Best Iron Sight Setup For Cup

[38stupid]

I am building a 1911 6" Iron sight gun for the Cup / Action shooting. What seems

to be the hot setup for front and rear sights?

I am going to shoot 9mm and want to keep the slide as light as possible. I have used

the lowered Bomar setup for Bullseye and liked it.

Any input welcome.....

Bob

[DougCarden]

Bob Marvel told me that if you were shooting PPC and the Cup, the 3 position Aristocrat sight is the hot ticket, but if you were just shooting the Cup and other accuracy events the Bomar was the ticket along with a similar rear sight from Champion gun sights. I think the Champion has the same look at the Bomar, but the rear notch goes deeper than the Bomar...Hope this helps, DougC

[SRT Driver]

The Aristocrat Tri-Set is nice but only needed for 50 yr Practical.

A couple of clicks on a Bomar does the trick, however.

[Allgoodhits]

I am building a 1911 6" Iron sight gun for the Cup / Action shooting. What seems

to be the hot setup for front and rear sights?

I am going to shoot 9mm and want to keep the slide as light as possible. I have used

the lowered Bomar setup for Bullseye and liked it.

Any input welcome.....

Bob

If you plan to make no sight adjustments after sighting in, then it only matters that you like the sight image that you see and you can shoot the sights well. They could be fixed sights for that matter, after you get them "set" the way you want.

Most Bullseye and PPC shooters prefer "finer" definition, thus less light space to either side of the front blade as viewed in the rear notch. NRA Action and other quasi speed game shooters usually prefer a bit more light space as "picking up the front/rear sight" has to happen a bit quicker. Then you fine tune the alignment, but with less absolute finesse as in bullseye or PPC. If the light space is too little then it is harder to pick up the sights quickly.

BOMAR type adjustable rear compared to Aristocrat Tri Set type rear:

BOMAR has very solid click adjustments for elevation and windage.

Aristocrat has same feature, maybe not quite as firm in clicks. However, the Aristocrat Tri Set has 3 pre-sets. these pre-sets were designed for PPC shooting on a NRA B27 silhouette target. These settings are independent of the normal rear adjustments.

Setting 1 is for center mass, point of impact = point of aim, as are most other sights.

Setting 2 is designed to allow significant drop as it permits sighting or aiming at neck/head of B27 at 25yds and point of impact will be at target center some 15" or so lower. This way, the shooter has a smaller aiming area, and he/she is not distracted by bullet impact changing the aiming area.

Setting 3 is designed for neck/head hold like setting 2, but the drop variation is for 50 yds instead of 25 yds as in setting 2.

These tri sets enable the shooter to shoot center hold at close disatance on setting 1, then with a quick preset click to 2 for a head/neck at 25 yds, then a quick preset to 3 for 50 yd neck/head hold. The windage adjustment should be the same for all, but each preset has a seperate elevation "fine" tuning adjustment.

Now a NRA D-1 compared to the NRA B27 for purposes of these sights and presets on the Aristocrat.

D-1 From center of X to top of target is 15"

NRA B27 from center of X to head/neck area is about 15-18"

Using the NRA DI and an Aristocrat tri Set rear sight, you can do the following. Setup #1 for point of aim = point of impact, and simply hold center at 10, 15, 20, 25 yds and maybe a slight hold over at 35 and 50 yds depending on your gun/ammo.

Set #2 so that you may hold a few inches from the top of the target at 25 or 35 yds. This gives you a more defined (smaller) aiming area thus more precision. The bullets will impact target center.

Set #3 so that you hold a few inches from top of target at 50yds and bullets will drop in target center.

Bottom line is that with the Aristocrat, you have a lot of options. This was the original intent of the Aristocrat triSet rib when it came out around 1980. It followed the BILL DAVIS RIB which came out a few years earlier. The Davis did the same thing except those adjustments for the tri sets were done at the front sight, the Aristocrat tri sets are at the rear.

Hope this helps,

Martin

[SRT Driver]

Keep in mind that position 2 on the TriSet should be the lowest setting.

When I tried the Aristocrat:

Pos 1 - 10 yard zero. If you use a 25 yard zero up close your POI is lower by about 1.5" than POA.

Pos 2 - 25 yard zero.

Pos 3 - 50 yard zero using the bottom edge of the D-1.

On the Triset, the set screws adjust the zero for the position. The widage and elevation screws are used to adjust for light/wind conditions without affecting the zero.

It worked but I found a Bomar worked just as well.

[wolfgang]

Hello there,

coming back from the Cup I was ckecking the Forum and found this old Thread. If you not already have bought a 6" slide I would like to show you my Teammates gun.

See pict attached.

Instead of using a long slide and mill it out you go with a 5 inch plus a Barrelweight. Kind of old style design but it appeals to me also.

Shown gun has it´s slide milled out internally and also an additional weight on the Frame.

All following the idea nonmoving mass heavy and moving mass light.

The gun feels remarkably easy during recoil and recovery of target is also very good.

Just a suggestion.

02062006:

couldn´t get the attachment uploaded ???

now included pict as a link:

picture

Edited June 2, 2006 by wolfgang

[Flexmoney]

So...where is the picture?

[gm iprod]

Flex,

Email with picture sent.

Edited June 14, 2006 by Flexmoney

[Service Desk]

Flex,

Email with picture sent.

When I read the rules for metallic sight semi-auto - it seems that those guns are excluded from the metallic sight division because of rule 3.2

"3.2 Metallic Sight Firearm - Minimum caliber is 9x19mm (9mm); a semi-automatic firearm with no more than a 6 1/4 inch barrel length. The front sight not to extend past the front of the slide and the rear sight not past the rear of the slide by a 1/4 inch. A revolver’s barrel will not exceed 8 5/8 inches in length; the front sight not to extend past the front of the barrel and the rear sight will not extend past the rear of the frame. "

[BigDave]

The front sight and end of barrel are stationary - the sight does not extend forward.

[Allgoodhits]

The front sight and end of barrel are stationary - the sight does not extend forward.

Big Dave,

If your comment above is regarding the photo Wolfgang posted, then it appears that the front sight is mounted on a separate piece of material which is the shape and dimension of the slide, yet not attached to the slide, almost like a comp without ports. If that is the case, then the front sight would in fact be extended forward of the slide, as the slide ends, then the other piece encapsualtes or is attached to the barrel which extends past the slides end. Perhaps I am seeing the photo wrong, as I see a seam just aft of the front sight, which is where the slide ends(?). {Just looked at photo gmiprod posted with gun in cycle mode. I'm surprised that passes the muster, as the front sight clearly is extended beyond the front of the slide}

I don't think stationary or non-stationary is the critical issue. One could have a front sight which extends and retracts, as long as it does not extend past the front of the slide for an auto, or past the muzzle if a revolver. In the picture, the front sight does not extend beyond the muzzle, but it does appear to extend beyond the slide, as that other piece does not appear to be part of the slide.

Interesting.

Martin

Edited August 28, 2006 by Allgoodhits

[BigDave]

Martin,

If you consider the slide a reciprocating mass, yes. I don't see why a portion of the slide could not be stationary. I think the intent is that the sight should not extend forward of the barrel when in battery. And, before anyone jumps me on for "what the rules say vs. what they really mean", check the rules, as written, regarding prone.

DP

[Allgoodhits]

Martin,

If you consider the slide a reciprocating mass, yes. I don't see why a portion of the slide could not be stationary.

I think the intent is that the sight should not extend forward of the barrel when in battery.

And, before anyone jumps me on for "what the rules say vs. what they really mean", check the rules, as written, regarding prone.

DP

Big Dave,

Sadly, I think if some not so well known shooter were to use a gun ala photo and they were to win beating some vocal big name shooters, then it would be a problem. I think it is quite arguable that a "slide" must move, or slide. This is the 1871 NRA who runs this show.

Perhaps you are correct. I recall in the 1960's there were a number of bullseye shooters who had "extended front sights". This was a front sight blade mounted in such a way that it hung out in front of the end of the slide and the end of the barrel, like a diving board. This was before the longslide guns, scopes and the like and was done to increase the sight radius. Many of the AP Rules were bastardized from other NRA rule books.

Martin

p.s. ....and what about this hurricane season? Should I avoid a cruise in Gulf in early October?

[Leroy]

Martin

Yes avoid the far south for now and- Instead come to Bedford on sept.9th and Hinton on Sept 16th and Bluefield on Sept 23rd and 24th Kevin has a great prize table lined up. and keep packin and go on to Kansas with Kevin and I on BYOV.. Sept30th and onto San Antonio on Oct.7th and 8th..then back to Bedford on Oct.14.

The fall tour.

PS. Bedford Hinton and Bluefield is by the old rules:)

BYOV--Bring your own Vehicle. Truck is full....

Leroy

[EricW]

How do the Aristocrats hold up over high round counts? I don't shoot the cup for real or on TV, but that sight looks pretty darned compelling. Too bad it's a one-way deal with the slide cut.

[gm iprod]

Allgoodhits,

After thouroghly checking the rule book and having a plan of pictured gun sent to rules committee I decided to have the gun built as shown.

Whilst the rules do say the sight must not "extend" forward of the slide. It first must be attached to the slide to "extend" forward of it. Guns of this design were inspected and passed for use at both the 2005 (two handguns) and 2006 (mine) Bianchi Cup. I specifically had the my gun checked at the practice match by TWO members of the rules committee who were conducting the check in, I further had the gun checked by TWO referrees at the match and asked that the gun be checked specifically to see if it breached the rule you quote before I used it.

The sight is effectively attached to the barrel (the same as a revolver). No where in the rules does it state that the sight must be attched to the slide (reciprocating or not). No where in the rules does it state that all the slide has to reciprocate. No where in the rules does it state that you must use a semi auto of 1911 design (which has a sight mounted on the slide). If I was to construct a firearm with the sights attached to the frame and not to the slide, or modified a Olympic Bullseye Pistol (Hammerli 280 for example) to 9mm something and used that it would be legal as again teh sights are not attached to the slide. Most of these have the barrel attached to the frame and sights attached to the barrel and have a breach block behind or partially around the barrel. Much like a Smith & Wesson 41 or Browning Buckmark 22lr semi auto.

It is down to how the rules are interpreted. Four different referees agreed with me. My own Pistol Assocaition also agreed with the NRA Rules Committee. I made the gun to the letter of the rules, not neccessarily to the intent. But the intent is way behind what is going on in the firearms world. The rules were written by someone who had never seen anything other than a 1911, unfortunately there is more than one handgun design in this world, it seems the NRA just need to catch up.

The main intent of the rules it would seem, was to prevent someone making a 6 1/4" barreled semi (or 8 3/8" revolver) and extending the front sight out to the target, they went about it half arsed, I spoke with some of thereferees committee and they would like to change the rules to reflect the advances of gun design without restricting innovation, whilst trying to keep the guns within reach of most people. If the sights are within the confines of the rear and the muzzle of the handgun, they seem happy. Similar to how the rules are written for ISSF (ISU to you) Olympic Standard Pistol.

That gun cost me $6000 NZ Dollars (about $4000US) to have built, not including magazines. So it's not totally out of order.

It is a simple design, relible, light recoiling, accurate and most importantly, legal.

If you want one let me know, the lead time is about 12 weeks, reciept of deposit.

Dave,

Nice picture, shame you ruined a perfectly good shot with me in it.

See some of you in October in Ozzie. (and I don't mean some drunk git from Birmingham)

[Service Desk]

Allgoodhits,

After thouroghly checking the rule book and having a plan of pictured gun sent to rules committee I decided to have the gun built as shown.

Whilst the rules do say the sight must not "extend" forward of the slide. It first must be attached to the slide to "extend" forward of it. Guns of this design were inspected and passed for use at both the 2005 (two handguns) and 2006 (mine) Bianchi Cup. I specifically had the my gun checked at the practice match by TWO members of the rules committee who were conducting the check in, I further had the gun checked by TWO referrees at the match and asked that the gun be checked specifically to see if it breached the rule you quote before I used it.

The sight is effectively attached to the barrel (the same as a revolver). No where in the rules does it state that the sight must be attched to the slide (reciprocating or not). No where in the rules does it state that all the slide has to reciprocate. No where in the rules does it state that you must use a semi auto of 1911 design (which has a sight mounted on the slide). If I was to construct a firearm with the sights attached to the frame and not to the slide, or modified a Olympic Bullseye Pistol (Hammerli 280 for example) to 9mm something and used that it would be legal as again teh sights are not attached to the slide. Most of these have the barrel attached to the frame and sights attached to the barrel and have a breach block behind or partially around the barrel. Much like a Smith & Wesson 41 or Browning Buckmark 22lr semi auto.

It is down to how the rules are interpreted. Four different referees agreed with me. My own Pistol Assocaition also agreed with the NRA Rules Committee. I made the gun to the letter of the rules, not neccessarily to the intent. But the intent is way behind what is going on in the firearms world. The rules were written by someone who had never seen anything other than a 1911, unfortunately there is more than one handgun design in this world, it seems the NRA just need to catch up.

The main intent of the rules it would seem, was to prevent someone making a 6 1/4" barreled semi (or 8 3/8" revolver) and extending the front sight out to the target, they went about it half arsed, I spoke with some of thereferees committee and they would like to change the rules to reflect the advances of gun design without restricting innovation, whilst trying to keep the guns within reach of most people. If the sights are within the confines of the rear and the muzzle of the handgun, they seem happy. Similar to how the rules are written for ISSF (ISU to you) Olympic Standard Pistol.

That gun cost me $6000 NZ Dollars (about $4000US) to have built, not including magazines. So it's not totally out of order.

It is a simple design, relible, light recoiling, accurate and most importantly, legal.

If you want one let me know, the lead time is about 12 weeks, reciept of deposit.

Dave,

Nice picture, shame you ruined a perfectly good shot with me in it.

See some of you in October in Ozzie. (and I don't mean some drunk git from Birmingham)

Dude.... the words do not support your theory. Why blow off $6k on a project without a ruling from the NRA ?

Hell, if it is knocked back ... you can always shoot Service Pistol.

later

Edited September 2, 2006 by Service Desk

[Allgoodhits]

GM,

Hey if it has passed the muster of the NRA fine. At least it passed the muster of the NRA referee(s) who inspected it. What if there is a different referee the next time? The one who rules the nest, at the moment the nest is ruled prevails. The wind of interpretation may change quickly at NRA, referee to referee, event to event.

You obviously had doubts, as you made inquiries to "officials" during or prior to the process. In the previous posts there was no comment about "this has already been approved by NRA" etc. Comment was only intended to be cautionary as I have seen competitors and the NRA in action. Recall a couple years ago when Jerry Miculek had to change guns, because his revolver with a "slighty" deburred hammer spur was "questioned by a competitor", and it was ruled as an illegal modification, as an external modification? Jerry shoots all double action, yet somehow that hammer spur mod, gave his gun a competitive advantage, and when questioned by a competitor to a referee, that mod violated the letter of the rule and the gun was disallowed. Jerry, a world class shooter, was permitted a "re-shoot" with the replacement gun on the event he had already shot, then he fired remaining events with replacement gun. Would anyone else in a similar predicament been given the opportunity for the reshoot? My guess, most would have got a -0- for that event, then they can use the preplacement gun for unfired events.

Why the hell the NRA made what could have been a simple rule complicated. Why not have the limit of front sight as the muzzle for revolvers and muzzle for semi-auto when in ready to fire position? As written I think the gun with the front sight "beyond" the end of the slide violates the letter of the rule, but not the intent of the rule. Intent then is up to the referee passing judement at the time. Good luck.

Nice gun!

MJ

Edited September 2, 2006 by Allgoodhits

[gm iprod]

MJ,

The complications of interpretations is why I consulted with Rudy and the rules committee all the way through the process. The rules are indistinct, badly written, multi interpretational and generally bad.

Jerry's problems (2003) were with the old STOCK GUN rules, not the newer METALLIC SIGHT rules. TGO protested the decision to ping Jerry, Fred Craig and his own gun, by saying that the guns as they originally intended to shoot were exactly as they had used them in 2002, therefore if legal then, legal now. He won. They used the modified guns and had to reshoot some of the match.

I used this same ruling to ensure my handgun was legal. Using the ambiguity of their own rulings.

Moves are afoot to remove the ambiguity of the sight placement inline with your thinking. Placing a maximum sight radius for each type of handgun and a more defintive positioning of sights in the rules is being explored.

We hope they get it right.