USPSA Production/Carry Optics

[ATLDave]

why does one set up a match under such short time constraints. That seems more the clubs fault than the competitors.

Because it's an indoor range on a weekday night. We can't get it for longer. Been that way for years and years.

And being able to shoot a match in a reasonable amount of time is actually attractive to folks with, you know, jobs and families and such. It's nobody's "fault," it's just the way it is. And that means adding things to the match that will slow it down is unappealing.

 

[tarosean]

Another good point made by Ben is that the PCC shooting itself will be lame if you can't give it a full test with longer shots, etc, at the pistol match. Absolutely true if you are concerned with the overall brand of USPSA and the total product that is being put out. I hadn't really thought of that before since I have no plans to shoot it.

I get the long shot argument.
However, the up close aspect is more intriguing to me, personally.
I did get the go a head from one club, so I may end up trying it out for a match or two.

 

[egd]

I too understand the long shot argument. No, I wouldn't want to change the way a course is set up, just shoot another type of weapon in it.

As for the indoor range, I'd really like to see and shoot in something like that. Is it a really big building? How do you set different stages in a confined space? I certainly understand how adding pcc to that would be very hard to do. But to me that is a special circumstance to that range and not a reason to discourage them from other "regular" ranges and matches.

And BTW, the name of the body is US Practical shooting, not pistol shooting. What's practical to one person may not be practical to another, but that's why there are different divisions.

 

[ny32182]

They have different sports within USPSA.

Steel challenge
USPSA Multi gun
USPSA handgun

I'm not interested in seeing one molded to fit guns it is not designed to fit. There will inevitably be concessions made that will take away from what it is now.

We wouldn't try to shoot steel challenge with a shotgun or shoot a rifle stage with a pistol, because it doesn't make any sense.

It doesn't make much more sense to try to cram a long gun into a pistol match, but I suppose we are going to try.

There are many things that will have to be addressed/watered down to fit a long gun into a USPSA handgun match:

-Start positions
-Classifiers
-One handed shooting, either mandatory or forced by interesting shooting positions
-Tight shooting positions in general

And that assumes they won't start trying to throw "rifle targets" into the match.

The whole division might be DOA like Carry Optics anyway so we'll see.

 

[ATLDave]

Search for "gwinnett practical shooting" on youtube and you can see some videos posted by some of the shooters. Not necessarily the strongest shooters, but you can see the kind of stages we have.

Indoor matches are definitely a common thing in the Atlanta area. At least 2-3 nights a week, there's an indoor USPSA match. If you're willing to shoot IDPA (I'm not), I think that gets you another night.

 

[egd]

Very interesting videos. That looks like fun and the ability to shoot several nights each week would be great. Although I'd probably have to break down and get an expensive progressive press to keep up with my reloading needs. That must be some! indoor range to have several stages.
Ironic though, one of the videos shows a guy using a carbine of some type.

ny32182, I don't think we are going to change each others minds. I see nothing in your list of things that would need any change other than POSSIBLY one hand shooting. But that is strong hand/weak hand and with a rifle it would just be strong side/weak side. You do not want things to change and I do. No problem. We are still just shooters and gun nuts at the end of the day.

 

[GarrettJ]

Wow. This is starting to sound like a bunch of old ladies bickering about nothing! (so I guess I'll join in).

Much of the argument against PCC sounds like "I don't like it, so here are a bunch of reasons it won't work". Only all of them can be overcome. You just have to be willing to try.

Search for "gwinnett practical shooting" on youtube and you can see some videos posted by some of the shooters.

I've shot there a couple of times. Good bunch of people that put on a solid match.

I used to shoot an indoor match at the Bullet Hole in Shawnee, KS, and the setup / accommodations were very similar. Tight spaces, time constraints, short distances, etc. Only they would let a shooter run through a second time as a "fun run" if time allowed. And any pistol-caliber firearm that the range allowed could be used. 9mm rifles were not uncommon. The occasional full-auto subgun was run through as well. (Loads of fun, BTW)

And it worked. None of the problems people are predicting here were "problems". Because the club was not opposed to doing it.

Incidentally at pistol distances, the Open Division pistols, and many of the Limited pistols still turn in better times.

 

[GarrettJ]

Back to the original question, CO doesn't seem to be very big around here. The local club is doing a classifier match this weekend, so I put a Cmore STS on a Beretta and plan to take the opportunity to get classified in this division.

But having played with the gun some, I'm not really feeling it. Maybe it's just that I'm not all that proficient with the Beretta. But I think I like Open or Limited better. Lately I've been playing SS Minor, and that's fun for a change. But I don't think CO would be my first choice.

Now for someone who's eyes have a hard time picking up iron sights, I can see where this would be a great choice. Or someone who can't afford a full-blown Open gun, but could bolt a FastFire on a dovetail mount to their Production gun.

The other side of me is wondering if we have reached a point where we dilute the game with too many divisions. When I started, a local match would have 40-ish shooters, with maybe 2/3 of them in Limited and 1/3 Open. You get a feel for how you rank against several others. Now if you shoot a 40-person match, there may only be 2 or 3 others in your division.

 

[ny32182]

If it stays as a "fun run" thing at a multi-division match, fine. That is what it should be. If they want to have a stand alone nationals, also fine. What it doesn't need to be doing is limiting stage design for every other division in a pistol match. This is a real concern and people are going to be pissed if it starts impacting matches. Same as they would be if you had to redesign a rifle match to accommodate a pistol.

Impossible with carbine:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PfVxlC3SVNo

Very questionable with carbine:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WsVBarxwWjQ

Stage at 1:13, impossible with carbine:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F3WrsFPTVJ8

I have nothing against any guns obviously, but in a competitive sport, they need to be appropriate for the venue.

 

[egd]

No not impossible. Sure one could dream up a stage that is impossible for a carbine, just as you probably could for a pistol.
Like I said, we are not going to change each others minds. So I will quit this discussion. Good shooting.

 

[ATLDave]

Ironic though, one of the videos shows a guy using a carbine of some type.

No, not ironic. We do that once a month as a single-stage side match. Outlaw, and just for fun. We score PCC as minor for that, and "real" rifle calibers as major.

Because it's just a single stage, we build it with rifles and the need for bagging/unbagging in mind. Doesn't impact the pistol match in terms of standings, nor even in stage design. It's a slight time drag, but we can manage it for a single stage.

 

[ATLDave]

Incidentally at pistol distances, the Open Division pistols, and many of the Limited pistols still turn in better times.

Interestingly, this is exactly what we have found from comparing scores on stages re-run with rifles (including PCC's) at our small, indoor range. Add in any manipulation of props like doors or ammo cans or activator ropes, or really hard leans around cover (especially to the weak side), and the difference gets even more pronounced.

I started a thread about it here: http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=793540

 

[tarosean]

Interestingly, this is exactly what we have found from comparing scores on stages re-run with rifles (including PCC's) at our small, indoor range.

Against the timer I am also slower with my 9mm PCC vs 40SW Limited gun. My home brew test was just short "hoser" stages that I set up at my range. (2 classic target arrays x 3) Admittedly, I have far more rounds through my CZ than the Vector so its not quite a true test.

I dont thing much will be "impossible", per say. With exception, of small ports that a PCC might not even be able to fit in. SHO to WHO will likely be cumbersome and slllllllow vs. the typical fluid handoff of a handgun. So I would expect PCC Classifiers to be rather pathetic.

 

[ny32182]

Remember that any gun handling you can do because you have the strength of a semi-fit man doesn't mean it is viable for a match. The match has to be physically doable for virtually any able bodied person that might enter, including little old ladies with virtually no arm or chest strength.

I figured if they leave the stages the same, Open handgun will still be the overall fastest division, but that might be hard to say for sure unless a top guy were to put serious commitment into it.

 

[GarrettJ]

Remember that any gun handling you can do because you have the strength of a semi-fit man doesn't mean it is viable for a match. The match has to be physically doable for virtually any able bodied person that might enter, including little old ladies with virtually no arm or chest strength.

Make up your mind. You can't have it both ways.

I would contend that the videos you posted showing examples of stages that are "impossible with a carbine" would also be impossible for the "little old ladies with virtually no arm or chest strength."

I figured if they leave the stages the same, Open handgun will still be the overall fastest division...

I agree. But that's not a valid reason to not do PCC. Otherwise we would need to get rid of the other "not fast" divisions, like L10 and Revolver.

 

[ny32182]

I would contend that the videos you posted showing examples of stages that are "impossible with a carbine" would also be impossible for the "little old ladies with virtually no arm or chest strength."

I would not contend that... we have little old ladies who do stages just like those around here.

 

[ny32182]

I agree. But that's not a valid reason to not do PCC. Otherwise we would need to get rid of the other "not fast" divisions, like L10 and Revolver.

I wasn't implying that combined results mean anything at all.

 

[GarrettJ]

I would not contend that... we have little old ladies who do stages just like those around here.

Just like we have rifle shooters that can do stages like those. ;-)

 

[ny32182]

Video of rifle shooters shooting one handed?

 

[GarrettJ]

Video of rifle shooters shooting one handed?

Here's what I found in 10 seconds of searching. One-handed around a barricade, from a wheelchair.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=072ib7U-t4U

Since PCC isn't officially recognized by USPSA for another month or so, you probably won't find a lot of videos of USPSA PCC matches.

But if you're not sure, you can always allow them at your local matches and see what the shooters come up with on the "impossible to carbine" stages you design.

Personally, I don't understand the people who are so against it. If it is destined to be a big flop, it should become obvious in short order. In which case I would expect the "provisional" status to not become permanent, and the whole thing be scrapped. For the MDs who don't want it, they are not required to offer it. Just publish it in advance, so your customers will know prior to match day.

Or maybe it will be successful enough that it will spin off as a separate, stand-alone match, and the "pistol-only" crowd can get back to pistol-only matches. Either way, it's up to the clubs and shooters (the "customers) to determine what happens with it.

I think it looks like fun, and I'm looking forward to trying it out.

 

[GarrettJ]

Maybe it's a good thing we didn't have much in the way of Internet forums in the '80s and '90s. The doom and gloom surrounding those fancy red dots, comps, and big 10-round mags that were all going to kill the sport would have been deafening.

 

[ATLDave]

Maybe it's a good thing we didn't have much in the way of Internet forums in the '80s and '90s. The doom and gloom surrounding those fancy red dots, comps, and big 10-round mags that were all going to kill the sport would have been deafening.

LOL! There certainly was such crying. (That's part of where IDPA came from.) I don't see anyone threatening to leave USPSA and start a new, competing sport in response. For a bunch of competitive shooters, the discussion seems pretty restrained to me!

 

[ny32182]

Nice... the stage from IPSC nats at least still would have been out though.

I believe it will be a flop. I thought there was much more chatter/perceived demand surrounding CO than PCC. CO is a flop, and yet it is now a real division. But other than just adding a division that is just sort of "there" and has 3 shooters at the sectional/area level, it doesn't threaten the fundamentals of the sport.

The resistance comes from what I stated earlier; if it DOES become popular, the fear is that the rifle shooters will complain about pistol stages being too hard to shoot, and stage design will become watered down to make everything "carbine friendly".

If it is a flop... I expect we'll just have yet another division with 3 shooters at the Area level. But if it becomes popular it has the potential to impact the sport in a negative way.

 

[tarosean]

If it is destined to be a big flop, it should become obvious in short order. In which case I would expect the "provisional" status to not become permanent, and the whole thing be scrapped.

I think one of the glaring issues is they tend to not scrap things. i.e. L-10 still hanging around. Zero reason for that class to be in existence.

I am not against revolver like some are, as its unique and you need to be pretty darned skilled to be at the top of that division.

PCC Might be interesting to new comers to USPSA as its a fraction of the cost of 3 gun. Bringing in new people is the name of the game though..

I'm already a member so me trying CO & PCC don't really count towards that goal..

 

[tarosean]

I believe it will be a flop. I thought there was much more chatter/perceived demand surrounding CO than PCC

Yep, but HQ also went around it wrong with the 1st rules w/weight limits, coupled with the fact that none of the rds ready guns were even NROI approved yet. Automatically allienating a lot of potential and existing shooters right off the bat doesnt exactly help.