what is acceptable eye protection?

[MetropolisLake]

Everybody knows you need good eye protection, but at meets I've seen aviators that look rather brittle, sportier glasses like Oakley and Tifosi that I know are shatterproof but not really ballistic rated, prescription glasses, ANSI rated safety glasses like you'd find on a shop floor, ESS crossbows that are rated for a direct shotgun blast, etc., etc., etc. Are there not any standards to this stuff? Seems like everybody is on a different page.

Also curious as to if 3-gun has additional risks to your eyes vs. pistol only, such as pellets or rifle shells, or if everything ought to be the same as USPSA or whatever.

Edited June 9, 2014 by MetropolisLakeOutfitters

[fishsticks]

ANSI rated for me. Eyesight isn't replaceable. Do we need a rule? Personally, I don't think so. On some level, we're all adults and this is an adult decision. I wear the best hearing protection I can too. Then again, I work in an industrial setting, and much like wearing a seatbelt after awhile you feel vulnerable without your safety gear.

[StraightUp_OG]

http://www.oakley.com/customer-care/faq

"Most Oakley Eyewear meets or exceeds ANSI Z87.1 standards for optical clarity and impact resistance."

For me my eyewear must meet Z87.1

[mulrick]

Yeah, do we really need a rule or another regulation?

You can't fix stupid, I see guys spending 3k on a rifle but won't pony up $150 for decent eyewear?

I get hit with enough splatter at most matches to be smart... Smith tactical elite for me... Killer product, ballistic rated, and the aegis that I have slips under ear pro without drama... I wore these for over a year on deployment, most comfortable eye pro for over the ear hearing protection hands down

[JBOT5000]

I just won a set of the ESS crossbows and they are legit very comfortable under ear muffs. As for oakleys their ballistic set is very nice and covers a lot of your face. My SEAL buddy toured their facility and watched them test them by shooting everything you can imagine at them and said they held up to everything. He used them on deployment and they held up to everything. I use them in an LE environment and they haven't let me down yet. If your glasses cost less than your mags ditch them.

[MetropolisLake]

If your glasses cost less than your mags ditch them.

Yeah but clear safety glasses can cost $3. A pair of Louis Vuitton glasses can be over $700. I'd probably go with the $3 jobbers.

Reason I asked is that I swapped my Oakley flak jackets with more ballistic oriented prism lenses for some Oakley Valve's with plain but ANSI rated lenses. Was curious as to whether that was sufficient for shooting 3-gun in but I couldn't find any kind of minimum standard, there doesn't seem to be anything. I'm not even real sure what the risks are. I know once in a blue moon you'll get shrapnel from pistol shots at steel coming back at you but I don't know how hard they hit you and what it takes to stop it from poking you in the eye.

Edited June 10, 2014 by MetropolisLakeOutfitters

[mulrick]

Yes but please remember that those $3 glasses will save you, but they are not optimal from an optics stand point... Ess, Oakley, Smith all make optically superior, ballistic rated, glasses that provide distortion free viewing...

[jriggs]

I love my Maui Jims keep em in my car, wear em at the range...out fishing...one pair of glasses for everything.

[J.Schmitt]

Remember that if a round comes back at you it usually comes straigh back along the bore, ofter hittin you in the arms, hands, and face. I took a round off steel over the right eye, half inch above glasses. Eric Miller took a like splatter to the temple this weekend, Eric Lund, same thing at Ozarks a few years back. I am sure the list is long, as the more you shoot the more likely that you have been hit. I wont let people shoot our local matches without real safety glasses

jay

[jriggs]

By "real" you mean ANSI rated...correct?

[mulrick]

By "real" you mean ANSI rated...correct?

That's what I would go by... These are the standards for a Balistic level protection

US STANDARD MIL-PRF-31013, ANSI Z87.1-2003 & EN 166 STANDARDS

I love my Maui Jims keep em in my car, wear em at the range...out fishing...one pair of glasses for everything.

Believe it or not, Maui Jim has the most loyal customer base right after Harley Davidson who has been and will probably always be number 1.

I personally am a Persol man myself, but in the end a pair of high quality glass lens polarized sunglasses are one of those "once you have them, you never go back" kinda things.

Just know if you take a round with those, they wont protect you. Also I try to only use sunglasses if I absolutely need to (I am one of those guys who wears them all the time so that is hard.) But when I get to the range I put my clears in and only switch if I have to shoot in direct sunlight or if the sun is just too damn bright. Sunglasses cause your pupils to dilate. In shooting we want as small of a aperture as possible to give us a nice clear picture of the front sight and target in the background... Think of a peep sight or the small ring on your AR.

[MetropolisLake]

http://www.elvex.com/Facts-What-changes-in-ANSI-Z87.1-2010.htm

Interesting. Apparently for glasses to be ANSI compliant you only have to survive a single 1/4" steel ball traveling 150 fps. That doesn't seem very impressive considering that ESS can be directly blasted with a shotgun and will survive. That's literally almost identical to getting hit in the face with an airsoft pellet, it's the same caliber and speed, although steel would be a little harder.

[jriggs]

By "real" you mean ANSI rated...correct?

That's what I would go by... These are the standards for a Balistic level protection

US STANDARD MIL-PRF-31013, ANSI Z87.1-2003 & EN 166 STANDARDS

I love my Maui Jims keep em in my car, wear em at the range...out fishing...one pair of glasses for everything.

Believe it or not, Maui Jim has the most loyal customer base right after Harley Davidson who has been and will probably always be number 1.

I personally am a Persol man myself, but in the end a pair of high quality glass lens polarized sunglasses are one of those "once you have them, you never go back" kinda things.

Just know if you take a round with those, they wont protect you. Also I try to only use sunglasses if I absolutely need to (I am one of those guys who wears them all the time so that is hard.) But when I get to the range I put my clears in and only switch if I have to shoot in direct sunlight or if the sun is just too damn bright. Sunglasses cause your pupils to dilate. In shooting we want as small of a aperture as possible to give us a nice clear picture of the front sight and target in the background... Think of a peep sight or the small ring on your AR.

I was told that the Maui Jim's I have meet or exceed all ANSI standards....they just don't advertise it like the other guys do.

And yes... Customer service is second to none in my opinion.

Edited June 10, 2014 by jriggs

[mulrick]

By "real" you mean ANSI rated...correct?

That's what I would go by... These are the standards for a Balistic level protection

US STANDARD MIL-PRF-31013, ANSI Z87.1-2003 & EN 166 STANDARDS

I love my Maui Jims keep em in my car, wear em at the range...out fishing...one pair of glasses for everything.

Believe it or not, Maui Jim has the most loyal customer base right after Harley Davidson who has been and will probably always be number 1.

I personally am a Persol man myself, but in the end a pair of high quality glass lens polarized sunglasses are one of those "once you have them, you never go back" kinda things.

Just know if you take a round with those, they wont protect you. Also I try to only use sunglasses if I absolutely need to (I am one of those guys who wears them all the time so that is hard.) But when I get to the range I put my clears in and only switch if I have to shoot in direct sunlight or if the sun is just too damn bright. Sunglasses cause your pupils to dilate. In shooting we want as small of a aperture as possible to give us a nice clear picture of the front sight and target in the background... Think of a peep sight or the small ring on your AR.

I was told that the Maui Jim's I have meet or exceed all ANSI standards....they just don't advertise it like the other guys do.

That would not surprise me... I know a lot of bikers (MC type) that wear them... If you are riding down the road with an open face helmet, and take a rock to the face... It would be nice to have ballistic rating

[jriggs]

A few years back I called and asked them about the Peahi model I had picked up from them. I had shot in them a few times and loved them...but noticed there was no ANSI info in their web page. So I called and was told that those models met or exceeded all ANSI standards. Not sure about all the others...but the Peahi is.

Edited June 10, 2014 by jriggs

[MetropolisLake]

Has anybody actually been blinded by this? Is it a regular thing? I mean is it actually a reasonable fear to worry that you'll lose an eye? I'm aware of shrapnel cutting people but are there actually instances where ricocheting shrapnel off a target literally busted through a cheaper set of glasses and blinded someone?

Edited June 10, 2014 by MetropolisLakeOutfitters

[fishsticks]

Has anybody actually been blinded by this? Is it a regular thing? I mean is it actually a reasonable fear to worry that you'll lose an eye? I'm aware of shrapnel cutting people but are there actually instances where ricocheting shrapnel off a target literally busted through a cheaper set of glasses and blinded someone?

Ricochets are one possibilities, a kaboom of either a firearm you are shooting or that of someone else is another possibility. Accidents happen, why wouldn't you take reasonable precautions? Decent effective eye pro isn't expensive. I'm sure the ANSI rating isn't the be all end all, nor does it ensure 100% effectiveness, but it is a decent place to start. Eyesight isn't replaceable.

[jriggs]

Has anybody actually been blinded by this? Is it a regular thing? I mean is it actually a reasonable fear to worry that you'll lose an eye? I'm aware of shrapnel cutting people but are there actually instances where ricocheting shrapnel off a target literally busted through a cheaper set of glasses and blinded someone?

Never heard of it before.... Damned if I'm gonna be a possible test subject though. Ballistic glasses for me and I'll make no exceptions.

We'll... I'd make exceptions for zombies!!! If they show up I'm shooting... Glasses or no glasses

[bagdrag]

Anyone know what Rob Leatham is using? I saw a sponsor on his website but couldn't find the frame on that sponsor's website.

[RiggerJJ]

They look like Decot to me.

jj

[bagdrag]

They look like Decot to me.

jj

You're right. Looked a little closer and I think it's their Revel frames.

[rboyes]

Go with the mil-prf for the best ballistic protection. It is superior to z87. I found a video a few years ago showing the difference when shot with a bb, I don't recall the velocity but there is a large difference in protection offered. Also, while a riccohet may come straight back, you may not be the shooter, so I prefer wraparound lenses (I use m frames).

[legion85]

I like my Oakleys.

[exmr2sw]

ESEE or Rudy Project for me!

[rtr]

Here is my conundrum for new glasses. I need prescription glasses with the best protection and optical clarity possible. I do not want RX inserts. I like the Decots but worry that they lack enough side protection, they are available in trivex which is supposedly the best optical clarity and protection available. The Rudy's would have more side protection but I don't think can be had in trivex so not as good of optical clarity and protection. Any input?