Page 37 of 55 FirstFirst ... 27353637383947 ... LastLast
Results 361 to 370 of 542

Thread: AIWB now legal in all divisions?

  1. #361
    King of Craft Clusterfrack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Redneck wonderland

    AIWB now legal in all divisions?

    I shot my first match with the new rules. I moved my holster slightly forward, and made major adjustments to my mag carriers. The match went very well, and after visualizing my mag changes in a very granular way on the first two stages, I forgot about it and had no problems.

    Iím glad I have always run bullets forward because the hand trajectory parallel to the belt makes changes in mag carrier position less of a difference. With bullets out, Iíve always felt like very precise hand placement was required.
    "BJJ is sort of like nonconsensual yoga"
    "You donít really graduate from certain problems or certain thingsÖ like you always have to work on trigger control and pulling the trigger straight. " --Ben Stoeger 1/24/2018

  2. #362
    Site Supporter
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Location
    TX
    I moved the mag carrier which I had positioned at about 8 o'clock up to the front of my belt, to about 11:30. But my problem is that my muscle memory is still ingrained to go for the mag carrier that I have positioned at my hip bone at about 10 o'clock. So, on most stages at the match I attended today, I ended up drawing that 10 o'clock magazine for a reload instead of the one at 11:30. More dryfire reload practice I guess!

  3. #363
    Site Supporter JCS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Location
    Oklahoma
    Quote Originally Posted by Clusterfrack View Post
    I shot my first match with the new rules. I moved my holster slightly forward, and made major adjustments to my mag carriers. The match went very well, and after visualizing my mag changes in a very granular way on the first two stages, I forgot about it and had no problems.

    Iím glad I have always run bullets forward because the hand trajectory parallel to the belt makes changes in mag carrier position less of a difference. With bullets out, Iíve always felt like very precise hand placement was required.
    Interesting observations! I moved my pouches forward and have been thinking about how I'm gonna make sure and not grab for where the pouches used to be. I was thinking of adding cues like "pouch 1" and moving my hand towards the pouch during visualizations. Any tips on how you did this?

    Also, I'm running bullets forward because that's what I was running and it's gonna be real uncomfortable on a prone stage but oh well. It seems like cheating having the mag below my nipple line but you are right it does take precise placement of the hand.
    SDG

  4. #364
    Site Supporter JCS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Location
    Oklahoma
    I like the pouch and holster placement rules. I've heard the big names discussing the light thing and it seems like it's going to change the game where everyone will be running a light of some sort if you want to compete. The advantage of using it as a light don't seem to make the much sense to me because it can be addressed in the wsb to not allow competitors to use them in a shoot house style stage. But the added weight and inevitable gaming of the light will make it an advantage apparently. I am scouring for a discounted light and plan to see just how heavy I can get a streamlight trl-1 to see if I notice anything. I believe I can easily fill the head up with lead shot to add some weight while not changing the functionality. This feature is gonna be gamed so hardcore. I think the one thing that does make it tricky is that the light does have to be functional and strapping a cheap light to a lead weight won't hold up to recoil. In fact I'm not sure how even the big name lights will hold up to the kind of rounds USPSA guys are shooting. It seems like just another purchase you'll need 2 of if you wanna compete seriously.
    SDG

  5. #365
    @JCS a guy on Enos mentioned you can get knock off Surefires for like $35 apiece if you are just using them to game.

  6. #366
    Site Supporter JCS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Location
    Oklahoma
    Quote Originally Posted by NoTacTravis View Post
    @JCS a guy on Enos mentioned you can get knock off Surefires for like $35 apiece if you are just using them to game.
    I'm conflicted because I really hate supporting knock off companies because it justifies what they are doing but I don't wanna spend $250 on a light when I don't care about the output.
    SDG

  7. #367
    Quote Originally Posted by JCS View Post
    I like the pouch and holster placement rules. I've heard the big names discussing the light thing and it seems like it's going to change the game where everyone will be running a light of some sort if you want to compete. The advantage of using it as a light don't seem to make the much sense to me because it can be addressed in the wsb to not allow competitors to use them in a shoot house style stage. But the added weight and inevitable gaming of the light will make it an advantage apparently. I am scouring for a discounted light and plan to see just how heavy I can get a streamlight trl-1 to see if I notice anything. I believe I can easily fill the head up with lead shot to add some weight while not changing the functionality. This feature is gonna be gamed so hardcore. I think the one thing that does make it tricky is that the light does have to be functional and strapping a cheap light to a lead weight won't hold up to recoil. In fact I'm not sure how even the big name lights will hold up to the kind of rounds USPSA guys are shooting. It seems like just another purchase you'll need 2 of if you wanna compete seriously.
    You could specify in the WSB to not use the light, but why would they? I haven't shot a dark stage in a long time, but I used to shoot at least one every year when single stack nats was at Barry. They could make the house dark enough where it was a pretty good advantage, and trying to nail speed reloads with a flashlight in your hand isn't great. I'm mainly shooting locals lately so I guess it doesn't really matter to me, but I'm not sure I'd bother signing up to shoot a dark house until I had my equipment sorted, which may be a long time because I wasn't planning on buying new guns.

    I didn't see that the weight restrictions were changed for production or single stack though...Were they? Not sure it'd be that easy to make weight with a railed SS gun and light.

    My plan so far is to put a magnet around 11:00 and make some minor holster and mag holder adjustments.

  8. #368
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    1984
    ....
    Last edited by cheby; 03-13-2021 at 11:13 PM.

  9. #369
    Quote Originally Posted by NoTacTravis View Post
    Just to be devil's advocate on this point... bigger name sponsors like that scenario can allow a niche sport to make huge steps forward and leads to more sponsored athletes making meaningful money. Which in turn tends to make the level of the top competitors jump as they compete for those dollars.

    A 2022 Surefire nationals could be a strong argument in favor of rules like this as much as against it.

    Prolific contingency sponsors by gear manufacturers could end up being an interim step to that the same way a lot of tire manufacturers do in autocross. Big money sponsors have potential for a lot of corrupting of the purity of a sport but also offer huge upsides for talent growth when there's that kind of incentive to break new performance barriers.

    I'm curious to see what USPSA develops into in the next 5 years. If it's just "big tent" shooting, or starting to bring out some next level performances from a growing pool of pros and semi-pros.


    I'm also a little curious if @Archer1440 sees a growing parallel to the gear used at the highest levels in archery competition. I doubt all the extra stuff hanging off the bow in the pic below would do me much good for a few years but everyone at the Olympic level pretty much has to use it.
    That particular shooter, Alison Williamson, was in her 6th consecutive Olympic Games (London) where that photo was taken (it was also my 6th consecutive Games as a technical official). Yet, some of the gear on her bow in that photo was actually considered obsolete by 2012.

    The items you see there- sight, stabilizers, clicker- have been on Olympic bows for over 50 years now. The World Archery federation is extremely conservative when it comes to equipment rules. The allowed equipment items themselves have evolved considerably and scores are higher than ever, mostly due to improvements in training, and benchmark scores are up 60 points from when I was internationally competitive (on a base perfect score of 1440). The last equipment item that demonstrably increased score all on its own (an improved barreled arrow) was introduced 25 years ago. The ones before that (the clicker and stabilizers) were introduced in the 1960ís. We still have no rear peep sight, which would definitely push scores up at least 30-40 points on a 1440 round for mid level shooters and give the top shooters 5 points at least. Thatís not going to happen in the foreseeable future.

    To your point, some rank beginners in archery (and some in competitive pistol) often put all the bells and whistles they see on top shooters equipment on their gear right from the start, and focus too much on equipment, which can actually be a detriment to development very early on. In Olympic archery every shot is a process, and some of the gear (stabilizers, cushion plungers and clickers in particular) can cause problems for shooters who are developing their shot process.

    While I put a clicker, and a sight on a studentís bow as soon as they have developed a proper process, too much gear does complicate early development.

    Korean development shooters donít even touch a real bow for the first few months of their training- they drill tens of thousands of reps on the kinematics of the shot with stretch bands before they ever shoot a single shot. It would be like making a beginner dryfire their pistol for thousands of shots before touching off a primer (which, come to think of it, might not be that bad of an idea...). If American students were subjected to the same training for archery as the Koreans, we would have a 99% fallout rate.

    Only after perfecting their shot process (coordinating the sight picture and controlling the clicker) will I let my students start adding farkles to their bows.

    Similarly, I like to make sure my firearms students thoroughly understand the principles of a proper trigger press, sight picture, grip, and stance before moving on to anything else.

    So to circle back on the subject at hand, I think USPSA/IPSC is at an existential crossroads. Between the primer/ammo shortage and the travel situation the short term is pretty tough- it makes sense that they will do whatever it takes to keep people coming to matches.

    After all, it left its founding principles in the dust 30 years ago. (Channeling my inner Cooper...)

  10. #370
    Quote Originally Posted by Clusterfrack View Post
    I shot my first match with the new rules. I moved my holster slightly forward, and made major adjustments to my mag carriers. The match went very well, and after visualizing my mag changes in a very granular way on the first two stages, I forgot about it and had no problems.

    Iím glad I have always run bullets forward because the hand trajectory parallel to the belt makes changes in mag carrier position less of a difference. With bullets out, Iíve always felt like very precise hand placement was required.
    I know you are running a Shadow 2, but any plans to add a WML in the future? It really seems split at this point among guys running heavier, steel frame guns.

User Tag List

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •