Wicked Wrister

This thread was the first I'd heard of Tac-Iron changing. Normally I stay out of these things, but this change really upsets me. My apologies if this is not the appropriate thread to debate. Not sure which thread is or was, but it sounds like it's too late anyway. ...and, with all due respect, defending Tac-Iron is not pot-stirring.

Apparently electronic non-magnified optics are the same as traditional iron sights, which is news to me, but be that as it may, I assume no-one will mind when I show up in "Tac-Iron" with JPoints on my shotgun and pistol. Since it's not an advantage on the rifle, it must not be an advantage on the shotgun or pistol either. See you in a few weeks.

"Just trying to keep Tac Irons alive and give some of the new shooters an advantage. It pains me to see guys shoot TO with an EOtech and wonder why they dont do better." I don't see how this rule change helps keep Tac-Iron alive and I am opposed to it. It does not in any way encompass the spirit of the division. When a new Tac-Optic shooter shows up to face a 350 yard target with an EoTech; #1). they will quickly learn why it's not the best choice for Tac-Optic and #2). the friendly seasoned competitor will offer up myriad suggestions on how to be better equipped for the next match, ie: maybe don't use an EoTech. That's called being a new shooter. It is not necessary to dilute an otherwise competitive and established division for the benefit of someone's first match. I will still show up with my eyeball, rear sight and front sight. Advantage, disadvantage or neutral, electronic sights have no place in Tac-Iron or He-Man. It is not necessary to change long established rules in order to accommodate a shooter who failed to research appropriate gear before they purchased a rifle. This sport is expensive and you have to expect to buy specialized gear, more than once. If "only ONE sighting system is allowed" in Tac-Iron, are we no longer allowed to run two sets of iron sights on the rifle? Also, it was said here that EoTech type sights will not be allowed in He-Man because competitors have expressed they want to keep that division pure. What a total contradiction! Keep the iron sight divisions pure across the board. Start a new division if you want to level the playing field for EoTech, C-More, JPoint, Aimpoint, etc., but please, leave the iron shooters out of it.

I've never had a complaint about RM3G. It is always my favorite of the year and a true yardstick to measure my progress as a shooter.

Good point Trapr. I'm guessing Lea could give the "Yea or Nay" on this. Thanks

This system looks like you can't use it with other gear on the belt. It seems like a "shotgun only" set-up. Has anyone used this system for a multi-gun stage? Also, has anyone encountered a match where you were not allowed to reconfigure your gear after the first stage? I recall a match where we were not allowed to change or relocate our pouches, caddys, pistol, etc, after the start, same as not being allowed to reconfigure your firearms. Maybe I'm not remembering correctly, but if that were the case, this "shell clip" system looks like it would be tough to work around.

Are those the standard velocity slugs? 1300 FPS or thereabouts? I'll give them a try. For as few slugs as I seem to shoot, I don't know that "low recoil" is really necessary. Thanks.

Use rifled slugs. The Remington Managed Recoil always ran and grouped great in my 1100, but have failed to cycle my FN. It has broken in nicely now and has started cycling lower dram shot, so intend to try them again. I have used the Brenneke K.O. in the FN with great results and they're priced competitively. I bought some Winchester Win-Lite and Federal Truball to try on the recommendation of a trusted fellow FN shooter and I imagine those would be good choices for you as well.

Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's Benelli. You should get your own now instead of living in sin Agreed! After fingering the trigger and stuffing the tube of another man's Benelli... how could you ever look at your FN the same... I don't look at my FN the same. I criticize it constantly and sometimes it "falls down the stairs", all the while my thoughts are with another... my soulmate. On the other hand, my FN lets me watch hockey and pops zits on my back, so I should really quit my cheating ways and appreciate her more. Maybe a warm powdered graphite bath tonight...

I have never "dialed up" a scope. It seems to make more sense in action shooting to have hold-over and wind info in the reticle and just hold 'n' shoot. Even my front Globe on the iron rifle has "information" so I know where to hold. I've used a simple duplex like the Weaver 1-3, but only at distances out to 300 max, where it was easy enough to judge my hold. The TA01 ACOG with the JP reticle or the Leupold Varmint reticle are great examples of reticles that are both loaded with info, but instinctive to use and not cluttered. No matter what you're going to spend some dough! I often ask myself why I didn't start collecting rocks, or become a mime. All my hobbies are way too expensive!

Ditto. I saw Carl shoot at the 2008 Tri-Gun team event and as I recall he turns the gun over, puts the comb on his right shoulder (right handed), grabs four from a caddy on his right side and whips 'em in like milking a cow (heel of the hand first, thumb on top). I have been trying to find a video too, as I can not for the life of me figure out how it's possible, but it was hands down some of the fastest and cleanest loading I have ever witnessed.

Agreed. I borrowed an M1 when my 1100 went down and the recoil was sharper than my 1100. The recoil of the M1 was also not easy for me to recover from. It felt very snappy and inconsistent. I have since shot the M2 and it still moves pretty good, but you can really feel that flex in the stock and it makes my sight recovery much more consistent than both the M1 and 1100... and the FN for that matter. Considering the M2 is probably the lightest quality shotgun out there, it still has the most controllable recoil impulse for me. I would spend a little more and get the M2. You certainly will never regret spending the money. I currently shoot the FN and love it as it was a major upgrade from the 1100, but inside, I am lusting after my buddy's M2.

From a "fairness" standpoint, it could be said that all steel should be painted between every shooter, like steel challenge. I don't think this is necessary however. Most of my experience has been fresh paint, slug paper, etc. between squads and that has always worked just fine. Give the iron boys and girls a chance to go first and everyone feels they have an equal opportunity to see what they want to see. If you've ever shot at Tac-Pro, you'll know that they don't paint any steel. The 300 rifle steel is all matte gray, but it's the same for everyone. I personally like the challenge, even as an iron shooter. I agree that the rule should either require paint for each shooter, or say nothing at all. As it is stated now, it seems rather vague and pointless. Also, J. Schmitt is absolutely right about rollers. They are much more efficient and cost effective than aerosol, plus you don't look like you had a flour fight from all the overspray.

Recently, I have had some breakthrough with this and been able to really stare at the front sight, like a cat watching a laser pointer on the wall. What a glorious difference! I relate it to the problem of closing your eyes when the gun goes off. Until I began to control that reaction, I had to force my eyes as wide open as possible. I mean really hold them open ridiculously wide while I shot to eventually train them to fight the instinct of closing at the shot. I've been doing the same thing watching the sight. Fighting tooth and nail to stare at that front sight no mater where it goes or where the previous shot went. When I do this successfully, I can remember staring at my front sight, but I cannot remember what the rear sight looked like or what the targets looked like and it doesn't matter. My focus was on the front sight, my brain figured the rest out and my body executed. Frequency in shooting is important here because when I go a month or more without pulling the trigger, I have to "re-learn" these things for the first part of my range session before I can move on.

EXACTLY and you should buy one. They work great... super quiet. Extra power absorbs more of the recoil impulse. The rifle cycles faster and feels softer with less slamming effect in the buffer tube, especially with a low mass carrier and adjustable gas.

I load weak hand and have been wanting some sort of chest rig for the rare, high round count shotgun stage. Most of the time the 22 on my belt plus whatever's in the gun is plenty, but now and again you have those 50 rounders and a chest rig, completely independent of the rest of your gear, would be so easy to toss on quick before the stage without upsetting the rest of your gear. I'll have to look at that Mark Otto rig.

Khunhausen does not have a 2011 manual specifically, but his 1911 and other manuals are unrivaled in detail. The line drawings in his books are worth the price of admission, not to mention the technical info. Not exactly a quick reference field manual though.

a good jam.

OK, joking aside now... For me, letting myself down seems more emotional for me, but I don't think it drives me to improve my actual shooting techniques, it drives me to improve my attitude and reactions to the let-down. I don't like the way I react when I let myself down and it is that reaction that I want to improve upon when I fail, not necessarily the performance. From the performance aspect, it is the success that drive me to improve my shooting and be more mindful (or mindless) of the details. The success is so rewarding that I want to experience it again. It seems to be a form of Yin & Yang for me. Both the successes and failures drive me to improve, but in very different areas. They balance each other out. Also, I've tried to focus on the little break-throughs and personal battles won and make them out to be as big a success as I can, while simultaneously making the failures seem as small as possible. It's a constant work in progress, but attitude really is so important.

This approach seems tough to manage if I am not competing very frequently... once a week or more, which I suppose makes the point that the more frequently I compete, the less these 1st stage ticks are even an issue.

I have one 6-rounder off to the side that often stays empty, as I use 4-rounders up front almost exclusively. I like having the 6-rounder for segregating slugs. Most of the time that's all the extra slugs I need to carry and it offers a very distinct separation from my primary bird-shot loaders. It's one more safeguard against paying Denise & JJ $25 for a dented bird-shot plate! I also find it rare that I need to load more than 2 or 3 slugs at a time, so the 6-rounder offers more logical division of the shells for me... grab 2 three times or grab 3 twice, etc.

A good friend of mine straight up ignores people if they try to address him in the bathroom. He was standing at the urinal and the guy next to him (only two people in a huge restroom) asked him a direct question and my friend just stared straight ahead and said nothing. No head nod, no sound, nothing, just completely ignored him. That still makes me laugh. How uncomfortable can you get!? I agree with the attitude that the last thing I want to hear when I'm touching my pee-pee is another man's voice. Yuck!

How the upper is assembled has a lot to do with it also. It's difficult to do a side-by-side comparison on two of the "same" barrels because they are going in two "different" upper receivers with two "different" handguard assemblies holding everything together and who put everything together and how means something. Those little tolerances can have a noticeable affect, not to mention the earlier comment about variation in the barrel making process. Then how the scope/irons are installed and set-up, and on and on and on... Tough to quantify and it's too bad those true tack-drivers won't last forever!

I think limiting open to 11 is the stupidest thing ever. What heck is the point of "open" then? Those are USPSA rules and I should clarify that I never shoot USPSA multi-gun matches. Not because I don't want to, just never have. I understand that 3-Gun does not (or did not) have a set of rules like IPSC pistol for everyone hosting a sanctioned match to follow. Every match I have attended has had some variation of equipment and scoring rules unique to the host. That being said, my earlier comments are based on those experiences and how those matches were administered. When it comes to USPSA multi-gun, I've never seen a rulebook, so to be fair, I may have been inaccurate on some earlier comments regarding "rules". I just don't think of 3-Gun in the USPSA context. Regardless, your points about tactical capacity are valid, but at least for now, I respectfully disagree. I do, however, think that limiting Open shooters in any way is ridiculous. If someone wants to show up with a semiauto, belt-fed shotgun with a little red wagon in tow, I don't care. That's what Open is all about if you ask me.

Why not just be able to load more in the tube as long as everyone starts with the same capacity? Pistols mags hold different mounts, Ar mags hold different amounts. Its fun to have options and be able to use a longer tube and load 12 when you have time to do so. Sure, but then why not allow He-Man to use 10+ round single stack mags, or more than 20 round rifle mags? Because those are the rules. That's the point of that division. There are certainly aftermarket products available that allow one to upgrade their old MIA or 1911 beyond it's original configuration and capacity. I may be mistaken, but I thought one of the rules of Tactical division (at least used to be) 8+1 in the shotgun. The idea of the division is tactical shooting and yes, one could argue that a Tech-Loader is tactical, but you know what I mean. That is an extreme example, but where do you stop? Look at pistol divisions. It seems to me that it started all Open. Then Limited came in to support what is now Single Stack, then Lim-10 came in to support what is now Single Stack and now Single Stack is here to support that old 1911. Would you want to shoot in Tactical against someone with the X-Rail? As long as they only loaded to 8+1 before that 40 yard trail hike to the next target array?