New IPSC rules interpretations: Fibreoptic OK on PD guns.
- Thread starter Radagast
- Start date
hungrybeagle said:
Unmodified duty guns, no SA (to keep 1911s from dominating this division also), minor scoring to allow people to buy functional match ammo at destinations (factory 9mm is pretty universal, so people don't need to worry about bringing their custom .40/.45/etc loads, with the ammo air travel restrictions).
I would get a fibre Optic front sight. It is does give an advantage. I have looked thru various, and it shows up much better than a regular white dot sight, allows (IMHO) a quicker sight picture, and aids in transitions. Reminds me of an electronic red dot.
- Location
- Halifax - NS
Perfect - and to open IPSC up to more gun manufacturers.omen said:
- Location
- Halifax - NS
Single Action first Shot and it would never be allowed on the list.Bartledan said:
why does anybody even care? THe last couple of matches ive been to...virtually every single production gun ive seen had modifications from tape on slide, fibre optic front site, glock mag plugs, rubber bumpers on mags, flared mag wells. it goes on and on...
nobody says anything, so obviously people cheating is no longer a big deal huh?
nobody says anything, so obviously people cheating is no longer a big deal huh?
USP said:
to each his own. I wouldn't compete with it unless it was compliant with production rules. That means springs, and sights. I almost got the jet funnel and longer mags for my USP, but was told it would not be allowed for long. (for a short while you could use the jet funnel on the USP). That being said, some guns have a much better design than mine when it comes to the mag well, but I like my pistol as it is not finicky, and if I want quicker mag changes, than I just practice more.
I have seen the fibre optic on CZ, Tangfolio and Beretta, and it does give an advantage or is "preferable" for the owners.
If it was not of advantage they would be using black sights or regular three dot sights. BUT, it doesn't make up for practice and skill!!
USP said:
sad but true. Who knows though? The shooter knows. (sights) Was some what of a grey area, as a lot was subject to interpretation. There it is in Black and white when it comes to sights, (as per recent interpretations ruling) As a shooter said to me this weekend, "when you hear about people sending a production pistol away for a trigger job, than is it really still a production gun?"
Like I said, to each his own.
Last edited:
Well IMO, cheating is still cheating. The way I see it, if your particular gun does not come with a certain accessory, then why should you be allowed to modify it simply because that part is made by the same company who made the gun.
Perhaps more stringent enforcement is required since honour is simply not enough these days. Then again, most of the mods done to production guns are not visible externally anyway, so I guess we are back where we started.
Perhaps more stringent enforcement is required since honour is simply not enough these days. Then again, most of the mods done to production guns are not visible externally anyway, so I guess we are back where we started.
Dragoon said:
...and it's not tolerated here...
There are quite a few people in Ontario shooting Standard with guns that could be used in Prod...and they dress them up (I can think of at least 10 off the top of my head) If anyone is seeing such obvious Mods...this would explain the majority of them...
I'm sure some do slip through in Prod once in a while...but they eventually pay the proce (Open Class)
Last edited:
USP said:
Did those people win those matches
? But seriously, with smaller matches people tend to get away with more, but at the "serious" matches (level 3+), those things do get checked and enforced...
Personally, as much as I dislike this from the production 'idea' point of view, this will open up the field of guns which I might choose from (since I REALLY, REALLY like adjustable sights; I don't care so much for FO). So, put adjustable sights on a baby eagle, and hey!
Or even a Sig...
