Aperture sights for CLA ?

[boats]

Watched all the back on forth on Fiber Optics last year. Ending up with F/O’s specifically allowed. Over the winter played with some F/O sights and did not find them to my liking. They were all too big could not pick my spot on the critter. Went back to the very small post and bead, that's fuzzy after 2 or 3 seconds. Other Iron sight matches I shoot that don’t have a “post and bead” rule I always use Apertures. Much easier to focus with 65 year old eyes.
Why not allow apertures. Doors open might as well allow a useful sight that equalizes the playing field old eyes vs. young. Any opinions ?

Boats

[jnyork]

Why not just allow scope sights under 36 power and avoid all the controversy?

[cslcAl]

boats check your pm Al

[PhxShooter]

Come on, we just finished a huge fight over the sights. Let's let the dust settle on this one before we start another one.

There are methods already in place for those of us with older eyes. Mine are 60+. You can already purchase shooting glasses which unfortunately are fairly expensive. You may be able to do as I did for several years and buy off the rack reading glasses that will allow you to focus on the front sight without blurring the target too badly. Those, however, are not safety glasses and afford little true eye protection. My current option is to use the "Merit Adjustable Lens Disc" which allows you to install a suitable single lens in the rear sight that will give you a clear front sight while still leaving the target clear enough to sight on. This is NOT a scope rather it puts the shooting glasses in the rear sight in the form of a single lens. With this option, which is already accepted by the NRA, you can then wear good safety glasses for eye protection. This set-up will run you about $100 for the disc and lens.

There may be additional options I'm not familiar with, without having to alter the current post/bead rule.

If you want to shoot a scope that's already available. It's called "Rifle Silhouette" and "Smallbore Silhouette".

I know that starting some of these discussions can be fun but let's not stir the pot just for the sake of stirring. Just my humble opinion.

[boats]

Stayed away from the F/O controversy did not lobby for or against them. Never mentioned Scopes.

Seems strange CLA can't use iron sights that fit under the front sight's hood and were cataloged by Winchester and Marlin in the 19th Century If modern bright fibers are allowed why not take off all restrictions and let people put any non optic sight they want in that front globe. BPCS you see all sorts of front sights. Post, Cross hairs, Aperture's, anything as long as it's Iron and does not magnify. Whatever you can see you can use. Change inserts for a few bucks.

Make the rule much easier to enforce too, has to fit under the hood that's it.

Boats

[PhxShooter]

And for those of us that don't use a hood? I don't know the percentages but many CLA shooters don't use a hood. Personally I find them distracting since I use a FO bead sight.

One of the problems that kept arising during the FO "controversy" was that people confused the intent behind CLA rifles with "period" rifles. The fact that CLA rifles are frequently antiques or replicas thereof is not involved in the intent behind the sport. The intent as described by the NRA is:

(The intent of these rules is to establish a match for common hunting carbines and other lever action rifles. The match is focused toward shooters
who enjoy shooting hunting arms and do not want to make the investment required of other specialized types of shooting competitions.)

Well, the manufacturers are now putting Fiber Optic front sights on common hunting carbines and lever action rifles but I've never seen one come from the factory with a 17A or anything similar attached. Most come with a removable hood to protect the sight but I've never seen one with interchangeable inserts from the factory. I've got a feeling that those sights were included in the initial rules and remain there because that was what those that wrote the rules used on their guns.

Boats, you're right that you never mentioned scopes. I was responding to jnyork and should have said so.

[lone ringer]

PhxShooter, I agree with you 100% but that does not mean that the rules will be liked by every one.

Before the NRA decided to sanction the Cowboy matches there were several groups of shooters through out the Nation that practiced their version of the CLA. Here in CA at one of the local clubs you were allowed to use just about anything you brought to the match and it did not need to be a lever action rifle and as long as you were shooting lead cast bullets and your rifle had iron sights, you could even shoot four different rifles at the match (one for each distance). In Oregon they let shooters use Savage 99's and other lever action rifles but did not allow for the forward arm to touch the torso for support (pretty much like the hunter pistol shooters do).

A few of those shooters wrote letters to the silhouette committee asking for their rules to be adopted but the NRA went with the ones used at the Whittington Center in Raton, NM and they have not changed all that much. The way they were written did not require but a couple of pages in the rule book. What appealed to the majority of the participants were several things, the most important was the lower cost of the equipment compared to any of the other silhouette disciplines plus the larger targets shot at closer distances.

It is my hope that we will keep shooting Cowboy Lever Action Rifle Silhouette for a long time the same way we have been doing it for the last 12 years and that it will not revert to an equipment race with rifles sporting custom barrels chambered to wildcat cartridges, custom stocks and very expensive match/target sights.

[boats]

Guys I agree with the basic lever action intent of the rules. That’s one of the reasons our club started NRA Approved CLA matches. We ran and still run separate club offhand matches that have more open rules for Lever and Single Shot rifles. Approved tournament We are strict though, never saw anything but regular factory outfits until some of us traveled to out of town matches and looked at other rifles.

Before the change Rule book used to have two simple sentences restricting to post and bead now added long paragraph describing Fiber Optics

Far as Factory Winchester cataloged the 67a globe for its 1873, Marlin had a globe for the 1881. They both offered Lyman’s as options when the 17 was introduced before 1900. Today 17A’s are 40 bucks with any insert somebody could want.

Suit me fine if we had a simple strict equipment rule, it’s not that way anymore. Perfectly reasonable to let somebody use any front sight they want long as it’s in keeping with the intent of the rifles class. I am a match director for Small bore Silhouette and can tell you firsthand the Hunter class has been ruined by equipment race that keeps entry level shooters away from the sport. I don't want it to happen to CLA either.

I don’t think going back to a simple two line front sight rule is going to harm CLA. Just a clean up of the Silhouette committes action in 2011

Boats

[jnyork]

It is my hope that we will keep shooting Cowboy Lever Action Rifle Silhouette for a long time the same way we have been doing it for the last 12 years and that it will not revert to an equipment race with rifles sporting custom barrels chambered to wildcat cartridges, custom stocks and very expensive match/target sights.

My remark about the 36 power scopes were submitted with tongue in cheek, but not very far.

I would hate to see the sport get ruined by equipment prissies who demand rule changes just because they have a rifle or sights or other equipment that doesnt fit the rules or because they dont see as well as they used to. NONE of us see as well as we used to, so get over it.

[cslcAl]

Anyone having that much trouble seeing either sights or targets,should check out Bob Jones Sights. They are legal, they are easily installed on most rear receiver or tang sights, and THEY DO WORK. Al

[tenx9]

Being that I'm only writing this and only playing the role of "Devils Advocate", lets try to see this side of the subject. Over the last couple of decades that I have been shooting, it seems to me that the NRA competiton committes' only take into account shooters and the opinions of those shooters who are winning competitors. Its easy to makes equipment changes and rules changes when they apply to the top 1% of the competitors. Okay, keep in mind this is only a hypothectical scenario. What would make a difference if a A or AA shooter mounted an Anschutz front and rear sight on his lever gun? Besides looking ridiculous would such a set up turn that shooter into an instant Master? Odds are probably not. Maybe his scores would improve 10%? And not due to his skill improving but with the exactness of his sight settings. Sure all the big guns' scores would be higher but by how much? They're already shooting 35 and better (prob much better) and where is the true gain? Not much percentage wise. I could see where an equipment race would turn into the ridiculousness. I'm not in favor of custom calibers, spitzer bullets, single loading...etc. However, making an older shooter see the sights better or turning an A into a AA shooter due to less vague sight settings then I could get behind that. If your so worried about perfect scores then "RAISE" numbers to reach the next class. That actually makes more sense to me rather than worrying about what iron sight a guy is using. My opinion only.

[boats]

All I want is simple and fair, This is what we have now

The front sight must be a post or bead or if
changeable inserts, may use a post or bead insert only.
A front sight anti-glare tube, which may be no longer
than 1 1/8" to include any attachments and no larger
than a 3/4" outside diameter, may be used.
Fiber optic material may be used in or on the post or
bead and may not be longer than its support blade and
not to exceed 1 1/8" in length. In an anti-glare tube,
the fiber optic material may not be any longer than the
tube or extend outside the tube. The fiber optic sights
do not need to be commercially manufactured.

This is what I think we should have

The front sight may be of any material that does not magnify.
A front sight anti-glare tube, which may be no longer than
1 1/8" to include any attachments and no larger
than a 3/4" outside diameter, may be used.

It's going to the Silhouette committe, Like it or not let them know your opinion.

Boats

[lone ringer]

If your so worried about perfect scores then "RAISE" numbers to reach the next class. That actually makes more sense to me rather than worrying about what iron sight a guy is using. My opinion only.

Tenx9, they are not going to raise the numbers any time soon since a few years back they "LOWERED" the scores by a couple of points to make it easier to reach the next class.

[lone ringer]

This is what I think we should have

The front sight may be of any material that does not magnify.
A front sight anti-glare tube, which may be no longer than
1 1/8" to include any attachments and no larger
than a 3/4" outside diameter, may be used.

It's going to the Silhouette committe, Like it or not let them know your opinion.

Boats

Sorry Boats but your suggestion makes very little sense to me.
I would like to find out what material you know that magnify and how you could make a sight with it?
Also a front sight anti-glare tube is a hood over a post or bead front sight not an actual sight like a Lyman 17A. I would suggest to call the inserts you want to use by their name APERTURES and NOT attachments because they would want to know exactly what it is that you want to attach to the sight.

[ppkny]

Boats, I say good luck with the NRA committee. In the infinite wisdom with the rule rule as stated the front sight (globe ) can not be any larger than 3/4 inch made both my rifles, and I'm sure plenty more folks, have to change from their Lyman 20MJT back to the Lyman 17A.
The 20 MJT measures .806. Does the NRA really think that .056 is going to make a difference OR do they just don't know what is being used currently. This change forced me to buy 3 new 17A's at about $35 each.
I gave up on the NRA a long time ago becuase it's apparant they just don't care.
I've changed by sights and I'm ready for the new season and not looking back. I want to shoot not spend my energy fighting loosing battles.
ppkny