You'll NEVER attract enough competitors to grow the ranks. Instead you'll provide visual ammunition for the gun grabbers, "They're training to kill us!" Better they don't know you exist.

Or else we'll be shooting at IPSC Coke Bottles on our once a month range visit to see our pistol at the club, UK style. Sporting purposes is the worst excuse to give gun grabbers. And they've exploited it time and time again.

I also think it's silly to argue about competitive advantage/disadvantage with chasing equipment. You either pay to play or you run middle of the pack. Like auto racing - how fast you go is directly proportional to the money you have to spend. At the end of the day it's cheaper (and less stressful) to benchmark yourself and try to beat those benchmarks, than try to keep up with the dudes who spend more on guns an ammo per month than half the country makes in income.

[GJM]

10 and 5. Make y'all work for it.

It kind of blows my mind that the purpose of making 1911/2011s into Single Stack and Limited was to make production "less gamer". Then they made legal 50 ounce pistols with DA and SA triggers so light they won't always reliably touch off hard primers.

I'll go on record as being opposed to practical shooting as a marquee sport. You'll NEVER attract enough competitors to grow the ranks. Instead you'll provide visual ammunition for the gun grabbers, "They're training to kill us!" Better they don't know you exist.

Or else we'll be shooting at IPSC Coke Bottles on our once a month range visit to see our pistol at the club, UK style. Sporting purposes is the worst excuse to give gun grabbers. And they've exploited it time and time again.

I also think it's silly to argue about competitive advantage/disadvantage with chasing equipment. You either pay to play or you run middle of the pack. Like auto racing - how fast you go is directly proportional to the money you have to spend. At the end of the day it's cheaper (and less stressful) to benchmark yourself and try to beat those benchmarks, than try to keep up with the dudes who spend more on guns an ammo per month than half the country makes in income.

Around AZ, Nils kicks almost everyone’s ass, regardless of division, shooting a Canik.

[JCN]

Instead you'll provide visual ammunition for the gun grabbers, "They're training to kill us!" Better they don't know you exist.

Or else we'll be shooting at IPSC Coke Bottles on our once a month range visit to see our pistol at the club, UK style. Sporting purposes is the worst excuse to give gun grabbers. And they've exploited it time and time again.

I've long maintained that all it would take is some media sensationalist type to visit a match for USPSA and make an article about how we are training to be mass murdering active shooters... "shoot as many defenseless humanoids in the quickest time possible while inflicting the most damage with the least amount of ammunition!"

The IPSC classic targets seem less visually damning... I wonder if that's why some of the European countries use them.

[YVK]

FWIW, I've been running a TLR1 body stuffed with lead on my USPSA limited gun since 2014.




Ironic is that now people who have those lead-stuffed lights for Limited will now have to throw them away and buy frame weights, since "functional light" applies to all divisions.

[cheby]

http://www.axonshootingsports.com/

A lot of interesting points are discussed there. Highly recommend

[cheby]

Absolutely. And make it a reasonable weight for a "practical pistol" in PROD/CO. like 6lbs for DA's and 4lbs for


You dont need to worry, that is not happening ever. However, it would be badass if it did. It would test important Practical Pistol skills, given that the world is dark roughly half the time.
Triggers- there is no difference between a shadow 2 trigger in single action mode and 2011. Believe me, I have shot both a lot. Triggers can be turned to the point that it is irrelevant. The weight on the other hand is very important in mitigating recoil. That part is the most difficult and important part of shooting. Well, unless you shoot groups with no time limit. But we not talking about that, I hope.

Low light stages. If I remember correctly, 5 or 6 years ago there was a stage at the nationals with low light and a flashlight. You could have an option to shot it one handed or with compromised grip with the flashlight or freestyle with limited vision.

[JCN]

68589

https://www.bravoconcealment.com/products/glock-17-gen-5-streamlight-tlr-1-hl-dos-light-bearing-iwb-kydex-gun-holster-combo?variant=9547229462580

I have had a number of Bravo Holsters in the past and have really liked them.

Good quality, made in the USA, excellent price point.

This IWB light bearing rig with two mag pouches was total $58.

Instant Timmy Carry Optics setup for not a whole lot of money.

If you had someone with a $500 Glock, $250 Holosun, $60 Holster and a $150 light they’d be good to go.

[NoTacTravis]

The IPSC classic targets seem less visually damning... I wonder if that's why some of the European countries use them.

I always kind of just assumed that to be the case too. And the FBI q-targets for similar reasons. Great zone, innocuous looking milk bottle.

[Glenn E. Meyer]

I've long maintained that all it would take is some media sensationalist type to visit a match for USPSA and make an article about how we are training to be mass murdering active shooters... "shoot as many defenseless humanoids in the quickest time possible while inflicting the most damage with the least amount of ammunition!"

The IPSC classic targets seem less visually damning... I wonder if that's why some of the European countries use them.

Barnes and Noble used to sell UK handgun magazines before their bans. I bought a few. They had snide editorials about American humanoid competition targets indicating we were blood thirsty killers. When the bans were proposed, they tried to protect their guns as being for 'sport'. Didn't work. As an aside, the sports argument for the RKBA is useless as is the euphemism for ARs as MSRs.

The speed of folks shooting higher capacity guns (handguns or carbines) at matches, is an argument used for their banning. Folks prattle about how the AR isn't an assault boom boom because it isn't fully auto and thus 'nice' sporting toys but watch competitors with the semis and that argument is washed away.

BTW, I think this thread is hilarious and equal to one of wine snobs denouncing a $12 bottle of a red as not worthy of their majesty. Just shoot for fun and if you enjoy being anal retentive over the equipment and millisecond performance differences, it's your hobby. It's like coins, you can get a nice looking specimen of something you like in the lower MS ranks and then if you move up to the higher ones, the cost goes into the thousands. I shoot a stock Glock as I want to practice my EDC. I know that USPSA or IDPA or steel have nothing to do with da street but being practiced there is good for da street. OK. That makes sense.

[Eyesquared]

JJ posted on Instagram that he's going to shoot production nationals with a Surefire on his 92x Performance so apparently someone sees an advantage in going super heavy.

[Glenn E. Meyer]

We are all waiting for the Interplanetarys on Jupiter as the gravity will make the guns heavy. Tell Musk to set it up. However, the match might start with a bang.

[cheby]

JJ posted on Instagram that he's going to shoot production nationals with a Surefire on his 92x Performance so apparently someone sees an advantage in going super heavy.

Listen to the podcast with Mason Lane that I posted above. Mason said that everybody on the super squad is going to have a flashlight on there guns at least in Production and CO.

[Kirk]

Here is JJs Insta Story:

[YVK]

^^^^
I didn't read the rules. Do production guns still have to fit into the box, even with lights attached?

[Kirk]

^^^^
I didn't read the rules. Do production guns still have to fit into the box, even with lights attached?

This is a good question. I see nothing that indicates this either way in the rules (I may have missed it). Sort of like how they forgot to clarify that non-functioning WMLs used as frame weights in Limited are acceptable, they also *seem* at first glance to not have clarified this either. Seems the roll out here was poorly executed overall, that is my only complaint.

[Norville]

I am more concerned with what if they make low light stages where the WML are nessesary? What if you have to have them? What is next?? Lasers? Bayonets?? What skills are we even testing now??


Area 5 had a low light stage on an indoor range in 2016/7. You could borrow a mini mag lite, or hope you were dark adapted enough to see. A WML would have made that a lot easier.

[YVK]

I would also add that I am surprised about these top dudes jumping on extra-weight wagon just from a technical shooting standpoint. I don't know what goldilocks weight for a 9 mm gaming gun is but at some point they do become too heavy and too nose heavy. Personally I would take an improvement in my transitions over improvement in my splits. I can see how people would want to make poly guns heavier but 3 lbs Berettas and CZs?

[JCN]

I would also add that I am surprised about these top dudes jumping on extra-weight wagon just from a technical shooting standpoint. I don't know what goldilocks weight for a 9 mm gaming gun is but at some point they do become too heavy and too nose heavy. Personally I would take an improvement in my transitions over improvement in my splits. I can see how people would want to make poly guns heavier but 3 lbs Berettas and CZs?

About a year ago, I thought about something similar...

But then an Open guy reminded me that their guns are significantly heavier than even an overloaded Shadow.

JJ is a strong guy and I’m sure that he’s not at the limit of his physical transition speed.

It might actually help his transitions if his Production gun was closer to his Open gun weight.

I know that when I switch to polymer guns, I need to calibrate or else I over transition....

[YVK]

JCN: yup, my training partner's Limited gun is over 60 oz.

I dunno about open enough, but seems like if you're not splitting everything in teens, you're not competitive and dropping a Charlie on an imprecise gun stop is a fair tradeoff for the degree of aggression on arrays. For minor PF and its scoring, do we want guns that afford more precision? Again, I dunno enough to speak with any authority.

You mentioning JJ being strong etc made me think about my other sport, tennis. Tour players are using racquets with swingweight in 350s-360s. Me, if it gets above 330, it starts getting to be too much. I wonder if many of us are making a mistake trying to emulate shooting sport's equivalents of Rafa or Roger.

[NoTacTravis]

I would also add that I am surprised about these top dudes jumping on extra-weight wagon just from a technical shooting standpoint. I don't know what goldilocks weight for a 9 mm gaming gun is but at some point they do become too heavy and too nose heavy. Personally I would take an improvement in my transitions over improvement in my splits. I can see how people would want to make poly guns heavier but 3 lbs Berettas and CZs?

Atlas Nemesis in .40 S&W is 54oz
Atlas Nemesis in 9mm is is 46oz
https://www.atlasgunworks.com/product/nemesis-order-now-pistol-2#_specifications_tab

I'm assuming that Atlas has optimized the weight for their custom guns and the idea is to come as close to that as possible. Minor power factor is 75% of major but Atlas only reduced the weight by 15% for their 9mm version.


Beretta 92G LTT is 33.3oz
https://www.beretta.com/en/92g-elite-ltt/


CZ Shadow 1 41.1oz
CZ Shadow 2 46.5oz
Someone clearly thought that 5 more ounces primarily in the front dust cover would help there and the competition world seems to have agreed by making the switch. Goldilocks weight for a 9mm gamer gun seems to at least be above 41oz and approve of the extra 5oz in the nose of a 41oz gun.


Also, it doesn't make sense to me that people discount the recoil of 9mm to be so inconsequential and so easily overcome. But similarly find a a nose heavy gun to be impossible to compensate for in their gun handling. If your grip is so rock solid that 9mm recoil means nothing to you then I'm sure you can keep the nose up and transition few more ounces.

I think we're seeing people trying to make their production guns as close to limited minor specs as possible which is probably why the Shadow 2 has always been so close to Atlas 2011 specs in many ways.

Who's going to be the first to make a sight block flashlight?

[YVK]

Also, it doesn't make sense to me that people discount the recoil of 9mm to be so inconsequential and so easily overcome. But similarly find a a nose heavy gun to be impossible to compensate for in their gun handling. If your grip is so rock solid that 9mm recoil means nothing to you then I'm sure you can keep the nose up and transition few more ounces.

I think we're seeing people trying to make their production guns as close to limited minor specs as possible which is probably why the Shadow 2 has always been so close to Atlas 2011 specs in many ways.



You and I were typing at the same time, see my post above. It isn't that 9's recoil is inconsequential. Approach to same stages with major vs minor is different, so the question is what specs support factor-specific approach better.
Having been to three Ben's classes, if you listen to him correcting people during transition drills, he sounds like a broken record. "Too tense, too tense, relax". There are many reasons for tension,, 3 lbs weight extended out maybe one of them. I wonder if we are not very smart about this with those 47 oz guns. I simply don't have time for anything, but if I had, I'd test it out.

[JCN]

JCN: yup, my training partner's Limited gun is over 60 oz.

I dunno about open enough, but seems like if you're not splitting everything in teens, you're not competitive and dropping a Charlie on an imprecise gun stop is a fair tradeoff for the degree of aggression on arrays. For minor PF and its scoring, do we want guns that afford more precision? Again, I dunno enough to speak with any authority.

You mentioning JJ being strong etc made me think about my other sport, tennis. Tour players are using racquets with swingweight in 350s-360s. Me, if it gets above 330, it starts getting to be too much. I wonder if many of us are making a mistake trying to emulate shooting sport's equivalents of Rafa or Roger.

I dryfire practice with a heavy gun as weight training.
And yes, I think that casual shooters picking equipment based on pros can be an error (see dot and window sizes).
I think golf equipment is a very good analogy.

I don’t use a super stiff shaft blade faced 2-iron....

[bwswanson]

^^^^
I didn't read the rules. Do production guns still have to fit into the box, even with lights attached?

My understanding is it has to fit in the box with the light attached.

[cheby]

It's interesting to follow the discussion on my Facebook where 99.99% of my friends are USPSA shooters. I don't think I have seen anyone who approves the direction the sport is heading these days. Some people are just quiet because of the sponsors, and other political issues. Kudos to Mason Lane, Ben Berry, Cody Axon, and others for having balls to openly speak out about it.

[Sal Picante]

IDPA should take notes, but they won't.

What's IDPA?

:rolleyes:

[cheby]

What's IDPA?

:rolleyes:

International Doberman Pinscher Association according to Steve Anderson

[Glenn E. Meyer]

I Don't Practice Anymore - was the old joke.

I loathe to enter this debate again but I was taken by comments that new timmies pollute the 'game'. Don't try to get more folks into it. Given the posts on increased handgun buying, the increased diversity and clear data indicating the purchasing is for self-defense and not competition, are the purity of the game police counterproductive to gun usage, rights, etc. ?

Just a comment, it's not my business model or committed 'game'. Kind of off AIWB but those ideas are in this thread.

[JCN]

What's IDPA?

:rolleyes:

I think it’s a social fisherman’s competition from what I’ve seen of the competitors...

[cheby]

Locally all matches are sold out in 10 min maximum. Considering the ammo situation this is very remarkable
We obviously don't have enough ranges. This problem needs to be addressed immediately if we really want to grow a sport because it's going to get much worse.

A quick quote from a friend: the intent is to give the people what they want in hopes of growing the sport. That's where you are failing. Sometimes you have to tell little Johnny "No" because its for his best interest

[JCN]

A quick quote from a friend: the intent is to give the people what they want in hopes of growing the sport. That's where you are failing. Sometimes you have to tell little Johnny "No" because its for his best interest

Have you ever seen a parent tell little Johnny “no” because the parent wants what they want and thinks that supersedes the kid’s input? I have.

With paternalism you have to be VERY careful that it actually IS in their best interest and not selfish self-interest...

Or call a spade a spade.

[GJM]

It's interesting to follow the discussion on my Facebook where 99.99% of my friends are USPSA shooters. I don't think I have seen anyone who approves the direction the sport is heading these days. Some people are just quiet because of the sponsors, and other political issues. Kudos to Mason Lane, Ben Berry, Cody Axon, and others for having balls to openly speak out about it.

Probably because the ones that like it are busy practicing with their new pouch positions and flashlights and don’t have time to internet. I was quite disappointed when I registered for a USPSA match on Sunday, and flashlight wasn’t offered as a category along with the others like lady, senior, etc.

I am still trying to figure out if the objections are around the process or the actual changes? Hard to see why Open shooters who can do practically anything and Limited shooters with their heavy $5,000 pistols and no holster/mag pouch limits would care about my 30 ounce hunk of plastic with a light.

[Glenn E. Meyer]

Is it a business or not? The interplay of what the customers want and the purity issue is for some MBA to decide, I would think.

It's like Asian restaurants - they have authentic dishes for the cognoscenti and there is always sesame chicken and sweet and sour pork for for the unwashed masses.

As I've said, I play and shoot different games and get what I want out of it. Shooting production guns or SSP or some mundane 22lr works for me. If they offer PPC, so I can shoot that - that's fine as my goal is to shoot that gun to keep up skill levels with that.

As far as AIWB, if it makes folks happy let them shoot it. If they shoot off their reproductive parts, it is a positive for the evolution of humanity. If they shoot someone else, put them in jail or sue them. Should the organization and range be responsible, let the lawyers figure that out. My old body isn't going AIWB.

I argue that the 'games' have to have a path for inclusiveness of even those who don't meet the game purity test as it is good for those shooters to get some trigger time beyond the square range and it helps support the RKBA.

Yeah, I've trained with many of the best for my EDC issues. I wish more folks would. We know they don't. Can the games get them at least more experience - that would be a good thing.

[Eyesquared]

Being constructive: what improvements to the current ruleset would people suggest?

Some ideas (some overlap here):
1. List of legal lights
2. More clarity on what constitutes a light (what happens if I show up with a laser and beam diffuser, sort of like the IR flood on a PEQ15 but visible? Is it still a light if the beam is insanely narrow?)
3. Limitation on using lights outside of level 1 matches

And from a rules making procedure perspective, what changes would people suggest?
1. Rules changes voted on by board, proposed to membership, and then comment period before implementation.
2. Clearer communication between board and members re: reasoning behind changes. With a big rules change like this you should be able to see why the board wanted to do it on the USPSA website rather than just speculate or have to go off what the instagram account posted.

[Sal Picante]

At the end of the day this is a rule change that upends a lot of existing competitors' gear setups, all in hopes of attracting timmies (who I think are not going to flock to USPSA in droves over this change). It's pretty annoying to be a USPSA member and have stuff like this rammed down your throat supposedly for the benefit of potential timmie USPSA shooters, who have historically never been particularly active or interested in the sport anyways. Just look at who is posting in this thread, almost all people who already shoot USPSA, not timmie converts drawn in by this rules change. I am not anti-timmie but it's unfair to the membership to pull shit like this IMO.

Were they not interested because they were turned away because of restrictive gear rules? We've seen more and more folks come out to USPSA over the years, They added PCC & CO, and those are growing faster and faster - a lot of the "timmies" are showing up at my local matches.



I was speaking with a friend about the new rule changes. He shoots carry optics, limited and single stack. He said he had no heartburn with the new rules except for appendix carry. When I asked him why, he said “those guys will shove all that crap up front and then they won’t wanna bend over and pick up steel on stages.”

... and that's how you know that dude is retarded, in the literal sense of the word.



This exact topic came up on Stoeger's podcast, with Matt Pranka on the side of the stock glock being usable to win Nationals, and Stoeger being surprisingly adamant that stock Glocks are not competitive anymore. IIRC he also hinted that back when rules were more restrictive, some supposedly "stock" glocks were not quite stock. Now obviously winning Nationals is different from winning a local match but if you get a consistent 3-5% performance increase that is actually a big deal to me.

Ben and drama? No... He'd never do that...


These changes don't seem likely to cause a technology race BUT I have 0 faith in the board to have the level of foresight to prevent one from occurring with future rules changes. It just so happens that these recent changes don't offer an absolute advantage because gun weight has diminishing returns. However it's also pretty obvious from past rule changes that the board doesn't always think these things through. I suspect they did not expect non-timmie USPSA competitors to want to put on lights and I also don't think they considered the effect of being able to use a light with irons in different lighting, or the possibility that someone ends up making a "flashlight" that is basically an aiming device. If I recall the old X200 had a version that put out a beam that was like 8" wide at 25 yards.

... and we're arguing Cody Axon's point, which only really applies to a dark house stage. IDK. You're free to add/remove the light as you want... Do it or don't do it...



What's important to me is that we grow the sport in today's political climate.

^^^ I wish I could like that more than once... ^^^


I have to disagree with you on this. I am pretty sure that an average gamer would beat an average timmy with any duty gun. Opposite is not true. Average timmy has no chance against an average gamer with the gamer gun. This is just a fact of life. You are a good shooter not because of your timmy baggage, quite opposite.
Of course, this is the rabbit hole we went to before and never got back

Well, at least now they can go to a USPSA match and see the reality?

I don't even know what we're talking bout anymore...

[JCN]

I am still trying to figure out if the objections are around the process or the actual changes? Hard to see why Open shooters who can do practically anything and Limited shooters with their heavy $5,000 pistols and no holster/mag pouch limits would care about my 30 ounce hunk of plastic with a light.

Because when your wife smokes them through hard work and training, they will feel badly about themselves!

[Sal Picante]

Wait... Fleshlights are legal now in USPSA!?

p/CMDWAianf7p

Do they have to be functional?

[Eyesquared]

I argue that the 'games' have to have a path for inclusiveness of even those who don't meet the game purity test as it is good for those shooters to get some trigger time beyond the square range and it helps support the RKBA.

To be clear, it was legal to shoot AIWB and use a light before, but you would get bumped to open. IMO not a big deal as new shooters are not going to be super competitive from the get go and it doesn't matter if they shoot production or open, they're not likely to be in the running. I even knew a guy who stubbornly shot a 9mm ironsighted Glock with a light on it in open despite barely carrying it, primarily just for the ego protection excuses when he got crushed at every match.

I will also add, is it really true that gun games must be inclusive to all gun owners? If so I think we should take some of the guns out of 3gun, to make it more financially accessible to new gun owners who can't afford to buy a rifle, pistol, and shotgun. I also think we should move the targets closer in bullseye because the current distances are too discouraging for new shooters who aren't shooting accurate 22s or accurized pistols. And of course PRS needs some new divisions to allow people to shoot it with their home defense glocks.

[Zincwarrior]

I think it’s a social fisherman’s competition from what I’ve seen of the competitors...

Everyone makes fun of us old farts, until you need to know where the closest restroom is at.

https://i0.wp.com/www.chrisschmied.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/120539169_2857708207797875_8774080377245721892_n.j pg?fit=660%2C650

[Eyesquared]

Were they not interested because they were turned away because of restrictive gear rules? We've seen more and more folks come out to USPSA over the years, They added PCC & CO, and those are growing faster and faster - a lot of the "timmies" are showing up at my local matches.


In my experience, most of the time when people claim not wanting to use gamer gear is the reason they won't compete, it's just an excuse for why they don't want to come out and be put on a list where they may be placed lower than they'd like. Almost all my local CO and PCC shooters shot other USPSA divisions first. There are a handful of guys who were timmies originally (Safariland holsters and molle gun belts) but they have "converted" to being "regular" USPSA shooters and one even switched to a Shadow 2 with SRO.

YMMV. I think the concealment and WMLs at matches is going to be a highly regional thing. At my local matches of about 60-70 people I have never seen anyone shoot from concealment. I can't remember if I've seen anyone using a light. I've met one cop and he shot a shadow 2 or a tanfoglio stock 2 in production with normal USPSA gear.

[GJM]

... and that's how you know that dude is retarded, in the literal sense of the word.
.

He was kidding.

Face it, each division has its quirks. The Open guys never reset and tape because they are loving on their magazines. Production and Single Stack guys are collecting all their magazines off the stage. CO guys are trying to see if their dots are still functioning, and the appendix shooters are reminding all the other shooters how special they are.

[YVK]

I am still trying to figure out if the objections are around the process or the actual changes?

Bingo. Everything that struck me as a reasonable complaining about this didn't involve what these rules gonna do to outcome of matches.

The bitching which I felt was legit was about processes, priorities, and consistency. A deluge of rule changes in general, (alleged) prioritization of new shooters influx over opinions of current cadre on what's important, lack of transparency, inconsistent explanations for new rules.
We all know that match placements won't change.

P.S. Ordering a new Shadow 2 tonight. Both of mine have dustcovers milled out. Everyone is beefing up, I gotta too. Wonder if I can fill those milled pockets with molten lead.

[Glenn E. Meyer]

appendix shooters are reminding all the other shooters how special they are.

And checking the sausage and nut sack.

[JCN]

Everyone is beefing up, I gotta too. Wonder if I can fill those milled pockets with molten lead.

Tungsten pinewood derby putty...

[Glenn E. Meyer]

Would wearing a weighted wrist band by cheatin'? I had some for physical therapy. How about making the flashlight body out of gold and painting it black? Sorry to be frivolous.

[cheby]

Is it a business or not? The interplay of what the customers want and the purity issue is for some MBA to decide, I would think.

As an MBA and USPSA member I can tell you, this is NOT a business and it should not be. This is where I think the philosophical differences are between the current leadership and the top guys.

[cheby]

I am still trying to figure out if the objections are around the process or the actual changes? Hard to see why Open shooters who can do practically anything and Limited shooters with their heavy $5,000 pistols and no holster/mag pouch limits would care about my 30 ounce hunk of plastic with a light.

It is actually both. The judicial conservatism is a good thing especially when changes affect so many people. In the past there were review periods instead of pushing the changes instantly overnight.
With so many changes going in this direction in the last few years, it's hard to see why we actually have different divisions. This affects the sport in general and has an impact on all of us even if we shoot open or limited. For example , first they changed the weight limit to a ridiculous level, now they had to help the plastic guns to bump the weight. Now they would have to list allowed flashlights? Because I guarantee someone will get something absolutely ridiculous attached to their glocks soon. And so on. This is what happens when major decisions are ill-thought. One bad decision drags out even the worse one

[Glenn E. Meyer]

As an MBA and USPSA member I can tell you, this is NOT a business and it should not be. This is where I think the philosophical differences are between the current leadership and the top guys.

All 'sports' have a business component. The ranges that have charges and expenses, the manufacturers of equipment, the personnel who get paid in the organizations, the advertisers, etc.

Are the Olympics without money flow considerations? So are all the rules and divisions actually coming down to cash flow by supplying participants something they want to play at. Even churches play to the money flow at times.

Masses moved to the vernacular from Latin, outraging the purists. The rationale was to open access to the regular folks AND keep up attendance.

[cheby]

All 'sports' have a business component. The ranges that have charges and expenses, the manufacturers of equipment, the personnel who get paid in the organizations, the advertisers, etc.

Are the Olympics without money flow considerations? So are all the rules and divisions actually coming down to cash flow by supplying participants something they want to play at. Even churches play to the money flow at times.

Masses moved to the vernacular from Latin, outraging the purists. The rationale was to open access to the regular folks AND keep up attendance.

There's a difference between developing the sport and generating enough cash flow to cover the expenses and growing the revenue as a goal through the sport participation.
As an example - music. If the goal is to sell as many records as possible you will get something like Britney Spears vs Chic Corea for example. A lot of participants are not equal to high quality of competition and growing the skill level.

[Glenn E. Meyer]

Thus USPSA is only for the chosen? That's what I'm getting out this conversation. All those who don't reach a certain level cannot be part of the what level of matches? Having some of the losers at the matches you compete in is a horror?

I suppose you could have a set of matches for only those above XY or Z. Would that suffice? Is that model economically viable? Does the local club match offend you? Don't go to them.

[RJ]

I'm just here to represent the noobs in D class. This has been a pretty interesting thread; sitting back and learning how the higher classified shooters (which, is probably errbody here) are taking the rule changes.

So I went and downloaded the new rulebook, and started to make sure I understand what the list of changes might mean to me. I have a whole 14 matches, lifetime over maybe 5 years, as, for me, life gets in the way of my USPSA matches and I've been busy traveling/retiring/unretiring/working/retiring again/moving house/yes again. Anyway, I don't really see what the fuss is all about? Again, this is from a pretty new shooter, experience wise, but is seems like the rules make sense to me.

Flashlights, yeah sure, I see a lot more carry guns with flashlights on them. Does it add weight to steady follow up shots; well sure. But I still have to focus on trigger control, and not screwing up. That always affects my score a heckova lot more than whether I have an extra 1.0 oz at the end of my gun.

Moving mags and holsters more forward on the hip, makes sense too. I now carry AIWB, to I can skosh my G34 B/T holster around a bit more to the front without worrying about moving to Open. I mean hell I'm not competitive anyway, so who cares at the local level. I only draw like 5 or 6 times in match anyway.

As to USPSA, I think overall they are moving in the right direction. Having match scores done with tablets, so your results get uploaded to the site before you get home to take a shower, that is pretty cool, and only happened relatively recently. Carry optics is much more interesting to me now, since I got on the dot bandwagon and bought a HS507c and a Glock 34 last fall. I'll have some adjustments to make going from Production to CO. Way I read the rules I guess I don't need no more stinking 5 magazines on a stage, since I can load up the G17 magazines I have.

Bottom line, I don't see this moving me from my current position, just above DFL; I'll need to get a bit better first.

[cheby]

Thus USPSA is only for the chosen? That's what I'm getting out this conversation. All those who don't reach a certain level cannot be part of the what level of matches? Having some of the losers at the matches you compete in is a horror?

I suppose you could have a set of matches for only those above XY or Z. Would that suffice? Is that model economically viable? Does the local club match offend you? Don't go to them.
There were rules that's been in place for a long time. Internationally accepted for the most part. ANYONE was welcome. Why was that a problem?

[NoTacTravis]

Thus USPSA is only for the chosen? That's what I'm getting out this conversation. All those who don't reach a certain level cannot be part of the what level of matches? Having some of the losers at the matches you compete in is a horror?


So the notion of Timmies getting their feelings hurt by getting beaten by Open shooters is so scary to them that they see themselves as being unwelcome? But when they get their feelings hurt by Production shooters instead it's going to be a total game changer for them? That seems to be the crux of your argument.


I don't really much care where people are allowed to draw from. But if you've got a one second AIWB draw anyways, it should only take you a day or two to get a solid one second 3 o'clock draw. For a group of guys who are all about adapt and overcome, be ready at all times, rack your slide off your holster and all of that, they sure seem to have an awfully hard time adapting to even the idea of a new pressure environment and slightly different way to get their gun into their hand.

And if they are such an inexperienced EDC carrier that this is their first experience on a non-square range, maybe not having concealment and extra stuff hanging off their gun is a good place to start if they are going to be running and gunning.

I don't think the logic that all these new EDC appendix carriers are getting shut out of their local matches is correct. Generally I hear story after story of members loaning them gear, letting them run whatever they brought at locals, and all kinds of open arms welcoming of new shooters of every background.


Having said that, I absolutely think people should have to qualify for nationals once the sport grows enough. It's pretty much what every other newer sport does as it matures. Place in your division at state to go to nationals is pretty much the recipe of every growing sport once it gets past the stage of just trying to fill up a walk on nationals.

[cheby]

Having said that, I absolutely think people should have to qualify for nationals once the sport grows enough. It's pretty much what every other newer sport does as it matures. Place in your division at state to go to nationals is pretty much the recipe of every growing sport once it gets past the stage of just trying to fill up a walk on nationals.

Essentially it's already like that. Each section gets the nationals slots based on the section numbers. Each section distributes those slots to the divisions winners. Recently there were more available slots than usual because of growing number of divisions and diluting the competition as a result in some divisions. Last year, COVID-19 affected the participation of course. This year, some top production shooters are skipping the nationals because of the bad timing.

[Eyesquared]

As to USPSA, I think overall they are moving in the right direction. Having match scores done with tablets, so your results get uploaded to the site before you get home to take a shower, that is pretty cool, and only happened relatively recently.
To give credit where credit is due, Practiscore was developed by Ken Nelson from TPC. AFAIK it is not officially affiliated with the USPSA org.

[LittleLebowski]

With all of this new shit, I’ve reaffirmed my stance on shooting matches for fun.

[olstyn]

There were rules that's been in place for a long time. Internationally accepted for the most part. ANYONE was welcome. Why was that a problem?

It wasn't a problem and isn't a problem, but if you look back at the history of your posts in this thread with open eyes, I think it'll become clear pretty quickly why Glenn thinks you hate newbies. I tend toward sharing his evaluation of your attitude.

[cheby]

It wasn't a problem and isn't a problem, but if you look back at the history of your posts in this thread with open eyes, I think it'll become clear pretty quickly why Glenn thinks you hate newbies. I tend toward sharing his evaluation of your attitude.

Sorry you feel this way. I'd suggest listening to the podcast with Mason. They addressed that "attitude" probably better than I can.

[Eyesquared]

Have you ever seen a parent tell little Johnny “no” because the parent wants what they want and thinks that supersedes the kid’s input? I have.

With paternalism you have to be VERY careful that it actually IS in their best interest and not selfish self-interest...

Or call a spade a spade.

You can make that argument about the board bringing this rules change to a vote and implementing it without seeking input from the membership.

[Clusterfrack]

I just spent $70 on magnets.

[Clusterfrack]

Thus USPSA is only for the chosen? That's what I'm getting out this conversation. All those who don't reach a certain level cannot be part of the what level of matches? Having some of the losers at the matches you compete in is a horror?

I suppose you could have a set of matches for only those above XY or Z. Would that suffice? Is that model economically viable? Does the local club match offend you? Don't go to them.

I love having new shooters join USPSA. I’m mentoring one currently. However, I want USPSA to remain a sport, where the competition is first and foremost. I don’t want USPSA to become a business, or just an activity that people like to attend. It is a sport, and should be governed with openness, fairness, stability, and competitive equity as guiding principles. If we can grow the sport without compromising that core, I’m good with that.

[olstyn]

Sorry you feel this way. I'd suggest listening to the podcast with Mason. They addressed that "attitude" probably better than I can.

I'm partway through it, but I rather doubt it's going to change my mind about your attitude. The number of times one of them (sorry, I lost track of which voice belongs to which name) said "I don't mean to sound like a dick, but" is pretty indicative of the same attitude, and I don't view the arguments they're making as terribly persuasive. Yeah, matches already fill up. That's not a reason to be against more participation, it's a reason to encourage more clubs to host matches, thus increasing capacity.

[cheby]

I'm partway through it, but I rather doubt it's going to change my mind about your attitude. The number of times one of them (sorry, I lost track of which voice belongs to which name) said "I don't mean to sound like a dick, but" is pretty indicative of the same attitude, and I don't view the arguments they're making as terribly persuasive. Yeah, matches already fill up. That's not a reason to be against more participation, it's a reason to encourage more clubs to host matches, thus increasing capacity.
You could also read the post right before yours. It may be more pleasing. However, still "facts don't care about your feelings" B. Shapiro

[JCN]

You can make that argument about the board bringing this rules change to a vote and implementing it without seeking input from the membership.

I guess. But the board didn’t say it was something that was better for the current membership.

Part of the goal of a board is to keep the organization healthy for the future and even if it’s not popular for what people want right now, it might still be best for the organization.

But that’s different than telling the current members that it’s the best for them.

In a sport like this, the people who bitch the loudest... are the most invested and will just deal with it.

[YVK]

I just spent $70 on magnets.

You're getting slow. Mine are halfway here.

I also hit four sub-second reloads yesterday after moving mag pouches forward. That pretty much never happens for me. Is 0.75 a new 1.0?



I'm partway through it, but I rather doubt it's going to change my mind about your attitude. The number of times one of them (sorry, I lost track of which voice belongs to which name) said "I don't mean to sound like a dick, but" is pretty indicative of the same attitude, and I don't view the arguments they're making as terribly persuasive.


I thought that some stuff they said made sense.

I welcome new guests to my house but I am not going to change house rules to get more new guests in if my house rules are well established and fair.
Speculatively, the changes are there to bring more new people in but if a dude didn't join before simply 'cause he couldn't compete from junk carry, then he may have not tried to understand what this sport was about.

I think that those two points from podcast at least have merits, if not fair.

Another absolutely spot on thing was pointing out that USPSA's reasoning for flashlights and part of reasoning for appendix position - that part where they said it was about letting people compete with their carry setups out of their carry rigs - sounded less than persuasive. Sure, we let you hang the WMLs because that's how you carry, sure we let you shoot from AIWB because how you carry but no, you still have to download you carry mags to 10 even though you don't carry that way. Because??? Lack of consistency raises fair questions about truthfulness of explanation.



Aaand, as a comic relief, somebody, who we will not name, excitedly put a flashlight on his new Walther PDP, went to shoot a match with it, and ran said flashlight into a barrel or a barricade or something. Fortunately. RO didn't check if flashlight still met the "functioning" requirement after.

[olstyn]

Speculatively, the changes are there to bring more new people in but if a dude didn't join before simply 'cause he couldn't compete from junk carry, then he may have not tried to understand what this sport was about.

I think that those two points from podcast at least have merits, if not fair.

Another absolutely spot on thing was pointing out that USPSA's reasoning for flashlights and part of reasoning for appendix position - that part where they said it was about letting people compete with their carry setups out of their carry rigs - sounded less than persuasive. Sure, we let you hang the WMLs because that's how you carry, sure we let you shoot from AIWB because how you carry but no, you still have to download you carry mags to 10 even though you don't carry that way. Because??? Lack of consistency raises fair questions about truthfulness of explanation.

That's fair, and I don't disagree with the basic point, except in the case of rules that didn't seem to make sense to begin with. (I believe the holster position rules fell under that category.) Having now gotten through the whole podcast, I still generally dislike the elitist attitude of the three people in it, but their points about the potential impact of flashlights do make logical sense, apart from the reductio ad absurdum they got into about dead batteries and light/laser combos. I can see them being an advantage during suboptimal lighting conditions for sure.

I have also previously expressed concerns about rules consistency around the flashlight change in this very thread, but nobody had a good answer for the question I was asking. I'll restate it now: As far as I understand, the rules still say that holsters must fully protect the trigger. How can that work with a light-bearing holster? Lights are wider than trigger guards, so basically every light-bearing holster has space around the trigger guard, definitely enough for foreign objects, and in some cases, maybe even fingers, to get into. Based on that, it sounds to me like the rule change around lights makes the lights legal, but there won't be a way to actually run them because the holsters won't fit within the rules. Unless, of course, I'm misunderstanding...

[GJM]

Yep, I whacked my Surefire on a barrel. Now I know what a girl experiences right after getting a boob job.

[YVK]

I have also previously expressed concerns about rules consistency around the flashlight change in this very thread, but nobody had a good answer for the question I was asking. I'll restate it now: As far as I understand, the rules still say that holsters must fully protect the trigger. How can that work with a light-bearing holster? Lights are wider than trigger guards, so basically every light-bearing holster has space around the trigger guard, definitely enough for foreign objects, and in some cases, maybe even fingers, to get into. Based on that, it sounds to me like the rule change around lights makes the lights legal, but there won't be a way to actually run them because the holsters won't fit within the rules. Unless, of course, I'm misunderstanding...

I think this is one of the many unintended consequences that they simply have not thought through. I don't own a single WML-bearing AIWB holster for this very reason. Last I looked into this was maybe a couple of years ago and it seemed that newer WMLs allow for tighter holster to trigger guard fit than legacy Surefires. Still this is something I personally will never do unless they come up with a light that's narrower than the gun.

I don't have a good answer but I think that because USPSA runs cold ranges, and loading and holstering is effectively a supervised procedure, risk of adverse events on this particular account is low.

[GJM]

I just spent $70 on magnets.

Better be careful, my wife just let out a yell and I found her stuck to the gun safe with her new magnet!

[YVK]

Now I know what a girl experiences right after getting a boob job.

Based on observations of not an insignificantly sized sample, that would be an urge to share with girlfriends, an urge to wear more revealing clothing, and back pain. Was it what you experienced too?

[NoTacTravis]

I have also previously expressed concerns about rules consistency around the flashlight change in this very thread, but nobody had a good answer for the question I was asking. I'll restate it now: As far as I understand, the rules still say that holsters must fully protect the trigger. How can that work with a light-bearing holster? Lights are wider than trigger guards, so basically every light-bearing holster has space around the trigger guard, definitely enough for foreign objects, and in some cases, maybe even fingers, to get into. Based on that, it sounds to me like the rule change around lights makes the lights legal, but there won't be a way to actually run them because the holsters won't fit within the rules. Unless, of course, I'm misunderstanding...

The answer to this is new aluminum race holsters for everyone. You know, just like everyone carries with their EDC. So this will make things fully accessible and low cost to all. For another $175.

[Norville]

That's fair, and I don't disagree with the basic point, except in the case of rules that didn't seem to make sense to begin with. (I believe the holster position rules fell under that category.) Having now gotten through the whole podcast, I still generally dislike the elitist attitude of the three people in it, but their points about the potential impact of flashlights do make logical sense, apart from the reductio ad absurdum they got into about dead batteries and light/laser combos. I can see them being an advantage during suboptimal lighting conditions for sure.

I have also previously expressed concerns about rules consistency around the flashlight change in this very thread, but nobody had a good answer for the question I was asking. I'll restate it now: As far as I understand, the rules still say that holsters must fully protect the trigger. How can that work with a light-bearing holster? Lights are wider than trigger guards, so basically every light-bearing holster has space around the trigger guard, definitely enough for foreign objects, and in some cases, maybe even fingers, to get into. Based on that, it sounds to me like the rule change around lights makes the lights legal, but there won't be a way to actually run them because the holsters won't fit within the rules. Unless, of course, I'm misunderstanding...


I just checked the OWB holster I have, and I can’t get a finger near the trigger. A piece of coat hanger wire, probably. Much like a lot of this, I don’t think all the ramifications have been thought through.

I think 5.2.7.4 was meant to address open and partially covered triggers, not a fully covered trigger that would require a concerted effort to activate.

[Eyesquared]

That's fair, and I don't disagree with the basic point, except in the case of rules that didn't seem to make sense to begin with. (I believe the holster position rules fell under that category.) Having now gotten through the whole podcast, I still generally dislike the elitist attitude of the three people in it, but their points about the potential impact of flashlights do make logical sense, apart from the reductio ad absurdum they got into about dead batteries and light/laser combos. I can see them being an advantage during suboptimal lighting conditions for sure.

I have also previously expressed concerns about rules consistency around the flashlight change in this very thread, but nobody had a good answer for the question I was asking. I'll restate it now: As far as I understand, the rules still say that holsters must fully protect the trigger. How can that work with a light-bearing holster? Lights are wider than trigger guards, so basically every light-bearing holster has space around the trigger guard, definitely enough for foreign objects, and in some cases, maybe even fingers, to get into. Based on that, it sounds to me like the rule change around lights makes the lights legal, but there won't be a way to actually run them because the holsters won't fit within the rules. Unless, of course, I'm misunderstanding...

Personally I think it's not entirely accurate how everything related to USPSA rules changes always gets spun to be elitists vs the everyman. Then of course you have to "tone-police" the elitists because they're whiny and rude, which is also a convenient way of getting them to shut up without having to make an actual argument in favor of changing rules. None of the people at my local club match were shooting from concealment, shooting from any form of AIWB, or using lights on their guns. They are the norm in USPSA, and the issue these rule changes supposedly fix, apparently did not meaningfully affect them. I don't see anyone I know suddenly deciding they want to shoot a lot more USPSA because of the rule changes. Does it make sense to act like these changes were made for the benefit of the everyday USPSA shooter? On social media I see a lot of people getting up in arms at the "elitists", but I haven't seen any meaningful arguments from those people explaining why they are so attached to the idea of being able to use flashlights in USPSA when (assuming they shot USPSA before) they were doing just fine without them.

Pro-flashlight arguments I've seen:
1. USPSA is supposed to be practical. (disregard the 38 supercomp open guns with frame mounted optics and 29 rounds in a mag, also disregard that shooting well is transferable with or without a light on your gun)
2. Evens the playing field between polymer and steel frame guns (IMO the jury is out on this, for all we know it may turn out that the best combination is to go all the way for 59oz, like an open gun)
3. Less heartbreak for the new shooter who shows up and gets bumped to open. (okay, but he's still going to learn the hard way about stuff like footfaults on stomp pads, getting bumped to open for starting with 11 rounds on an unloaded start, etc. You can't insulate new shooters from having to learn the confusing rules forever.)

Is the everyman (as opposed to the elitist GM) someone who doesn't currently shoot USPSA? Is it even possible to change the rules to persuade them to join? As I noted earlier in the thread I see many more current USPSA shooters talking about this than prospective ones.

[olstyn]

I think 5.2.7.4 was meant to address open and partially covered triggers, not a fully covered trigger that would require a concerted effort to activate.

No doubt you're right about the intent, and no doubt there will be a ruling that says I'm wrong soon, but the wording of that rule as it currently stands at bare minimum makes light-bearing holsters sound questionable if for no other reason than the word "completely":


5.2.7Competitors must not be permitted to commence a course of fire wearing:
...
5.2.7.4 A holster which does not completely prevent access to, or activation of, the trigger while holstered.

[olstyn]

Then of course you have to "tone-police" the elitists because they're whiny and rude, which is also a convenient way of getting them to shut up without having to make an actual argument in favor of changing rules.

When has being whiny and rude ever been a good way to persuade people that your position is the right one? If they presented their arguments in the way Clusterfrack does instead of being snide and talking down to their supposed audience, they might actually get somewhere.

As it is, listening to them, I had to fight through my baseline dislike of listening to the way they spoke and their disdain for all of us untermenschen to get to the meat of their argument. As I've already said, I see their point on WMLs and have concerns of my own about the consistency of those rules that they didn't even bring up, but I continue to believe that the gear positioning thing is just a correction to how things should have been all along.

[Eyesquared]

When has being whiny and rude ever been a good way to persuade people that your position is the right one? If they presented their arguments in the way Clusterfrack does instead of being snide and talking down to their supposed audience, they might actually get somewhere.

As it is, listening to them, I had to fight through my baseline dislike of listening to the way they spoke and their disdain for all of us untermenschen to get to the meat of their argument. As I've already said, I see their point on WMLs and have concerns of my own about the consistency of those rules that they didn't even bring up, but I continue to believe that the gear positioning thing is just a correction to how things should have been all along.

I listened to the same podcast as you and while I find they're not inclined to give the USPSA org any benefit of the doubt (or rather they tend to assume the worst), I really did not perceive the snobbery you perceived.

I also still think the USPSA "everyman" is sort of a fictional construction. As stated before, I think the rules change benefits a tiny tiny fraction of existing shooters and if the holsters were stopping "tactically-minded" people from shooting USPSA, wait until they hear about other unrealistic gamer stuff like doing the flamingo on a hard lean, shooting while falling out of the shooting box in the last position on a stage, in-battery speed reloads, no use of cover, that goofy kneeling prone everyone does instead of actually going prone, not having to PID threats vs non-threats, only 2 rounds to neutralize any threat, etc. USPSA is so riddled with game artificialities. Anyone who was actually prevented from shooting because they had the wrong holster or they absolutely had to have their WML missed the forest for the trees.

[NoTacTravis]

I've listened to Cody Axon and Mason Lane on a number of podcasts for the past year or so and really enjoyed both what they have to say and their approach to the sport. i thought this episode was a solid listen that I enjoyed as well.

[Bucky]

I just spent $70 on magnets.

Magnets allowed in all divisions now?

[Norville]

Magnets allowed in all divisions now?

Yes sir.

[Zincwarrior]

Our officers often compete with their lights in SSP. Not a difference worthy of putting one on or taking one off.

inversely, if shooters are worried about WMLs in production used for weight, wouldn't those people already be shooting high weight pistols. how does this not offer an option to even that out if one wanted? I'm confused - which is situation normal for me*

*I shoot an X5 with legion grip in production, but would not be keen on going heavier. Too much to push around, and I'm just a hack anyway.

[DC_P]

Magnets allowed in all divisions now?

Could someone please explain to the FNG (me) what the magnet is used for?

[Glenn E. Meyer]

Flashlights - just a diversion for grins. At a TX IDPA match (horrors, horrors, true believers), for some reason a group of new folks (horrors, they pollute our paradigm) showed up. They were led by their minister and were clad in tactical polyester pants and polo shirts, looking like they stepped out of time machine from Leave it to Beaver. Uncle Mike's holsters!

Now we tried to be nice to them but the minister tried to take over the squad and the SO had to speak to him. Anyway, Ward Cleaver gets up and draws his 'piece'. It has a combo light and laser. Well, it falls off and strobe goes on as does the laser. Looked like a disco on the ground. Hilarity ensued. They never came back, maybe they went to USPSA. That's a joke.


So the notion of Timmies getting their feelings hurt by getting beaten by Open shooters is so scary to them that they see themselves as being unwelcome?

We were always nice to beginners and told them not to try to win but to improve their skills set. Sure you need to qualify for higher level matches. So what. My feeling don't get hurt if someone beats me, if I improve. I'm my own challenge. I have a different mindset, I suppose. The matches are fun but keep up my skills for da street, da real world, etc. Thus, the equipment issues aren't for me, if you enjoy them and the arcane world of rule changes, have fun. Note, I have trained intensively with the best instructors and know that the games are NOT training.

Someone said that most USPSA folks don't carry. Well, that says a lot to me. Thus, the games are somewhat irrelevant to the RKBA as sports are not part of it. Flame on.

[Clusterfrack]

Could someone please explain to the FNG (me) what the magnet is used for?

https://benstoegerproshop.com/ghost-360-universal-magazine-pouch-with-magnet-uspsa-ipsc/

https://www.doublealpha.biz/us/daa-bullets-out-magnetic-pouch

https://www.doublealpha.biz/us/magnetic-mag-holder

[Clusterfrack]

Someone said that most USPSA folks don't carry. Well, that says a lot to me. Thus, the games are somewhat irrelevant to the RKBA as sports are not part of it. Flame on.

I'm not into flaming, but let me offer my perspective on this. USPSA/IPSC is a sport that has significantly advanced handgun technology and shooting skills. While some USPSA shooters still use revolvers and 1911s (and 10 round mags), the sport also includes the most modern guns, with high capacity magazines, red dots, and even PCCs. It shows that these types of firearms are owned for sporting purposes, as well as for self-defense.

It get kids and families involved in shooting, and teaches safe handling under much more realistic conditions than a bench type range. USPSA shooters may not carry, but I don't know anyone who is opposed to it. As well, their larger family and friend group learns that shooting isn't scary.

USPSA participation is a win for the 2nd Amendment.

[Zincwarrior]

https://benstoegerproshop.com/ghost-360-universal-magazine-pouch-with-magnet-uspsa-ipsc/

https://www.doublealpha.biz/us/daa-bullets-out-magnetic-pouch

https://www.doublealpha.biz/us/magnetic-mag-holder

To paraphrase CF:

A must have item for those "pick up the mag" stages. With this custom made magnetic mag holder, you can slap your extra magazine onto your belt as fast as you can pick it up from the table! Never again waste precious time fumbling to insert a magazine into your magazine pouches!

Basically for stages that require tac reloads instead of sticking it in your pocket, you just slap it against the magnet.


I'm not into flaming, but let me offer my perspective on this. USPSA/IPSC is a sport that has significantly advanced handgun technology and shooting skills. While some USPSA shooters still use revolvers and 1911s (and 10 round mags), the sport also includes the most modern guns, with high capacity magazines, red dots, and even PCCs. It shows that these types of firearms are owned for sporting purposes, as well as for self-defense.
Interestingly, at least in Texas, you almost never see an IDPA shooter who is not a CHL or doesn't want to be one. Of course, in Texas I'd assume most USPSA shooters are the same (in Texas its best to assume that regardless).

[Clusterfrack]

To paraphrase CF:


Basically for stages that require tac reloads instead of sticking it in your pocket, you just slap it against the magnet.


Interestingly, at least in Texas, you almost never see an IDPA shooter who is not a CHL or doesn't want to be one. Of course, in Texas I'd assume most USPSA shooters are the same (in Texas its best to assume that regardless).

Thanks for the translation. I admit that was little terse.

I'm going to experiment with a magnetic 1st mag pouch, at 10:00.

68645
https://www.doublealpha.biz/us/daa-bullets-out-magnetic-pouch

[RJ]

I’m now semi-seriously thinking of calculating how much current I need for a large electromagnet, so all I have to do after a Stage is flip a switch to recover all my spent mags back to my pouches. :cool:

PS I shoot USPSA, and I carry.

[Glenn E. Meyer]

I agree with you Cluster. However, didn't someone in this thread have a problem with PCC being added? The shooting sports are great for folks and getting into them does support the RKBA attitudes, even though sports aren't a reason for the 2nd Amendment. I want more practiced and trained folks to carry. I don't get folks who don't. That's another debate and I do understand it a bit as some folks don't want to train or compete because they feel they will look silly or less dominant.

If the shooting sports aid in handgun or long arm design, that's great. I suppose we are just talking about attitudinal differences. I recall some dude who had a hissy fit because we older folks weren't taking a knee and taking the penalty. He might LOSE! The penalty wasn't enough. So with bum knees, titanium knees, exoskeleton on your knees - you might lose a club match to them. Horrors! At least, I'm not going to run so fast that I slide by the next position or fall flat on my face.

Anyway, AIWB doesn't work for me and we have diverted. I don't use a WML based on the 'tactical debates' as to their utility. Got that Surefire as part of my EDC, though. It was useful in the NTI when we had a run without guns and I had to bop a dummy in the head with it.

This is probably irrelevant but a speed issue - we had a fun knife stage at the IDPA match. You had to first engage the target with your knife and then draw, etc. Some folks didn't have a knife - shame! Some guys just stabbed it with the point as fast as they could to get to the gun. Didn't even penetrate - save time! I and my LEO friend (who name is Tim and runs a Shadow - huh?) - we eviscerated the SOB, even though we ran up the clock.