IHMSA Rule

Let's fight the good fight.

Rich,

I've already started fighting this battle by posting on IHMSA's forums. I feel strongly about this issue so I'm ready to fight through some resistance. There is a couple of factors at play here (Contenders competing against BF's & MOA's in addition to the availability of Contender barrels now that T/C has stopped regular production of the 10" barrels). Personally, I think that I would be satisfied to compete with my Contender if I were allowed to use a barrel from one of the aftermarket makers of Contender barrel makers.

Personally, I'm not ready to accept the status quo because IHMSA doesn't make sense. I think we could drum up some grassroots support for this.

Send me some suggestions worded in such a way that they could be added to the description of the "production" category gun. While I wasn't sure I wanted to fight this battle on my own, I think that I'd be happy to take the lead on this knowing that there are others feeling the same way.

Send rule suggestions to [email protected]

Bret

Stooooooopid Rules

Bret. I most certainly agree with you on the barrel idea. I also feel that it is unfair to ask a competitor who happens to use a Contender to be hamstrung with the garbage bbls usually produced by TC. It is also unfair to have to buy several bbls to find a decent shooter as Deadeye brought up. It is no secret that the finer single shot pistols used in IHMSA are thinly veiled benchrest equippment. Nothing at all wrong with the pursuit of fine accuracy but why legislate accuracy only to the high priced equippment? This is far from fair.......................But perhaps we are putting the cart before the horse with the problem of bbls WHEN ONE CANNOT EVEN RETAP A STRIPPED SCOPE BASE HOLE OR DRILL OUT THE PUNY 6/48 WITH THE MUCH SUPERIOR 8/40 and remain legal in the production classes. Let's call it like it is. Chickenshit is chickenshit, always was and always will be. I tell you true, if it were left up to the rules of this game instead of the GREAT people who participate in it, I would probably take my goldfish for a walk instead of shoot. Why can't the crapola nickle and dime rules be flushed where they belong and then move on to the other problems like the bbl issues?
DON'T YOU THINK THAT AT SOME TIME COMMON SENSE WOULD KICK IN AND THE RULES WOULD BE AMMENDED TO ENCOURAGE SHOOTING RATHER THAN DISCOURAGE IT? I really do not mean to be too caustic but DAMN, some of the rules in our game are downright stupid. Regards... Gary

I humbly apologize for my tone.

The implication is that a TC in 7TCU is a poor choice for production, and a rules change is needed to "fix" that. I really, really doubt that. There are platforms that excel in a given class, there are those that are worthless in all the classes. I don't see jennings 22s listed much on the high scoreing rimfire platforms.

I do not want special consideration for the Raging Bull. I thought you might see the sarcasm in the analogy. I'll expand; It is illegal for revolver or production because it is ported from the factory. I don't whine, I just shoot it and smile. But lets say I asked for, and recieved, a waiver to shoot in revolver class. Now Dan Wesson starts making a factory ported barrel standard on a new model. It should also recieve the same consideration. Well, what about TCs? It goes on and on. A percieved "hindrance" is labeled unfair, and special "handicaps" are granted. That is why I will stand against this proposal. Hey, I'm only one vote.

I think if you want to truly compete in a given class, you have to put together a well thought out platform, and that isn't easy or cheap. If you just want to see how well you can shoot with your actual hunting tools, just go shoot, classes be danged. In fact, I would like to see them get rid of production and revolver, and base the classes on target size, shooting position and sights alone. Those 3 variables alone can determine 8 separate classes.

Gary,

maybe I should clarify something based on your frustrations. I do think there is silliness written in the rules, but in the example you mentioned, it does not make the gun illegal, just not production. Likewise with a better barrel. Unless I read the rules wrong.

Once again, if you based classes on the three things I suggested, you would have the following big-bore classes:

Standing, open sight, full size (S)
Standing, open sight, half scale (SHS)
Standing, any sight, full size (SAS)
Standing, any sight, half scale (SASHS)
Any position, open sight, full size (U)
Any position, open sight, half scale (UHS)
Any position, any sight, full size (UAS)
Any position, any sight, half scale (UASHS)

your frustrations about piddly rules and big money guns vs home-engineered guns go away. No need for a mile long list of acceptable production guns either. In fact, I really don't think that some of the talent I've seen needs to spend a fortune to be good. They simply are good shots.

I know we are beating a dead horse here but. My concern was with the total discrepancy within IHMSA between the two siihouette disaplines.
Air and high power pistol. In air there is a dollar limit on the gun. I can not use my IZH46 because it costs too much. Now we come to high power and there is no such rule, anything goes as long as a factory made it. I would put my TC up against any gun if I had the opportunity to buy a decent barrel. Nothing special, just on made by some one who takes a little pride in what they sell and does it right. After market barrels look the same, smell the same, feel the same but they sure do not shoot the same as factory barrels. If a gun is eliminated because of porting that's fine as long as it applies to all guns. Some where there was a little sanity and the use of Bomar sights is allowed. Hardly anything like the TC sights.
Rich

rules

Scott.... The reason I brought these rules to light was based on the prod style shooting. I picked it because it will most probably be the one most new shooters will start out with. HAD I READ THE RULES BEFORE BEGINNING SILHOUETTE I MOST PROBABLY WOULD NOT HAVE BOTHERED. That would have been a huge loss as now that I have been in IHMSA for one season and met a GREAT bunch of guys both locally and at the Internationals I would not trade it for the world. So you tell me, why make the rules so a guy can't start out on a budget and improve his firearm as he goes [ ie. recrown, trigger work , refinish, repair and retap poor screw holes, REPLACE PISS POOR FACTORY BBL WITH A HIGH GRADE BBL,etc ] ****, let's do all we can to chase this new shooter away................. What do we want with new shooters anyhow?.........................Catch my drift? Let's make it easier, not harder. Regards... Gary

Maybe I am being one sided here. I can definitely sympathize with the intent to bring in people. I could be convinced of the need for specific changes if it would substantially remove barriers from a new shooter's fun.

But lets not forget, the vast majority of young shooters (in IHMSA terms) are into the Glocks, HKs and the like. Until you remove the "single shot race gun" from dominance, most new shooters will be intimidated or just plain uninterested. And I don't see that changing, just like NASCAR isn't going to allow minivans so that new drivers can get into the sport easier. You would attract more new shooters with a class like "combat pistol" that required all 10 targets fall in the first 2 minute bank. Why? Because joe-mall-ninja now has something useful to do with his 50AE Desert Eagle. Or "Magnum Field Pistol" for those 480 Rugers and BFR in 45-70.

I see the biggest controversies regarding production class. I'm not convinced that tweaking the rules is ever going to end it. If the original intent of the class was to make it possible for someone to just buy a pistol, open the box and shoot it with the big boys, well, they can. And some manufacturers capitalize on this, and they should. Why even have this class? It seems too artificail to me.

The Decline in Silhouette

I sat at the recent delegates meeting of the Tusco internationals like a good school boy being told how things were going to be from the board of directors. There was "NO" reasonable explanation given when questioned about adopting the use of aftermarket barrels for production. The delegates were not asked for input and were not allowed to vote. As a matter of fact the issue was decided long before the delegate's meeting (sermon). The membership SHOULD decide this matter and not the board of directors. It is the member's organization and it is we who should have the input and the vote on what is legal and what is not. Our current rules only alienates new shooters. Take a good look at attendance around the country at most matches it is apparent that interest in silhouette is waining.

Personal Opinion: Why dilute production Category?

Seems to me the more modifications we allow on production guns, the closer they become to unlimited guns.

As a dead serious question, How would you rewrite the production rule so that it would not turn into a lighter, shorter unlimited gun? We already allow aftermarket sights, grips and a trigger job. I seem to remember that the production rule was modified to allow custom engraving as long as it didn't serve as an artificial aid.

As for cost, I can't believe that a contender with a custom barrel, sights and a trigger job will be that much less than a brand new B/F.

Higher in this thread someone mentioned the dominance of expensive single shot pistols in the production category as driving the Glock shooters away. I don't think any Glock, no matter how much customization, would shoot with my "cheap" contender at silhouette ranges. They are very good at what they are designed for, which isn't long range shooting.

As far as the contender barrels not being accurate, I would say I have had a couple of clinkers, but for the most part, I can get 2" at 100yards with most of the ones I have seen. You can still get almost any caliber you want from Fox Ridge and still be production legal. Lets face it, unless you are an International class shooter, chances are your contender can outshoot you.

I don't see what the big fuss is about.