Shooting glasses - 2004 ISSF rules

[pgmartin]

Hi, there! I´m a standard and centerfire pistol shooter and I´m doing some research to buy some shooting glasses. I say research, because I live in Argentina and I have to search for information in the net (we have no local dealers here). I´ve read a lot of posts about glasses in this forum, but I still have two questions:
* which brands (Champion, Jäggi nova, Knobloch) comply with the new ISSF regulations about blinders?
* What about polarization filters? Are they usefull or just an excentricity?
Regards
Pablo

PS: sorry for my lousy english

[iandavid]

Hi,
All will comply with the blinder rules, and if the blinder supplied is too large I find a pair of scissors, or a sharp knife useful. At least this is what I am doing with the blinders I carry in stock!

Regards


Ian

[F. Paul in Denver]

Ian's right Pablo - dont make your selection of frames based on blinder sizes. The blinders are plastic and easily modifiable/replaceable. My guess though is that all the manufacturers have modified their blinders to conform with the new ISSF rules.

I own a pair of Champions - the Olympic model. This model is now replaced by the Super Olympic model. The frames will allow you to tilt and rotate the lens with micrometer wheels in addition to the usual up/down/sideways adjustments.

I have had mine for a couple of years and have absolutely no complaints. They are very sturdy and extremely reliable. I also ordered the optional adjustable iris to give my old eyes a little extra help.


The frames cost about $295 USD and the iris is $60 USD

Good luck and good shooting!

[wai]

I have used the Polarization filter from Knobloch. It takes a bit getting used to but seem to result in less eye strain.

However, I am told by the local range officials here that the Polarization filter is NOT legal under the new ISSF rules for 2005.

[David Levene]

I have used the Polarization filter from Knobloch. It takes a bit getting used to but seem to result in less eye strain.

However, I am told by the local range officials here that the Polarization filter is NOT legal under the new ISSF rules for 2005.

One of what I suspect will be many questions raised on the new rules.

7.4.7.6.1 says "A piece to cover the non aiming eye not larger than 30 mm wide (B) is permitted."

It doesn't say "An opaque piece". Does this mean that someone wearing normal spectacles, where the piece covering the non aiming eye (i.e. the lens) is obviously wider than 30mm, is in breach of the rules. If normal spectacles are OK then can one lens be very dark? If one lens can be very dark then why could you not use a polarization filter.

I know that it can get ridiculously detailed but the ISSF need to be that detailed where medals (which mean money in these "professional" times) are involved.

[wai]

I have used the Polarization filter from Knobloch. It takes a bit getting used to but seem to result in less eye strain.

However, I am told by the local range officials here that the Polarization filter is NOT legal under the new ISSF rules for 2005.

One of what I suspect will be many questions raised on the new rules.

7.4.7.6.1 says "A piece to cover the non aiming eye not larger than 30 mm wide (B) is permitted."

It doesn't say "An opaque piece". Does this mean that someone wearing normal spectacles, where the piece covering the non aiming eye (i.e. the lens) is obviously wider than 30mm, is in breach of the rules. If normal spectacles are OK then can one lens be very dark? If one lens can be very dark then why could you not use a polarization filter.

I know that it can get ridiculously detailed but the ISSF need to be that detailed where medals (which mean money in these "professional" times) are involved.

Is there anyway that the ISSF be contacted to clarify on this rules changes ?

I am thinking that a reply from ISSF on their official letter head would be good as it seem the local range officials are themselves confused by the rules.

[David Levene]

Is there anyway that the ISSF be contacted to clarify on this rules changes ?

I am thinking that a reply from ISSF on their official letter head would be good as it seem the local range officials are themselves confused by the rules.

You could try emailing them. They have been known to reply sometimes, and sometimes their replies make sense (OK that may be a little hard on them, they are often quite helpful).

I wouldn't bother doing it until after the Olympics though.

They should have an answer as this rule was actually introduced in January 2004.

[Spencer C]

However, I am told by the local range officials here that the Polarization filter is NOT legal under the new ISSF rules for 2005.

Wai,

Can you ask the 'local range officials' which rule they are referring to?

Regards,

Spencer

[wai]

The "not wider than 30mm" rule, the Knoblock filter is about the same width as the Pistol Lens holder ( 40 mm ? ).

However, I am told by the local range officials here that the Polarization filter is NOT legal under the new ISSF rules for 2005.

Wai,

Can you ask the 'local range officials' which rule they are referring to?

Regards,

Spencer