ErikW Posted December 4, 2003 Share Posted December 4, 2003 The USPSA Board of Directors voted unanimously to create a Tactical rifle division, which allows a single optical scope or electronic sight on an otherwise-Limited rifle. They also voted to score a Tactical aggregate. The division doesn't go into effect until the new rulebook does, presumably some unspecified time in 2004. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
glockster96 Posted December 4, 2003 Share Posted December 4, 2003 That's great news. Do you have a link? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Dunn Posted December 4, 2003 Share Posted December 4, 2003 That is welcome news! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GordonB Posted December 4, 2003 Share Posted December 4, 2003 When they say tactical does that mean the scope has to be a "tactical" scope? i.e. SOF approved (Trijicon, US Optics, $$$$). Will I be able to slap on a cheapie and shoot in this division? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ErikW Posted December 4, 2003 Author Share Posted December 4, 2003 Pretty much as I worded it, one and only one, any kind of scope or sight. Subject to final wording. I only wish they didn't call it "Tactical." http://www.uspsa.org/members Give the username and password from Front Sight magazine, and navigate to the most recent BOD minutes. (Not the two reports with the same date.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
diehli Posted December 4, 2003 Share Posted December 4, 2003 Mike V. said it was coming. EXCELLENT news! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rhino Posted December 4, 2003 Share Posted December 4, 2003 Awesome! Now I need to get an unported barrel for my shotgun . . . Wait! Scratch that ... I need a new shotgun! HAHAHA! Hmmm . . . an 11-87 Police model with rifle sights should do the trick . . . get the forcing cone extended, ez loader, extended charging handle, mag tube that holds 8+1 . . . and a short stock. Oh, now I am excited! When will they update EZWinscore? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Singlestack Posted December 4, 2003 Share Posted December 4, 2003 I hate that they are adding another division. I wish, if they had to do it, just allowed scopes in limited. I also hate the name "Tactical". I think I feel a rant comming on.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steve223 Posted December 4, 2003 Share Posted December 4, 2003 Thats great news,I know some dont think so but its good news for us old guys over 40. Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lcambre Posted December 4, 2003 Share Posted December 4, 2003 Also if you look at the App. for the 3gun nationals in June,you can now select tactical division. Louis Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chp5 Posted December 4, 2003 Share Posted December 4, 2003 Singlestack, As I read the minutes, Tactical is essentially Limited/Standard where you can use one scope/optic on your rifle only. You can’t change/add your sights/optics/scopes during the match or use bipods. BTW John, I’ve NEVER seen you actually shoot a singlestack. You should change your username to Doublestack! So the next question for the 3 Gun Big Dogs on the board is: “What’s the hot set up for Tactical division?” Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chuck Anderson Posted December 4, 2003 Share Posted December 4, 2003 JP Upper mated to a lower with a good trigger. 20 inch barell. For a scope either the Leupold CQ/T (my choice), IOR Valada low power variable or the Trijicon ACOG 3.5X35. Pretty much the same setup that can be found at the other major three gun matches that have allowed a tactical class for year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kellyn Posted December 4, 2003 Share Posted December 4, 2003 Your limited setup with a lowpowered variable scope on your rifle: Simmons 1.5-6X, Leupold 1-4X, Leupold 1.5-5X, IOR 1.1-4X (which is what I'll have). THANK GOD they did no go with some sort of approved list which does not reflect reality. USPSA 3 gun tends to be short range so maybe even a Holosight - but who knows what Reno will bring. Of course, the ACOG TA11 would be a good choice, especially if setup with the JP foreend iron sight setup. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chp5 Posted December 4, 2003 Share Posted December 4, 2003 Kellyn, Do you have eye relief issues shooting a scope on the pistol-length stages? Do you also have to shoot with one eye closed? I already have a Eotech, so I'm thinking about giving that a try. In my limited experience, the 3G matches in which I've participated have multiple short range stages (< 50 yards) and one long range stage. I think this is the case because most host ranges have multiple pistol bays and only one or two rifle ranges. Is this a common set up or are there many matches that have multiple long range stages? If my assumption is correct, the Eotech may be the ticket for me - assuming I can hit anything with it at 250 + yards Thanks for your thoughts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kellyn Posted December 4, 2003 Share Posted December 4, 2003 I shoot with boths eyes open. I don't really have any problems with eye relief. And I always use the sights unless it's a contact/near contact shot. In my opinion, EOTechs rule the roost inside of 75-100 yards and they're adequate for farther shots. BUT not having magnification is a hinderance for shots past 100 yards, particularly shots on plates past 200. You can be competitive with one but you'd better practice the farther shots. Another good scope that I'd add to the list is the Kahles 1.1-4X. Jeff Cramblit and Kyle "I love it when it rains and makes the stages muddy" Lamb had them at this years North American Tac 3 gun. That's an impressive scope. Great glass and a wider field of view than the Leupolds. I don't particularly care for the German reticle though. I suppose a new division is a good idea, since the most popular class of 3 gunning has been the scoped rifle and limited/tactical/practical shotgun and pistol. I'll bet that its the largest USPSA 3 gun division by 2005. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Singlestack Posted December 4, 2003 Share Posted December 4, 2003 BTW John, I’ve NEVER seen you actually shoot a singlestack. You should change your username to Doublestack! Well, When I joined this forum, thats all I owned. I swore I would never shoot anything else.... You should read some of the old threads when I built my SVI. But that is another thread. Sorry for the drift. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shred Posted December 4, 2003 Share Posted December 4, 2003 As an occasional grumpy statsmeister, adding another class annoys me. As a 3-gun competitor, I shoot Open, so it doesn't matter But.. as a club member, we have a ton of people shooting Open only because they have a scope on their rifles. This will be a good thing for them. Maybe we can demote Limited to pump shot guns only Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary Stevens Posted December 4, 2003 Share Posted December 4, 2003 Just as a matter of personal interest, what is wrong with the word "Tactical"? We created a Division that is very close to what is being used every day in Iraq and other places, why not the word "Tactical"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary Stevens Posted December 5, 2003 Share Posted December 5, 2003 I understand your thought process, and it has merit. I personally wanted to call it the "Over 50 ,but still think they are 21, who can't see the darn distant targets" Division. The less verbose members of the BOD thought that was a bit wordy and picked "Tactical". My opinion, although I might be wrong, is that those non-shooting types who think "Tactical" is bad are probably doing so because of the evil black gun that most of us use and not because of the word itself. You can put a dress on a pig, and call it a ballroom dancer, but in the end it is still a pig. Trying to convince the "uninformed" that we are playing a game called "Optical Rifle", while we are blasting away with our 30-40 round AR 15, at a variety of targets will probably have the same effect as using the name "Tactical Rifle". The observer will probably either approve or disapprove based on their own pre-concieved ideas, regardless of what you call the division. As to the "Commando" element, if they want to play by our rules, observe our decorum as to dress, and pay their money as far as I am concerned they are welcome. We are not catering to anyone. What we are actually doing is providing a vehicle where those who are having eyesight problems, but don't want to compete in Open Division, still have a few years to play. We will see how it works out, things can always be changed down the road if there is a problem. Also congratulations on bringing an alternative to the table along with your concern. Constructive discussion is always a good thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rhino Posted December 5, 2003 Share Posted December 5, 2003 1) Because it connotes a paramilitary nature to outsiders who don't understand that IPSC/USPSA is simply a game/sport. "Outsiders" are going to think that anyway (as Mr. Stevens alluded), I think. In any event, I don't see that as a significant problem. Even though it is a game/sport, it doesn't mean it's not also paramilitary. The DCM matches are a game, but they are definitely paramilitary if you consider the original intent. I'd apply the same to IPSC. 2) Because it will attract armchair commandos - exactly the demographic the sport should NOT cater to - and exactly the type of crowd that will give a good thing a black eye and eventually cause it to implode. Again, I agee with Gary. Anyone who obeys the rules and pays their money is welcome in my book. Given that, I doubt if many "armchair commandos" will even try it, much less come back for more. Part of the Walter Mitty experience is avoiding any incursions on your fantasy by reality. I hope you didn't mean it, but you're sounding a little ... elitist. Correct me if I am wrong! (Do not misunderstand me. I have ZERO problems with Military/LEO personnel showing up in their duty gear. I think it should be encouraged. Civillians should act and dress as civillians, as is current IPSC custom.) Well, first of all, law enforcement officers ARE civilians (unless they are in the military). Second, how are civilians supposed to act and dress? You're really troubling me now. In my opinion, people should be allowed to dress and act as the please as long as they obey the rules, pose no safety risks, and pay their fees. This is, after all, the remnants of the American experiment. I don't wear camouflage, but it doesn't bother me at all when others choose to do so. I hope you don't go to any of the "tactical" 3-gun matches! Even the "civilians" get decked out with the thigh holsters and other gear. Again, I don't see a problem. If our sports "image" can't withstand those little things, we are too weak and don't deserve to survive. I think it doesn't matter. We needed a new division that allows scopes on rifles. We don't, in my opinion, need any more "us vs. them" stuff. Calling it "tactical" is probably the best choice because it's meaningful to the people who will be utilizing the division. That's what they already call it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
George Posted December 5, 2003 Share Posted December 5, 2003 My .0002, This has always been a real hot button item. Ironically, the rhetoric surrounding this issue is one of the factors that influenced USPSA to label the stock gun division as Limited in the first place. I started shooting this game in late 1988 and we used to call it tactical if you were not shooting open. After a short while the same brouhaha led us to call it "stock gun" for a little while. and then if I remember correctly (if I don't, would somebody please help me here), around 1989 to early 1990, USPSA invented the Limited designation and has intentionally stayed away from the dreaded T word ever since. Funny how the worm turns. I've never really given a hoot which way the wording goes, I was part of our clubs administration back then and remember many long and tedious discussions regarding PC wording, removing target heads and so on to make us more media friendly. There is no denying the fact that media spin techniques applied in the ""Somebody that we don't need to talk about on the SHOOTING forum"" style can twist anything into anything and someone, somewhere will always buy it. But that is no reason to run scared down a path that could eventually have us using airsoft, or even laser tag gear instead of actual firearms. BTW, to get back to the original thread here, even though I shoot in open I am very pleased that USPSA finally did the right thing and instituted this new division. The popularity of this combination of gear is not to be denied. Who cares what it's called, we got it! Regards, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gary Stevens Posted December 5, 2003 Share Posted December 5, 2003 My .0001 cent, it is a Division. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shred Posted December 5, 2003 Share Posted December 5, 2003 Hmm.. we do get "tactical" people at our 3-gun matches that I've never seen at a pistol match. I don't think adding a 'tactical' division will change that, except they'll probably start saying "why's it called Tactical, if I don't have to use cover,... do tac-loads, ...". Right now they just say "This isn't tactical because.. I don't have to use cover, ..." Of course we usually answer with something "Yup, it's a game that improves your shooting skills. We hope you don't mind" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chp5 Posted December 5, 2003 Share Posted December 5, 2003 Shred - LOL! Call it "Tactical" or "Schmaktical" - it all sounds like FUN to me. "These things are fun and fun is good." Dr. Seuss One fish, two fish, red fish, blue fish 1960 (For those of you with small kids like myself) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flexmoney Posted December 5, 2003 Share Posted December 5, 2003 I don't know...maybe calling it tactical was good strateeegorie. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now