[tgibson]

Let me start off by saying I did the search and read the two pages of banter and still have no idea what the rule is. My question is, "Can I shoot my SV that has a full length dust cover in ESP as long as it has bushing barrel, fits in the box, and makes weight?" (I don't think the dust cover is steel, and it IS factory) I am contemplating building a complete new gun in 9mm, but if I can get a new top end for this one, I would be much happier.
I hope I am not "stiring the pot" here, but I am getting ready to invest some serious time and money in this, and want to make sure I am headed in the right direction!! Please don't take this the wrong way, but I would really only like feedback regarding this matter from AC's or anyone that has heard DIRECTLY from IDPA HQ. Thank you in advance.
Adios,
TG

This post has been edited by tgibson: 10 August 2008 - 08:28 PM

[warpspeed]

Someone correct me if I'm wrong but it will not make weight without some serious slide lightening which is prohibited.

[Seth]

Absolutely not. Its the VERY first Excluded Modification for the ESP class.

'EXCLUDED Modifications (NON-Inclusive list):
1. Full length dust covers of carbon or stainless steel.
2. Oversize diameter magazine release buttons.
3. Trigger shoes.
4. Slide lightening (see “slide, lightening” in glossary for
further information).
5. Refer to Appendix ONE-A. Firearms-Non-IDPA-Legal
Modifications.;

This post has been edited by Sethmark: 10 August 2008 - 08:50 PM

[Aristotle]

Sethmark, on Aug 10 2008, 08:50 PM, said:

Absolutely not. Its the VERY first Excluded Modification for the ESP class.

'EXCLUDED Modifications (NON-Inclusive list):
1. Full length dust covers of carbon or stainless steel.
2. Oversize diameter magazine release buttons.
3. Trigger shoes.
4. Slide lightening (see “slide, lightening” in glossary for
further information).
5. Refer to Appendix ONE-A. Firearms-Non-IDPA-Legal
Modifications.;

The CZ SP01 is legal in both SSP and ESP, per Robert Ray.

Quote

Taken from the idpaforum.com

Jim and all,

The standard SP-01 has previously been deemed to have a full length dust cover. That makes it illegal for ESP and the standard SP-01 is too heavy for SSP.

They do make a SP-01 that they started calling the SP-01 Shadow, then it changed to the SP-01 Custom Shop. That gun is under the weight for SSP and therefore legal for ESP.

I hope this helps.

Robert Ray
IDPA HQ

Here's the link http://idpaforum.yuk...pic/2634?page=2 It's post # 12

[Steve J]

Aristotle, on Aug 10 2008, 11:20 PM, said:

Sethmark, on Aug 10 2008, 08:50 PM, said:

Absolutely not. Its the VERY first Excluded Modification for the ESP class.

'EXCLUDED Modifications (NON-Inclusive list):
1. Full length dust covers of carbon or stainless steel.
2. Oversize diameter magazine release buttons.
3. Trigger shoes.
4. Slide lightening (see “slide, lightening” in glossary for
further information).
5. Refer to Appendix ONE-A. Firearms-Non-IDPA-Legal
Modifications.;

The CZ SP01 is legal in both SSP and ESP, per Robert Ray.

Quote

Taken from the idpaforum.com

Jim and all,

The standard SP-01 has previously been deemed to have a full length dust cover. That makes it illegal for ESP and the standard SP-01 is too heavy for SSP.

They do make a SP-01 that they started calling the SP-01 Shadow, then it changed to the SP-01 Custom Shop. That gun is under the weight for SSP and therefore legal for ESP.

I hope this helps.

Robert Ray
IDPA HQ

Here's the link http://idpaforum.yuk...pic/2634?page=2 It's post # 12

That is something completely different. The SP-01 is primarily an SSP gun. Any SSP gun that is legal in SSP can be used also for ESP or CDP depending on the caliber, but if you modify it to make it illegal for SSP then it has to meet all the requirements for ESP to still be legal. So, if you modify your SP-01 making it illegal in SSP, then it is automatically illegal in ESP too due to the full length dust cover.

You have to read the rule book!!!!

Pistols approved for SSP may also be used in ESP and CDP
depending upon caliber, even if the pistol in question has a full length
dust cover. However, should the pistol in question have a
modification that removes it from SSP, it must meet all other
division criteria for ESP or CDP, again depending upon caliber.

And if you'll bother to notice, full length dust covers are not excluded from SSP

EXCLUDED Modifications (NON-Inclusive list): [SSP]
1. Externally visible modifications other than grips or sights.
2. Robar style grip reduction.
3. Add-on magazine well opening.
4. Guide rods made of a material different from the factory part
it replaces.
5. Seattle Slug Grip Plug and similar weighted products.
6. A barrel of another caliber that is not offered in the original
factory model.
7. Slide lightening (see “slide, lightening” in glossary for
further information).
8. Checkering and stippling.
9. Refer to Appendix ONE-A. Firearms-Non-IDPA-Legal
Modifications.

It's all there in black and white. Full length dust covers are not legal in ESP or CDP. Ok in SSP (probably because they're usually plastic), but you have to read the rule book!

And the question was about an SVI which is a single action gun which can only compete in ESP or CDP depending on the caliber. No SVI, STI or other 1911/2011 with a full length dust cover is legal in ESP or CDP.

This post has been edited by Steve J: 11 August 2008 - 03:41 AM

[tgibson]

Sethmark, on Aug 10 2008, 09:50 PM, said:

Absolutely not. Its the VERY first Excluded Modification for the ESP class.

'EXCLUDED Modifications (NON-Inclusive list):
1. Full length dust covers of carbon or stainless steel.
2. Oversize diameter magazine release buttons.
3. Trigger shoes.
4. Slide lightening (see "slide, lightening" in glossary for
further information).
5. Refer to Appendix ONE-A. Firearms-Non-IDPA-Legal
Modifications.;

It is not carbon or stainless steel.
Adios,
TG

[Seth]

I must be misreading something... The gun is a 2011 SV, right? Did they ever make a frame that wasn't Carbon steel? I thought they were 4140.

[RobMoore]

Here is a real simple answer.

If your gun has a full length dust cover, you CANNOT shoot it in ESP if you could not shoot it in SSP in the exact same condition, nothing changed.

It HAS to be fully SSP legal to go shoot in ESP with a full length dust cover. A 2011 does not qualify, since its single action.

[Gregg K]

Here is what I see from this, the rule book says no full length dust covers of carbon or stainless steel in the ESP division.

Tgibson has an SVI. SVI offers frames in Carbon, Stainless, Aluminum and Titanium.

Aluminum and Titanium are not prohibited as full length dustcover materials.

Game on Travis

This post has been edited by Gregg K: 11 August 2008 - 07:47 AM

[Jim Watson]

The only feedback that counts is from Robert Ray at B'ville HQ. Contact him. ACs don't make official rule interpretations.

Quote

I don't think the dust cover is steel

A couple of seconds with a magnet would let you know for sure.

I think a debate over a long titanium dust cover would be dismissed as bedroll lawyering and disallowed, but I am not Robert Ray.

If it is not steel, get a specific pronouncement from RR at B'ville.
If favorable to your gun, print it out and have it and a magnet with you for all IDPA matches.

[Steve J]

Jim Watson, on Aug 11 2008, 09:49 AM, said:

The only feedback that counts is from Robert Ray at B'ville HQ. Contact him. ACs don't make official rule interpretations.

Quote

I don't think the dust cover is steel

A couple of seconds with a magnet would let you know for sure.

I think a debate over a long titanium dust cover would be dismissed as bedroll lawyering and disallowed, but I am not Robert Ray.

If it is not steel, get a specific pronouncement from RR at B'ville.
If favorable to your gun, print it out and have it and a magnet with you for all IDPA matches.

+1 I just don't see it being worth the hassle. Go with a classic short frame.

[redundent comments deleted]

This post has been edited by Steve J: 11 August 2008 - 09:18 AM

[tgibson]

Steve J, on Aug 11 2008, 10:15 AM, said:

Jim Watson, on Aug 11 2008, 09:49 AM, said:

The only feedback that counts is from Robert Ray at B'ville HQ. Contact him. ACs don't make official rule interpretations.

Quote

I don't think the dust cover is steel

A couple of seconds with a magnet would let you know for sure.

I think a debate over a long titanium dust cover would be dismissed as bedroll lawyering and disallowed, but I am not Robert Ray.

If it is not steel, get a specific pronouncement from RR at B'ville.
If favorable to your gun, print it out and have it and a magnet with you for all IDPA matches.

+1 I just don't see it being worth the hassle. Go with a classic short frame.

[redundent comments deleted]

The reason to go through the hassle is to have the same exact grip, trigger, safety, etc. etc. for IDPA and multi gun that I do for USPSA....oh yea...and to save $700 not buying a completely new gun .
Adios,
TG
PS I have an e mail into Robert Ray. As soon as I hear back, I'll post here.
TG

[eerw]

just cut a .25 to .50 off the dustcover.

[Steve J]

eerw, on Aug 11 2008, 11:37 AM, said:

just cut a .25 to .50 off the dustcover.

That doesn't work. It has to be factory short dust cover length, not a slightly altered full length dust cover. That just makes it a custom full length dust cover. That satisfies neither the spirit, nor the letter of the rule.

[boo radley]

Why does it have to be a *factory* short dust cover length? I'm not arguing with you -- just want to know where that is in the rules.


A while ago someone was selling a 2011 9mm gun with it's DC cut slightly back so as not to be full-length. Per the rules, I'd think it would be legal, but no doubt it would be tedious getting into a constant argument at every match.

[Aircooled6racer]

Hello: Life would be so much easier if they just said that it has to fit the box and have a minimum weight and maximum allowable weight. That way we could have some pretty cool looking guns that would fit the box. At a match a club could have a official IDPA box and a scale. Then it would not be up to the individuals to decide which gun is legal. After all we all use stock factory pistols with no mods what so ever Thanks, Eric

[Steve J]

boo radley, on Aug 11 2008, 02:50 PM, said:

Why does it have to be a *factory* short dust cover length? I'm not arguing with you -- just want to know where that is in the rules.


A while ago someone was selling a 2011 9mm gun with it's DC cut slightly back so as not to be full-length. Per the rules, I'd think it would be legal, but no doubt it would be tedious getting into a constant argument at every match.

True. The rule book needs to be more specific, or they need to go to the "make weight and fit in the box" principle. For me it's simple math. S_I makes short and full length dust cover frames. If you cut your full length back to the same length as a factory short, then you have a short. If you cut it back just a little so you can call it "not full length" you're trying to "game" the rules, and IMHO it violates this statement from the first page.

The main goal is to test the skill and ability of the individual, not equipment or gamesmanship. “Competition only” equipment is not permitted in this sport.

[jhe888]

Allowing competitors to modify frames would also violate one of the guiding principals of IDPA which is to not permit highly modified (read expensive) racey guns. If they were permitted, eventually someone would come up with a modification that was so successful it would become required to be competitive. The basic idea is that competitors use guns that are commonly available, and something that would be practical, and readily available. (I don't think it is unreasonable that that includes relatively affordable.) I know that a shortened STI would be a modification that duplicates a factory issued gun, but allowing that exception would be a slippery slope. People would soon be arguing that some other modification wasn't really that much of a departure.

It's a game. It has rules. In some sense all the rules are somewhat arbitrary, but some are more arbitrary than others.

[smokshwn]

jhe888, on Aug 11 2008, 08:42 PM, said:

Allowing competitors to modify frames would also violate one of the guiding principals of IDPA which is to not permit highly modified (read expensive) racey guns. (I don't think it is unreasonable that that includes relatively affordable.)

Would this be considered racey and or relatively affordable?
http://www.wilsoncom..._supergrade.asp

[tgibson]

smokshwn, on Aug 11 2008, 08:51 PM, said:

jhe888, on Aug 11 2008, 08:42 PM, said:

Allowing competitors to modify frames would also violate one of the guiding principals of IDPA which is to not permit highly modified (read expensive) racey guns. (I don't think it is unreasonable that that includes relatively affordable.)

Would this be considered racey and or relatively affordable?
http://www.wilsoncom..._supergrade.asp

Oh man!!! You are too much!!! I don't even have to look at the link to know where you are going!!! What was the name of that skit that Jonny Carson did where he held the envelope up to his head and guessed the answer?? I am holding my laptop up to my head right now and I am guessing....."$3500 Wilson Combat Burkett Custom CDP Pistol....WE HAVE A WINNER!!!" Thanks buddy!! I needed that!!
Adios,
TG

[Steve J]

smokshwn, on Aug 11 2008, 09:51 PM, said:

jhe888, on Aug 11 2008, 08:42 PM, said:

Allowing competitors to modify frames would also violate one of the guiding principals of IDPA which is to not permit highly modified (read expensive) racey guns. (I don't think it is unreasonable that that includes relatively affordable.)

Would this be considered racey and or relatively affordable?
http://www.wilsoncom..._supergrade.asp

It would be considered overpriced. You can get the same quality gun with the same ergonomic features for half the price. And let's remember that the thread has now drifted to CUSTOM Defensive Pistol Division. But, this is a stock, out of the box, albeit semi-custom factory pistol completely legal in CDP Divison. And did I mention stock, out of the box. If someone wants to pay an extra $1500 for the name and a few extra grooves milled in the slide, then knock yourself out.

[shred]

Steve J, on Aug 11 2008, 04:52 PM, said:

boo radley, on Aug 11 2008, 02:50 PM, said:

Why does it have to be a *factory* short dust cover length? I'm not arguing with you -- just want to know where that is in the rules.

A while ago someone was selling a 2011 9mm gun with it's DC cut slightly back so as not to be full-length. Per the rules, I'd think it would be legal, but no doubt it would be tedious getting into a constant argument at every match.

True. The rule book needs to be more specific, or they need to go to the "make weight and fit in the box" principle. For me it's simple math. S_I makes short and full length dust cover frames. If you cut your full length back to the same length as a factory short, then you have a short. If you cut it back just a little so you can call it "not full length" you're trying to "game" the rules, and IMHO it violates this statement from the first page.

FWIW, My ex-US military STI Tactical 5.0's dust cover/light rail is 0.75" shorter than the slide. That (with a bushing barrel replacing the bull barrel) would appear to be an IDPA-legal factory configuration for a STI framed gun.

[smokshwn]

Steve J, on Aug 11 2008, 08:59 PM, said:

smokshwn, on Aug 11 2008, 09:51 PM, said:

jhe888, on Aug 11 2008, 08:42 PM, said:

Allowing competitors to modify frames would also violate one of the guiding principals of IDPA which is to not permit highly modified (read expensive) racey guns. (I don't think it is unreasonable that that includes relatively affordable.)

Would this be considered racey and or relatively affordable?
http://www.wilsoncom..._supergrade.asp

It would be considered overpriced. You can get the same quality gun with the same ergonomic features for half the price. And let's remember that the thread has now drifted to CUSTOM Defensive Pistol Division. But, this is a stock, out of the box, albeit semi-custom factory pistol completely legal in CDP Divison. And did I mention stock, out of the box. If someone wants to pay an extra $1500 for the name and a few extra grooves milled in the slide, then knock yourself out.

Steve,

No drift whatsoever. The gun in question can be built in 9mm, .40, 38 super, and 10mm. All of those calibers are legal in ESP.

It is not my arguement that I can get a serviceable firearm at a lower pricepoint. If it was so there would be only a need for one division, one gun, one caliber, one manufacturer etc. As to stock out of the box, whos measurements do we use. Springfields, Sig, JB's original, Les Baer, STI, Taurus, Kimber, Colt, etc etc etc etc

My point to the discussion is simply. that to exclude one legal firearm option as being outside the rules based on its cost when clearly there are just as expensive options which are legal, is unreasonable.

This post has been edited by smokshwn: 11 August 2008 - 10:53 PM

[Steve J]

smokshwn, on Aug 12 2008, 12:50 AM, said:

Steve J, on Aug 11 2008, 08:59 PM, said:

smokshwn, on Aug 11 2008, 09:51 PM, said:

jhe888, on Aug 11 2008, 08:42 PM, said:

Allowing competitors to modify frames would also violate one of the guiding principals of IDPA which is to not permit highly modified (read expensive) racey guns. (I don't think it is unreasonable that that includes relatively affordable.)

Would this be considered racey and or relatively affordable?
http://www.wilsoncom..._supergrade.asp

It would be considered overpriced. You can get the same quality gun with the same ergonomic features for half the price. And let's remember that the thread has now drifted to CUSTOM Defensive Pistol Division. But, this is a stock, out of the box, albeit semi-custom factory pistol completely legal in CDP Divison. And did I mention stock, out of the box. If someone wants to pay an extra $1500 for the name and a few extra grooves milled in the slide, then knock yourself out.

Steve,

No drift whatsoever. The gun in question can be built in 9mm, .40, 38 super, and 10mm. All of those calibers are legal in ESP.

It is not my arguement that I can get a serviceable firearm at a lower pricepoint. If it was so there would be only a need for one division, one gun, one caliber, one manufacturer etc. As to stock out of the box, whos measurements do we use. Springfields, Sig, JB's original, Les Baer, STI, Taurus, Kimber, Colt, etc etc etc etc

My point to the discussion is simply. that to exclude one legal firearm option as being outside the rules based on its cost when clearly there are just as expensive options which are legal, is unreasonable.

True enough. I though about the caliber issued after the fact. I see 1911 and think 45acp. My bad, as they say in the vernacular. I'm not against expensive firearms. My twins are nearly in that price range. You can spend as much money as you want. Most of us will still get beat by people using less expensive guns.

But the fact remains. The short dust cover length in 1911/2011s is based on the length of JMB's 1911 frame. If you take a Les Baer Monolith with a full length dust cover in 38 super or 9mm and cut the frame back to anything longer than a standard 1911 frame, you do not magically have a "short dust cover" gun. You have a modified full length dust cover frame that you're trying to pass off as a short dust cover frame for the competitive advantage of the extra weight up front. Allowing that. Creating a situation (real or perceived - and I acknowledge that it's mostly perceived) where people feel they have to spend money and do the same, contravenes IDPA's anti-equipment race principle.

[Glshooter]

Back to the original question. The rule book says Carbon or Stainless steel. That means if it is not carbon or stainless steel then you are good to go. If all full length dust covers were illegal it would have just said full length dust covers. Since they were specific about material then that's what they have to abide by.