Reflex Sight

[260 Striker]

I honestly believe the Federal Government is helping make our rules. We can take something so simple and convolute the heck out of it. Now with this rule we are only supposed to allow certain makes of sights that are "truly reflex" and ban all other dot type sights. In addition, we now have to ask people for their drivers license to prove how old they are. Is this getting out of hand??? Just hitting a certain age does not mean your eyesight went to hell. Even younger people can have eye issues. Why not allow anyone to use any type of sight as long as it is 1X? I wouldn't care if a person used a 1X scope sight with a cross hair reticle if that will allow them to continue to compete in Production classes. Dots are dots, reflex sights are just reflections from the sight base up onto a viewable screen. Whats the diff? These types of issues are taking the pleasure out of shooting for a lot of people. Also, most match directors are just going to shake their heads and let people shoot anyway unless there is a "blatant" violation of a rule. I believe all rule changes should be presented to the current recognized MDs for input and possible comment/clarification before they hit a trial period. MDs are the ones who will be enforcing these rules so let them buy in on proposed changes. If a rule is going to be ignored by the majority of MDs I guess that isn't a very well written or popular rule.

[contender1121]

I honestly believe the Federal Government is helping make our rules. We can take something so simple and convolute the heck out of it. Now with this rule we are only supposed to allow certain makes of sights that are "truly reflex" and ban all other dot type sights. In addition, we now have to ask people for their drivers license to prove how old they are. Is this getting out of hand??? Just hitting a certain age does not mean your eyesight went to hell. Even younger people can have eye issues. Why not allow anyone to use any type of sight as long as it is 1X? I wouldn't care if a person used a 1X scope sight with a cross hair reticle if that will allow them to continue to compete in Production classes. Dots are dots, reflex sights are just reflections from the sight base up onto a viewable screen. Whats the diff? These types of issues are taking the pleasure out of shooting for a lot of people. Also, most match directors are just going to shake their heads and let people shoot anyway unless there is a "blatant" violation of a rule. I believe all rule changes should be presented to the current recognized MDs for input and possible comment/clarification before they hit a trial period. MDs are the ones who will be enforcing these rules so let them buy in on proposed changes. If a rule is going to be ignored by the majority of MDs I guess that isn't a very well written or popular rule.

I agree. I personally am for anything that will bring new shooters (or old ones back) to the matches (so long as there is no obvious advantage)(no radar directed guns allowed). I used to shoot back in the late 80s and early 90s and had to give it up for my business. Business is over and I'm shooting again and enjoying the hell out of it. There aren't very many advantages in this game (scopes being the biggest one I can think of at the moment). There is still a human driver behind the wheel and dealing with whatever obstacles are present. I do not view RDS (no matter the type) as having any advantage. On turks and rams, I think RDS are tough due to dot size versus the apparent size of the target. Love'em or hate'em, let's go shoot some steel.

[35isit]

I think getting "bad eyed" and aging members to shoot more production guns has been discussed. I know it is essentially UAS. But I feel and the gentleman that I discussed this with at the 2010 Internationals felt it would be the best of all worlds. Mr. Fields from Oklahoma said we should have Production Any Sight. Simply put Production guns with a scope. Increase the weight limit enough to include the scope. Put revolvers in with the single shots and have a good time. I'm sure there are enough Production guns laying in safes that would be shot if we could see the @#$% sights. I know I have a couple.

I do want to say that the trial period is addressing part of the issue. But it is convoluted. When adding one-two pounds to the weight limit would have sufficed.

[260 Striker]

The aging process, early or late, usually later, affects a persons ability to see and align two objects (front ant rear sights) with a far distant object (targets). Allowing ANY type of reflex, dot, 1X scope or other non-magnifying type sight still means the sighting system must be aligned with the targets so there is still skill required to hit the targets. At least aligning a front and rear sight has been eliminated. This should help people with eye issues so good deal. Now creating PAS for big bore MIGHT be a good idea but would need more thought on the part of many people. The casual mention of lumping revolvers BACK into Production would be detrimental to lower class revolver shooters who may only be using Rugers for example since they would then be up against TCs, BFs, MOAs and other production legal guns. Even the lower class Production shooters can be very competitive but a non-FA revolver shooter would be at a distinct disadvantage. Revolvers were broken out many years ago for some of these reasons and have really progressed on their own merits but still have some minor disadvantages compared to some single shot pistols. FAs are a whole other issue but not everyone can afford an FA. The reflex sight trial should have just used the word "reflex" as an example of a 1X type sight and not be restricted to just "reflex" specific sights. I'm sure this suggestion was made based upon the persons current use of a reflex sight. If the use of "reflex" was broadened to mean any 1X type optic then the trial period would be more inclusive of other sights and might stimulate more shooters to give them a try.

[i26963]

There are classes they can shoot in now! It is called Practical Hunter and UAS.
If they are using a reflex sight, they are NOT shooting Production or Revolver class. It is a bastardized class, no matter what one wants to think. I am not a young whipper snapper at 69, and my eyes are not good, but I don’t want to cheapen the accomplishments of those shooting iron sights, which is what IHMSA was based on from the start.
Melvin

[aggshooter]

There are classes they can shoot in now! It is called Practical Hunter and UAS.
If they are using a reflex sight, they are NOT shooting Production or Revolver class. It is a bastardized class, no matter what one wants to think. I am not a young whipper snapper at 69, and my eyes are not good, but I don’t want to cheapen the accomplishments of those shooting iron sights, which is what IHMSA was based on from the start.
Melvin

When first approached on this, I felt a simple reflex sight with allen wrench adjustments allowed an older shooter with fading skills to continue participating. At least that was the argument put forth. I'm not sure how big a problem this is morphing into. Now the reflex sights are priced at $300 and advertise 1/2 moa click adjustments. I don't have one, and I haven't seen fit to buy one. When this was discussed at the meeting, there were questions about the limitations, such as no scope type red dots, nor are any 1x or 1-4x scopes allowed. Same with tube sight limitations, there cannot be any solid glass inserts, there must actually be an aperture with a hole in it, and sight radius must remain within the rules.

I've always felt it was hypocritical to argue that "I just want to shoot the gun instead of letting it sit in the safe, I'm not looking for an advantage" and then argue "My scoped revolver won't keep up with my scoped bolt gun so we need another class".

Semantics is arguing that a reflex (weighing 4 ounces) has a red dot and so does a Tasco Pro Point since the Pro Point doesn't magnify we should allow 1x scopes and that's no different than a 1x-4x scope set at 1x so a Leupold Scope set at 1x is the same as a $69 reflex with a 5 MOA dot.

Melvin is correct, we invented PH and UAS to address this. I support that.

[35isit]

There are classes they can shoot in now! It is called Practical Hunter and UAS.
If they are using a reflex sight, they are NOT shooting Production or Revolver class. It is a bastardized class, no matter what one wants to think. I am not a young whipper snapper at 69, and my eyes are not good, but I don’t want to cheapen the accomplishments of those shooting iron sights, which is what IHMSA was based on from the start.
Melvin

When first approached on this, I felt a simple reflex sight with allen wrench adjustments allowed an older shooter with fading skills to continue participating. At least that was the argument put forth. I'm not sure how big a problem this is morphing into. Now the reflex sights are priced at $300 and advertise 1/2 moa click adjustments. I don't have one, and I haven't seen fit to buy one. When this was discussed at the meeting, there were questions about the limitations, such as no scope type red dots, nor are any 1x or 1-4x scopes allowed. Same with tube sight limitations, there cannot be any solid glass inserts, there must actually be an aperture with a hole in it, and sight radius must remain within the rules.

I've always felt it was hypocritical to argue that "I just want to shoot the gun instead of letting it sit in the safe, I'm not looking for an advantage" and then argue "My scoped revolver won't keep up with my scoped bolt gun so we need another class".

Semantics is arguing that a reflex (weighing 4 ounces) has a red dot and so does a Tasco Pro Point since the Pro Point doesn't magnify we should allow 1x scopes and that's no different than a 1x-4x scope set at 1x so a Leupold Scope set at 1x is the same as a $69 reflex with a 5 MOA dot.

Melvin is correct, we invented PH and UAS to address this. I support that.

I quoted this one because to a large degree I agree with both. I have issues with PH. My point with a PAS category you don't bastardize a category that is a mainstay of IHMSA. By putting revolvers with single shots, we don't make in essence four categories but two. Less paperwork for the MDs. But if the consensus is to make four we could.

Obviously each range is doing what it has to do to stay open. In the case of my home range averaging five to eight shooters most months. If one or two of them shoot a PAS gun that would help a lot. Consequently as I've mentioned before. I traveled to a lot of Regionals and only shot three guns. Bigbore UAS which I am fair at and half scale and unlimited standing both of which I suck at. I spent a lot time, money and effort travelling to Ms., N.C., Ga., and other states doing that. My point is with common sense categories and not scategories with convoluted rules. Especially rules that need a lawyer to figure out. (I wonder if I still have my old Gold color rule book?) More shooters would travel to matches or shoot extra guns! David and I get lonely when everybody shoots in the morning and goes home. I know I rambled and guess what? I don't care! I'm old cranky and we've had this argument when we started PH. Nobody shoots PH at my club. I don't know why. Maybe because it's not appealing.

I just know that when I discussed this with Mr. Fields his idea made the most sense. It was simple. Since there are so many blind people. Or, they don't want to put in the work to be proficient with iron sights. There could be three and four gun ags for scoped guns. We could use UAS, PAS, RAS, & US.

[Richard Pickering]

We must face the facts that as an organization we are aging. When we discussed this we came up with UAS as a means to keep interest. I shoot UAS and enjoy it. I shoot Prod and Revolver and the scorers reflect the difference. We adopted P H. I shoot P H and I like it because I can campaign a scoped 10'' TC in the same chambering as my Prod. gun. We want to use P H to attract shooters who may wish to use a hunting gun or bring out something that doesnt fit well under our rules.
If we use P H to bring out new shooters, lets not burden them with the original rules. I'd prefer to have P H as an open (shoot what you have) category-----not for awards. Just shoot for your own enjoyment. There are other established categories for competition.
I dont think tinkering with iron sight rules will help. People who want to shoot will shoot. rp

[contender1121]

Lots of discussions/opinions which is ALWAYS good. However, bkraft's original question as to whether or not his Ultradot is legal to shoot has not been definitively answered. With the World Championships looming I think it is imperative that the rule is clarified.
I still contend, that due to the optical physics involved, a "closed" red dot sight (versus an open frame type) meets the definition of a reflex sight. Now, if the rule was absolutely intended to exclude the closed design then the author(s) of the rule should have clearly made that distinction in the very beginning as I am sure they must have been aware at the time of the differing configurations.
If one studies the rule book it is very obvious that things that are "not allowed" are so done to prevent an unfair advantage in a particular class or circumstance. That being said, and regardless of the semantics involved, can someone explain the advantage that a tubular or compact closed design has over the open frame design?
If it is chiseled in stone that the open frame design is going to be all that is allowed, period, then I sincerely hope that an official clarification will be forthcoming as I will have to buy two new open frame sights ASAP.

[i26963]

I agree, Contender 1121,
But I wouldn’t hold my breath until a clarification is made
MC