Range Report: 4-day Practical Rifle at Front Sight

Status
Not open for further replies.

Ian

Member
Joined
Dec 24, 2002
Messages
3,855
I just got back from taking the 4-day Practical Rifle class at Front Sight, outside Las Vegas. Thanks in part to the kind folks who gave me suggestions on what to take along, I had a great time. My overall impression of the entire setup at Front Sight is very positive.

There were several classes being held there this weekend, and between them all there were about 300 students at the facility. A hand survey showed that 5-10% were women, and about 15% were police officers. Most people were there for the 2- and 4-day handgun courses. The rifle course had about 40 shooters (about two thirds of whom were there for all 4 days).

The instructors were quite good. It seems to me that the instructional staff there is composed partly of folks with real-world shooting and training experience (the rifle staff included a couple vets and former military instructors), and partly of former students who have shown themselves to be very competent in Front Sight classes. I would prefer to have more of the former (it was about 50/50 for my class), as I felt I learned more from the instructors with real experience. In particular, one of them had shot competitively for the military with an M1 Garand early in his term of service, and later was a sniper early in Vietnam (where as a spotter he used an M14). I particularly appreciated his knowledge, because I used a tanker M1 Garand for the course.

There was not a whole lot of variety among the guns brought by students. About three quarters were AR-15s of one sort or another, most of them sporting electronic optics (ACOGs, Leupold CQTs, Aimpoints, etc) and tactical slings. The other rifles included two hunting rifles, two Steyr Scouts, three M1As (on standard, one scout with scout scope, and one SOCOM 16), and my M1 tanker. It's in .308 with an 18" barrel and equipped with basic iron sights. For ammo storage, I used a WWII 10-pocket ammo belt. I took 800 rounds of Australian surplus ammo, of which I fired 341.

The class included both range practice and classroom lectures. The lecture topics were "moral and ethical decisions on the use of deadly force," "use of deadly force," "stoppinig power," "color code of mental awareness," "principles of tactics," and "facing the criminal and civil liability after use of deadly force." There were also supplecmental lectures on choosing a practical rifle and tactical shotgun. The lectures were all quite informative and well presented.

Range practice covered presentation, fundamentals of marksmanship, supported positions, clearing malfunctions, and both tactical and emergency reloads. The shooting was done from 7 yards out to 200 yards, with a short session on the last day devoted to shooting from 400 yards. At 15 and 25 yards, we practiced head shots as well as torso shots. There were two simulators that we went through, which included hostages, no-shoot targets, targets you had to make threat assessments on, and hostiles out to 200 yards. On the third day we spend time practicing indoor tactics (doors and corners) with dummy guns, and on the last day there was a skills test and a man-on-man steel shoot.

All of the live-fire exercises were designed as practice for the skills test. The test consisted of 24 rounds fired and malfunction drills, all done from ready positions (safety on) and under time pressure, from and shooting position. Specifically:

3x 15-yard torso shot, 1.5 seconds
3x 25-yard torso shot, 2.0 seconds
3x 50-yard torso shot, 3.0 seconds
3x 75-yard torso shot, 4.0 seconds
3x 100-yard torso shot, 5.0 seconds
3x 200-yard torso shot, 6.5 seconds
3x 15-yard head shot, 2.0 seconds
3x 25-yard head shot, 2.5 seconds
2x type 1 malf (full mag, bolt closed on an empty chamber) clearance, 1.6 seconds
2x type 2 malf clearance (stovepipe), 1.8 seconds
2x type 3 malf clearance (double feed), 6.5 seconds (8.5 seconds for non-AR rifles)
2x tactical reload, 2.5 seconds (3.5 seconds for non-AR rifles)
2x emergency reload, 2.5 seconds (3.5 seconds for non-AR rifles)

My M1 served me very well over the course of the class. I cleaned it before i left for Vegas, and didn't have to clean it again until I got back home - I had no malfunctions that weren't intentionally induced. I was able to get all the malfunction clearance drills in within the allotted time, and by the end of the course I was getting my reloads completed in about 2.0 seconds. Its accuracy was more than adequate - when I did my part (shootinig at the range, I've found it capable of at least 2 MOA). At 400 yards, I made 3 out of 6 hits (including a second-round hit) on a torso-sized steel target. The area I found I need the most work on is (unsurprisingly) the one I've practiced the least on my own - 75- and 100-yard shots from kneeling or squatting positions.

When it came to the man-on-man shootoff, I made it into the third round, beating a scoped AR and the scoped M1A scout. On my third opponent, I got over-excited, and made a valiant-but-ultimately-unsuccessful attempt to miss fast enough to win. :)

A couple of the ARs in the class stopped functioning, due to gunk in the bolts. Also, several people had bad mags appear, causinig unanticipated double feeds. On the third day the standard M1A had something physically break in the trigger group (I never found out what), rendering it inoperable (the owner went to his backup SOCOM-16 M1A). Lastly, one of the Steyr Scout shooters had sporadic trouble with his bolt coming apart. Oh yeah - there were also one or two people who had the batteries die suddenly in their optics. One of the guys had backup iron sights installed, but his optic actually distorted the view through them, resulting in shots off by 3 or 4 feet at 200 yards (bummer!).

Facilities - Front Sight is still under a lot of consturction (they have big dreams). At the moment, they have 8 handgun/shotgun ranges and a 400-yard rifle range, plus simulators and outdoor open-air shoot houses. There is one large air conditioned classroom for lectures (capacity 400 or 450), and a large air conditioned tent containing the hand-to-hand classroom and the pro shop. There are no indoor bathrooms, but there are portapotties all over the place (at least two on every range, five on the rifle rrange, and several by each building. They are all accompanied by handwashing stations, and are all cleaned/emptied daily. I only had to wait in line for them on two occasions, both right after large lectures. I was quite satisfied with the arrangement.

All in all, I had an excellent time, and learned a lot of good stuff. I'll be starting a daily dry-fire schedule (something I've been meaning to do for some time) in an effort to retain it all and improve some more.

I would definitely recommend Front Sight classes to people looking for training, particularly novices. Definitely look for the grey certificates for sale if you haven't been to FS before - they are legit. I attended this course with one a friend gave me (if you're reading this, H.P., thanks again!).
 
Sounds great! I was actually looking forward to your report of the class. I'm glad that it went so well. I'm also very excited to hear that your Tanker survived and thrived. What's the history of your rifle, if you don't mind?

Not at all in an 'in your face' manner, but it's really interesting and awesome that a WW2-era rifle with associated gear kept up with and exceeded lots of the newer stuff.

Every time I hear a report on a class, I hear about the optics that failed. As much as I love the idea of a good red dot, I just don't think it's a good enough idea to safely venture away from irons. Not that my two cents matter...

I wonder if an AK type rifle would survive the skill tests they gave. Seems it would be tough to get that safety off and get your shots out in under the specified times.

Sounds like a great course overall, glad you enjoyed it. Thanks for posting the review!
 
I'm also very excited to hear that your Tanker survived and thrived. What's the history of your rifle, if you don't mind?

I don't mind at all, though I don't know too much of it. The receiver was made in 1944, and most of the rest of the parts (aside from those replaced when tankerizing it) also date from WWII. The barrel is stamped Arlington Ord, so I assume they did both the .308 barrel and the tankerizing work (I bough it already cut down, from an individual on sturgewehr.com). At some point the bolt was also retrofitted with a springloaded firing pin to prevent any possibility of slamfiring. The only thing I did to the gun was install a Smith Enterprises muzzle brake, which does a very good job of reducing muzzle climb (and deafening the shooter to either side of me).

Not at all in an 'in your face' manner, but it's really interesting and awesome that a WW2-era rifle with associated gear kept up with and exceeded lots of the newer stuff.

Like they hammered into us in class, the keys to shooting are sight picture, sight alignment, and trigger control. Sight picture may be easier with fancy optics, but nothing else has changed. IMO, particularly under stress, trigger control is the limiting factor for most people (myself included).

I gotta say, I really enjoyed being able stay right with everyone despite having the least expensive rifle in the class. :) In fact, Front Sight's motto, plastered on all our paperwork, is "Any gun will do - if YOU will do."

Every time I hear a report on a class, I hear about the optics that failed. As much as I love the idea of a good red dot, I just don't think it's a good enough idea to safely venture away from irons.

The one place that the optics really helped people out was on the night shoot (did I mention that in the range report?). I had real trouble seeing my sights, and seeing a target through them, in the dark. Only when the targets were decently well lit was I able to engage them. Some of the optics (in particular, an ACOG TA01 I looked through) were fantastic at night. The fellow next to me with a scout M1A and Leupold scout scope was just wailing on 50 yard steel silhouettes with barely more than ambient light.

I wonder if an AK type rifle would survive the skill tests they gave. Seems it would be tough to get that safety off and get your shots out in under the specified times.

Yeah, I think safety manipulation would be the biggest challenge. But hey, with some practice and/or one of the Red Star Arms modified safeties that you can operate with the trigger finger, the rifle could do everything just fine (assuming it's not blindingly inaccurate).

Thanks for posting the review!

My pleasure.
 
Nice review. Thanks for the time to put it up.

I'm pleasantly surprised to see that your Tanker made it through OK. I wouldn't have had any doubts on the ability of a stock M-1 to make it through, but the Tanker Garands can be more prone to problems.

Personally, I still think a M-1 Garand is one of the best rifles out there. It's my "go to" gun if I ever NEED a rifle.
 
I took my Garand to a "tactical carbine" class. It did everything the ARs could do except night fighting. The red dot ARs did much better than me. When it was time to shoot steel at 100 yards, you should have seen the look on everyone's face when it was my turn. 30-06 makes a bigger clank than .223.
 
That's great Ian. Sounds like you had a good time and it was worth your time and effort. I have always had a great time at the classes I have taken at Front Sight.
I have to admit that I was somewhat worried about you taking the tanker M1. But you have now proven to yourself that it will do, if you will do :D
Did it get heavy for you ? I have thought about taking that same class with an M1 but I decided against it out of respect for my back and shoulders.

On the issue of optics, can you tell us what kind of optics failed ? Spooky made the statement "Every time I hear a report on a class, I hear about the optics that failed." At the classes I have been to, I never saw an optic fail. BUT, everyone was using a quality, proven, top of the line optic. We didn't try to get some cheap Chinese optic to work. We didn't try to get something for $30. We bought an Aimpoint or an EOTECH. A lot of the stuff people talk about on these boards doesn't work when you give it a real good workout. There is no free lunch. This stuff is cheap for a reason. The military doesn't use this stuff for a reason. You shouldn't either. Quality stuff costs money. Imagine how happy you would be with yourself if you paid to take a class like this, paid to get there, paid to stay somewhere and your $30 optic let you down. That wouldn't be too good of a deal, would it ? Quality is remembered long after price is forgotten.

How did you make out sleeping in your truck ? I hope you found somewhere to get cleaned up. Where did you eat ?
 
Thanks for the great report on the class, and congrats on doing well with your M1.

One of the things I like most about reports like this are reports of equipment failures - it sort of helps me decide what to avoid. (Same as going to matches - I test MY equipment, and see how other brands/models work, too.)

Any details on the optics or brand of weapons (specifically AR15s) that failed?
Lastly, one of the Steyr Scout shooters had sporadic trouble with his bolt coming apart.
After handling & shooting Steyr Scouts, I've been less than impressed with Jeff Cooper's rather pricey baby in the past, usually from a value/workmanship standpoint . . . this comment reinforces my opinion.
 
How did you make out sleeping in your truck ? I hope you found somewhere to get cleaned up. Where did you eat ?

It worked very well for me. I parked just outside Front Sight, so I didn't need more than 5 minutes to get back onto the range in the mornings (I got to run through one of the simulators twice because I was the first person to show up one morning). I have a long-bed truck, and threw a futon pad in the back, and it was perfectly comfortable. As for food, I took all of mine with me, and just ate on the tailgate of the truck. As for cleaning up, I had water and soap with me. No problem there.

Any details on the optics or brand of weapons (specifically AR15s) that failed?

Unfortunately, I don't. When things went down, I was usually on the line myself, so I wasn't able to get a good look at what was going on. Incidentally, as far as I could tell, none of the optics actually broke, they just had their batteries die.

I took my Garand to a "tactical carbine" class. It did everything the ARs could do except night fighting. The red dot ARs did much better than me.

Yeah, I had the same experience in the night shoot. I simply couldn';t see unlit targets through the peep sights. I asked one of the instructors about the usefulness of a tritium front post, but his take was that since it wouldn't allow me to identify targets any better, it probably wouldn't ever make a big difference (since when there was enough light to ID the target, I could usually see well enough to hit it).
 
Ian said:
It worked very well for me. I parked just outside Front Sight, so I didn't need more than 5 minutes to get back onto the range in the mornings (I got to run through one of the simulators twice because I was the first person to show up one morning). I have a long-bed truck, and threw a futon pad in the back, and it was perfectly comfortable. As for food, I took all of mine with me, and just ate on the tailgate of the truck. As for cleaning up, I had water and soap with me. No problem there.

Let me get this straight...You lived out of your pickup truck just outside the gate during your 4 day class? :what:
That is awesome!! :D I'm not kidding or trying to poke fun... It's just that I tend to live out of my truck during short road trips (because I'm a cheapskate) and I am in the early planning stages for a trip to Front Sight myself.
You have just set the example for me, so to speak. :)
Great training report by the way. Very detailed.
Have you completed any other training classes at any other schools? I'm just wondering if you can provide any comparisons.
Thanks,
 
I asked one of the instructors about the usefulness of a tritium front post, but his take was that since it wouldn't allow me to identify targets any better, it probably wouldn't ever make a big difference (since when there was enough light to ID the target, I could usually see well enough to hit it).
I'm wondering if that would hold true when you're shooting at a light source, rather than at something illuminated. Such as aiming for headlights, or someone's flashlight. You'd be able to figure out where your target was, but your sights wouldn't be illuminated.
Same thing, perhaps, if you're sitting in a dark area (inside a building) aiming at something out doors which was sun lit.
 
I asked one of the instructors about the usefulness of a tritium front post, but his take was that since it wouldn't allow me to identify targets any better, it probably wouldn't ever make a big difference (since when there was enough light to ID the target, I could usually see well enough to hit it).

It seems to me the problem with irons at night is a combination of poor contrast (what the tritium is designed to solve) and the fact that the rear aperture limits the amount of light reaching your eye. If you add tritium without opening the rear aperture up more, I have no problem seeing my front sight at night; but it appears to reduce the range where you can see the low-light target through the sights. I'll see the target, bring the sights up and ooops... target is gone now.

Great report. I am curious to hear what you think the best lessons you took away from this experience were?
 
Just to throw around an idea, do you think it would be worthwhile to add the tritium sights and a flashlight to your rifle? That might aid a bit in the low light shooting, though obviously not much past 100 yards. It does rub one the wrong way to add a light to a garand, but if there is a need that can be met, why not. You could always replace the wood with a synthetic so you could add a rail there.

Anyway, just a thought.
 
Very interesting. That skills test looks like it would be an absolute nightmare with a bolt gun. Three shots in 1.5 seconds can be done from a semi, but I'm not sure I could work a bolt fast enough... and I'm pretty damn fast with my Scout. Did you happen to see how the Steyr guys did?
 
Let me get this straight...You lived out of your pickup truck just outside the gate during your 4 day class?
That is awesome!! I'm not kidding or trying to poke fun... It's just that I tend to live out of my truck during short road trips (because I'm a cheapskate) and I am in the early planning stages for a trip to Front Sight myself.

I would definitely recommend sleeping in a vehicle like I did if you're not put off by the concept. There's a dirt parking lot type of area literally 100 feet from Front Sight's main gate, and I was one of 3 or 4 people using it at night (half pickups, half RVs). Pahrump is about 20 miles away, and Vegas is 40 or 50 (and with Vegas traffic, assume at least 75 minutes each way, more if you don't get on the road early).

Have you completed any other training classes at any other schools? I'm just wondering if you can provide any comparisons.

I have taken two one-day rifle courses from a private instructor, but nothing from any other large schools. one thing I did notice at FS was that all of our shooting was done from the ready position, never from a slung rifle. Perhaps they reserve that for an advanced class.

I'm wondering if <poor peep sight performance at night> would hold true when you're shooting at a light source, rather than at something illuminated. Such as aiming for headlights, or someone's flashlight. You'd be able to figure out where your target was, but your sights wouldn't be illuminated. Same thing, perhaps, if you're sitting in a dark area (inside a building) aiming at something out doors which was sun lit.

No, the peep sights on the M1 are definitely usable if you have some light on the target. Our night shoot included shooting while the instuctors used flashlights and headlights to intermittently illuminiate targets, and also shooting while road flares were used to back-light the targets. In those circumstances, I was able to make hits, though still not as fast or accurately as some of the scoped rifles. If I were shooting at a bright light source, like someone else's flashlight or car headlights, I don't think I'd have any trouble using my sights. Same goes for shooting from a dark area into a light one - as long as light from the target is refected towards me, I think I'd be in good shape.

If you add tritium without opening the rear aperture up more, I have no problem seeing my front sight at night; but it appears to reduce the range where you can see the low-light target through the sights. I'll see the target, bring the sights up and ooops... target is gone now.

That's a really good point, Bartholomew - I hadn't thought about it. The light from a tritium from post might well wash out a target through a small aperture.

Great report. I am curious to hear what you think the best lessons you took away from this experience were?

The biggest thing I came away with is the importance of trigger control. I knew it intellectually going into the class, but it was really driven home to me. I need to avoid trying to force shots, and instead just let them happen. In addition I need to establish a regular dry-practice routine, for the same reason.

The other things I learned were more technical and less significant, including some details of stance, stock weld, and how to acquire and use supported positions. The indoor tactics were mostly new to me, as was much of the criminal and civil liability information.

Lastly, it confirmed my notion that I don't need an expensive whiz-bang rifle to be an effective shooter.

Just to throw around an idea, do you think it would be worthwhile to add the tritium sights and a flashlight to your rifle?

I don't like the idea of adding a dedicated light to the M1, because it would really hurt the rifle's balance, and would be very, very rarely needed. What I may do is buy a spare handheld Surefire and a junky bayonet, cut the blade off the bayonet, and kludge the flashlight onto its grip. That way I'd have a removeable weaponlight, which I could attach when I want the rifle for nighttime home defense or a match with a lowlight stage, and leave it off the rest of the time. I think the only gun I would permanently mount a light on would be a defensive shotgun.

As for tritium, my instructor pointed out that (at least with a handheld flashlight), the edge of the light beam will illuminate your sights automatically, reducing the utility of tritium. I might have to play around to get a bayonet lug mounted light to do that, though.
 
Cliffy - the skills test shooting was done one shot at a time. You'd have 1.5 seconds for a shot, and you'd do that three times - so there wasn't a penalty for bolt guns. During the man-on-man shoot, one of the Steyrs did very well, and made it into the second round by beating an AR. The shooter was working the bolt during recoil, and was quite fast. The other Steyr owner hadn't mastered that technique, and was bringing the rifle off his shoulder to cycle it (he wasn't all that fast, needless to say).

BTW, the fast Steyr shooter also got 3 out of 4 hits at 400 yards, including a first-round hit, using a manual hold-over rather than adjusting the scope. We all decided that we didn't want to get into a gunfight with him. :)
 
Ah... that makes sense. I took the 4 day pistol from FS last month and we had similar drills, but had to put two shots to center mass within the times. I'd love to go back for the rifle course and I already own a Steyr Scout and am pretty damn fast with it. I wouldn't want to take it if it really put me at a disadvantage. From the sounds of it, it sounds like the disadvantage would be with the .223s with irons.

Great report.
 
It has been a couple years since I took that class, but there were two guys next to me on the firing line who were using their bolt action hunting rifles. They did fine.
Someone asked for comparisions with other schools. In addition to Frontsight Practical Rifle, I have taken Gunsite Basic and Gunsite Advanced carbine. And the firepower aspect is one big difference. Ian mentions that he fired 341 rounds. At the Gunsite classes I took, I fired close to 2000 rounds in each class. At Frontsight, most of the time, you engage one bad guy with one or two shots. At Gunsite, you have a lot more multiple bad guy senarios and more failures to stop. Gunsite is also a lot bigger on double taps and controlled pairs. They spend more time on box drills and other multiple target senarios.
But, I honestly couldn't say that one class was a lot better than the other. I would honestly say that I thought Frontsight's basic handgun class was better than Gunsight's basic handgun class.
 
Great report! Here's one question: how many magazines would you need if you were limited to the 10-rounders? Assuming that they want you to spend your time shooting and not loading magazines, you must have showed up with a whole bunch of en-block clips loaded. How many would have been sufficient to spend your time productively?

Getting magazines for my Saiga .223 is a pain, and for reliability's sake I would rather use the factory 10-rounders than cobble something together.
 
At Frontsight, two, maybe three.
At Gunsite, I took 56 and carried 9 on me everytime I went to the line (30 round mags).
 
When I took my night urban carbine class with my Garand, I just duct taped a $30 G2 Surefire Nitrolon to the side of my rifle. It worked perfectly.
 
Roscoe - Even with only 10-round magazines, you would be fine with three. The fellow next to me on the firing line had an M1A and only had two mags for it with him - a 10-rounder and a 20-rounder. He had no problem with the shooting drills, except that he discovered that the 10-round M1A mags are tough to get a solid grip on because of their short length. The reason I say you'd need three instead of two is that the simulators can take a fair number of rounds to complete. Twenty rounds might leave you empty, but thirty would probably be enough.

FWIW, I keep all my clips loaded for ammo storage at home, and had about 500 rounds loaded in them when I left for the class.
 
Thanks! I guess I am OK for mags after all. I always felt like you needed 25 or so for those calsses.
 
Using an AK came up in 223 class last year, and Pat Rogers related a story of a guy who shot very well with one. However, this person didn't show up for class with a low round count. It was obvious that this shooter had is manual of arms down before setting foot on Gunsite. Reloads, malfunction clerences, etc, were all done on par with the AR guys. The guy could shoot, too, from what Pat was telling us. And of course, ultimately, that's what counts in the end.

Anyway, the AK thing is about ergonomics, and ergonomic the AK isn't. Mag changes take longer, as well as safety manipulation.
 
Taking a class like this is my idea of the ultimate "vacation".

Just... so much money. I'd need some more gear. Optics and more mags for the AR specifically. Then I'd have to fly out west. Pay for the class. Pay for a hotel. Pay for everything else...

Someday I will do it. I really enjoy reading the reports of those who have been to these classes. Thanks for posting.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top