Eye protection, to wear or not.

[pnuk]

Do be aware though that the Specsavers ones are only rated to EN166f (for low energy impacts) as you'll see from their own literature here http://www.specsavers.co.uk/sites/defau ... yewear.pdf

Damn sight better than nothing or standard glasses but not ideal for shooting.

[HH1]

I have just checked the spec of the Uvex Winner Safety glasses that I use at work with the spitting cobras and they are rated at DIN EN 166 + DIN EN 170 so I can use them for shooting too I've been wearing this model for years and they are comfortable.

[Blackstuff]

Rules dictate i wear them for PSG, mini-rifle, pistol and clay pigeons, which makes up 80% of my shooting. And to be fair the number of times I've been hit with bits of shot, bullet fragments and pieces of clay I would wear them even if I didn't have to.

The problem I have is when shooting short eye relief scopes in the prone position. The ACOG I have (which is an older model with a VERY short eye-relief) would touch glasses if I wore them while shooting while prone, and I prefer to have an unobstructed view when I'm using my high magnification scope on my .308.

Everywhere I shoot you're either the only person shooting at any one time, there's a brick wall between you and anyone else, you have to wear glasses or you're well spaced apart so I feel there is minimal risk of not wearing them when permitted.

A simple sign at a range or mention in a range briefing should provide adequate protection from being sued.

[Maggot]

Funnily enough it was F class, that made me start thinking about eye protection. The amount of debris (mostly grit and grass fibres) being thrown into the air meant something ended up in your eyes for the drive home.

Then there was the odd occasion when it was that wet keeping ammo dry was damned near impossible..nasty.

What really did it was wind making my eyes water....stupidly I never really worried about safety but its a very fair comment.

I also found that the yellow lenses on my glasses really helped in low light picking up Fig11s against the butts.

So yes, when I remember, they get worn now.

[froggy]

Whilst I can respect his right to choose that doesn't stop me from thinking he is a fool.
+1, You resume perfectly my opinion & could not agree more with your statement.

[dromia]

Do be aware though that the Specsavers ones are only rated to EN166f (for low energy impacts) as you'll see from their own literature here http://www.specsavers.co.uk/sites/defau ... yewear.pdf

Damn sight better than nothing or standard glasses but not ideal for shooting.

The lens in mine are shooting rated or so I was told as that is what I asked for.

[pnuk]

Do be aware though that the Specsavers ones are only rated to EN166f (for low energy impacts) as you'll see from their own literature here http://www.specsavers.co.uk/sites/defau ... yewear.pdf

Damn sight better than nothing or standard glasses but not ideal for shooting.

The lens in mine are shooting rated or so I was told as that is what I asked for.

If SS are referring to Brit/Euro ratings, unless things have changed recently the highest possible rating for glasses is 'F' (low impact) with medium and high impact ratings reserved only for goggles and face shields.

[dromia]

You would need to get that clarification from Spec Savers as all these numbers and letters are meaningless to me. I know what I asked for and I know what I was told then. If I have been lied to then they have sold me something that is not fit for the purpose asked for.

What I do know is that they have resisted cap fragments without scratching or damage, these fragments also lodged under my skin around the glasses so they do seem to be doing what they are supposed to but I will take this up with spec savers quoting you.

[pnuk]

Be interesting to know what their response is. If you look at lots of the shooting glasses sold they are only quoted as 'tested to EN166' or EN166F so perhaps they are justified as being reasonable protection as its the highest glasses rating or simply 'give adequate protection'
Or, most likely, anyone can call their safety glasses 'shooting glasses' regardless or their actual protection level.
Personally though anything being sold as for shooting that only gives low impact just doesn't cut it.

As you say, ratings aside all will protect from many of the smaller issues you're likely to face but perhaps not the ones that would see you losing your sight.

[Paul-Andrzej]

Froggy: Whilst I can respect his right to choose that doesn't stop me from thinking he is a fool.
+1, You resume perfectly my opinion & could not agree more with your statement.
+2.

And a baseball cap, the correct way around, when shooting clays. Ear defenders goes unsaid. I don't shoot as much as I used to but when I do go to a ground I still see worrying stuff done by some others.