F T/R Competition Field Precision Rifle Class Concept Approved!

[MTETM]

Re: Field Precision Rifle Class Concept Approved!

Hello Darrell,

While I appreciate your comments regarding 223 and low recoil with a heavy rifle, part of this discussion is being able to use your current tactical rifle to shoot F-Class. My wife has both a 223AI she has shot in tactical matches and a 6mm she currently shoots. These are her rifles, they weight 11 pounds, not 18. She is not interested in shooting an "18 pound F-class" tactical rifle. If she was interested in that, or I for that matter, this discussion would not be happening. We would have dedicated F-class rifles and shoot an appropriate caliber...
I still have to ask, why is the NRA concerned with the breaks??? Flash hiders on XC AR's and MIA are legit...and they are breaks.

So... this is a nice touchy issue... If I choose to shoot F-Class, then I will play by the current rules. If you want a new class, thus the potential for new shooters and those shooters prefer breaks and the new rage tactical rifles, then something needs to give. If as a current F-Class shooter you don't want to be on the line with a break next to you, then Vu's clubs MD has the right solution, squad them separately.

To those with comments regarding the blast, I have spent lots of time on the ground next to large bore rifles with breaks, and have had them shot over my shoulder. Yep, it is loud, and they do throw stuff around.

It appears to me the problem isn't the breaks, it is a change and an alteration to the status quo. That is fine.

We will continue to shoot with breaks, F-Class won't. I hope to be see you ladies and gents on the line somewhere sometime.

Good Luck,

Eric

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Darrell Buell</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: memilanuk</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">If they want my wife and little girls to shoot in the future, breaks will need to be allowed. </div></div>

Considering that I've seen a number of small women and girls shoot (very well, in fact) with a .223 Rem in F/TR for mid-range matches, I say you might want to reconsider that. A 17-18lb. .308 doesn't have much recoil; a .223 has almost none. </div></div>

I'll take this one step further, I've personally watched a 16 year old girl that *might* weigh 90# soaking wet shoot a 20 round match with a 300 Win Mag with <span style="font-weight: bold">no brake at all</span>. She did very well with it. The rifle might have weighed 14# total, including scope, and was shot "sling and irons", ie. no front rest.

That said, it is silly for a "F-Tactical" class to be restricted to no muzzle breaks. I think I have shot closer to a (very aggressive) muzzle break than most, and find that while annoying, it is quite possible to do in competition. In my case, it involved a sniper match in Canada that required the shooter to fire a string using their spotter's shoulder as a support, leaving the muzzle break about 8" from the spotter's head. Loud? yes, even with double ears, but hardly "concussive".

As far as the proposed new class, as much as I'd love a new division in F-Class to get more shooters involved, I think your concept has some issues. The vast majority of shooters in it would likely be using some form of .308. The way you have your concept outlined now, you are basically turning it into F-Open on bipods right out of the gate. I can't think of a way to turn off new shooters quicker than to have 80% of them shooting stock .308's and have them constantly getting demolished by the couple of guys with their hyper-modified 6.5-284 "sniper rifles". The massive differences in ballistic efficiency between the different calibers will dictate that those that are truly interested in excelling in the new class will be driven to the crazy barrel-killing calibers that are currently in vogue with the F-Open crowd. You want to unscrew your insanely accurate barrel and turn it into a tomato stake at 700-1000 rounds? Run a 7mm "ultra-mag", or 6.5-284. The expense of constant barrel changes alone will turn off many of the same shooters that you are trying to attract.

Just my .02,

Darrell

</div></div>

 

[9H_Cracka]

Re: Field Precision Rifle Class Concept Approved!

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: MTETM</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
I still have to ask, why is the NRA concerned with the breaks??? Flash hiders on XC AR's and MIA are legit...and they are breaks.

Eric
</div></div>

No they are not. They are flash suppressors/hiders. The do not create a concussive shock that misses the shooter but lights up everyone on either side for 30+ feet the way an effective brake on a magnum does.

Go set up on the line 5 feet from a 7 WSM with a Thruster or FTE brake on it while firing and get back to us on whether or not you think the NRA should be concerned about brakes.

If you want to squad together only a group of shooters that are content to hit each other with brake blast, debris, and concussion, they are welcome to do that to their heart's content IMO. Just don't mix them on relays with non-brake shooters.

Having run a dozen matches where we had brake shooters in the mix, I can tell you first hand that they are an issue. Some brake/chambering combos more than others, some less than others, but an issue nonetheless.

As always, if you don't like the rules for an event or the way it is run under those rules, don't show up or run your own events. Lots of choices out there for the shooter.

 

[scaxeman]

Re: Field Precision Rifle Class Concept Approved!

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: MTETM</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Hello Darrell,

While I appreciate your comments regarding 223 and low recoil with a heavy rifle, part of this discussion is being able to use your current tacticle rifle to shoot F-Class. My wife has both a 223AI she has shot in tactile matches and a 6mm she currently shoots. These are her rifles, they weight 11 pounds, not 18. She is not interested in shooting an "18 pound F-class" tactile rifle.

</div></div>

Hey Eric,

I don't think I said anything about 18# tactical rifles, I merely mentioned that the lack of a muzzle break shouldn't be a deal breaker, thus the example of a very small girl running a 14# 300 win mag without problem (and without a muzzle break).



<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: MTETM</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

I still have to ask, why is the NRA concerned with the breaks??? Flash hiders on XC AR's and MIA are legit...and they are breaks.

Eric

</div></div>

Honestly, I have no idea here. For a "tactical" match, it would seem that muzzle breaks (of any flavor) would be quite appropriate. My guess is that you are seeing the hold-over attitudes of the older "Palma rifle" crowd. As long as the muzzle break gang was separated, either by space on the firing line, or by a separate relay, I can't see why there would be an objection. As Monte states, there may be some bellyaching from those "tactical" shooters when they get squadded by someone with a monster caliber and a very efficient brake...

Darrell

 

[sinister]

Re: Field Precision Rifle Class Concept Approved!

It seems NRA wants some of the action and money bipod shooters would bring, and F-class guys want venues and occasions to shoot (especially back east) where otherwise they have no access.

Using California's "No suppressor / no brakes" perspective for everybody else in the country is regional-centric. I understand the desire to keep games open to everybody (those shooting in ban states and metro-urban areas) but it does no favors to those in free states or actually shooting military-issued weapons with evil features.

CMP/NRA rules accomodate California M1As with compensator brakes as opposed to flash suppressors.

Top, California evil; bottom, California good:

 

[XTR]

Re: Field Precision Rifle Class Concept Approved!

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: MTETM</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Hello Darrell,

... My wife has both a 223AI she has shot in tactical matches and a 6mm she currently shoots. These are her rifles, they weight 11 pounds, not 18. She is not interested in shooting an "18 pound F-class" tactical rifle. If she was interested in that, or I for that matter, this discussion would not be happening. We would have dedicated F-class rifles and shoot an appropriate caliber...

....

Eric
</div></div>

What class do you think will work for her? With of w/o a brake? Part of what I think is being lost here is the concept of the format. Matches are typically 800 to 1000 yds with the majority being from 1000. Yes there are mid range matches but far and away most that I see posted here and other places are 1000yd matches. The reason for this is that the matches are shot along side or at least as a part of/same weekend as the Palma/HP matches.

Your wife can come out and "participate" with those rifles in F-open today, will she be competitive against a 7RSAUM at 1000 yds, not likely, <span style="font-weight: bold">BUT</span> neither of those rifles is going into a 308/223 class whether it is todays F-TR or Vu's proposed Field Precision class for 223/308s. So we are still talking about trying to compete in an open class and with or with out breaks at 800-1000 yds and neither of those calibers is going to win very often against heavy high BC 284s pushed at almost 3000FPS.

The point I'm making is that this part of your argument isn't really pertinent because even if you had your perfect ruleset the equipment you are arguing for wouldn't be competitive. I don't think you are the only one making or failing to make this connection.

 

[MTETM]

Re: Field Precision Rifle Class Concept Approved!

Darrel,
My apologies, I should have done a better job or reading what was written. With the appropriate rifle and barrel, I agree, recoil is not an issue, even for a small stature shooter. I know several smaller shooter who do very well with larger calibers. If my wife wanted to shoot a dedicated F-Class rifle, recoil would not be an issue with out the break.

My issue with this entire discussion is: My wife (others with "tactical" rifles) currently has a rifle she shoots well, shoots often, has setup for her and has a pile of hard earned money invested in. F-Class could offer her another avenue to shoot competitively and become more effective with her current equipment. In the current configuration with the break on the rifle, she (others) can't participate.
Starting a new class geared around a "type" of rifle and then removing a component of that rifle just doesn't make any sense to me.

Thanks for the discussion.

Eric

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Darrell Buell</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: MTETM</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Hello Darrell,

While I appreciate your comments regarding 223 and low recoil with a heavy rifle, part of this discussion is being able to use your current tacticle rifle to shoot F-Class. My wife has both a 223AI she has shot in tactile matches and a 6mm she currently shoots. These are her rifles, they weight 11 pounds, not 18. She is not interested in shooting an "18 pound F-class" tactile rifle.

</div></div>

Hey Eric,

I don't think I said anything about 18# tactical rifles, I merely mentioned that the lack of a muzzle break shouldn't be a deal breaker, thus the example of a very small girl running a 14# 300 win mag without problem (and without a muzzle break).



<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: MTETM</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

I still have to ask, why is the NRA concerned with the breaks??? Flash hiders on XC AR's and MIA are legit...and they are breaks.

Eric

</div></div>

Honestly, I have no idea here. For a "tactical" match, it would seem that muzzle breaks (of any flavor) would be quite appropriate. My guess is that you are seeing the hold-over attitudes of the older "Palma rifle" crowd. As long as the muzzle break gang was separated, either by space on the firing line, or by a separate relay, I can't see why there would be an objection. As Monte states, there may be some bellyaching from those "tactical" shooters when they get squadded by someone with a monster caliber and a very efficient brake...

Darrell

</div></div>

 

[Zak Smith]

Re: Field Precision Rifle Class Concept Approved!

I'm curious how you shoot a "field" match on a square NRA HP range.

 

[Lowlight]

Re: Field Precision Rifle Class Concept Approved!

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Zak Smith</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I'm curious how you shoot a "field" match on a square NRA HP range.</div></div>

You don't it's so you can shoot your AW in F Class and get a score, if you're into that sort of thing.

This way we can F Class Tac to CRC here every month LOL for NRA ranking

 

[gstaylorg]

Re: Field Precision Rifle Class Concept Approved!

Personally, I don't care about the brakes; with or without it's all the same to me, and I've shot next to some pretty nasty magnums running brakes.

As far as a new division in F-Class, I guess the first question I'd want to ask before forming an opinion would be what course of fire is it anticipated would be used? Would it be exactly the same as F-T/R and F-Open? Or would it be modified in some way?

If it was intended to be the exact same course of fire as in the other F-Class divisions, I guess I really don't see how it would differ from F-T/R all that much except for the caliber. If the idea is to attract a group of shooters that are perceived as currently not having a good venue to shoot competitively, it doesn't make a whole lot of sense. I would guess that a significant majority of shooters that don't currently compete in F-Class are already running rigs that would be legal in F-T/R, with the possible exception of muzzle brakes. Meaning far more .308s and .223s with bipods than other calibers and front rests that are currently restricted to Open Class. So it seems like the way to generate interest for shooters that don't currently compete would be to make sure that a new division created would be fundamentally different enough from the existing F-Class divisions, rather than what seems to be a new division based on a marginal overlap of the requirements for the two that already exist.

 

[Zak Smith]

Re: Field Precision Rifle Class Concept Approved!

You can already do that. I shot my AI-AW in .260 in an F-class match several years ago.

Does this really come down to bipod vs. "adjustable front rest"?

 

[9H_Cracka]

Re: Field Precision Rifle Class Concept Approved!

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Lowlight</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

This way we can F Class Tac to CRC here every month LOL for NRA ranking

</div></div>

Who is this WE you speak of LL? I ran the pre-cursor to the FPR (and came up with the name) matches at CRC for 2 years, 2009 and 2010, and you never showed up.

Are you going to start running matches at CRC?

 

[9H_Cracka]

Re: Field Precision Rifle Class Concept Approved!

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Zak Smith</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I'm curious how you shoot a "field" match on a square NRA HP range. </div></div>

Zak - "field" is not a reference to the range - it is a reference to the type of rifle. It is used in an effort to avoid the names "sniper" and "tactical" when describing the equipment.

 

[9H_Cracka]

Re: Field Precision Rifle Class Concept Approved!

To all of you that think you are too good of a shooter or think you have nothing to learn from a day on a KD range, just screw your brake or can off, bring your 22 pound or lighter rifle, front rest or bipod, and rear bag to an F-Class match, then line up and prove it.

 

[Lowlight]

Re: Field Precision Rifle Class Concept Approved!

Yes, because your 260 puts you in Open class, so now, you can use a bipod and be in your own class, plus your magazine fed rifle is not competing against a single load action, LOL

the last time I shot the SOA in Raton I used an AE... but back then they didn't even have F T/R which means my 308 with a bipod was scored against the F Class Team with their 6.5-284s and a rest.

Just be sure to take your brake off.

The funny thing is guys shot on a line at tactical matches all the time next to brakes, and my personal rule is guys with brakes can't complain about guys with brakes, regardless. Honestly there is very few 338LMs on the line, if you have an issue with someone using a brake, build a block or put a pack between you and him. Start a new market of nice tight folding walls that anchor to the ground to make a "booth" out of your firing position

 

[Zak Smith]

Re: Field Precision Rifle Class Concept Approved!

Taking an F-class open rifle and putting a bipod on it makes it a "field" rifle? Wow, that was easy.

Even with bipods I never see rifles like these at our field matches in the Rocky Mountains
http://f-classinfo.com/page9/page9.html

Just throwing that out there.

 

[Lowlight]

Re: Field Precision Rifle Class Concept Approved!

I wasn't around or was home relaxing

I'm not starting any matches, but I have been going to them when I can now that I am here.

You invited once and said I could use my suppressor if I was on the end. Appreciate it but sometimes my schedule here is not as flexible, especially when I was commuting to TX --- Weekends are harder for me than Weekdays.

 

[scaxeman]

Re: Field Precision Rifle Class Concept Approved!

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Zak Smith</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I'm curious how you shoot a "field" match on a square NRA HP range. </div></div>

At the end of the day, it matters little what you call the prospective class, the main point is to get people out competing. I don't care what you are shooting, whether you think you'd be competitive or not in a given class, just the fact that you're out there in an organized competition will make you a better shooter.

Shooting in a match, with no "Mulligans", "pulls", or other crutches will tend to focus you more than almost any practice I can think of. Again, regardless of class, you will naturally refine and perfect your position, reloads, and equipment in general to get better scores.

F-T/R went through a similar change in 2005 when the new 1/2 MOA target was floated. There was much wailing and gnashing of teeth, claims that the new 5" 1000 yard "x" was so small that it would demoralize and ruin the class, etc... Time has shown this to be not the case. The National Records now for F-T/R are higher than they were with the old "huge" target. As aforementioned, people stepped up their shooting, reloading, and equipment, and accuracy in long-range shooting in general took a boost.

Darrell

 

[9H_Cracka]

Re: Field Precision Rifle Class Concept Approved!

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Zak Smith</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Taking an F-class open rifle and putting a bipod on it makes it a "field" rifle? Wow, that was easy.

</div></div>

I encourage you to read the draft rules that Vu put together. That is an erroneous statement Zak.

 

[Zak Smith]

Re: Field Precision Rifle Class Concept Approved!

Where is the link? I do not see it in this thread.

 

[nhm16]

Re: Field Precision Rifle Class Concept Approved!

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Zak Smith</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Taking an F-class open rifle and putting a bipod on it makes it a "field" rifle? Wow, that was easy.

Even with bipods I never see rifles like these at our field matches in the Rocky Mountains
http://f-classinfo.com/page9/page9.html

Just throwing that out there. </div></div>

As I read it, the intent is to allow someone like you, who has a rifles built for your field matches (sans brake and can), to shoot in their own division in an F-class match. The intent is to broaden the kinds of guns that are competitive in "F-class" (generically), so that a tactical style gun is not competing against a purpose built F-Open gun like the one you linked to. I don't think the intent was to change the F-class course of fire into something other than what it is now.

 

[Lowlight]

Re: Field Precision Rifle Class Concept Approved!

The rules as propose require a new shooter to modify their rifle... that should be a deal breaker. Especially when you see Savage offering brakes from the Factory under their "L/E - Tactical " Line of 10FCP. Savage is the lowest common denominator and if they are doing, it should be respected as mainstream.

Don't like shooting next to brake, add a separate relay.

 

[9H_Cracka]

Re: Field Precision Rifle Class Concept Approved!

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: nhm16</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Zak Smith</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Taking an F-class open rifle and putting a bipod on it makes it a "field" rifle? Wow, that was easy.

Even with bipods I never see rifles like these at our field matches in the Rocky Mountains
http://f-classinfo.com/page9/page9.html

Just throwing that out there. </div></div>

As I read it, the intent is to allow someone like you, who has a rifles built for your field matches (sans brake and can), to shoot in their own division in an F-class match. The intent is to broaden the kinds of guns that are competitive in "F-class" (generically), so that a tactical style gun is not competing against a purpose built F-Open gun like the one you linked to. I don't think the intent was to change the F-class course of fire into something other than what it is now. </div></div>

DING DING DING - the light goes on. Some of us misguided people actually think we should broaden the participation in shooting sports by making already in place venues and events open to more shooters.

As much as the tacticool crowd likes to pick on us old sling and coat shooters for being whiny babies, it is threads like this that show it appears to go both ways.

If you don't like it, don't show up. Is that the better attitude than "hey, let's see if we can accommodate the surge in precision rifle growth and shooters by including them in some of our traditional venues and scheduled matches"?

 

[scaxeman]

Re: Field Precision Rifle Class Concept Approved!

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Lowlight</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

I have been going to them when I can now that I am here.

</div></div>

Lowlight,

Make some time in early September next year and drag a .308 to Raton for SOA/Nationals! We will have some of the best .308 shooters (F-Class) in the world there (Canada, South Africa, Australia, etc.) getting a closer look at the range prior to the World Championships there in 2013.

It'd be worth a trip.

Darrell

 

[Lowlight]

Re: Field Precision Rifle Class Concept Approved!

Face it Leo,

The coat and sling crowd is shrinking ... its why they keep expanding F Class. No disrespect but Palma is slowly falling behind, which is why the NRA is looking to "exploit" the tactical / practical / precision rifle crowd with a token gesture like letting you use your tactical rifle for score. Well if you modify it... read my links, look at the Military precision rifles, (decidedly tactical) and understand brakes and suppressors are here to stay -- more so I would argue then coats and slings with iron sights.

 

[Lowlight]

Re: Field Precision Rifle Class Concept Approved!

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Darrell Buell</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Lowlight</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

I have been going to them when I can now that I am here.

</div></div>

Lowlight,

Make some time in early September next year and drag a .308 to Raton for SOA/Nationals! We will have some of the best .308 shooters (F-Class) in the world there (Canada, South Africa, Australia, etc.) getting a closer look at the range prior to the World Championships there in 2013.

It'd be worth a trip.

Darrell
</div></div>

I Might, but I would have GAP Build me a Real Rifle in 308 to compete with, I'm not bringing my 20" AX to a competition with guys pushing a 308 to 3000fps to 1000 yards. Like my 18.5" Gladius would stand a chance in hell -- not to mention my Surefire brake, which is timed and not meant to be removed.

 

[9H_Cracka]

Re: Field Precision Rifle Class Concept Approved!

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Lowlight</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> I'm not bringing my 20" AX to a <span style="font-weight: bold">competition</span> with guys pushing a 308 to 3000fps to 1000 yards. </div></div>

Why not?

First off, 95% of the people that show up to a shooting sports event are not competitors - they are participants. I don't care what kind of match it is, with what type of equipment.

People go because they enjoy shooting, they enjoy learning, they enjoy being around others they share a passion with.

If you were truly interested in being an F-Class competitor, you'd bite the bullet and have a rig made that fit within the rules - not just sit back and armchair criticize a discipline you choose not to participate in.

Participation is the key to the long term health of all shooting disciplines. Without participation, you have no venue for competition. The number of true competitors cannot sustain the sports. Participation must be encouraged and facilitated, otherwise, the sports will die. This is my position on it, and I will continue to focus a not insignificant portion of my time and attention re: the shooting sports around promoting participation.

 

[scaxeman]

Re: Field Precision Rifle Class Concept Approved!

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Lowlight</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

Like my 18.5" Gladius would stand a chance in hell

</div></div>

LOL... Truth there, although I saw a guy running a GAP 20" barreled rifle be VERY competitive at 1000 yards running 208 A-Max's of all things! Different equipment for different jobs.

I started out in F-T/R with a 24" barreled mag fed sniper rifle. The other competitors had a conniption when I was feeding from the mag on my first string (I had no idea)

Darrell

 

[gstaylorg]

Re: Field Precision Rifle Class Concept Approved!

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Lowlight</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Darrell Buell</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Lowlight</div><div class="ubbcode-body">

I have been going to them when I can now that I am here.

</div></div>

Lowlight,

Make some time in early September next year and drag a .308 to Raton for SOA/Nationals! We will have some of the best .308 shooters (F-Class) in the world there (Canada, South Africa, Australia, etc.) getting a closer look at the range prior to the World Championships there in 2013.

It'd be worth a trip.

Darrell
</div></div>

I Might, but <span style="color: #FF0000">I would have GAP Build me a Real Rifle in 308 to compete with</span>, I'm not bringing my 20" AX to a competition with guys pushing a 308 to 3000fps to 1000 yards. Like my 18.5" Gladius would stand a chance in hell -- not to mention my Surefire brake, which is timed and not meant to be removed. </div></div>

Exactly what I did about a month ago. I still fully expect to have my ass handed to me, but I at least won't be able to blame the rifle (LOL).

 

[kengel2]

Re: Field Precision Rifle Class Concept Approved!

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Lowlight</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> I Might, but I would have GAP Build me a Real Rifle in 308 to compete with, I'm not bringing my 20" AX to a competition with guys pushing a 308 to 3000fps to 1000 yards. Like my 18.5" Gladius would stand a chance in hell -- not to mention my Surefire brake, which is timed and not meant to be removed. </div></div>

Well, we shoot a midrange match due to the range only being 600yds. I have a 20.5" barrel and another guy has a 19" barrel. Ive taken second multiple times. Not to say that wont change once more people start coming, but for now Im happy with my results.

 

[Lowlight]

Re: Field Precision Rifle Class Concept Approved!

Because Leo'

Unfortunately I can't go like I did in 2000, 2001, etc, the fact is, what I do is scrutinized so just going out to enjoy myself becomes a bit of a challenge.

Personally I have no problem shooting my 20" AX in an F Class competition, I simply enjoy shooting and would take my numbers to help tighten my dope and learn from, however the reality of the internet, this site, my background changes all that. Even when I showed I up at the prairie dog comp, people based their performance off of where they scored in relation to me. I don't mind it, I still do my own thing, but some where, some how someone will try to bite me with it --- Ya I shot next to Lowlight and beat him, yadda, yadda, yadda,

If CRC has a match and I can make it, I show up, heck I even brought prizes last month to the Prairie Dog Match, anything extra I have I put on the sign up table to give away. When I can, I do it, when I can't like any other normal person, I shouldn't t have to hear about it.

 

[poison123]

Re: Field Precision Rifle Class Concept Approved!

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Lowlight</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Because Leo'

Unfortunately I can't go like I did in 2000, 2001, etc, the fact is, what I do is scrutinized so just going out to enjoy myself becomes a bit of a challenge.

Personally I have no problem shooting my 20" AX in an F Class competition, I simply enjoy shooting and would take my numbers to help tighten my dope and learn from, however the reality of the internet, this site, my background changes all that. Even when I showed I up at the prairie dog comp, people based their performance off of where they scored in relation to me. I don't mind it, I still do my own thing, but some where, some how someone will try to bite me with it --- Ya I shot next to Lowlight and beat him, yadda, yadda, yadda,

If CRC has a match and I can make it, I show up, heck I even brought prizes last month to the Prairie Dog Match, anything extra I have I put on the sign up table to give away. When I can, I do it, when I can't like any other normal person, I shouldn't t have to hear about it. </div></div>


We need to get you a disguise.

 

[Lowlight]

Re: Field Precision Rifle Class Concept Approved!

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Poison123</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Lowlight</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Because Leo'

Unfortunately I can't go like I did in 2000, 2001, etc, the fact is, what I do is scrutinized so just going out to enjoy myself becomes a bit of a challenge.

Personally I have no problem shooting my 20" AX in an F Class competition, I simply enjoy shooting and would take my numbers to help tighten my dope and learn from, however the reality of the internet, this site, my background changes all that. Even when I showed I up at the prairie dog comp, people based their performance off of where they scored in relation to me. I don't mind it, I still do my own thing, but some where, some how someone will try to bite me with it --- Ya I shot next to Lowlight and beat him, yadda, yadda, yadda,

If CRC has a match and I can make it, I show up, heck I even brought prizes last month to the Prairie Dog Match, anything extra I have I put on the sign up table to give away. When I can, I do it, when I can't like any other normal person, I shouldn't t have to hear about it. </div></div>


We need to get you a disguise.

</div></div>

Definitely, Being "announced" has it's drawbacks, trust me. LOL

I know my 20" gun can be "competitive" I mean Raton is at 6600ft, in Sept the DA will easily be 8000ft, so doing it is not a problem In fact Bryan Litz's Tactical Load is damn accurate and I wouldn't hesitate to shoot one of my tactical rifles for score with it. But why would I handicap myself when I have the means and resources, heck I can even just spin up a tight bore barrel at 26" and shoot his stuff and probably do well, However I am smart enough to pick the right tool for the job.

I love to shoot, I have no problem competing .. but as my SGT at Sniper School used to say, "good to be hard, hard to be smart".

 

[crewchef]

Re: Field Precision Rifle Class Concept Approved!

I haven't been shooting competitively for that long but saw this same sort of thing in my drag racing days. They kept trying to add classes just to make sure everyone could play. Just didn't work, there's always the next group coming down the path that wants it their way too.

I can't see a reason to add a new class. Take your muzzle brake off and come shoot F-Open or F-T/R. I shot an SPS Tactical for over a year (almost two) in F-T/R. Did I expect to win, no but lucked out and did win one and second in another mid-range match. I was welcomed at the match and shot along side sling and other F class guys shooting custom rifles special built for the class. So without another special class just for me and my short barreled factory rifle I was able to; shoot at the match competitions, improve my skills, learn how others were doing it, list goes on and covers most of the reasons given for allowing shooters in the new class. I decided I liked it and now I'm building a rifle just for F-T/R. There's nothing but removal of the brake that keeps most tactical shooters/rifles from coming and shooting F class now.

 

[kengel2]

Re: Field Precision Rifle Class Concept Approved!

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Crewchef</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Take your muzzle brake off and come shoot F-Open or F-T/R............................................................................There's nothing but removal of the brake that keeps most tactical shooters/rifles from coming and shooting F class now. </div></div>


So why dont they just allow brakes, since most tactical rifles have them?

 

[crewchef]

Re: Field Precision Rifle Class Concept Approved!

I think it's been pretty well covered already but, they're loud and disruptive to the person shooting either side of you. If we were running and gunning and shooting far away from each other probably wouldn't matter but side by side, prone with just a few feet between each position, no thanks.

 

[mjh30]

Re: Field Precision Rifle Class Concept Approved!

If the purpose of this new class is to encourage more of the field/precision shooters to participate in F-class shooting events, I am not entirely sure the idea will work. As a shooter that has used his field/precision rifle to shoot in F/TR matches, I really don't see a lot of the guys that I shoot the field/precision matches with, out at matches shooting paper. Honestly, I just don't think its their thing, they enjoy their type of shooting, ringing steel, shooting from various positions, moving from one shooting position to another, etc.
A lot of the local f-class type matches here are any rifle/any sight, will a match director have a fit if someone shows up shooting a mag fed 223AI or 260 Rem, hopefully not, hopefully they are aware that the more participants involved in the sport benefits the shooting sports. Will their score get recorded for the NRA records books, no but does that shooter care.
There is I believe some old school opposition from within the shooting sports world to change, I think the folks shooting F-class already know this and changes to long running established matches to seperate the F/TR, F-Open shooters in to their seperate catergory, rather than have them lumped together as has happened in the past. Obviously these are just my opinions, I could be entirely wrong and next year all the field shooters that I know will be lying on their bellies shooting at a paper target for score.
Marty

 

[Lowlight]

Re: Field Precision Rifle Class Concept Approved!

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Crewchef</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I think it's been pretty well covered already but, they're loud and disruptive to the person shooting either side of you. If we were running and gunning and shooting far away from each other probably wouldn't matter but side by side, prone with just a few feet between each position, no thanks.</div></div>

That is a personal problem, and when you want to invite "tactical" shooters to participate you have to take the good with the bad.

The solution is simple, grow a pair as tactical matches have plenty of shooters on the line right next to each other with brakes as evidence by the endless images on here of competitions or create a separate relay.

Just because you can't handle a little noise, or dust, doesn't mean we have an issue with it.

Guys are on the line the same as any other competition

Brakes and Suppressor rule the day,

You want the participation but not what goes along with it.

 

[kengel2]

Re: Field Precision Rifle Class Concept Approved!

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Crewchef</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I think it's been pretty well covered already but, they're loud and disruptive to the person shooting either side of you. If we were running and gunning and shooting far away from each other probably wouldn't matter but side by side, prone with just a few feet between each position, no thanks. </div></div>

Loud and disruptive? We are shooting guns right?

 

[crewchef]

Re: Field Precision Rifle Class Concept Approved!

Grow a pair, really. You want to change the rules of an established class so you can play too without changing anything about your "field" setup. But I need to grow a pair. I took what I had and shot under existing rules. No effort to get someone to change things so I could be competitive. If it's all about participation then put together a true factory stock class. No custom barrels, no after market stocks, etc. Off the shelf rifle, add glass and go.

 

[Lowlight]

Re: Field Precision Rifle Class Concept Approved!

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Crewchef</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Grow a pair, really. You want to change the rules of an established class so you can play too without changing anything about your "field" setup. But I need to grow a pair. I took what I had and shot under existing rules. No effort to get someone to change things so I could be competitive. If it's all about participation then put together a true factory stock class. No custom barrels, no after market stocks, etc. Off the shelf rifle, add glass and go.</div></div>

excuse me, this is not an "established class' this about making an new "tactical class" if you want tactical rifles to be allowed to play, you have to allow at least brakes because that is how they are made.

If the NRA wants to exploit the tactical community they have to understand and except what that means -- brakes.

 

[jlaw973]

Re: Field Precision Rifle Class Concept Approved!

Quick question....

Is there going to be basically 2 F classes... regular F class and F/Tactical?

 

[Lowlight]

Re: Field Precision Rifle Class Concept Approved!

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: jlaw973</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Quick question....

Is there going to be basically 2 F classes... regular F class and F/Tactical?</div></div>

There is F Class Open, F T/R and then there will be F Tac which looks like it might be F T Open and F T 308 or something

 

[jlaw973]

Re: Field Precision Rifle Class Concept Approved!

If F/Tactical is going to be a NEW class of it's own, then allow the brakes, suppressor's or whatever. If someone doesn't like shooting next to a rifle with a brake on it, then don't, stay in one of the other classes then you don't have to worry about it.

 

[crewchef]

Re: Field Precision Rifle Class Concept Approved!

Best of luck with it. I don't agree with what's proposed but do hope you guys are able to put something together where you have an opportunity to shoot and compete with your equipment of choice.

 

[kengel2]

Re: Field Precision Rifle Class Concept Approved!

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Crewchef</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Best of luck with it. I don't agree with what's proposed but do hope you guys are able to put something together where you have an opportunity to shoot and compete with your equipment of choice. </div></div>

Its a new class and doesnt effect you in any way, it just allows more shooters to get involved. It doesnt in any way effect the class you are shooting in now.

 

[Tactical]

Re: Field Precision Rifle Class Concept Approved!

Having dealt with NRA I suggest you get the new class without allowing brakes and then revisit the issue in a couple of years.

I have no problem with the brake but guys as set in there ways as King Tut make the decisions not me

I alos think the resitriction on bullet weight for 308 makes about as much sense as the brake rules

 

[hank440]

Re: Field Precision Rifle Class Concept Approved!

tactical

I disagree, these crusty old codgers running the NRA committee need a swift kick in the backside to vault them into the 1990's everything they do is stuck before the 1950's they need to get with the times, you know buy a vowel or something

 

[crewchef]

Re: Field Precision Rifle Class Concept Approved!

Kengel and jlaw973, have either of you ever attended one of these matches? Squadding at matches I've participated in have had sling, F-Open and F-T/R shooters squadded side by side w/ our counterparts in the pits pulling targets. Remember F class uses smaller targets so match directors are already having to take that into account when setting up the relays. And while some may be immune to effects of the muzzle brake, my preference would be to not have to shoot beside one.

At least attend one of these matches as competitor or spectator so you know how it works today before suggesting changes that won't effect anyone.

 

[jaychris]

Re: Field Precision Rifle Class Concept Approved!

Personally, I'd be fine with suppressors. I'll shoot next to a tactical rifle with a suppressor all day long. Muzzle brakes, not so much- there's some I wouldn't mind shooting next to and some I would.

For example, 360º brakes could be problematic, kicking dirt and debris onto the competitor next to you. Brakes with baffles than vent past 90 degrees could be a problem as well.

But, in the end, you could probably work around it. I don't like hot brass down my ass or my neck at the shooting line- so I stick something between me and the service rifle shooting next to me to block flying brass. It's not too big of a leap to make some adjustments to allow people to shoot.

I hear you about the sling-shooter bias- I shoot F-Open in the NW, where F-Class has a lot of shooters and we're still second class citizens at the matches.

 

[kengel2]

Re: Field Precision Rifle Class Concept Approved!

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Crewchef</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Kengel and jlaw973, have either of you ever attended one of these matches?

At least attend one of these matches as competitor or spectator so you know how it works today before suggesting changes that won't effect anyone. </div></div>

Did you even read the thread? Its only 3 pages, Im not going to repeat what is still there.