Pistol Caliber Carbine
well ... actually, there has been very little talk about this at all!
Pistol Caliber Carbine - USPSA
WHY should we do this?
I don't know why we should add another Division ... I'm under the impression that this is a "provisional" Division, but nobody is talking about it. Well .. except me, and I do think we should talk about it.Because I think it sounds like fun.
Let's face it, when Col. Jeff Cooper gave up his presidency of USPSA in 1997 because he considered it to be "no longer even vaguely practical", the doors swung open and we can play any games we want to.
(If we really want to.)
And I'm only talking about it now because I spent thousands of dollars (that's a lie .. it was more like a dollar two-ninety-eight) to buy a mech tech caliber conversion unit from The Hobo Brasser where my 1911 would slide into a carbine barreled action with a rifle stock and it would turn into a carbine.
Which I discovered was REALLY FUN to shoot!
(okay, it currently has an electronic dot-sight, which complicates the equation, but ... we'll talk about that, too.)
My 1911 works quite well in this framework, although I've discovered that I need to load my .45acp ammunition to a bit higher power-factor to make the much heavier action work reliably. Okay, that's talking point #1.
What are the other talking points?
Wow! Assuming that the Division might be approved by USPSA, there are some basic questions that need to be discussed. For example:
- What is the starting position?
- Can the Carbine legitimately compete against other divisions for "Over All" scores?
- Sights?
- Magazine Capacity?
- Can it fold into "Open Division"?
Looking at each question:
1. Starting Position could obviously NOT be "pistol holstered". It would have to be the "Low Ready" position (default for 3-gun?) or something that looks like "laying flat on the table ... " etc.
2. Over all scores (if the division were truly accepted only as a 'provisional' division) might not be affected by inclusion of Pistol Caliber Carbine. Or should it?
3. Sights? Most people (all three of them?) would probably choose to use an optical sight rather than an iron sight, if only because since this division would obviously be a "Red-headed Stepchild" Division, you might as well spend an extra couple hundred bucks and get a Red-Dot Sight to go with your "Red-headed Stepchild" BUT perhaps some people would prefer to shoot with iron sights? I don't know why, so I'm going to assume that SIGHTS would not be the basis for initiating a subdivision. Use whatever you have, no limit on sight configurations.
4. Magazine Capacity: One assumes that (since current production of this Bastard Division only accommodates 1911 single-stack and Glock pistols .. which might change) this would require a division sub-genre with "limited" (10-round or less, as in Single-Stack frames) or "open" as when a Glock 19, for example, offers a 19-round magazine capacity). So we're talking about 2 sub divisions based only on magazine capacity. But this is not, really, necessary. Use whatever you have, no limit on magazine capacity.
5. Fold into "Open Division"? Why would we want to do that? We've (0kay .. *I* have) already arbitrarily proclaimed that magazine capacity and sights don't necessarily need to be included into the Division specification. If you look at the mech-tech webpage, you'll see that there are more options than were available when I bought my version a decade ago. Which, in my mind, makes the question even more appealing!
