MN3GUNGROUP Rules: Red dot = Iron Sights? What the...?

[hammAR]

When I'm the only one left shooting irons then we'll know what happened.

You won't be........

[Snowgun]

When I'm the only one left shooting irons then we'll know what happened.

You won't be........

[Payne]

At first thought I would have also voted against combining Red Dot Sights (RDS) and Iron Sighted Divisions, but the facts definately do not lie. RDS do allow a new shooter to experience a certain level of comfort and success at matches, but once the shooting level goes up, Iron sights definately win out. Placings at matches around the counry have proven this fact.

3-gun is trying to attract new shooters because they are the future of our sport. A huge segment of the AR-15 community have their weapons set up with RDS, and we are trying to supply a place for these shooters to get into the sport, yet not be at a significant disadvantage to the magnified optics in Tactical Optics Division. Adding them to the population of shooters in the iron sighted divisions serves two very imortant roles. First, it allows new shooters to become involved in this sport. Second, we are able to populate divisions that have become stagnant or are slowly going down in population.

I am hoping that shooters keep an open mind to this idea, and come out and try the sport. The MN3gunGroup is setting these matches up as a good introduction to the 3-gun sport so no one will be winning a new Ford truck at the end of the day. It is just a fun, safe, day of shooting that involves three weapons and good people. Come to the match with an open mind, and a sense of humor, you will probably need both by the end of the day.

[Snowgun]

At first thought I would have also voted against combining Red Dot Sights (RDS) and Iron Sighted Divisions, but the facts definately do not lie. RDS do allow a new shooter to experience a certain level of comfort and success at matches, but once the shooting level goes up, Iron sights definately win out. Placings at matches around the county have proven this fact.

3-gun is trying to attract new shooters because they are the future of our sport. A huge segment of the AR-15 community have their weapons set up with RDS, and we are trying to supply a place for these shooters to get into the sport, yet not be at a significant disadvantage to the magnified optics in Tactical Optics Division. Adding them to the population of shooters in the iron sighted divisions serves two very imortant roles. First, it allows new shooters to become involved in this sport. Second, we are able to populate divisions that have become stagnant or are slowly going down in population.

I am hoping that shooters keep an open mind to this idea, and come out and try the sport. The MN3gunGroup is setting these matches up as a good introduction to the 3-gun sport so no one will be winning a new Ford truck at the end of the day. It is just a fun, safe, day of shooting that involves three weapons and good people. Come to the match with an open mind, and a sense of humor, you will probably need both by the end of the day.

I totally understand the reasoning behind the decision. I'm excited to compete no matter what.... However I respectfully dispute the "they are equal sighting systems" facts. The following studies support the notion that RDS systems are king out to 100 yrds. These studies account for shooter variability, which is the biggest reason why on any given day an iron sight user could place higher than a Optics user in matches, especially if those divisions started out as irons to begin with...

Study by Kyle Defoor, Chief firearms instructor at Blackwater
http://www.kyledefoor.com/2010/12/iron- ... -year.html (the salient points)
http://www.kyledefoor.com/2010/02/iron- ... l#comments (the intro to the study)

Are irons as accurate as red dots? Yes, with a caveat. It depends on the distance (more later) from the target and the speed (more later) at which the target needs to be engaged. Another huge thing that I think is not talked about is the shooter's eye strength and any astigmatisms or other eye deficiencies. Some folks with an astigmatism actually shoot irons better because they see the front post perfectly, whereas with an astigmatism they see the red dot as a blog/2 dots/line etc. In the traditional accuracy sense, on say a bull target, irons seem a little bit of an advantage.

Can you be as fast with irons as a red dot? Overall, no. In some cases at certain distances, yes, big comma- it is going to take ALOT of time to achieve this. Time that most people, unless you do what I do, don't have. Also, consider the cost of ammo to get to that level vs. the price of a quality red dot. With all that said, more later on the speed/distance thing.

Can irons do all that red dots can do if the shooter has the time to practice ALOT? No. Big period. While I was able to eventually keep up (after 3 months of hard practice) with irons with some seriously good shooters using red dots, there are a few spots where it is just not possible;

(1) shooting on the move to the weak side
(2) shooting any position that moves the sights away from
a traditional position- straight up, in front of your
face.
(3) Any low light situation
(4) Any situation where you are winded

The speed and distance thing. Read this loud and clear- the red dot rules from 15 yds to 100 yds.

Study done by James Ryan, Criminal Studies Professor at Norwich
http://www.norwich.edu/about/news/2010/ ... Range.html

29 December 2010
PRELIMINARY REPORT OF THE COMPARATIVE PISTOL PROJECT
By James E. Ryan, D.P.A.
Associate Professor of Criminal Justice
Department of Justice Studies and Sociology
Norwich University
Northfield, Vermont 05663
This report summarizes the findings of the “Comparative Pistol Project” conducted on 28 and 29 September, 2010. This report is organized as a description of five (5) figures that depict the descriptive statistics compiled by the author. A more extensive and detailed report will follow. The figures depict the results of a comparison of the effectiveness of conventional iron pistol sights and Trijicon’s “Red Dot Optic. The project consisted of four (4) stages of fire and the analyses included information both on the number of “hits on paper” and the accuracy of hits.
1: HITS BY STAGE
illustrates the percentage of shots that hit an International Defensive Pistol Association (IDPA) standard target (“hits on paper”) by sight type and shooting stage;

Stage 1- 15 yard slow fire-
75 percent of the shots fired with iron sights hit the target;
98 Percent of the shots fired with the red dot optic hit the target;

Stage 2 – 5 yard rapid engagement-
95 percent of the shots with iron sights hit the target
99 percent of the shots with the red dot optic hit the target

Stage 3- 10 yard rapid engagement
81 percent of the shots with iron sights hit the target
96 percent of the shots with the red dot optic hit the target

Stage 4 – 10 yard multiple threat
77 percent of the shots with iron sights hit the target
94 percent of the shots with the red dot optic hit the target

The following depict hits by “zone.” Zone 1 is the center mass of the IDPA target. Zone 2 refers to the inner octagon of the target. Zone 3 refers to hits on the target outside of Zones 3 and 2.

2 – STAGE 1- HITS BY ZONE
illustrates the percentage of hits by zone and type of sight used

Iron sights- 30% of shots hit zone 1
43 % of shots hit zone 2
27 % of shots hit zone 3

Red dot optic – 57 % of shots hit zone 1
30 % of shots hit zone 2
13 % of shots hit zone 3

3- STAGE 2- HITS BY ZONE
illustrates the percentage of hits by zone and type of sight used

Iron sights- 59% of shots hit zone 1
27% of shots hit zone 2
14% of shots hit zone 3

Red dot optic- 74% of shots hit zone 1
23% of shots hit zone 2
3 % of shots hit zone 3

4- STAGE 3- HITS BY ZONE
illustrates the percentage of hits by zone and type of sights used

Iron sights- 30% of shots hit zone 1
50% of shots hit zone 2
20% of shots hit zone 3

Red dot optic- 46% of shots hit zone 1
42% of shots hit zone 2
12% of shots hit zone 3

-STAGE 4-HITS BY ZONE
illustrates the percentage of hits by zone and type of sights used

Iron sights- 30% of shots hit zone 1
46% of shots hit zone 2
24% of shots hit zone 3

Red dot optic- 44% of shots hit zone 1
47% of shots hit zone 2
9 % of shots hit zone 3

So at the end of the day, it is possible to overcome the handicap of irons vs optics, but it's gonna take a lot of practice.

[timwarner]

snowgun, maybe look at a fiber optic front sight, that wicked rear would snap up a green dot real well.
I'm gonna order one for my 16" cqb rifle. Probably do a fiber front after checking out your sight.

[Payne]

Snowgun

Thanks for the links. I have never seen those before, very interesting. What I was talking about is actual match scores that have been monitored for the last year. The results at the matches did surprise me, I will admit. Something to think about - in competition shooting the majority of good shooters use rifle length gas systems on their rifles putting the gas block/front sight farther down the barrel, and a lot of good shooters in Iron Sight divisions use 20" barrels with the front sight mounted directly behind the compensator, giving a very long sight plane. Could this possibly be the reason the results at shoots is different from the results you have posted? Who knows.

I am glad you are going to still compete with iron sights. I now Jay and Jomar have not switched and they are two of the best iron sight shooters in the country.

An interesting twist to this scenario is that companies making RDS are already planning reticle changes to allow for bullet drop compensation (like the ACOGS), would this change the dynamics of iron sight vs RDS? Time will tell.

[firebob66]

I'm with goalie as well. His logic around this supports what's reality.