Reflex Sight

[260 Striker]

Here is another eye of newt to throw into this witches brew. If a person has a Production gun with a reflex sight and also uses it in PH, should PH be shot last? If PH shot first then that is technically practicing for a better Production score. Some rule changes have far reaching impacts on other rules and I have not heard anyone comment on the order these new reflex Production guns must be shot. Same goes for a person shooting a reflex revolver. This simple suggestion has gotten messy.

[braud357]

I am sorry that I offered a differing opinion than yours, but I will continue to oppose the usage of reflex - or red-dot sights in any Production category !

[aggshooter]

I'll attempt to address several recent posts.

This isn't a debate. It isn't even an argument of opposing view points. The guy from Shooting Illustrated wasn't at the delegates meeting. Somewhere, I'm sure I can dig up an article describing a reflex sight as a window pane style hologram.

For the others who weren't at the meeting, you're 10 months late to that particular discussion, largely to improper procedure. What is actually relevant is the discussion at that meeting in which the reflex sight that was proposed was described as "reflex sight, red dot, window pane, hologram, lightweight, under 4 ounces, not a scope body, and, you know that thing that the action pistol shooters are now using, just something simple, and using an allen wrench to make sight adjustments." As I said, this isn't a debate, Jim clearly made a case for what he called a reflex sight and against everything that was in a scope body or over 4 ounces, and everyone who actually attended the meeting was aware of that.

The reason I am so aware of the "no scope style" is because my wife shoots a Tasco Pro Point red dot scope body optic for US that we got in the 1990's. At the time, reflex hologram sights either hadn't been invented or were barely invented, and this was the optic that all the action pistol shooters were using because it was only 5 inches long and weighed 8 ounces. I was at the delegates meeting last July, and I put forth this question because if the answer had been yes, then she could use it in Production as well as US. The answer at the delegates meeting in July was no.

The vote was taken that night based on the discussion of that night. Rules regarding voting were waived because the rule had been submitted on time but the officers/rules committee/BOD dropped the ball in the incredibly easy task of disseminating the proposal via email or forum thread. The delegates there were trying to be nice, myself included, which I now regret. Had PROPER procedure been followed, we would have had this discussion in the 90 days prior to the delegates meeting.

That a match director now, when asked about shooting a red dot scope, should reply "I don't care, I don't see why not, shoot what you brought" or any variation thereof, does not constitute approval to violate the premise or limitations of the trial proposal that was discussed last July. The vote to approve was based on the info and description that was described at the July meeting.

At this point, I don't see how the BOD can continue with this fiasco. Perhaps a petition from match directors in opposition will trigger an appropriate response.

On a related note, I've been teaching rifle & pistol to 4H kids for the last 15 years. Without question, kids shoot better with a red dot than with open sights. So yes, there is an advantage. The simple rebuttal to this argument is to name off a couple dozen shooting sports disciplines that lump red dot optics (of any kind) with traditional open sights in the same class and going head to head with each other.

Also on a related note, I ran the IHMSA .22 records program for about 9 years. Year in and year out, I received submissions from shooters using a red dot optic for their US entry. In those 9 years, I never once had a US entry (32 or more) from a shooter using open sights. So the argument that there is no difference and that you still wobble, twitch, etc is bogus.

So now we come down to the real question: Why don't you shoot your gun in PH? That category was designed expressly around Production guns with optics up to 6x.There is no rule that says you MUST use a 6x, you have the choice of using a red dot of your choosing. Let's not try to reinvent the wheel here, there is a category for red dot equipped production guns, and it's called PH.

[aggshooter]

Regarding RDS advantage.....View any Steel Challenge or USPSA match report. The guys with non-magnifying optics beat the iron sighters hands down. That's why they don't compete in the same class. NRA doesn't allow optics and open sights in any category going head to head, neither does NRA rifle Silhouette or Pistol Silhouette. Muzzle Loaders? nope, not allowed there either. 10 meter air rifle? Nope.

Again, name a couple dozen shooting sports that have red dots in the same category as open sights.

[contender1121]

As I said sometime back, this has been a good discussion and thanks to all that participated (we made over 4 pages). Unless there is a great silent majority hiding out there I expect this rule to be rescinded. In the meantime, I'm going to take advantage of it and shoot for the fun of it 'cuz it doesn't count anyway.

[braud357]

Rich and all - thanks for the discussion. We are not late discussing this - in fact, we had a rather vigorous debate about this subject many months ago !

[StandingTall]

The guy from Shooting Illustrated wasn't at the delegates meeting. Somewhere, I'm sure I can dig up an article describing a reflex sight as a window pane style hologram

The definition of a reflex sight ain't just an opinion:
http://ultimak.com/UnderstandingE-Sights.htm#ref
https://www.dailyshooting.com/reflex-si ... dot-sight/
http://www.goodgamehunting.com/reflex-sight-vs-red-dot/
https://www.pyramydair.com/airgun-exper ... ex-sights/

If I can get enough people to agree with me that a revolver is a semi-automatic pistol and write an article about it.....would that actually make a revolver a semi-automatic pistol?

Again, if the "discussion" was about a certain type of reflex sight, it should have been specified in the rule. They have left themselves open to different interpretations from those who know that "reflex" isn't about what the sight looks like, it's about how it functions.

In the end, it doesn't make a single bit of difference what was discussed when creating this rule. It's about how it was written in final form.

All that being said, I agree with Melvin and others. This rule addendum was created without following proper procedure, and there are already other classes in which shooters can use reflex sights....or any sight they desire.......

[braud357]

One last note on this - I was reminded of a shooter from Mississippi that shot with us around 10 years ago. He used a Smith and Wesson 629 Classic 44 Mag, 6 inch barreled revolver, equipped with an original Aimpoint (that is a reflex sight, correct) ? He used it in UAS category, and he shot several 40x40 scores and even a 60x60 at a regional championship. I doubt that this would have been possible with open sights ! if it had been legal for Production Revolver category - he would have OWNED it !

[Richard Pickering]

Philip, that was Terry Hairston. He shot a great score with that Smith at Little River GC, Georgia. Shooting from prone (if I recall). he killed a number of 200m Chickens. I havent heard much about him lately but that day he reigned supreme. rp

[braud357]

I knew that it was Terry - I omitted his name on purpose ! Have not seen him for quite a while.