STI Edge vs. Trusight

R

Riflman

CGN Regular
EE Expired
Rating - 100%
21   0   0
Location
Canada
Okay. I want shoot IPSC but there is only Standard and Open class in Manitoba. I looked at a guy's Edge tonight who shoots Standard and he told me .40 S&W is what I should get and the Edge was hard to beat. I am thinking about getting one, but now see that the Trusight is supposed to be the "new" Standard gun from STI. What is it about it is so special and should I consider that over the Edge? The price difference is negligible. Reagrding caliber he said that most matches are majors.

Thanks!
 
I can see the advantage speed-wise cycling the action with less slide to move back and forth, and I can understand the concept of recovering your front site quicker as ti is not moving with the slide (other than muzzle jump). The expanision chamber I am not sure of, unless what they mean is that the last 1" or so of barrel is machined out to overbore or there is simply more freebore in the throat, the latter theorectially allowing more time for powder to burn early creating more pressure and velocity (??). I am a handgun newbie here and most of my experience is with rifles but this would seem to make sense. Looks wierd though, you are right. Why is the dovetail front sight an issue?
 
What about the .40 vs. 45 thing. Is .40 that much better for Standard Division?? Also, just how new *is* the Trusight??
 
40 SW is mostly used in Standard because once-fire brass is available, versus 45 brass pretty much have to be new.

I own a Edge.
 
How new is the Trusight?

To Canada; 1 day. I picked up 7 of them at the airport last night. I am currently waiting on the CFC to make up a new FRT # so we can register them. STI's been making them for about 4 months - I was late in getting my order in. (FYI - 4 of 'em are already on the way to dealers where you can get them - more are on order too.)

What's the expansion chamber? Well, the theory is that silencers - true supressors - are in fact complicated expansion chambers and they do reduce recoil - so this enlarged area for the last inch of the barrel will allow gasses to expand and smack into the very end of the barrel and tame recoil a bit. "Silenced" would eb the opposite of describing these, BTW.

Why the sight on the barrel? Theory has it you can track the sights and be back on target better if the front sight is not rocketing back and forth.

What's the difference between the Trusight and Edge? The Trusight is 30 grams lighter. That usually translates to more felt recoil (unless you're a big strong guy) but the two theories above dictate that recoil will be in fact, less.
The Trusight has the recoilmaster just like the Edge, BTW.

STI says that when thier 2 USPSA GrandMaster Gunsmiths shot them, they found the guns faster target to target and to faster to get back on target on a double tap. When thier A & B class shooters tried it, they found it no better than an Edge and liked the Edge better as it's a little quieter. (remember, the Trusight has less barrel to get the bullet up to major velocity, so you're going to load it hotter)

Is the Trusight much better? I'll let you know next week. Thursday night; Myself, another NS provincial standard champion, a couple of A & B class shooters and a 3 time Canadian National Standard champion are going to try them out head to head - Edge vs. Trusight.

40 vs. 45 in standard - that debate has been carried on a lot here - do a quick search. I say 40 is better for IPSC standard as it's cheaper to shoot and has less felt recoil. No one winning or placing in large matches is shooting a 45.
 
Freedom Ventures said:
. No one winning or placing in large matches is shooting a 45.
Click to expand...

Not to take away from the fact that REAL MEN shoot .45!!


Thanks for the update Sean.................that is what I love about CGN now that we have grown so large. Through our membership we have our fingers on the veritable pulse of the Canadian Firearms industry!

YOUR HEARD IT ON CGN FIRST!!!
 
I never owned a Trusight but I had a 1911 setup simular to it. It was a Commander length slide with a 5" barrel with a single port comp and the front sight was on the comp. I found it was much easier to double tap with that gun then it was to double tap with the sight moving on the slide. Becuase It seemed that the front sight stayed still wile the slided moved.
 
Shot the STI Trusight in .40 head-to-head with my STI Edge in .40 on Thurs past.

My first impressions were good. Nice balance, lighter overall and noticably lighter in the muzzle meaning less inertia and hence faster transitions tgt to tgt.

I found no noticable difference in recoil or sight picture and it was really no louder than an Edge. It is possible that one could load a little lighter due to the shorter lighter slide and improve this over the Edge.

My Edge is tricked out, with a trigger job, so it naturally works for me much better than the Trusight, which was out-of-the-box stock. I think it could make a fine standard machine with the usual cast of little tweaks one sees on this type of machine.

In my humble A-class opinion of course, your mileage may vary.

;)
 
Freedom Ventures said:
Is the Trusight much better? I'll let you know next week. Thursday night; Myself, another NS provincial standard champion, a couple of A & B class shooters and a 3 time Canadian National Standard champion are going to try them out head to head - Edge vs. Trusight.
Click to expand...
Sorry for the delayed response, life got really really busy last month.

So we did the test with the Trusight back on the 10th. The testers were as follows:

W: 3 time national Standard Champion.
J: National Top 10 Standard Shooter, past NS provincial Standard champ.
S: Me. National Top 10 Standard Shooter, current NS provincial Standard champ.
Viper 7: A - Class shooter – who lights a fire on my butt at every match down here. (Will be a Master very soon) He’s already given his opinion.

As a note, I used the standard major practice loads that I always shoot. (5.5 gr Win 231, 180gr Frontier) for this session. (this is important later)

The Trusight used had no thumb ledge and the factory 4 lb trigger. No grip enhancements like skateboard tape or undercut trigger guards.

W: Really liked the way the gun tracked and enjoyed the lightness. Said it was easy to follow the sight and it seemed to get back on target very quickly. Ontario shooters can ask him yourself when you see him at matches.

J: Reported the gun’s front sight was really easy to follow. Also liked the lightness. Unfortunately, he disappears again until it gets very nice out, so you can't talk with him for a while.

S: I’m spoiled. I have a thumb ledge on my IPSC Commemorative, so I found I to be pretty much the same in recoil, although it was a little faster target to target. Maybe if it had a thumb ledge too, recoil would be pretty non-existent.

So results were good, but I started thinking about it. It has this expansion chamber and we were using regular standard gun loads. Comp guns use slower burning powders to make the comps work, so maybe I should try some slow powder loads in this expansion chamber gun.

I made up some 180 gr frontier bullets with IMR 4756 and chroned them to 175 PF. Then I went back to the center of the range. When before at 10m, as fast as I could pull the trigger on the Trusight, I was clustering in the A zone, I was now putting my first shot in the A, and the second under it. Consistently. I had to re-adjust my compensation for recoil to get the double taps back in the A. I had to put less force on keeping the gun back on target. The slower powder really made the gun come alive - similar to a comp gun, but not to that extent.

So to sum up, the boys liked the gun - as is, with no extra mods that we all do to our normal competition gun. It came alive big time when it got some slow burning powder and it worked pretty slick.

This thing might just be the next “Edge.”

If you want to handle one, those of you in NS can see me, in Edmonton – Phoenix has them in stock and Gunnar has picked up one for stock at Armco.
Naturally, I'll be bringing samples to the Nationals (and maybe the Ontario provincials, depends...)
 
Something kept nagging at me after reading this thread, and I finally realized what it was.

I have serious doubts about whether the Trusight qualifies for Standard Division. I'm surprised none of the rules lawyers in the BE forums picked up on it.

I haven't held or seen a Trusight up close, so maybe the problem is my understanding of what the "Expansion Chamber" really looks like. The impression that I got was that it was basically a 1 baffle compensator that had the ports covered up so that it has no ports. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

The definition of standard division indicates that "Compensators, sound and/or flash suppressors" are not allowed.

The definition of a "Compensator" given in the rule book is:

Compensator: A deviced fitted to the muzzle end of a barrel to counter muzzle rise (usually by diverting away escaping gases)
Click to expand...

I added the italics around "usually". To me, this indicates that MOST compensators act this way, but it is not the ONLY way that compensators operate. IMHO, the "expansion chamber" clearly qualifies as a muzzle brake. Is the difference here that the expansion chamber is not really fitted to the end, but part of a one piece unit with the barrel? That seems too fine a distinction for me. I would hazard a guess that the rules committee would look at such a device and declare it does not qualify for Standard Division.

I won't even get into my thoughts on the "functioning of a sound suppressor". Some of you may guess where are my thoughts are going with respect to that statement.
 
I've been doing some looking at the IPSC Global Village, and the matter was discussed last year. However, have things changed now that there is a new definition of "Compensator" in the new (2006) rulebook? Apparently it wasn't defined as such in the old (2004) rule book.
 
Nope - still OK.

Let's be frank, at a minimum, STI was the World Shoot Sponsor (Bailing out the match) and GIASF (SP?) Presentation sponsor. Not that he does it for this reason, but The CEO from Texas's donations to IPSC have been so vast, that I'd guess if he asked for a single action 1911 to be approved in Production, it would happen WITH an apology for it not being included before. ;)
 
I've asked around on the IPSC Global Village website, and Vince has been emphatic on insisting that the Trusight is DEFINITELY Standard legal as it does not have a compensator. His definition of "compensator" includes some kind of porting with holes.

I still think it's open to challenge, so if the intention is to keep it in, then they really need to adjust the definition of "compensator" from what appears in the rule book.
 
hungrybeagle said:
I've asked around on the IPSC Global Village website, and Vince has been emphatic on insisting that the Trusight is DEFINITELY Standard legal as it does not have a compensator. His definition of "compensator" includes some kind of porting with holes.

I still think it's open to challenge, so if the intention is to keep it in, then they really need to adjust the definition of "compensator" from what appears in the rule book.
Click to expand...

Oh good, then my barrel weight is legal too. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom