There is an eye dr. who runs an ad. in the SSX for these glasses.

Ken, let me share with you what I have been through with glasses. My eyes are just old which means the lens is not able to change shape as much, hence for reading the bifocal power lens is 2.50 diopter. Works fine for reading, the upper is about 1.75 and gives fine focus from about 5' to infinity. 

The bottam line for shooting irons is that you must have a sharp focus on the front sight be it aperature or post. The exercise is to achieve that fine focus without too much target image degradation. With aperature rear sights of type with a Hadley eyepiece or a contemporay rear with a variable aperature rear this is not hard to do. Problem is that as you "stop down" the aperature the amount of light drops. 

I have a Knobloch shooting glass with interchangeable lens and an adjustable iris. I just find the rig uncomfortable. As I shoot the Schuezen rifle, muzzleloaders with open sights, and the 10 meter air pistol, I would be constantly changing lens, etc, on the Knobloch. Salvation came via my local Ace Hardware which offers reading glasses from 1.00 to 3.00 for $2.99 a copy. What I wanted to achieve is decent focus on front, a fairly defined rear sight, and having the target somewhat defined though it is not important that it be in sharp focus. What it takes for me is a differant pair of glasses for each weapon. 

Some time ago I bought a "no-line" pair of bifocals, frankly a waste of money. What you get is an inbetween area in the lens which is just really useless. In essence, whatever is being touted as the "perfect pair of glasses", at the time of trigger release that front sight must be in hard focus.

Dick

I  agree with Dick on the Koniblocks. I have a pair and while they worked well when I shot smallbore prone, for offhand and Schuetzen I never got them adusted properly. Plus the recoil of my 38/55 knocks them out of kilter. Rimfire they are OK if still arkward.

What I have gone to is a regular pair of glasses set up for distance.  They are not ideal for focusing the front sight but with front and rear arpatures and a Hadley disk on the rear it's acceptable. I think I am loosing 1 moa due to sight picture with irons. Scores bear that out too. Iron scores are lower than my scope scores.

Problem is I can't read the sight settings with them. So I keep a small pocket magnifier handy for sight and powder measure settings.  The good thing is the regular glasses are also correct for my scopes so I don't have to do a lot of changing.

The head positon on a Schuetzen rifle is pretty hard to accomidate with bi-focals. Most of the ones you see advertised are for pistol or shotgun shooting.  The no lines glasses are the worst. You can't see the change comming up on you. Better to use a full line bi-focal with a very small reading portion. 

Boats

like dave, i found moving the fr site bAck worked the best, cut my barrels back to 25 inches.

tried every thing else, even took an arm load of rifles, shotguns and pistols to the eye institute. 

tried moving the optic center in line with the eye and the sites, differant colors etc.

cutting the barrel worked the best. and it's a lot easier to hold the gun on target. snd nowhere near as tiring..

but, i am gonna try those reading glasses

..ttfn..grampa..

I'm very near-sighted & have cataracts also, age 58. Have had best results by: A) using shorter bbls, B) using a larger diameter front aperture, usually the largest available, and C) going to trifocals.

I had the middle band ground to focus on the front sight, actually to focus on the front sights of both rifles and handguns. Also had the middle band position (height) on the lense set so that  my head was in a natural position when the middle band was aligned with the sights. Both of these things are important, both the focal length and the position of the band on the lenses. The shooter's head position is critical to good shooting and a middle band set too low or too high will cause neck strain.

The upper and lower bands are ground normally, I can see my sight verniers very well through the lower band and the target is in focus through the  upper band.

All this required extensive communication with my optometrist and eventually a 'direct order', mainly since he wasn't a shooter.
Good luck, Joe

I wear no-line bifocals, and had the lower (near) section moved up a bit for computer and workbench use.  I find that this works out just fine for my use of iron sights on rifles.  I use the four-post type insert by Lee Shaver with an adjustable aperture rear.  Of course, with handguns, my head moves like a baby bird pecking, getting the sights aligned, finding the target, and focusing on the front sight!  You can sure tell us middle-aged bifocal types at the pistol range!

David