The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The North Corral > Competition Shooting

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old August 20, 2015, 08:55 AM   #1
kraigwy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 16, 2008
Location: Wyoming
Posts: 9,866
CMP Service Rifle Rules - Scopes

These are proposed rules being discussed by the CMP for their Service Rifle Matches.

Quote:
Service Rifle:
1) The only alibis that will be permitted are range alibis (no fault of the shooter).

2) Optics will be allowed on rifles that weigh 11.5 lbs., total with optic installed. Optics will only be allowed on the AR platform. The optic maximum magnification will be 4.5 power. There will not be a separate category for optical sighted ARs.

3) No weight limit on iron sighted, non-optical sighted ARs, i.e. you can shoot the current configured service rifle just as it is with no weight restrictions.

4) Only .223/5.56 NATO will be allowed for ARs, .308/7.62 NATO for M14 platforms, .308/7.62 NATO or .30/06 for M1 Garands.

5) M-4 type stocks will be allowed on the AR platforms.
As a long time High Power Shooter, (38 years to be exact) and getting my DR badge with iron sights on an M14, I hate to see this.

But in reality it makes sense. Service rifles are service rifles and our military do use scopes on their rifles now days.

Score are gonna go up, I'm sure, but 10% of the top shooters get points in Leg Matches regardless, The scores will just be higher then when I got my distinguished badge.

Things change and some call it progress. I'm still conflicted on this.

When I started shooting leg matches, you shot their ammo, shooting mats weren't allow and you had to load from the person (no laying your next mag on the ground).

Oh well, they still have the CMP GSM games, using as issued surplus rifles used prior to 1955. Guess I'll just stick with my Garands and Springfields.
__________________
Kraig Stuart
CPT USAR Ret
USAMU Sniper School Oct '78
Distinguished Rifle Badge 1071
kraigwy is offline  
Old August 20, 2015, 10:01 AM   #2
Jim Watson
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 25, 2001
Location: Alabama
Posts: 12,085
Well, at least No 4 will knock out the M110 7.62 AR rooneyguns that you or Bart were sorry to see.
Jim Watson is offline  
Old August 20, 2015, 10:10 AM   #3
kraigwy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 16, 2008
Location: Wyoming
Posts: 9,866
Quote:
Well, at least No 4 will knock out the M110 7.62 AR rooneyguns that you or Bart were sorry to see.
Jim this affects the CMP rules, not the NRA. The NRA allows the M110, the CMP never has.

EIC, Presidents Matches etc are CMP games. The 800 Across the course matches are NRA.

They have different rules for their matches. However if rules conflict the CMP takes precedence.

But the National Matches include CMP and NRA matches.
__________________
Kraig Stuart
CPT USAR Ret
USAMU Sniper School Oct '78
Distinguished Rifle Badge 1071
kraigwy is offline  
Old August 20, 2015, 11:42 AM   #4
Slamfire
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 27, 2007
Posts: 4,302
Quote:
Optics will only be allowed on the AR platform.
I have seen plenty of pictures of troops with scoped M14, in Iraq or Afghanistan. This seems to me to have been written by an AR promoter. There ought to be a separate category for the scoped rifles, as having a scope is an amazing benefit at all ranges. I have friends who are XTC shooting scoped AR15 Spaceguns, they are doing much better than when they had to use irons.
__________________
If I'm not shooting, I'm reloading.
Slamfire is offline  
Old August 20, 2015, 03:18 PM   #5
kraigwy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 16, 2008
Location: Wyoming
Posts: 9,866
Yeah scopes are put on M-14s, and M1 Garands.

But they were not issued to line companies with scopes. Snipers, DMs yes but no to infantry troops

However they are issuing M16/A4s to line units now. I think that's where the CMP is coming from.
__________________
Kraig Stuart
CPT USAR Ret
USAMU Sniper School Oct '78
Distinguished Rifle Badge 1071
kraigwy is offline  
Old August 21, 2015, 10:51 AM   #6
BobCat45
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 18, 2004
Location: East Bernard, TX
Posts: 248
Kraig, a friend of mine (a Service Rifle NRA High Master) told me about this proposed optics rule and my first impulse was dismay that they are changing the game, but he made two good points.

The first was that most Service Rifle shooters these days are old, like us. Yes we have some real good youngsters, but by and large the young people go for F-Class or "action" gun games like 3-gun, not Service Rifle. As we age our eyes go bad, but maybe our basic shooting skills are still good.

The second was that he has cataracts and something wrong with a retina, he can shoot real well with a scope but his iron sight scores have fallen off with his eyesight, and it should be a shooting contest, not a seeing contest. I know every bad shot I shoot is because of trigger control, not vision. So if he can continue to shoot the kind of (High Master) scores he has been shooting for years, but it takes using a scope to make up for his failing eyes, why not?
__________________
Retractable claws - the *original* concealed carry

http://www.bayourifles.org
TinyURL.com/qgdojvh
BobCat45 is offline  
Old August 21, 2015, 11:11 AM   #7
kraigwy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 16, 2008
Location: Wyoming
Posts: 9,866
The NRA does change its rules to benefit the shooter. That's why they allow AR10s.

The CMP is about service rifle, or T. Roosevelt's idea that every citizen should be taught in the use of our servicer rifles.

Remember they are two different organizations, with different missions.

The CMP does change as does our service rifle, from restricting service rifle to the Krag, then Springfield, then M1s, M14s M16s M4 and now M16/M4s with glass because the military issues the M16/M4 with glasses.

Another difference is the NO SHOOTER ALIBIES. The NRA allows shooter alibies, the CMP doesn't.

Having said that, from what I've seen shooting both, the CMP GSM games attract an overall older set then the NRA.

Heck I'm 68 and I often feel like a youngster in some of the CMP games I shoot. I find the NRA HP crowd a bit younger.

We need to understand the NRA conducts its matches, the CMP conducts there. Sometimes the matches are combined. They have different rules and if the rules conflict, the CMP Rules take presence.

I believe the goal of most HP and other shooters is the Distinguished Rifle Badge. If one elects to chase that noble goal, then he should concentrate on CMP Rules as they conduct the EIC matches.

The CMP is required by law to conduct the National Matches, the NRA assist.
__________________
Kraig Stuart
CPT USAR Ret
USAMU Sniper School Oct '78
Distinguished Rifle Badge 1071
kraigwy is offline  
Old August 22, 2015, 07:20 PM   #8
4EVERM-14
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 12, 2006
Location: Pennsy
Posts: 612
I too am conflicted by the new optics rules. I went Distinguished the hard way. '14' with issued ammo. Shooting irons was the real challenge. The restricted nature of the Service Rifle category was an important part of the event. I can understand a service rifle with electronics[ Eotech,etc ] on an M4 as it appears to be an infantry standard now. But a 4x scope seems out of place. The basic skills of iron sight marksmanship are being pushed aside.
On the other hand I see High Power shooting needing a stimulus to draw new shooters. If this helps increase the participation I guess it could be a good thing. I just think the elite status of DCM/CMP shooting is slipping away.
__________________
David
NRA Benefactor Member
Distinguished Rifleman #731
Presidents 100
4EVERM-14 is offline  
Old August 23, 2015, 07:34 PM   #9
4EVERM-14
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 12, 2006
Location: Pennsy
Posts: 612
I heard some interesting comments today. It seems that the Marines played hardball with the CMP. They wanted 4x scopes allowed or they would not participate in the National Matches. Without the Marines the Army would also not play. Without the services there would be no National Matches.
I had a chance to handle a rifle legal under the new rules. The weight restriction made it difficult to hold steady in the standing position. The 4x scope did offer a good reference but it also exaggerated any movement because of the light weight. The highmaster who was shooting this rifle fired the same scores he usually posted. So after reflection I can see this as a definitive change although I doubt that it will make a major difference to the average shooter. Good shooting skills are still required. The scope may offer help for those with eye issues and irons sights.
I still like my'14' better.
__________________
David
NRA Benefactor Member
Distinguished Rifleman #731
Presidents 100
4EVERM-14 is offline  
Old August 23, 2015, 10:36 PM   #10
kraigwy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 16, 2008
Location: Wyoming
Posts: 9,866
That's difficult to understand. The National Matches consist of NRA Matches and CMP matches.

I really doubt the Marines will stay home and I'm certain the Army wont.

I don't keep track of the NRA Rules anymore. I understand they allow AR10s so people can be competitive in NRA Service Rifle Matches.

The CMP doesn't.

The CMP runs the EIC, matches, Presidents Matches and such. These are all service rifle matches going by the CMP's rules. Cant shoot AR10s in these.

The NRA 800s 'n such, have different rules, they allow the AR10s in their service rifle category.

The CMP only allows service rifles that are issued by todays troops (not special troops) plus past rifles (M14, M1s etc.)

I can see their reasoning.

Whether they participate or not, I believe the Army is suppose to conduct the SAFSs.

Also the AMU has a great working relationship with the CMP,

They arnt staying home nor do I believe the Marines will.

This bickering distracts from the CMP's mission of instruction US Citizens in the us of our military's weapons.

Makes me glad, that in my old age I've drifted toward the CMP's vintage rifle games. I shot NRA HP a long time. The CMP games are a more relaxed friendly sport.

That's probably why its growing and the NRA HP isn't (or at least not as fast)

Besides the CMP puts on a dern good feed at their games.
__________________
Kraig Stuart
CPT USAR Ret
USAMU Sniper School Oct '78
Distinguished Rifle Badge 1071
kraigwy is offline  
Old August 24, 2015, 09:12 AM   #11
4EVERM-14
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 12, 2006
Location: Pennsy
Posts: 612
I should have described the rifle I handled in more detail. It was essentially an M4 in .223/556. Specialty handguards [can't remember the nomenclature] with 4x scope. More of a carbine then a full size rifle. It looks like a legal rifle can be assembled easily but a decent scope could double the cost.
Over the years the CMP have allowed lens inserts plus other sight options for those with eye issues plus they also retained the standing before the rapids. It tells me the core resisted the concept of making things easy, like the NRA, and wanted to remain an iron sight game in the traditional form. The service rifle has always been the tough nut to crack. Apparently the other pressures were greater.
I'm not opposed to change. I think input from the participants would have been a more positive maneuver.
__________________
David
NRA Benefactor Member
Distinguished Rifleman #731
Presidents 100
4EVERM-14 is offline  
Old August 25, 2015, 11:41 AM   #12
rdsii64
Member
 
Join Date: November 28, 2008
Posts: 52
I don't understand what the issue is. The plain and simple truth is things evolve and change. Besides, As long as you can add weights, and run a float tube under the hand guard, it isn't a TRUE service rifle anyway.

If were left up to me. I would allow your choice of STANDARD MILITARY IRONS, or the standard ACOG and no others. The only difference between the rifle you compete with and one issued to the grunts should be a civilian legal fire control group. Trigger pull weight should be the same as military issue. No weights, float tubes, stainless steel heavy match barrels or other such stuff. Matches would be shot with issued M55 ball ammunition through a gov profile chrome lined 7 twist barrel.

This is my idea of service rifle competition. I also understand that this is not the way its done. So I have to either get onboard or get out of the way. Either way,
occasional evolution and change don't bother me as long as I get to keep shooting.
__________________
Howa M1500 - .308
Bell and Carlson A2 Stock
harris bipod
Friends don't let friends buy Nikko Sterling Scopes

Last edited by rdsii64; August 25, 2015 at 02:15 PM.
rdsii64 is offline  
Old August 27, 2015, 07:46 PM   #13
Slamfire
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 27, 2007
Posts: 4,302
Quote:
I heard some interesting comments today. It seems that the Marines played hardball with the CMP. They wanted 4x scopes allowed or they would not participate in the National Matches. Without the Marines the Army would also not play. Without the services there would be no National Matches.
Should have told the Army and Marines to pack their toys and go home. The USMC has Camp Lejeune, the AMU Fort Benning. Let them go play in their own sandboxes and stay inside their own sandboxes.

The NRA contracts for Camp Perry from the Ohio National Guard. The NRA is paying all the bills, the state of Ohio provides the National Guard. The Federal Government, that is the Regular Army stopped providing funds for the National Matches back in 1968.

I suggest the CMP periodically kick the services off their Talladega range, or in time, as at Camp Perry, someone will forget that the services contribute almost nothing to the game.
__________________
If I'm not shooting, I'm reloading.
Slamfire is offline  
Old August 27, 2015, 11:38 PM   #14
Phil McGrath
Member
 
Join Date: July 14, 2013
Posts: 19
Should have told the Army and Marines to pack their toys and go home. The USMC has Camp Lejeune, the AMU Fort Benning. Let them go play in their own sandboxes and stay inside their own sandboxes.

The NRA contracts for Camp Perry from the Ohio National Guard. The NRA is paying all the bills, the state of Ohio provides the National Guard. The Federal Government, that is the Regular Army stopped providing funds for the National Matches back in 1968.

I suggest the CMP periodically kick the services off their Talladega range, or in time, as at Camp Perry, someone will forget that the services contribute almost nothing to the game.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Well, said! where is the like button!
Phil McGrath is offline  
Old August 28, 2015, 01:44 PM   #15
Jimro
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 18, 2006
Posts: 6,117
Interesting how "proposed rules being discussed" turned into "Kick the Army and USMC out!!!!"

If these rules are enacted, hopefully some of those guys who claim the M4 is more accurate than the M16 show up to compete. So far anyone shooting an M4 pattern rifle has had to compete in the "match" category as it doesn't qualify as a CMP service rifle configuration, maybe because it's a carbine?

But I would like to see a separate category for optic and iron site service rifle.

Jimro
__________________
"Gorsh" said Goofy as secondary explosions racked the beaten zone, "Did I do that?"

http://randomthoughtsandguns.blogspot.com/
Jimro is offline  
Old August 28, 2015, 10:25 PM   #16
Phil McGrath
Member
 
Join Date: July 14, 2013
Posts: 19
No you misunderstand. When the big green team wants something, normally the NRA will give it too them. And that's a shame, the NRA and the Army had a very good relationship back in the day about 50/50. Not that anything happened but sense the Army dropped support for the National Matches the Army has gotten more and more from the NRA than the NRA from the Army.
Phil McGrath is offline  
Old August 29, 2015, 02:46 AM   #17
Jimro
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 18, 2006
Posts: 6,117
I don't think I misunderstood.

Maybe a little history is in order.

When the "Army" dropped support for the National Matches it was a dictated move by Congress through the creation of the CMP Corporation and the redefining of support relationships. That was in 1996. Part of the peace dividend and Congress was cutting funding for the Army, so to keep the CMP going, and out of the Army budget, the CMP Corporation was chartered.

You could say that was one of the longer lasting effects of the Clinton administration, longer than the AWB at least. If you don't like it, call your Congress critter.

Anyways the law changed, and it doesn't make sense to blame the Army for changes in law.

Of course none of that has any bearing on whether the CMP enacts a rules change regarding irons versus optics for service rifle competition.

Jimro
__________________
"Gorsh" said Goofy as secondary explosions racked the beaten zone, "Did I do that?"

http://randomthoughtsandguns.blogspot.com/
Jimro is offline  
Old August 29, 2015, 09:08 AM   #18
4EVERM-14
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 12, 2006
Location: Pennsy
Posts: 612
This thread has taken an unnecessary turn. It was originally informational about an important future change in CMP Service Rifle. The question was whether scopes and irons should compete together or be separate categories. For 100 years high power shooting has been an iron sight game with the Service Rifle being limited by strict rules. NRA allows rifles that do not conform to those rules. Since DCM/CMP shooting is exclusively Service Rifle ,which has been traditionally iron sights, scopes create questions that need open discussions.
__________________
David
NRA Benefactor Member
Distinguished Rifleman #731
Presidents 100
4EVERM-14 is offline  
Old August 29, 2015, 09:36 AM   #19
1-DAB
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 5, 2010
Location: Santa Fe, NM
Posts: 316
as noted above, for most of the last 100 or so years, the average soldier was not issued a rifle with a scope, that appears to have changed.

so separate the rifles. one class with optics, one class iron sights. if the rifle normally carried optics, then it competes that way, and likewise if iron sights, then it competes that way.

they can all shoot on the same line, but the scored are sorted out by rifle class.

similar to how IDPA is run, everyone shoots the same course, but scores are sorted by pistol type.

i'll bet the high scores are obtained by scoped rifles, thus demonstrating that that is a superior platform for accuracy.

no point in fighting, let everyone play with their favorite rifle.
1-DAB is offline  
Old August 29, 2015, 12:36 PM   #20
Jimro
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 18, 2006
Posts: 6,117
While not germane to the CMP potential rules change, it is possible for a Servicemember to earn EIC points without shooting the CMP course of fire.

The original national match course was the Army qualification course. That is of course no longer the case. The "quickfire" and popup ranges killed that right off, because scoring became "hit/miss" instead of numbers and X count. Even the pistol course is different now, but for other reasons.

Right now a Soldier who competes in the All Army competition (EIC producing event) will not shoot neither the CMP nor NRA course of fire, but as of the 2015 match, no optics were allowed for All Army.

As a side note, I tried to get a modified NM pistol qualification course set up with the 25m Army alternate Pistol qual (using an E type with scoring rings to score the event) last year, but the Army Marksmanship Unit signed a memorandum of understanding with the National Guard Bureau and the CMP which dicated the course of fire for military EIC matches must be "combat oriented" with an approved course of fire (as approved by the AMU/NGB MOU). The 2015 All Army course of fire is the only approved Army EIC course of fire, it's actually easier for me to have the local rod and gun club put on a CMP course of fire than it is to go the Army route.

Blowing a Soldiers yearly allotment of training and qualification ammo on ONE EVENT is a non starter for any Infantry commander out there (there is no extra ammo in the STRAC for competition, only training and qualification). And yes, AR 350-66 requires the use of issued ammo for official competition.

Sorry for being long winded...

Jimro
__________________
"Gorsh" said Goofy as secondary explosions racked the beaten zone, "Did I do that?"

http://randomthoughtsandguns.blogspot.com/
Jimro is offline  
Old August 29, 2015, 08:59 PM   #21
Slamfire
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 27, 2007
Posts: 4,302
Quote:
When the "Army" dropped support for the National Matches it was a dictated move by Congress through the creation of the CMP Corporation and the redefining of support relationships. That was in 1996. Part of the peace dividend and Congress was cutting funding for the Army, so to keep the CMP going, and out of the Army budget, the CMP Corporation was chartered.
You really don't know your history. Prior to 1968 the Army ran the National Matches at Camp Perry and was a positive force for marksmanship. Go look at the Oct 1967 American Rifleman for the excuses the Army used to drop the National Matches. The conversion of the DCM to the CMP was actually of importance to Civilians, as we got access to Garands, but basically at the end, the DCM was doing as little as possible. Under the DCM era I got my once in a lifetime Garand. That was about all they were doing at the end.

Neither the AMU nor the USMC rifle team provide any supplies nor run the matches where I shoot. We don't get loaner rifles nor do we get ammunition from the Army. Clubs could get that out of the DCM, prior to the 1980's. I would like you to tell me just how much financial, and logistical support these organizations provide to the National Rifle Association, the CMP, and to civilian shooters and civilian clubs. . I would be interested in that number.

What I see, is that these organizations are irrelevant outside of Camp Lejeune and Fort Benning but, but they are still at the top dictating how we shoot, what we shoot, and making rule changes to fit their ideologies. Fine, let them fill out the paperwork, order the targets, build the frames, run the matches, send out the results, and do the logistics running the matches at our ranges . They won't. Just how many gun clubs have access to military ranges? It is about time that our spineless NRA and CMP leadership realized, that the civilian shooter base likes the game as it is, and it is the civilian base that is running these matches at the local level, not the AMU or USMC rifle team.
__________________
If I'm not shooting, I'm reloading.
Slamfire is offline  
Old August 30, 2015, 04:24 PM   #22
Jimro
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 18, 2006
Posts: 6,117
Slamfire,

That was rude, but I think that was your intent. I also think your anger is misplaced for the following reasons.

1, the Army National Guard is a part of the Army. Yes it gets State dollars too. Support for the National Matches by Guardsmen and Reservists will count against Annual Training dollars for the Army and will not be reimbursed by the CMP. The Army will provide other logistical support which can be claimed for reimbursement by the Army to be paid by the CMP.

2, The USAMU still conducts the small arms firing school as part of the national matches. People can earn their first EIC points from that event, civilian and service member alike. The conduct of SAFS is dictated as a support requirement to the National Matches, and is not chargeable to the CMP for reimbursement.

3, the 1967 decision to pull support was DOD wide, not just an "Army/USMC" thing. Just like the National Guard is part of the Army, the Army as a whole is part of the DOD, and led by the Secretary of Defense. That's a free lesson in how your Government organizes on your behalf, one of the many free services I offer. If you think that only the President or SECDEF has the power to pull DOD support for the National Matches, you would be correct. With an increasingly unpopular war in Vietnam, the messy public assassinations during the civil rights movement, I think you could make a clear case that the SECDEF pulling support for the national matches was a political move made by a politician at the time. Once again, if you don't like the SECDEF, call your congresscritter.

4, as of the 1998 revision to the NDAA, the last I bothered to check, the Secretary of the Army is responsible for the conduct of the National Matches with the CMP as a partner agency. The CMP's job is to facilitate marksmanship competition, the Sec Army's job is to make sure the national matches are held, fulfilling his legal obligation. The CMP role is also spelled out in law.

5, lastly, I have yet to find serious evidence beyond "someone said" that the proposed rules change is being driven by either the Army or the USMC. The USAMU service rifle team has been very dominant with irons, so I don't see any reason for them to be lobbying for ACOG inclusion. It is true that the Army and USMC are using ACOGs on M4 and M16A4s as part of the standard infantry rifle, but that has nothing to do with the competition teams for either service when competing under CMP or NRA rules.

If you are still complaining that the Army has too much influence over how you shoot, by all means write your congresscritter.

Right now, when the Army wants to hold a competition, it doesn't have to get a mother may I from the CMP. All it has to do is figure out what it wants to do and then do it. Look up the 2015 All Army course of fire document to see how the Army did it last time if you like.

Jimro
__________________
"Gorsh" said Goofy as secondary explosions racked the beaten zone, "Did I do that?"

http://randomthoughtsandguns.blogspot.com/
Jimro is offline  
Old August 31, 2015, 06:57 PM   #23
Slamfire
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 27, 2007
Posts: 4,302
Quote:
Slamfire,

That was rude, but I think that was your intent. I also think your anger is misplaced for the following reasons.
Yes I was rude, sorry for being so. But it gets my dander up to read of the Active Duty Military forcing an Army agenda on either the NRA or the CMP.

I don't have the numbers, but I would like to know, just how much money does either and both the Regular Army and the USMC contribute to civilian marksmanship. I am curious to know, for the National Matches, just how much money the NRA and the CMP spends for that event, and how much the Regular Army and the USMC rifle team contribute. A simply accounting of the money contribution would quickly show, in my opinion, that the NRA or the CMP are contributing 99% if not 100% of the funds necessary to run and manage the National Matches at Camp Perry. If either Organization stops their financial support, the National Matches would end because the services ended any significant financial support back in FY1968.

However, Camp Perry is not Mecca, not everyone is obligated to go there, attendance is in fact, dwindling, and if the National Matches at Camp Perry go away, there are lots and lots of local and regional matches held at Civilian Gun clubs to pick up the slack.

Neither of the services, nor the NRA and CMP provide financial support for Civilian gun clubs: we pay for our grass to be cut, we pay our rent, club members create our target frames, order our own targets, run our matches. Local match directors send the results out to participants, and fork over entry money to the NRA for the matches to be listed in Shooting USA. The NRA will post classification cards to shooters, so the card and the listing in an online Shooting Magazine is all the value the NRA adds to the process.

Therefore I am rather resentful that the Active Duty Services seem to get the 90% vote in determining the rules of the game. It has only been recently that the AR10 was declared to the "a service rifle", and regardless of the fatuous reasons by DeMille, it is my opinion the AR10 was declared a service rifle so the Service Rifle teams could continue to win at Long Range. Having shot with them, at 1000 yards, they were not doing so well with the 223. The round is out of gas at 600 yards, and they were struggling to beat Civilians shooting Garands and M1a's. The Army was not going to drag out M14's and shoot them again, one reason because they would have to train new guys to operate two different rifles, other reasons are that the logistics and repair are so different. However, the AR10 is so functionally similar in operation and repair, that rifle, which never had ever been an American service rifle, is now a "service rifle". A couple of Google searches will easily find all the new records set by Army shooters with the AR10 rifles. The NRA and the CMP just bend over backwards to ensure that the service rifle teams are kept happy.

I did get into the National Match forum and found, why yes, this whole optical service rifle category is something pushed by the active duty military. Like little children, they want, they want, they want. They want, but what are they contributing to civilian marksmanship? In my opinion, not enough to offset the unwanted and disruptive influence they have on the sport.

Well, who needs them really?
__________________
If I'm not shooting, I'm reloading.
Slamfire is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:42 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2015 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.12572 seconds with 9 queries