Walther Forums banner

1 - 20 of 33 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
226 Posts
Discussion Starter #1 (Edited)
I just added Springer Precision Base Pads to the mix and I think that besides some serious gunsmithing and cosmetic cerakote I'm max-ed out for USPSA production.

Below is my list, Im curious to know what paths others have taken.

My list of aftermarket parts is short and sweet:

Dawson Charger Rear Sight (.210 Tall x .145 Notch) $40:


Dawson Fiber Optic Front (.180 Tall x .100 Width) $40:


BT Guide Rod $64:



Springer Precision .375in Base Pads (you can also see the Dawson sights) $16/ea:














All-in, $240 in aftermarket and no regrets.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
476 Posts
Sights

Hey Lef-T,

A few questions if you don't mind:

1. Any particular reason you prefer the plain black rear sight as opposed to the one with the two fiber dots?

2. With the sight heights shown does it shoot sight pic #3 ? i.e. center of the front dot

3. Similar question on the slot width and front sight width you choose - what do you like about the more narrow front and wider rear?

Thank you,
Dave
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
410 Posts
Looks good! I really wonder if I can replace the plastic rod on my PPX with a steel guide rod. It's about the only thing I'm not to comfortable with.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
226 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
Always happy to answer questions:

1. Any particular reason you prefer the plain black rear sight as opposed to the one with the two fiber dots? I like the simplicity of the plain black rear so that the front sight is the only thing that calls attention to my eye. It helps more when tracking the front sight at close/medium range at full speed. For far or difficult targets you'll slow down to better align your sights with or without dots. Overall I found it easier to focus on one dot rather than three.

2. With the sight heights shown does it shoot sight pic #3 ? i.e. center of the front dot
For most distances yes, but I found it can shoot a little high within 1-3 yards. It's only something to remember for close and thin no shoots.

3. Similar question on the slot width and front sight width you choose - what do you like about the more narrow front and wider rear?
I fell in love with it from the first moment I shot them. Having more space between the front and rear makes is so easy to speed up on close and medium range targets. I can still hit the far stuff easily, but it takes getting comfortable with. It can be difficult at first to get precision at greater distances but it comes with practice. The speed benefit of seeing the target zone through your sights is immediate and so worth the cost of the learning curve at distance.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
476 Posts
Thanks, this is very helpful. I am liking the stock sights less and less and need something else. I had Heinie sights on a P30 and liked them, wish they would make them for Walthers......

Also wondered what holster you use?

Thanks,
Dave
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,032 Posts
The following isn't meant to be accusatory in any way; I'm really just looking for some clarification.

Isn't that a 5" top end from an M2 swapped onto an M1 frame? Doesn't that make it not legal for production, since that's not a factory configuration? Even if that doesn't do it on its own, there's a limit of +2 ounces over factory weight for production. The base pads and the BT spring put you at +1.853, and I doubt that an inch of additional slide length doesn't put you over. (I was once allowed to slide by at +2.1 with my P99c because the scale being used was only accurate to +/- 0.1 ounce, but that's not something I'd want to count on.)

From my perspective, it looks like you've got a really nice gun for shooting Limited, but I'm of course willing to be corrected if I've misunderstood the rules. (Do those base pads add capacity, or just weight?)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
565 Posts
The production list shows the same weight for the 4" and 5" PPQs so I'm assuming the slide lightening done is adequate to keep the weight the same.

That said, the frame / slide swap would indeed make this illegal for USPSA Production
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
226 Posts
Discussion Starter #10
The production list shows the same weight for the 4" and 5" PPQs so I'm assuming the slide lightening done is adequate to keep the weight the same.

That said, the frame / slide swap would indeed make this illegal for USPSA Production
Interesting catch on the listed weight. I can't drop mine on a scale at the moment, but the stock 5in seems heavier and could the 6 holes in the slide really even it out?

As for the 5in w/paddles, it depends because the PPQ falls into an interesting spot because the paddle is an OFM option. Obviously you can't put a longer slide on a gun, but appendix D4 (21.6) does allow the use of a larger OFM mag release if it's available on an approved model:

  • A factory/OFM magazine release which extends only the length of the magazine release may be used. A magazine release which provides a larger surface area (paddles, buttons) may only be used if it is an OFM part available on an approved model of gun.
The way I see it, I'm not putting a longer slide on an 4in PPQ, I'm using an OFM paddle mag release on my 5in that's available on an approved model.

I haven't found any specific rulings to the contrary. I'd be willing to run it at a major and this would be my defense if it falls into question. Worst case scenario, I'd get bumped to open, but I'd be curious to see which way it landed.
 

Attachments

·
Registered
Joined
·
893 Posts
Running it in a major like that is a bold call.

Why not just send Troy an e-mail and get a ruling from DNROI ahead of time? That way you are not forced to "defend" yourself at a major if it becomes an issue (not that I expect it would). If you are spending ammo, hotel, match fee, and travel time to go to a major, I'd sure as hell want to know that I'm good to go before I invest.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
565 Posts
A factory/OFM magazine release which extends only the length of the magazine release may be used. A magazine release which provides a larger surface area (paddles, buttons) may only be used if it is an OFM part available on an approved model of gun.



The way I see it, I'm not putting a longer slide on an 4in PPQ, I'm using an OFM paddle mag release on my 5in that's available on an approved model.

If you could actually swap the paddle mag release to the M2 frame with no external alterations to the frame you might have an argument. But you can't, and altering the frame to allow the change of mag releases is not specifically allowed and therefore not legal. Neither the frame nor slide is a "minor external component" legal to swap. In fact what your are doing is specifically prohibited by 21.3 - you are replacing your 4" slide with one that is not of the same length as the OFM slide.

I doubt you'd ever get called on it - even at a major match I doubt they'd be familiar enough with Walthers to catch it. It's also unquestionably a modification not specifically allowed by production rules, prohibited by 21.3, and therefore not production legal.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
226 Posts
Discussion Starter #13
Running it in a major like that is a bold call.

Why not just send Troy an e-mail and get a ruling from DNROI ahead of time? That way you are not forced to "defend" yourself at a major if it becomes an issue (not that I expect it would). If you are spending ammo, hotel, match fee, and travel time to go to a major, I'd sure as hell want to know that I'm good to go before I invest.
C'mon devil what's the fun in that? Gamers gonna game. To me it makes sense and since it's a specific exception in the production rules I'd have just as much fun stirring the pot as I would shooting the match. Of course I could email Troy and ruin the fun, but why?

With that said, if anyone is curious and wants to clarify with DNROI I'd have no hard feelings, but would get slightly less excitement when I run my (cough cough) Production legal (cough cough) Franken-Q.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
226 Posts
Discussion Starter #14
If you could actually swap the paddle mag release to the M2 frame with no external alterations to the frame you might have an argument. But you can't, and altering the frame to allow the change of mag releases is not specifically allowed and therefore not legal. Neither the frame nor slide is a "minor external component" legal to swap. In fact what your are doing is specifically prohibited by 21.3 - you are replacing your 4" slide with one that is not of the same length as the OFM slide.

I doubt you'd ever get called on it - even at a major match I doubt they'd be familiar enough with Walthers to catch it. It's also unquestionably a modification not specifically allowed by production rules, prohibited by 21.3, and therefore not production legal.
I get what you're saying, but it mentions paddle releases as a specific exception which is why I view it as legal. You'd never be able to replace a button with a paddle otherwise.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
565 Posts
Troy may have the last call if this comes up at a match, but he has a way of shoehorning his interpretation of the rules to fit his desired result.

Hopefully that nonsense will end in 2016.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
226 Posts
Discussion Starter #16
shoehorning his interpretation of the rules to fit his desired result.
I could be accused of the same.

I had a similarly interesting experience when I was running the P99 AS when I first started. Every RO would tell me I had to decock before the beep and I would argue that a striker is not a hammer per the rules. I finally got confirmation when I took my RO class. The Walther designs are unconventional and since the bulk of the rules were written without them in mind it leaves some room to game.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
565 Posts
I get what you're saying, but it mentions paddle releases as a specific exception which is why I view it as legal. You'd never be able to replace a button with a paddle otherwise.

You can view it as legal but you would be wrong. The rule you quoted does not allow swapping a button for a paddle. It allows swapping a button for a button with a larger surface area or a paddle for a paddle with a larger surface area (HK has two sizes of paddles).

If you think your interpretation is correct, it would require you to actually swap the paddle mag release to the PPQ M2 frame. You can't swap out a frame and say "I'm complying with the spirit of the rules" any more than you can use a G34 frame with a G17 and call it production legal.

Leaving that aside, the frame is the firearm. You are using a 4" PPQ frame and swapping out the slide with one not of original length. Your non-compliance with rule 21.3 (or any production rule) makes the gun ineligible for production. Your argument is like " well I think I'm in compliance with the spirit but not letter of 21.6, so the fact that I'm not in compliance with the clear meaning of 21.3 doesn't count".

It does count and it bumps you to open.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
565 Posts
I had a similarly interesting experience when I was running the P99 AS when I first started. Every RO would tell me I had to decock before the beep and I would argue that a striker is not a hammer per the rules.

That is pretty awesomely gamer. Looks like they still haven't fixed that, which is surprising because Clear is defined as striker decocked as well.

I'm telling you, if someone dropped the P99 or PPQs firing mechanism in a 2011 platform they would destroy production division.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
893 Posts
C'mon devil what's the fun in that? Gamers gonna game. To me it makes sense and since it's a specific exception in the production rules I'd have just as much fun stirring the pot as I would shooting the match. Of course I could email Troy and ruin the fun, but why?

With that said, if anyone is curious and wants to clarify with DNROI I'd have no hard feelings, but would get slightly less excitement when I run my (cough cough) Production legal (cough cough) Franken-Q.
You can stir the pot online easy. If you want to pay, literally, match fee, ammo, hotel, travel and food just to stir the pot, more power to you.

Seriously though, a single e-mail to Troy would make it a non-issue for everyone. Especially from someone who sent a well thought out, intelligent, and reasonable e-mail, that would be a benefit to an awful lot of people....just sayin'.....
 
1 - 20 of 33 Posts
Top