1x optics for FB3G

[bigbrowndog]

The whole idea of allowing an unmagnified optic into the Iron sight divisions was to bolster more participation in those divisions, because the vast majority of shooters are using some optic of some kind on their rifles. It was not an attempt to drive out iron sights from being competitive, I personally think that for now irons are the way to go, but it allows new shooters to come out and try 3gun with the optic that they invariably and probably impulsively bought and not feel completely outclassed by shooters with 2000.00 scopes.

As Chuck said, no one is saying you have to shoot an optic, and if optics wind up dominating the class I would like to see a change made to correct that, but i do not think that allowing an unmagnified optic into the class is going to upset the final results, the folks that win and place high in the finals are still going to be there, whether they use irons or go to an optic themselves. When you look at what type of sighting device won the class, look at who shot it as well, could they have won even if they shot irons??????????????????

Lets face it the absolute worse thing with regard to participation in the class, that could have happened to the Iron sight division (limited), was the implementation of Tac Optic. We did it to ourselves because as a whole the masses didn't want to take the time to learn how to shoot irons. Consequently when a US TacOp shooter decides to shoot IPSC 3 gun, and has to compete in the Open division, its an eye opening experience. Whereas the Iron sight shooter transitions quite easily, because its the same.

trapr

[kellyn]

308 as used today by the Military, LE, and Federal agencies all have optics. Why not do away with Heavy Irons and switch to all optics in HM? It makes sense to me anyway.

Instead of that, why not go a step further and just eliminate divisions completely? Run what you brung, heads up, etc. No handicaps of any kind, no equipment divisions, no skill divisions, no decared power factor, nothing. Just show up and use what you have within safety and course description parameters.

Sounds like a good way to "level the playing field" to me. I doubt if match results would change very much accross the board.

Wrong.

At every match I have scored over the last 3 years, in every case except one (LaRue Tactical), the match winner would have been an Open division shooter. And LaRue Tactical did not have any Open Division shooters.

In most cases, the ONLY Tact Optics shooter in the top 5 is Daniel Horner. Shooting "straight up" is a great idea when you are shooting the local match for fun. It is a bad idea when you are putting up a prize table & the bulk of your shooters prefer Tact-Optics. It would start an "arms race" that would seriously change the game & inhibit new shooters entering the sport.

Linda Chico (L-2035)

Columbia SC

+1 on that. We will all HAVE to be in Open division then.

[Chuck Anderson]

I guess the more relevant question for Iron shooters is if you want to have more than a handful of people to compete against. TI is a small division and participation is normally in the single digits to low 20's. Some matches have had to not recognize the Division because there just weren't enough people there shooting it. By allowing folks with red dots to compete, hopefully we can bring participation in this division up, not just in major matches but all the local matches around the country that feed big matches like FB3G. I kind of liked the idea of leaving HM an Iron Sight only division but I know there are a lot of people that shoot that division that wanted to see it opened up to red dots. 3 Gun is still evolving. Lets see where the rules go.

[Mickster]

It seems most of the attention is on the 1x red dot sights. For me, a red dot sight is un-workable because it looks like a figure 8 blob, splotch or red shooting star depending on the price of the optic.

I would prefer a 1x scope like the Burris Scout 1x20 Plex Reticle or the TC 1x32 or even the 1x Simmons with the Pro Diamond reticle. They are one power but allow focusing of the reticle for a very clear and defined crosshair aiming point.

Would this be allowed in He-man iron or Tac Iron?

If so, it could rip into and reduce the number of shooters using iron sights. Do you think it could mean the beginning of the end of iron only rifles in 3-gun?

Edited October 26, 2010 by Mickster

[Stlhead]

Thank you Chuck for boiling it down for us so well. As a frequent iron sight shooter I support the inclusion of 1x optics for just the reason Chuck speaks of, increasing the number of competitors. I also feel that once people give 1x a try they will see that Iron sights may indeed be a fun way to play the game and stick in the division. As for the shotgun and the .45 discouraging people from shooting HM, there is nothing that can be done about that, I for one consider the pump gun and .45 a draw for me as opposed to a discouraging point. I think many of the people that actually shoot HM would agree that the pump must stay, there is no other 3 gun division that requires it and it is just so satisfying.

[dcloudy777]

I agree that a 1X optic doesn't offer that much of an advantage over irons in a typical 3-gun match. I shoot my Eotechs better than irons, because I've put a boatload more rounds downrange with them than I have with irons. I would expect that folks that have more time in with irons would shoot them better than a dot. I believe that the standings in tac-irons and HM won't change much, except maybe the results lists will be longer, and I get to get beat by more people!

DanO

[-=VILLAMOR=-]

Does the 1x optic have better advantage than iron sights? Let’s take a look at them separately.

The challenge of iron sights is the proper alignment of two points (front and rear sights) to your target. It requires proper cheek weld, eye relief distance from the rear sight, and focusing on the sights to be able to shoot straight. The shooter have to be able to see the front sight through the rear sight regardless of the distance of the target. Focusing on the sights forces the shooter's vision to be narrower, forcing the shooter to widen his field of vision after engaging one target to start acquiring the next target. For the long distance, the shooter has to determine his hold-over.

The advantage of a 1x optic like the EoTech is the fast acquisition and aiming on the target as well as being able to shoot with both eyes open. Focus on the red dot is not as important as long as the shooter can see the dot on the target, allowing the shooter to have a wider field of vision and be more aware of his surroundings. A good cheek weld and proper eye relief is also not as important as long as the shooter can see your dot through the optic. And now EoTech and other companies offer these 1x optics with multiple dots or other reticles that compensate for bullet drop, so the shooter can use the proper dot for the distance instead of determining hold-overs. These are the reasons why law enforcement and the military like them.

I've run both a standard EoTech and back-up iron sights on my rifle when I was on SWAT. Both sights were set up for co-witness and both were zeroed for the same distance. I trained extensively with both as I will never rely on technology alone as they would sometimes fail. I know that with the EoTech, it's much faster to get on target than iron sights, especially if the targets are closer and bigger. It is also faster to acquire and engage multiple targets. For the long distance and smaller target, I can dim the dot enough to make it transparent and see the target behind the dot.

So does the 1x optic have better advantage than the iron sights? It clearly does, hence, the reason why law enforcement and the military like them. And depending on the 3-gun match which may have a lot more close-range targets than long distance (like Tri-Gun Challenge that is limited by the range facility), the standard one-dot 1x optics will have an advantage over the iron sights.

I understand that the Heavy Metal and Tactical Iron divisions need more competitors, and we want those new shooters who come with these 1x optics to feel welcome by not letting them get hosed in Tactical Optics. But right now, the only reason why the iron sights shooters are winning those divisions is that those shooters are seasoned competitors. I know that once these shooters switch to the 1x optic and start dominating the divisions with these 1x optics, it’ll be the death of iron sights. And once that happen, how are we going to make the new shooters who come with basic iron sights feel welcome?

[Bryan 45]

I understand that the Heavy Metal and Tactical Iron divisions need more competitors, and we want those new shooters who come with these 1x optics to feel welcome by not letting them get hosed in Tactical Optics.

This is the usual arguement for allow 1x into iron divisons. But truthfully- most new shooters are going to get hosed no matter what division and equipment they are using. Allow new shooters to use a varible optic and they are still going to get beat with a wide margin by the seasoned iron shooters.

And I agree with Jomar about some matches favoring 1x over irons. I'm not sure if Benning will be one of these or not- we assume (and hope!) there will be at least one long range stage, and last year there was a good mix of paper targets with hard cover/no-shoots.

[Stlhead]

I don't favor the addition of 1x optics with the hope of new shooters deciding to play in the non-magnified division, I am hoping that some of the people shooting in tac optics will decide that a red dot is enough optic for them and that they may find a more open field in the non magnified division. If new shooters are gravitated to non-magnified then even better. I think there are many like Villamor that will consider the dot an advantage and come try and prove it, in fact I very much hope that this is the case. I am confident that if more shooters where to try a match or two without magnification, and spend some time at the range practicing, they would once again find the thrill of hitting their targets without the aid (or burden) of magnified optics. Little is as satisfying as hitting your target without the aid of magnification when others are struggling to hit the same target with magnification, especially with a .308 that knocks the dog shit out of the steel.

[Blockhead]

I don't favor the addition of 1x optics with the hope of new shooters deciding to play in the non-magnified division, I am hoping that some of the people shooting in tac optics will decide that a red dot is enough optic for them and that they may find a more open field in the non magnified division. If new shooters are gravitated to non-magnified then even better. I think there are many like Villamor that will consider the dot an advantage and come try and prove it, in fact I very much hope that this is the case. I am confident that if more shooters where to try a match or two without magnification, and spend some time at the range practicing, they would once again find the thrill of hitting their targets without the aid (or burden) of magnified optics. Little is as satisfying as hitting your target without the aid of magnification when others are struggling to hit the same target with magnification, especially with a .308 that knocks the dog shit out of the steel.

+1, well said.

[Les Snyder]

an old guy's point of view...at 63 a 3.75 asthigmatism, and beginning cataracts, a flash target at 200m is challenging with a .065 front sight blade....and not so much with a 1.5x16 ACOG... I've never looked through a dot scope or holographic sight to see a round dot...I don't think I would shoot HM at Ft Benning, but as the rules trickle down to the local clubs, it would be fun to bring the 870 and single stack out...

[sono]

Well I'm still running irons. Long range with irons and a dot are about equal, maybe. However, I'm working on a dot for the close stuff. This is where a dot shines. May have to spend money just to stay competitive.

It's all about the learning curve. Most people don't put the time and effort into shooting irons. This is why optics are so popular. Along with inconsistent Target presentation and so on. With that said let's go play!

Ryan

[dcloudy777]

Well I'm still running irons. Long range with irons and a dot are about equal, maybe. However, I'm working on a dot for the close stuff. This is where a dot shines. May have to spend money just to stay competitive.

It's all about the learning curve. Most people don't put the time and effort into shooting irons. This is why optics are so popular. Along with inconsistent Target presentation and so on. With that said let's go play!

Ryan

At least if you do have to spend money to stay competitive, you won't have to spend all that much. Used Eotechs and Aimpoints are everywhere, often for 3 bills or less. Lower cost sights like the Primary Arms and Burris dots aren't as rugged, but are plenty for 3-gunning. You can buy as nice a 1X optic as there is for where you're just starting to get into decent low-power variable.

DanO