I recently sent an email to IDPA on this topic. I am a big Sig fan and love competing with them and 1911s. Here is my email.



Current Rule: 8.2.4.1.5 The firearm with the largest magazine inserted must fit in the IDPA gun test box measuring 8

¾” x 6” x 1 3/8” ( 222.3 mm x 152.4 mm x 34.9 mm.)



First off, I totally agree with the decision to add a Compact Carry Pistol (CCP) Division in IDPA. It allows for people who purchased a practical concealed carry gun to compete in the sport. I believe you just made one tiny (0.25”) mistake in the CCP dimensions. Before I get into the specifics, let’s look at the major manufactures; Glock, Smith&Wesson, Springfield Armory, CZ, Walther and my favorite Sig Sauer. Each of these manufactures offer a Full Size, Compact and Sub Compact in their various models. IDPA has done a good job of establishing what is standard versus non-standard. Their equipment rules totally leave out the 6” barreled guns and their weight restrictions make guns like the whole Sig P226X5 series illegal for IDPA and rightfully so.



The problem is that each of the major manufactures base their compact models on their full size frames so that their magazines and internals work as well as their full size. All they do is shorten the barrel and in some cases the handle.



With that being said, there is no reason why the CCP division should be restricted to a width of 1 3/8” instead of the standard width of 1 5/8”. I am not going to do the research on all the different manufactures that are out there, but here are the Sig Sauer dimensions:



image



So, for 0.25” the new CCP dimensions exclude the Sig Compact models (P229/P228/P227 Carry). On top of that, the single stack Sig P239 is restricted from the BUG division due to ½ ounce of weight. Some of you might say that the compact single stack P239 will work fine for CCP, but you are missing out of .3” of barrel length on a gun that is better suited as a BUG.



IDPA may have reasons for these size/weight restrictions, but I cannot think of anything that would be considered “practical” other than wanting to restrict ambi-safeties from the division, which is a poor functionality to restrict. I even had to send my Sig P226 SAO back to the shop to shave 0.2” from the ambi-safety just to make it legal for ESP.



I would urge IDPA to reconsider the dimensions for the separate divisions so that it is inclusive of a manufacture that has a long history in Law Enforcement and Personal Defense deployment and not focus on the plastic guns for their measurement standards.



v/r



Brent Pack

A52155, RSO

Board of Directors, Twin Cities Action Shooting





The response that I got was very understanding and they stated that the CCP division was provisional so they will more than likely have some changes to incorporate next year.



Bp