Red dot for Tact Optic only

[ChristianHE]

I read that letter in Front Sight also, and one of it's main points (and the most important to me) was that it's a gear-race and I totally agree. A guy with a 1-6 has a definite advantage over someone with a 3x or 1-4 optic. "Well, just buy yourself a 1-6 then" is the answer? How about when the 1-8 power comes out? Then I need to dump a $2200 optic so I can get the $3000 one? Also a person with a $200 1-4x optic will not have as clear a shot on those "unpainted, hidden in the brush" targets as those with $1200 optics. No question, it's about money. Some shooters are definitely better than others for sure, and will win with whatever, doesn't negate the advantages though.

Oh, I forgot- why not instead move 1x dots to tac-irons?!

This just goes back to the "level the playing field" discussions that seem to rear their ugly heads here. Aint gonna happen and it is not productive to keep changing the rules to try to achieve it. Get used to the fact that unless you are Rob Leatham, there will always be those that do things better and a little smarter than you. A lot of us enjoy and welcome the challenge of improving our gear and techniques to someday possibly achieve greatness at our own level.

I was jabbing trapr suggesting dots move to irons... I guess I forgot the smiley face? nothing in MY post about rewriting rules or leveling the field or no one being smarter or better than me. I, by the way, use a $1200 NightForce NXS 1-4, and after looking through my buddies 1-4 Millet I thought "wow, that sucks, not very bright or clear and has huge solid black lines and dots... so yes, as I said, it's an advantage no matter who you are.

[Y. Koester]

I agree with the article. I'm a 20 year old college student and I can afford an AR and ammo but not $1,000 to dump on glass when it could go into ammo or even another rifle. (or books )

I'm going to a three gun match soon and I chose to remove my EOTech because I'd be getting slammed by people with long range variable optics when it comes time for shots hundreds of yards away.

It's pointless to shoot an Aimpoint or EOtech against someone with a variable power scope when my dot fully obscures a plate at 100 yards .

My cheap EOTech will continue to come off for matches unless we see a new division or aggregate...

I was done with this thread but ahhh hell, here you go !!

http://www.midwayusa.com/viewProduct/?productNumber=186660

So will this scope work or is there a red dot that you recommend????

[bigbrowndog]

I personally can not think of any Irons sight shooter that would be worried or concerned about competing against a 1x red dot sight.

I just got back from the range and shot my red dot Leupold, and my iron sight LaRue, given equal target presentation I'll take the Irons, but if I decide to switch for different matches I'll go with a variable.

Trapr

[scirocco38s]

Dont think you are being beat because of the variable optics. It a differrent reason.

No, I'm being beat because I'm not the best. I shoot for fun, not to win (Otherwise I would have hung this stuff up nearly a decade ago and rolled around in all of the money I'd be saving right now from not shooting)

My cheap EOTech will continue to come off for matches unless we see a new division or aggregate...

I watch a guy with a 16"M4 and an eotech whip everyones butt at 3-gun matches and we shoot out to 300 yards at the match. He knows his gun and his ammo and his points of aim. Absolutely no problem, he shoots the long range stuff as fast as or faster than anyone there. Regardless of the optic they use.

He will also do the same with irons but that is another issue.

My point was - give that same guy a variable power scope and put him against a clone of himself using the same EOTech. Watch him lose. Just because a person is getting beat doesn't mean they don't want to be competitive. Just because a person isn't trying to win the match doesn't mean they don't want to compete against their peers.

Otherwise, I'd save even more money and just shoot a high-point.

The guy I am referring to can afford whatever he wants and has other guns setup with other optic and he feel and his scores always show it that with an eotech he is quick efficient and accurate. he can shoot both eyes open and he fov is huge compared to any other optic out there. Past 300 he might need an optic with power to it but 300in he stays with an eotech. And like I was saying he is almost as fast with irons so it is as much about knowing the weaqpon and its abilities as the equipment that is added to it.

I agree we would have lots of money to spend if we didnt do it on shooting but we do. I also shoot for the fun of it mainly and althoough I do compete and want to win, most of my competition is localin 3 gun with friends to see who buys supper after the match.

[scirocco38s]

You mean like an M1A or a M1 Garaand? Or do you mean like a Disipator? How about EVERYTHING is in open and we all just shoot heads up? That would be my vote, no more divisions or classes, I ain't afraid of no dots or optics and then we could all run Beta C Mags like we used to! KurtM

Kurt, your my hero. tell it, brother tell it.

[SinistralRifleman]

That would be my vote, no more divisions or classes

I concur with this, if it were an option.

The only useful purpose of divisions is to help attract new shooters that are worried they don't have fancy enough gear. Other than that, who cares.

[el pres]

Do whatever you guys want !! Over this winter I'm going to go and learn how to play "Golf" !!

[bigbrowndog]

start from the Iron shooters tees,...........I mean ladies tees, I mean optic tees, Oh whatever!!!!!!!!!

trapr

[uscbigdawg]

You mean like an M1A or a M1 Garaand? Or do you mean like a Disipator? How about EVERYTHING is in open and we all just shoot heads up? That would be my vote, no more divisions or classes, I ain't afraid of no dots or optics and then we could all run Beta C Mags like we used to! KurtM

I'm down.

Run what you brung and no stage diagrams before the match either.

Rich

[Sterling White]

No stage diagrams ... not really a big deal because most diagrams are sketchy however an example tried in the SE several years back could level the playing field for shooters flying into a match the night before it begins. At the A6 - shooters were directed not to walk certain stages until it was their squads turn to shoot.

Match directors provide a minimum round count per stage.

The question to be answered if this idea should be considered is: Should the 5 minute walk thru be increased to 7,8, or 10 minutes so competitors can range targets, get dopes, and make a plan?

[spelling edit]

Edited September 5, 2009 by Sterling White

[StealthyBlagga]

I could actually support this. Merge Limited and Tactical into one (irons and red dots shoot against each other). I would expect this to even out the division numbers considerably.

[Sterling White]

And balance out the prize tables!

[00bullitt]

I have a better idea....lets just shoot and drink cold beer afterwards. Preferrably some of Kurts home brew. When it breaks.....then we can fix it.

[Arbor_Shooter]

Rich, his point was that although ACOG's and variables do exist in combat, they are grossly outnumbered by 1x optics.

Not true, unless you are looking only at the Army, who believes in 1x optics and 14.5" barrels. The Marine Corps issues 4X ACOGs and 20" barrels almost exclusively, with some allowance of 14.5" barrels being made for vehicle crews, weapons crews, and those whose job generally isn't front line combat. But even those 14.5" M4s wear ACOGs.

I'm fine with going after variable power scopes, but just because the Army has decided to arm itself for close quarters combat doesn't mean 3G should follow suit.

Yes, the 1x dot obscures much of the target at long distances. Yes, it is only marginally more effective than iron sights (and even that is debatable). Fact of the matter is 1x optics are generally a poor choice beyond 200 meters, compared to traditional iron sights or a magnified optic. I guess what I am missing is why we should change the rules instead of changing our equipment to suit a certain set of problems, in this case, long shots at obscure targets.

[jnikoley]

I use a Meopta 1-4x variable. I bought it out of necessity. Without it, there's no way I could see/hit the longer range targets. Before I got the Meopta, I used a red dot co-witnessed with irons. I used the red dot for the close stuff, and the irons for the long stuff. It worked really well, unless the targets were 200+ yards. With the trend to put targets out so far, a lot of us "need" magnified optics. I suppose, I would be forced to go "open" if USPSA adopts this rule. I would prefer they leave well enough alone, or I will have to buy a new pistol, and shotgun that are also open, just for USPSA. I hate to say it, but I would probably "opt out" of USPSA before I do that.

[Doug H.]

I switched to open this year, not because of my rifle choice but because of my shotgun choice (Saiga). I did spend several years in Tactical/Tac Optics and think that is is the most popular because fits in with the equipment that the majority of shooters have and it is easier (for me) to shoot an optic than iron sights. Messing with Tac Optics is a great way to get less people to come to matches. I don't see a problem with letting Eotech/Aimpoint shooters compete in Limited and I'm pretty sure that the regular iron sight shooters will still kick butt. But for most of us average shooters with limited skills and ability, a magnified optic lets us play the game and not feel completely foolish.

Doug

[Chills1994]

First off, welcome to the forums Arbor Shooter.

Second, me, as a new guy to any sort of 3 gun, I was just finally wrapping my mind around the existing USPSA rules, and now you want to change them...

Third, I've said it here on this forum before and I will say it again...I'm a cheap a$$, both in terms of equipment and these bigger matches. I doubt I will ever have the big bucks to attend something like the Ironman or the Ft. Benning 3 gun.

EDIT: so I really don't have a dog in this hunt... and all you big time 3 gun competitors can go on and ignore me accordingly...or take what have to say with a grain of salt...or a block.

I have only had two scopes in my entire life. A 15 year old Nikon 3 X 9 by 40 and a real POS BSA Sweet 17 scope.

That 3 X 9 Nikon gave me a real good look at the pasters and perforations just at 3 power....Oh, I am in St. Louis by the way, so we don't shoot 3 gun matches or rifle side matches out past 200 yards.

Fourth, after that first match where I got to count the perforations in the carboard with the Nikon, I switched to strictly irons. I couldn't see myself spending $700 + + for a Meopta. I like to put things into perspective...for a lot of people, that's a house payment. Maybe for some other people that's a car or a truck payment.

Fifth, if I could scrape up the money to buy a $700 optic, it would totally tick me off to be forced into a division a few years from now where I have to compete against $3,000 open pistolas and $2,000 open Benelli's. No thanks. I will just take my ball and go home.

Sixth, I'm just speculating here, but if USPSA were to tinker with the rules anymore...well... that's just gonna allienate more of the local MD's. In turn, for simplicity's sake, they will just come up with their own match rules and hold "outlaw" matches. I think many of them do already...where they cherry pick the better rules or principles from say the DPMS rules or even the IDPA rules.

Seventh, yeah, Trapr, I do think you stirred the pot pretty well with this thread. I can picture all sorts of people working themselves up into a lather sitting behind their keyboards right now. As a fellow $hit disturber...good job!

Lastly (since I have droned on here long enough), If you put the Aimpoint and EOTech guys in with me shooting irons...well...not to brag, really.... that just gives me more people to beat.

Edited September 7, 2009 by Chills1994

[MemphisMechanic]

Personally, I'm a pistol-only competitor who is thinking about dabbling in 3-gun.

I would love a division that was built around a rough duplication of the typical grunt's service rifle:

1x dot optic

30-round mags

No bipod

Flash-hider only, no comp.

[Chills1994]

Why should what the Army or the Marines issues have any bearing on USPSA rules? Eh?

Nobody here is saying or has said that you are NOT allowed to play Army in the current "TacOptics" division.

Just like nobody says you can't shoot a USPSA pistol match with your IDPA vest or some other concealment garment on (especially if you live in a state that allows CCW) .

If you really want to try your hand at playing Army, some of the bigger matches do recognize a Trooper division..err.. class. But no matter how gamey the equipment gets, I think the general rule is, "if you can carry it, you can shoot it."

I, for one, would absolutely love to see the word "tactical" dropped from any and all division descriptions.

I think going in the opposite direction would better... have four divisions:

1. Open (is open as we understand it now)

2. One Variable optic only division

3. One Power red dot only optic division

4. Iron sights only division

But the obvious argument that most people are going to bring up is "But...but...that just makes the number of shooters smaller per each division and in turn that just makes ......"

[Bryan 45]

Chills, please don't leave out Heavy Metal!

There may not be a lot of shooters in it typically, but those of us who do shoot it are dedicated to the cause.

[Chills1994]

I didn't mean to leave out Heavy Metal, intentionally.

It's just how it is treated at some matches...like an offshoot of limited or something... Like a category or something.

Yeah, sure if I had the money I would love...LOVE to get a .308 rifle and a 12 gauge pump.

<sigh>

Too many toys on the wishlist... and not enough dough....<sigh>

[Trail3]

Leave Tac Scope alone. I do not want to get a open shotgun or open pistol.

I finally got a Burris XTR this year after using a Simmons Diamond Pro, 1.5-5, $50.00 scope for 4 years, and now you want to change things.

Good variables are out there for less than a good red dot.

The letter writer in FS needs to shop around more.

[kellyn]

Ugh, yet another division! Please NO!

Please remember that the Army is a big organization and some units actually do use variable power scopes in combat. See the Schmidt and Bender Short Dot and Leupold 1.5-5X MR/T. Not that what the Army and Marines issue should control our rules.

The author of that letter puts far too much emphasis on power. Many a 3 gun match has been won with an ACOG and some even with a Holosight. Most of the major 3 gun matches are being won with a 1.1-4X in the Tactical Division (being driven by Daniel Horner). If you think a 1-6X or 1-8X is going to radically change your game and you are going to beat Daniel because your scope goes to 6X or 8X or 80X, you are in for some major disappointment. People inherently focus on equipment as the solution to their needs when in actuality it is practice and experience.

[bigbrowndog]

Can it possibly make 8 pages?????????????????

Trapr

[Chris]

People inherently focus on equipment as the solution to their needs when in actuality it is practice and experience.

It took 7 pages for someone to finally bring up the 'P' word