Optics in CMP matches

[jasons]

There's an interesting thread going on over on NM about whether or not it's a good idea to allow optics on service rifles for CMP matches (LEG, Prez 100, etc.) There are some pretty high-level people who seem to support the idea. Personally I don't like it one bit. What do other CMP shooters in the Northeast think?

 

[milktree]

Seems like it ought to be a separate class, given how critically important it is to be able to see and align the sights correctly.

I can kinda see it in match rifle, given the fancy-ass sights with glass in them that are already allowed, but not in service rifle.

 

[jasons]

Seems like it ought to be a separate class, given how critically important it is to be able to see and align the sights correctly.

I can kinda see it in match rifle, given the fancy-ass sights with glass in them that are already allowed, but not in service rifle.

CMP doesn't have classes. Are we going to now have two different President's 100 matches; one for irons and one for optics? Two different Distinguished Rifleman badges? It's just silly.

Supposedly the reason for all of this is because the USMC team ("my" team) wants optics. Maybe because they're embarrassed about getting schooled by the AMU for the past decade or so. Makes me want to puke.

 

[Jasper]

CMP doesn't have classes. Are we going to now have two different President's 100 matches; one for irons and one for optics? Two different Distinguished Rifleman badges? It's just silly.

Supposedly the reason for all of this is because the USMC team ("my" team) wants optics. Maybe because they're embarrassed about getting schooled by the AMU for the past decade or so. Makes me want to puke.

only way the USMC is gonna put together a solid team anytime soon is to STOP rotating guys/gals out after 12-18months. I mean, what do you expect? Hell, there are guys on the USAMU who have made all out careers out of it. the marine's have some REALLY talented shooters in their ranks...they just dont make a point to keep them on the rifle teams.


that being said, i dont think a 4x scope is gonna help any of us offhand. MAYBE prone...but ACOGs aren't well suited to precision shooting @ 600yards...and to be fair, the optic itself would have to be limited to something that everyone has/carries/uses. I'd hate to have to deal with mirage off the barrel on top of all the rest of the crap we have to struggle with to shoot a good score @ 600. Whatever optic they decided to use would have to be kept on the rifle for the entire match.

and thats not even getting into the "tradition" aspect of it.

id say allow it for NRA, and let em compete in a Service/Optic class. oh wait, they already have that...but they aren't currently eligible to "win"

 

[jasons]

only way the USMC is gonna put together a solid team anytime soon is to STOP rotating guys/gals out after 12-18months.

Won't happen. The units bitch and cry if anyone gets FAPed out past a year. You can play paperwork games for a few months past that but eventually they're going to drag your ass back to wherever you came from.

Marksmanship clearly isn't as important to the Marine Corps as we all like to think / say it is. Sad but true.

 

[jasons]

I don't think it would help with offhand or sitting, but 60% of a LEG match is prone and it would definitely help there.

 

[bpm990d]

I shot an ACOG in combat matches back in the day. They are very nice to shoot. I have a TA01 and am going to try and shoot it in a directors match this year.

Two big problems. Cost, and what optic will be allowed. I would hate to have one particular manufacturer given the nod, but then again I don't think there is a standard optic. I kinda liked the box idea.

One the other side, I don't think recruits in any of the branches will be trained on optics, so I really think this is moot.

B

 

[jasons]

I shot an ACOG in combat matches back in the day. They are very nice to shoot.

That's the thing, it's easy to shoot with optics. For example I shoot low to mid 190's at 600 with irons, but with even a (relatively) cheap Tasco scope I can clean it. Anyone who says there's no difference is being disingenuous at best.

Do we really want to take one of the fundamental "pillars" of marksmanship off the table? If so, what's next? For what it's worth this is coming from someone who is fast approaching "middle age" and would greatly benefit from optics, but I for one would never accept a DR badge or a Prez 100 tab stolen with a scope.

 

[bpm990d]

I know that CMP does not do classes in the EIC and National Trophy matches, but they do have an As-Issue class with the Garand/Springfield/clunker matches. I think they should change the games matches to "as-issue" matches and then they can have all of the M4 crowd shoot their poodle shooters and they can get class awards.

B

 

[PatMcD]

Any medals won with an optic cheapens the effort that went into those who won them without. If that's the case, discontinue the whole DR program, and P100 while they are at it.

I think a line in the sand needs to be drawn somewhere, and this is a good place.
Military shooters are issued rucksacks that they sometimes use in the field to rest a rifle on for a long shot. Allow that too?

 

[jasons]

Any medals won with an optic cheapens the effort that went into those who won them without. If that's the case, discontinue the whole DR program, and P100 while they are at it.

I think a line in the sand needs to be drawn somewhere, and this is a good place.
Military shooters are issued rucksacks that they sometimes use in the field to rest a rifle on for a long shot. Allow that too?

Agree. If that means people stop showing up for CMP matches (which is BS as the number of new distinguished riflemen per year is increasing) then so be it, let the CMP die a dignified death and we'll all move on. Don't cheapen it by stooping to the NRA's level and letting all the rules and traditions fly out the window.

 

[bpm990d]

I don't think it would cheapen it. That would be like saying real rifles are made of wood and steel. I do think you would need to use an optic to remain competitive if you were to allow them in the matches. It would obsolete the M1A and M1 as Service Rifles and that crowd would bellyache something awful. I don't think the CMP will go for it because of the huge cost to the competitors.

Seriously, what would we do if the next service rifle was an AUG?

B

 

[jasons]

I don't think it would cheapen it. That would be like saying real rifles are made of wood and steel. I do think you would need to use an optic to remain competitive if you were to allow them in the matches. It would obsolete the M1A and M1 as Service Rifles and that crowd would bellyache something awful. I don't think the CMP will go for it because of the huge cost to the competitors.

Seriously, what would we do if the next service rifle was an AUG?

B

I think there's a big difference between the whole wood vs. plastic thing and moving everyone to optics. First off, the movement to ARs actually lowered the barriers of entry into the sport whereas requiring (de facto) an optic would greatly increase them. Second, there was nothing fundamentally different about using ARs vs older rifles - they had similar sights with similar adjustments that required traditional marksmanship skills to master instead of a retical and hold-offs. Lastly, moving to the AR was based on precedent from our own military services who began to use that rifle for introductory marksmanship training during basic training - something that's not happening with optics as far as I can tell. (At least not in my service.)

If the next service rifle is an AUG we can jump off that bridge when we get to it. In reality that's not going to happen for a long time.

 

[bpm990d]

..... training during basic training - something that's not happening with optics as far as I can tell.

I don't think any service is shooting optics in IET. The old DCM's mission was to train civilians on a pre-induction basis for basic rifle marksmanship that they would encounter in basic training. In fact the old SAFS use to shoot the Army Alt. Course B qual. In my mind, keeping irons is a good thing to do. I would like to see it remain as a game of iron sights v. iron sights. There is a crowd that would like to mash it up.

My thoughts are that if they really want optics, then harp on as-issued. Make em play that silly game.

B

 

[highscore]

Any medals won with an optic cheapens the effort that went into those who won them without. If that's the case, discontinue the whole DR program, and P100 while they are at it.

I think a line in the sand needs to be drawn somewhere, and this is a good place.
Military shooters are issued rucksacks that they sometimes use in the field to rest a rifle on for a long shot. Allow that too?

I agree 100% with PatMcD. I have 10 points and just lately decided it's time to get the rest. If they allow optics, I won't even bother.

 

[jar]

I'll throw in my 2 cents as an outsider who hasn't yet shot a high power match. I agree with keeping CMP matches as they are. I'd love to some day dedicate the time and effort to getting a DR badge, and wouldn't want optics to cheapen it.

There is, however, a point to be made that there may come a time when optics are necessary for the matches to survive. I primarily shoot action pistol and 3 gun matches. 90%+ of the competitors in a 3 gun match use an optic on the rifle. Do I understand correctly above that there's a class for optics in the NRA matches? If so, I'll probably try to come out and shoot a match or two with my 3 gun rifle. If I enjoy it, I'll probably build a service rifle eventually to shoot CMP matches.

 

[55_grain]

The purpose of the CMP is to teach civilian markmanship. Would you rather teach new shooters how to shoot well with irons...or...spend your match/clinic diagnosing whether little Jimmy's sh!tty group is because of his lack of skill, or because of the $20 Leapers scope he's tacked on top of his dad's Garand? Just saying.

55_grain (who shoots iron sights 95% of the time)

 

[jasons]

I'll throw in my 2 cents as an outsider who hasn't yet shot a high power match. I agree with keeping CMP matches as they are. I'd love to some day dedicate the time and effort to getting a DR badge, and wouldn't want optics to cheapen it.

There is, however, a point to be made that there may come a time when optics are necessary for the matches to survive. I primarily shoot action pistol and 3 gun matches. 90%+ of the competitors in a 3 gun match use an optic on the rifle. Do I understand correctly above that there's a class for optics in the NRA matches? If so, I'll probably try to come out and shoot a match or two with my 3 gun rifle. If I enjoy it, I'll probably build a service rifle eventually to shoot CMP matches.

Yes, it's called F class, and I encourage you to come out and give it a try.

To be clear I have nothing against optics or people who shoot with optics. I myself enjoy shooting with optics. I just don't think CMP matches are the place for them.

 

[jar]

Yes, it's called F class, and I encourage you to come out and give it a try.

To be clear I have nothing against optics or people who shoot with optics. I myself enjoy shooting with optics. I just don't think CMP matches are the place for them.

Cool. I'll try and fit it in to the schedule.

Yeah, I didn't read any anti-optic bias in to your post at all. I agree with you 100%.

Rather than derail this thread too much, I'll send you a PM.

 

[mac1911]

Maybe its time for different service rifle classes??
Rifle class which would adhear to A1 and A2 services rifles
M4 class respectfully
Then I would say a service rifle "optics" class. Hard part is what would be acceptable optics that would closely follow the optics that are in service today.
Match rifle would be anything that is not a A1/A2 or M4 with the crazy sights
Then there should be a open class---all is good.

 

[PatMcD]

I think we are starting to confuse CMP Match Rules with NRA Match rules.
CMP EIC Matches have no different classes. EVERYTHING must conform to their definition of a Service Rifle. As of right now, that means an iron-sighted M1 Garand, M14-type, or a 20" AR15 (more complete definitions can be found at the CMP website, I think).
NRA Matches have different rifle classes. Service Rifle (pretty much the same as CMP rules), and Match rifle (everything else). Both iron-sighted. There is an optics division, but I think that is up to the discretion of the local match director.

The question here is whether the CMP is going to allow optics. I've changed my mind a little on this; I say add the M4 (allow up to 16" barrels so civilians can conform) to the list and allow them to use optics up to a certain magnification (maybe 4x?). I don't think that would give them any advantage at all. If a shooter chooses to use that rifle, they shouldn't get their panties in a wad if we choose to call them a homo. (I kid, I kid)

 

[Madball13]

Not a fan for all the reasons already stated.

 

[mac1911]

for the most part, lacking vision problems not many people i know shoot better(myself included) with optics. It does not make it easier per say.
If They want optics I say make a new class for optics and regulate it to what is being issued in service? Then have it be known that you needed optics to achieve your goal.

I for one have made the shift back to basics, why im trying to get into service rifle more.

 

[jasons]

for the most part, lacking vision problems not many people i know shoot better(myself included) with optics. It does not make it easier per say.
If They want optics I say make a new class for optics and regulate it to what is being issued in service? Then have it be known that you needed optics to achieve your goal.

I for one have made the shift back to basics, why im trying to get into service rifle more.

I guess I have vision problems then, because I can clean 600 with a scope and I'm in the low to mid 190's with irons.

Just to be able to read the mirage in real time is worth some points, especially if it's switching or picking up and letting off. Usually if I drop a 9 at 600 it's because I missed a condition change or I lost focus and the FSP fuzzed out... Sometimes it's just me with my head up my ass, but that's happening less frequently lately. (This past weekend excluded.)

 

[G Smith]

If a shooter chooses to use that rifle, they shouldn't get their panties in a wad if we choose to call them a homo. (I kid, I kid)

There's one of the reasons I like you Pat....

Where is the little cartoony animated thingy that shows me rolling on the floor laughing my @ss off p!ssing all over the place.

 

[jasons]

I say add the M4 (allow up to 16" barrels so civilians can conform) to the list and allow them to use optics up to a certain magnification (maybe 4x?).

Why just the M4? Marines are using 20" M16A4s with a Trijicon RCO. (http://www.trijicon.com/na_en/products/product3.php?pid=TA31RCO-A4CP)

At a list price of only $1,645.00, which is way more that I pay for an entire service rifle

 

[PatMcD]

Why just the M4? Marines are using 20" M16A4s with a Trijicon RCO. (http://www.trijicon.com/na_en/products/product3.php?pid=TA31RCO-A4CP)

At a list price of only $1,645.00, which is way more that I pay for an entire service rifle

I have no idea; it's definitely a slippery slope once you start opening things up. Do you think the CMP would ever do a one year, non-bonding trial allowing any optics and see what happens to scores, points awarded, etc.? I'd accept that, but not sure that we could ever go back to the way it is currently if people's scores went way up.

 

[jasons]

I have no idea; it's definitely a slippery slope once you start opening things up. Do you think the CMP would ever do a one year, non-bonding trial allowing any optics and see what happens to scores, points awarded, etc.? I'd accept that, but not sure that we could ever go back to the way it is currently if people's scores went way up.

That's the issue I see. First optics, then supported positions (hey, that's how guys shoot in combat,) then laser-guided homing bullets.

I think for CMP matches there should be a focus on the classic fundamentals of marksmanship, and the less we mess with that concept the better. Leave the gadget matches for the NRA.

 

[bpm990d]

I got me a p-town special I'm going to run in one of the director matches this year if i can get some zeroes.

Let the spankings begin!

B

 

[Admin]

Maybe because they're embarrassed about getting schooled by the AMU for the past decade or so. Makes me want to puke.

You can't even compare the two. The Army recruits specifically for their team as a full time career billet. The USMC team is made up of Marines who have jobs outside of competition shooting and only spend short stents on the team. Not to mention the budgets are amazingly different. The pool of talent the Army has to draw from is 3 times the size of the Marines as well. From from embarrassing.