I have posed a question by email to the folks in Arkansas, but they have never responded, so I thought I might get an "unofficial" opinion on my question from fellow forum members that shoot IDPA. The recent rule changes now have a prohibition against "slide lighting". I do not recall this being in the old rules and I have never had any reason to lighten a slide; I don't really see the advantage to it since you would have to go to a heavier recoil spring to compensate - or so it seems. I am guessing here, but maybe less reciprocating mass (the lighter slide), would result in less muzzle rise on recoil.
The question I posed to IDPA headquarters was about a cosmetic change to a 1911 slide and whether or not this would be considered "lightening". I am having a STI type 1911 built and I ran across pictures of a custom 1911 that had the front portion of the slide narrowed, slightly, back to the forward edge of the frame dust cover. It gave it a sort of Browning Hi-Power look and provided you something to hook your fingers on when doing a press check, if you really dislike front serrations - as I do. The depth of the cut appears to be only about a 1.0-1.5 mms deep, and as I said it only travels about the front 1/3 of the slide. I can't see that it would really reduce weight that much.
Although this would be a carry gun for me, I would also like to shoot my IDPA matches with it. I pointed out in my email to IDPA in Arkansas that this full length slide would probably still be heavier than a Commander or Officer model slide due to their length. I wanted an official ruling as to whether or not this cosmetic, IMHO, alteration would constitute "slide lightening" under IDPA rules. I don't know where you would draw the line; are rounded edges lightening, a flat topped slide, enlarged ejection port, front serrations, etc. It has been quite while and I have received no relpy. I am looking only for opinions here, especially from match directors or SOs, because if IDPA Arkansas will not give me an official opinion, it will likely be left up to whomever is running the match. The folks I regularly shoot with don't see it as a problem and point out that some SEVERE slide lightening is done in IPSC open class or unlimited, I think, and that they feel this is what the new IDPA rules were trying to prevent.
Thanks - TEX
The question I posed to IDPA headquarters was about a cosmetic change to a 1911 slide and whether or not this would be considered "lightening". I am having a STI type 1911 built and I ran across pictures of a custom 1911 that had the front portion of the slide narrowed, slightly, back to the forward edge of the frame dust cover. It gave it a sort of Browning Hi-Power look and provided you something to hook your fingers on when doing a press check, if you really dislike front serrations - as I do. The depth of the cut appears to be only about a 1.0-1.5 mms deep, and as I said it only travels about the front 1/3 of the slide. I can't see that it would really reduce weight that much.
Although this would be a carry gun for me, I would also like to shoot my IDPA matches with it. I pointed out in my email to IDPA in Arkansas that this full length slide would probably still be heavier than a Commander or Officer model slide due to their length. I wanted an official ruling as to whether or not this cosmetic, IMHO, alteration would constitute "slide lightening" under IDPA rules. I don't know where you would draw the line; are rounded edges lightening, a flat topped slide, enlarged ejection port, front serrations, etc. It has been quite while and I have received no relpy. I am looking only for opinions here, especially from match directors or SOs, because if IDPA Arkansas will not give me an official opinion, it will likely be left up to whomever is running the match. The folks I regularly shoot with don't see it as a problem and point out that some SEVERE slide lightening is done in IPSC open class or unlimited, I think, and that they feel this is what the new IDPA rules were trying to prevent.
Thanks - TEX