What I was thinking there was: what if an otherwise vintage gun is reintroduced, temporarily, albeit unsuccessfully (i.e., it's pulled out of production again) in the POST vintage years/
Does this unsuccessful production attempt eliminate the otherwise vintage-ness?
Under our rules, I'm inclined to say that it DOES: since, no matter how you look at it, the same gun WAS (even if NOT "is") in production beyond the vintage cut-off point.
Jim
UBC's Police Pistol Manager
"Nasty, noisy things, revolvers, Count. Better stick to air-guns." Sherlock Holmes, The Adventure of the Mazarin Stone
What I was thinking here was: what about the same model being marketed identically under two different names SIMULTANEOUSLY, like the HW 40 and the Beeman P3?
What if one of them went out of production in a pre-cut-off year, but the other continued in production beyond the cut-off date?
Here, you'd have a better case for saying that they were differnt models, I would think - though admittedly, not MUCH of a better case - - than in the case of a vintage model going belly-up pre-cut-off, and the admittedly exact-same gun being reintroduced under another brand name: on the grounds that they always were two different models.
But it's debatable.
If the mods and the Gang agree, I'd have no objection to changing the rules to either/both:
(1) you can show that the particular model (manufacrurer's name, model number) went out of production before 1986: OR,
(2) you can show that the particular gun in your hands was made before 1986.
I hate for all this to get too "rulesy": the UBC's supposed to be good-hearted fun anyway, not serious competition.
Jim
UBC's Police Pistol Manager
"Nasty, noisy things, revolvers, Count. Better stick to air-guns." Sherlock Holmes, The Adventure of the Mazarin Stone
Proud to be a member of; MVAC and Countryside Alliance
"...... I'm good with the science, but rubbish with the gun "
Dunno. That would mean I could shoot at least one of my Tempests amongst other things. Not that I would, because the fun is getting the old girls out (ooer) but it wouldn't be in the spirit of a vintage comp.(2) you can show that the particular gun in your hands was made before 1986.
Morally flawed
Two responses, two different opinions, both making good points. Anyone else?
Jim
UBC's Police Pistol Manager
"Nasty, noisy things, revolvers, Count. Better stick to air-guns." Sherlock Holmes, The Adventure of the Mazarin Stone
No its not, The originals were better made & had the 3, Ball bearing trigger,
IE much better than the Diana counterpart,
A Pair of Originals 35 S ( A big gun ) & a 35
http://i101.photobucket.com/albums/m...Picture085.jpg
Ok then, another thought to consider ;
If we apply amendment (2): "you can show that the particular gun in your hands was made before 1986."
But with the proviso that production of the precise model began before a set date (1975 maybe?) then it would avoid the issue of a design that was "brand new" in 1985, and thus relatively modern, being eligible.
I know this is making things a bit complicated but it is just a thought .
Cheers, Mark.
Proud to be a member of; MVAC and Countryside Alliance
"...... I'm good with the science, but rubbish with the gun "
the rules for this comp seem to confused and variable, Jim ok'd my diana 6g, but i'm now told on ubc site that its not, the thread for this rifles confusing.
Please someone make the Rule and stick to it...mike...:confused
Last edited by mickson; 20-09-2009 at 07:32 PM. Reason: correction
Jim's the Vintage manager and if he OK'ed a particular gun, he won't de-OK it.
The rule now is that if the MODEL went out of production before 1986, it's automatically OK.
The rule is being amended to say, IN ADDITION, if you can show, via serial number or date stamp or whatever, that the particular gun in your hand was made before 1986, it's also OK: PROVIDED that model is NOW out of production.
This amendment stands, UNLESS I am overruled by the other moderators.
How's that?
Jim
UBC's Police Pistol Manager
"Nasty, noisy things, revolvers, Count. Better stick to air-guns." Sherlock Holmes, The Adventure of the Mazarin Stone
that suits me fine.
thank you
Sounds a spot on solution, superb.
And for an encore, Jim will address the Middle East conflict and draft a new theory of everything unifying the theories of quantum mechanics and relativity.
“We are too much accustomed to attribute to a single cause that which is the product of several, and the majority of our controversies come from that.” - Marcus Aurelius
Proud to be a member of; MVAC and Countryside Alliance
"...... I'm good with the science, but rubbish with the gun "