Podcast: Play in new window | Download (Duration: 1:10:05 — 24.1MB)
Subscribe: RSS
This episode starts with a review of the Taurus PT 24/7 DS, 9mm that a listener let me borrow for T&E. Overall, I give this gun high marks. There were some features I didn’t like, but I have to say that this is a very reasonably priced gun that gives you a lot of features and it was very reliable. But I give you my usual unbiased review after shooting over 100 rounds through it. The second half of the show is dedicated to listener emails and questions. I also pick on IDPA a little bit even though I love the sport. This is the last week to take advantage of the drawing for a free admission to the CRG Suarez International Class in Dallas this month. Just invest in my Shooters Club Podcast and I’ll email you your ticket number this weekend. Thanks for listening, Bob Mayne, HandgunWorld Show
Links:
Bob – I listened to your advocation of a “zero tolerance” for modification in Stock Service Pistol Division; how would you enforce that? Would there be a rules addendum each time a company made a change? It’s like the rule requiring all “safety devices” be operable; what’s a safety device? Where’s the inclusive list of safety devices and the test to be performed to determine compliance? Match officials should be expected recognize the stock internal parts of virtually every handgun on the market? Impossible. Limited mods to internal makes sense, since most people are generally familiar with external appearance of popular firearms; it’s a rule that can be realistically enforced.
Maybe a good topic for the show.
Rick good points, what I was really trying to say is how the rules relate to high capacity (normal capacity) magazines. The IDPA excuse is “we don’t want to create an equipment race.” I think that’s not a good justification because a magazine, as you easily point out, is a part that’s also easily recognizeable and I don’t think that’s a good reason to limit round count to 10 rounds in SSP. There are plenty of stock pistols that can be purchased with 17 round magazines for example. So IDPA should get their justification right and quite saying they don’t want to create an equipment race, and just let shooters use whatever magazines are allowed in their area. It’s an easy solution. When a competitor goes to another state, he abides by that state’s rules. Simple. I just think “Stock Service Pistol” is not a good name for it, because they already allow non stock modifications.
When IDPA was introduced in ’96, everyone was limited to ten rounds max, so the rule makes perfect sense in that respect. Maybe, Mostly Stock Service Pistol? Since the level playing field is one of the more important principles of IDPA, how would that be maintained if the only way to keep it level (keep up with the Joneses) was to buy an 18-round gun; it would “force” everyone to buy an 18-round gun to keep up, creating an equipment race that is also anathema to IDPA. With a 10-round limit, capacity doesn’t drive equipment choice.
This isn’t 1996. The high capacity magazine ban has been expired for quite a few years now. There’s not much difference between 17 rounds and 18 rounds. A Glock 17 holds 18 rounds with one in the chamber and is every bit as competitive in SSP as any other gun. If one lousy round makes that much of a difference, then it’s mostly the shooters problem, not the gun’s capacity. As I mentioned in the podcast, I’ve beat shooters who were using a Glock 34, with my Glock 19 and I have a round count disadvantage. Once again, this is a poor argument by IDPA. They are using 1996 rules, still 15 years later.
If you can avoid ever having to reload by using a gun that holds 18 rounds, anyone who wanted to win, either at the division or class level, would “have to” have an 18-round gun. Guns holding less than 18 rounds would all but disappear from SSP and ESP if the capacity limits were removed. A guy who won three or four USPA Area championships a couple of years ago, credited it to having mags that held one more round than his competition. Last year, I shot two IDPA sanctioned matches, both in CDP; I loaded 8+1 for one match, and 7+1 for the other. The guy who beat me by five seconds in the first match, beat me by almost a minute in the second! An IDPA reload costs three or four seconds for the average shooter, and across a six- or seven-stage match? I’d expect the capacity limits to be the last equipment rule to ever change.
All they have to do is change the maximum round count to something higher than 18 rounds. USPSA does it.
More likely, the round count would be reduced to ten!
Thanks for sharing some family stories!!!
You’re welcome, not subjects I enjoy talking about but it fit the subject matter at hand.
Bob,
I completely agree with your viewpoint on adapting the IDPA rules allowing you to compete with the magazine size that considered standard from the manufacturer. If you carry that way to protect your life then you should practice that way. However I live in the not so gun friendly state of NY where any magazine capacity over 10 is evil. If IDPA eliminated the 10 round magazine limit I wonder if any manufacturers would feel compelled to continue to make 10 round magazines in mass, making availability scarce. I have to imagine that the buying power of all IDPA members using 10 rounders keeps production and choices strong for us New Yorkers (even if out of state IDPA’ers can’t compete here thanks to our gun laws)!
I really enjoy your show and don’t forget about us behind enemy lines!
-Jason
North Chili, NY