Service Pistol Rules

The old style gold cup IS legal.  The newer gold cup, which had the "eye" cut behind the trigger guard is not.  

To answer your question, Yes.  Basically some 1911 frames are made with a relief (eye) cut where the trigger guard meets the front strap.  This allows the fingers of the shooting hand to be a fraction of an inch higher than on a normal frame (radius) or a frame with a un-radiused trigger guard to front strap (angle but not less than the trigger guard.  (If you just look as some different frames you can see what I'm talking about).

Much howling and gnashing of teeth over the legality of the latter 2 options, letters were writtern, covens met, a seance with JM Browning was probably conducted and eventually the standard curve and 90 degrees became OK, anything with an "eye" cut was not.  

Cecil

What is this "eye" cut out as opposed to the 1911A1 addition from the 1911.

I think the "eye cut" is that ugly removed material under the magazine release.

They should describe that as indented or concave.

I've been reviewing the rules as well to see what I need to do in order to get my Range Officer legal for Service Pistol until I can get a dedicated hardball pistol.  I'm surprised you can have Accu-Rails, as long as they are not visible, but no Beavertail Grip Safety.   I understand "aesthetics" and trying to stay true to the spirit of the original design; however, if that's the case why not return to the Mil-Spec of the M1911 or M1911A1 as a "stock class" i.e. out of the box Springfield Armory "Government Issue" or Colt Government Model?  That would seriously decrease the cost and level the playing field.

With Accu-Rails, adjustable high profile target sights and triggers, front strap and slide serrations all permitted and not initially featured, it seems like Service Pistol has already deviated from the earlier design and ceased to be a true representation either in form or mechanically.  If that's the case, why not permit commander hammers and beavertail grip safeties, which are found on the M45 MEUSOC pistols, which are issued, albeit in small numbers, but I will go out on a limb and assume in greater numbers than 1911s with accu-rails and extended, adjustable vented triggers...lol.  I know I would appreciate the beavertail, and the convenience of not having to buy a dedicated hammer and grip safety to participate in hardball or even more expensive, a dedicated hardball pistol.

Oh well, I may not understand the logic, or the threshold for the decisions, since they seem arbitrary.  Regardless, a new, non-extended slide stop, thumb safety and a standard grip safety are in my future.  Fortunately with the rule change as I understand it, the frame being modified to support a beavertail doesn't disqualify the pistol, which is great.  So goes the price of admission to the dance...  

2 or 3 months ago, I emailed CMP about the possibility of allowing the features of the M45 to be allowed for service pistol matches on the grounds that they are issued now.

I didn't recieve so much as a "we recieved your email".

the "issued" firearm of the military, is still the Beretta m9, the colts are only going to 12,000 of the marines elite, maybe one day if the other 180,000 marine's get them and the army ,air force and navy decide to adopt it again the CMP would consider it im sure.

Agreed, I'm on active duty and did a tour as a Weapons Officer.

I don't recall receiving an M9 with high profile adjustable sights, adjustable vented triggers, or accurails.  So I would assume there are more 1911s issued with beavertails than 1911s or M9s with the features above. 


 

Sights, triggers and accurails are allowed on the 1911 as well.

JayhawkNavy02 wrote:Agreed, I'm on active duty and did a tour as a Weapons Officer.

I don't recall receiving an M9 with high profile adjustable sights, adjustable vented triggers, or accurails.  So I would assume there are more 1911s issued with beavertails than 1911s or M9s with the features above. 


 

The guns for shooting the CMP matches don't have to be exactly as issued to the troops. They just have to comply to the CMP rules. The military has long had significant input as to what is and is not allowed. In fact, the military branches have usually led the changes in the rules.

Terrific! Hopefully there is a shift at some point!