Quantcast
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Safariland equipment IDPA legal?

Discussion in 'Competition Shooting' started by jdkelly, May 25, 2003.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. jdkelly

    jdkelly Member

    Joined:
    May 9, 2003
    Messages:
    622
    Location:
    Massachusetts
    Are Safariland comp2 and comp3 speedloaders legal for IDPA?

    Is the Safariland 333 speedloader legal for IDPA?

    jdkelly
     
  2. Jim Watson

    Jim Watson Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    21,972
    "Are Safariland comp2 and comp3 speedloaders legal for IDPA?"

    Yes.

    "Is the Safariland 333 speedloader legal for IDPA?"

    The 333 speedloader CARRIER?
    No.
     
  3. jdkelly

    jdkelly Member

    Joined:
    May 9, 2003
    Messages:
    622
    Location:
    Massachusetts
    Thank you mister Watson!

    jdkelly
     
  4. braindead0

    braindead0 Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2002
    Messages:
    1,208
    Location:
    Canton, Ohio
    The funny thing (to me) is that they don't allow the Safariland speedloader carrier (333), but I see guys shooting moonclip guns with very similar carrier designs that don't seem as secure as the Safariland 333 (I pulled one off, of a guys belt (with permission). Perhaps the one he was using was wore out or 'tweaked' for lighter friction.
     
  5. ChristopherG

    ChristopherG Member

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2003
    Messages:
    1,933
    Location:
    Central WA
    Yeah, IDPA rules--you can't fault them for intelligibility:rolleyes:
    My favorite pet peeve, also related to revolvers, is the ban on moonclip modifications. You can shoot a 625 or a 610 that's made to accept moonclips; but you can't modify a regular old 66 or 686 to accept them, 'cause that would be...unfair???:confused:
    Oh, well, it's easier to criticize than to actually come up with a set of consistent and fair rules, I'm sure. Isn't the IDPA greenbook up for a biannual revision? I thought I heard somewhere that they would review it every two years, and the IDPA website indicates that the last revision was in May of 2001. Anyone know anything about this?
    cg
     
  6. faustulus

    faustulus Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2002
    Messages:
    1,185
    Location:
    Middle Tennessee
    I hope you are right CG, that book needs some serious tweaking. And they need to allow the 7 and 8 shot revovlers in to play, even if they don't let you shoot 7,8 they could at least let you load them.
     
  7. Dr.Who

    Dr.Who Member

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2003
    Messages:
    768
    Location:
    IL
    Faustulus,
    They do allow 7-8 shot revolvers. Refer to page 13 in the LGB just under the heading of Stock Service Revolver Division. The book reads (7 & 8 shot revolvers are permitted, but may only load six rounds)

    Our club takes this one step further; we will allow the shooter to load 8 or 7. But can only shoot 6 then must reload and retain the non-spent rounds. If you try to follow the book, indexing the rounds after a reload on the clock would be an unfair penalty. Our SO and Scorekeeper will keep count to ensure the correct shot count is kept. We do not get a large numbers of these guns in our events.

    I agree that the rule should be changed. In fact I think that the 8 shot wheel guns should go head to head with the 1911 CDP 8 round mag class. That would be very interesting, 8 round moon clip 627 against the single stack 1911 (8 round max). Not sure if a handi-cap is needed, but it would be worth some thought.

    Do I hear grudge match, wheel against semi?

    Your right the LGB was put into effect 5-2-01. It is due to be updated.
    :)
     
  8. braindead0

    braindead0 Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2002
    Messages:
    1,208
    Location:
    Canton, Ohio
    It's particularly funny that you can have a factory moon clip gun, but you can't modify.

    You can't have factory or aftermarket porting. I don't think there is any difference in any advantage gained.... It's just so darned many revolvers are coming ported now.

    My wife shoots her Tracker 627, 7-shot, ported.. at our club matches.. cause we'll take anybody's money ;-)
     
  9. jdkelly

    jdkelly Member

    Joined:
    May 9, 2003
    Messages:
    622
    Location:
    Massachusetts
    braindead0,

    Both you and your wife know more about IDPA then I do. I just shot my first IDPA match this past Sunday. But my understanding is that IDPA wants to stop the gun race (and it's cost) at the beginning. I think they want to keep shooters on a fairly level playing field, while keeping IDPA simple to manage.

    Lets take your wife's 627 for example. The 627 has two features that most revolvers don't.

    1) Porting helps control the muzzle flip of a hand gun and gives an advantage to that shooter over another whose revolver does not have that feature. If you allowed factory ported handguns you'd have to allow special factory order porting and after market porting to level the playing field. This increases the cost to participate in the sport.

    2) The seventh chamber of the 627 gives an advantage to the that shooter over another who's revolver does not have that feature. To level the field you'd have to allow factory, factory special order, and after market seven chambered cylinders. Again the cost of precipitation is increased

    If you allowed the 627 shooter to only load six rounds in a seven round revolver, they would be at a disadvantage, to the normal six shooter, do to indexing problems.

    You can see (I hope) how this could go on and on, and make managing this very tough on the IDPA.

    And no, I not happy not being able to use my PC 625 (5.25") in IDPA.

    Respectfully,

    jdkelly
     
  10. Andrew Wyatt

    Andrew Wyatt Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2002
    Messages:
    4,468
    Location:
    Bakersfield, California
    are webley mark sixes IDPA legal if they've been modified for moon clips?
     
  11. Jim Watson

    Jim Watson Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    21,972
    Can't see how, no other clip conversion is.
    Get some auto rims and the appropriate speedloader.
    Trust you have one of the rather uncommon 4" Mk VIs.

    I'd let you fun-run a 6" with clips, but you couldn't get it in the Nationals.
     
  12. Dr.Who

    Dr.Who Member

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2003
    Messages:
    768
    Location:
    IL
    Andrew,
    Your Webley modified for moon clips would not be legal. Based on the LGB "Little Green Book"

    Basically, if it did not come from the factory that way, (with a few exceptions) then it would not be legal. The LGB advises what modification would be legal. Usually sites, action jobs, springs, checkering, appearance items, and enhancing the trigger pull are just a few things that you can modify and use in IDPA.

    IDPA wants you to shoot what would normally be carried. Heavy modifications in real life can create liability and reliability issues if the gun is used in self-defense.

    Did not make the rules, just trying to explain them. As said prior, IDPA is trying to limit the gun of the month money race that can occur if not regulated. IDPA is trying to focus on skill and ability of the shooter, not the best modification.

    I shoot a 625 4" in 45acp with moons. Would love to shoot an 8 shot 380, but not legal, yet....

    Enjoy...
    :cool:
     
  13. faustulus

    faustulus Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2002
    Messages:
    1,185
    Location:
    Middle Tennessee
    That is what I meant I just worded it badly. I know they can be shot just that they can't be loaded with 7 or 8 rounds. I would have no problem if I could load 8 and only shoot six.
     
  14. Andrew Wyatt

    Andrew Wyatt Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2002
    Messages:
    4,468
    Location:
    Bakersfield, California
    So, in the interests of encouraging practice with your carry gun, you can't shoot your carry gun?

    as an aside, is there a class where i can compete using my field holster and equipment, which i actually use instead of a concealment rig which i never use since i don't have a CCW?
     
  15. Dr.Who

    Dr.Who Member

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2003
    Messages:
    768
    Location:
    IL
    Andrew Wyatt,

    A police officer can compete in IDPA with their duty rig. When they use their rig, all flaps must be in place and fastened. No it does not need to be concealed. The officer can compete in any of the 4 classes.

    Shooting the qualifier will deem your level for each class.

    IDPA is trying to create a "real Life" scenario, using conceal carry guns. If a peace officer is on the street, and runs into the situation, you use what you have. IDPA does not want an ARMS race or the latest modification to take away from the shooter ability or skill.

    Enjoy...
    :D
     
  16. faustulus

    faustulus Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2002
    Messages:
    1,185
    Location:
    Middle Tennessee
    No offense, but IDPA is Bill Wilson's version of 'real life' and while like shooting the game, it is a bit frustrating to see so many rules based more on what Wilson believes. Isn't it strange that bull barrel .45s were illegal until Wilson started to make them... I don't mind so much the rules as I do the 'real life' justification that spouts out of many of the born-again IDPA shooters mouths. I am lucky enough to have found a club where members realize it is a game and has different rules. I am about sick of hearing 'that's the way it is done in real life.' I real life I carry a bull barrel 1911 in .38 super, which I can't use in competition. In real life I don't download the mags to 10 rounds from 15. Just say that is the rules of the game, don't try to justify them.

    Again no offense, I am a bit emotional right now. :)
     
  17. Andrew Wyatt

    Andrew Wyatt Member

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2002
    Messages:
    4,468
    Location:
    Bakersfield, California
    IMHO, the Swat magazine 3 gun match pistol rules make more sense.

    to my knowledge, there's no equipment race there, and even though they allow things that some people whine and complain about, like magazine funnels, every one of the guns there is reliable, accurate, and fits the shooter.

    seriously, they need to reevaluate their green book, and say "any reliable, non optically sighted gun within X and X weightlimits that fits in an X sized box is legal for use"

    or hell, even have it where you can only shoot with a gun that's listed on your permit.
     
  18. ChristopherG

    ChristopherG Member

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2003
    Messages:
    1,933
    Location:
    Central WA
    A fine idea, Andrew--except some of us don't have to list weapons on our permits! :p
     
  19. Jim Watson

    Jim Watson Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    21,972
    I don't agree with all IDPA rules and policies, but most are ok and I enjoy shooting it and will abide by those rules. I hear the LGB is in line for a badly needed revision but it will be for clarity, not major changes in equipment and procedures.

    Bull barrels are only allowed for 4.1" and under. Bill can't shoot one of his own Tactical Elites, although he could bring a Stealth. (Actually Bill W. shot the first year or more of IDPA with a Beretta to defuse claims that he was setting up a match to sell 1911 pattern guns.)

    Magazine capacity is limited to ten because that is the LAW. Bill did not want to put new shooters in the position of having to scrounge and pay scalper's prices for "pre ban" magazines or to incite a felony by encouraging them to assemble "high capacity ammunition feeding devices" out of "replacement parts." I doubt there will be a change even if the AWB is allowed to sunset next year.
     
  20. faustulus

    faustulus Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2002
    Messages:
    1,185
    Location:
    Middle Tennessee
    If their logic is based on the law and the law is removed from the equation, doesn't their arguement fall apart?
     
  21. jdkelly

    jdkelly Member

    Joined:
    May 9, 2003
    Messages:
    622
    Location:
    Massachusetts
    faustulus,

    I don't know, but I'd guess that the IDPA limited the round count to ten because of the difficulty and cost in obtaining high cap mags after the AWB. I don't think that it was done to reflect the law, but rather to reflect the laws cost on the shooting public. Why tell someone they need to have three 75-$125 mags to play this game?

    With that said, why would the IDPA then tell thousands of members, that with the AWB sunsetted, their perhaps 10s of thousands of mags are now obsolete?

    I think if the IDPA wants to add high caps to it equipment list it will add other divisions. Perhaps, under ESP or SSP, something like Novice to Master High Cap. or Low Cap.. That would add a lot of work to the job already being done. I think the most likely scenario would be for the IDPA to continue with things as they are. But, hey I don't know!

    jdkelly
     
  22. Jim Watson

    Jim Watson Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    21,972
    Certainly if the AWB is not renewed the logic behind IDPA's ten round limit (and USPSA's L-10) will not hold. But I do not expect them to change. IDPA has pretty much ossified at the 1997 level of development. The only equipment changes I recall are allowing bull barrels under 4.1" to admit Kimber and late SA Compacts and the reduction in revolver barrel length to 4".

    If I were on the BoD - and I am glad I am not - I would move to realign the Divisions by capacity instead of action type. A good shooter with a well tuned gun makes no difference between ESP, CDP, and SSP; there was a 0.22 second difference in the top scores of each Division in the 2002 Nationals, out of totals near 170. Of course that was for Rob Leatham, David Sevigny, and Scott Warren. Scott Warren? Don't know him, but he is a fine shooter. But the difference between an 8-10 round magazine and a 15-20 is the time for a reload on a long CoF. But I doubt it will happen; ossified, I said.

    I do wonder why there is so much quibbling over IDPA rules. There are not nearly so many bedroll lawyers in the other shooting sports I do.
     
  23. faustulus

    faustulus Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2002
    Messages:
    1,185
    Location:
    Middle Tennessee
    Fossilized is more like it.

    I think there are a couple of reasons people nitpick the rules more than other games. One has to do with the IDPA's insistance on justifying every rule. This is rooted in IDPA's philosophy. They present themselves as more than a game. However they are a game.
    A second reason is the game was formed from the negative. That is IDPA set out to NOT be IPSC. Many of the rules are designed to herd you into a particular way of doing things. I feel this stiffles creativity, but it is just one of those things I live with to shoot.
    A third reason is people recognize how the game can be better and want to improve it. It is natural to try to improve something you care about.
     
  24. another okie

    another okie Member

    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2002
    Messages:
    1,850
    Location:
    Oklahoma
    The ten round limit is not all that important. If the AWB actually sunsets and IDPA does away with the ten round rule, you'd still have the CDP rule, and you'd still have the problem of making courses of fire revolver friendly, which would probably be solved by requiring reloads frequently.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page