STI Edge vs. Trusight
- Thread starter Riflman
- Start date
hungrybeagle said:
I don't think it is personally. Any compensator I've ever seen uses some mannor of deflecting the hot gasses to redirect their thrust. This doesn't do that, the thrust is still in the same direction. There is no compensation happening here.
Personally I think that any felt reduction in recoil/muzzle jump is a side effect of reduced reciprocating mass and added barrel mass. Both things which are completely legal in standard.
The effect of the chamber is going to be very small in comparison to those two items (IMO). Since all it really could do is slightly alter the timing of the thrust due to hot gasses escaping from the barrel after the bullet does. This is much smaller an effect than a true compensator and still in the same direction. Its also WAY smaller than the effect of having a bullet of given weight leaving at a specific velocity. This is similar in result to playing with loads, bullet weight, powder type, springs and buffers to alter the energy distribution of the recoil pulse, but not its direction. Again all those are perfectly legal in Standard, this is no different.
SVI produced an essentially identical effect (for the most part) by slotting the top of the slide and having a large key added to the top of the barrel along with the front sight.
The real advantages are as I said before light mass slide, heavier barrel and a front sight that doesn't move several inches back and forth with each shot.
Stop worrying about minor "(dis?)advantages" in your gear and improve your shooting skills.
Last edited:
- Location
- Halifax - NS
This really isn't about shooting skills, this is more about deciding whether an Edge or Trusight is a better standard gun, and I do believe in my experience that the expansion chamber effects muzzel rise, but you've definately got a good point about the less reciprocating mass and sight on the barrel.Rapt said:
Last edited:
That comment wasn't aimed at you. 
I guess my point is if you've got the skills as a top shooter then you're going to be top whether you're shooting Para custom, STI Edge or TRUsight.... Just ask Rob Leatham. LOL! At least thats my view...
That said who doesn't like the new toys, I've just got my first STI (Edge) to try back to back with my tricked out Para.
Looking forward to it. Once I get this damn cast off...
I guess my point is if you've got the skills as a top shooter then you're going to be top whether you're shooting Para custom, STI Edge or TRUsight.... Just ask Rob Leatham. LOL! At least thats my view...
That said who doesn't like the new toys,
I've just got my first STI (Edge) to try back to back with my tricked out Para. Looking forward to it. Once I get this damn cast off...
I'm not interested in whether a Trusight is a better or worse improvement over a standard bull barrel with a long dustcover. I'm only interested in interpreting the rules correctly.
I really dislike this trend that the IPSC rules are taking, where the rulebook isn't enough, and questions are asked on an unofficial discussion forum to get a ruling on the what one of the rules actually means.
Surely, you remember the controversy when the Springfield XD was pulled from the Production list, and when the CZ and Tanfoglios were also pulled. The most frequent questions asked are what is legal in Production division, and it's almost impossible to keep up with what is and isn't legal anymore. At the World Shoot, there was an arbitration filed as to whether a gun was really Production legal or not.
We've NEVER had this kind of problem before. Is it the fault of the shooter, the officials, the manufacturers, or is it maybe the fault of the rules committee?
As for the expansion chamber, does it affect muzzle rise or not? If it affects muzzle rise, then by the definition in the rulebook, it is a compensator, regardless of how effective it is at being one. Just because a ported compensator does a ####ty job, doesn't mean it's not a compensator anymore. If the expansion chamber affects muzzle rise by even a miniscule amount (although I doubt you would ever measure the effectiveness of it accurately), then by the definition provided by the rulebook, it IS a compensator.
If it doesn't affect muzzle rise, then what is the point of it being there? Why not simply have the ligher slide and mounting the sight directly on the barrel like the SV?
As for how a compensator works, my understanding was that the primary feature of the compensator was for the gases to slam forward into the baffles, pusing the gun forward. I've never really paid much attention to the how's or why's of what makes them tick. I'm a driver, not a mechanic. Gunsmith says this works, I say okay fine...Gimme.
I dabble in Production division. I shoot the occasional match in Standard, but I think I'll stay in Open where there are no equipment controversies, no interpretations of the rules, and the equipment is so far out on the leading edge that only our shooting ability matters.
I really dislike this trend that the IPSC rules are taking, where the rulebook isn't enough, and questions are asked on an unofficial discussion forum to get a ruling on the what one of the rules actually means.
Surely, you remember the controversy when the Springfield XD was pulled from the Production list, and when the CZ and Tanfoglios were also pulled. The most frequent questions asked are what is legal in Production division, and it's almost impossible to keep up with what is and isn't legal anymore. At the World Shoot, there was an arbitration filed as to whether a gun was really Production legal or not.
We've NEVER had this kind of problem before. Is it the fault of the shooter, the officials, the manufacturers, or is it maybe the fault of the rules committee?
As for the expansion chamber, does it affect muzzle rise or not? If it affects muzzle rise, then by the definition in the rulebook, it is a compensator, regardless of how effective it is at being one. Just because a ported compensator does a ####ty job, doesn't mean it's not a compensator anymore. If the expansion chamber affects muzzle rise by even a miniscule amount (although I doubt you would ever measure the effectiveness of it accurately), then by the definition provided by the rulebook, it IS a compensator.
If it doesn't affect muzzle rise, then what is the point of it being there? Why not simply have the ligher slide and mounting the sight directly on the barrel like the SV?
As for how a compensator works, my understanding was that the primary feature of the compensator was for the gases to slam forward into the baffles, pusing the gun forward. I've never really paid much attention to the how's or why's of what makes them tick. I'm a driver, not a mechanic. Gunsmith says this works, I say okay fine...Gimme.
I dabble in Production division. I shoot the occasional match in Standard, but I think I'll stay in Open where there are no equipment controversies, no interpretations of the rules, and the equipment is so far out on the leading edge that only our shooting ability matters.
- Location
- Halifax - NS
No worries - didn't take it as a shot.Rapt said:That comment wasn't aimed at you.
ABSOLUTELY!Rapt said:
But - I don't believe that any of us are going to get that good, (unless someone here wins the lottery and starts shooting 2000 rounds a day...) and better equipment does make a difference with us mortals. (It does with me, anyway.) So trying these new things and getting some of these new things are definately worth doing.
- Location
- Halifax - NS
Yeah, we did - when Standard division was spun off of Open. Production was but a twinkle in Nick's eye back then. There were arbitrations in Cebu against guns that were in Standard division that others felt did not qualify.hungrybeagle said:
I don't blame shooters or manufacturers. The rules are there. They (you and me) do thier best to perform the best they can within those rules. Any other sport involving a tool or accessory does the exact same thing. (All racing + curling + golf, etc.)
The officials? Well, they just work with what they have.
A couple years ago, once Production started going strong it was decided that it was going to be the controlled game. Standard was going to be open division, with three exceptions: No ports, no optics and fit in the box. Today's rules work for that and the Trusight does too so I don't fault the rules committee.
If I have to fault something, I fault competition.
Last edited:
hungrybeagle said:
Well, many things affect muzzle rise... The weight of the gun out front, affected by barrel weights, long dustcovers, etc. The grip and whether its higher cut, the way the shooter holds the gun... None of them are "compensators" in the sense that I take it to mean in the rules.
The difficulty with interpreting ANY set of rules is that most people will try to read them in the way they want. So stretching the letter of the rules. We're doing here right now. Its human nature and will always happen if you have rules. The more complex they are the more this happens, because its harder to get a consensus on the meanings of things as the become more confusing. The simplest rule systems are the ones that have the least "interpretation".
Rapt said:
And only barrel weights are devices attached to the muzzle end of the barrel. As I mentioned earlier, barrel weights match the definition of "compensator" as given by the latest edition of the rulebook.
Ah, I missed those years. I was back at school.
Do you remember what kinds of guns people were filing arbitrations against?
Exactly the reason why I think we need some more specific rules. If the rule reads ambiguously or contrary to the rules of english (from what was intended) then the wording needs to be changed.
And I'm sorry to say, the XD isn't going to dominate anything. EXcept possibly the "most refinishing needed" category. Or possibly "Longest trigger reset".
Production is being successfully limited, arms-race wise, that top shooters can pick any of a number of guns,a nd be perfectly competitive.
CZ, Tanfoglio, Beretta, HK, Glock. The top shoters around here (B.H. on the glock, you jerks!) use these.
Production is being successfully limited, arms-race wise, that top shooters can pick any of a number of guns,a nd be perfectly competitive.
CZ, Tanfoglio, Beretta, HK, Glock. The top shoters around here (B.H. on the glock, you jerks!) use these.
