CMP Allows Optics?

[Laphroaig]

I just received a notice of updated rifle rules from the CMP yesterday, and the bombshell was they will now allow optics on AR 15 rifles. Up to 4.5X and with a 8.5 lb. weight limit.

What say you competitors?

Personally, I've gravitated more to the "games" events shooting the old guns. I do drag my AR National match out a couple times a year for old times sake and don't plan on mounting a scope.

Laphroaig

 

[Hoser]

Max weight of optic sighted service rifle is 11.5 lbs, max obj diameter is 34mm.

 

[Jeff H]

Ohhh, I need to look into this. Might rekindle my interest in shooting service rifle. My interest in shooting open sights has waned in recent years.

The question would be to get a flat top upper for my service rifle or a scope mount on the carry handle.

 

[Howard Roark]

They should just drop SR and adopt MR specs and be done with it.

 

[Jenrick]

My thought was that if the stated reason was to have the current SR be closer to what the military is using:

16" quad rail (free floated or not)
Flat top
Adjustable length stock
Flip up rear sight and red dot optics allowed (non-magnify)

That would be about as close to "average" as you can get for our current military rifles.

As far as the current ruling really changing anything? About the only thing it will do is allow a lot more shooters to compete in SR instead of MR if they bring their normal carbine. They won't be anymore competitive in SR then they would have been in MR though. Also the hard holders aren't going to go anywhere, at most adding magnification just allows them to be competitive longer in SR, instead of them going to MR due to eyesight issues.

The reality is, if you can shoot irons, adding an optic of some sort really doesn't help you out that much (maybe 10 points across the whole match if you're lucky). If you can't shoot irons, you probably don't have the requisite marksmanship skills to have a chance in heck of being competitive at anything other then a small local match. For the in between folks (expert and just barely master), it'll help some. Honestly, a top notch upper and high quality ammo will be worth far more points then a scope of equivalent cost.

-Jenrick

 

[rskent]

I'm conflicted
It has become harder and harder for me to see a good sight picture with irons. Even with all the cheats like lenses in the rear hood. It has become a game of seeing. So a optic will help me there.

However, making weight is gonna take some thought. There is no way to make weight with the standard ultra heavy barrel most people use. So you are not gonna just drop a optic on your current
service rifle and go shoot a match. I'm thinking a 16 inch heavy barrel should be about right. We will have to see how it all shakes out.

For now I'm gonna keep shooting my current setup.

 

[Hoser]

The NRA rulebook committee amazes me sometimes. Not in a good way, again.

 

[mtlucas0311]

It's the CMP, not the NRA. I like that they reeled in the weight of the rifles, I wish they'd axe a few other things like shooting coats and gloves for those using AR's. It'd take some of the crap out of the match and maybe get more new shooters out. I think it would make guys with M-14 type rifles more competitive, kind of level the playing field a little. I agree with the above poster. if you can shoot, you can shoot. No optic is going to win the match for you. Hopefully it brings back a bunch of old timers who don't compete because their eyes went.

 

[Howard Roark]

I don't foresee the CMP allowing optics bringing many if any back to the sport due to vision problems. Most folks in that category have already checked the service rifle boxes and have moved on to NRA match rifles where there are fewer restrictions and better calibers.

 

[Laphroaig]

NRA match rifles where there are fewer restrictions and better calibers.

True, but you still must use "metallic sights". The NRA allowed optics for a few years on a test basis, but quit allowing scopes thereafter. Surely they will follow suite shortly.

Laphroaig

 

[Howard Roark]

True, but you still must use "metallic sights". The NRA allowed optics for a few years on a test basis, but quit allowing scopes thereafter.

Not true, rule 3.3.2 is still in the rule book and is for an any sight match rifle without restriction to sights.

 

[Laphroaig]

OK, technically true. But I see only 5 people competed in that class in the Nationals at Perry this year. I shot in about 10 NRA matches this summer at the local club level and nobody used optics. Maybe it will become more popular as people gear up.

Laphroaig

 

[Welding Rod]

About damn time! Our club just adopted the new rules, so optics, telescoping stocks, and carbine length barrels are in. Our first match under the new rules is tomorrow morning - I can't wait.

I have competed for years with my A2 configuration, which I have a soft spot for since that is what I was issued in the Army. However I always wished I was getting this hard to come by trigger time with my bedside gun instead.

I think the rules change is fantastic. Now all the new shooters who bought AR carbines with optics can play. I always said this sport was going to die if they didn't get the service rifle matches to allow today's service rifles. Few new shooters were going to go backwards by spending big money on antiquated equipment, after having just bought current technology, just so they could engage in a local game once or twice a month. I can't imagine how backwards this would be for our recent veterans.

I agree with a poster above that those ridiculous stiff back shooting coats and gloves need to go. As do the lead weights. It makes no sense to me to complete in a sport with firearms and equipment you would not choose should you need a weapon for non-sporting reasons.

Now they just need to get the sling rules up to speed to reflect the developments and service use of the last 20 years.

 

[Jenrick]

The glove is pretty much a necessity if you're going to shoot truly slung in. Heck you can get hand damage even with a glove if you're not careful.

What would you purpose for a change on the SR sling?

-Jenrick

 

[Welding Rod]

For the sling, the 1907 or web sling is fine, but it is not reflective of what is being used on actual service rifles. One and two points, frequently with the two points connected in non-traditional locations, are what are being used.

Sure the 1907 mounted in the traditional locations is probably superior from a pure marksmanship perspective, but why not allow other slings, like the Blue Force / Vickers for example, if that is what a shooter wants to use in order to maximize their familiarity with their personal defense / militia arm? Or because that is what they became familiar and comfortable with as a Soldier or Marine. For every aspect other than maximum bullseye precision modern slings are superior and therefore commonly used by our military.

I never understood the previous prohibiting of carbine length barrels. It actually provides the shooter a competitive disadvantage, why in the world would it be prohibited in a service rifle match when that is what our military has been using? Same deal with the slings.

 

[Manny]

I'm very happy they've finally changed the rules. I have terrible vision and have since I've been a kid. I can't see the sights well enough to shoot to my potential without optics. With optics, even limited by the rules as they are, it now again becomes a shooting competition to me, not a seeing competition. My only slight quibble is the 34mm objective limitation rules out my excellent 3.5x35 ACOG for use.

 

[GooseGestapo]

Actually, the weight restriction was eliminated from the final version of the rules once they were released. (See the CMP forum).
However, the problem is, the actual scopes that will be in use (ACOGS), will cost more than the rifles!
I'm told the best non-ACOGS option is the Vortex Viper PST 1-4.5x. Still, a $500 scope.
Added; ( I'm told by the CMP people that it was the Marine Corp teams that successfully lobbied to have optics permitted, to specifically allow them to use their ACOGS so, I doubt that a 3.5 ACOG will be disallowed.)
I just bought my first "entry" level rifle to start competition with.; a Rock River NM A4 with 1/2moa detachable carry handle sight assembly and Wilson 1/8" Heavybarrel. Weighs ~14lbs with stock and fore-end weights.

I mounted a 6-24x scope for load development and break-in, but find no practical advantage to the scope in actual match shooting.
Heck, at CMP Talladega, I don't even see need for a high power spotting scope as the winds aren't that tricky. Range faces south and prevailing winds are from North West and are usually only 1/4-1/2 value, and typically less than 10mph.

I don't think equipment is the problem. It's the logistics of, and expense of getting to the range, and dealing with the "personalities" involved that hurts the shooting sports!

From what I've heard over the years, I'll probably never shoot at River Bend (near Atlanta).
Still trying to manage to make it to one of Creedmor Sports monthly Talladega matches. Seems they schedule their matches on weekends I'm tied up on... And I'm retired!!!

When did I EVER have time to work???

 

[rskent]

Welding Rod said:

*agree with a poster above that those ridiculous stiff back shooting coats and gloves need to go. As do the lead weights. It makes no sense to me to complete in a sport with firearms and equipment you would not choose should you need a weapon for non-sporting reasons.

The thing here is, it is a sport. I have shot next to a lot of guys and a few girls that shot less than optimal equipment for the sport.
There is no requirement that I know of, to use a hard back coat. If you don't like them, just leave it at home.
If you want to shoot your M1 or whatever else, shoot it. If you want to shoot a rifle that doesn't fit the service rifle description , call it a match rifle and shoot it.

Welding Rod said:

About damn time! Our club just adopted the new rules, so optics, telescoping stocks, and carbine length barrels are in. Our first match under the new rules is tomorrow morning - I can't wait.

Please let us know how it goes. Our last match, the highest scoped gun was a distant third. Other people have told me that in the matches they have shot, the scope guys have dominated. And that soon you wont be able to be competitive without one.

We will have to wait and see on that.

 

[mtlucas0311]

The thing here is, it is a sport. I have shot next to a lot of guys and a few girls that shot less than optimal equipment for the sport.
There is no requirement that I know of, to use a hard back coat. If you don't like them, just leave it at home.
If you want to shoot your M1 or whatever else, shoot it. If you want to shoot a rifle that doesn't fit the service rifle description , call it a match rifle and shoot it.

I agree that if you just want to shoot, then go out and shoot, but if you want to be competitive and pick up leg points you are at a serious disadvantage without a hardback coat and glove. You certainly don't need them for recoil, why not take that expensive piece of gear off the cart if you're shooting an AR. It would make M14 type rifles more competitive and be one less thing a new shooter has to buy. Why not make service rifle "simple" and focused on the rifle and shooter.

 

[rskent]

Why not make service rifle "simple" and focused on the rifle and shooter.

I'm ok with that. I shot without a coat for quite awhile before I gave in to the “gaming” aspect of the sport.
And now I am told if we want to be competitive we will need to buy and optic. I think it will be a while before I get one.