PSA: most eye pro = insufficient

[md123]

I had never given eye pro much thought. I double up my ears and max noise reduction ratings (NRR) but when it came to eyes...Home Depot work glasses / ANSI Z87 rated, whatever that meant...

Apparently very little...



Long story short, that rating won't stop much more than a spent casing. You can and should get mil-prf-31013 rated eye pro, which is said to stop 22 short & #8 shot.





Longer version below:

Do I plan on being shot in the face with 22 short or #8 shot? No but preparing for a competition that would have steel poppers, I wondered if any splash would defeat my ANSI Z87 eye pro. [hickock45 vid on steel target safety]



Standard eyes probably would NOT stop splash but you'd have a chance with mil-prf-31013.
Z87 ~150 ft / second threshold
31013 ~650-750 ft / second threshold

Lucky guner has a great article detailing the levels of coverage, testing and comparing market offerings:

http://www.luckygunner.com/labs/eye-protection-shooting-glasses-review/

If you shoot indoors or shoot steel, you should spend a few bucks on mil-prf-31013 ballistic coverage.



Smith Optics and ESS (among others) have affordable ballistic eye pro available under $100. Oakley is more pricey around $200 but much more "operator"!

 

[j_h_smith]

I don't believe most (if not all) shooting glasses are meant to protect you from being shot.

 

[md123]

I don't believe most (if not all) shooting glasses are meant to protect you from being shot.

Take a look at the first ceiling baffle at your indoor range...the one three feet off the line. People shoot those things all the time!

So the point is that I'll take 6x the eye protection for an extra $20 all day long.

 

[davsco]

yeah i got razzed for wearing regular sunglasses, but when i started checking, most so-called shooting glasses weren't much better than regular sunglasses.

i ended up buying two pairs with milspec ratings. smith pivlock echo max and wiley x vapor.

 

[Uncle Duke]

I finally made the investment in mil-spec eyewear based on a thread that appeared here a month or two ago. It got me to thinking long and hard. I wasn't anxious to spend money on something as mundane as upgraded "safety glasses". But then I thought that any and all of my many other investments over the years in an activity I've enjoyed my whole life are completely and utterly worthless to me as a man who can no longer see.

No telling what one might encounter. Hopefully absolutely nothing. To me, the scenario I can most readily imagine that I'd want the best available protection from would be a "kaboom" from a rifle or handgun coming unglued, even if at an adjacent bench. That's a scenario that's all about different degrees of bad.

 

[md123]

yeah i got razzed for wearing regular sunglasses, but when i started checking, most so-called shooting glasses weren't much better than regular sunglasses.

i ended up buying two pairs with milspec ratings. smith pivlock echo max and wiley x vapor.

I bought some smith aegis Echo's. Super high quality.

The durability, scratch resistance and fog resistance is worth the money alone. And if they save an eye, that's a bonus.

 

[kstone803]

I read that lucky gunner article years ago and bought the Smith aegis. Love em.

 

[cantstop]

Hmm... I expect my glasses to keep hot cases ejected from my self loading guns out of my eyes.

Nothing more. If my glasses ever get hit, I try to figure out what is wrong with that firearm.

 

[ken792]

I use glasses with real glass lenses mainly for shooting high power, but also when it's too dim to use my prescription Oakleys. I prefer them for the clarity and scratch resistance. I shoulder my M1903 with the firing pin pressing the glasses into my face, so the scratch resistance part is useful. A few of my friends who don't need vision correction or wear contacts just use a cheap pair of shooting glasses with a 1/2" hole drilled in the lens if they're at a venue that requires eye protection. That gives them the best clarity when shooting the tiny sights on a National Match AR while complying with the letter of the rule.

 

[FrankOceanXray]

We can have all sorts of body parts replaced (hearts, lungs, kidneys) or sewn back on (fingers, arms, ears)....but they do not replace eyeballs quite yet.... take good care of them. The ones you were born with are likely to be the only set you will have.

 

[pitpawten]

Interesting, I've been looking for new eyewear due to Scratching and Fogging when doing metalwork (grinding).

I wonder if a good mil-spec pair would do double duty for work and shooting.

 

[d33rhunt3r]

I always have eye protection. Lessons learned from cutting wheels exploding in your face and things like that over the years makes you appreciate your eyes more.

 

[Blacksmith101]

The ANSI 87 rating covers two levels of impact protection make sure you have the "Impact Resistant" type. The test is a 1" steel ball weighing 2.5 oz. dropped 50".
ANSI/ISEA Z87.1-2010

 

[md123]

We can have all sorts of body parts replaced (hearts, lungs, kidneys) or sewn back on (fingers, arms, ears)....but they do not replace eyeballs quite yet.... take good care of them. The ones you were born with are likely to be the only set you will have.

I always have eye protection. Lessons learned from cutting wheels exploding in your face and things like that over the years makes you appreciate your eyes more.

Bingo! And yet we shooters generally wear $7 cheap Chinese plastic over our eyes.

How many of us spend more on gimmic accessories?

 

[dreadpirate]

Thanks for reminding us there are other choices for eye protection.

 

[dreadpirate]

Check this out:
http://www.luckygunner.com/labs/eye-protection-shooting-glasses-review/

 

[Biggfoot44]

I have long been in d insistent on eye protection, since years ago having a bullet fragment slice the bridge of my nose. Buuuuut....


If you are shooting yourself in the face, you're doing somthing wrong . The primary threat profiles for *accidental* hazards are gas leaks from split cases, cylinder gap spitting, and fragments from backstop/ targets. ANSI ratings should handle those . If one wants to exercise extra diligence in that regards, then maximize area of coverage through side shields, or maximum wraparound coverage without constant fogging. And wear hat with bill to keep "stuff" from falling between forehead and lenses.

If you have realistic concerns about being shot in the face , what you need is a full face IIIA faceshield for your ballistic helmit, not expensive sunglasses.

In this thread, the super-duper shades were mentioned as starting around $100 . The better ( clearer vision) ANSI glasses are $15-ish. So that's 6-8 sets for the price of one. Or, multiple lens colors for you, plus sets for family members and guests, g or the price of one pair of super-duper.

 

[md123]

.....If you are shooting yourself in the face, you're doing somthing wrong ....

If you have realistic concerns about being shot in the face , what you need is a full face IIIA faceshield for your ballistic helmit, not expensive...

Haha. Yea, I don't plan on it.

I do worry about an idiot shooting the steel over his head in the booth next to me, a kaboom gun or steel target ricochet.

 

[Bob A]

Bought a pair of Smith Optics Outside the Wire goggles from Keepshooting for 25 bucks. A sceaming deal considering the level of protection they afford.

Here's a link:
https://www.keepshooting.com/smith-enterprises-outside-the-wire-goggles.html

Edit: postage was an additional 6 bucks. I decided it was such a good deal I bought another pair.

 

[Minuteman]

Excellent.

Eye protection is critical.