1911Forum banner

Do you like the new equipment rules

  • Yes

    Votes: 32 19.6%
  • No

    Votes: 131 80.4%

IDPA Equipment Rule Changes Poll

6K views 98 replies 34 participants last post by  robertbank 
#1 ·
I just want to get some acctual numbers of who likes and dislikes the new rules governing equipment.
 
#52 ·
I am now wondering how safe it is going to be for me to make my Taurus 905 (5 shot 9mm revolver that uses moon clips) make that 165,000 power factor? :mummy: Does anyone have a good load to drive a 124gr bullet 1330fps out of a 2" revolver? :bawling:
 
#53 ·
srf said:
The travesty is the bod's implementation of these rule without consulting the AC's, MD's, or membership.

Again: I'm not flaming anybody - some people will agree with me and some won't. But that is the entire problem: You can't run a sporting event with rules based on opinions - and without soliciting the opinions of the members that participate and work the matches.
IDPA doesn't have to ask it's members what direction to go it's a business, and if that is the way the CEO want's his business to gravitate then so be it.

As far as the 99% that should just enjoy their hobby at least they now have clear rules to play by, well at least better ones to play by...

A local match should be run just as close to the rules as a national match.

Sno
 
#54 ·
snokid,

You hit the nail on the head: IDPA is a business concern. Nothing wrong with that (although I wish the bod would just admit it) - but like any business, your customer votes with their money or feet. I'm already hearing about two large matches in my region that will run large, unsanctioned IDPA type matches. This already happened last year in New Hampshire (Their state champoinship was unsanctioned). Independent matches taking place around the country would eventually kill IDPA. Lack of a nationally recognized sanctioning body will make large regional or national matches very difficult without the human resources from other parts of the country. There's just not a big enough pool of active shooters (I'm not including IPSC shooters in the equation). Maybe a rival group will win out with a better organization. I just hate to see it happen when it doesn't have to. If IDPA would avail itself to the suggestions of the membership, and work cooperatively with it, IDPA would have an unclouded future.

srf
 
#55 ·
snokid said:
IDPA doesn't have to ask it's members what direction to go it's a business, and if that is the way the CEO want's his business to gravitate then so be it.

As far as the 99% that should just enjoy their hobby at least they now have clear rules to play by, well at least better ones to play by...

A local match should be run just as close to the rules as a national match.

Sno
1)Sure idpa doesn't have to ask. And shooters don't have to play. How long can a business survive that doesn't listen to its customers?

2)If you call the holster rule clear I need to ask what you're smokin'. The holster list was at least black and white. Many people on this site and the other one(BE's) I have looked at still don't know if they are legal or not.

3) Local clubs need some latitude to accomodate different people and varying circumstances. Sometimes the rain makes it more sensible to shoot steel. Some newbies show up with safe but certainly not IDPA approved gear, and they get to shoot. Some get talked through the cof but aren't awarded procedurals. We are trying to get them back, not run them off.

I'm afraid Will Rogers was right. Common sense ain't all that common.
 
#56 ·
I'm cross posting this on other forums as well:

I have been involved in IDPA since day one here in Texas and love this sport. A big part of my life revolves around IDPA.

When the rulebook first came out I thought "aww hell" in regards to the holster changes. However, the more I think about it and look back on the evolution of the sport. I can see the incremental changes that took us off course.

Here are some quotes pulled from the IDPA webpage, please read them and try to recall why IDPA was formed originally.

"The goal of Defensive Pistol is to create a level playing field for all competitors to test the skill and ability of the individual, not their equipment or gamesmanship. Defensive Pistol will be very responsive to the needs and wishes of both the shooters and sponsors as long as their wants do not conflict with the basic principles and goals of Defensive Pistol.

If you're interested in being involved in a shooting sport that mandates the use of serious equipment, practical courses of fire and promotes fellowship among like minded shooters, then Defensive Pistol is for you. "

"Shooters competing in Defensive Pistol events are required to use practical handguns and holsters that are truly suitable for self-defense use. No "competition only" equipment is permitted in Defensive Pistol matches since the main goal is to test the skill and ability of an individual, not his or her equipment or gamesmanship."

"What type of equipment do I need to compete in Defensive Pistol matches?

Practical concealed carry type holsters are stipulated for Defensive Pistol use."

The new holster rules make perfect sense when you remember the original intent of our sport.
I, for one, am glad to see us trying to get back to our original purpose.

I also have alot of sympathy for the manufacturers who were just trying to help the shooters by building more competitive equipment.

I also hate the fact that people will have to go spend more of their hard earned money to continue their participation.

Unfortunately these are the hardships that we all have to endure to ensure that our sport stays true to its original intent.

Michael "Iron Mike" Webb
Texas Tactical
 
#57 ·
TEXASTACTICAL said:
...
"The goal of Defensive Pistol is to create a level playing field for all competitors to test the skill and ability of the individual, not their equipment or gamesmanship. Defensive Pistol will be very responsive to the needs and wishes of both the shooters and sponsors as long as their wants do not conflict with the basic principles and goals of Defensive Pistol.
...
Unfortunately these are the hardships that we all have to endure to ensure that our sport stays true to its original intent.

Michael "Iron Mike" Webb
Texas Tactical
With all due respect,

There is absolutely *no* way I can be considered a "gamer". I am, however, competitive. If what you say is fair and accurate (I believe it is), I see IDPA constantly chasing it's tail because the spirit and intent of IDPA is antithema to keeping score. As long as you keep score, it's a game.
 
#58 ·
I'm a new shooter, and was hoping to get involved with IDPA. Unfortunately I'm having trouble with it now, since I have no idea what holsters and mag carriers are legal, and the set I was originally planning on purchasing for conceal carry won't apply. I originally was going to pick up a full Brommeland Gunleather set (belt, mag carrier, Max V) since everyone I've talked to has suggested being serious about conceal carry equipment, but I also want to try IDPA. I'm on a college budget that can't really afford to play around with different sets of holsters, particulalry if the inexpensive stuff is banned already.

So what exactly is IDPA trying to do here?
 
#59 ·
So what exactly is IDPA trying to do here?


They have clouded the waters so bad it my cause a major fish (membership) kill. :mummy:
I do like the new format of the rule and even several of the clarifications of the rule, i.e. No deactivating of the grip safety. But the whole holster/mag pouch thing might just drive too big of a nail into the wood support of IDPA.
 
#60 ·
why is it so hard to figure out what's legal?

as long as the gun is tight to the body, breach half way up the belt, trigger covered, straight or rearward drop, and not adjustable it's legal.... not very hard to understand

mag pouches even easier straight up and down cover 50% of the mag....

why is that so hard to understand.....

sno
 
#61 ·
TEXASTACTICAL said:
"Shooters competing in Defensive Pistol events are required to use practical handguns and holsters that are truly suitable for self-defense use. No "competition only" equipment is permitted in Defensive Pistol matches since the main goal is to test the skill and ability of an individual, not his or her equipment or gamesmanship."

"What type of equipment do I need to compete in Defensive Pistol matches?

Practical concealed carry type holsters are stipulated for Defensive Pistol use."

The new holster rules make perfect sense when you remember the original intent of our sport.

Texas Tactical
Hmmm..... Saturday, I had two errands to attend to before our match. I had another one to attend to on the way home. From the time I left my house till I returned, I wore a 5" 1911 in a Comp-tac locking paddle, and two magazines in Comp-tac magazine pouches. My mags didn't fall out, my gun stayed put, and no one saw that I was armed. So, are you telling me that my equipment is unsuitable for concealed carry? Gee, I wish I'd have known this sooner. I use those mag carriers EVERY SINGLE DAY.

Here's my biggest problem... There is all this talk about how 'some' holster makers changed their designs after being approved. And, we have to assume Comp-tac is one of the 'some'. But, I have a locking paddle that was (supposedly) of the original configuration. And, it doesn't pass the 'daylight' rule either.

We have heard and read that the criteria now published in the rule book is the same as that which was used to compile the original holster list. But clearly, if my holster (the specific version AND model that I have) was specifically added to the approved list, and now doesn't pass the test, then how can it be said that the criteria is unchanged?

And the magazine carrier rule is just stupid. I've said this before.... If some guy's magazines are so loose, in whatever carrier he uses, that they fall out, then DQ the dumb sob. Why penalize me because some moron doesn't know how to tighten the adjustment screw on his mag pouch?

Several members of my club have already announced their intention to abdicate their SO and MD duties if and when our club begins enforcing the new holster rules. For my own part, I've not yet decided exactly how I'll proceed, but I can promise that I will not be kneeling down with a flashlight to see if I can see daylight between the holster and belt of any competitor. And, their is NO WAY I'm going to tell a female competitor that her figure is 'not sufficiently hourglass in shape' to allow her to use an offset, dropped holster.

I've read that the holster list was 'just too hard to maintain'. Why? I bet that when it comes down to it, there are very few holsters that have changed since their addition to the list. I refuse to believe that it's harder to maintain that list than it will be to deal with all the fallout from the new, terribly subjective application of the 'criteria'. Seriously... unless they're scribing the holster list into granite tablets, it can't be that hard to remove a holster that no longer complies! Even IDPA HQ has a computer... they sent me an email, after all.... so they have to have heard about Excel....
 
#62 ·
snokid said:
why is it so hard to figure out what's legal?

as long as the gun is tight to the body, breach half way up the belt, trigger covered, straight or rearward drop, and not adjustable it's legal.... not very hard to understand

mag pouches even easier straight up and down cover 50% of the mag....

why is that so hard to understand.....

sno
Don't forget, you can't have daylight between your holster and belt, either. My holster passes all the other tests, but not that one. So.... banned!

It's not hard to understand at all. It's just stupid. Why is a mag carrier better, or more tactical, or safer, or more concealable, just because it covers 50% of the tube of the magazine?

Do you know how many dual mag carriers made of leather have a slight cant to the magazines? If I understand the rule correctly, they're illegal now, too.
 
#63 ·
Do you know how many dual mag carriers made of leather have a slight cant to the magazines? If I understand the rule correctly, they're illegal now, too.

Yes but they have to draw the line somewhere and that is where they picked to draw it....

sno
 
#64 ·
snokid said:
Yes but they have to draw the line somewhere and that is where they picked to draw it....

sno
No, they didn't have to draw that line at all. I've shot about 40 local and regional matches so far. And, the only time I've seen a magazine fall out of a pouch, it was from a mag carrier that a) covered more than half the magazine tube, and b) IS STILL LEGAL So, tell me how these changes make things more safe or tactical?
 
#66 ·
I guess I fail to see how less material holding onto the mag makes it any less concealable. Also, I fail to see how magazine orientation affects speed any way what so ever? I've seen a lot of mag holders that look like sunglasses holders. They keep the mag horizontal at the belt line. IMHO, these are even more concealable & don't scream gun. After all, if you truly can't use your carry gear, isn't any other gear you buy for "competition only"?

What really chaps my ass is I just bought a comptac locking paddle & mag holder not 5wks ago for OWB carry and have shot exactly one match with them. Now, if I want to play by the rules, I'll have to use my IWB holster which is leather, and I do not feel comfortable re-holstering a locked & loaded 1911 with it. In addition, I'll either have to use my pockets for mags or pony up even more $$$ and find a new mag holder.
 
#67 ·
snokid said:
Well you can't catch everyone, but you sure can cut down on the cheaters with stricker rules....

sno
Exactly how is one cheating by using a magazine pouch that is angled, and covers less than 50% of the magazine? Brommeland gunleather makes a good point that forward canted magazines are more useful, particularly when someone is trying to reload from a crouch position.
 
#68 ·
snokid said:
Well you can't catch everyone, but you sure can cut down on the cheaters with stricker rules....

sno
Your response makes no sense.... how on earth can you accuse someone of cheating just because their magazine pouch holds the magazine at an angle? Or doesn't cover 50% of the tube? For pete's sake, on a double mag pouch, the rearmost mag is canted AWAY from the front... if anything, that would slow you down!

Seems pretty obvious that your gear is unaffected. And, I'm genuinely happy for you. And, if any of this gear was unusable as a carry item, or gave me a huge advantage in a match, maybe I'd even agree with you. But neither is the case, I'll be no slower or faster if I change equipment, just poorer. My wife shoots also, and she also will need new mag carriers.

Are you defending the rule change so vehemently (in this thread and others) because you truly believe they are good changes, or just because you figure there's no point in fighting them?
 
#69 ·
aclundwall said:
Your response makes no sense....Are you defending the rule change so vehemently (in this thread and others) because you truly believe they are good changes, or just because you figure there's no point in fighting them?
Me thinks snokid might have some $$$ in the leather market...Or he's like a duck hunter on 2nd ammendment rights "I don't care if you take away all the evil guns, just let me keep my shotgun as its for hunting."

If it doesn't affect me directly, who gives a crap right?

If I'm remotely "warm", please throw this old dog a bone!
 
#70 ·
I haven't done any competitive shooting yet. I've been trying to get around to taking my lazy butt to a match. I was looking at starting with IDPA, but with these new changes seem like a marketing gimic. They have outlawed all my equipment but the gun, and that might be next. I'll go shoot IPSC, and use whatever equipment I have.

If it's concealed, it's concealed. Outlaw the expensive speed holsters, not the cheap everyman holster. What a joke. How does outlawing Uncle Mike's holsters level the playing field?
 
#71 ·
stability

Last weekend I drove to another state to compete in a USPSA match.

I knew exactly what the rules are and exactly how they would be enforced.

See where I'm going with this........?



(IMNSHO to change rules so radically as to invite clubs to do things their own way means it will be very difficult to maintain the 'umbrella of cooperation' in the rank-n-file.)
 
#72 ·
Thanks but No Thanks!

About 12 years ago I almost got involved in IPSC but was turned off by the escalating arms war it appeared to be combined with the gamesmanship. I just got back into shooting seriously 1 1/2 years ago and was seriously thinking about IDPA.

Here is the problem....

I shoot a 1911 chamberred in 10mm. Apparently, from what I understand of the rules that is a "minor caliber." Gee I thought 135gr at 1700 fps or 200gr at 1300+ fps would qualify as major....

I carry in a Kydex Sidearmor IWB with a belt hook. It is the most secure holster I own for retention and weapon placement. From what I have seen it is illegal as it is adjustable and the belt hook doesn't fully enclose the belt.

I use both of these peices of gear regularly for concealed carry. Why would I want to compete in something labeled as PRACTICAL when the practical items I own and use are not recognized properly? I also do not WANT to participate in something called PRACTICAL when it plainly isn't. I am very interested in Cowboy Action Shooting (Classic Cowboy Category) but that makes no pretense of being PRACTICAL and it is fairly easy to know what is what there to compete.

Here is my solution.... I'm young (34 years old). From the trend seen to date IDPA will turn into IPSC. People who want to compete and not be botherred with the hogwash coming out of the IDPA will create a new format. This will probably happen every 10 - 15 years as the new format gets filled with busy body rules lawyers meaning I have 2 - 3 more competitive forums I will get to participate in in my lifetime. :cool:

See you all at the next iteration of IPSC, IPDA or whatever it will be called. :rock:
 
#74 ·
DelayedReaction said:
Exactly how is one cheating by using a magazine pouch that is angled, and covers less than 50% of the magazine? Brommeland gunleather makes a good point that forward canted magazines are more useful, particularly when someone is trying to reload from a crouch position.

then wouldn't that give someone using them the advantage?

sno
 
#75 · (Edited)
snokid

Well we have talked about things like holsters, mag pouches, well how about the new weight restriction for SSP! AT 39 oz. your Para LDA 9MM which in the past is OK, in not anymore as weight of the LDA 9MM is 40 oz. The isn't a $50 item. any connection that Glock is a major sponsor of IDPA? I know from what other Canadian shooters have said that Wilson doesn't want our business and I guess he doesn't want a Canadian made gun competing in his IDPA SSP. Interesting gun qualifies for ESP and since it doesn't have any modifications to exclude it, the gun should qualify because it doesn't have to meet all other division criteria (page 20) of the rule book.

Well IPSC up here is well organized and I guess I can make the switch this summer and get my Black Badge and shoot IPSC with my toys.

Seems we have two threads going in the same direction and I thought this might add to this discussion.
 
#76 ·
snokid said:
why is it so hard to figure out what's legal?

as long as the gun is tight to the body, breach half way up the belt, trigger covered, straight or rearward drop, and not adjustable it's legal.... not very hard to understand

mag pouches even easier straight up and down cover 50% of the mag....

why is that so hard to understand.....

sno
Nice going snokid. The person you are mocking clearly stated he is new to shooting and was considering joining IDPA. I seriously doubt he has read the rule book from cover to cover nor does he understand the issues being discussed here. You attitude stinks and as an IDPA member and a SO I would like to personally thank you for treating a prospective new shooter in a very disrespectful manner. The sport needs attitudes like yours like it needs a hole in the head.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top