View Full Version : Why all the hate? The IPSC/IDPA debate

September 7, 2004, 03:18 PM
Not having THR is killing me. Maybe this will generate some interest.
I shoot IDPA and IPSC(USPSA) and there are things I don't like about either of them, however, I shoot them and enjoy them. I bitch about them too. But often times, and I admit this is mostly in cyberspace, there is outrigtht animosity for one group toward the other. This seems to be the case mainly with IDPA toward IPSC, and I guess when you write the rulebook with every other page mentioning IPSC you kinda are setting yourself up for a fight. But this antipathy is something I just don't get.
I like both for different reasons.
IPSC engages my mind, it lets me be creative and a problem solver.
IDPA is abundent in my area and allows me more trigger time and everyone has to shoot the course the same way so we focus on speed and accuracy and not worry about which direction to run and which order to shoot the targets.
So the question is why can't we just get along?

September 7, 2004, 04:08 PM
I think the fact that IDPA was created by the same people as IPSC, with a mind to correcting the "mistakes" of IPSC, causes a certain amount of bitterness on the part of IPSC shooters. I mean, if I pursue something enthusiastically, and I like it a lot, and someone then tries to publicly "correct" it, I might feel kind of self-conscious about it.
Seriously, I've been shooting IPSC for eight years, and have helped run an IDPA club for three, and I can't figure out why there isn't more cross-over. I'll do just about anything that allows me to put holes in things, but others are not that way.

September 7, 2004, 04:24 PM
We have tried to remove the feud at our IDPA club by instructing all our SO's and making the point in all our New Shooters Clinics that we run by the rulebook. That allows space for people to play just to the legal side of the rules, but outside of the 'purists' defensive-only game in order to get a competitive advantage and place higher in the standings. This is life. We encourage people to shoot their own game, to bring to the match what they want to bring and let others shoot it as they wish on that particular day. We also encourage people to shoot IDPA both ways: shoot it with the tricked out photog vest and the OWB one day and then next month try it with your IWB and whatever you normally use for concealment.

The point we make is that we will not 'chastise' people who are playing the game within the rules, just as we will protect those who wish to 'sneak up' to cover or what have you. If you are a purist, you are giving up competitive advantages to those who are in it to win. Get over it. There's no way around it. As soon as you post scores, someone is going to read the rulebook and try to figure out how to beat the guy they lost to last month. It's the way of the world. We don't try to fight it and we feel that strict adherence to the letter of the rulebook is the best way to avoid this friction. We couple that with a recommendation that if you are looking for stress-time on your carry rig, ignore the scoreboard. This is the best way to lose your bitterness at getting beat, and it only makes sense.

It's been working so far. We have USPSA and IDPA shooters side-by-side at every match, and we haven't had any issues. We all just get along. ;)

- Gabe

September 7, 2004, 04:38 PM
All I know is that I shot 2 IDPA matches in Minnesota this summer (my first matches with a pistol ever) and they were great. When I asked about mag changes on certain COF they were great with letting me just drop the mag on the ground (as I have trained to do), even if not at slide-lock, and take the penalty instead of fumbling around with some reload that I do not have any time under my belt practicing. Nobody accused me of "gaming" or anything like that. Then again, shooting one of the "freestyle" scenarios one-handed (that's how I figured it would have played out in the real world, as, IMO, my left hand would have been pushing someone away) might have helped to remove any "gaming" label my illegal mag changes might have earned me.

FWIW, I didn't hear anyone badmouthing any other pistol competitions, and they even gave out dates and times for upcoming USPSA matches before we started shooting. It would appear that there is a lot of crossover shooters here in Minnesota.

Jim Watson
September 7, 2004, 04:44 PM
Most of the disputes seem to be by computer shooters.
A good shot can compete, do well, and have a good time by different sets of rules.
I think most of the rest of the venom is due to the similarities, not the differences.

September 7, 2004, 06:03 PM
Seriously, I've been shooting IPSC for eight years, and have helped run an IDPA club for three, and I can't figure out why there isn't more cross-over.

That is interesting. I have noticed the same thing around here. There are several who shoot both, and there are more IPSC shooters who frequent IDPA but it seems like I never see IDPA people at IPSC matches. I wish there was more crossover, more people to shoot with, heck more clubs.

September 7, 2004, 07:24 PM
I don't take part in the venom, but I've seen it, and I don't understand what the mystery is.

IPSC was founded to provide PRACTICAL pistol shooting competion. Real world defensive shooting competion, as far as that is possible. It stopped being that, and some people feel that's a betrayal of the original intent.

Not complicated. You don't even have to agree with it to understand why it's there.

September 7, 2004, 07:47 PM
To me the debate ends with the fact that I shoot both, accept both their faults (IDPA's hypocritical equipment rules and IPSC's reloading race) and attempt to excel equally in both. Interestingly enough, the majority of my money goes to IPSC, but my awards say IDPA on them :)

I've gotten past the equipment problems by having dedicated gear for all of the possible competitons. What's great about shooting sports, though, is that this isn't really even neccessary -- a well tuned-1911 and a handful of 10-round mags (not to mention lots of practice time) will let you compete in IPSC, IDPA, Steel, ISU and Bullseye. If one is inclined to badmouth any of them, I suggest not showing up for the events. Shooters don't need negativity while engaging in competition and / or enjoyment.

September 7, 2004, 09:40 PM
:D I love it! :D
I have been competing in local USPSA matches for about 5 years. I started in open class using iron sights simply because the gun I already had was ported. After shooting a while, I replaced it with a limited legal gun once I decided what I wanted. Everyone was very friendly and helpful.
I don't shoot to win; just to develop the skill, have fun at a challenging sport, and BS with my friends (not necessarily in that order).
I have never shot an IDPA match (plan to as time permits). I have three or four guns that would be suitable. I might even use a revolver, I've used one in a few USPSA matches. I'm sure I have many friends in IDPA, I just haven't met them yet.

September 7, 2004, 10:40 PM
IPSC was founded to provide PRACTICAL pistol shooting competion. Real world defensive shooting competion, as far as that is possible. It stopped being that, and some people feel that's a betrayal of the original intent.

This hasn't been my experince. Most of the people I encounter with dislike toward one game or another are usually newer members. Certainly no one who has been around long enough to feel betrayed. A lot of times the prejudices involve erronous assumptions about the other game.(sometimes they are legitimate beefs -- or would it be beeves?) Most of the IDPA shooters I shoot with have never encountered IPSC.

Also your argument would tend to lean toward more bitterness on IPSC's side. I find it to be the opposite, if anything there predisposition by IDPA shooters to hate IPSC more so than the reverse.

September 7, 2004, 10:55 PM
Also your argument would tend to lean toward more bitterness on IPSC's side. I find it to be the opposite, if anything there predisposition by IDPA shooters to hate IPSC more so than the reverse.

No, sir, you've got it backwards. The IDPA people who don't like IPSC are IDPA BECAUSE they don't like IPSC. As for the newer shooters, well, they can read.

September 7, 2004, 11:32 PM
The IDPA people who don't like IPSC are IDPA BECAUSE they don't like IPSC
But why would those people care? They have IDPA. And many people who are in IDPA haven't shot IPSC and wouldn't know if they liked it or not.
Most people I know shoot becasue they want to see what they can do against other shooters and have a good time. There are one or two 'born again' IDPAers who believe in the whole 'training for real life' BS but most realize it is a game and something to do on a weekend. yes it improves skills but so does IPSC and Bullseye.
IPSC shooters on the other hand who have a problem tend to look at the young shooters in IDPA and make fun of their skill. (of course they aren't as good as IPSC shooters most of them have been doing it for only a few years.)
I can even understand good natured rivalry, but how many threads on IPSC/IDPA have been shutdown because of the behavior of the posters? It just strikes me as weird that this debate grows so passionate.

September 8, 2004, 10:48 AM
I think it really depends on the club and not the sport. Some clubs I have shot at were very very hostile to shooters who didnt shoot like them. I think it also has to do with the type of person who is drawn to each sport. My perception is that IPSC draws more younger shooters and more people that want to be very competitive. I dont see the reason for the tension since both involve exactly the same skills. I think that different people like different stuff. I have seen more hostility toward IPSC than the other way around but that is just my experience and it could vary from state to state.

September 8, 2004, 04:19 PM
Does it ever strike anyone that the founders of IDPA are all retiree age? It almost seems like they just formed the sport to have something to do that didn't involve moving too fast.

They could have used their influence to form a "Street Practical" division of IPSC, rather than a new game. Which is ultimately the source of this devisiveness.

Jim Watson
September 8, 2004, 05:23 PM
Being of retiree age myself, I recall when IPSC was going through the Gamesman vs Martial Artist schism in the early 1980s. I thought there was enough support then for a stockgun division that might have been "practical" enough to keep Wilson & co in the fold. But the management made the choice to go all racegun run 'n gun and about ten years later Wilson went his own way, essentially recreating IPSC when he was competitive.

I repeat, the reason there is so much quibbling between IPSC and IDPA is because they are so much ALIKE and everybody concentrating on one knows enough about the other to find fault. The differences are really trivial. Ask Rob Leatham.

September 8, 2004, 05:31 PM
the reason there is so much quibbling between IPSC and IDPA is because they are so much ALIKE

So are you saying the they don't like each other because they are essentually the same and there is a sort of a 'dopplegagger effect' or that because they are so much alike they tend to harp on the subtle differences? Or am I missing it completely?

Jim Watson
September 8, 2004, 06:04 PM
The latter.
You don't hear many Sporting Clays shooters finding fault with CAS, do you? Most of them don't know what is going on over there in the first place; might as well compare with golf (eww.) Like I said, IDPA is a copy of IPSC ca 1980 and it is easy to nitpick.

September 9, 2004, 04:48 AM
Wilson told me "Nobody carries one a them Redhawks".

Andrew Wyatt
September 9, 2004, 12:21 PM
Me and dad recently shot our first IDPA match, and dad (who's an old SWPL/early IPSC hand) told me it reminded him of the good old days.

some of the stuff IDPA does i don't understand (tactical reloads with empty magazines) but i'll take my procedurals.

September 10, 2004, 12:50 AM
It's simple, it's call intimidation. I started in IPSC and going to IDPA was fairly simple, just a different set of rules. I manage to get a few IDPA shooters to try IPSC. First thing they notice, it's freakin hard. You actually have to think. Many are also scared of competing against open guns which is mostly due to ignorance of not understanding the rules and divisions.

As far as which is more practical, the best response I've ever seen is by Rob Leatham posted over at Brian Enos' forum.
I recently ran a class of military shooters, and among other things, ran them through the IDPA classifier, Participated in a local steel match and shot The Arizona State IDPA Championships! Let me share with you some interesting observations. They get more wound up and nervous in a match than they do in combat! Why? Because they have time to think about it and get tense! I respect these guys opinion more than ANY so called tactician out there who is sure he knows the tricks to surviving an armed confrontation. These guys have been doing that a bunch lately and think IDPA and IPSC shooting both offer much to the testing phase of ones ability. On the other hand, they to a man do not agree with the philosophies that either is inherently more practical. All the little things like which way do you turn or where you do the load is all something that we can discuss all day on the range, but on the battlefield, men do things that may not be considered practical or tactical and live because they did it fast, accurately and decisively. On the other hand, there are those who did it "right" by some folks judgement and still lost. We all have our ideas of how it should be done, and the rules of the existing games are just that, some ones ideas. To say going to any kind of shooting event will teach you technique that will get you killed is idiotic and irresponsible. Guys, it is cool to have your own plan but do not try to pass it off as gospel to the rest of us. A discussion of technique and philosophy seldom ends with agreement, but that does not make the other guy wrong or stupid. These are just games designed to test your abilities in a very controlled and pre-planned arena. Who wins is your best shot, not your most likely survivor. That can not be tested under the clock. However, those that master executing under the timer are probably more likely to do well in a pressure situation, than someone who chokes, misses or gets procedural penalties. This is a point the boys all agree on, thus they train hard and test themselves in the arena of competition to see what they know and whether they can do it.

September 10, 2004, 11:49 AM
What's all the fuss? IPSC is more sport oriented; IDPA, more personal defense oriented. "What's your pleasure?" is all I'd say.

September 10, 2004, 04:21 PM
"What's your pleasure?" is all I'd say.Both please! And anything else anyone can dream up. Give 'em to me!

- Gabe :cool:

September 14, 2004, 09:19 PM
thaye are both a game, shoot both and enjoy.

Number 6
September 15, 2004, 07:33 AM
Anything more is just the gun game version of the mindless Ford v. Chevy, Coke v. Pepsi, stick v. auto "debates" - pointless. ;)

September 15, 2004, 12:13 PM
Anything more is just the gun game version of the mindless Ford v. Chevy, Coke v. Pepsi, stick v. auto "debates" - pointless
like 9mm vs. .45 :)

September 15, 2004, 12:18 PM
Or mine is bigger and fatter than yours...

September 15, 2004, 07:21 PM
I've been shooting IPSC at the local level since 1978 and IDPA since 2001.

In our area (central Wisconsin) we see a fair amount of shooters who compete happily in both disciplines.

I think the best thing USPSA ever did was (finally!) create the PRODUCTION class so that shooters with relatively stock equipment can compete against others with comparable gear. I'm a cop and I shoot my issue SIG 226 in both USPSA Production Class and IDPA Stock Service Pistol Class (when my schedule allows to get to a match). USPSA badly needed an entry level class where beginners or the more "practically" oriented can compete on an even playing field.

The IDPA shooters I know who have gone on to try IPSC have enjoyed it, and the reverse is also true. I suspect the shooters who are very focused on competition will stick to IPSC.

The biggest perceptual problem that most shooters who are unfamiliar has about IPSC is that it requires an expensive scoped handgun in some weird caliber to be competitive. Once people discover that is no longer true, they tend to become more interested.

November 20, 2004, 01:39 AM
When I used to live in South Dakota I was a member of a pistol club that held action matches each month. One of our officers was an IPSC shooter who attended at least one IPSC match a month if his schedule permitted. He had his Gee-Whiz 2000 Race Gun all set-up the way he liked and he was very good with it. Would anyone care to guess why he was good at it?

Practice Practice Practice Every spare moment that he was not at a match, at work, or on a Honey-Do assignment, he was either reloading or shooting. He didn't win because of the G-W 2K RG, he won because he practiced all the drills all the time.

One year he mentioned that he averaged nearly a thousand rounds a week in practice alone. I'm fairly certain that's what you're going to find in any sport, the top people are always practicing their craft.

It's not going to be any different whether you're an IPSC shooter, IDPA shooter, NRA High Power shooter, etc. If you're not practicing, you're playing.

Me? I shoot too many things to spend all my money on just one aspect of the shooting sports, so I'm just playing. And you know what? I'm having a blast, thank you very much. :)

November 22, 2004, 08:50 PM
Ditto on that one.

the duck of death
November 27, 2004, 11:45 AM
I shoot 3 matches a month, IDPA/USPSA/CAS. Keeping all the rules straight---will make your head spin. Too busy shooting to bitch.;)

November 28, 2004, 11:47 AM
I wholeheartedly agree with Faustalus earlier post

"I find it to be the opposite, if anything there predisposition by IDPA shooters to hate IPSC more so than the reverse."

It's has been my experience here in California is that most IDPA only competitors initially tend to have very strong feelings against USPSA/IPSC but once those that individuals have been competing in IDPA for a while they tend to make the crossover and end up competing in both sports.

November 29, 2004, 06:38 PM
IDPA = Profit Organization

USPSA = NON-Profit Organization

I prefer 3-Gun personally (Tactical 3-gun)

November 30, 2004, 01:12 PM
I think that it is really funny there is animosity between the two. At the nationals, the same guys win both(ie Rob, Matt B., Dave S,) If that doesnt show the similarity then what else does?

Charlie Golf
December 2, 2004, 08:26 PM
like 9mm vs. .45

So is the .40S&W a "Dodge?" :D

December 25, 2004, 01:21 AM
I've been shooting IPSC a few years and decided to try a few IDPA matches recently.

People told me whatever you do, don't tell them you shoot IPSC. I saw people posting on the internet like there was some kind of animosity against IPSC by IDPA. From the sound of it, I was going to drop a mag on the ground be found out and burned as a heretic.

I shot IDPA and barely heard a word about IPSC.

A few people seem to think IDPA is more about personal defense, is more "tactically correct" or something like that, but I never met one of those people in person; they're all on the internet, and they're wrong.

The only differences I saw were shorter, simpler, closer stages, and those danged tactical reloads. Nobody was shooting at me, or chasing me with a knife, and I had fun, so IDPA must be a game too.

The club I was shooting IDPA with did a lot of kneeling and going prone and crawling around with a gun- which I have fun with. Which reminds me... I need to go ahead and join so I can shoot more. (If it wasn't 80 miles away I'd have joined already.)

February 20, 2005, 04:02 PM
Like others, I shoot both, when I can. My mentality is that I am working on my own skills, and that I am competing against no one but myself and my ability to learn and absorb.

I believe the schism dates back to the days when the tricked out guns and the racing mentality 'took over'. To Bill Wilson, Ken Hackathorn and others who founded both IPSC & IDPA, the realism was losing out. That's when they decided to form the IDPA and get back to self-defense realism.

Some time later, the IPSC (USPSA) tried to win back many of those shooters by opening up new chances for production gun shooters to find a home with the USPSA. I believe that is roughly where we are today.

So, from my perspective, when I hear negative things said one way or the other about either of the two, I only respond by asking "Who cares about the politics? How soon can we SHOOT?". The more trigger time, the better.

ted murphy
February 20, 2005, 07:43 PM
Too frigging funny, the whole "profit is evil" thing.

They did not want open elections, thus they had to go to a for profit setup. Not for profit corps have to be structured with elections and various failsafes. It doesn't mean that the guys at USPSA are somehow more moral because they are not for profit- it's a managarial and tax decision.

Believe me, the staff at USPSA isn't starving and USPSA has quite a nice nest egg put aside. And there isn't a darn thing wrong with that.

Problem with the 2 shooting sports debate is some people get religion and thing their respect to their favorite sport and will try like heck to make the other one look bad at any turn.

I've seen USPSA shooters lie their butt off to try and get an IDPA club at the same range banned and I've seen IDPA shooters talk so much dirt about USPSA to its potential new shooters it is saddening. The fact though is that the majority of the lovers of both sports have nothing but respect for the other. It's the few loud dirtbags in both camps that make it look like there is a feud.

Shot a USPSA match today. at the end of the match briefing the MD asked me to make any appropriate IDPA announcements to the peanut gallery. Both myself and the MD are of the same mind, which is that any shooting sport is great and we best hang together or we will hang seperately.


February 22, 2005, 12:32 AM

If I may make so bold as to offer a POSSIBLE explaination, did you ever come across the phrase PISSING CONTEST, or perhaps EGO TRIP? I believe that one and or the other will serve to explain.

I generally shoot IPSC. I use one of two pistols. In Limited Ten, a 1911 type pistol, single stack, with 10 round magazines. In Production, I shoot an old Star Model 30M, 9mm "classic" double action , magazines loaded with 10 rounds. 1911 is Major, the 9mm is Minor.

In IDPA, I would shoot either of the above mentioned, without problems. Oh, once, I was "called" on my holster, it was an old Rodgers-Hackenthorn, no longer made. I believe that the guy who kicked up a small fuss lacked anything better to do at the time. Nobody else seemed to care.

Essentially, IDPA requires pistols or revolvers that one might actually carry on the street, along with same type of holster. Compensated handguns, with large optical sights aren't really practical for street carry, though they might be fun to shoot. It all depends on which type of game one chooses to play.

Enough said.

ted murphy
February 22, 2005, 06:00 PM
To be fair,

USPSA's production and Revolver divisions are good forums for using your carry gear and guns. You have to carry a LOT more moonclips or magazines, but it's pretty decent practice.

USPSA's Open and Limited divisions are the one with the space holsters and far out gear. Those two divisions are pretty expensive but you can compete in production or revolver for just a few bucks more than in IDPA's divisions, the difference being you needing about a few more mag pouches and magazines, or speedloader/moonclip setups.


February 22, 2005, 11:20 PM

Dont fool yourself into believeing that IDPA guns are cheap. THe guns that are used at nationals in CDP and ESP are the same price as a limited USPSA gun.

ted murphy
February 23, 2005, 01:55 PM

I have a second place trophy in my office (SSR SS) that I won at the IDPA Nationals (2000) with a $150.00 revolver, $18.00 holster, and three speedloaders. I have a 3rd place trophy right next to it from the 2001 Nationals I won with a stock G17, and about eighty bucks worth of blade tech equipment and 4 mags.

My most cherished trophy is a "SSR Champion" trophy I learned at the Liberty Bell match in Pa. I used a Model 15 and cheap speedloaders to best some really good moongun shooters.

You can buy an expensive gun in IDPA but the guy who refuses to lose will kick your butt with a box stock gun.

Some guys go high dollar in ESP and CDP, but that's cause they can. They don't do a darn thing better than a good Springfield and Kimber with a decent trigger can. Prettier though, but that's about it.

FWIW, I've shot Sevigny's glocks this year. It's all stock Glock parts and the pull weight isn't any different than my G17 with a glock 3.5# connector installed.

A quick look to the 2004 nats results shows that a couple of the top 5 in CDP Master class had factory guns. They were smithed, but nowhere near the expense discussed in the above post. ESP Ma is pretty similar in that respect. Heck, on of the top 10 in ESP Ma used a nearly stock Beretta that had only a trigger job. I doubt that shooter felt he was ill prepared to take on the high end 1911's there.

It really is the Indian and not the arrow.


February 23, 2005, 07:43 PM
ted murphy:

Sounds as if you have a pretty fair idea of what to do with a handgun, from the competition results you mentioned either that or you are pretty lucky, likely the former.

As for myself, I shoot IPSC Production class with a Star Model 30, 9mm, that when new, a while back, cost between $200 and $250. I also have a Kimber I shoot in Limited 10 class, which was more expensive. Have also shot Limited with an old Browning Hi-Power that I put out about $65 in actual cash, plus the Walther P-38 I traded back in 1967, total value slightly less than $100 for the Hi-Power.

Back when I was shooting High Power Rifle, Ron Troyer who lived in Ohio then used to shoot with us at Malvern. He had been 3 or 4 times in a row, Civilian High Power Rifle Champ. He came down to a 600 yard match one time, with a Model 70 Winchester sporter, in caliber 270 Win. He put Redfield sights on it, Iron Sights, and proceeded to out shout everyone who was there, or almost everyone.

Like you said, it isn't the arrow, it's the Indian.

February 23, 2005, 11:41 PM

I dont get it. You say to compete in open and limited you need expensive guns. Then you say you dont. The only difference between most limited guns and guns used in ESP is a bull barrell and a magwell. They are otherwise identical. I dont think that the gun makes a rats bit of difference. Stock glocks compete very well in limited. Add an optic and they shoot well in open. I was just taking note to the normal myth that you need to spend a lot of money in IPSC and not in IDPA. The top guys use expensive guns in both. They dont need to but the fact is that they do. Just because the top guys in IDPA in ESP and CDP use a "factory" gun doesnt mean it isnt $2K. Look at Burkett, Bulter and Leatham. They arent shooting $500 pistols. I was trying to find an old post by Burkett that he talked about how there was no difference in cost between guns used in IPSC and IDPA. I couldnt find it though.

ted murphy
February 25, 2005, 10:00 AM

Read my posts again

I never said you "had to have" expensive guns in Limited/Open, I just said that they were there. And that is quite true. And the majority of my comments were related to IDPA by the way.

In reference to limited class:

Until you get to the top of the game, you do not need the expensive guns in Open and Limted. But the fact remains that the vast majority of the open and limited shooters I know, put a boatload of money into the guns. And there isn't a darn thing wrong with that. For most those fellas, it's a large portion of the fun of USPSA. The act of tricking out your gun and playing with different accessories and add-ons. Like the teenagers tricking out their honda civics. I've beaten my friend with his $2600.00 limited gun with my wheelgun at matches, but you cannot deny he is having as much if not more fun than me at the range.

Having handled Leatham's IDPA gun, it isn't much beyond a stock gun. I could have one like it in the $1200.00 range, though my $450 Springfield with a $75.00 trigger job does what I need it to.. Sevigny's all stock too btw.

FWIW, of all the esp shooters I know, I'd say the average value of the 1911's used is about $800.00 with all the tricking out. Low point is $350.00 and high point is $2200.00


March 14, 2005, 04:49 PM
I have always been told that anything less than a 45 is a sissy cal.

Yea right

tell that to Leatham, Mickulek, Koo, Munson & company

but I still tell my brother that he shoots a sissy cal.

March 14, 2005, 04:57 PM
I personally have seen RL and the boys and girls shoot the high dollar race guns at the Bianchi cup.

I don't think that the type of gun or how expensive it is determines the winner. When a person gets to that class of shooting the gun does not matter much. the hours of practice do.

As for me I have probably what is the best value for the money. I shoot a Spgfld 1911A1 "loaded" retails for 725.00-825.00 depending where you buy.

Last week I was shooting empty 12 Ga. Hulls from 40 ft. I have not done anything to the gun since purchasing other than reducing the trigger to 4 lbs.

I do shoot a 200 gr. Semi round nose lead with 4.1 gr of Bullseye.

The most accurate handgun right out of the box I have shot.

I don't practice but maybe once a month plus shoot a USPSA match once a month.