Allowing Optics in the CMP Black Rifle Matches

[WARFAB]

Liberty's Teeth shot me a text message asking what I thought of "optics for the P100 and NTI matches". I thought it was a typo and asked him to clarify. He informed me that the CMP is talking about allowing optics on AR rifles for the P100 and NTI matches next year.

The discussion on the CMP forum: http://forums.thecmp.org/showthread.php?t=172888

It sounds like the proposal is to allow ARs to use an optic up to 4.5 power, with the total weight of the rifle capped at 11.5 pounds. Iron sight rifles would still be allowed as much weight as you can jam into them.

Other notable rule change proposals include allowing M4 stocks and only allowing pit alibis.

Personally I'm against the change. Perhaps I'm just a traditionalist. Perhaps I just like the simplicity and relative parity of the current modern service rifle rules. I also think that allowing "any" optic up to 4.5 power goes against the general rationale behind most CMP rules. Most of the rules about the rifles follow the idea that only equipment that has been or is currently issued to regular US troops is allowed. They've recently allowed quad rails instead of just regular handguards to follow this idea. Saying the scopes don't have to be models issued to regular troops opens things up quite a bit and seems to violate the spirit of the CMP competitions. They may clarify the rule a bit more, but I'm guessing not many competitors are going to want to drop the money to try competing with a Trijicon.

I really have no idea how much of an advantage a 4.5 power optic would be. Might depend on the optic. If this rule change is being suggested to allow more people to compete, then I can't help but wonder what scopes will accomplish that other iron sights modifications (Bob Jones, Microsight) won't. It seems like promotion of the sport will increase competition numbers more than a rule change. Granted a rule change costs the CMP nothing while effective promotion usually costs money.

[thughes]

Not a fan but then again I'm a cranky old guy who never had anything but iron sights (and walked to school, uphill, both ways, in 2 feet of snow, barefoot.....)

[Liberty's Teeth]

We live in a country that affords us our right to express our opinions, so here is mine;
Real men shoot "as issued" iron sights!
Some of the feedback from top shots is pointing towards less accuracy trying to work with the "mandated" dot optics for competition. Additionally, there appears to be concern over shooting on cloudy low light days and foggy conditions. Shooting optics won't allow for frame hold when you can't see sh*t done range. Will be interesting to see the results!

[WARFAB]

If the optics rifles start cleaning up and they don't make them a separate classification, I'll start shooting NRA week. I'm skeptical that a 4.5 power will be an advantage over irons, but think it will hurt the competition if it is.

[usmcveteran]

I thought I posted in here when thread was posted originally......

I don't see a problem with it personally but agree with the thought of making it its own class possibly. Now a days scopes are issued with the firearms. The modern military rifle has a detachable carrying handle and hense rear iron sight so I don't see an issue with using scopes that are issued with the rifle systems they are used for if that makes sense.

[Meketrefe]

IMO they should have two categories, irons as it is today and then modern with optics and whatever.
I think it is a good thing in order to promote and renew interest but they should not be mixed.

[WARFAB]

The big question is how much of an advantage/disadvantage the optics allowed would be over irons. With no distinction between shooters using irons and optics, this rule change has the potential to really mess up shooters who are working on their EIC points trying to go distinguished.

M1A/M14 competitors might have wondered the same thing when black rifles started showing up at competitions, but my understanding is that it took a number of years for competitors to figure out how to get the AR platform to work well for competition.

If the goal is to increase participation numbers, I'm not sure this is going to do it. The guys who will appreciate the advantage of optics are probably older shooters already participating, or possibly who did participate in the past. Brand new shooters aren't going to have an easier time entering the sport when you have to add the cost of a quality optic if you want to be competitive.

[usmcveteran]

Should be you can use military firearms as issued. They do issue ACOG's on these rifles now adays . a new competitor shouldn't expect to win and frankly should not spend a ton on equipment until they get experience IMO to save money on unnecessary purchases..

Why not create new categories based on era of arms used?

[usmcveteran]

Oh and when I first saw the cmp stuff years ago I asked if I could use my scope since its issued with the AR I have and was told no and was kinda turned off because its supposed to be About issued service rifles.

[Meketrefe]

I think there will be an advantage with the optics. The disciplines and principles are the same but what you have now is a way
to better define the target and using a finer reference to hone in on a smaller detail to clearly define the POI something that the human eye alone
cannot match with he same precision.
With all that said, everyone should learn well the irons. When everything else fails the irons are always there, we hope.

[Tony]

In my younger days I shot centerfire rifle competitively. The classes were Service Rifle, Match Rifle, and scoped rifles. The scoped rifle category was instituted to allow older shooters who didn't see as good as they once did to enjoy the fun of competition and shooting in general. However, their score was not allowed to be part of the team score.

[WARFAB]

Another question is whether or not the standard gas block/front sight will be required on the rifles competing with optics. Certain quad rails are already allowed instead of standard handguards, but a standard NM float tube with regular hand guards is a lot cheaper. I haven't seen many quad rails on the firing line.

Sounds like the NRA might mirror the CMP rule changes. If I'm going to have to put a bunch of money into my rifle to be competitive, it seems like I might as well move to a match rifle.

[thughes]

Or trade that plastic for some wood. ;-)

[Meketrefe]

Quad rails are history. People now go for key hole mod so they can put the rails where they want when they want them.
So the overall profile is lower that lowers the center of gravity and It is the way to go imo.
but a vented tube will do the same, or better unless one wants to have the picatiny rail on the front for the by-pod that would be the minimum
and a practical addition.

[WARFAB]

Or trade that plastic for some wood. ;-)

This might be the best argument yet for moving to a Garand. Just remember you suggested it before you start complaining about my scores. ​

Quad rails are history. People now go for key hole mod so they can put the rails where they want when they want them.
So the overall profile is lower that lowers the center of gravity and It is the way to go imo.
but a vented tube will do the same, or better unless one wants to have the picatiny rail on the front for the by-pod that would be the minimum
and a practical addition.

Right, but only certain handguards are allowed at this point according to the rules. It's supposed to more or less follow military issue equipment, so you can't just pick any rail system. Plus, the currently allowed quad rail hand guards do have room for lead weights which is a plus. This isn't the open rules kind of shooting you're used to meke.